Skip to main content

Meghan and George: Why does a 40-year-old woman envy a 6-year-old?

Apparently Photoshop is not required when releasing photographs of Royal children. Prince George appeared today in a historic image of four heirs to the British throne - Elizabeth, Charles, William, and George - and both his blue-piped white shirt and Black Watch long trousers were hopelessly wrinkled.

That's an easy Photoshop fix - the white shirt is, at least. But the Royal family seems more interested in authenticity than perfection.

They don't have to be Kardashian-smooth. They have the security of old money and it shows.

Meg and her Photoshop

By contrast photos of Meg and Harry's son Archificial, whomever he is and wherever he comes from, are tweaked within an inch of their lives. Backgrounds don't match, faces are imposed, and sometimes the whole thing is reduced to black and white to make the tampering less obvious.

Archie does not have a title, even though he is technically 7th in line to the throne. (And I have my doubts about that.) 

He doesn't have the security of a steady income the way the heirs do, whether it is the Duchy of Cornwall or the Duchy of Lancaster. For Royal income and privileges, he will always be dependent on somebody else. 

So he's got to look good. And he needs the sort of publicity that proclaims that he is going to be a "confident social butterfly." (Which sounds to me like one of those wealthy wastrels out of an Evelyn Waugh novel from the 1930s, but I digress.) And he needs to be admired by glossy celebrities.

At least his mother thinks he does. 

Meg and Envy

Meg is well-acquainted with most of the seven deadly sins - lust, greed, pride, wrath, gluttony, sloth, and envy. When it comes to George and his sister Charlotte, envy seems to be Meg's primary emotion. 

George and Charlotte have something Meg can't hustle her way to. They were born into their roles, born into immense privilege. 

This frustrates Meg, who feels she should be able to hustle her way into everything

Thus we get Sunshine Sachs-style publicity that emphasizes the superior people skills of poor Archificial (whomever he is) and how the Cambridge children should spend more time with the little Mountbatten-Windsor, so they can watch and learn.

(Meg hasn't gone after Prince Louis yet, but give her time.)

Prince George's personality

Usually the only people concerned about a six-year-old's personality are his parents and perhaps his first-grade teacher. 

George is a little different, of course, given his future position. But kids' personalities can change. William was a difficult and arrogant child - his school nickname was Basher - but seems to have matured into a calm and responsible adult.

And George - who is reportedly called "PG" at school, leading to the inevitable nickname "Tips"- seems to have friends, hobbies, and loving parents. 

With his father and grandfather ahead of him in line for the throne, George also has the advantage of many years to live his own life, which would allow him to pursue his own interests. Japan's emperor Akihito was a marine biologist, for example, and of course Prince Charles has used his extensive waiting time to get involved in environmentalism and architecture. 

Does George look miserable when forced into formal clothing and interactions with adults he doesn't know? Yeah, he does. That's pretty normal for a six-year-old boy. 

(And personally, I think it is highly inappropriate that he and Charlotte are being asked to hug random members of the public. Shaking hands is fine for that circumstance.)

Meg's personality

Meg's personality has been extensively discussed on this forum, but her constant craving for publicity and approval is what runs her headlong into George. 

How can she understand someone who was born with all the fame he'll ever need? 

Comments

xxxxx said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7856191/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-work-Canada-2020-royal-expert-claims.html#comments

Same link as posted above. This Omid Scoobie-Do piece is getting brutal comments from the DM commentators....Here is one. >>

Doug, Rochdale, United Kingdom, 21 minutes ago
This shows just how easy a dope and a money grabber can start the end of the British Royal Family.

****another

mart1964, Stoke, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
Work ???????? 6 week break at expense of taxpayer for security detail, you would never cope in the the real world , stop trying to make out you are normal , you live a privileged life and still moan
CookieShark said…
Glad you had a laugh Texshan 😄

Celt News has a great video about the Investiture. Some of the commenters make a great point that H&M may have gatecrashed, betting PC wouldn't dare make a scene. I do think I can hear him tell them to "stand back" but MM keeps walking to him!

I rewatched the video recently of them leaving PCs garden party. She is clearly seen holding court with Harry and accepting a gift from someone. Right after that Harry is tapped on the shoulder and they leave the party.
PaisleyGirl said…
I think you all are right that the Omid Scobie piece in the Daily Mail is significant. He seems to have been Meghan's mouthpiece so far and the fact that he is announcing that the Harkles are not focusing on a second baby at this point says to me that they either tried to get pregnant and it didn't work out or they tried IVF / surrogacy in Canada and it didn't happen. OR they are actually divorcing and a second child is no longer on the cards. The (part time?) move to Canada also seems significant. I think this is the only place where Meghan still has friends she can ask favours from.
Louise said…
I don't understand the phrase "take on more work in Canada".

Unless they plan to obtain degrees in a needed skill such as nursing or information technology or work in an unskilled labour job such as a fast food restaurant, I don't understand what type of "work" they would do in Canada.

We already subsidize a governor general and ten provincial lieutenant governors to represent the monarchy and whose roles are basically ceremonial. There are many Canadians who already question the role of the monarchy in Canada and I don't believe that there would be much enthusiasm for having a Canadian born governor replaced by a British one. Besides the fact that it reeks of a colonial mentality, our governors are chosen for their past contributions to Canadian society (our current G-G is a former astronaut, for example). I believe that installing Harry in this role would create a lot of hostility both to the monarchy and to any Prime Minister who appointed him to that position.

So given that this option is off the table (in my opinion), it comes back to the same question.. what work do they plan to do here? Run her Instagram account?

I also have to add that this repeated reference to Canada as a commonwealth country where she would be welcome seems rather archaic in the Canada of today.. Yes, we are a member of the Commonwealth, but it has zero impact on the day to day lives of most Canadians. It's just something Canadians need to know for history exams or citizenship tests. It's not really something that we care about. That is why she is "left alone" in Canada, i.e. ignored. There is no role for her here.
Henrietta said…
CookieShark, Where is the video of H&M at PC's birthday party?
NeutralObserver said…
@Kate, @abbyh. I didn't realize Henry Vlll was trained for the church, although I knew he was very well educated for the times. Perhaps that was part of Anne Boyleyn's allure? She also was well educated for the times, especially for a woman. We (especially here in the US) tend to think of Henry Vlll as a rapacious Bluebeard, but we forget that the civil wars which preceded Henry's father's reign made securing the succession with a male heir vitally important to him. Legitimate, male heirs were not just important to the Tudors, but for the peace of the kingdom. Ending primogeniture(male), modern divorce, DNA testing sound much more humane & 'civilized.' LOL.
xxxxx said…
More entertaining comments for the Obie/Daily Mail piece. Laughs ensue.

beckers, Homestead, United States, less than a minute ago
This "reporter" is a friend of a friend, and this is all nonsense. Sounds like a bunch of talking in circles around the fact they were given the boot. Why in the world would they trademark things as royals? Greed, that's why. Sounds like 2020 is off to a great start for the BRF not having these two fruitcakes around. "Friends AND FAMILY in Canada". Pffffft... Really? Who? Did her only family member at the wedding move there?

_____________

Kabuki, Somewhere in the World, Ã…land Islands, less than a minute ago
So the IVF didn't work. Quick. What's a cover up story? Such a bizarre story from MM's mouthpiece. Canada is her hometown filled with friends and family? Haha. She worked there for a few years and most of those "friends" were actors also working there for a few years. If you are going to lie, try to get the facts straight.

_____________

Feetupwithacoffee, Perth, Australia, about a minute ago
They are pleading to go on a royal tour of Canada like they did with the USA, it ain't gonna happen after the Australian debacle. Charles wont allow it. They carried on like a pair of vulgar hippies down here. It was disgraceful...

______________

Never Never Give In, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2 minutes ago
Let's hope that the BRF strips MM-"H" of their royal titles and privileges. They are both a liability to the Monarchy: she's a malignant narcissist and he's a dope. They play the self-pitying victim and r cards; the D card; the Archie card ... to merch, merch and merch. Perhaps they should re-think having a 2nd child ... because parents who are "miserable and unhappy" do not bring up well-adjusted children.

_______________

Cherry Bright, Rominaoundtheworld, United States, moments ago
Her reluctance to do anything in the UK makes me wonder whether she realised what her obligations would be after marrying a member of the RF. She gives the impression she doesnt want anything to do with the UK. With that said the UK have effectively lost Harry!

_______________


yourlivingalie, inthemiddleofnowhere, Gibraltar, moments ago
I really feel sorry for the canadians who now have got to suffer with these two parading themselves in Canada,who will be paying their security bill,will it be the Canadian government or these two freelancers?

******Freelancers! Brutal I tell ya! Brutal for a new decade plus Ricky Gervais put a hit on all the phony wokeness going around. Of course this Sussex duo being main displayers-propagators of woke nonsense. Better stay in Canada for a few more months, is my advice. Bottom line is Megs married her dream Prince, then found out she does not like being around, in proximity to average British people. Thus the Archie reveal in multi-cultural South Africa where they (Megs) used Bishop Tutu.
Sandie said…
There is a very informative post here

https://the-charlatan-duchess.tumblr.com/

about Meghan using a photograph about the Australian fires and not crediting the photographer (Alex Coppel), even though he has clear information about who he is, who he works for, that he owns copyright for his photographs, and that he must be credited.

Do the Sussexes not have competent informed staff who can not make these embarrassingly unprofessional errors, or is Meghan controlling the account and being her usual arrogant and messy self?

Anyway, Alex Coppel was struggling to contact the Sussex office and the comments are not kind to the Sussexes.
abbyh said…

Henry wrote a book defending the 7(?) sacraments for the Catholic church before they and he parted ways.
Miggy said…
Oooh, they must be back in the UK.

https://twitter.com/RE_DailyMail/status/1214219650537598976
NeutralObserver said…
@abbyh, little nuggets like yours are what make me love this blog. You learn something everyday!
Miggy said…
Oops... having read further, maybe not.

Now I'm confused!
Miggy said…
It has the Royal stamp of approval...

https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=news&q=%23meghanmarkle&src=typd
PaisleyGirl said…
Tomorrow's "engagement" is not on the Court Circular, though. Is it something they came up with themselves to make it appear as if they had an official engagement?
Hikari said…
@Wild Boar,


>>>Chav nicknames: Sharon has long been `Shazza'

Thanks for the reminder--I believe I first heard this in "Bridget Jones's Diary"--Bride's BFF played by Sally Phillips is 'Shazza'. Or "Shezza". To my American ears it sounded like "Shezzer".

Fans of BBC Sherlock will recall that Sherlock Holmes went undercover in a crack house, in an ode to "The Man with the Twisted Lip" as a crack addict named 'Shezza'.

Mary: Seriously . . .SHEZZA?

When posh boys try to go the full chavvie, it can sometimes turn out sort of ridiculous. Though 'Hazza' suits Harry. He has proved himself to be quite a Hazz-ard to the Royal family. Edward Lane Fox may be somewhere nursing a drinks problem, to see all his laborious and careful work in image rehabilitation undone so quickly and completely. For ELF's sake, I hope he retired on a generous pension and is nursing his drinks problem somewhere warm and sunny.

I always really liked cheeky Haz, until around two years ago when his intrinsic IDGAF tw*tness was revealed. Haz was the weakest link who allowed his narc grifter an 'in' into his family, but he seems to be a willing participant in ripping his own reputation and credibility to shreds. Harry must indeed be really stupid, whatever his other issues might be. I prefer the nickname "Hapless".

I don't know whether he will extricate himself from The Claw, or if he even wants to, but regardless of what happens in the Sussex marriage, such as it is, if I were William, I would never, ever trust Harry again. Far from being the sweet, dim, gullible victim here, I think he's bought in to Megs' toxic vision for their "Stardom". Jealousy is corrosive, and it seems now that Haz has been corrosively jealous of his elder brother since they were children. His attachment to the "Lion King" now feels extremely sinister. If Lion King is an animated children's riff on "Hamlet", then Harry is Scar/Claudius . . the younger brother scheming to undermine the anointed King, his brother.

King William may have his hands full with the 'Scar' in the family, even sans his enabler. Harry is too dim to drive this crazy train fully on his own, but he could still man it to a spectacular derailment. To mix my movie metaphors, he is also 'Fredo', the mentally deficient Corleone brother who got a taste of being a big shot but lacked the ability to judge poor companions, who filled his head with discontent and coaxed him into betraying his family. He paid for his disloyalty with his life, and he didn't get a free pass for being close to an imbecile.


>>>nobody knows what really goes on between a couple…’ a counsellor once said to me `and very often the couple themselves haven’t a clue either.’

That would seem to describe at least one half of the Sussex duo. Not having a clue is Haz's thing. Maybe too many hits to the head in his rugby days, piled on top of whatever learning disabilities he already had.
Louise said…
It looks as though the Smirkles will be sucking the Canada angle dry.

I am curious about the reference "Canadian hospitality and support" in the official announcement. I had believed this to be a private visit but obviously the Canadian government was involved, based on this statement, since private hospitality has nothing to do with Canadians diplomats. I am not pleased that this seems to have been done in secret. But typical of the Trudeau government.. Trudeau has already been found in an ethical breach for having accepted a free trip (and a suitcase) from the Aga Khan. His wife also had her knuckles rapped for accepting, but not declaring, freebies of clothing and jewelry. Free hospitality for the Smirkles' holiday from the Canadian taxpayers is more of the same.

As for the reference to the partnership between Canada and the UK, I see this as the Smirkles setting themselves as U.K. trade commissioners to Canada, or something along those lines. Andrew abused his position as "trade envoy" in the same way, I believe.

They may also try to replace Andrew as patrons to some Canadian organizations such as the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto
HappyDays said…
xxxxx said…
More entertaining comments for the Obie/Daily Mail piece. Laughs ensue.

xxxxx:

Here’s one more from Feetupwithacoffee, one of the commenters you listed. During and after H&M’s big tour Down Under, I read several times on Twitter where people who were friends or relatives of staff people such as lower level government employees and employees of some of the lodgings where H&M stayed that Meghan treated staff people terribly. For example, at one lodging, she was pleasant to service staff who made the cut for Meghan’s standard of being good looking, but if someone wasn’t a particularly handsome or beautiful person, she treated them like crap.

Here’s the other comment from Feetupwithacoffee, which echoes what I’ve already read about how Meghan treats the help:

Feetupwithacoffee Perth, Australia
Well don’t come here. You abused the staff. You aren’t welcome.
Miggy said…
@PaisleyGirl,

If you scroll down on this link you will see the screenshot.
It says Royal Communications. (with Royal stamp above)


https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=news&q=%23meghanmarkle&src=typd

It must have been sanctioned by the Palace.
Louise said…
Sandie: Thanks for that link regarding the Smirkles not giving the Australian photographer credit for his photo and how they are ignoring his requests to be credited.

They are such low lifes.
Miggy said…
Okay, so now Richard Palmer has confirmed that they are back in London!

https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter
Hikari said…
@Texshan, Cookie and all . .

>>>"Markle is meeting with lawyers to help manage her turbulent and sudden rise to international fame. Insiders say Markle, who has starred on 'Suits' for six years, may be struggling to come to terms with the overwhelming attention."<<<

Good thing I don't wear dentures like Megs, because I'd have choked on 'em from laughing.

In the Country Known as Meghan's Mind, she 'starred' on Suits. Yep. I'm filing this away under the delusional 'I'm a polyglot in four languages' . . 'Both my dogs are OK and flew with us to Canada' . . . 'We ran into a couple of COMPLETE STRANGERS in the woods in Canada' and "My Black mother and I are **like this**.' Among others.

So, this piece came out in 2017--well before the engagement, her Narc PR was on full display.

Re. the Role for the Spare

Elizabeth's father made a career as a naval man when he was Duke of York and even after he was the King, still considered himself a naval officer first and foremost. His heir to the Duke of York title, Andrew, pursued the same path.

The military would have been a good career for Harry, but he didn't have the temperament for a good soldier. Insubordination and racial ephithets for fellow squaddies . .not cool. It's unfortunate, but Harry seems to completely lack any internal resources to call upon in terms of brains, drive or ability to do anything but party, whine, and stick his foot in it at speeches. We had a couple of bars of his "Hamilton" and his voice was actually pretty decent. Harry has not amounted to much and I expect the trend to continue. I guess being born to such immense privilege and being guaranteed a cushy berth for life, regardless of your screw-ups (Andrew is 'retired' but he will never want for anything for the rest of his days) blunts any initiative toward excellence unless one has an interior motivation to excel which is not standard issue among the 'rich and thick'.

Charles has endured a lot of guff for decades, not least from his own father, but he stuck to his guns and has excelled in his chosen fields. He was derided as a whinger as a child and youth, but he has stayed an often-rocky course (parental disappointment; Gordonstoun; the first marriage) and he is steering his own course. He has not shirked his duty to the Crown, despite the daily small humiliations of being so publicly, Not Mummy or Daddy's Favorite. His eccentricities have proved prescient. Charles was actually 'woke' about the environment long before it was trendy to be so. He is too indulgent toward his youngest son but he probably still feels guilty about his role in depriving his sons of their mother so young. I hope that he can find some way to bring Harry back into the fold without catering to Hazzard's whims but that relationship might be irretrievably broken. I think Wills is done with Harry. If Haz had *any* brains, he'd suck up to Pa and try to mend fences, but it could very well be too late for that.

What are these rumors wafting about Le Divorce?? Must investigate. Probably too good to be true.

I didn't expect Meghan at the Globes last night, but the longer time passes without the Harkles showing their faces in England, the more it looks like the 'break' is permanent. Maybe their BFF PM Trudeau will give them a job . . won't that go over a treat with Canadian voters??
Miggy said…
"The Sussexes return! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will end their six-week break TOMORROW with a visit to Canada House to say thank you for the 'warm welcome' they received during recent stay with Archie."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7857421/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-visit-Canada-House-London-tomorrow.html
Hikari said…
"The Sussexes return!

UK, steel yourselves!

I guess the prospect of their break being permanent was just too good to be true.
CookieShark said…
On further review, who meets with lawyers to deal with attention? Everything that has happened since MM came on the scene sure seems attention-seeking. I don't understand the daily updates from Scobie, et al. The PR surrounding every major event for her is a disaster. It's beginning to mess with my own head.

I do not think she is as famous as she believes she is. None of my coworkers have ever discussed her, and we're a chatty bunch who love to gossip and carry on. The MM news surging to floodtide daily is fatiguing. They are overexposed. It is not helping the RF. If they do stay in Canada, if they don't...why not just live their lives and we will find out eventually?
Trying to figure out if I am happy or disappointed that they have (apparently) returned to the UK. Happy they are not defiling Vancouver Island any more but disappointed they appear to be together and that Harry remains under the claws of this woman. Look what has been achieved though! We have seen PH with his son! The world now knows who Abigail Spencer is! The owner of the "mansion" has free PR for future letting/sales! We now know the value of fake PR and Photoshopping, and that lousy acting can get you in the limelight if you are friends with a "royal." Quite incredible. Really..
xxxxx said…
I guess we should have known they were returning when Scoobie-Doo perked up so much he got squirted into the DM pages, or got goosed by his Soho patron Marcus whatever his name.

Happy Days -- Thank for the additional comments from DM commentator Feetupwithacoffee Perth, Australia. The comments ring true and not a lie.
CatEyes said…
@Kate said:

>>>This is why Henry VIII, who was a spare himself before his brother Arthur passed away, was uniquely qualified to first defend and then criticize Catholic theology during the Reformation.<<<

If "uniquely qualified" means successfully defend himself for wanting to constantly divorce and kill wives, then NO he was not successful. It is a dogma of Catholicism (my religion) that Henry VIII broke with the Church because he was obviously unsuccessful in pleading his knowledge of theology. That and many other problems with his theology such as he inherited the lack of theology that Lutheran put forward by eliminating willy nilly a number of books of the Bible (such as Macabees I and II).
KitKatKisses said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hikari said…
Over on "The Crowns of Britain" blog which I check religiously every Sunday, when she posts, only, I couldn't get it to open on my phone last night, so I logged in there today, blogger Saffy posts a large sized copy of the Archie & Harry against a 'Canadian backdrop' (quotes hers) and posits an interesting theory/observation about Archie's harlequinesque two-toned legs which others had commented upon. I have just spent a few minutes looking hard at the aforementioned area which was harder to see clearly in smaller versions of this photo and I have to say, she might be onto something.

She says that 'Archie' is wearing a little denim skirt with grey woolen leggings, and the skirt is hiked up due to the way Harry is holding the child. She jokes about this being the 'gender neutral' dressing that Meg spoke of as the woke way she and Haz were gonna raise their baby in his/her vegan painted nursery. She steers away from overtly stating an obvious alternative suggestion: that the baby in Harry's arms is wearing a little-girl outfit because she is actually a little girl.

I have no die-hard opinion on this subject, but I have yet to see any form of wool leggings on a boy of any age, infant or no. On the other hand, skirt and leggings are extremely au courant for girls of all ages (most of whom should not be wearing this combo if they are significantly over, say 16 or 160 pounds, but that doesn't stop enough women from doing it anyway.)

Also, the cute AF bobble hat being sported by Archie in this picture isn't particularly *girlie-exclusive*. It's just that we have photographic proof that the infant daughter of Harry's 'Turkish friends' owns and has worn the identical hat very recently. The hat that retails for $47 and had sales skyrocket the instant this picture of Harry and the baby was posted . . . yet another marching opportunity for Meghan. It's not likely that the Turkish couple just happened to have an identical, nearly $50 baby hat in reserve on the off chance that Harry would drop by for a photo op with his identically sized infant, is there? Just saying.

For the record, the child that Harry is holding seems to have outgrown the 'infant' designation, being at least 12 months old, I'd say. Otherwise those are some freakishly long legs for a baby who, according to Meg and Harry (if not any practicing physicians anyone has been able to find) is turning 8 months old *today*.
lizzie said…
@ Hikari,

I wasn't convinced Archie's two-tone look was from the light and shadows either and I'm not at all sure Harry is wearing a scarf.

But Louis wore what looked like leggings or tights in the Cambridge Christmas card in 2018. He wore shorts over them but with the way Kate was holding him, it could look like a skirt.
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a25584481/kate-middleton-christmas-card-jeans-sweater-2018/
Sandie said…
Have a look at the replies to Richard Palmer's tweet about the Sussexes visiting Canada House:

https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/1214221768103268354
Miggy said…
@Hikari & Lizzie,

If you look really carefully you can see the blue scarf under his chin and a tiny bit around his neck, (although most of that area is hidden by his hood) and the end of the scarf is obviously resting on Archie's leg.

Miggy said…
@ Sandie,

I've just been reading them. They are scathing.
Kate said…
@cateyes I never used the word “successful.” But yes, he was uniquely qualified, because in an era where only those in training to join the Church would have been educated in theology, he could make a case against Luther and then for his annulment of a marriage he claimed was illegal. Make no mistake: I’m not putting Henry VIII on a pedestal. I’m simply pointing out that creating a specific role for the second in line could be advantageous for everyone involved. I agree with a previous poster that the military is a good option.
Hikari said…
@KitKat,

My choice of 'learning disabilities' was perhaps poorly chosen. And my choice of 'stupid' certainly was not kind, either. I am an educator who currently tutors a young lady who struggled with dyslexia in school and I have a very good friend who is also an adult dyslexic. You are right in saying that dyslexia is a separate issue from IQ--indeed, most of the dyslexics I have known both personally and anecdotally, like Tom Cruise, are intelligent, with a very impressive aural-recall memory. They have to develop alternative skills when navigating a world where print is not always reliable for them. In my real life, I have great compassion for those coping with physical and mental challenges. If I had been Harry's teacher, I certainly feel like I'd have a better handle on what ails him and could probably be more compassionate. In the context of this blogosphere, I find myself frustrated with Harry and more or less like he's fair game for insults about his mental acuity . . mostly because he really has yet to display any, and frankly hadn't, since long before Meghan came into the picture.

Many of the photos we have of Harry, from little boyhood up to the present day (oftentimes during 'official' photographs) display him looking surly. For all his (pre-Meg) reputation as that cheeky, sunny boy of Diana's, the fact is that Harry was rarely ever 'sunny'. He more often wore/wears a face like a smacked bum, as the saying goes. I chalked it up to bad attitude, but perhaps a lot of the time, it's due to the stress of not being able to keep up with the rest of the world, intellectually and the inferiority that stems from that.

Dyslexics and those with other LDs are made to feel less than bright, which is not fair. In Harry's case, though, I do wonder if something apart from dyslexia is at root of his problems, though. Or I should say, more than being dyslexic and being born second in his family. Until recently I was not aware of Harry's struggles in school. Notwithstanding that his path would have been smoothed as a royal, Eton and Sandhurst are two of the very top schools in England. If he were admitted solely because he is a Windsor, without possessing the ability to do even rudimentary work there, his parents did him no favors. Of course, he's a boy . . . Diana was more or less treated like the village idiot in her family due to her reading difficulties and was sent off to Switzerland to learn how to ski in lieu of even pretending to sit for any A-levels.

Hikari said…
If dyslexia were Harry's only obstacle, he might not be so badly off, but I'd say there's a lot more going on there. Unlike during his mother's schooldays, Harry could have and should have received top-notch diagnostics and remediation for his reading difficulties. It's actually only hearsay that he is dyslexic, I believe, but he seems to have been unable to pass any exams at all except for two he cheated on. Maybe it's down to substance abuse or just intrinsic laziness. Or perhaps Harry does have an intellectual impairment (not dyslexia, or in combination with it.)

If I have seemed to insensitively conflagrated dyslexia or other specific learning differences with low intelligence, I apologize for seeming offensive. I do understand the difference . . I just do not understand Harry. I realize that I'm being mean to him online in a way I wouldn't be to any person's face, including his. The Sussexes just make it so darn easy to dump on them.

I feel like Meghan is far easier to get a grip on than Harry. Two years on, I do not understand *his* motives for being in his marriage, or this hold she seems to have over him and the decisions he makes, both jointly and by himself. Harry as an entity seems quite lost, where he seemed so vivid before she came into the picture. It's a cheap shot to dismiss it as just rank stupidity on his part but in the absence of other information to redeem him in my eyes, I'm going with the easiest explanation. Maybe that's not fair . . Harry may add that unfairness to all the other items in his life which he feels are too unfair to deal with.
Miggy said…
I think it's quite obvious now that the "Royal Communications" announcement came from the Sussexes own office at Buck Palace. They themselves requested the visit.

Ugh, anything to put them back in the spotlight.
Hikari said…
@Miggy,

Well, at least we didn't have to endure any photos of Meg preening on the red carpet last night in some sartorial horror. Small blessings.

Gee, they still rate an office staff at BP? If they still have palace staff (for all the good they are able to do) then the plug is not fully pulled out of the socket yet.
I see the New Zealand Herald has an article on `The Curse of the Spare' . It's a very recent problem, I'd say. The need for an understudy was very real in the past and it's remarkable how often the `spare' has succeeded to the throne after the death of the heir, or the heir fathers no children.

Succeeded deceased sibling: Henry VIII ; Mary I : Elizabeth I; Charles I; James II & VII.; Anne; William IV:, Victoria ( sideways & down!); George V ; George VI.

Compare with:

Henry VII (usurped); Edward VI; James I & VI (nearest in line); Charles II; Mary II; Georges I , II , III & IV; Edward VII; Elizabeth II/

In the past, the `spare' had almost an evens chance of becoming monarch.

NB The Jameses with 2 numerals denotes their English and Scottish regnal numbers
IEschew said…
If they still have an office staff at BP, then why has the Australian photographer had such difficulties reaching anyone about the copyright he holds to that photo SussexRoyal posted sans permission or credit? They are beyond the pale. I will never understand why they are not held accountable.
Girl with a Hat said…
I've been very busy so haven't caught up with all the comments from commenters I feel deserve to be read.

I don't know if anyone's posted the tweet about the rumours of a divorce proceeding between Meghan and Harry. I will post the link later if no one else has done it.

Miggy said…
@Hikari,

Yes, thank god we were spared the Meghan horror show.

Someone has commented on the Richard Palmer thread that they read that only Harry is going tomorrow, so it'll be interesting to see if she turns up or not!

KitKatKisses said…
@Hikari, thank you for the lovely explanation and kind words. I apologize for "scolding" and have deleted my reply. I do get too upset about this issue having witnessed first hand how dyslexics are still affected by ignorance, even from teachers. I am very passionate about advocating for these students and am even considering a second career to help students with LD's.

Anyway, I thought there was a video of Harry mentioning he is dyslexic but I may be wrong about that. It seems that there might be a "dyslexia" gene dating back to Queen Victoria, as her children married throughout the royal houses off Europe, and now many of those offspring are dyslexic. It has been reported that Prince Charles struggled to learn to read, although he may not be formally diagnosed as dyslexic. Besides Harry, there is Princess Beatrice, King Carl of Sweden, his daughter Victoria, and his son, Carl Philip, and Prince Louis of Luxembourg. These are the ones that I know of. Some suspect Victoria and Albert's eldest son (Edward VII) was dyslexic, although of course it wouldn't have been diagnosed as such then. I had not considered that Diana may have had learning disabilities but that does make sense.

I also agree that Harry has thrown away his advantages with both hands. I doubt we will ever be able to separate all his issues, from his mother's death to his lack of drive, possible drug habits, and so forth. If Harry is indeed dyslexic, that would have been an amazing platform for him to bring attention to, which I believe Carl-Philip and Louis of Luxembourg have tried to do.

However (and not directed to you), I do stand by my previous comments about Gary Janetti and don't think that was "scolding", as I was clear to state that was my opinion and others are welcome to theirs.
KC said…
Does any picture exist of Charles holding Archie, even just holding his hand? I can't recall seeing one, just Charles looking almost over Harry's shoulder at the baby in Harry's arms, released after the christening. but the Real Fab Four, with Charles' arm around his grandson, makes me wish they had gotten one for grandson Archie. Not photoshopped either. He's not being allowed to be with the (ok, alleged) family.
Miggy said…
@ Mischi,

I posted the link earlier, (much earlier) so it may have got lost! :)
Girl with a Hat said…
@Miggy, thanks. I haven't had time to go through all the comments.
CatEyes said…
@Kate said:

>>>@cateyes I never used the word “successful.”<<<

Precisely why I phrased my sentence if you noticed..."IF (see the word :If:) by "uniquetly qualified" means successful...."

But people, other than priests (or Henry VIII) at that time period, would have access to the Bible, such as monks, religious brothers, religious hermits, nuns, novices, altar boys, readers at Mass, higher-level heirachy of the church (such as Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals) and others who had copies of the Bible, men in colleges (the Catholic Church started the first system of colleges/universities in the world) and the people who attended mass who have the old and New testament readings each Sunday (where over the course of three years the Bible is read in its entirety.
CatEyes said…
@Hikari said:

>>>For the record, the child that Harry is holding seems to have outgrown the 'infant' designation, being at least 12 months old, I'd say<<<

I also noticed the extremely long, long fingers on Archie (in the Canadian photo). They sure don't look like an 8 month old baby's fingers as both Meghan (especially is petite despite her 'claw' like hand) and Harry are not basketball size type people who would have a gigantic baby with long extremities it seems.
@Miggy .
"The UK press announces a royal family scandal following. Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are in the middle of a divorce. "Prince Harry Divorces Meghan Markle Will Continue to Postpone His Return to the Royal Family," headline several publications in England."

https://www.uk24.co/2020/01/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-getting-divorced-the-british-press-makes-the-announcement.html

Not sure where this is coming from because I certainly haven't seen any major British publications print this.

This had its origin in a non-existent news vehicle called the "Daily States News." However, Google that and you get a link that says it isn't available/doesn't exist.

Miggy said…
@Lighthealer Astrid,

Maybe it was 'part' copy & pasted from another link which I posted before that one?

It was a similar story.



CatEyes said…
Here is What that link says about alleged "divorce"

>>>The UK press announces a royal family scandal following. Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are in the middle of a divorce. "Prince Harry Divorces Meghan Markle Will Continue to Postpone His Return to the Royal Family," headline several publications in England.
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry getting divorced? The British press makes the announcement
The atmosphere in the British royal family has been very tense lately. After Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made several too candid statements last year, the media is now speculating that the two are going through a nasty divorce. There seems to be no place of reconciliation between them, even though they chose to spend Christmas in the United States, far from the evil mouths of the United Kingdom.
Their little vacation couldn't bring them closer and now things are not at all pink. The speculations are even greater than in the speech of Queen Elizabeth, their names were mentioned fleetingly, and on the table on which their portrait was not found. This hyped the fans of the royal house.
The UK media also wrote that Queen Elizabeth forced Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to sign a prenuptial contract before the wedding, to make sure everything would be as she wished. Fiona Shackleton, the highest paid divorce lawyer in the UK, was present when this contract was signed.<<<
Sorry @Miggy. I don't understand. I will go look for your previous post.
CatEyes said…
@Lighthearted Atsrid

What I posted above is from the link @Miggy posted (if I followed the link right; I dont know how it could be wrong)
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Cat Eyes
Isn't Fiona Shackleton the lawyer representing Prince Charles when he divorced Diana? Interesting they threw her name in. Only two options here - either it is complete bovine waste product and her name is just used to give it weight or the story contains some truth in it.

I believe the royal family would insists in a prenup knowing her background.
CatEyes said…
@Lighthealer Astrid

Sorry typed your name wrong.
CatEyes said…
Does seem strange such earthshaking news wouldn't be picked up by every possible media source in UK?!!

Would the Queen have a right to insist Megs submit to a Prenup? Of course she (HMTQ) was footing the bill for a hasty expensive wedding so you would think she would have some weight in insisting such take place.

An aside: My opinion is that Meg got an engagement ring because she was preggers (then conveniently miscarried after the engagement was announced) but that is my evil mind thinking.
@CatEyes. Thank you! It is early afternoon here in BC and you would think by now, the coffee would be working! On another note, the Island feels lighter today.
DesignDoctor said…
Not a video but pics and commentary on Charles birthday party.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a20873008/prince-harry-bee-meghan-camilla-charles-70th-birthday-party/

One of the few times I thought MM dressed appropriately for an event.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/style/fashion-trends/a20871232/meghan-markle-blush-dress-first-post-royal-wedding-appearance-garden-party/

And they were kicked out. I read it was because she was laughing at Harry during the speech, but another poster (in this thread) said it was because she accepted a gift.
@CatEyes. Just read what you wrote. I think this is translated from a Romanian news outlet. In any event, sadly, it doesn't appear to be true, does it?

Isn't it incredible how this woman "sees a lawyer" to cope with all this publicity she is getting. Other people, such as the Great Unwoke, would seek psychological counselling or tips from senior royals, but our American friend has to find a lawyer. She makes me feel ill.
Bravura said…
Awww man! I'm so sad I missed the tea conversation!!! I am partial to PG Tips or Typhoo, personally - extra strong (almost black) - with sweetened condensed milk. My grandfather served in India as part of the Royal Horse Artillery and that's how he learned to drink it. Mum takes hers with just milk though (I used to prefer milk or creme with sugar) like a "proper Brit" as she says, lol. Twinnings Black Currant is ah-mah-zing though. Why the US has a hatred toward black currant I will never know. Everyone knows the black currant flavored winegums and fruit pastilles are the best. ;)

Ps - I just learned today that Prince George's nickname is "Tips" because they refer to him as PG in school. I thought that was a brill nickname for him and love how it comes full circle to our tea topic! <3

Getting back to subject; I am still on the fence about TP and DD being "troll accounts." Like all Megxit posters, I take it all with a grain of salt. Is there some truth to any of it? Who knows. It appears that TP and DD are limited on what they can share, exactly, so time may tell as to what the true narrative is.

I still do not believe they were in Canada. It just doesn't sit right with me, especially given how utterly orchestrated everything was. Nothing about Megan is ever quiet.

1. In almost every single one of her trips, we have pictures and information about the planes she took, her itinerary, her wardrobe, etc. Now we have nothing? Nadda? No rogue Canadian or American journalist/photographer grabbing any pictures of anything?
2. The only people who see them see them while on a hiking trail (SERIOUSLY? When does Megs ever hike??) while they were struggling with their selfie-stick (who struggles with a selfie stick????), and said persons end up having ties to the news (or something akin to it?).
3. The weather in the PNW has been disgusting for the past three months. I live in Washington State. We have been dealing with torrential rain and flooding off and on from November through December. There have been very few clear days for either that picture with Harry and Archie to have taken place and for them to have gone hiking. If they had gone hiking, it would have been muddy and slippery. Given that Megs doesn't lend herself to be an outdoorsy type, I can imagine her hating being outdoors in the PNW this time of year. Even most die-hard PNW folks don't venture outside this time of year.

Rumor is that she's back in the UK again. I am very curious how all of this will turn out.
Girl with a Hat said…
I wonder how Ricky Gervais' performance yesterday at the Golden Globes will affect people's perception of Meghan. People are fed up with the hypocrisy of the Woke Set.
CatEyes said…
Here is a previous account about Prince George calling himself 'Archie'.

>>>What will Prince George call himself now that the new Royal Baby, Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, has stolen his alleged secret nickname? According to The Sun, earlier this year Prince George reportedly told a dog walker that he is actually called Archie.

“I was asked by a police minder not to take a photo of the children, which I didn’t, but George started stroking my dog. Just to be friendly I engaged in a bit of small talk and I asked George what his name was, even though obviously I knew it" the dog walker, who wished to remain anonymous, told the paper.

"To my astonishment he said ‘I’m called Archie’ with a big smile on his face. I don’t know why he calls himself Archie but kids often play with their names and I think it’s lovely” she added.<<<
Henrietta said…
DesignDoctor, thank you for the links! I wondered if the divorce story link originated in Romania, but didn't have time to look it up. Wasn't Romania where their private secretary was ambassador?
DesignDoctor said…
@CatEyes
I totally remember reading about that incident!
I also remember hearing that Archie was George's RPO code name and thought it was very odd that MM & PH chose that name for their son's name.

@Henrietta
I do not know anything about the Harkle's private secretary.
CatEyes said…
@Bravura said:

>>> The only people who see them see them while on a hiking trail (SERIOUSLY? When does Megs ever hike??) while they were struggling with their selfie-stick (who struggles with a selfie stick????), and said persons end up having ties to the news (or something akin to it?).<<<

I don't know how Meghan can hike when she can't even walk without hanging onto Harry for dear life because she walks so wobbly. Yes, it could be due to the ridiculously high heels she wears, but what is wrong with her that she can't walk in them, assuming she has worn them for almost two decades. She does not come off as a person who values physical activity unless it is yoga which is a relatively slow movement(s) in a confined physical setting. Her legs do not show calf muscle like she is inclined to hiking or much walking for exercise (saying this as a former athlete myself).
KC said…
Blogger Elle, Reine des Abeilles said...
Has anyone noticed @Nutty has been silent? I hope she is okay

I hope so, or maybe traveling for work...or enjoying how we are minding what we say, not commenting on or at other posters, focusing on the blog's real topic and closely related material (sharing notes on tea, etc.)

DesignDoctor said…
@Bravura

I am American and I love Twinings Black Currant tea and also think it is ah-mah-zing. I love Black Current everything especially preserves but that flavor product is hard to find here. I have thought about trying to grow black currents in my garden.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
DesignDoctor said…
The Sun has an article on Charles' birthday party with a pic of MM sticking her tongue out! She has NO manners.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6347754/meghan-markle-prince-harry-royal-wedding-charles-70th-birthday-first-event/

In the past couple of weeks I watched a video of them leaving the party after being kicked out and their faces were very stormy and angry. I will post the link if I can locate it again.
Kate said…
@cateyes You listed people who were in the Church. The average congregant only knew what the priests wanted them to know, which is a huge part of why the Reformation happened to begin with.

But we’re getting weighed down by semantics, which is annoying for me. You don’t seem to get, or want to get, my point: Henry VIII, because of his religious training due to his place in the line of succession, had religious knowledge that he would not have if he had been firstborn and thus educated for the throne, not the church. That’s all.
Bravura said…
@CatEyes - Yep. Hit the Nail on the head there! I would be very curious about how she handled being in the PNW if she was here. Depending on the type of weave she has and the hair type/quality weave/wig/extensions she has, it's not exactly the most conducive weather for sleek wavy strands. Given our very wet weather and humidity here, its just another thing that sticks out to me as to why she wouldn't *want* to be here. Those cute, chic belted jackets she's so fond of are worthless out on the trails. You want a decent anorak or waterproof jacket for our temperamental weather. We know she wore Wellies in the UK so I wonder if she even brought those out here? But even those are worthless to really "hike" in. It just doesn't sit right with me - having observed Megan's behavior this past year alone and how she almost always has her hair down or in a low, messy bun with loose bangs, I don't see how that would work in the rainy PNW if she was hiking. If it's raining, you pull that back. No one likes wet hair hanging in your face.

@DesignDoctor - YES!! Black currant jam/preserves are lovely! I get mine at World Market (along with most of my British staples) but some of the British imports are stale :( We don't have Banana Milk (which should be an abomination) and Ribena/Vimto are very rare to find out here. Black currants do grow out here though and I wish you well in cultivating them :)
KC said…
@Louise,

"...it comes back to the same question.. what work do they plan to do here? Run her Instagram account?"

Seems like that is a specialty of hers these past months....
Hikari said…
@Cat,

>>>"To my astonishment he said ‘I’m called Archie’ with a big smile on his face. I don’t know why he calls himself Archie but kids often play with their names and I think it’s lovely” she added.<<<

For me this bolsters the likelihood that 'Archie' was his call designation for his RPO detail. George said, "I'm *called* Archie" (ie, by other people), not *I call myself Archie*. Since 'Archie' is so out of left field as a nickname, and not any sort of variant on any of his given names, it's really weird that he would have chosen it himself, out of the blue. On the other hand, its complete non-resemblance to anything like George makes it a good call sign.

He's got another call sign now, of course, and would have after that hit the papers, even before Auntie Meghan stole it.

Archie was already, unaccountably to this American, a hot boys' name before the advent of Master Mountbatten-Windsor-Who-May-Or-May-Not-Exist. I'd say chances are high-ish that many of the expectant couples who might have been considering 'Archie' for their impending son went off it after the spectacle last year. As for the parents of children who predated Archie and already had the name . . guess they are stuck with it.

I wonder what percentage of Markle stans are now planning to name their future sons 'Archie'? The Sparkly Woke One notwithstanding, I doubt Archie will catch on as a trend here in the States, where it still conjures up a mental image of a portly white haired bigot from Queens wearing flood pants and flushing the 'terlet'. I guess Archie Bunker and 'All in the Family' (modeled on a British sitcom, incidentally, just like another contemporaneous Norman Lear vehicle, "Sandford and Son". Was the British version of the star bigot called Archie?--is unknown to Millennials because it doesn't seem like Meg could overcome the associations of the name for her (allegedly) biracial son otherwise. Archie Bunker hated black people . . at least until actually meeting some in his neighborhood. Whatever the popularity of Archie among the British populace, for a half-American child of the royal house, it was a balls-out bizarre choice.

'Henry' seems to be enjoying a resurgence here in America. As a children's librarian who does weekly story times for the rug rat contingent (birth to 5) I have a front row seat to the names which the Millennial parents are choosing for their progeny. Among our group there are two 3-year olds named Henry. Not 'Harry' though. "Harry" was my grandfather's name--that was on his birth certificate--and I suppose it might have 'grandpa' associations for a lot of people.
Sandie said…
I doubt that Charles would commit such a faux pas as to ask Meghan and Harry to leave the garden party, in front of the public. Sticking her tongue out and accepting a gift would not be reasons to ask them to leave (the royal family graciously accept gifts on walkabouts - we see the Queen, William and Kate and their children do so, and they always pass it onto an assistant straight away, except Charlotte!). Plus there was a lot of good will for them both at that stage. This was a story made up by someone and now the piece of gossip has grown legs.

They had just got married and were going on some ultra secret honeymoon straight after the garden party (remember there was a delay because they had such an amazing work ethic and wanted to hit the ground running and would be honeymooning for a very short time but not right after the wedding - yeah sure, like those two don't like luxury holidays!). The garden party was probably running late and there was transport waiting to jet them off on holiday, and so they left early. Camilla even kissed Meghan goodbye (it was obviously not a hello kiss as they were together before they came out onto the steps).

Meghan did have an unhappy look on her face in the car, but the photographer just caught a moment, and, as we have subsequently found out, Meghan is a whinger so there are dozens of reasons why she might not have been pleased with whatever on that occasion.

Amazing that Meghan spent all that money on an outfit she would wear very briefly just that once. It was fabulous, but wasteful (although she was given the benefit of the doubt then as someone who was new to the role and high society and she would learn ... not!).

Hikari said…
Re. Meg and Harry's "hike" in Canada . .

Saffy on CoB pokes fun at this terminology. She's British and says "We take walks here. We do not 'hike'--not unless there's a pub at the top of the hill.'

The Brits do love their bracing walks. Even if every muscle in their thighs are screaming, they need a stick, stout boots and the sweat is pouring into their eyes, they will tell their friends down at the pub that they 'did a spot of walking this afternoon.'

She pokes fun at the 'selfie stick' couple and Meghan's 'photography skills' . . without mentioning that the couple in question just happen to work in Canadian television and are pals with Ben Mulroney. Maybe she didn't get that tidbit before she went to press.

As usual, Meg can't stop adding the extraneous detail that just underlines her story as bogus . . that the couple had no clue who she was, but recognized her minor starlet co-star from a now-cancelled TV series. Meg is no doubt banking on that unflattering detail being the clincher for its authenticity, though ordinarily the mere thought that someone walking in the woods wouldn't recognize HR Wokeness the Duchess of Sussex instantly would be more than she could bear.
Hikari said…
@Sandie,

>>>Meghan did have an unhappy look on her face in the car, but the photographer just caught a moment, and, as we have subsequently found out, Meghan is a whinger so there are dozens of reasons why she might not have been pleased with whatever on that occasion . . .Amazing that Meghan spent all that money on an outfit she would wear very briefly just that once. It was fabulous, but wasteful (although she was given the benefit of the doubt then as someone who was new to the role and high society and she would learn ... not!).<<<

The two items you mention here are the precise reasons why I believe that the Sussex duo *were* asked to leave Charles's party well ahead of schedule due to some infraction on their parts. As you say, it's possible for the photog to have just caught a random fleeting unhappy moment . . She looks a bit more than unhappy . . she looks absolutely downcast. If they were being ferried off to a top secret fab honeymoon location, which beats a stiff garden party by a mile, and her new father-in-law had been kind enough to personally inform them that the car was waiting and to wish them Bon voyage . . why should she look so downcast? Haz too. Harry looked like he wanted to punch out the car windowns . .but then, he often looks like that.

Given that this was the couple's very first public engagement after the wedding, just days later, and the fact that they'd splashed out for new outfits and presumably delayed their honeymoon expressly so they could attend Pa's birthday party--it fails the smell test to say that they'd have done all that when they knew they could not stay more than 20 minutes. Wouldn't you say? It took three times as long for Meg to get dressed for the event as she graced it with her presence. Clearly from their demeanor and the timing, they were surprised, and not in a good way. I think they had expected to stay at least 2 hours or whatever the standard time is--it was their debut as a couple on an official engagement after all. To all appearances, it was severely truncated, and it was not their idea.

As for Camilla kissing Megs goodbye . . . the society air kiss is a deadly weapon. You can totally hate the recipient but deploy it anyway. As the wife of the guest of honor, Camilla saw them off, but you can be sure there was no love lost there. Camilla's face during the ToC carriage ride shows that relations have not improved upon a longer acquaintance.

Miggy said…
@Lighthealer Astrid & CatEyes,

I read 2 articles about the divorce this morning and could have sworn that I posted them both, but obviously not, so apologies if I confused you.

Have been searching for the other one and can't find it anywhere now!



MustySyphone said…
Some one is going to have to explain this
"official" visit to Canada house to me. You go on a "much needed six week family time break' and beg for privacy. You release one picture of the entire six weeks (ok, its more like 7 and the picture is suspect because of the weather in BC at this time of year). And yo u feel the need to publicly thank Canada for leaving you alone but you do it in the UK and not in Canada? Did they do this do after the SA tour (which was an official tour not a private holiday)? Are they so broke they need her to merch ???? Or are they trying to muscle their way into being sent into exile in Canada. Sorry Canada, you did nothing to deserve that. Also, just what did Canada do that it needs to be so publicly and obviously thanked?
Hikari said…
P.S. I am not convinced at all that the Harkles actually took a honeymoon. She would have been unable to avoid disclosing where they were, and there was nothing. Not even a blind(s). Everyone assumed Africa, but to be frank, I think anything physical was over between them prior to 2017, and that weeks of uninterrupted time with Meghan is the last thing Harry wants. Or Meg, frankly. She's done with the love bombing now that she's got her title and her petri dish anchor baby . .(or does she . .?) All that squicky PDA they used to do is them playing a role. So wherever the car took them after Charles's party, I doubt it was to some grand honeymoon destination. It probably took him back to Nott Cott and her to whatever Soho House bolt hole she's been living in since they got 'engaged over a chicken dinner'.

If that actually happened the way Meg tells it, I am Pope Francis.
CatEyes said…
@Kate

>>>@cateyes You listed people who were in the Church. The average congregant only knew what the priests wanted them to know, which is a huge part of why the Reformation happened to begin with. But we’re getting weighed down by semantics, which is annoying for me. You don’t seem to get, or want to get, my point: Henry VIII, because of his religious training due to his place in the line of succession, had religious knowledge that he would not have if he had been firstborn and thus educated for the throne, not the church. That’s all. <<<

It hasn't anything to do with semantics (that does a disservice to what the word semantics mean. It has to do with accurate history. of several items that you are ignorant of. And That Is Annoying I might add, doubly so! You are annoying and ignorant in not knowing history of the Reformation causes.

No, I specifically listed the average person who attended Church(among religious and people who were Altar Servers, nonclergy and novices, women who are interested in becoming nuns but not yet nuns, and brothers who are not ordained priests and most importantly the average congregant who attended Mass. The Guttenberg and his Guttenberg Printing Press predates even King Henry' VIII's birth. Guttenberg published the Bible first in 1455 and that also predates Henry VIII' birth. It was the Guttenberg printing press that allowed the widespread (beyond the earlier handwritten bible editions with rich illustartions) distribution of the bible into the general population (although as I stated above it was not unknown)

I don't appreciate people who mischaracterize the Bible use by the public when it occurred and that Henry VIII selfishness to want to divorce and marry and kill multiple wives and his breaking from Rome because of this. read how he stole the monasteries and their lands (who were economic engines for the populace) and killed the clergy, even his own catholic advisors (much has been written on this and it is common knowledge).

I responded because you said he was 'uniquely qualified" when my point was that many many people knew about the Bible and Catholicism (It had been in existence for 1500 years at that time). Even today, as a Catholic I find I have more knowledge about the bible and Christianity than most (not all) non-Catholic Christians I meet. I thank the Church for that and it has been a hallmark that dates back many, many centuries as a testament to Catholicism that us faithful adherents can claim. Again. the Catholic Church thought so highly of education that it established the level of universities (and elementary schools also) worldwide for all (even here in the US, the Church established in New Orleans schools run by nuns dating back to 1600's).

CatEyes said…
@Miggy

No confusion here, because I used your one link to copy article and post above.
Miggy said…
@CatEyes,

Yes, I know you did. The confusion was that I was sure I had posted two links!

Don't worry - it is me who has lost the plot!
punkinseed said…
Interesting points Cat Eyes. I recently learned that I descend from Rowland Taylor, who was an arch deacon of Exeter, England, and burned at the stake by Bloody Mary so I've been studying a lot about those times. Rowland's wife was William Tyndale's niece, so I've been reading up about bible publishing history a lot lately.
Tyndale was also executed on order of Henry VIII for translating and publishing his translation into English because the monarchs and the church back then didn't want common folks to be able to read and interpret it in their own tongue. It was all about controlling the masses at all times via benefit of clergy.
It was also common knowledge that Henry VIII wanted to divorce Katharine quite awhile before he ever met Anne Bolynne, but little facts like that get left out.
CatEyes said…
@Miggy

I wasn't trying to correct you, lol...I thought you thought you had confused me. But I am beginning to wonder why would a publication write such a salacious falsehood, as it would be sure to anger Meg and Harry (who both seem to be 'sue happy').

I sure wish it was true, but alas it probably isn't unless the part about the prenup is (and I hope that is at least).
Fifi LaRue said…
Anyone notice that Markle was on the North American continent, and yet, she wasn't a presenter at the Golden Globes? Last year she bought that $50,000 dress, and ended up wearing it to a one-hour afternoon house party.
Where were all her good pals in Hollywood, the ones that tweet support for her?
Piroska said…
Princess Beatrice was diagnosed as dyslexic at 7 years of age; if she could be diagnosed why not Harry also after all the age difference is only 4 years
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bravura said…
@Hikari - yep! Brits (and most Europeans) walk - a lot - compared to Americans. Now if Megsy was a native New Yorker or lived in a proper city (I could maybe give her Toronto), then she would be no stranger to walking everywhere. But as CatEyes pointed out, she wobbles a lot in her heels, which is odd for someone who wears them everywhere.

And yes, Brits love their walks :) I can see Harry loving a good walk in the weather and countryside. He's no stranger to a good rain. Megan? Nope. I doubt she can do much merching wearing Northface or a poncho in our weather. *snorts*
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
KitKatKisses said…
Apparently Harry did tell Jeremy Clarkson in an interview that he is indeed dyslexic. Catherine's brother James is also dyslexic
and learned as an adult that he also has ADHD. Many people with learning disabilities also have a comorbid condition such as anxiety, ADHD, OCD and so on. I thought the piece James Middleton wrote for the Daily Mail about his struggles with school and depression was really courageous.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…
Glowworm here: @Hikari and @Sandie. Regarding PC’s birthday/garden party, I believe as Hikari does, they WERE told to leave. Many of you have seen a video that has been circulating for months now of a scene that played out before the group went out into the garden to greet the well-wishers. What we see in the video is a doorway through which Prince Charles is going, FOLLOWED closely by Camilla..as is correct protocol for the Royals. As Camilla walks through, we see her head turn ever-so-slightly to her left, looking back over her shoulder; availing herself of a peripheral view of the Harkles as Harry begins to move towards the doorway and Meg taps him behind his right elbow. Harry stumbles into an immediate halt whereupon Ms. Harkle does her entitled sashay through the doorway...Her action demonstrated that while Camilla had to follow behind her man, SHE did not.

Then, of course, ‘meg’ laughed at the bee buzzing around Harry - but they all did - and she WAS holding court among the well-wishers in her most grandiose fashion but I truly believe that little entitled performance by the new Ms. Harkle is what got her ass thrown out of the Garden Party.
CatEyes said…
Please can anyone explain why it is important (if any) why harry is to be known as dyslexic? It isn't an excuse for him to be not bright right? He seens pretty sharp to pull off the huge donation from Disney and not show anything for it yet. He gets by with so much without having any consequences to his actions it seems. If I didn't despise what he and his pick of a wife did to the Queen, the BRF as a whole and to the UK public not to mention the people he offended on the Aus tour and Morroco I would credit him with being slick. a successful gifter himself and positioning himself to use Sussex Foundation as a money cow!
Miggy said…
@CatEyes & Unknown,

Found it!!

This was the first article I posted, (yesterday) from an Australian news article.
https://www.newidea.com.au/meghan-markle-and-prince-harrys-shock-secret-split

Then this morning when I saw the divorce article I suppose I was hoping it was some kind of confirmation - even though I couldn't find anything in the British press.
KnitWit said…
Maybe Megs got a makeover wherever she us
is. Time for a different, preferably more natural style. That would be woke! It would get her lots of attention too.
Unknown said…
@Hikari Love your posts! I am a Millennial and younger than H&M and know about Archie Bunker. All in the Family ran on Nick-at-Nite for some years. That show was always discussed in every American history class I took. Meg being oblivious about Archie Bunker just highlights how she may not have been very careful in learning about her American History, Black History, and Television History. Her lapse makes her credentials as an actress and a woke American SJW look worthless.

As for Meg not being aware of Archie Comics, that is also laughable. I remember sometimes catching an animated series of Archie Comics in the early 2000s but otherwise she must be a really awful Hollywood insider if she doesn’t know about the current TV reboot of Archie comics, Riverdale.

I actually thought Meg named her son Archie because of the show and to get the younger watchers of Riverdale to look into her son and by extension her. She may have envisioned a lot of “organic” articles linking the two and maybe a call-out from the cast about Archie’s name.
lizzie said…
@Unknown,

It's not odd to me that British royals don't have prenups. From everything I've read, they aren't legally binding in England and Wales anyway. Here's a popular press source that says that although I've read the same thing other places.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3169738/pre-nuptial-agreement-legal-marriage-uk-mel-b/

It also says judges may take them into account under certain circumstances IF

"....both partners received independent legal advice, that they both fully disclosed their assets and that neither of them was under duress to sign the agreement."

I can see why royals would skip them if they aren't likely to be enforced, disclosure could be an issue, and it would seem easy for the non-royal spouse to claim implicit coercion/duress given the position of the RF.
CatEyes said…
@Miggy

I read the article you cited and it is very believable. It would explain why they didn't spend Christmas in the UK especially avoiding the BRF, why the Christmas pic was photoshopped (they weren't together) and no one essentially saw them together in Canada or the US. I'm on board with this media explanation especially since many here mentioned the cracks that showed/started at the WellChild Awards.
Kate said…
@cateyes Again, you are assuming what I know and don’t know, and you have not, for the record, provided ANY new information. And I understand the meaning of semantics perfectly, thanks. It’s like you’re stuck in the wrong debate. I’m not claiming Catholicism equaled ignorance in any era. I’m not defending or justifying Henry VIII’s actions. At all. But nor—here’s the big takeaway—am I comparing Henry to all other Catholics. Here’s the breakdown:

-I’m making a case for a specific role for the “spare.”
-I reference Henry VIII as an example.
-Henry VIII received an education preparing him for a role in the Church before his brother died and he was unexpectedly thrust onto the throne.
-This education was different than what his brother Arthur received in preparation for the throne.
-That special education also allowed him to argue for and against the Catholic Church (when it suited him).

@cateyes, have I said anything incorrect in these points? I’m trying to understand what you are arguing. Are you making the case that the Catholic congregant during the Reformation was as qualified as Henry to argue theology. Because that is purely laughable. And if you’re not attempting to make that point, why bring them up? What is your point?

Kudos to you for also having a passion for history. But it sucks the joy out of the discussion if you need to try to prove you know more. I’m done with this side debate; I’m here to laugh at Meghan.
Hikari said…
@CatEyes,

>>>Please can anyone explain why it is important (if any) why harry is to be known as dyslexic? It isn't an excuse for him to be not bright right? He seens pretty sharp to pull off the huge donation from Disney and not show anything for it yet. He gets by with so much without having any consequences to his actions it seems. If I didn't despise what he and his pick of a wife did to the Queen, the BRF as a whole and to the UK public not to mention the people he offended on the Aus tour and Morroco I would credit him with being slick. a successful gifter himself and positioning himself to use Sussex Foundation as a money cow!<<<

If Harry were a successful grifter in his own right, I would have supposed a couple of things: that Harry would have smarmed his way into a more prominent role in his birth family, pre-Meghan, leveraging his Royalty ala Andrew for bigger gain than a free trip to Vegas with some strippers. Why weren't there any Disney-style multimillion dollar charity deals pre-Meghan, if Harry's royal status was the real cachet, not the very, very minor show biz talents of Ms. Markle?

Secondly, if Harry had successful grifter's instincts, he would have chosen a different wife. He probably could have grifted his way into a glittering marriage with some European princess, when his reputation as the dashing soldier Prince and Britain's favorite royal was still viable, rather than what he's got now. Harry is not benefiting from this marriage in the slightest, and a successful grifter would have more self-preservation and savvy than he has so far displayed.

You might be onto something by suggesting that he is only pretending to be dumb in order to get off scot-free from fulfilling any responsibilities . . but if you're right, it's an act he's been playing assiduously every day for three decades. For an intelligent person to play that consistently dumb over so many years . . I can't imagine the boredom and the sheer work of it all, to appear dim when one is not. It seems like it should be possible for a halfway smart individual who attended school every day to at least pass a few courses through osmosis. Haz failed everything. If it were on purpose, that does seem like a reckless campaign of self-destruction. Haz may just not be quite the full quid as they say; at any rate, he seemed pretty content with his lot before Meg came on scene, so I have to think of her as the engine behind this train.

If Harry had dyslexia like his late Mum, which made it really hard for him to thrive at school despite his best efforts and not understanding why something that came easily to other students was so difficult for him, that would go a long way toward explaining some of his jealousy of William and discontent with his life, wouldn't it? And why he's clinging to Meg's vision of Global Superstardom for them?--he knows he isn't going to earn a meaningful role through being smart or accomplished in some way.
Anonymous said…
@KC, well, almost on the good behavior...
Anonymous said…
@AbbyH, At some point, there's always someone smarter, cooler, has more followers, younger than you who will step in and take your spot.

True that. Additionally, if you're the smartest, coolest, most beautiful, etc. in the room or online or wherever, then it's a life lacking in challenge or inspiration and everyone else is a threat. Sad, really.
3culprits said…
I’ve never seen any credible claim that Princess Diana had dyslexia.
NeutralObserver said…
@Miggy, Thanks for reposting the link to the New Idea article. I have no idea how reliable a source they are, but it sounds plausible. There's a photo in the middle of the article, Megs in a black or dark navy blue dress, Harry in a nice blue suit, that you can look at & say 'what an attractive young couple.' Harry looks clean & healthy, Megs looks pretty & demure, her usual irritating loose strands of hair around her face are nowhere to be seen. Who are these people? Where are these people? What became of them & why have they been replaced by the disgruntled, unkempt snowflakes we've been seeing for most of the past year?
CookieShark said…
@ Design Doctor et al., re: PC's garden party.

Allegedly, PC put MM on a plane back to Toronto when she was dating "H", "Haz," "Hazza" because she was taking unauthorized photos inside the palace. I have no idea if this is true, but I have read that this is why she is not allowed on palace grounds without someone to chaperone her.

If it's true, then PC had her number way before the garden party. In the footage she is definitely holding court amongst some of the guests and accepts a gift. This may have alarmed PC or Cam, who may not like the optics of her accepting gifts at his party.

I believe they were asked to leave, even if PC did it in the nicest way possible. He may have told Harry to just go on and enjoy his honeymoon. Harry immediately understood his father and steered MM away. She definitely appears surprised that they are leaving. I have also read she was asked to leave because she was laughing at Harry when he was stung by a bee, she stuck her tongue out during his speech, allegedly.

I saw another clip today on Twitter where she is being asked to stand on one side of a plaque by a greeter, but she points with her finger to Harry to stand there instead. It is not feminist behavior; it is rude lizard face behavior and the Investiture gatecrashing is another example.
Henrietta said…
@Hikari, I think the Sussexes went on what they call a "baby-moon" -- just a few nights -- to Ireland, but I don't remember where I read that. It was probably the DM, but I would have to research it.

Also, my previous reference to the Sussexes (former?) private secretary Fiona Mcilwham was wrong. She's the former British Ambassador to Albania, not Romania. So no connection to the "ghostly" article about an impending Sussex divorce.

Also, to Unknown and CatEyes re the pre-nup, I'm pretty sure I read a weird article about the details of a Sussex pre-nup in which MM gets almost nothing if she walks away. (Yes, as other posters mentioned, the royals usually don't use them.) You guys won't like my source; but if I find it again, I'll post it. The gist was that MM eventually signed one, right before the wedding, after previously refusing. I personally think she may have because of what allegedly happened at Charlotte's dress fitting, but that is strictly my own guess.
Anonymous said…
@Hikari, @Texshan, Cookie and all . .

>>>"Markle is meeting with lawyers to help manage her turbulent and sudden rise to international fame. Insiders say Markle, who has starred on 'Suits' for six years, may be struggling to come to terms with the overwhelming attention."<<<

And yet, the CTV news woman didn't recognize her? OH, how the mighty have fallen lol


@Bravura, 3. The weather in the PNW has been disgusting for the past three months. I live in Washington State. We have been dealing with torrential rain and flooding off and on from November through December. There have been very few clear days for either that picture with Harry and Archie to have taken place and for them to have gone hiking. If they had gone hiking, it would have been muddy and slippery. Given that Megs doesn't lend herself to be an outdoorsy type, I can imagine her hating being outdoors in the PNW this time of year. Even most die-hard PNW folks don't venture outside this time of year...

Bravura, I feel your pain lol. I am out here, too, and I love our state, but OMG, the rain, the humidity, the mud, the mush, the standing water, the grey skies, the bad hair, etc.-- who would choose this for a vacation with their resources? I do not believe that their "choice" of BC was a choice at all. IMO, it was either rehab, or the best of the choices offered by the BRF, because really, WTH would they come here at this time of year? And, as you know, the islands are even worse, generally.
CookieShark said…
Update to include: thank you for linking the article to the Sun, @ Design Doctor.

There appear to be several photos from this event where she's clearly posing for the camera. It just isn't natural. In at least one photo, she is looking straight into the lens and no one else is. It is unnerving really. The members of the RF, Kate included, exude class and confidence. They are old money. They don't scan constantly for cameras or stand just so, providing the perfect snap for InTouch weekly or Us magazine.
CatEyes said…
@Kate

I never said I know more than you, but I know more about some points you made.

Most odious is that you said the average congregant only knew what the priest's wanted them to know which in huge part the reason for the Reformation. That is so wrong on so many levels (I could give you a theology lesson but you refuse to read accurately what I wrote so far...ie.non clergy who could read the bible had access to it in Churches before the Guttenberg presses produced enough copies). Besides, congregants evru]y Mss heard Old Testament, new Testament and Plasm readings covering the entire Bible during the cycle of a couple of years od]f attendance and students learned in school too. We are big on the Scripture and Communion being the focus of our service rather than signing song, after song after song, after song, etc....all thru a service

Henry VIII is the best evidence he did not know what the Catholic Church taught...he asked to be freed of his marriage vows for a nonacceptable reason, he thought he could religiously replace papal authority, violated fundamental precepts of Christianity in general at the most fundamental level (killing, killing, killing 'ad naseum'). I wish the past Monarchs would have returned to the Catholic Church the stolen monastry and convent lands and churches in the UK. Although I understand some Anglican Churches, very few, have gone back not due to the Queen.

I don't have a dispute with Henry VIII being the spare.

Of course I will quit writing because you won't address my points where you are wrong. I wish you wouldn't have called me annoying or I wouldn't have returned the same. But I get tired of bigotry against my religion because people don't know the facts. As it is the 1701 Act of Settlement ActnCatholics are banned from succession to the throne (that's as bad as racism in my book).
abbyh said…

Henry and Anne Boleyn

I believe it was Anne who made the link between the OT Leviticus readings and reason enough for a divorce. She (and he) both read and spoke Latin and would therefore have understood what was being said during the Catholic services.

Tyndall> really sad.

Prince Charles party and the unexpectedly quick exit

I have always wondered if the gift she received (just before the go whispers) was the trigger. I think it is really rude to bring a gift to someone whose birthday you are attending to but give it to someone else. My thought was that PC realized this immediately and thought: nope, not protocol and here's how to handle it. He may have also realized how much attention would have been more on her than him and wanted to curtail it. They may have pleaded to be able to come, won't be a bother and it was clear that it would have been a big deal.

Princes Di and dyslexia

Certainly was not diagnosed (and it wasn't that well known to look for back when she was a kid). However, she famously said something about how she was thick like a plank which most followed the dotted lines later to say probably dyslexic.

What I have (very limited) experience with someone with profound dyslexia was that they had quite enhanced other skills, especially being able to read people and meet the person where they were.
Anonymous said…
@Hikari and @Rabbit,

No Rach on the red carpet or "surprising" the "other" A-listers at the Golden Globes tells me that either the BRF yanked the chain and said no, Hollywood didn't ask b/c Rach is ghosted, or both. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but IMO her absence is indicative of her fading "international celebrity" status.
NeutralObserver said…
@Hikari, very good points re: Harry. Also, terms for various learning disabilities get thrown around pretty loosely these days, including by people who are experts. It's become a bit of a scam nowadays to get children designated with some disability so that they can get extra time on their SATS & so forth. Very unfair to youngsters with real disabilities. I think what seems to be clear is that you can be dyslexic & still be highly intelligent, ( I think I've read that both Winston Churchill & Michael Heseltine are dyslexic), or not. Churchill is a distant relation of Harry's through the Spencer family, interestingly. I think you've made a pretty good case that Harry might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer. If he's really bright under all of the lack of achievement, he's sadly self destructive, & truly does need mental health care. I read somewhere that Sandhurst has an entrance exam that is scored on a scale of 1 to 10. Apparently William scored a 7 on it, pretty respectable, Harry a 4. My impression is that elite military schools like Sandhurst or West Point, while they value traditional 'book smarts,' they also test for things like leadership skills, decision making, & the ability to remain calm under stress, etc. traits very valuable when taking incoming from an enemy, & traits that a lot of Ivy Leaguers might not possess in great quantities.
CatEyes said…
@Hikari

>>>If Harry had dyslexia like his late Mum, which made it really hard for him to thrive at school despite his best efforts and not understanding why something that came easily to other students was so difficult for him, that would go a long way toward explaining some of his jealousy of William and discontent with his life, wouldn't it?<<<

I've met dyslexics who were smart just had a hard time reading but they were sharp in other ways. I doubt really Harry is jealous of William due to brainpower and much more probably due to the fact William will be King. Wasn't it reported that he told his Mum he wanted to be King when he was young.

>>> And why he's clinging to Meg's vision of Global Superstardom for them?--he knows he isn't going to earn a meaningful role through being smart or accomplished in some<<<

I said Harry was a grifter *cogifter) when he had the encouragement of Meg I believe and I don't mean on the level like Megs is. Afterall she was married twice before and lived with Corey and never had Real Jackp[ot grifter success until she met Harry and likewise him. Now he has Ophra offering him a TV pro]duction series on Mental Health and a huge donation from Disney (I don't think Megs landed the $3 mill from Iger). Now he is staying at a huge mansion in Canada and is getting worldwide attention globally.

They are the gifter gruesome duo. Synergistic effect they have together. I read on the royalforum blog that Harry was not marketable to other royal families as he wasn't appealing (I don't know if this was true) but he didn't seem desirable as the posters there descibe it. I will say that they are very antiMeg and pretty much frown on Harry in case other readers here are interested. One cant post of not a member (which I havent gotten approval to join in over a year).
Mimi said…
once they come back on the scene at an engagement, royal or of their own doing, it will tell us what is going on with those two. If he is still completed besotted by her and/or if she still has him by the.........um...has him.
Glow W said…
My guess is completely besotted. :)
SwampWoman said…
No Rach on the red carpet or "surprising" the "other" A-listers at the Golden Globes tells me that either the BRF yanked the chain and said no, Hollywood didn't ask b/c Rach is ghosted, or both. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but IMO her absence is indicative of her fading "international celebrity" status.

There do not seem to be a lot of friendships that are not transactional in nature in Hollywood.
SwampWoman said…
once they come back on the scene at an engagement, royal or of their own doing, it will tell us what is going on with those two. If he is still completed besotted by her and/or if she still has him by the.........um...has him.

She could be in the early stages of a (real) pregnancy with the extreme fatigue and projectile vomiting.

But I really do not want to contemplate that.
Mimi said…
Tatty, “if” the three of them have spent the past six weeks together, bonding as a family, relieved of their brutal royal schedules and lives then my guess is they will be back and nothing will have changed and when they get out of hand they will throw a tantrum and request a “much deserved break” or they will be told they are being put on “a much deserved break”. After the Andrew debacle I think the RF wants to keep things on the down low.
Glow W said…
@mmi that has alaways been my point of view. But as the previously mentioned, I follow the palace narrative. Also, per their usual, I expect they will “hit the ground running” again and we will see a lot of hot mess again.
Henrietta said…
PC's birthday garden party: This shows some of H&MM's greeting the people, MM's accepting a gift, and PC's seemingly getting them to leave.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xGO4mTQnseU
Mimi said…
SwampWoman, Hi, I’ve missed you. Projectile vomiting!!!! Ha!!!! I had whatever it is that Kate gets with every pregnancy, too lazy to look up the medical term. Even with medication I threw up (PROJECTILE TYPE VOMITING) up until I gave birth and once more after they were born just for the heck of it!!!!! I lost my hair, my teeth, I looked like a cadaver but my doctor told me it was “psychological”. that I was trying to throw the baby up!!!!!!
CatEyes said…
@tatty

>>>Also, per their usual, I expect they will “hit the ground running” again and we will see a lot of hot mess again.<<<

They certainly did not do much with an abysmal number of engagements. Megs a measly 28 and Harry only 98.
CatEyes said…
@Mimi said:

>>> I looked like a cadaver but my doctor told me it was “psychological”. that I was trying to throw the baby up!!!!!!

Gosh, I would of told that Dr. you were sick just thinking about paying for his medical fees and crass bedside manner.
Mimi said…
Cat Eyes, I was very young and VERY STUPID!!!!
CatEyes said…
@Mimi

Maybe it was better to try to throw the baby up, than come out of the other end! lol sorry, couldn't resist.
Sarah said…
The father of a close friend was at Cambridge when Prince Charles was there. My friend’s dad used to rant against Charles because he was not particularly bright and except for his role as future king, would never have been accepted as a student there. My friend’s dad came from poverty. He went to Cambridge as a scholarship kid. He was extremely bright and a hard worker.
Diana’s academic career was abysmal, although she had a certain savvy. William struggles at university and needed tutors. It isn’t shocking that Harry is not over blessed with brains.
I maintain that Harry chose Meghan, consciously or unconsciously because he knew she would be unsuitable. She’s a way of thumbing his nose at his family. Is it because he’s angry at his father over his mother or the family In general because William is the heir and gets every preference.
Mimi said…
Cat Eyes, ha ha! that was funny! Luckily my labor and birth went lightening quick so at least I didn’t suffer too much at the very end. In those days they did not OFFER you any kind of drugs, epidurals , etc. It was all about giving birth “NATURALLY”! (MF’ers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) 😡
SwampWoman said…
Mimi, yes, I feel sympathy because I had it, too. Just smelling food was enough to set me off.
I didn't get up to the weight at which I started my pregnancy until the very end. I was very thin and fit then. Maybe thin, fit people have a harder time.

I read accounts of people that didn't even know they were pregnant when they went into the ER for stomach pains and found out that they were in labor and about to deliver. I hated them with every fiber of my being when I was pregnant. When I heard the word "deliver", I figured it meant I was about to hork mine up.
SwampWoman said…
Mimi, we must be about the same age. All natural here, too. Daughter looked at me like I'd lost my mind when I recommended it.
CatEyes said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mimi said…
SwampWoman, ugh, then you know what I went through, I was in a restaurant that had fish aquariums and for whatever reason when I glanced at the fish in the tank I got sick! To this day, (30 years later) the smell of peppermint toothpaste makes me gag!

We better get back on topic or the comment police will scold us!
SwampWoman said…
Tatty, “if” the three of them have spent the past six weeks together, bonding as a family, relieved of their brutal royal schedules and lives then my guess is they will be back and nothing will have changed and when they get out of hand they will throw a tantrum and request a “much deserved break” or they will be told they are being put on “a much deserved break”. After the Andrew debacle I think the RF wants to keep things on the down low.



I do not believe that I could spend six or seven weeks in hiding with either one of them. I applaud them if they did spend the time together and both survived. I think I would get all twitchy and have the urge to stab something or somebody within an hour or two.

So, if you were going to be locked up in a Russian billionaire's resort with MM and PH, which one do you think would get on your last nerve first?

If the Russian billionaire had a well-stocked kitchen and library, I needn't see either one of them. Something tells me "library" is not a place where either would be likely to be found.
Mimi said…
SwampWoman, 😂😂😂😂😂
Anonymous said…
@catseyes Apologies to nutty for the long post. Of course banning Catholics from the succession was horrible. I doubt anyone would disagree with you. By the way, I was raised Catholic. But that doesn't excuse basic history. Masses were said in Latin, libraries didn't exist. At most, 11% of the male population in the 16th were literate. The general population did not have access to any educational opportunities, and all colleges (like Oxford and Cambridge) were essentially theological schools, not educational institutions. There were limited to scholars and seminarians. England at that time was an agrarian society. Local politics ruled the lives of the everyday. Which is why the Tudors did their level best to chop off the heads of anyone landowner with greater pretensions to the thrown that they had because much of the political power was still feudal in nature. The translation of the bible did not come into play UNTIL the Reformation, and the translation of the text into vernacular. The only people who had access to books were the upper classes, and by that I mean the aristocracy and landed gentry (like Sir Thomas More, who also believed in the education of women as did Martin Luther). And, certainly, women were not educated. Mary Tudor and especially Elizabeth I were considered exceptional because they had the best tutors of their day. IMO, the worst excesses of that era were not committed by Henry VIII, but rather Philip, the father of the Spanish Inquisition.

This link has some interesting facts on the rise of literacy: https://lhrtnews.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/literacy-and-libraries-in-sixteenth-century-england1.pdf.
Anonymous said…
Part II

To add to abbyh's comments on Henry VIII, he was honored by the Pope with the title, "Defender of the Faith" (no small beer at the time), and was acknowledged to be quite religious. In essence, he was a conservative in his faith. What changes he made to the Church had very little to do with changes in dogma and everything to do with lining his his coffers (I certainly agree with you there). He despoiled the monasteries to pay for his stupid wars and, obviously, stopped all tithing to Rome. He stripped the clergy of their enormous power and demanded their allegiance to the Crown and not the Pope, but very little changed dogma-wise. England was exceptionally anti-clerical at the time, and Henry tapped into that fervor. Both Henry VII and Margaret Beaufort (his grandmother) were exceptionally religious, and if my sad memory serves me right, Henry was destined for the church, If Arthur hadn't died, I imagine history would be speaking of Cardinal Tudor or even Pope Henry. It is impossible to talk about Henry VIII's "divorce" from the Catholic Church and his first wife, Katherine of Aragon, without taking into account the state of politics in Europe at that time. He would have been granted his annulment most likely if Katherine's nephew, Charles hadn't been sacking Rome at the time. The successful passing of the crown from father to son was prized because it meant stability. And the only other time a woman monarch sat on the English throne (I want to say, Matilda?), it threw the country into utter chaos, and Henry was adamant he had to have a son. There were many more annulments among the royalty that occurred during that period and earlier that were based on much flimsier cases than Henry's. Case in point that Eleanor of Acquitaine had two daughters by Louis and SHE was granted an annulment to marry Henry II. Henry VIII's outrage at being denied was understandable. I am NOT defending him, but it wasn't purely out of his lust for Anne Boleyn that caused the inevitable breech. It was his lack of sons. Even before he began his affair with Boleyn, he was pushing to get Cardinal Wolsey to research ways to dump Katherine (who was six years older than he was, and by all accounts went into early menopause when still in her 30s), and spent lots of money in bribes in a hopeless effort to put Wolsey in the pontiff's chair. Even a cursory study of the popes of the 15th and 16th century would show that the papacy then was less of a religious force than was a political force, with the power of excommunication hanging over the royal houses. But once you play that card and nothing happens, then it becomes pointless. Harry didn't explode on being excommunicated and neither did his daughter.

And to bring this back to our true passion, the insular quality of the BRF and its pathological need for a legitimate heir(s). This more than anything makes me believe that Archie is not of Harry's issue. Otherwise Archie would have a royal title. And Harry's behavior over the last 24 months shows him to be the worse possible choice to succeed William, and thank goodness he's sixth in line. Ms. Markle encourages the real deficiencies in his character, and we suffer through the daily shitshow these two conjure up to increase their validity as heirs. And I can only harken back to Richard III (a spare!) and those two young princes who entered the Tower and never saw the light of day again. I for one will breath a sigh of relief if Kate has baby no. 4, just to give us more breathing room. I shudder to think of the havoc this man-child would wreck on the BRF if he were on the throne. Compare Harry's childish behavior with someone like Anne, the hardest working royal today, who didn't even have the glory of being a spare(!); he really falls short and then some.
Sandie said…
PC's garden party:

I watched the video and two things struck me as odd: 1. Harry and Meghan were interrupted in the middle of a conversation, as though there was an urgency about their departure. The aide touched Harry on the back instead of waiting for him to finish the conversation. 2. Charles had a quick word with his son but ignored Meghan. (This is his new daughter-in-law whom he walked down the aisle and he completely ignored her ... Distracted? Preoccupied?). Camilla then comes across and warmly kisses them both goodbye.

I found this description from someone who attended a garden party. The royal family all go to the royal tea tent for tea, and some of them spend extra time informally chatting to people, even en route when they are leaving. They really do try to interact with the public as much as possible for the 1.5 to 2 hours they are there.

https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/inside-the-buckingham-palace-garden-party-with-royal-centrals-chief-reporter-82389/

I just can't get my head around them being escorted out so early. To politely but firmly publicly escort them out for breaking protocol (or for whatever reason), surrounded by people who are all looking and have phone cameras, just seems like bad manners, especially as they had just got married. Yes it is against protocol to give gifts, or even flowers, directly to the Queen at a garden party, but what was Meghan to do? There was no lady in waiting to take the gift for her. She graciously accepted it (actually she was well behaved and well dressed for the occasion ... no bits of hair hanging around her face, no hanging onto Harry, no dominating the conversation, no looking at Harry adoringly, no pushing ahead of Harry ...).

I do see why people believe they were asked to leave by Charles, but I am still gobsmacked that he would do something like that in such a public place with cameras all around.
Anonymous said…
>>the comment police will scold us!

@Mimi, lololol, as I was reading the comments, I wondered why there was no comment asking @Nutty if this was okay, etc.
Anonymous said…
@WizardWench,

for one will breath a sigh of relief if Kate has baby no. 4, just to give us more breathing room. I shudder to think of the havoc this man-child would wreck on the BRF if he were on the throne.

Although I would not want my BFF to suffer thru wretched illness and have another baby if she and Wills don't want a fourth, anything that puts distance between Rach & H & the throne is a good thing. At the very, very least, I wish the Cambridges would start traveling separately. As awful as it is to think of losing part of that family, losing all of it would end the BRF, I fear.
punkinseed said…
Swampwoman, LOL! I'd be in the library then, looking for the magic door latch to escape to the hidey hole or secret room or exit tunnels! AFter hitting the well stocked kitchen and liquor cabinet.
I'm also from WA, born and raised. I love the mucky mud puddle rain but yes, when it's downpour after downpour and not the usual drizzle ick or drizzle, rain ish, we never go outside. So for them to be staying on Vancouver Island as alleged, how NUTS to choose there for this time of year? Even the cougars up there are in their hidey holes. Sasquatch is never sighted this time of year either, probably wintering in Sequim. And yes, the islands are far more foul than Puget Sound where I am from. Windy, wet way windier and cold up there in the straights where every morning the radio is saying: "Small craft warnings in the Straights of Juan de Fuca and gale warnings in effect for...."
SwampWoman said…
With the Sussexes allegedly scheduled to thank the Canadian representative for their enjoyable private vacation tomorrow, I am feeling very uneasy that I have been unmannerly in my visits to foreign parts in the past. While I feel that showing up and interrupting the work schedule at an embassy so that I could thank them for their country's courtesy would probably have resulted in them telling me to p*ss off, I hang my head in chagrin that I didn't even write a thank you note.

Anonymous said…
>>probably wintering in Sequim

thanks, @punkinseed, now I want a lavender latte lol

@Swampwoman, thank you for your efforts to shine a light on the importance of handwritten thank you notes
SwampWoman said…
Punkinseed, I went to high school in the Willamette valley in Oregon and am no stranger to the Vancouver area (or Washington) and the miserable winter weather particularly during a pineapple express. I found the vacay thing there at that time of year rather odd but, if there are mansions sitting about just being ignored by their wealthy owners, why not.

Sandie said…
An interesting post on LSA about the Markles:

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-2235#post-53574017

The poster claims that the Sussexes knows they will be cut off from the funding (in all ways) when William is in charge and that granny will not live forever, so they need to urgently become superstars (and it aint happening).
KitKatKisses said…
The whole thing about dyslexia and Harry's intelligence or lack thereof was just because I was clumsily trying to point out that there is no correlation between learning disabilities and intelligence. Harry may well not be bright but that isn't necessarily related to his learning disability. I have never seen conclusively anywhere that Diana was dyslexic, and she was a prolific letter writer, if not necessarily a devoted reader.

Anyway, dyslexia and similar learning disabilities come in many sizes and shapes. There isn't a "one size fits all" definition of dyslexia. Dyslexia can also affect more than just reading; it can really affect a person's whole life, although it does come with certain positive gifts as well. My son still has trouble with left and right, which makes it interesting when he drives.

Thanks for letting me put my 2 pence in.
Anonymous said…
@Swampwoman, not that you asked me, but there are mansions a lot of places, and they have so many good friends. And it's not just a little rain, it's a mess. For example:

"..HEAVY RAINFALL THROUGH TUESDAY WILL LEAD TO AN INCREASED THREAT OF LANDSLIDES IN WESTERN WASHINGTON... Soil moisture will remain at high levels across western Washington. Additional heavy rainfall of 1-2 inches for the Lowlands and 2-4 inches for the mountains is expected through Tuesday night. This amount of rain will put extra pressure on soil instability, leading to an increased threat of landslides."
Sandie said…
A Bingo card for the Canada House visit ...

https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/post/190113358596
MustySyphone said…
Elle, Swamp Woman, Brauva: I too am from WA!
Nutty Flavor said…
Hi all - just a note to say that I am fine, just busy with end-of-holiday cleanup.

I'm looking forward to the Sussexes' return to duty, such as it is, later today and (if work assignments today permit) I will write a post for us all to discuss.
AnnaK said…
What do you think of this headline in Business Times today @Nutty and Nutties?
Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Royal Family Exit Sparked As Buckingham Shares Photo Of Queen Elizabeth And Heirs
Nutty Flavor said…
Just looking at the Telegraph to find the time of today's engagement - the Telegraph is allowing comments again, such as these:

Trish Beech 7 Jan 2020 4:06AM
I believe very little that I read about this couple now!!

When I see Harry (allegedly 'on holiday in Canada'?) holding
a baby who is supposed to be just around 7 1/2 - 8 months
old, BUT who looks far more likely to be almost twice that
age (more like a 14+ month old?) … one can be forgiven for
wondering just what on earth is going on here?

Some of us who read these pages from time to time are
midwives, doctors, nurses - and folk with an experienced
eye will notice these things immediately.

I don't know what is going on with them, but there certainly
seem to be a LOT of unanswered questions...



George Eldridge 7 Jan 2020 5:03AM
When they visit the Canadian Embassy to express their heart felt thanks, I assume no roads will be closed, extra police rostered etc, etc. I have been to France. Is it necessary for me to go to its Embassy to thank the Ambassador, who would no doubt make time to see me.
Princess Mrs. B said…
Regarding the visit to Canada House today, why are they doing this? They insist on privacy so why now make a public spectacle of themselves thanking Canada for its hospitality and support? They were not in Canada in any sort of official capacity. It was a vacation FFS. A vacation in an ultra-exclusive, privately owned residence where they were supposedly seeking time away from the spotlight. This really merits a pre-announced official visit to the High Commissioner? Wouldn't a thank you note have sufficed? I'm also getting tired of their use of the word "support." Don't they understand that their disastrous SA interview did not go down well and instead of being remembered for their good work, the whole tour is now more about "poor us?" Woe betide the Commissioner if she forgets to ask MM if she is OK.
Unknown said…
LOL @Nutty, we really need to start a list of all of Archie’s medical marvels. I’ll start:

- In utero, shape shifts, folds, jiggles, and disappears depending on Mom’s outfit
- In utero, mom can safely go to Zika countries
- In utero, mom can take international plane flights after 28 weeks
- In utero, geriatric Mom can have overdue birth
- Mom can manhandle the soft spot on his developing skull
- Can travel to third world countries before scheduled immunizations
- Can be held in the air at 4 months
- Has no breathing issues being smushed into parent’s chests
- Sleeps and is quiet whenever Mama and Papa wants
- Drools and stands up when Mother doesn’t want him to
- Has tufts of red hair that recedes into his scalp and turns dark depending on how “famous” the person looking at him is
Shaggy said…
-Can spend long amounts of time in the hot sun without sunscreen, nourishment or a diaper change.
-Can hover in midair over pub tables
-Is able to change his ethnicity appearing Japanese at will
-Has a super strong neck able to support his head immediately following birth
-Supervised his own birth thus the ability to enter the world without any doctors present
PaisleyGirl said…
- Needs a warm hat in the South African sunshine yet does not need mittens in the Canadian cold
- Is able to stand up and is teething at four months old
- Is able to change size at will, being unnaturally large when entering a private jet at three months old yet appearing smaller in the following months
- Is magically able to grow an extra pair of eyebrows in Canada
- Is able to reposition his own ears on his Christmas card
PaisleyGirl said…
- Is able to sleep for eleven hours straight on the plane to South Africa without needing diaper changes or food
lizzie said…
@Charade & @Unknown. Good lists.

Also at barely 6 months wasn't Archie supposed to be  "crawling over to" two red-haired babies present at a playdate and "playing with them"? Not impossible to crawl at 6 months although it's on the early side but actually "playing with" other children at that age? (What a social butterfly!) And noticing hair and being attracted to certain colors?

And among his other shape-changing antics in utero, while he did disappear and reappear frequently early on during the Australian tour he was capable of disappearing entirely at 7+ months of development in NYC.

Is so fascinating to W&K's children who "absolutely adore" him that they were afraid to look at him or express any interest in public on the one occasion they were seen together. (Maybe that's really an instance of the Cambridge children's superb acting abities though)

You mention his ability to sleep when convenient for H&M but maybe a special mention of his 11 hours straight nap lying on Harry traveling to SA is warranted?
-----------
Also, I thought the Sussexes were claiming to have visited the US at some point during their long break. Where's our public thanks? ;-) And where was our thanks for hosting the baby shower and providing escorts/security on our dime?
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…
Thanks @Unknown @PaisleyGirl @lizzie for the contributions. I hope the list keeps growing. I just have to say, Trish Beech is my hero :)

- Can forego Mom’s milk for days when she’s on another continent but can’t wait an hour when she’s on British soil
- As a newborn, does not move or wriggle especially when Mom hits him on the head
Well, I managed the last of these and I expect other Nutties have as well.

As the result of neglect by pre-NHS `nursing'staff at a municipal hospital (in effect, still the workhouse lying-in ward) I mercifully popped out into the world `like a cork from a bottle' in the presence of nobody except my 38-knocking-on-39-year-old-prima-gravida mother. We got away with it but it is not to be recommended. Not a single person had believed my mother she arrived at the hospital saying she was in labour - they just dumped her in the delivery room and ignored her.

Imitating a bottle cork and fighting successfully for breath were my only early accomplishments though.

re Catholicism- is there evidence to suggest the Kents are bothered about being excluded from the Succession?

The big issue, I always understood, was about the authority of the Church v that of the Bible- who may interpret what is written, in which translation, in Latin, Greek, or from which sources? The CoE manages, just about, to contain those with the widest possible views.

For example, the Mary Rose sank in 1545. Sometime in the 1980s, a considerable number of the skeletal remains of the crew were buried at sea following a Requiem Mass in the Anglican Cathedral at Portsmouth.The service was in Latin, according to the rite of 1545, when Henry VIII was `Supreme Head of the Church of England' ( we can argue about that but that's what he called himself, daughter Elizabeth corrected it to Governor) and the priest were Anglicans who considered themselves true believing Catholics. You are entitled to hold a different view but that's how it is.

On the other hand, there are those who take a completely opposite view, the Evangelicals, who hold that everything necessary for salvation is contained in Scripture and everyone can read the Bible and make up their own mind - with predictable consequences.
Miggy said…
SCOBIE!

From the Daily Express.

Clarification - Removal of Three Articles - 07 January 2019

On 06 January 2020 Express.co.uk published three articles headlined "Will they ever come back? Meghan and Harry to ‘take on more work’ in Canada", "Meghan Markle pregnant? Duchess to cancel baby plans in bid to 'recharge' after tough year" and "Meghan Markle pregnant: Why Meghan and Harry WON’T announce pregnancy this year". They have been removed. These reports were based upon an article from the Mail Online. According to a journalist called Omid Scobie of Harper's Bazaar the Mail Online's quotes were inaccurate. In light of Mr Scobie's claim we have removed those three articles.
Miggy said…
" According to a journalist called Omid Scobie of Harper's Bazaar the Mail Online's quotes were inaccurate."

He sure is working hard for the Harkles.
Miggy said…
Matthew Wright claims he's been branded 'racist' for criticising Prince Harry and Meghan Markle – but insists people have a right to question them after they used '£20 million of public money’ for their wedding.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7860437/Matthew-Wright-claims-hes-branded-racist-criticising-Duke-Duchess-Sussex.html
Nutty Flavor said…
Very sad to hear that the 27-year-old son of Ron Burkle, Andrew Burkle, was found dead in his apartment yesterday in Los Angeles. The cause of death was not released, but he was not known to be ill.

Ron Burkle, of course, is a part-owner of Soho House, and I've long speculated that he might be the money behind Meg's social climbing and PR efforts.

The Daily Mail ran the news on its front page right next to a Royal story (about Wills and Kate), so perhaps they also believe there is a connection between Burkle and the Royals.
Miggy said…
@Nutty,

Thank you for pointing out that article. I hadn't made the connection.

Yes, it's very sad.

If this is another suicide, (big IF) then it begs the question, "Why is this happening to so many young men?"
Nutty Flavor said…
Could be suicide, could be drugs. It's heartbreaking for the family either way.

I saw the Andrew Burkle article next to the Royal stories at around 14:28, and when I checked back again at 14:35 it was no longer next to the Royal stories - in fact, it was off the front page entirely.

Somebody made a phone call. I wonder who.

Sconesandcream said…
@miggy@neutral observer - re the divorce article in New Idea magazine. You wondered if New Idea was a legit source. Sorry to break it to you but New Idea has a reputation for being a trashy magazine full of completely fabricated stories. It's nickname is No Idea. Definitely not a legit source, unfortunately.
Nutty Flavor said…
Speaking of which, I see that all the comments have been removed from the Telegraph article about the Sussexes' visit to Canada House today.

I think the Palace is using Telegraph comments to check the public temperature, because the Telegraph is behind a paywall, so they have at least some idea who the commenters are.

Much harder for PR companies to create multiple accounts, unless they also have multiple credit card numbers and are willing to pay multiple subscription fees.

The last time I saw the Telegraph article - around 1130 EET/930 GMT - there were about 30 comments there, all of them unflattering to the Sussexes.
Miggy said…
@Nutty,

Having followed another big story, (many years ago) I also noticed how newspapers often placed articles side by side when trying to make a point.

Strange indeed that it was moved so quickly.
Miggy said…
@Sconesandcream,

The magazine cover, (pictured in the article) sort of gave that impression but thank you for confirming.

Unknown said…
@Nutty Yes, it is truly sad. May he rest in peace. I think dissociating H&M from Soho House is hard to do.

I see this under the Daily Mail Meghan section. Cheeky but the link between Meg and Soho House is there for all to see:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7859937/Soho-House-London-private-members-club-ban-nuts-menu-week-protect-allergies.html
Interesting about the Burkle link -

https://jerseydeanne.com/2018/11/09/radar-online-meghan-markle-pals-with-ron-burkle-exclusive/

Oliver Bullough's `Moneyland: Why Thieves & Crooks Now Rule the World & How to Take it Back' (Profile Books ppaperback 2019)has now worked it's way to the top of my book-pile so it look's as if it's time to read it (hitherto I haven't been able to face it.) Although Burkle isn't mentioned in the index, he may be cut from the same cloth.
Miggy said…
@Charade,

I love the ONE comment they've allowed.

"Nuts and fruitcakes not allowed then?" LOL
SwampWoman said…
Don't forget about Ron Burkle being a friend of Bill Clinton although it is alleged that there was a falling out between them over money (imagine that).



Henrietta said…
WizardWench said...

"@catseyes...But that doesn't excuse basic history. Masses were said in Latin, libraries didn't exist. At most, 11% of the male population in the 16th were literate. The general population did not have access to any educational opportunities, and all colleges (like Oxford and Cambridge) were essentially theological schools, not educational institutions. There were limited to scholars and seminarians...The translation of the bible did not come into play UNTIL the Reformation, and the translation of the text into vernacular. The only people who had access to books were the upper classes..."

Thank you so much for clearing up the experience and worship of most Catholics at the time of the schism. As a post-Vatican II Catholic baby boomer, being able to read along with the celebrant and lectors at Mass is so important to me, I can't imagine how medieval laity (that is, overwhelmingly all the peasants) were able to really believe in their faith without having access to a Bible and, indeed, without being able to understand what the priests were saying during Mass. FTR, I thought "The Tudors" handled this really well in the person of Anne Boleyn showing her household where they were displaying their Bible and giving each member express permission to consult it whenever they felt the need.

It's funny to read everyone's take on the most important reason for the break from Rome. I was taught -- yes, in Catholic schools -- that it started out because of the annulment and then very much became about dogma, specifically about salvation by faith alone or faith and good works. It took centuries for the Catholic clergy, especially the nuns, to teach all Catholics to read!
SwampWoman said…
Miggy said: If this is another suicide, (big IF) then it begs the question, "Why is this happening to so many young men?"

Lots of tainted illicit pharmaceuticals out there. To kill somebody, no direct violence is needed, just spike their drugs.
SwampWoman said…
Oh, thanks y'all for noting that the stories (re RF news and the death of young Burkle) had been moved. I couldn't find it and was wondering what I was overlooking. Apparently sleeping is overrated and I should have been up earlier.
Henrietta said…
Miggy, About the Express pulling three articles about the Sussexes which included Omid Scobie's quotes, I don't think I'm understanding the significance. I never saw the original article(s) in the DM. Is the implication that Scobie (and MM) said too much?
Miggy said…
@Henrietta<

I interpreted it as Scobie is saying that the DM have attributed quotes to him that he didn't make. ie: DM is lying.
Miggy said…
@SwampWoman,

In the UK, the suicide statistics are rising amongst young men. Poor mental health, rather than drugs appears to be the cause.
IEschew said…
Does anyone ever wonder if tabloids post stories such as the Andrew Burkle one at ungodly hours, knowing they’ll be short lived and hoping that someone like Nutty will see and capture them before they are forced to take them down? ‘Cause I do.
IEschew said…
Should have checked before posting: Burkle and RF stories are still aligned on DM’s US site.
MaLissa said…
Good morning Nutties!! First and foremost, Merry New Year! I hope everyone had a safe and wonderful holiday and now is looking forward to a brand new year with all it brings - the foibles and muckups of the Harkles :) LOL :) And of course the personal milestones and daily grind of life for the rest of us :)

I'm loving the discussion on this post - lively and informative. Thank you Nutty for providing us with a place to voice our opinion - complimentary or otherwise. As I said in an earlier post (not this one) I'm sick and tired of the Harkles shenanigans. In other words, I'm Markle fatigued. I don't know where to even start but being jealous and threatened by a 6 year old is just insane and very insecure. Trying to one up everything especially the Cambridge kids .. I just don't know. SMH. But carry on with the lively discussion, I love reading it. Sorry I haven't been around but the holidays and life keeps me busy.

Have a lovely day everybody ;)
Miggy said…
@MaLissa,

What a lovely post.

Wishing you a very Happy New Year too. :)
SwampWoman said…
IEschew, thanks! I check the UK site so didn't know. How silly of me not to check the US site.
Miggy said…
Richard Palmer: "Waiting for Harry and Meghan’s arrival at Canada House on their return to official duties. They are coming straight from visiting the Hubb Community Kitchen in west London, where Meghan got an update on the activities of the project which helped Grenfell victims. Harry went too."
SwampWoman said…
Happy New Year's, MaLissa! My resolution was not to read anymore about the Harkles; you can see that that resolution crashed and burned. There was also something in my list of improvements about diet and exercise for health reasons but then again, the Queen is 95 and eats biscuits upon arising which I understand are cookies here. I have been doing this health thing all wrong. Goodbye, kale, hello, cookies!

Thank you, Queen Elizabeth, for pointing me toward a healthier diet (grin).
Miggy said…
First picture of the Harkles:

https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
PaisleyGirl said…
The Queen apparently also enjoys a daily cocktail before lunch. I think we should all follow the QEII diet. It seems a lot more enjoyable than a kale diet...
Miggy said…
Now a video:

https://twitter.com/CarolynDurand
PaisleyGirl said…
@Miggy, re the video: it seems nothing has changed with the Harkles. The wig, the handholding, the moving in front of Harry, the giant heels, the poo coloured clothing. Ugghhh.
Miggy said…
@PaisleyGirl,

Yes, no change at all.

Here's Scobie's video.

https://twitter.com/scobie
Miggy said…
Chris Ship: " It’s possible the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will announce a tour to Canada while they are at @CanadianUK TV is afternoon. Can’t say for sure.
So we await confirmation... "
Miggy said…
Richard Palmer videos:

https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter
Miggy said…
I'm starting to feel nauseous.
Living through the reigns of the Tudors as an ordinary parishioner/incumbent must have been so difficult,having things you'd known & loved all your life taken away. The imposition of the English liturgy precipitated a rebellion in 1549 in the SW - many Cornish probably didn't speak English at that time and possibly rural Devonians has difficulty as well. There was even a battle & massacre near here in 1549, almost as bad as Culloden, but now almost forgotten.

The Church of Ireland (ie Anglican) Dean of Killaloe in Eire once said to me that the relationship between England and Ireland may have been very different had Eliz.I thought through her declaration that the Prayer Book should be in the language `understanded of the people'. I recommend Eamonn Duffy's `The Stripping of the Altars'.


About Soho House: Harrymarkle smelled that particular rat early on, wondering if there was a conspiracy involving Markus, Doria & possibly others. Would Ron using MM as clickbait for Radar on Line be sufficiently profitable?

Could the idea have been to plant her to create so much chaos that the RF would pay anything to be shot of her? To try and bleed the the RF dry and share the loot? Harrymarkle hinted at blackmail. Rumour had it that there was no pre-nup but that £37m tops would be the maximum they were prepared to offer in event of a divorce.

I'm speculating, of course, but I doubt that is anything like the figure plotters might have in mind. How squeaky clean is Doria? Where might Harry stand in all this? It'd be criminal, activity; if carried out by US citizens or others aliens, on British soil, treasonous.

Do they get off on the idea of humiliating the Royal Family on the 400th anniversary of the Pilgrim Fathers, perhaps even bringing them down? Could there be someone else behind them?
Miggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Miggy said…
Daily Mail latest:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7859867/Prince-Harry-Meghan-return-royal-duty-today-trip-Canadas-London-HQ.html
Fairy Crocodile said…
I am still waiting for the info how royals helped Australia. In fact I am waiting for any info on how UK helped Australia. USA,New Zealand, Canada - all helped. Countless private donations from around the world. Useless words from the Palace and silence from Westminster. I am quickly losing remnants of respect for the Head of State and Commonwealth.
abbyh said…

I am sad to read that a kid died before they really got a chance to do a whole lot or to see what kind of person they were (IMDB is pretty sparse). Not even a bio.

As for the theory that his dad may have put a cat in with the pigeons, I am reminded of the Ben Ames William short story "They Grind Exceeding Small". https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2018/09/they-grind-exceeding-small-by-ben-ames-williams/

Popular posts from this blog

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.  

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...