Skip to main content

Archie is an H&M model; poor Desmond Tutu

The website of clothing retailer H&M is currently featuring an image of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor wearing H&M clothes.

"A Royal Baby First," says the ad copy. "Archie Mountbatten Windsor wears H&M Baby."

It certainly is a first for the Royal Family, who are generally not celebrity endorsers. In addition to Archie, Prince Harry appears prominently in the photos.

But it's also certainly a first for Most Reverend Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a brave man who helped broker the peaceful transition to a post-apartheid South Africa and won the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.

Is that what the Sussexes' meeting with Desmond Tutu was about? To sell some baby clothes?

And did the elderly Archbishop know this was what he was participating in? Did he get a cut? Or was his family merching out their 87-year-old-patriarch for a payday?

H&M sent the stylist

No wonder Harry looked unusually well-groomed in the photos. H&M must have dressed him, and made sure Meg's hair was done properly as well.

As Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols used to say, "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"


Comments

Girl with a Hat said…
I find this very offensive. It's as though the Prime Minister was making a second income as a used car salesman. These people represent the State. There is no reason they need to make extra cash on the side.
Girl with a Hat said…
the spending of the Royal Family increased by 20 million pounds in the one year that Meghan joined the Family. How much money does this grifter need? That doesn't include security costs.
Nutty Flavor said…
Greed. Greed is the reason - greed not just for money, but for attention.

At any rate, it's time for Charles to take action. And the Queen.
Girl with a Hat said…
they already have. Apparently, they cut off her clothing allowance. Which is probably the rationale she uses to explain this merching of her child.
Nutty Flavor said…
Not good enough. They need to do more.

The problem, of course, is that Harry appears to be dealing with a serious depression.

Check out Chris Ship's Tweet: https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1177161175773130753
Girl with a Hat said…
It must be hard living with a narc with a raging temper. But, it's what he chose and still enabling.

He needs to stand up for himself and mend bridges with his family. I think he's too proud to do so. I also think that HM might have told him that after spending 25 million pounds on their wedding, they must be seen to be together for at least a couple of years.
LadyJaneJagger said…
She just wore a $14,000. Valentino last weekend in Italy. I'm not convinced her clothing allowance has been cut. The "recycling" of dresses and pedestrian tone of her wardrobe on this African tour, have been intentional.
Nutty Flavor said…
Knowing how deeply he’s disappointed his family must be difficult to bear.

He also must feel trapped in a very unpleasant situation, and perhaps has trouble seeing a way out.

I hope he is being closely watched to prevent him from self-harm.
abbyh said…
In some ways, I expected this to happen. A little shocked it took this long and absolutely horrified it happened with Desmond Tutu.

The only one which might have shocked me more was if Mother Theresa was still around and she was used.
Nutty Flavor said…
International and insulting, in my opinion.
Girl with a Hat said…
I truly believe that she didn't pay for that dress but it was gifted to her. That's why it was so ugly. Remainders or something.
Girl with a Hat said…
he is continuously surrounded by staff, so I don't think that's an issue. why he is enabling her is what puzzles me? Why doesn't he just refuse to hold her hand, or stop her from pushing her way in front of him? I would.
Tamhsn said…
I am sorry but I dont understand why Harry is being defended!!! He's a matured, grown man in his mid 30s! He can decide himself...he is not a kid whom Meghan has hypnotized or something...I think he is equally as Meghan. If Meghan is putting ideas in his head, he's also liking it and helping her to enable it.
Nutty Flavor said…
She's probably convinced him, "I'm all you have left."
LadyJaneJagger said…
Could be, @Mischi, but the fact that the dress was hideous, doesn't necessarily mean it was gifted. MM has atrocious taste in fashion, all on her own.
Tamhsn said…
Ugh...so many typos!
* he can decide by
**equally guilty
Louise said…
I thought that it was prohibited to use photos of Royals in advertising. I am not able to link, but this is what I am reading on a Government of Canada web site
Nelo said…
It's strange that no British media has picked it up
Nutty Flavor said…
I actually thought the first dress she wore in Africa, the black and white wrap dress from Malawi, was not bad. A bit low cut, but otherwise OK.

This trip would have been a fabulous opportunity to show off African fashion- and show African fashion to the world. My guess is that there are many excellent designers on the continent who are not yet known elsewhere.
Guesser said…
A list celebrities are usually more subtle about endorsements of this type. They make sure the clothing line is mentioned,but actually an ad on the H&M website? What's worse is these are the first clear pictures of him. Maybe this was the plan all along.
Nutty Flavor said…
Perhaps they know that when they pick it up, it will be very big news. Maybe they're trying to get a comment from BP before running with it. Almost midnight now in London - maybe nothing before morning?
Tamhsn said…
Yes, maybe. But he cannot get out of bed because of world problems!! Yeah right, most likely still recovering from a hangover or binge drug session or whatever it's called. It was so cringey...it gets the "Cringiest (!?!) Quote ever" award!!
Nutty Flavor said…
It's gross, isn't it?

I also don't understand what H&M's angle on this is. It'll turn off more people than it turns on. And H&M has been having business difficulties recently. They're not really in a position to take risks.

In addition, more and more young people are becoming conscious of the environmental costs of fast fashion like H&M. Teaming up with the Sussexes brings H&M into the whole controversy about their environmental hypocrisy.

It seems like a terrible business decision. What were they thinking?
Louise said…
From the Royal Family: "Images of members of the Royal Family under the age of 18 should not be used for commercial purposes"
Louise said…
Correction: From the Royal Family website
Ilona said…
"he is continuously surrounded by staff, so I don't think that's an issue." Sorry, Mischi but if one really wants to harm oneself, they can do it no matter what. I really feel for him. And if he is so depressed because of that woman, no one has the right to ask him to continue being with her - 25 million wedding or more. Depression is a real illness and if is not treated properly it can have devastating effects.
none said…
Narcissists use a psychological technique called gaslighting for control. My brother has been subjected to gaslighting by his narc. wife for years. He's a shell of a person now.

Here's a definition.

Gaslighting is a tactic in which a person or entity, in order to gain more power, makes a victim question their reality. It works much better than you may think. Anyone is susceptible to gaslighting, and it is a common technique of abusers, dictators, narcissists, and cult leaders. It is done slowly, so the victim doesn't realize how much they've been brainwashed.
Nutty Flavor said…
Which leads us back to the usual problem with Meg - there's no enforcement mechanism.

This is the rule, she's broken the rule, what happens now? Nothing.
Girl with a Hat said…
no. they are waiting for the ok of BP to print this story.
Nutty Flavor said…
It'll be interesting to see if the final Mrs. Mandela and South African President Ramphosa keep their appointments with the Sussexes after this.

I think a lot of it depends on whether or not Bishop Tutu's family was in on the deal. South Africa is, unfortunately, a very corrupt place, so they probably were.
none said…
H&M has to know this is not allowed. Very strange they would go ahead and use these pictures.
Girl with a Hat said…
they should be called back immediately and very publicly.
Nutty Flavor said…
I agree with Ilona - if someone wants to harm themselves, they can usually find a way. I doubt the RPOs sleep in the same room with Harry, for instance.

Men who want to harm themselves often do so by means of an "accident" caused by foolish behavior. Harry is on boats, in helicopters, in vehicles....does anyone remember when George Michael "accidentally" fell out of a vehicle onto a busy highway?
Nutty Flavor said…
Not only that, H&M is Swedish. They would never do this with the Swedish Royal Family. They know how royalty works.
Now! said…
The argument might be used that Archie is a "private citizen", but in that case, what are Meg and Harry doing in the photo?
Nelo said…
If the British press wanted to publish not, they would have. I'm wondering why they haven't.
Now! said…
Nelo, the British media have a very delicate and careful relationship with the British Royal Family. Media outlets that offend them won't get access to family events or family interviews. They're not just going to rush off and publish until they get the green light from the palace.
none said…
How can he be a private citizen if he's listed as seventh in the line of succession to the British throne? I in the US and don't know a lot about how the BRF works. I just checked his wiki and it says he is a citizen of both the UK and the US which I didn't know.
Girl with a Hat said…
the web site is in the UK. they seem to like to court controversy. As I posted earlier, they were responsible for riots in SA last weekend.
Girl with a Hat said…
I bet you she got paid through the Sussex Foundation and they will claim this was a charitable contribution, although the SF is not listed as a charity.
Nutty Flavor said…
The problem is, H&M is clearly a commercial enterprise.

If Archie has been photographed in service of a charity, that might be a different discussion.
Girl with a Hat said…
Nutty, I agree but they may be saying that it was done after a charitable donation to the SF
Charlie said…
I just can't wait to see how her stans will going to protect her and explain to us, haters and racists, why we're wrong and why she's doing that. Because it is clear merching, not just wearing maybe gifted dress, which doesn't suit her by size or whatever (like that Lion king premiere dress), this is clear: photo was posted straight on the page, with a link to clothes.

I don't see myself as a hater, and previously I kinda tried to protect her from being negatively labeled as "social climber", because I still don't see anything wrong with being social climber, unless you are breaking the law, or moral code (like twisting and straight up preying your "victim").

But this is too much, she really crosses all boundaries, and I hope RF will do something with that. I understand, they don't want another huge public scandal, but she's using a one to the throne, doesn't matter that Archie doesn't have a title, he is in line, he is royal, Queen and RF must do something with that, for this kid at least.

And actually I remember H&M congratulated Harry and Meghan with pregnancy https://twitter.com/hm/status/1052270852291682305?s=19 so it didn't come out from nowhere.
CookieShark said…
While we're talking about clothing, there is video on Twitter of MM presenting the women at Mothers2Mothers with the Invictus onesie gifted to Harry by Princess Margriet of the Netherlands.

I certainly understand that kids outgrow clothing, but unless that was a newborn onesie, at four months he could probably still get a lot of wear out of it. Either way it was thoughtless to discard a gift, especially one presented to Harry publicly by another Royal Family member.
Nutty Flavor said…
I wonder if it is time for the Queen to take the Sussex title away.
Nutty Flavor said…
Agreed. A quiet donation would have been fine - or keep it for Archie’s future child.
Aquagirl said…
I believe that Harry is beyond finished with the relationship and that the end is near. Would love to know the origins of ‘Archie’. In the photos & the video, he looks as if he’s never seen this baby before. Does Sunshine Sachs provide babies as props now? The baby obviously does not recognize either one of them and there is clearly no parental bond. He is staring at either the person taking the video or someone else in the entourage. The real mother? Is ‘Archie’ temporarily ‘borrowed’ from a friend or staff member? Is this the baby from the surrogate & they finally got custody? BTW, this baby is much older that 4 1/2 months. He’s trying to stand on MM’s lap. Harry looks as if he’s in a state of shock, as was I. I’ve always doubted, and still doubt, that Harry is the father of this baby (or any baby that a surrogate was carrying). It’s abundantly clear when you compare his reaction to this baby to the way he usually acts with children in public. MM has officially committed treason, by announcing herself as a member of the BRF and presenting this baby as their child. I’m hoping LG is waiting for her when she gets back and that she is officially gone soon. P.S. Did anyone notice her flashing her middle finger in one of the still shots?
none said…
I wonder who was responsible for giving H&M the picture.
fairylights said…
Aquagirl, I did not notice that, I'll have to take a look later. Which location were they at?
Aquagirl said…
Did anyone notice the cookies on the plate? One of them said ‘Me Too.’ Did MM bring those?
Nutty Flavor said…
There were no press photographers at the event - only the Sussexes’ own photographers. Who seem to have also been H&M’s photographers.
Aquagirl said…
@Charlie: She did ‘break the moral code and straight up preyed on her victim.’ He was blackmailed into marrying her.
Nutty Flavor said…
Yes. They all had #woke slogans on them.
Girl with a Hat said…
the BRF have warehouses full of gifts that were given to them, and which they catalogue and bring out when the giver comes to visit. They try to be gracious about it. Not Meghan. She is visibly giving away gifts given her.
Aquagirl said…
It’s all about getting attention. Who donates a bag of used baby clothes and takes them out to display them. Humiliating for those women who attended.
Aquagirl said…
@Desmond Tutu’s. She’s holding Archie & looks as if she’s going to drop him & you can clearly see her giving the finger.
Girl with a Hat said…
I read this on twitter and thought it was quite witty

Goodbye England's ruse
May you grow up and get a heart
You were the grifter for yourself
Where lives were torn apart
You came out to our country
And you manipulated for your gain
You never belonged here
Nor the stars you like to name
And it seems to me you lived your lies
Like🕯

https://twitter.com/VerbuntHelen/status/1177167106023948289
LadyJaneJagger said…
Harry is most definitely the father of Archie. The facial similarities of father and son as babies is undeniable. You don't have to be a geneticist to see that Archie and Harry are from the same gene pool.
SwampWoman said…
Well, if they worked for private firm, they would be cleaning out their desks into a box while security stands by. At least, that is how it works here in the states. When you go out of your way to flaunt company rules in the UK with a big "eff you", how does being dismissed for cause work?
SwampWoman said…
I agree, Aquagirl. It would have been difficult to endure.
gabes_human said…
I noticed that Harry looked really good yesterday. Hair clean and neat, beard trimmed, looked like he even had a facial. Then I saw pictures of him falling around with elephants and planting trees. I wonder if a month or so doing what he loves in the bush away from MeGain might help break his dependence on her. There is a lot of indigenous weed where he’s at now but if that’s the worst he’s doing-well, he’s not snorting coke and some people even say that cannabis is beneficial for depression, PTSD and myriad other maladies. Barring an extended African bush stay do any of y’all think what we used to call an intervention (can’t believe I’m suggesting this) consisting of his family and all the friends that the witch demanded he ghost. If, as some of you opined, he wants out and doesn’t know how to escape or even if he’s still in lust with her, maybe photos, personal accounts, recordings-anything that documents the change in him since she entered his life-could make him see what a dream world he’s living in. If he admits to being complicit and approving in all these get rich and famous schemes then he needs to be told they WILL be making there home elsewhere. Sans titles.

I understand depression. I wish I didn’t but what he’s doing isn’t going to fix it. He knows proper protocol and I think half of his problem is that he feels guilty. He has done a 180 degree turn away from the way he was raised. Without going into any personal sob stories I can attest to the difficulty of getting back some semblance of joy and happiness. The first step is you have to want to get out of the fog.
Kate said…
I can not believe they would stoop this low! It’s gross and I hope this will be addressed by the Royal Family. It’s also annoying that the company H&M is the same as Harry and Meg’s first initials. A little too convenient.
I do not think Desmond Tutu and his family were in on this. This is a separate deal Megs cooked up with her people. Disgusting.
Also, she has no clue how to be a Mother. She looks perplexed amd annoyed when Archie was wiggling around, which is what babies do as they approach 6 months. They want to be crawling and exploring, not be held so tightly. How do they not know that they needed something to wipe his drool?!?!
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
How woke:

https://goodonyou.eco/how-ethical-is-hm/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-workers-garment-abuse/hm-accused-of-failing-to-ensure-fair-wages-for-global-factory-workers-idUSKCN1M41GR
Ozmanda said…
Here is what I find perplexing (ok there is a list but lets look at one:) Harry seems totally disconnected with that child, whether he isn't allowed by sparkles to touch him or his own uncertainty. You can put that down to the "new parent" thing, HOWEVER

When there is vision of him interaction with other children, even around that age it is completely different - he is engaged, smiling - even if he isn't hugging random children his body language completely changes. You would think he would be even more connected with a child that is supposed to be his?

Or am I thinking too much?
Ozmanda said…
I agree with what Nutty said, the UK media have had a long relationship with the BRF, correct me if I am wrong but I believe after diana's death there was a agreement to leave the boys alone to grieve and grow up into adulthood. On the other side, if you screw over the UK media, they will take you down pretty ruthlessly.

The US media don't have this - this is in my opinion exactly why MeAgain is making all these arrangements over there - they will pay good money (to go into a discreet account) and will give her positive PR.
Ozmanda said…
The whole Desmond Tutu thing was very predictable - of course she was holding out until she could get optimum exposure - and that was it - added to that it means she will appeal to the "Oprah crowd" and now I will bet a gin martini that she will be interviewed by Oprah or the GF pretty soon.
Unknown said…
I missed seeing the advert with Harry and Archie in it...can you post aa link to it please?
Ava C said…
When you think the country that pays for this family and that loves this royal family has been waiting what feels like forever to see Archie properly, as a normal, happy baby in some informal shots. Then as soon as these finally come out, they're merchandised in an unprecedented way, immediately. If the BRF don't address this promptly, it's not just Harry and Meghan I'll be giving up on for good.

Poor Archie will continue to have my best wishes and all my hopes for a happy future, whatever and wherever that is going to be. I only hope it is with more caring and worthwhile adults.
Ava C said…
Here you go Unknown:

https://www2.hm.com/en_gb/kids.html

It's still up there - just checked. Shameless. Shameless. UK media please cover this soon.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
HOLY JESUS CHRIST ON A HELICOPTER 🚁

tone down the boobage at the mosque, woman!

And cover your arms!

For the love of God.

*unclutches pearls*

I'm quite familiar with Islamic culture. I can tell you that in certain parts of the world it's okay to enter a mosque without a headscarf, but there's no point in wearing a headscarf (even a loose one that doesn't cover hair) if you don't have your arms/legs covered to the wrist/ankles.

And I live in a part of the world where out-of-wedlock cohabitation and premarital sex is about to be outlawed in an AMENDED penal code.

LOOOOOOOLLLLLLL.
Girl with a Hat said…
I expect her to visit Oprah's school in SA soon.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
@Mischi: IDK if that's her rationale. But maybe it's a motive. I feel like this is her way of punishing the people who cut her wardrobe allowance.

She reminds me of a former employee of my parents' right before she was let go:

1. She stole as much as she could while she could.

2. She went on a smear campaign to spread all these nasty rumours of what a terrible human being I apparently am to the neighbours/other employees.

FFS Meghan I don't even consider myself a "woke person" (if anything I consider myself anti-SJW) and even I don't buy H&M anymore. Like the last time I bought H&M was in 2007 as a broke-as-a-joke grad student. And then I learned all about sweat shops. I'm guessing tons of my other clothes are just as unethical, but the ones who have been called out like H&M, I can't do it anymore. And I'm even one to yap about "ethical products". But yeah keep on sniffing that vegan paint and carry on... 🌱

*Goes back into hiding*
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Oh and one last thing before I go again:

The British Council likes to go into developing countries talking about ethical fashion...

And then a member of their royal family merches SWEAT SHOP BRAND


HAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAGAHHAHAH
Scandi Sanskrit said…
*merches a sweat shop brand on a developing country's soil no less!!!!!!!
Ava C said…
I've written to the Daily Mail about the H&M act, as I think Mischi did, and also to The Telegraph. Although as we all know, they won't act until they have a response from BP. But I can't stand being treated as a fool, so I had to do something, to show it matters. I considered Mumsnet but could be taken to be too controversial. We make an effort on here not to behave like trolls, but as the reasonable people we are. And that goes for other communications also.

I keep thinking back to that remembrance event in the evening last year when Harry and Meghan were gently booed, leaving Harry a little bit shaken. Wasn't Meghan thought to have said to him that they were "a**holes"? Seeing that ad, it feels like this is her saying that to all of us.
Button said…
There is a post showing the advert here:
https://the-charlatan-duchess.tumblr.com/
.
I really hope LG throws her in the Tower.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ava C said…
Just checked it again myself. 'Technical issues'. Hmmmmm ... Will be interesting to see what's there when it comes back. At least some of us had already contacted newspapers flagging this before it went down.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
That baby is adorable, though... 💜

How could they.
PaulaMP said…
I feel the same way
I agree, the rewears have been intentional. It's not just because they have been cut off (if at all they have been. Highly doubt it).

Its obvious she has been told to it by her team, and this time made to listen. It's also obvious that this time, whoever is incharge is doing a somewhat good job of being at the helm of things. Ine if the reasons for the rewears could be that she needs to prove someway that she actually owns everything she has worn so far. She has been agued by merching rumours from day1. So they want to dispell those rumours, and asked her to wear old clothes. Now, I for one, do think she gets clothes on loan and merches some brands. Her nicer looks have all been courtesy of a stylist (Jessica, is it?). Unfortunately for her, and us, her personal style is horrible. All pukey, poopy, hippy, unpressable atrocities as we can see from the 4 days in SA so far. But those are the only ones she could wear because those are the ones she actually owned. The nicer ones have probably been sold off, hired out or returned to the designer.
PaulaMP said…
HA! Hadn't seen it, just went there and this came up: IT´S NOT YOU - IT´S US!
At the moment we are experiencing some technical issues at hm.com. We are working hard to fix this and we thank you for your patience!
Girl with a Hat said…
the behaviour you are describing is typical narc behaviour. It's one thing to steal someone's money which a lot of non-narcs do, but the smear campaign ensures that you're dealing with a narc. Narcs feel entitled, so they will steal other people's money.

So, a lot like Meghan.
Tamhsn said…
I just went to check and it's down. ....hmmm...I wonder what happened!
Scandi Sanskrit said…
"Adult hoomans are the worst, Archie. That's why I stick to socialising with cats only."

-Life Lessons from Scandi
As for the H&M baby merching... I remember a few days before they embarked on the tour it was being said that she will be dressing baby Archie in low cost, affordable clothes like H&M (something to that effect). So the brands name was already being associating with her. Maybe it was a strategic plant, because this photo op was planned well in advance.

This is obviously crossing the line, and not allowed. The brand has to be utterly stupid though. Almost every year they do something ridiculous, especially with their baby range. And each time they have to pull the ad down. Their sales don't suffer though, so for them any publicity is a good publicity.

Also explains why the press, camera entourage accompanying the Sussexes is so big. The marketing/PR/merchin opportunities to have been well thought of and planned in advance.
Button said…
There is a section here: https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/royal_arms_blue_booklet20152.pdf
toward the end that states legally they cannot do this. But as Nutty stated, even though there are rules in place Megladon has broken them. Please LG, throw her in the tower.
Fifi LaRue said…
H & M, and Old Navy are some of the biggest polluters on the planet. The industrial waste, huge amounts of water, etc. make them prime polluters. So the "woke" Suxxeses are merching and preaching at the same time. They are absolutely disgusting. Both of them need to be pulled back to the UK, and given ultimatums, via the official channels of the BRF. Harry and Markle are absolutely shameful in all respects.
Tamhsn said…
I went to check DM if they have anything regarding this...I had to scroll wayyyyy down...after so many not-really-important articles, I found articles on Meg and Harry....3 in total...2 of them are those tiny ones and one big one about how Meg calls Archie Bubba! I am really hoping mags do a silent blocking.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
IDK how many of you are open-minded enough for this. But I follow some Sedona-based apolitical spiritualists.

One of these spiritualists is psychic. She predicts Canada will separate "from The Crown" describing it as independence (not sure what that means since I don't know how this Commonwealth thing works, but I'm guessing it means Canadians will no longer have to cutesy to the monarchy).

Thought that was an interesting tidbit.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
@charade: it does, doesn't it?

The private jet thing is only outrageous because it's so inaccessible to most people. Not everyone can afford to piss the plebs off that way.

But wearing an unethical brand when you can afford something reasonable (and by reasonable I'm not saying like something pretentious like 100% vegan and some gimmicky brown-paper label that says "eco-this/that 🍃) is a choice everyday people like us make.

I always say don't promote "ethical" brands and make people who honest-to-God can't afford something labelled "ethical" feel bad about themselves for being too poor to afford "ethical".

But then how can these people who can afford a better option just... do this? It's like they live in extremes.

I'm telling you this is probably a form of revenge. It's like, "oh you want to cut my wardrobe budget?! Fine! Watch me act so broke I play in the mud with a fast-fashion brand with a sweat shop problem to make you all look REAAAALLLLLL bad!" MESSY.

Anyway "Charade" is probably the second best Audrey Hepburn film after BaT. 🖤
Ava C said…
About the dress for Nonoo's wedding, which is our main reason for doubting the money tap's been turned off. If she is responsible for the H&M ad - and they have to be involved as why else would Harry finally look presentable? Would take more than Archbishop Tutu to accomplish that - then accepting a free or heavily discounted dress would be nothing to her. She wouldn't care about that being against the rules too. If Harry and/or Meghan ARE responsible for the ad appearing, it's official. They are now loose cannons, just like Harry's mother.
Nutty, I don't think the Tutus were in on any deal. They were just used for this photo op because it was the best chance for the Sussexes to bring out the baby in a controlled setting g, without a crowd around them. It was supposed to be an intimate tea (with a media and a few staff members). So it allowed them, and rather justified, looking polished presentable and wear fancy clothes and be officially photographed. If, for example, they were to be photographed lounging by the poolside with the baby, on their off time, the photos would have been unofficial, not of good quality and they wouldn't have been able to be in the headlines so blantantly.

The Tutus, unfortunately, were Markled. And they can't do anything about it. The SA govt heads don't really care about that and wouldn't feel obligated to take a stand on their behalf.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
*curtsy"

Okay I'll stop commenting on this now. Enough attention for you, Meghan! Putting a cap on the amount of attention I allow myself to give her.

Toodles all.
On day 3, when Arch meet Archie, I remember there was a tweet (from Emily andrews, I think). It said something to the effect of ' there was an embargo on this and the media we're banned from this/taking and publishing photos of this event but they brought out the baby and the video is on their Instagram.'

That's not a direct quote, but what I understood was- the media accompanying the Sussexes were not told before hand they would be bringing the baby along, and in case they did, there is an embargo in effect. The media cant talk about it or publish the pictures of the baby if they bring him out. And so the video was only in the Sussex IG first. So Emily was kinda pissed about that and directed her audience towards the Sussex IG to see the baby oics because she couldn't write about or post pics. They wantedd exclusivity for any pics and had their own photographer for this engagement.

In wake of what's happened since, it makes sense. Also explains why the media hasn't said anything about it in the UK all these months. Maybe there is an embargo in effect about baby Archie (and the Sussexes) in the UK.
KnitWit said…
Ridiculous.

What is next, push up "nursing" bras?

Butt padded girdles?

Harry looks happy. Perhaps he should spend more time in Botswana.
FGB said…
The H&M UK website is back up and the photo of the Sussexes has disappeared. Now I really want to know what happened.
Anonymous said…
@Tamhsn - I believe what you're witnessing from some of us is called "empathy" (in some cases) and "sympathy" in others. We're not just "defending" but have seen this kind of toxicity in action.

If Harry is not terribly smart and can't find a way out, I do worry what could happen. Meanwhile, that utter whore of a wife of his is doing a smash-and-grab of ghastly and global proportions.

Dear Kate, if you're reading here, please, it's time for HMTQ, Chas, or (if possible) William to do something. So, let's talk. I would love a Contemptini. We can have cocktails, dish, watch Louis roll large in his bumper, and draw buttoned blouses on that harlot of a SIL you have. Cheers, elle.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
DuchessOfCray said…
Sparkle and SS making a feeble attempt at breaking the internet? Lol
Tamhsn said…
Yes, it's still there. :(
Anonymous said…
I've got to check Charlatan Duchess now because I haven't seen much of this. The situation is clearly in its crash and burn death spiral but how bloody long till it hits the ground?

Also, good read: https://howardfeldman.co.za/duke-and-duchess-of-sussex-on-tour-south-africa/

Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
FGB said…
Oh wait...I was lookimg at the main H&M UK home page...if you go to H&M Kids...it's still there.
Anonymous said…
I wonder if this was retaliation for the Bea Sting:

https://blindgossip.com/god-save-the-overlap/#more-99289
A tiger can't change it's stripes!

Time and again MMs downfall has been her own hubris. She is self confident and self assured to the pint of being cocky. She is brazen about traditions and customs and bulldozes through her duties as if she owns the place. And it's this superiority complex that has envitably led her to cock up over time. So it was only a matter of time that she would screw up and do irrevocable damage to her whatever reputation on this tour.

For the first couple of days she was so by the books, towing the lime, almost goading the sceptics with her goody two shoes act. And there was a considerable amount of "she did well" pat on the back for her. It's interesting that this H&M debacle happens the moment Harry leaves for Botswana. I'm assuming that the important official staff (the unspellable named lady), palace coordinators, even the senior media persons probably left with Harry's entourage, and MM was left with minimal staff except for say Sara L, Danial insta poster, the wig-comber, nanny, some personal PR liason persons. We talk about the timiyof things here a lot, and the timing of this alleged merch deal is alos to be noted.
emeraldcity said…
All Commonwealth Countries are independant (all 16 of them), what they would be doing is declaring a Republic, where the Queen is no longer legally Queen of that country and all legal ties to the Monarchy would be recinded by their parliament.

It would take a referendum before said country could formally sever that link and then parliament would have to vote on it, such an act would also mean re-writing quite a few laws within each country as well.

Basically at the moment the Queen is still officially the ultimate head of state in Commonwealth countries (even if it is just a figure-head). There have been very good reasons to stay in the Commonwealth up to now (the assured British security umbrella for one) especially for the smaller less affluent nations, but the larger Countries such as Canada , Australia, India, NZ, SA are very much on the edge of leaving the Commonwealth. Any Royal shenanigans just keep adding weights to the scales on the side of Republicanism.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nelo said…
It's obvious Meghan and Harry still have the total support of the palace as no single mainstream media has published the story till now.
Nelo said…
Alice Surrey James, I'm confused because Tom Sykes of the daily beast said the media was allowed and that there was a photographer from the press pool. He even specifically stated that by allowing the media access, it will 'go a long way in improving the relationship between them and the press.' Those were his exact words. The event that was embargoed (I think) was Meghan's breakfast meeting yesterday. That's why there wasn't any report about it.
From my observation, we can speculate and throw up all sorts of theories about these two, but what is so so so obvious is that they still have the immense support of the palace and the media and that's why they get away with doing things that even William and Kate don't get away with. Just imagine for a second that Will and Kate are merching for H and M. The US media would have been the first to report it.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
@Mischi:

Speaking of entitlements, this landed in my email a couple of days ago: https://www.quora.com/Does-Prince-Harry-have-a-prenup-with-Meghan-Markle
gabes_human said…
Woo hoo! They finally took possession of an “Archie”. Does the surrogate live in SA? How many more loaner babies will they be able to find of an approximate age and with the appropriate features? This woman is beyond disgusting. How many big boxes of baby items does she have of baby items sent her when the baby was supposedly born? I’m willing to bet that there are many lovingly hand-made articles of clothing and some knitted or crocheted blankies that she wasn’t allowed to keep or that she didn’t consider good enough. Maybe someone should remind her of these goodies when she returns home. How many mums-to-be would be happy to have those things back in the UK? Just don’t embarrass the women by gifting the stuff while the cameras are rolling.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
The Audrey Hepburn film is the first thing I think of when I hear the word "charade".

BEST SCENE: https://youtu.be/Qgsst15iI2k

They don't make dialogue like that anymore.

Hell they don't make humans like that anymore.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Thanks for explaining that @emeraldcity 💚
gabes_human said…
LOL Knit, push-up nursing bras. Until recent times, when I was nursing my babies was the only time I ever really had anything to put in a bra.
gabes_human said…
I hope she is holding on to some special baby items for Archie or just as keepsakes but something tells me she isn’t the sentimental type.
gabes_human said…
Me third. Remember when Archie’s was supposedly born and a reporter quoted Doria as saying that Meg wouldn’t even let her hold him? That she dashed into the shower and right back out to hold him again? Last week the Enquirer supposedly interviewed a supposed former nanny ( lots of supposedly-it was the Enquirer) and she said the same. She said that M was petrified that the baby would form a bond with someone other than her. That Harry wasn’t allowed to hold him but could only interact with him as long as M was holding him? If any of that is true, it explains why Daddy didn’t take the baby when he was getting wiggly. It just looked like Harry had no feelings for that baby at all. M was annoyed when he was trying to stand up in her lap and that leads us to ask again; just how old is that child?
gabes_human said…
Oh no, did she break the internet?
PaisleyGirl said…
Perhaps she actually bought the $ 14,000 Valentino dress for the wedding at an earlier date and Charles saw the receipt and immediately turned off the money tap. It would explain the more inexpensive Africa tour outfits straight after the Nonoo wedding.
Nutty Flavor said…
You'd think that if they were going to use Archie, they'd go big. Billboards in Picadilly Circus, etc.

There's no point in taking this big risk and then hiding him at the bottom of a website.
Nutty Flavor said…
It sounds to me like Ace at Blind Gossip is just linking together an old Daily Mail story.

If Palace PR were smart, they'd exchange a prominient interview with Dara Huang to promote her career - like the Telegraph one they set up for Edo - in exchange for a few kind words about how she and Edo had already parted ways before he started dating Beatrice.

Not sure if it's true or not, but it hardly matters by this point. No need to have all that bad juju surrounding an upcoming wedding, and I'm sure Dara would enjoy the boost to her business profile.
Nutty Flavor said…
So dumb that you have to scroll down. If you're going do it, do it big.
Nutty Flavor said…
The server probably couldn't handle the additional traffic. Makes me wonder how high-up the decision to use this photo went. If it were top corporate, they would have known to prepare in advance.
PaisleyGirl said…
Gabes, if that were true, why doesn't Archie have any kind of visible bond or connection with his mother, who supposedly has been holding him non-stop since his birth in May (or was that March)? It seems to me this child was a stranger to her as well. I feel sorry for the poor child.
bootsy said…
Well, now we know what the plan was/is to monetise Archie.
I have to say that I'm surprised at the blatant commercialism of this move, I think we all expected a Hello magazine style intro to Archie, and not something as crass as this.

And to sound like a broken record, the fascinating thing is that there appears to be no way of stopping MM/Harry from doing any of this. Where are the control mechanisms? Or have there never actually been any at all, and the whole system relied on forelock tugging and people voluntarily toeing the line? Fergie always acquiesced to the RF (well, sometimes!) , so maybe this all shows that the idea of some sort of 'ruling mechanism' is simply incorrect. I don't think (but it is pure speculation) that the RF are simply allowing MM enough rope with which to hang herself (an unfortunate phrase). She can do far too much longterm damage to the entire brand before she is somehow stopped/excommunicated/whatever.

Wow. Just....wow.
Kat said…
It's like 2 am here in Colorado and I'm getting caught up on the tour. Of course she found a way to merch Archie. Who needs a magazine cover when you can go ahead and use them in an ad. I certainly hope that the Queen summons Harry to tea and tells him it's time to divorce.
Liver Bird said…
Someone on another board said that the blue jacket Archie was wearing coming off the plane was also H&M. So looks like it's a full-blown merching deal... involving a 4 month old.

I wonder how her sugars will spin this? Previously they could say 'Well you've no proof she's being paid to wear that dress'' or "Maybe she paid for it with her own vast personal fortune" etc. But now? This is blatant corporate sponsorship. There is absolutely no way H&M could use their image, and that of their child, without their approval. She is merching her baby. Fact.

My guess is that they will ignore it. And the palace will too.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ava C said…
To realise how shocking this is, imagine Diana being photographed meeting Mother Teresa, then within 24 hours those shots appearing in ads. Even Diana wouldn't dream of doing that. And it's not a question of money. Even if she hadn't received a huge divorce settlement and was getting by on the odd million or so, she wouldn't have done it.

So Meghan is even worse than Diana, in loose cannon terms. I never thought I'd see that kind of thing again in my lifetime. I thought that Diana was a one-off and that the BRF would exercise the greatest caution in future. And that if they were to be so unlucky to experience it again, they'd deal with it quickly and expeditiously this time, instead of letting it fester in public.

Yet what do we see? Nothing. In public anyway. I'm getting more than tired of making allowances and saying that of course they're sorting it out quietly, unbeknown to us. She has to be stopped, and stopped now. Every day counts with Meghan. Every day she remains in the BRF strengthens her hand for her life after the BRF.
Ava C said…
I know! Why is that? Charade is one of the best.

Thinking of re-wearing clothes, in the '80s Cary Grant was still wearing his shirts from the '30s. From Jermyn Street. As perfect as ever. He's always fascinated me. How was he real? The only time I saw him on film looking a bit less assured was when he was talking to Elvis backstage (Elvis still at his best). But Elvis felt the same meeting Cary Grant so that's OK.
bootsy said…
@Charade Hmmmm good point that it was done when Harry was absent. There's 3 ways to look at it (I think?):
1) Harry left and she did it when he wasn't around to control her.
2) Harry left and she did it when he wasn't there in order for him to be able to claim plausible deniability.
3) They both were in on it as it's too big a thing to hide from each other and the timing is just a coincidence.

I lean towards 3) as I don't think there's a massive conspiracy but we'll never know will we!
bootsy said…
Good work, please could you let us know if they respond? It's all very odd indeed. I'm hoping this doesn't go unreported.
Ava C said…
Yes bootsy I think of this angle more than any other. All my life I've believed those rules were inviolable and no one ever transgressed. Now Meghan walks all over them and nothing happens. I haven't read The Wizard of Oz since I was a child but wasn't it the case that everyone was terrified of the wizard, his audience chamber and his booming voice, but it turned out to be a little man operating it behind a curtain? It was all fake. There was nothing there.
bootsy said…
Hi Ava C. Great analogy r.e. Wizard of Oz. I think the key word to explain it all is '
deference.' Perhaps the Queen/RF has relied on this for years, therefore it is possible that there are no mechanisms in place at all.
Either way it's fascinating to see it unfold.
Louise said…
Becoming a republic is pretty much a non issue in Canada. It would require us to change our Constitution, which would lead to the province of Quebec asking for more money, power and special status before they would agree to sign off.

I don't see this happening any time soon. It is almost never even discussed.
Ava C said…
Hi bootsy. I've been reading court/political memoirs from the early 20th century when deference, behaving appropriately and avoiding the slightest social censure ruled their lives. Social death was feared like, well, like death. That fear must explain a lot.

I guess the real breakdown started with Princess Margaret in the '60s. Watching the documentary about her on BBCi made me realise how spending time with celebrities, hippies and hangers-on as she did was breaking something down that had stood for centuries. As if the BRF were in one cell, and celebrities in another, and Princess Margaret slowly broke down the cell walls until they started merging. The Queen and 'proper royals' hung back, in the furthest reaches of their cell, but Diana pushed further in and now Meghan is reaching them. They don't have much space left.

Interesting I feel I have to write 'Princess Margaret' but can refer to Diana and Meghan with their first names ...
Royal Fan said…
Wouldn’t it be funny if MM and H try to say the photo was used without permission which leads to a lawsuit from the BRF against H&M Corp. Then all of MMs merching will come out in discovery. Maybe even her little charity payments and their locations. Hmmm was this a master stroke from LG?? Did he give her enough rope?? Sure makes one think.
Jen said…
@Aquagirl, I saw that photo you are referring to (middle finger) and assumed it was her trying to wipe little Archie's drool. There was much said about his drooling, and that they weren't prepared (wipes or blanket).
Jen said…
I don't believe she is re-wearing anything. She's a different size than she was when she wore some of these the first time around. While anything is possible, I just find it not probable.
Royal Fan said…
I think this is all LG and he waited for PH to leave for plausible deniability. Who knows?? If he did it, he should teach a master class in getting someone to hang themselves lol
Jen said…
@Nutty, it also makes Harry and MM look like even more hypocrites then they were before. They speak about environmental issues and try to preach to everyone about carbon footprints and sustainability, but then allow their image to be a part of an ad campaign for a company that is no friend to the environment. Honestly, I'm at the point where I don't even care what they say, it's all BS.
hardyboys said…
I just saw harry walking thru Angola mines like his mother. No it didn't strike a chord of sentiment in me at all where you ate like awwwww. I was like desperate. Find a new theme and move on mate
Marie said…
Yes, everyone will ignore it unfortunately. I don't understand why the Royal Family doesn't see how this "hustle" for fame and money is ripping away the curtain of the monarchy. The monarchy basically promotes nepotism, which does not fit in this modern era of striving for equal opportunities, but nobody bothers looking too much behind that curtain.

Yet I hope people start to look quite a bit harder, now that a two-bit supporting cable actress/Instagram influencer and her dimwitted husband are given the platforms to fundraise money and elevate their own status, when in the real world, she would fade away into irrelevance when her looks faded and he probably would be consumed with worries about daily finances instead of his ridiculous cosplaying a global thought-leader because he sure as heck couldn't hack his way up into such a position on his own merits. Nepotism and abuse of privilege at its worst.

By the way, did you all see that BAE Systems will be the presenting partner for the 2020 Invictus Games in the Hague? They manufacture things like arms and weapons systems. I imagine they were chosen, though, because they have much deeper pockets (they receive contracts from not only the UK but Saudi Arabia and the rather hawkish US as well). And who knows how much they donated to the Sussex Foundation as well? So, who's next, the primary manufacturers of the AK47, i.e. the Kalashnikov Concern? The superrich seem to live by another sense of decency.

Ava C said…
Harry may think he's now showed he can walk the talk but he hasn't. Where's the real work his mother did first?
Nutty Flavor said…
I think today was “Harry’s Day” to get attention for his replay of his mother’s walk, just like yesterday was “Bea’s Day” because of her engagement.

It will be interesting to see if the H&M news comes out once Harry has had his time in the headlines.

But I agree with you: it looked contrived.
Jen said…
@ Ava, probably because Margaret was royal by birth, not by marriage. I've noticed also, the media refer to both MM and Kate with their maiden names. Why is that? Kate is NOT Kate Middleton, she's the Duchess of Cambridge. That bothers me; I see it as disrespectful (IMO). It's as though the media doesn't deem her worthy of the title, so refer to her by her maiden name. I don't remember them ever referring to Diana as Diana Spencer after her marriage to Charles, it was always Princess Diana or the Princess of Wales, etc. Do the media fear that people won't know whom they are referring to if they just say Duchess of "fill in the blank?"
Royal Fan said…
Didn’t William once day they were like ducks, calm up top on the surface but frantically paddling under the water. They may be scrambling to come up with a plan for response or who knows maybe they wanted her to do this so she’d “put her foot in it” so to speak. 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️
Mom Mobile said…
@Nutty and @Jen, have you seen the documentary True Cost? It's about fast fashion and the horrible tragedies in India where workers died while making clothing for fast fashion companies. H&M is called out quite a bit - rightfully so, I might add.

Shocking that such "woke environmentalist" who care so deeply about humanity would have ANYTHING to do with H&M. This goes way beyond the hypocrisy of flying private.

Outrageous! And to drag Desmond Tutu and his family into it.
Mom Mobile said…
@Scani Sanskrit and @Charade, I completely agree! It's all so outrageous. And if Harry is depressed and MM waited until he was away before the H&M merching came out, imagine what shame he will feel (assuming MM's gone rogue without him). Not a good combo.
Hikari said…
>>>Interesting I feel I have to write 'Princess Margaret' but can refer to Diana and Meghan with their first names ...<<<

@Ava,
I wouldn't lose sleep over failing to show deference to Murky. A British newspaper article I read the other day referred to "Prince Harry and *the American* being on their African tour. That was it . . no further elaboration. She was not even named as "Meghan". Just 'the American."

Oh . . .Snap!

Apart from the heartless merching of an innocent child, the thing that burns me the most about Smeaghan is that she is ruining the reputation of all American women by association for the British people from the monarchy on down. They read the fawning American press and Meghan's bought celeb 'friends' and assume that we are all for her over her.

If only they would come to Nutty's blog, they could see that she is in fact reviled. How do we get this across? We've had our differences with the mother country in the past and had to assert our rights to run away from home, but we've patched things up and our Special Relationship is worth nurturing.

Then along comes Meghan to blow it up with hand grenades . . .
Louise said…
Charlatan Duchess has photos of to men in street clothes putting up "beware of bombs" (to paraphrase) signs before Harry did his walk. Apparently the mines have all already been cleared for a long time.

What a loser.
Mom Mobile said…
@RoyalFan, I like your theory on LG waiting for PH to leave re: plausible deniability! Also, the more sympathetic a character PH becomes in all this, the more likely the public will forgive him and "take him back" once he jettisons MM.
abbyh said…
I agree with you about how she is making American women look. It's bad enough to have long been called ugly American for bad behavior but now the reality shows are everywhere and give a very skewed idea of real American values, American daily life and what it is really like on this side (coming from any direction).
Girl with a Hat said…
Louise, it's not just Quebec. Rewriting the Canadian Constitution would bring a lot of demands from every province and territory. And even from cities. Why always blame Quebec for everything?
Louise, to be fair, they wouldn't let Harry, or anyone else for that matter, to walk blindly into a minefield if the active mines were still there. And apparently there still are some undetected mines there, so public is still restricted from.going there. This organization is still working to find and deactivate active mines that may still be hidden. Then they mark the cleared path, with sign postings, ropes and sticks. Oftentimes the cleared paths are no more that 6ft wide and you can't walk either side of it.
I know this because I have a family member who was posted in Angola with a UN peace mission a while back. He is in the army, and the army also helps in this kind of work. Another family member is a doctor who works with UN, they travel to Angola to perform emergency surgeries and suppy med aid to areas where landmine related blasts and injuries are happening everyday.

But yes, Harry just seemed like he was walking for no other purpose than photo ops. In Diana's time this work was different, the work of clearing the mines was still looked upon with fear and infact deemed not important enough. People dies daily, and that the reason what she did was considered brave. It helped shine a light on this work. Harry the dummy basically played the Diana card and just seemed to be taking a stroll.
Girl with a Hat said…
The commenters over at DM are completely negative against Harry.
Girl with a Hat said…
Diana's campaign led to a ban on landmines for many countries. Some didn't sign the treaty banning them, but it was revolutionary.
SwampWoman said…
If she's been holding him non-stop from birth (except for those little vacation jaunts), why didn't she know that his socks were too small? Why didn't she know that babies drool and spit up and something is needed close to hand to take care of the mess. Why did the baby not cling to her?
Curious said…
I don’t think it’s the same baby as christening photos. I think they had to find this one after surrogate wouldn’t relinquish control and they knew public would be suspicious with continued lack of Archie. Kid does look like Harry’s baby photo but I’m sure they made sure to pick one that had some resemblance.
Girl with a Hat said…
the incident that really put Americans in a bad light was the incident at Wimbledon with her two fat and ugly friends. Ugly because their personalities "shone" through - materialistic, entitled, elitist (although they have nothing to distinguish themselves except their ugliness), and rebellious. They are the ones who told her to put her hat on because it's against the rules, and probably are the ones who told her to clear the royal box. I found them repugnant. And I truly believe in the old adage "Birds of a feather stick together".
Girl with a Hat said…
Dara is a social climber. Best to leave her to her own devices.
Jen said…
I think many are looking at this in the wrong way; yes it was a photo op, but I imagine for Harry it was also very poignant as this was the same ground his mother walked on so many years ago. This was something very important to her, and to come back to the same spot so many years later, and see the results of the work she did and hear the stories from people she may have worked with...it's not a bad thing. Maybe I want to believe that Harry has no ulterior motives here but to honor the work his mother did by going back. Call me naive, but I'm not going to be critical of this.
SwampWoman said…
*sigh* Indeed, abbyh. I would prefer if it referred to Prince Harry and the alleged "actress". That would be an appropriate way of saying "skanky ho".
Girl with a Hat said…
I think we should all start a boycott H&M campaign. And a boycott campaign of anyone who uses poor little Archie as a merchandising opportunity.
Anonymous said…
True, @SwampWoman, but I just love the directness of "skanky ho" because who are we kidding? Skanky Ho is the best of Rach's character. She's just getting started. I look at her and see a soulless monster filled with writhing snakes and putrid fluids. When I read the "she's changed" or "maybe she's not so bad" stuff, it is utter foolishness because this woman has a long history of heinousness and only the most gullible or shallow could believe the Skanky Ho is anything but... I really don't like her today, can you tell lol?
CookieShark said…
Typically Sussex-positive CB has zero stories about them today. It's hard for me to believe they don't know about the H&M ad. They are always squawking over there that there is "no evidence" that MM is merching.
JL said…
I agree with you @Nutty, Prince Harry is in deep trouble. He thinks humans are terrible because the person he fell in love with conned him and betrayed him in the worst way. The RF must be very worried about him. My hope is that he is taken in hand with an intervention, drug detox if needed, and a deprogramming. Meanwhile deal with Markle and take Archers away from her because he cannot be raised by an NPD/borderline. Based on her oblivious, baiting behavior and statements she must really believe she is Teflon against the family. Why? Either that or this is her way of pushing for a big payout/release. Maybe Harry is as downtrodden as he is because he knows what is coming?
Umm ...so I just happened to look at the Royal family insta post about Harry in Angola, and they have two, TWO!!!! pictures of Diana on that post. And they mention her in their caption as well. This has to be surprising right?!!!
Anonymous said…
A partial repeat of what I said before:

I think of it this way:

Rach is truly deceitful and heinous. She has the integrity of Bernie Madoff and the heart and soul of a hyena (they rip their own siblings apart at birth). She cannot be trusted and she has access to Harry, Archie, and the BRF, in part.

She can make a lot of trouble if the situation isn't handled correctly because of her ability to lie and create sympathy and destroy the BRF's case. They cannot act publicly or prematurely. The BRF must maintain a dignified public profile and cannot be seen to be in league with this person, but cannot attack her directly, either, so they must wait in relative silence.

It is imperative that she be caught full on, no chance for escape, no chance to explain it away -- she must be completely culpable for despicable actions.

What does the BRF do?

Well, they do a lot of things to document the situation, block potential escape routes (financial, physical, and otherwise), and all the while move to corner Rach without letting her know their plan. They do not confront her publicly - yet. They must remain as silent as possible and wait and either set the trap or let her enter a trap of her own design.

...... I do think it is possible that the BRF and Lord G are playing this long game and letting her destroy her own self. The DM is rabid this a.m. apparently. She's crossed a line that makes it difficult even for her "friends" to defend her (they cannot simultaneously attack others for benefiting financially by merching a public office and then cheer Rach for doing the same. Skeeziness is skeeziness regardless of party, race, creed, national origin, sexual orientation, etc. )

This merching move and the Tutu play really reveals Rach for who she is: a scheming emotional and intellectual whore who will do anything for money and fame. It's what drives her. The worst that can happen to her is for her to become a societal pariah, the desperate, grasping, clawing social climber shunned at the bottom of her greasy pole. And so, they let her go to it.

I could be wrong, of course. Perhaps HMTQ and Chas are just cheering the SoHo and making calls to do their own merching deals. But I doubt it. I think that it was no coincidence that Wills and Chas and HMTQ were doing the hang in Balmoral, chatting it up after the Eucharist.

Anonymous said…
Oh, and SussexRoyal is still at 9.5M followers. Rach just did a global pimp of her own child in order to pull off a smash-and-grab motivated by pure greed, and they're still at 9.5M IG followers. If that's not a sign that she is slowly turning stomachs globally, IDK what is. She will be the same joke she always was but on a much larger scale by the time this is over.
Anonymous said…
Oh, I missed that before @Nutty. So much despicable stuff, so little time lol.
Anonymous said…
Yes, @RoyalFan, yes he did, and I do not believe it was coincidence that Wills, Chas & Liz were doing the Balmoral group hug last weekend.
Anonymous said…
Jen, that's a sweet way to look at it. I think Harry has some really deep stuff going on. I have a hard time kicking someone who's already in their own pain. His skank ho wife OTOH....
JL said…
@Alice. Think she towed the line at first until she nailed down her place with a pregnancy. She thinks she is untouchable because of Archie. If they take him away from her she will scream racism.
Anonymous said…
And they sit at 9.5M followers. Same as before she pimp walked her own child to cash-grab selling cheap clothes that are horrible for the environment. If this were a screenplay, no one would believe it because it's too absurd.
bootsy said…
@Ava C. Damn you've done it again! That's an excellent point about Prince Margaret. Her behaviour was scandalous, I believe she hung out with a well known criminal in the Caribbean and held raucous parties with lots of sex and drugs (more research required). You're right, the RF didn't seem to do much, and I'm guessing the deference shown to Margaret by the Press and the public then is what allowed the RF to maintain a veneer of respectability. That's a dangerous game to be playing with a mercenary like MM and inplies that this has plenty of legs. Will be interesting to see if any news outlets pick up this story...
JL said…
Yes DM commenters braying because of the continue use of Diana for the Harry Markles’ PR. Harry really looks like a fool. Another Smirkles idea?
Lady Boo said…
The baby looks very like Prince Harry, his ears and hair in particular and his mouth. I'm pretty sure it's the same child as in the Christening pictures because I noticed his lazy eye in those too. He seems to be a very good natured, happy and smiley baby. However I think many people noticed the complete lack of interaction with either the Duke or the Duchess he seemed much more invested with the Tutus to me but I hadn't taken into account that there were other people in the room such as the person filming
Elle, I'm with you in thinking that the BRF are playing the long game.

When I saw the H&M post my first thought was that it is probably a joke and would be taken down within the first 2 hrs. (Remember the surrogate admission on the Kensington handle upon Archie's birth that was taken down)

When it wasn't taken down, my mind went to Wills, chas and HM at Balmoral and how we were all speculating about the timing being just before the Africa tour starts.

Letting Me get over confident is a good move, because it doesn't take much to get MM cocky. And the first two days of tour led her to believe she has won the world over. She soon got so over confident and smug, got caught in her own game.

JL said…
I have to ask what exactly is the sainted LG actually doing? I see no chess moves and no action. Smirkles keeps smirking. Am doubting his ability and the Royal Family’s to deal with her. Put Anne in charge! She’ll get the job done.
JL said…
Oy. There was a comment in the DM about Harry aping Diana with the landmines. It said in effect: what’s next Harry alone in front of the Taj Mahal? Now this:
https://theroyalweekly.com/post/187982230367/the-duke-of-sussex-sits-alone-beneath-the-diana
Jen, Harry has had plenty of opportunities to walk in her footsteps over the years. And he has visited Angola and the landmines before.

Over the years he has worked on many of her projects - Landmines, AIDS, Homeless shelters etc... He has also interacted with the very people she has helped and worked with. So I still say this particular move, while important to him in some ways obviously, has been very carefully planned by his PR people/Meg. To get maximum sympathy. By playing the Diana card.

Let's not forget that over the past year, while his wife has proved to be an insuferable self selrving idiot, Harry too has lost a lot of goodwill and is not so well.liked by the public. So rehabilitating his image is also important for brand Sussex .
(Unimportant in the grand scheme of MM though he might be).

For MM and her machiavellian plan, it's important to reiterate the idea of Harry the heart broken 12 yr old prince who lost his mother.

He could make a name for himself doing a lot of other very important things. William is doing just that. But they want to make sure he is known to us as Diana's lost little boy. Hence the photo ops. This was planned PR.
Lol... Harry pulling a Diana infront of Taking could actually be a good move. That picture tipped the balance in her favour as far public sympathy was concerned. Her sitting on that bench, sad, alone, being a trooper for the sake of the BRF and her duties was best sympathy card ever.

That could be Harry's SOS move... Hehehe
HappyDays said…
Nutty, Have you seen this yet on CDAN?
It is in today’s blind items for Sept. 27, 2019.

Blind Item #2 — This alliterate former actress earned herself $250K by having a 30 minute lunch with a group of people who each paid 5 figures to attend.


SwanSong said…
I am aghast at the blatant corporate merching of Archie and the Palace either condoning it or not being able to stop it, which leads me to believe that the Queen/Charles do not want it to stop. As Charles prepares to ascend the throne, perhaps his long-term financial strategy is to have all of the lesser royals not directly in line to the throne (Harry, Eugenie, Beatrice, et al) find their own income streams. Bask in the RF’s limelight on the balcony, but pay your own way. Andrew was told this years ago, but the onus was still on HM to find him an official position with the trade commission. And the results were disastrous, as we now know with all of the Epstein stuff that’s come to light. He & Fergie were always in debt, scrounging for money, and it made the RF look bad.

This would explain why Charles has gone silent on H&M’s gauche behavior and why he supposedly adores Meghan. She has introduced a new business model into the RF that’s easily adaptable in this age of social media, keeps the Royals relevant in the age of Brexit, and, most importantly, gets ALL of the tier-2 grandchildren, nieces and nephews off of his payroll. A huge cost savings for him. Look at Beatrice’s engagement photo in DM; the dress is tagged and available for purchase—straight out of Meghan’s playbook. Ka-ching! Harry’s Apple TV deal with Oprah, another offshoot of the Sussex master plan.

The most important factor going forward is keeping Charles & William as far away from this blatant commodification as it is beneath their station. That’s why you will never see William speaking to Meghan in public or even acknowledging her presence because, although he loathes what she has done to the RF, he understands why she is necessary.
hardyboys said…
I dont think she earned 250k it's just too much money to quickly.
Now! said…
No, I did not see that! Thanks for pointing it out. Not a surprise, though.
Louise said…
Because Quebec is the only province that has already made two attempts to secede, one of which came very close to succeeding.

No one wants to live through that again.
Girl with a Hat said…
I just read that Harry already did the march through the minefield in August of 2013
!!!

He is just as shameless as she is.
The Cat's Meow said…
In my opinion, the FAR better PR would have been for Harry to walk down that exact same street his mom did....as it is now! (Apparently it is now a street with many homes and a school). It could have been a sign of "look what we accomplished together" and "we can triumph despite the sadness." It would have been a lot more powerful, and I suspect, a lot healthier for his own mental state.
Jdubya said…
Why would Harry allow it? He could just walk into nursery and pick him up.
The Cat's Meow said…
Sadly, I agree. The longer this mess goes on, the more we have to accept that this is now a possibility.
The Cat's Meow said…
Why not? Since it was a private meeting (no public pics of the audience for status) what these people are purchasing are essentially her business contacts. SoHo club SA, anyone?!?!
Jen said…
@Alice, one could argue that every royal tour has some form of planned PR. What's the point of the tour otherwise? While I don't agree with MM's pimping for charities while in SA, Harry at least has some history here and it may very well be personal for him. We all can agree that he's not 100% the Harry we wish him to be, but the photos of him in Botswana and how happy he looks, make me think HE may still be in there and salvageable.
1 – 200 of 227 Newer Newest

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids