Open Post: Cambridge tour to Pakistan, Archie's lack of attachment, and the Sussex Foundation's new hire
Here's a fresh post to discuss the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's ongoing tour of Pakistan, various theories about Archie's lack of attachment to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and the Sussex Foundation's latest hire - Kirsty Young, a former radio presenter who is married to Nick Jones, the founder of Soho House.
Please be kind to each other! As some of you have noted, I'm not a professional moderator; I'm a writer operating this nonprofit blog purely for fun. A lot of the time I would like to have spent writing I've spent deleting comments in which people are sniping at each other. That's not fun at all.
There are only two rules at this blog: you must be willing to seriously discuss this case, and you may not use vicious language about the Sussexes or about each other.
Also, you are more than welcome to discuss possible surrogate situations regarding Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor.
Thank you!
Please be kind to each other! As some of you have noted, I'm not a professional moderator; I'm a writer operating this nonprofit blog purely for fun. A lot of the time I would like to have spent writing I've spent deleting comments in which people are sniping at each other. That's not fun at all.
There are only two rules at this blog: you must be willing to seriously discuss this case, and you may not use vicious language about the Sussexes or about each other.
Also, you are more than welcome to discuss possible surrogate situations regarding Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor.
Thank you!
Comments
Maybe she should remind them to ask her how she is doing?
I wonder what Serena, or Elton, or Ellen, or Paul McCartney, or anyone who has stood up for her in the press will think of these comments.
Not many of us have famous people willing to defend us publicly, or the unlimited wealth she has at her disposal.
Secondly, whatever happened to all her talk of 'empowered' women? It's not very feminist to use the phrase 'as a woman' to imply that makes you somehow more weak, is it?
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/828182/meghan-markle-prince-harry-crying
But I guess this shows who her audience are. Even though it's being produced by a British company, ITV, it's not the British public, or at least not the vast majority of them, who are the targets. It's her fangirlz, mostly in America, drunk on their own shallow wokeness. They will swallow it hook, line and sinker too. But even so, I don't really see the point. She's only preaching to the choir. This isn't going to change perceptions of her and Harry one bit. In fact, it's only going to harden them. But her ego is such she cannot think strategically.
Never should have been allowed.
I finally watched the teaser for the "documentary." Full meal of complaining with a side of word salad, and copious whine. She will never understand that if she would have taken a step back, and eased into her "duties" instead of coming off as a know it all, out to save the planet and the plebs from themselves, everything would have gone smoothly. It's not that hard, follow protocol, stand where you're told to stand, walk where you're told to walk, smile, wave, shake a few hands, make small talk about the person, event, or organization not about yourself. So much of this could have been avoided by a few months of training before letting her loose on the public... but know it alls think they know better than people who have been on the job for decades.
Put me down for a G&T, not sure I'll watch. I think The Durrells on Corfu is on at the same time in my timezone.
Charles wasn't "allowed" to marry Camilla. He was forced to by the Queeen. She thought that after everything they did to everyone to be together, the least they could do was get married.
In fact, they live mostly apart today.
Never should have been allowed.’
For which I totally agree. They bent the rules, and allowed him to have a civil ceremony too.
I will watch the documentary, but the nauseating snippets in the media today are enough, it might take a couple of sittings to stomach these two.
I don’t think he wanted to get married, but he couldn’t be King with a mistress, that’s why they married. He couldn’t remarry in church and he wasn’t able to pull off a private wedding at Windsor (because all and sundry could be married there, thereafter), so a civil wedding it was
Will anyone in England live blog it? As I mentioned, it won’t be on until the 23rd here and I will be on west coast time, so it will be well after whoever wanted to watch it would watch it. I would prefer to get the details on Sunday night.
Also, having viewed a toe-curling 45 seconds of Smirkle trying to exude stoic bravery, it's clear why her acting career failed to launch. Her eyes are so cold and shifty...lying eyes, I'd say, like she's always watching the person she's talking to see if they're buying her act or not. Nothing in that clip feels authentic. You can tell that she knew exactly what soundbite she wanted and had clearly rehearsed it to the beat. I'm very surprised Sunshine Sachs okayed this documentary. Their entire PR strategy with the Sussexes seems to be weirdly dated. The public is jaded to this kind of scripted soul-baring by celebrities, and has been for quite some time. This won't increase their supporters beyond the preexisting die-hard fans (and when she discount the paid-for bots, really, they don't have many) and it will likely alienate the wider public. What is the strategy here? I can't understand it.
We know they had a ‘church blessing’ after, I watched it live. I was merely stating they couldn’t have a church wedding like they had for their first marriages.
@Tatty, I think CB refers to the celebitchy site.
@drabredcarpet, royal docs and movies are my weak spot. I've mentioned this one before but you might want to watch the BBC's Panorama two-part documentary "Reinventing the Royals." It's about the lengths to which Prince Charles was willing to go in order to change the narrative after Diana's death and to gain public acceptance of Camilla, including using his sons.
As for MM, I wanted her to succeed when she first came on the scene despite some concerns; however it's clear that she has an agenda that is not consistent with her role in the RF. Whether she is dragging Harry down or we are finally seeing the real prince, well, not sure. Either way they feed into each other's lesser traits.
As someone who has recently divorced a narc, all I can say is that Harry is in for a painful journey.
Like I said, they spend a lot of time apart - him in Highgrove, and she in her home not too far away, 30 miles or so.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7588229/Meghan-Markle-says-never-guessed-awful-tabloid-press-be.html
What - exactly - has been so awful about how Meghan has been treated by the media?
Her fanz use highly emotive words like 'bashing', 'attacking', 'villifying' etc to describe said treatment, but when it comes to details - ie, actual stories which desierve such strong terms - there's not much there.
From what I can see the way she has been treated is pretty par for the course for a royal wife, obviously with some differences because the way she has behaved has been different from other royal wives. Scrutinising of her clothes and general appearance, calling out her hypocrisy on private jets, some palace tittle tattle about feuds with Kate or her habit of losing her staff and.... that's pretty much it. Hardly deserving of such emotional terms as 'vile abuse'. Not to mention that we were told she never reads her press. So how can she possibly be so negatively affected by something she's supposedly unaware of?
Could be.... but then again Harry has come in for very public criticism before. For his Las Vegas shenanigans, for his Nazi costume, for his use of racial epithets to describe his army colleagues. True, you are right in saying this run of bad press was fairly brief, and the palace PR machine did a very good job or turning around his image - only for him to ruin it all again since marrying Meghan - but it's not like he had never been criticised before. And yet he seemed to handle it OK in public at least... until Meghan.
I think we are dealing with two very spoiled, very arrogant individuals who bring out the very worst in one another. I really can't see a way back for them now. They probably COULD still turn it around if they wanted to, but the only way to do that would be to go away for a while, no social media, no 'leaked' stories, no merching, just a few low key unglamourous events in Bradford or Swansea. But that is the very last thing they would ever want to do.
As I've said before, how can they continue doing royal duties after all this? Christmas at Sandringham is going to be VERY interesting.
Connecting the dots starts leading to Epstein:
https://youtu.be/ZYjUCMS2ZAk
The moonbump malfunction:
https://youtu.be/2_XaippuOQc
The MSM is covering up the heckler in Parliament:
https://youtu.be/m9MvYN49BgM
The MSM is covering up the heckler in Parliament:
https://youtu.be/m9MvYN49BgM
Thanks for that. It was a good idea by whoever made it to compile the same scene from the past couple of years to highlight the shout some say is "Get rid of Markle" and others say is "Make way for the black rod". Also couldn't help but note that QE's heavy breathing I mentioned earlier was only the case this year. So, just the mantle (which I think is a lame reason considering I've seen loads of old folks her age haul around heavier things and up more steps) couldn't account for it. I suppose it could have been her quietly seething at the heckling, though. Regardless, it took her a lot longer than normal to start speaking.
The moonbump malfunction:
https://youtu.be/2_XaippuOQc
Whoa! Not only was it a really loud plastic-like popping sound, you can literally see it "pop" back into place and her hands immediately going for it in case anyone noticed. And, of course, she couldn't help but pull her coat aside to show off the moonbump after it was properly back in place/shape.
I guess I was right. Again. ;-) BBC cannot be trusted.
I have never seen/heard those US/UK influencers talking about MM so it is so weird to see MM -several times- today on those IG accounts.
I think SS is working hard to be sure that her strategy (race card, Diana card and above all victim of bullying card) be successful all over the world...
The problem with their strategy is that they antagonise as many people as they mobilise
Someone has always stepped in to clean up the messes he's made and he never faced any serious consequences, really he was shielded from the consequences.
"I think we are dealing with two very spoiled, very arrogant individuals who bring out the very worst in one another."
Spot on, but I would replace bring out the very worst with feed off and encourage.
" how can they continue doing royal duties after all this? Christmas at Sandringham is going to be VERY interesting."
I'd like to see their calendars to see what really is a royal duties and what is self-promotion.
@Lurking : I agree with you. We have seen cupcakes, Vogue, Smart works, S.A video and an upcoming book for kids.
Yet, HMQ gave her some patronages. What about those charities?
She is so obsessed by her own agenda that I can't see what are the royal duties she complied with.
Latest news : Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interviews overshadow Kate and William’s Pakistan : "According to the Standard, there is a decades-long unwritten rule that members of the royal family do not overshadow official overseas visits by more senior royals." See https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10165367/prince-harry-meghan-markle-documentary-kate-william-tour/
I hate to say it, but this might be a winning strategy for her. It will be difficult for the RF to get rid of her now.
There are, however, 2 main problems with this strategy.
First, those speaking in her defense are a small group of the leftist elite (The Clooneys, Obamas, Hillary, Ellen, etc). The people are fed up to their eyeballs with the elite telling them what to think. The populist movement is nowhere near over. I've said it before and I'll say it again; Rachel should be compared to Marie Antoinette, not Wallis Simpson. They have misjudged the mood of the people.
The second problem is Meghan herself. If her actions and behavior were in line with other royals (Kate, Sophie, etc) then sure the criticism might be unjustified. But she is so over the top in everything she says and does that there is no defense of her. Her spending, her clothing, her interactions with people, her jet setting, the fakenancy...she does this to herself. Another great analogy is "The Emperor's New Clothes" .
As to the question, what has the media done that is so bad? The answer is nothing, except allow comments. It is the comments and blogs and so forth that they want to shut down.
I like all of you am simply aghast that she can go to a country like South Africa, and go visit the memorial for that poor murdered girl, and then complain to the world that no one is asking if she is OK. How vain, how self-centered, how ungrateful, how immature.
She should be so thankful for where she has ended up and all she can do is complain that it isn't enough. It boggles my mind.
Mr Skinner says "No" then, "Well, i'm not going" & this was greeted by a few weak laughs by other M.P 's.
Black Rod enters the House of Commons & commands the politician's there to follow to hear the Queen opening the new Paliament session in the House of Lord's. Mr Skinner is a Labour M.P. & has always caused controversy with his lefty leanings & obvious dislike for the Royal Family etc so his outburst is nothing new.
I actually heard on Youtube, thru The Telegraph newspaper coverage, a woman shout out, very loudly, when no-one else was speaking - "get rid of Markle". This happened just as Prince Charles was escorting the Queen to her seat. This occurred at 46.30 minutes into filming (on the Telegraph newspaper footage anyway). This incident happened within the House of Lord's section of Parliament. I've no idea who said it.
I'd be the first to admit if i'm mistaken & apologise, but I'm sure this is what I heard. I played it back 5/6 times as I was amazed TBH. I've not seen (as yet anyway) any coverage of this online - apart from here & Youtube 😄
Please, let's all try & remain friendly in this blog. It's the reason I joined & check in every day as I like the discussions & amusing Posts. If it does become like other very personally abusive blogs etc, i'll be off but i'm hoping that won't happen. I've been fighting incurable Myeloma cancer since April 2016 so have got bigger things to think about, I come here for some light relief, BTW i'm doing good, in remission at the mo 😃 but the blooming thing will be back at some point 🙄 Have a great weekend! 👋🍷
At least she got her wish about "breaking the internet"
I watched the State opening of Parliament live on the BBC. The Queen sat down and there was a short pause when the commentator Hugh whatshisface (he’s Welsh), (I’m paraphrasing) said the Queen will give her command for Black rod to ask the House of Commons to join the peers chamber, there was quite a long pause then you heard two shouts for make way for Black Rod.
When I listened and watched the You Tube version (the one where someone was supposed to have heckled ‘Get rid of Markle ). The shout for Make way for Black Rod was being said ‘before’ the Queen was even sitting down. I thought it was very odd, I went and downloaded the State opening of Parliament to my Sky box to re-watch that part, and it showed it how I originally saw it live, the Queen sitting down and then the 2 shouts for Black Rod.
It appears that the YouTube version has been edited; the two versions of picture and sound do not align.
It’s a fake. No one disrespected the queen by yelling about MM.
The BBC coverage is real.
Excellent sleuthing, Louise.
She should be so thankful for where she has ended up and all she can do is complain that it isn't enough. It boggles my mind'
Well said.
Two things that are aggravating factors in any judgement of Meghan (and her assistant Harry) are:
1. She married into a public family who led the country, with dignity and without complaint, through a couple of world wars plus who knows how many other REAL challenging circumstances. (Hence your comparison with Marie Antoinette is so apt.)
2. She does not keep track of things. There is a record of the smug belly cupping and rubbing, the flicking back of the coat for the cameras, the over tight clothing and all sorts of other behaviour that is at odds with this vulnerable, struggling image she is now trying to sell. 'You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.'
1) what if PH and MM will announce they are giving up RF life for private life to do good? Everyone would like that, correct? If they also gave up public monies and If Harry is admitting to severe PTSD, then he isn’t right to be in the line of succession
2) what if the Queen abdicated in favor of Charles (like other European queens did) and explains that she wants to be alive to witness her son’s succession and she is old and therefore it isnt a national tragedy. Brits would be ok with that, correct?
“A new book by royal correspondent Robert Jobson has predicted her early abdication, reports Mail Online.
Clarence House, the official residence of the Prince of Wales, has made no comment.
But bookies are offering odds as short as 2/1 that the Queen will step down.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7595747/the-queen-abdicate-prince-charles/
Many people hate virtue signaling celebrities. People are not stupid.
When H&M were getting married, one of my friends told me H is very dumb and he probably would drive a garbage truck for a living if he was not born into royalty. I thought she was too hash at the time. I don’t think so anymore.
They way I look at it, the RF is a team, or Firm, as they like to call themselves. Their owners, or bosses, whether they like it or not, are the British public. As the boss, who would the British public like on their team, or to represent their 'brand'? Would it be the polished, diplomatic Cambridges on display in Pakistan? or the poorly groomed, indecorous & whiney Sussexes who appeared in Africa? To me, it looks like the A team versus the C team. If I were downsizing, I know who I'd want to ditch.
@Mischi I heard the yell and it had nothing to do with Yankee Wally.
I hope the Queen gets serious about the negativity of Harry and MM. Ideally, I would like to see their titles stripped and funds cut. At the very least I hope the Queen would curtail their representation of the BRF. I think it would be unwise if they ever do another tour. I think they should be told "Honey, we want to make sure you are ok so we want you to rest and relax at Frogmore". Period. End of. No ifs, ands or buts (and butt pads!).
I've just come from the comments on the DM article about her interview of victimhood. Oh man. If you have not looked at the bottom ones, take a gander. It is a jaw dropping how many still profess MM will be queen (a drama queen was one retort). Not just that people are posting how much they don't like her/want her/believe her but going to the bottom posters to respond that it is inaccurate.
Wowsa.
When Diana was killed, people created a mass movement of flowers, upset at the non response by the BRF. This time, it doesn't appear at flowers at a castle gate but comments on public board. 22K responses and more waiting approval. (the natives are restless).
Which is ironic really, as a few centuries ago they'd both be in the Tower by now.
I've heard the royals pay shite, but I'd consider going to work for them just to be a fly on the wall. Not sure I'm quick enough to dodge flying teapots though.
"Maybe the Queen is allowing them enough rope to hang themselves."
Surely by now they have enough rope. It's something else.
https://ourpastimes.com/how-to-use-a-menthol-tear-stick-12426466.html
This is why you shouldn't marry your dealer.
I really feel sympathy for William. He and his wife are the only hope that the monarchy has to survive, and he is pretty much helpless to stop Harry and Rachel.
I was at a forum amongst people whose interests should be maintaining the integrity/ethics of our community, but the moment I mention I'd prefer to keep this unethical/combative person anonymous because she is "litigious" despite my post containing the closest thing to evidence (facts) of this person's unethical behaviour and false reputation (along with a list of things everyone's trying to ignore).
Good thing I took screenshots/receipts of everything from her unnecessarily combative comments to her unethical work. I also kept all my comments saved on PDF before the mods freaked out. They cited maintaining a positive atmosphere, etc. (How is talking about maintaining ethics not a positive thing?)
It.
Is.
Amazing.
How people are afraid of LITIGIOUS PEOPLE more than they respect the Rule of Law.
LOL
...or escort
I'll toast to that....an authentic Mint Julep
This is the worst time for a spoiled rich white girl to whine about her life.
Someone needs to send MM some inspirational cupcakes and happy bananas. Too bad we don't know where she is lives
1) what if PH and MM will announce they are giving up RF life for private life to do good? Everyone would like that, correct? If they also gave up public monies and If Harry is admitting to severe PTSD, then he isn’t right to be in the line of succession
2) what if the Queen abdicated in favor of Charles (like other European queens did) and explains that she wants to be alive to witness her son’s succession and she is old and therefore it isnt a national tragedy. Brits would be ok with that, correct?
1. I doubt that Meghan and Harry will give up their royal roles, unless they can make enough money from their foundation to sustain a very wealthy lifestyle (protection, staff and offices alone cost a huge amount). I doubt that anyone in the BRF will pressurise them to do so. At best, in future Charles (or may have to wait for William to do so) will drastically cut their funding (e.g. get limited funding for appearances on behalf of the crown, which will be dependent on their behaviour ... and the funding will be itemised, scrutinised and questioned by the media, as it is now ... even the RPOs will go and they will have to pay rent for living at Frogmore).
2. The Queen will not abdicate. She may make Charles regent if she becomes too frail to do the job, but she will be Queen until she dies. She is more a Pope John Paul II than a Pope Benedict.
It's just another form of power-mongering.
It's just another form of power-mongering.
Waving your expensive lawyers and/law degree, talking in official legalese out-of-context... Like waving a freaking GUN.
Maybe when they were in Africa they legit didn't see anything that might've moved them.
If you've ever lived in a developing country (which I do right now), you'll notice the expats live in a bubble. Away from the real suffering.
Not defending them, but let's be real: this was just for show and they acted super chill in one of the most dangerous/violent countries in the world during a very volatile time.
Makes you wonder which parts of town they visited and under what circumstances.
The real winners are the ones who know how fake the world is and don't join the fakery and keep it real.
Even if on the surface you look like the loser.
Not in England. Have to catch it on YouTube.
Who's running this world now, scammers?
Are you new here? Because I don't even know who you Are?
I was commenting on the parallel between Meghan/Harry lawsuits and someone in my community who tries to scare people away with BIG LEGALESE WORDS trying to sound all OFFICIAL & AUTHORITATIVE in the spiritual world even when people are innocently complimenting her work.
What's your deal?
He would probably fail the drug test. Maybe he could be the guy who hangs onto the back of the truck dumping the cans.
Yes, Yankee is defending herself against censorship.
She's not just being litigious for the sake of it.
Yes, Yankee is defending herself against censorship.
She's not just being litigious for the sake of it.
I read the possible comment and you clearly have made up something that was not said. It is not unusual for you to attack people. Why don't you stick to writing about the subject at hand? Since you claim you are somewhat Autistic (I have a nephew who has Asperger's) why don't you cut some slack to others about their comments?
Your aggressive behavior is boorish.
It's not just making up a theory. It's saying someone lies and makes up things which are broadcast around the world.
You really don't seem to understand that you shouldn't accuse people of lying. Go check around comment 200 when you did that about me and other people came to tell you not to do that.
Please think about what you accuse people of before you type things. You are ruining people's reputations and Yankee Wally is quite adamant that people will not do that to her. So, just stop.
ow about a drinking game while watching the documentary, drink whenever she says " me, my,mine,I", take two drinks when she says "the Duke" .
Not in England. Have to catch it on YouTube.
I don't think I have enough alcohol to cover that drinking game. Y'all are on your own here!
Is this the in-fighting Nutty mentions in her main posts?
I come here very often but I only skim and didn't notice conflict and combative/belligerent personalities until I get caught up myself in the pettiness of it all.
No wonder Nutty's annoyed.
Can't escape them.
Can't have a peaceful life.
Love and light and you've seen served. 🙏🏼
tatty: “ I would say there is suspicion that she dubbed it in and in her own voice.“
(expressing the conditional mood) indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation.
"he would lose his job if he were identified"
Definition: suspicion: a feeling or thought that something is possible, likely, or true.
I expressed an imagined situation where it feels like something happened.
@Mischi please express your self control and stop reading and replying to my posts like you said you were doing.
It used to be fun LOL-ing at the Millenial Court Jesters.
The closest comments became personal was when we shared personal stories about being screwed over by similar Belligerent personalities in our own private lives.
Now it's overrun by Belligerent people trying to stir up personal drama just like on CDAN.
I'm no shrink but I know for a fact that there are people who get restless when things get too peaceful.
MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP
Empty threat there.
As for Yankee Wally, I will continue defending her because she's a woman of integrity.
Y'all are either engaging an autist, a bot, or a paid provocateur in heated discussion. Neither of the first two will understand y'all's emotional involvement.
Autists do not do well at inferential thinking. If there is not a clear cut A + B = C answer, they may make giant leaps that go out into left field. I remember a young autist that read a children's book. In the book was a passage about "When life hands you lemons, make lemonade!" I asked her what this meant to her in the context of the book. "They were thirsty!" No. It was about taking a bad situation and doing the best you could with it. "But it didn't say that in the book! That wasn't ANYWHERE in the book!"
The third possibility, paid provocateur, will consider it a job well done to disrupt the blog and have people huff away.
Conversation Pivot:
I have been reading Tina Brown's book about Diana. Just a couple of things which if I knew, I had forgotten or hadn't really thought through.
The infamous phone tapes. His was well isn't that odd that the person taping it stated they weren't at home to tape the conversation on the day it supposedly happened. Nope, he heard/taped it 4 days later. Her's was a phone tap internally within the palace. Wasn't the press hacking unless there was another time, (right? I don't remember a 2nd time and if there was - didn't seem to get out so would that be a legit complaint by H?).
What I'm finding interesting is reading about the blowing up of the marriage (well colluding with Morton was lobbing quite the grenade), how she really hadn't quite realized that the ranks would close against her (his and her own family) and then thinking about the parallels with M.
more later if any one is interested
If a bot/provocateur, simply exclude. Or they win.
But I rather doubt we're dealing with somebody on the spectrum?
Excuse me if this sounds ignorant but don't people o the spectrum have savant-like knowledge of their interest du jour?
And don't tell me an autie can't get fixated on gossip/celebrities or non-science subjects. Not all Auties collect trains lol. Some collect makeup palettes.
For example if an Autie/Aspie liked tarot and asteology, they would really enjoy keeping a list of astrological symbols (for funsies just because they like the look of it all in their tables/boxes and print that paper out to laminate and look at all day). And then they would make a list of colour meanings IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER DAMMIT, number meanings... and have a list of every tarot deck published. even if they don't actually read tarot cards.
So i'd think an Aspie with a fascination for the Royal Family would keep a family tree of the lineage & know all the Prince and princess names. And an Excel sheet containing a list of EVERY Markel YouTuber from Wally, Celt, DanjaZone, 2Taz, Janine, etc. With each of their URLs/handles on document.
They don't play disingenuous games like "I didn't know who Prince Harry was i just hoped he was nice." Or talk about Wally and then ask, "where can I find this Wally personality?"
I think this is a paid provocateur (the type who will claim to be another ethnicity or another minority group online etc. To shame anyone who disagrees with them.)
Again, I really hope I'm right and I SINCERELY APOLOGISE IF I'M WRONG.
But I'm guessing that is what we're dealing with.
If they can't conduct themselves civilly maybe they should find a blog where their behavior is welcomed. Why should we have to be attacked and like it, condone it and make excuses for it? I for one, could act out, be irritable and tell others I just got out of cancer surgery today (which I did) so get over it (but it would be wrong).
I’m not defending tatty, only saying it’s possible she knows about Wally but hasn’t found the you tube channel.
As for autism, my cousin is an autist who is disabled and can’t participate in social media. It’s a spectrum disorder that affects people differently. It’s how you can’t say all cancers are the same, or even that all breast cancers are the same.
You can’t compare one autist with another. That is all I know about that.
I guess I read something different from others.
I for one would not let a bully keep attacking me.
The media has generally been kind to them to the point where many MM critics have time and again accused the mainstream media of lacking a backbone and sucking up to the duo. I also believe that public sentiment goes a long way when it comes to the decisions that the BRF takes. They are well aware that they can't enrage the masses or they stay to lose their privilage. To the people outside ok the UK this is about holding a hypocritical sham couple accountable. But, to the UK taxpayer it's more personal. A taxpayer, without question, has been contributing a part of their hard-earned money to the firm. And if things come to a head the masses could just revolt and say we don't want to do that.
So, I do think the BRF will take notice now. I'm also pretty sure wheels are in motion behind the scenes, and that could be one reason these two are so desperate and have essentially lost the plot. The theatrics are embarrassing. The tears too fake.
Feel better 💜💜💜💜💜
I for one would not let a bully keep attacking me.
I thought I heard a voice in the far, foggy distance shouting "Release the Kraken!"
@Alice Surrey James After all, this is not a Sussexes vs Media. It's Sussexes vs the Public. To amlarge extent the media reflects public sentiment (whether it actually does that in today's world scenario is a whole together different discussion and let's not go there). The suck ass duo can't sue the general public so they are suing the media and that is very obvious to everyone.
Yes, they do appear to be trying to shut down any and all opposition. For what purpose? They should know that shutting down people's opportunity to vent steam has about the same result as stopping up the pressure relief vent in a pressure cooker. That sucker's gonna blow.
Pardon me if I'm not making any sense. I poured a bigger glass of wine than usual (waaaay bigger) plus it is nearly 1:30 a.m. and the tropical storm rains are beginning to arrive. I'm being clubbed over the head with sleepiness, and I really am having difficulty keeping my eyes open and my fingers untangled.
We come here for some frivolity and an escape.
Nobody wants to read your back and forth comments to each other.
Send each other your DM info or something if you want to argue.
There will always be trolls.
Don't take it personally and for the love of God, don't engage!!
As I said a couple days ago:
Don't feed the trolls.
If someone says something that offends you, just ignore them.
This is the worst thing you can do to a troll/bully/piece of sh*t.
Every comment you make replying to them only feeds them.
Ignore them, and they're yelling into a vacuum.
I feel quite inspired to start a blog like Enty/Nutty myself.
When will people of power understand that when you try to silence/censor someone, they just scream even louder? And when you're in the wrong and you wave around big legalese words in an attempt to intimidate others when you're the one in the wrong, people will just GLADLY be sued (hell, they'll practically be *begging* for it) because they know a lawsuit will just EXPOSE you.
Who ever asked, "WHAT ARE MARKLE & HARRY HIDING?!" before the lawsuit.
Odd isn't it? It's like the one thing people in power never learn throughout the centuries.
People are quite forgiving, the bottle things up for years and years... And then they get triggered by one mean sentence and all the tea starts to spill. Makes you wonder about all the people who talked about Markle (excluding the 5 imaginary friends). What did she do to them. LOL.
As for the Aspie/Autie issue, they are regarded to be innocent/pure, child-like souls with no ulterior motive by our society (beats an endorsement by Hillary Clinton). In more extreme cases, parents in-denial about their children's neurological conditions will claim their children are "Indigo children" (you know a little bit psychic and sensitive to low vibrational people like infants, if they like you then you must be a good person).
But I'll play along for now (I'm sitting on the fence, trying to decide whether I'm just a vile human being or if things really aren't adding up and as my gut says no).
But maybe I'm just a vile, vile soulless human being with a black heart to suggest that Harvey Weinstein's PR firm might be playing us...
God knows MY soul is impure as hell. 🖤
The Queen never wanted Charles to marry Camilla, even before Diana’s death and right up until the day the wedding was announced both the Queen and Philip wanted Camilla out of Charles life but he gave them an ultimatum “either you let me marry Camilla or I quit.......it’s non-negotiable”. The Queen reluctantly agreed.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9879832/queen-camilla-gone-prince-charles-divorce-princess-diana/
Penny Junor the author of this article is a good friend of Charles , she would have received this information right from the horse’s mouth.
The civil wedding was first scheduled for Windsor Castle but when it was discovered that the legal requirements for licensing the royal castle for a civil wedding meant it would have to be made available for civil weddings for at least three years , the Queen ruled out letting the public anywhere near the Royal Chapel or castle and the venue was changed to Windsor Guildhall, just outside the walls of the castle , The Queen did not attend because as head of the Church of England protocol forbids her from attending civil weddings .
The blessing and reception then took place immediately after in Windsor castle (both of which the Queen attended) A day late so Charles and other VIP wedding guests could attend the funeral of Pope John Paul II.
Unfortunately, the world goes beyond DM's comments, blogs & youtube channels we appreciate.
I woke up this morning, open my IG, twitter, facebook, you tube accounts.
Guess what : MM was everywhere : IG TV, stories of bloggers/influencers...People (who are not her traditional fan base) feel pity for her. The internet is supporting her and is amnesic : forget about private jets, Frogmore cottage, Vogue, Wimbledon....
SS won this battle. It's a smash it. They overshadowed Kate and William tour, they overshadowed Kate's 1st interview (who heard about it?). SS reversed the trend (MM bashing).
See her latest support : Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who has rushed to soothe Meghan Markle.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7589679/AOC-succors-Meghan-Markle-Duchess-broke-camera.html
With the upcoming documentary and the possible announcement of the 2nd pregnancy she has hugely secured her position for a while. She'll be untouchable for the BRF and all the persons they considered as nasty commentators.
One final word on SS's strategy. On IG, I noticed that the targeting audience was newly mums (and accounts related to motherhood) who have massively reported the video of MM explaining how you're vulnerable as a pregnant woman.
I cannot think of any case, at least in modern history, where a royal has been 'kicked out'. So I fear we are stuck with the Harkles. The most that could happen would be for Harry and Meghan to lose the status of 'working' royals, in which case they'd be like Beatrice or Eugenie, still members of the royal family, with royal titles, but not eligible for taxpayer funded protection and expected to work for a living. I wouldn't be surprised if Harry might in fact be talked into giving up the 'working' status and moving to Los Angeles, but he will come to regard it as the biggest mistake of his life if he does such a thing.
"SS won this battle. It's a smash it. They overshadowed Kate and William tour, they overshadowed Kate's 1st interview (who heard about it?). SS reversed the trend (MM bashing)."
Oh, I dunno. It's very hard to get a snapshot of what the representative view is. As I've said before, British people in general are much much less interested in the royals than is commonly assumed, esp with so much else going on right now. Your average person won't care one way or the other. And the parts of the internet I've been looking at tend to be very much against her. So I doubt this cry fest has actually been a game changer at all - her fanz will continue to be fanz, sceptics will continue to be sceptics. It will just entrench 'both sides' in their positions.
Also, what Meghan, absorbed in tacky American celeb culture, does not understand that royalty is about the long game. It's not about trending on twitter or dominating one day's news cycle. Kate is going to be queen and her son is going to be king. Meghan - in the highly unlikly even she stays married and learns to carry herslef with a bit of dignity - is going to be Sophie Wessex. It isn't a competition, because Kate has already won and none of Meghan's shenanigans can ever change that.
Ungrateful cow.
Did you ever ask anyone in South Africa if they were okay?
There's a video that comes with the story. She has these sad puppy eyes looking like Diana except Diana would usually have her chin down/lowered. Also with a lip tucked in her mouth. She is over-emoting.
I mean FFS the woman is in England now. She has access to the best acting schools in the world.
I love it when English people get pissed with other humans and then call them "cow". 🖤
PS ocasio-Cortez and Monica Lewinsky empathize with MM's sudden prominence. Omg!! As if it weren't bought and paid for. Poor little lamb.
Had a pretty awful dag yesterday and lost over 24 hours stressing out over a stupid comment I got from someone.
Thank you for this blog Nutty.
Human interaction is good.
Thank you everyone.
For existing. 💜
Liver Bird
I think people are being a bit over optimistic when they talk about the Harkles being 'cut off' or 'kicked out'. As with all families, you can only become a member of the royal family through birth or marriage, and memebership remains until death or divorce. Even in the latter case, the title is retained, but not the HRH, Sarah Ferguson, for example, is still "Sarah, Duchess of York."
I'm not familiar with the history of the British Royal family beyond the current ones, with the exception of Diana and bits of the previous monarchs, but it has occurred with other royal families. To use the Dutch royals as another example: Princess Beatrix's second son, Friso, and his fiancée weren't honest about the fiancée's past with a (dead) druglord and thus the government decided not to file for permission for their wedding with the Senate and House of Representatives. The permission is required for any Dutch royal who wants to marry and keep their royal position. Friso came clean, admitted they hadn't been truthful but decided he wanted to marry her anyway without asking permission for the wedding himself (as he was entitled to do) and upon marriage, he lost the right to the Dutch throne as well as his title of Prince of the Netherlands. At the time, he was second in line, although his brother's (the current king) wife was pregnant with their firstborn. The royal family later revealed Friso had consulted with his family/parents and they had given them their blessing so to speak (his two brothers were witnesses for the wedding and other family members were present) and Friso and his wife remained close with the royal family but were no longer part of the Dutch Royal House. Their children received no titles and upon his death, Friso was not allowed to be placed in the Royal tomb. The last time a Dutch royal had been refused that right was in 1883. His funeral was private (unlike other royals') and he was buried at a cemetery.
Now, I'm not saying that because it happened elsewhere, it would also happen in the BRF. However, I don't think it would hurt if they decided to implement a similar law for members of the royal family to have to be granted permission from parliament to wed and retain their royal position... and stripping H&M of their funding and HRH title also sounds like a good idea.
#weloveyoumeghan became trending after the video went viral and there is not so much opposite reaction thanks to S.S...
S.S knows how to make a spash. Yet, as I previously mentioned, the Internet is amnesic and MM will be slammed at her next new blunder.