According to a settlement with the British Royal Family, Harry and Meghan will no longer use their HRH titles and will repay 2.4 million pounds of public cash spent on Frogmore Cottage. They will no longer formally represent the Queen, and receive no more public money in return for Royal duties.
The Queen's Statement was as follows:
Statement from HM The Queen
Following many months of conversations and more recent discussions, I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family.
Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.
I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.
I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family.
It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.
What do you think of the statement, and of the settlement?
The Queen's Statement was as follows:
Statement from HM The Queen
Following many months of conversations and more recent discussions, I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family.
Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.
I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.
I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family.
It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.
What do you think of the statement, and of the settlement?
Comments
Harry Markle is updated and a good read.
https://pagesix.com/2020/01/18/the-post-answers-all-your-questions-about-meghan-and-harrys-life-after-megxit/
Question - "Wait, they’re no longer “His/Her Royal Highness” but they’re still Duke and Duchess?"
Answer - "Duke and Duchess are far lower titles than “HRH.” When greeting a member of the royal family, it’s customary to say, “your royal highness,” according to the Windsor family Web site. Not following this protocol signifies that Meghan and Harry are not seen as members of the royal family. Dukes and Duchesses can be both born into their titles or awarded them, typically when they’re married (like Meghan and Harry), reports The Sun and Reader’s Digest."
@Mimi - could not disagree more. The Harkles lost big here, very big. Demoted, titles gone, cut off from any official ties to the royal family. They now have no meaningful connection to the monarch and thus are like any other non-royal pretending they represent the monarch.
All the esteem and power that is part of being a royal is only that because of one's ties to the monarch. The Harkles no longer have that, and thus their cache is gone. No one who tries to buddy up with the Harkles believes doing so will help get them closer to the monarch, that is, and thus the Harkles relevance is drastically reduced.
Both Andrew and Edward live on the Windsor Estate (their homes are much bigger than Frogmore Cottage and they have various outbuildings and land with the dwelling). Andrew paid the full amount for renovations (it was about twice what it cost for FC) plus I think a lump sum of a million, so his lease is essentially rent-free, but because it is Crown property and not the Queen's personal property, the agreement can be changed by the government (I;m not ure about the legalities, but Andrew has extended the original lease term). Edward paid about half the amount for renovations (and I think that worked out to the same as what was spent on FC), so he has to pay rent, but I think it is a reduced amount.
So, there is a precedence for Meghan and Harry to pay for the renovations AND pay rent.
As long as she can use Meghan Duchess of Sussex, that’s enough for her. She will milk it for all it’s worth!!!!!!!!!!
I'm sure she will. The question again is, who's buying that milk?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thomas-markle-says-meghan-harry-21310697
Article title - Thomas Markle says Meghan and Harry are 'turning royal family into Walmart with a crown'
(Note to non USA persons: Walmart is seen as kind a of 'low brow' shopping place. Cheap, low end)
"The 75-year-old spoke to Channel 5 in a documentary that the Sussexes are 'turning into lost souls' and he felt embarrassed of their behaviour on using public funding to renovate Frogmore Cottage"
"They are destroying it, they are cheapening it, making it shabby. They are turning it into a Walmart with a crown on it, they shouldn’t be doing this."
"Apparently $3 million and a 26-room home isn’t enough for them… it is kind of embarrassing to me"
Brilliant idea!
I so agree with your posts especially about Archie.
I imagine how the Queen handled all things Harkle would be quite different if Archie's birth had been overseen by the Queen's doctors, if all the paperwork on him had been normal, and if he had been seen, photographed and shared with the UK public at several stages over the last 8 months.
Trooping the Color 2019 was when we saw the change in attitude toward Markle that occurred within the RF. NO ONE other than Harry (who scolded her) spoke to her on that balcony. Even Peter Philips edged away from her side and ignored her when she spoke to him. She ended up pulling her "talking to no one but it will look like I am part of the conversation in photos" act.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10771241/prince-harry-meghan-markle-queen-sad/
"A source who knows the Queen told The Sunday Times: “She will be very sad to have barely seen Archie, and that he will miss out on growing up with his cousins and wider family.”"
Big dig at the Harkles there and at Meghan as a mother. Her Majesty has turned the "toxic UK" and "bad family" narrative around on the Harkles here, basically saying that the Harkles' decision to isolate Archie from the rest of his extended family is not doing him any favors.
I'm expecting a lot more of this petty lashing out from the BRF towards the Harkles as we move forward. And I'm here for it.
"For this is a wound that will take years to heal, not just for the Windsors but for monarchists worldwide who grieve over such damage to the institution they love and admire. Damage that, in the way it was inflicted – without consultation, courtesy or any sign of responsible forethought – has many of the attributes of calculated vandalism."
A day or so ago I wrote that I feel as if Meghan has done a number on me personally, and the words "calculated vandalism" caused this feeling to well up again even more strongly. The choice of words is uncomfortable but justifiable. The damage and discord she has sown, with people divided into two camps arguing ever more fiercely. Just when we were beginning to come to terms after the EU referendum. After three ugly, frightening years when, immediately after the referendum, I had to report hate crimes on behalf of visiting foreign students and one of my colleagues felt forced to leave England after intimidation in public places. Thankfully in my experience that phase did not last long, but Meghan wilfully brought the ugliness back, in what is fundamentally a decent tolerant country.
I know this is not the place to discuss such things, but I must mention them as it shows the depth of Meghan's use and abuse of our people and monarchy, to foster such bad feeling at such a crucial time in our history. When we were learning to be charitable to one another again and make the best of things. It has all been unforgivable. Hopefully we can now start to draw a line under it, although we will have to be patient.
I think that the difference here is that most Americans apply our American standards to it. We expect blunt, direct, clear, the bullhorn moment. The BRF is never going to do that. Almost everything, including (especially) the bitch slaps, is in the unsaid.
As for Harry, the fact that this goes into effect in Spring 2020 does make me wonder. Could this be Part One of the divorce saga? Separate H from Rach physically and let the BRF be seen cutting both of them off so that none of this is about Poor Rach because she's bi-racial? Here, the BRF is seen as treating them both equally. In a few months, when they announce their conscious uncoupling (which will only have been surpassed by their unconscious coupling), Harry can quietly slip back into the fold (with shame, of course) and this makes it that much smoother - settled pre-divorce, and maybe even simpler from a financial standpoint. Everything has been stripped from Rach now. No divorce nastiness needed. I could see that long-game in play, possibly.
Very powerful. Thanks for sharing that.
The ladies at Lipstick Alley are dissecting the latest news. As expected, it seems all Team Cambridge there. Here is a recent comment:
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-2579
"(William) is a man who stuck to his duty and didnt play naked billiards or dress up like a nazi. Love or hate the monarchy, they believe it's a duty, and PH abandoned that duty. William played by the rules. I HOPE Big Willy holds that grudge for eternity."
I really do think many people excepted the Her Maj's statement to be an aggressive throw down and the end result to be crystal clear. I did not. There is much unsaid in that statement, even more from BP, and there is no way that the BRF didn't see this coming. They've been long-gaming from the start. The train ride was a big clue. Why would Her Maj travel with Rach when Kate has not been on the train? So that the BRF could say "we tried, we really, really tried", and that's exactly what's happening now. They tried, they really, really tried, and Rach was a loved part of the family. Now, when Rach starts her temper tantrum and accusses the BRF of toxicity and cruelty and racism and sexism, she will be essentially calling Her Maj a big fat liar. How's that going to look for Rach? Worse than the sausage casing she wore to The Lion King is my guess.
You mean like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XfvJeiUed8
MM on a USO Tour 2014. I can't stand this woman and even I cringe at how uncomfortable this is.
Well said. The Harkles are basically glorified commoners now, and nothing more. All cachet gone. That is a massive blow. A fatal blow, I agree. No reason for A-listers to pal up to them now.
I do think Oprah and Gayle King will still work with them. But that, to me, says more about Oprah's fading star than it does about the importance of the Harkles. Oprah is falling off fast, and looking for any kind of "life preservers" to keep her afloat as a relevant celebrity.
Good point on the "no bitch slap" thing by the BRF. True, likely this subtlety is lost on many Americans (and Meghan stans). But I think all will get clearer over time.
Good questions on the pending divorce saga (I agree, it's coming). Really not sure where things are at. Maybe the royal family did some "truth talk" to Harry at the meeting? I hope so. I think things are about to get quite rough for Harry after a short-lived 'honeymoon' period of the Harkles independence move.
Yes, I do think they were allowed to keep the patronages and whatever titles they had with the Queen's Trust or whatever it is. However, they no longer officially represent the Queen (the monarchy), and thus these would seem like nominal positions, at best.
The duo has been defeated and defrocked, it seems. The final battle, I guess, will be over their ability to use 'Sussex Royal' branding. I'm sure they'll fight hard for it, but how can you be 'royal' if you are essentially cut off from the royal family and no longer represent the monarch?
Perhaps, as seems the case with the patronages, Her Majesty will allow the Harkles to keep Sussex Royal even though is has no validity or meaning, in actual fact.
I agree with Elle, the duo are basically commoners now. With the understanding that Harry was born into the royal family (but he walked away from its duties).
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thomas-markle-says-meghan-harry-21310697
Thomas Markle says Meghan and Harry are 'turning royal family into Walmart with a crown'.
Thank goodness I never go to Walmart (I've been forced in their one time in my life, and it was done as a wicked joke), so looks like I'm safe, for now lol.
The 93-year-old monarch ordered an agreement to be reached with the couple in just 10 days.
Also, I think that this is another clue that the BRF long-gamed this and knew what they were doing. The merching forensic accounting will review will now take place behind the scenes. Nothing to see here lol. Very wisely done because as far as most of the world care, it's all done and dusted. The important bits of merching and review will be done much more discreetly, except with Rach involved, I still expect there will be some skankiness and a spectacle de merde or two.
And this is worth a look:
https://pagesix.com/2020/01/18/queen-elizabeth-pulls-off-hard-but-graceful-megxit/?_ga=2.179619172.1166910618.1579398829-2024507541.1579398829
You just made the point: aren’t they still president and vice president of something or other?
This is exactly what they are now, the somethings of something or other. And this is how they'll be seen for a few months as they fade into the obscurity of not much of anything. Sure, Rach will kick and scream her way into the Daily Mail scroll of shame, but will anyone care about the something or other of whatever? I think not.
announced? Why haven't we seen immediate interviews of them with big name media outlets?
I think we haven't because it was not what they wanted..it was not a win..it was not anticipated to turn out like this.
Bottom line people don't need to know the in and outs of the HRH or Sussex titles, the average person or the important somebody all know the same thing, they are not part pf the Royal family in the most important perception, valued working members. Heck even the Queen's elderly cousins have more to offer the UK (what does that say).
Harry has now gone down in history as the Second Duke of Sussex to be a disappointment and renegade to the BRF. Maybe the Queen did have in fact a foreshadowing Harry and his wife was going to be an embarrassment and bring dishonor, hence why she gave him and Meghan the Sussex titles.
I agree the Queen deliberately said she was proud of Meghan quickly becoming a part of the family (the toxic family...meaning Megs fit because she herself was toxic).
I personally am so glad that Harry won't be in uniform again (serves him right for not going to the Marine Deal Memorial) those honorable men don't need a turncoat like him standing in front taking the accolades if he can't support the Queen or the Monarchy. He just wanted pay for play (part-time) which he learned at Meghan's knees.
Good point on the "no bitch slap" thing by the BRF. True, likely this subtlety is lost on many Americans (and Meghan stans).
The very best bitch slaps are the silent ones.
@Hunter
I need to post one of those Lion King sausage casing photos on the cheese drawer of my fridge. That back spread and the splitting seams scare the hell out of The Ghost of Future Elle.
Ha. I agree! (bitch slaps)
--Sussex Royal may be taken away. She would be shut down very quickly if she tried using it without an agreement in place. Can you imagine how that would impact future deals?
--Without the BRF blessing and approval, who would want to sign on with Rach & H knowing Sussex Royal could be blown up and shut down?
Products cost millions of dollars to produce and launch on any scale. Who would be so stupid (other than Rach & H, of course) to enter into an agreement before the BRF had signed off on everything?
I believe any connections the Windors (other than David) may have had with Nazis were in the 1920's when it was not clear what the ultimate goal of the Nazis was.
Prince Philip had no control over who his sisters married.
I don't think this is the right blog to bring accusations of nazism against the royal family.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7902785/Princess-Beatrice-forced-delay-wedding-date-announcement-wake-Megxit.html
The Duo will have better luck with their pipe dreams of Sussex Royal Charitable Foundations. But then the BRF (their lawyers) will be monitoring the finances on these to make sure they do not bring disrepute to the Royal Family. Meaning no scam foundations where 90% of donations are blown on expenses. So what fun is that!
Harry still getting Duchy of Cornwall money, but this can be slashed if the Duo oversteps their bounds. What exactly are those bounds? I don't know and they don't know. Also the Duchy titles can be revoked.
So maybe their best move is to seek their fortunes in Hollywood. That Oprah mental health series and Netflix is handing out cash left and right.
If you can't access it, full print at Anonymous House Plant.
Anyway, it's not as if Meghan is ever coming back.
BTW I agreed with an earlier comment about the Duchess of Windsor being much more stylish and well-presented than Meghan (can't remember the exact words). I think we do her a disservice at times, although she certainly wasn't perfect. She didn't seek the throne or the abdication. She would have been happy as a maîtresse-en-titre. She had her work cut out in exile and she wasn't happy, but she didn't abandon the Duke of Windsor. Whereas Meghan will only think of herself.
On the 20th, there is an Africa reception that somewhere I read tonight expects Harry and Meghan to now attend?? Probably just speculation about her (fat chance) but since Harry is there, he should probably attend it. At some point, he has to cut the ties if he is ever going to leave and this isn’t a telenova divorce in disguise world wide drama.
They didn't need millions to come up with project concepts or products (heck I have a binder of inventions I have come up with; I don't have any backing or 'blessings from my family). Point being she/they are all talk and no go. Just like Travelyst...where has that idea gone, a big fat nowhere. Harry has drank her 'Koolaid' and he is going to realize its just going to give him a stomach ache and not the riches she envisions.
"Harry still getting Duchy of Cornwall money...",
"Harry and Meghan, let me introduce the new Duchy of Cornwall", and then William enters the room, and Harry bows and Rach curtsies, and then William cuts of their financial stream.
and......it is not lost on me the duo will use HRH as much as they possibly can for the next 8 weeks. When the new constraints kick in, everyone will be calling them HRH and the duo will not stop anyone from using the reference. "If they say it, it makes it so."
and..... notice the lack of mention of the TAXES! This is huge. Anything the duo earns will be taxed, as they will be like us.
Oh the fun and games.....
The paid security with an allowance from Charles seems to be what they were asking for.
Maybe, maybe not. Rach & H have done Chas no favors with their behavior.
The Sussex duo overplayed their hand with the joke of a website. The fact that they've had to backtrack already, and will likely continue to do so indicates immaturity and importantly, lack of professionalism.
As has been asked many times here and elsewhere: Who will likely work with them now?
I do agree it's a bit smoke & mirrors - keep the HRH but not use it and already a number of people on this board and in the DM comments are incorrectly saying they've been stripped of their titles (they haven't). I definitely think the RF needs to be more transparent about the finances though - the Duchy of Cornwall has lots of tenant farms. On the recent PC doc, there was an elderly farmer living in what looked like no more than a 2 room temporary building, very basic. He lives with his wife on a desolate moor and every day mounts an old horse and goes to tend his flock of sheep. No luxuries there, so it sickens me that his rent to the Duchy goes towards financing the spoiled brat prince and his wife. I think that and security will be the next can of worms, where the Queen will write yet another 1st person press release.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ8k96Am8wc
At about 48:00 mark
Those two could have already put forward their ideas (their IG reflects such) for projects under their titles now Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. Many here are saying how she won't seek approval anyway. So why didn't she hit the ground running already. She is showing up for charities without the Queen's approval, accepting an expensive gift (18k gold and diamond necklace)and merching it.
Or under the name Meg gave Harry 'Haz', just like some famous celebrity known by one name, Or he can aspire to be considered so famous he just needs to be known by one initial, "H". Imagine a lot of products with just a fancy calligraphy penned 'H" in Meghan's artistic skilled calligraphy.
Another observation, it is interesting to note that Meghan's coat of arms at the time was mocked because it had a white bird with a crown appearing to strangle its neck which at the time was explained by detractors as representing the Crown would eventually silence her. How true in some respects.
Something is definitely brewing! I don’t buy Edo cheating on Bea. It’s possible but Andrew seems like a scary guy to cross and Edo does not look stupid to me. I also think Edo wants the royal connection and won’t sabotage it unless the connection becomes worthless to him. It probably drives the Yorks nuts that Meg got that huge wedding and Bea is having a hard time scraping one together.
They may no longer be working Royals, but they are still Royals, with all the entitlements apart from the small salary for working Royal appearance, which the Smirkles themselves stated only accounted for 5% of the money they receive annually.
Canadians will still be on the hook for security for this vile couple and they will still refer to themselves as Duke and Duchess.
What a farce.
https://pagesix.com/2020/01/18/harry-and-meghans-abdication-is-biggest-since-king-edward-viii/
"Instead, they’ll be relegated to the royal hoi polloi, forever known as “Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.”"
"In short, Harry and Meghan — like Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson before them, in 1936 — have been booted from the palace inner circle and reduced to fending for themselves as middling royals."
"Meghan, as a no-longer-royal, can’t even wear a tiara at state functions, should she still choose to attend such events."
"And their options for growing wealth, rather than just spending it, are limited under their agreement with Buckingham Palace.
"In addition to being barred from cashing in on their “HRH” titles, they can’t become brand ambassadors for big companies, the Times reported."
Been a great day. And I'm happy to see the papers here in the USA getting the story and tone correct. The Harkles lost huge, and it's important that the Sussex spin masters don't try to twist their defeat into a fake "victory" among the masses.
I seriously doubt it.
First, I'm not at all sure they will "settle" in Canada.
Second, why would people who've been told they are "toxic" invite themselves to visit the person who called them that?
While I do think TQ left the door open, I don't think much of the RF was really speaking on speaking terms with the Sussexes when they were last in the UK. It's not as though we saw them interact much on UK soil. I don't think we've **ever** seen Harry interact with the Cambridge children. Whether that's because Harry was always drunk and W&K wouldn't allow it, who knows. But why would Will and Kate drag the children all the way to Canada if they didn't interact when they lived almost next door? Yeah, it's too bad about Archie but having kids he's never really met visit for a few days wouldn't make much difference anyway.
Harry's made this bed. It's not up to anyone else to make it comfortable for him.
They are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
They have been asked to no longer use the HRH (Harry does not lose it but should no longer use it; for Meghan, the HRH is a courtesy as she is not a British citizen, so she should not be using it if not living in the UK and being a working royal).
It was 'Their Royal Highnesses' (i.e. HRH) that Meghan used in the update on the website.
Technically, these new arrangements will only be applicable from Spring. However, it was passive aggressive for them to use it in the update.
1. She is not in the future going to be called her favorite title "Her Royal Highness"
2. She will not ever go to a state dinner.
3. She will be viewed as the awful woman who took beloved Harry away from his family
4. She will never wear the Queen's jewels (and Harry likely won't be able to buy fabulous jewels like the Queen owns and Kate wears).
5. She will never have any new patronages (and be recognized as a contributing member of royalty)
6. Doors won't open for her like if she was a working royal.
7. She is despised in the UK and probably the commonwealth by and large.
8. She will not get the expensive couture clothes to wear (unless tightwad harry buys it for her)
9. People who tolerated her gatecrashing events probably won'[t put up with rude antics
10. People will probably want to make money selling 'dirt' on her and it will see the light of day.
11. The media will have a field day will the stories the won't feel inhibited from publishing now.
13. It is doubtful she will be invited to important royal events.
14. She won't go to Christmas with the BRF.
15. Charles will probably not buy her a million dollars in clothes ever again, maybe not buying her a single dress ever again.
16. No royal tours on the royal dome.
16. Books will be written about her now with probably very negative story lines.
17. Harry will probably regret this sooner and later and it could lead to marital discord.
18. She is being vilified for hurting a 93 year old Grandmother who had nothing but nice things to say about her.
18. She has lost a lot of goodwill the public had for her (immeasurable in terms of bad PR)
19. Even her father who was so loving towards her and had hopes of a reconciliation has now said negative things about her.
These are just a few things I can quickly think of.
Yes, and that of course means that any luster they once had is gone. They were minor royals before, and now they are like one step above commoners (thanks only to Harry's bloodline).
There are still many outlets in the USA that will try to pump them up, for their own agendas, but I agree that all the coverage I have seen in the USA so far has been in the "no longer royals, giving up royal titles" mold. Here are a few examples:
"Royal No More: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Resign Their “HRH” Titles, Will Receive No Money From The Crown, And Will Not Engage On Behalf Of The Queen"
- Forbes
"Harry and Meghan give up royal titles as "no longer working members" of royal family"
- CBS
"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Will Abandon Their Royal Titles"
- Vanity Fair
Hard to carry out the Sussex Royal facade if you are no longer a real royal, I would think. We shall see.
Hollywood will not go well for MM. These clips of them offering to do voiceovers are embarrassing, and Jennifer Meyer was publicly scolded by the palace (because of MM). Just my opinion.
Perhaps his tweeted opinions of the announcement are not only shaped by his disappointment but may also be intended to provoke more anger over the decision in the hopes that any details not yet ironed out could be finalized against the Harkles. I for one would like to know why anyone else should be paying for their security, why they are still P and VP of the CW, why they get to keep their patronages and what will happen with the sussex foundation.
Swampwoman: As per my response to Sandie, most people in Canada and the USA do not follow this story as closely as we do and do not know or care about the nuances. They hear Duke and Duchess, Prince Harry and will treat them as Royalty.
In terms of entitlements, I am thinking of the allowance from Charles and, particularly, security. It is not an issue in the USA, but it is a HUGE issue in Canada to be on the hook for up to $60million per year in security. Just because they don't call themselves HRH doesn't mean that we don't have to provide security.
Frankly, I selfishly wanted them stripped of all things Royal since this would have made Canada far less attractive to them and maybe they would have just moved on to the U.S.
I usually don't mention anything personal in my posts, but today's news was a big disappointment and I am feeling angry.
I don't know what is motivating Wootton, but I support him 100% in his criticism.
Even the part about repaying the cost of Frogmore I found to be patronizing to the people of the UK; 3 million is a pittance to them and this clause was clearly (to me) meant to shut down the complaints of money squandered on the house. Charles will probably pay for it, anyway.
True: Hard to carry out the Sussex Royal facade if you are no longer a real royal, I would think.
It's rather like virginity. There is no "sort of" hall pass.
Article title - Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Called The ’Second Wallis And Edward’ After Surrendering Titles
https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-called-second-wallis-edward-after-surrendering-titles-2905146
"Another online user wrote that the incident has nothing to do with Markle’s race but nationality. She was a “second rate American actress” who married his way into the royalty and turned her nose up at it “just like Wallis Simpson.”"
To get some perspective on where the Harkles are heading, here is a look at the final years of Princess Diana's life:
https://www.biography.com/news/princess-diana-biography-final-years
"Yet the separation placed Diana in an awkward position, as it was Charles who had the defined role as heir to the throne. Though she remained extremely popular, and she'd always be the mother of a future king, she was no longer considered a true member of the royal family."
Once you are no longer a 'real' member of the royal family, you just don't matter that much (as regards the monarchy) and your luster and cache wane rapidly.
It was true for Diana -- a figure far more beloved than the Harkles -- and I'm sure the same will bear our for the Harkles.
The Harkles no longer formally represent the monarchy. Their only relevance was via the monarchy. Now, they have nothing and will fool only the most gullible.
In short, it's over. Even if they don't know it yet.
It really seems odd that they would be allowed to keep the patronages. Aren't some of Harry's related to the military?
And I really don't think she should be allowed to keep her 4 patronages. She has already angered the National Theater. And how will she help any of them if she does not come back to the UK? After all her nonsense including calling the people of the UK toxic, they should just cut her ties to these charities.
Ha. Yes indeed! ;)
It does seem odd. Not sure what Her Majesty was thinking on the patronages, to be honest. Seems awkward.
Not sure on the specifics of the patronages. But those military lads don't seem very happy with Harry at the moment.
I agree many may not understand the fine nuance of not using a "HRH' designation even tho they are a 'Duke and Duchess' but most any folks understand the words "We Quit", plain and simple. They are 'Quitters" and worse they are known to 'Quit' their family's firm so-to-speak. Most people don;t view 'Quitters' very well.
Most people don't think causing hurt and anguish to their family as a good thing (and Meg already had a history of ghosting her father under awful circumstances (how can she even be seen as decent now?). And for what...freedom to make a gazillion dollars in their deluded minds?
People in America also don't don't like the false cry of racism. There have been some ugly cases and certainly Meg is not a victim of racism by the BRF. Neither is her abhorrent claim that Harry'f was toxic, after all 'It was the "family she never had" Harry bragged. What a despicable woman to say such hieneous charges against the Queen and her family. The only people I have seen praising Meghan is a small set of WOC on LipStick Alley (hardly the majority of people in America.
I suspect many celebrities are going to be wary of befriending the Harkles, like where are her buddies now (Ophra, Ellen, Serena, Gayle, etc..) they seem to have wisely distanced themselves from the unstable duo.
I was surprised that the Queen was so hard on them, but it was fair and just.
1. They never expected to lose the HRH (not being able to use it is as bad as losing it). The HRH is actually more important than Duke and Duchess. They are Duke and Duchess of nothing (no land, no palatial home, no income at all ... it is just a title). Unlike non-royal dukedoms, theirs is meaningless without the HRH. It is just a fancy title. It is the HRH that opens the door to the funding and the free housing and travel and so on.
2. 95% of their funding comes from Charles (profits from the Duchy of Cornwall). There was a shot across the bow when a friend spoke to the DM about just how much the Sussexes were costing him, and that he gave them money for Frogmore Cottage (they had said they paid for fittings and furnishings privately ... nope PC gave them the money). They have said they want financial independence so I am sure that although PC will continue to fund them, it will be with a time limit (and a monetary limit).
3. There is no way Canada can be expected to pay anything at all for their security. The British people no longer want to pay. The BRF have kicked the can down the road and left it up to the government to make the decision. Non-working royals do not get RPOs so they should not either. Andrew pays for his daughters to have security, so PC should consider doing the same for Harry for that bridging period until they become financially independent.
4. They wanted to be halfeway royals (keeping the things they liked). That has not happened. Harry loses all his honorary positions; Meghan loses the patronages passed onto her by the Queen (and she really wanted the National Theatre because of its links to the USA).
The DM has a more detailed expose of their merching at the Disney event. It really is cringeworthy. This is their future ...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7903455/Moment-Prince-Harry-tells-Lion-King-director-Jon-Favreau-wife-available-work.html#comments
"What does it mean to have your cake and eat it too?
You can't have your cake and eat it (too) is a popular English idiomatic proverb or figure of speech. The proverb literally means "you cannot simultaneously retain your cake and eat it". Once the cake is eaten, it is gone."
Please Google if you don't know what something means before you post it. Thank you.
Other than that, I'm loving all of the comments on here. Thanks, Nutty and Nutties!
The statements Nutties would have like to have seen Her Majesty make. That would be very entertaining!
I don't disagree with you. But as I said earlier, I don't believe that most people in Canada (I can't speak for the US) have followed the Markle story very closely and many of them seem to sympathize with the Smirkles. The people who are cheering the Smirkles on tend to be young "woke" people, anti monarchists and the left wing media. Since the young people mostly control the social media message and the left wing media control the mainstream media (Including the national TV network(Canadian Broadcasting Corporation)), they are not being described as quitters. They are being portrayed as heroes.
I should also add that the go to "Royal Expert" in Canada seems to be Lainey Liu, a friend of Jessica Mulroney's.
Also, Diana was 36 at the time of her death. Meghan is 38 now. For someone apparently wanting to be a star and further her Hollywood ambitions, time is not on her side, one would think.
Also to all the non-Americans who say Americans don't know the difference between these things, thank you, but we aren't all completely clueless.
https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/
The Tumblr name is Tiaras and Houseplants.
https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/
AHP is a credible tumblr and takes anons questions until they become too crazy/rabid/trollish/etc.
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-01-17/prince-harry-very-jolly-meeting-charity-boss-johnny-hornby-meghan/
https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/g4401/princess-diana-summer-1997-timeline/
The reason I said above that Di had "slipped" in stature was because she went from Prince Charles (not exactly a 'prize' in my book, but a future king) to Hasnat Khan and Dodi Al-Fayed. Nothing against either man, they may be/have been great guys, but not exactly British royalty.
My guess is there will be a Hasnat Khan or Dodi Al-Fayed type figure in Meghan's future, once she and Harry divorce.
Dead on, balls accurate, to quote Mona Lisa Vito:
"It was true for Diana -- a figure far more beloved than the Harkles -- and I'm sure the same will bear our for the Harkles.
The Harkles no longer formally represent the monarchy. Their only relevance was via the monarchy. Now, they have nothing and will fool only the most gullible.
In short, it's over. Even if they don't know it yet."
The Sussex's have no intelligence, no charisma, no delightful personalities, no style, no wit, no charm, no creativity, no original ideas, no connections, no cachet. They have a big nothing that no one will want to buy. Maybe a few at first, but really, no one. They will not make millions.
Divorce is two years down the road, when Harry turns 37. It will hit him like a ton of bricks. He is still, as they say, dicktamized, and thinks he's abdicating his royal duties in the name of love. Half wit fool.
For now, Markle is still in the stage of thinking and believing that she will make oodles and oodles of money merching her crap, being a movie star, doing voice overs, being in demand in Hollywood, writing, being interviewed, being on talk shows, etc. It will take her two years to find she is a failure, and look for her next mark.
Even better was DripDrop's comment
Dripdrop@Dripdro74842947 "But everybody knows that. And such videos don't come out when you are royal. But they come when you are only Sussex 😂😂😂" He's referencing MM's porn tape. There's a lot of material the BRF can release about Meghan if she misbehaves.
As for security, the Markles might still be considered Internationally Protected Persons, which applies to visiting heads of state AND MEMBERS OF THEIR FAMILIES. This is a U.N. convention that does not distinguish between royal versus non royal.
Moreover, our Prime Minister's wife is a good friend of Markle and Jessica Mulroney, so regardless of the actual law, he will probably want to help them out. As it is, Trudeau has known about the move since November or December, but went along with the "they're on vacationn in Canada" farce.
One thing for sure, we will probably never know whether we are paying or not, since most likely the information will be withheld "for security reasons".
Thanks! I thought the information on Diana (her "not being the same" since she was no longer a 'true' royal) was appropriate here. A harbinger of what is to come for the Harkles.
I've posted more today (probably like 5x) than I have on this blog ever, put together. I am thrilled at what happened today. Thrilled. Been waiting for this, and here we are.
IMO the way the news of the Queen's announcement was presented was rather negative for the Harkles. At the top of each segment the newscaster made statements such as the Harkles "are out", "a Royal goodbye", "they on their own" and called the Queen's announcement "stunning".
The most interesting parts were:
- These are the FIRST round of changes as the Harkles start their independent roles.
- Many questions remain.
- This is a clean break and we will review what they lose and what they will pay back.
- No comment on security yet
- Majority of their time will be spent in North America.
One segment was led by royal correspondent Keir Simmons who said that "royal history was being written tonight" and that "the Queen was announcing a far more serious move rather than just simply stepping down as senior royals".
Overall all news seemed to review what the Harkles were losing and the fact that it was a removal rather than a step down from royal life.
@BlueBell
Thanks for the updates!
Anyone who knows any DIRT on Rachel Meghan Markle please begin leaking NOW!!!
Thank you from all who hate to see a grifter get away with ANY portion of a con.
@Hikari: You’re spot on. The Brits have a long memory, especially for a pair of ingrate money grubbers who put a rotten cherry on the top of a 75 year-long reign of woman who has cindicted herself with dignity and devotion to her country. Heck, they still remember Wallis with great disdain.
The family division of two once close brothers and the behavior of the Sussexes and lessons learned by choosing a totally unsuitable person with a profound personality disorder who basically stalked her way into the RF will not blow over for a long time.
I wonder who will be interested in having Smegs the one who flunked out of the Royals and whose father calls her the Walmart Royal, advertise their jewelry and beauty products?
@Vince - your welcome! :-)
https://www.4kdownload.com/products/product-videodownloader
https://www.4kdownload.com/products/product-youtubetomp3
- These are the FIRST round of changes as the Harkles start their independent roles.
- Many questions remain.
- This is a clean break and we will review what they lose and what they will pay back.
- No comment on security yet
- Majority of their time will be spent in North America.
The bit that is not on that list is merching review with forensic accountants and the subtle stuff in the BP statement about "the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty." What that really means is that there is a crystal clear agreement about review of merching opps and what happens in the event that the Sussexes FUBAR it. All of what has been announced is not just passing fancy and verbal agreements. This is all written and defined. I'd love to see those docs lol.
It's gonna get ugly and Megs can't afford to sue ***everybody.***
Part 1
Meghan’s PR stunts can’t gloss over the appalling way she’s treated her dad
camilla long january 19 2020, 12:01am
the sunday times
You know who the real victim in this whole Harry and Meghan thing is? It isn’t Harry or Meghan, however much these fey children tell us they’ve had their spirits “crushed” by the sheer number of palaces and diamonds and footmen we’ve flung at them. It isn’t us, even though we’ve had the stupidity to pay this pair of oxygen thieves more than £60,000 a day, if you take into account the £32m wedding, the £2.4m cottage renovation, the security and fripperies and Meghan’s dresses, for the privilege of being patronised and dissed to our faces by them, since they married in May 2018.
It’s the poor, sweet, unsuspecting ladies of the Grenfell soup kitchen I feel sorry for, who have been repeatedly duped into smiling and nodding as the duchess sweeps in to pretend to cook rice on yet another of her many content-gathering missions. These women have been treated as a glorified backdrop by Meghan, and at some point you have to ask yourself: if there were zero chance of those pictures being used for PR purposes, would the duchess even have come? Imagine arriving “discreetly”, as if you’d gone just for them, only to splash pics as soon as you need to launder your image. No sincerity, no truth — these visits only help Meghan.
She was at it again in Vancouver last week, where she has turned her vampire gaze on virgin territory on Canada’s west coast. There were the usual “secret” visits convened by a “secret” assistant from a “secret” hotmail address, before the smug blanket photo-dump, prompting one paper to shriek: “Canada cannot allow you to come to stay.”
How do we judge this woman, I thought, as I looked at the latest shots of her catching a seaplane to visit a women’s shelter.
By the actions that she takes that are easy for her, such as a quick visit to a kitchen or a refuge, where she is treated like a goddess and praised for her do-gooding by millions of leftards, or by the way she actually treats the people who are close to her, which is the way most people are judged in life? If we’re going on the way she treats people who are close to her, the record is currently abysmal.
You probably didn’t have time last Tuesday to read the response by The Mail on Sunday to the duchess’s decision to sue the paper. You probably missed the paragraphs revealing how Meghan is obsessed to the point of self-destruction with her own publicity, getting her friends to intervene over articles, even after she was married (hot tip: don’t sue a paper you’ve tried to manipulate). You probably missed the paper’s claim that she went as far as sending a letter to her father, the contents of which she allowed five of her friends to discuss and disclose to an American magazine, with the intention of smearing him and making herself look better. This is all desperate, mediocre stuff.
I should say at this point I don’t have an enormous amount of time for men who side with the papers against their children either. I don’t have the wildest respect for fathers who are prepared to clamber into the courtroom in order to slate any member of their family in petty disputes. It’s not thrilling that Thomas Markle is gearing up to bear witness against his own daughter but maybe it’s the only way he feels he can communicate with her these days — besides, he must be angry.
The letter wasn’t even the worst thing: there was the cold way in which Meghan responded to the news that he’d had emergency heart surgery the week of her wedding. I say Meghan, but it appears that Harry was the one who sent the text message to his soon-to-be father-in-law after he came out of surgery — no note, no words of condolence, no sign of the human warmth he’s famous for; just a curt telling-off for speaking to the press.
I am sure Harry was busy — wondering, perhaps, which wall of the suite at Coworth Park he was going to spray with his pre-wedding champagne — but it was a stinging enough response for Markle to say he was sorry his heart attack had been an “inconvenience”. How does anyone get tangled up in a web of such toxic misery and self-obsession that they can’t even ask a 73-year-old man how his surgery went? Who cares about the stupid wedding?
If Meghan is sensible, she will drop this legal dispute as quick as she can, unless she so wants to add “copyright warrior” to her Insta bio that she will submit to a shameful courtroom showdown. If she is sensible, she will realise this situation is now lose-lose for her — but, unlike Fergie, unlike Diana, she may not be able to resist the drama.
Let’s have some fun!
Theme playlist for the Sussex separation from the RF. Feel free to add your suggestions in replies. This has endless possibilities!
Fake - Alexander O’Neal
Material Girl - Madonna
The Greatest Romance Ever Sold -Prince
Thank You, Next -Arianna Grande
Gold Digger by Kanye West
Evil Woman - Electric Light Orchestra
Bad Romance - Lady Gaga
Man Eater- by Hall and Oates
Lyin’ Eyes - Eagles
The Bitch Is Back - Elton John
D-I-V-O-R-C-E - Tammy Wynette
Highway To Hell - AC/DC
Why Do Fools Fall In Love - Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers
Big Shot - Billy Joel
Dixie Chicken - Little Feat
All About You - Rolling Stones
You’re So Vain - Carly Simon
Liar, Liar - The Castaways
All About You - Rolling Stones
Plundered My Soul - Rolling Stones
She’s So Cold - Rolling Stones
All About You - Rolling Stones
Old Friends 4 Sale - Prince
The Great Pretender - The Platters
Opportunities (Let’s Make Lots of Money) - Pet Shop Boys
Diamonds Are A Girl’s Best Friend -
Material Girl - Madonna
You Give Love A Bad Name - Bon Jovi
Whipping Post - Allman Brothers Band
I Want You To Want Me - Cheap Trick
You Dropped A Bomb On Me - Gap Band
Fool for Love - Lord Huron
Drown In My Own Tears - The Smithereens
Goin’ On - Gnarls Barkley
Goin’ Down Slow -Eric Clapton
Flirtin’ With Disaster - Molly Hatchet
Fast As You - Dwight Yoakam
Everybody’s Trying to Be My Baby - the Beatles
I’ve Got a Line on You - Spirit
Heroes Are Hard To Find - Fleetwood Mac
Gonna Have It All - Danger Twins
Empty Arms - Stevie Ray Vaughn and Double Trouble
Witchy Woman - The Eagles
Kiss That Frog - Peter Gabriel
Down So Low- Linda Ronstadt
Big Time -Peter Gabriel
Fools Rush In by Johnny Mercer, sung by Elvis, Frank Sinatra, et al.
For the Love of Money - The Ojays
Gimmie What You Got - Don Henley
Your Cheatin’ Heart - Hank Williams
You Give Love A Bad Name - Bon Jovi
Faithless Love - Linda Ronstadt
Good Day In Hell - Eagles
Long Cool Woman In A Black Dress - The Hollies
Drivin’ With Your Eyes Closed - Don Henley
If Dirt Were Dollars - Don Henley
How Bad Do You Want It? - Don Henley
You are very welcome :)
Interesting to hear about the US news coverage of the Sussex statement. (And I do love the NYPost's headline, "The Great British Break Off.")
If I were the Sussexes' PR people (if they have any left), I would focus on the "love" angle.
"They gave up a kingdom for love!" Good hook with Valentine's Day coming up.
Ha ha! I posted before I saw your playlist, but that's great!
Harry and Meghan crisis: Sussexes seal exit deal with the Queen
‘Much loved’ couple barred from using HRH titles and taxpayers’ money
Roya Nikkhah and Tim Shipman
January 19 2020, 12:01am,
The Sunday Times
A palace statement said the couple ‘would no longer receive public funds for royal duties’
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be banned from using their HRH titles and will “no longer receive public funds”, in exchange for striking commercial deals under a historic royal peace deal announced last night.
But in what amounts to the abdication of the royal “rock stars”, the couple will repay the £2.4m of public funds used to renovate Frogmore Cottage, their home on the Windsor estate.
The Queen said she wanted the couple to ‘start building a happy and peaceful new life’The Queen said she wanted the couple to ‘start building a happy and peaceful new life’
Under the terms of the historic divorce deal — which follows the couple’s surprise announcement earlier this month that they were “stepping back” from royal duties — the house will remain the couple’s British base. They will pay commercial rent on its upkeep and take no more taxpayers’ cash.
The couple will keep their royal titles but in a move to insulate them from claims of cashing in on their status, Buckingham Palace announced: “The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the royal family.” They will be known as Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.
After that he and Meghan will be free to make millions from commercial deals without oversight from Buckingham Palace, though palace aides said the couple would be “respectful” of the Queen.
The couple have not signed any deals and have agreed not to become brand ambassadors for big companies. Instead their commercial deals are likely to dovetail with their charitable interests — just as Harry has already agreed to an Apple TV documentary on mental health with the US broadcaster Oprah Winfrey. Meghan has agreed to provide a voiceover for a Disney film in exchange for a donation to a conservation charity.
Harry and Meghan will also continue to receive an undisclosed sum of “private financial support” from Prince Charles, not necessarily from the Duchy of Cornwall.
After a week of high drama, the Queen made clear she sympathised with Harry and Meghan, recognising the “challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years.
“I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family,” her statement said. The Queen stressed she was “particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family”, after friends of the duchess said she had found royal life “soul crushing”.
Harry and Meghan will keep their roles as president and vice president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, but the Duke will no longer be a Commonwealth youth ambassador, a role given to him by the Queen in April 2018.
The couple will still be seen at set-piece events such as weddings, funerals, Trooping the Colour and the Cenotaph commemorations. “They will happily attend royal family events at the invitation of Her Majesty,” a royal source said.
It is understood Harry and Meghan do not yet know whether they will live in Toronto or Vancouver, where they have been staying for the past two months.
The arrangement will be reviewed after a year by the Queen and Princes Charles, William and Harry to see if it is working. The terms will be monitored to ensure it gives the royal household sufficient distance from commercial activities.
Buckingham Palace said: “While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.”
The palace said the Sussexes would continue to get some security support.
Charles, in particular, remembers what happened to his beloved uncle Dickie Mountbatten, who was killed by an IRA bomb.
I'm sorry I'm not understanding your comment to me - the list and everything else that I wrote in the post you quoted from, was what was reported on my local news. It wasn't my opinion - except for my idea that the news seemed negative for the Harkles.
Are you saying that what is NOT mentioned is worth contemplating - because if so, I'm not sure that would apply to the US news. I think I'm confused. :-)
"Royal" is on everything from taxis to dry cleaners. There is no cache to those names here.
Yankee Wally has been keeping up with a corporation that the Harkles started called QUOIL. They have changed their corporate leaders about 30 times in the last three days, with the Harkles dropping away (in name) from the corporation, and putting it into other people's hands under different names. You'll have to go back about a week as Wally follows this. It's very interesting, to say the least. Those in the accounting fields will find it fascinating. I'm not in that field, but maybe somebody here can look into what they're doing. I'm sure they have other corps like this without the Sussex or Royal names.
I do hav to laugh at how MM ran around like crazy setting up all of those corporate names under Sussex Royal. HMTQ qill be watching those closely, and QOIL, too.
- These are the FIRST round of changes as the Harkles start their independent roles.
- Many questions remain.
- This is a clean break and we will review what they lose and what they will pay back.
- No comment on security yet
- Majority of their time will be spent in North America.
And I think that the article overlooked this:
The bit that is not on that list is merching review with forensic accountants and the subtle stuff in the BP statement about "the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty." What that really means is that there is a crystal clear agreement about review of merching opps and what happens in the event that the Sussexes FUBAR it. All of what has been announced is not just passing fancy and verbal agreements. This is all written and defined. I'd love to see those docs lol.
Sorry, long day @Trudy Blue
Queen sad that she has ‘barely seen’ Sussex Jr
Roya Nikkhah, Royal Correspondent
January 19 2020, 12:01am,
The Sunday Times
When Prince Harry described his nearest and dearest as the “family [Meghan] has never had”, hopes were high in royal circles that his wife was going to throw herself wholeheartedly into the firm.
Now, however, the Queen is understood to be “very sad” that she and other members of the royal family have seen little of Harry and Meghan’s son Archie since his birth eight months ago — and not at all this year.
As the Duke and Duchess of Sussex embark on a new life in North America, it has emerged that Archie has met the Queen, Prince Charles, and his cousins — Princes George and Louis, and Princess Charlotte — only a handful of times.
Archie has yet to set foot on British soil this year, having spent the past two months in Canada, where Harry and Meghan decamped in November, missing the royal family’s Christmas gathering at Sandringham.
Harry is expected to rejoin Meghan and Archie in Canada soon. Yet with no sign of when the family will return to the UK, it seems the royals will not be seeing Archie in the immediate future.
A source who knows the Queen said: “She will be very sad to have barely seen Archie, and that he will miss out on growing up with his cousins and wider family.”
The Queen and Duke of Edinburgh first met their eighth great-grandchild in May when he was two days old, at Windsor Castle, where they were photographed with Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland. They did not attend his christening at the castle two months later, however, as it clashed with a private weekend they host annually at Sandringham.
Archie is understood to have first met his cousins in July at a polo match that William and Harry played in, but contact since is said to have been minimal.
Last week, The Sunday Times reported that William had spoken of his “sadness” at the broken bond with his brother and his sorrow that they are “separate entities”. Charles, who relishes his role as “Grandpa Wales” to George, Charlotte and Louis, is also understood to be despondent that he may be unable to develop the same closeness with Archie if the Sussexes are mainly overseas.
A source who knows the royal family said: “Where will Archie’s heritage and roots be? What about Diana’s family, the Spencers? Harry and William know all too well how damaging an unsettled childhood can be.”
I think the Archie story is going to come out, complete with moon bump, and that's one of the reasons Oprah, Ellen, Serena, etc. have been so quiet.
QUOIL LIMITED
Company number SC650317
Follow this company File for this company
CompanyOverviewfor QUOIL LIMITED (SC650317)
Filing historyfor QUOIL LIMITED (SC650317)
Peoplefor QUOIL LIMITED (SC650317)
View allfor QUOIL LIMITED (SC650317)
OfficersPersons with significant control
Filter officers
Filter officersCurrent officers
6 officers / 5 resignations
SHUJA, Aqib
Correspondence address
16 Richmond Street, Glasgow, Scotland, G1 1XQ
Role ACTIVE
Director
Date of birth
November 1991
Appointed on
27 December 2019
Nationality
Scottish
Country of residence
United Kingdom
Occupation
Independent Academic
NARK, Keena, Dr
Correspondence address
125 Richblonde Sweet, Glasgow, Scotland, G1 1XQ
Role RESIGNED
Secretary
Appointed on
14 January 2020
Resigned on
14 January 2020
SAQUIB, Keena
Correspondence address
125 Richblonde Sweet, Glasgow, Scotland, G1 1XQ
Role RESIGNED
Secretary
Appointed on
1 January 2020
Resigned on
14 January 2020
TALIB, Aqib
Correspondence address
125 Richblonde Sweet, Glasgow, Scotland, G1 1XQ
Role RESIGNED
Secretary
Appointed on
2 January 2020
Resigned on
14 January 2020
YOUNG, Anthony
Correspondence address
16 Richmond Street, Glasgow, Scotland, G1 1XQ
Role RESIGNED
Secretary
Appointed on
5 January 2020
Resigned on
14 January 2020
SUSSEX ROYAL THE FOUNDATION OF THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF SUSSEX
Correspondence address
7 Savoy Court, London, England, WC2R 0EX
Role RESIGNED
Director
Appointed on
11 January 2020
Resigned on
11 January 2020
Registered in a European Economic Area What's this?
Placed registered
UNITED KINGDOM
Registration number
12077679
I totally agree. As I said above, there have been three references in a couple of days and previously, nothing. It's dropping. Just a matter of when, and then it puts the pieces together. The pregnancy is when it really started going off the rails and getting stranger than usual for Rach. Although there is nothing wrong with surrogacy or whatever they did, there is something wrong with deceiving the whole world. If that comes out, she is done, and then the BRF will have been smart to get this resolved pre-divorce. This way, the titles, the money, the departure - all resolved.
I think the Archie story is going to come out, complete with moon bump, and that's one of the reasons Oprah, Ellen, Serena, etc. have been so quiet.
They should release this if it's true - it would certainly put her out of business with every demographic everywhere. It certainly would be easier than having to constantly monitor her.
Perhaps either a divorce is already being discussed and they are starting to lay the ground-works for a Markle take-down OR Harry refused to listen to his family this past week and they have decided on a tough-love approach.
Archie is understood to have first met his cousins in July at a polo match that William and Harry played in, but contact since is said to have been minimal.
The photos show no interaction at all between the cousins and poor Archie, dangling from that fraud of a mother.
None of the recent drops re Archie have been random. Now the queen and Chas distancing themselves from knowing Archie. The reminders in the press about how strange it was. The friends stating that the alienation from Harry began when Rach was about 6 mths pregnant. The inexplicable privacy BS being discussed. This is not random and the BRF still have plausible deniability. No doctors, no photos, no presence at the hospital, and probably none of the Senior Royals were up Rach's skirt, so plausible deniability, until they out it.
I think you might have mixed up a couple of my posts. I did paste a few articles from the Times. But I also did a review on the Harkle television news reports from my area. I watched several news programs tonight, took notes on the Harkle segments, and then did a report on what I had seen. What you quoted was my list of issues and/or comments the news programs addressed - it wasn't from any article.
There are so many posts it's all hard to follow.
I do hope the Fauxchie stuff comes out soon.:-)
❔❔❔
The stuff I italicized I agree with and I added the rest of my thoughts. I also agree with @Nutty that the Archie stuff is pending. The bread crumbs are getting bigger and dropped at more frequent intervals. There are only a very few things that would get Rach's PR support to vocally distance and run, and I suspect that Archie is that thing.
And here we go.. :)
I'd like to think it is the same baby, with Harry's DNA, from a surrogate, and nothing to do with that wretched narcissist. I'd like to think that Archie is safe from her, loved by his family, whoever they may be. I also think that the reason my beloved Kate has looked so stressed and tired is because of this. Knowing that a baby was being used like this and tossed about in the most crucial developmental part of his life would break her heart and worry her completely. Regardless of how she feels about Rach, I know that she would not turn her back on a baby, and this has got to have been so difficult for her and Wills. Think about the Christening photos, and it's only gotten worse since then.
He seems to have finally found himself an acutal royal source, someone who has connections in the Royal stables and is extremely annoyed about the Frogmore Cottage staff losing their jobs. The suggestion seems to be that stable people will also lose their jobs, which doesn't totally make sense to me, but let's put that aside for a moment.
The first thing Enty's reliable source told him was that the William cheated on Kate rumors Enty has been peddling were utter nonsense. Surprise, surprise.
The second thing was that it was actually Kate who wanted a long engagement, not William, because Kate wasn't sure she could handle the fishbowl. Given the way the paps were actually chasing her (unlike Meg), that's understandable.
The final thing I got before breakfast was finished is that William can be "headstrong", ie a complete pain in the ass, and the only person who can get him to see sense is Kate, which is something I've heard elsewhere.
The main thing he has been headstrong about recently is having all five Cambridges travelling together. I hope the Queen has told him that, given the Sussex and Andrew situations, that must cease immediately.
No surprise that there was no affair and that Kate was the one who wanted the long engagement. And not a surprise re Wills, so that should scare the hell out of Rach b/c it does not bode well for her future. I've known other men like this and their SOs were the ones who could talk them down. Kate was and always will be the best choice Wills could have made and one of the best of the BRF always.
I agree about the five of them traveling together. Kate must talk sense into him.
Do you or anyone remember the comment? At any rate, for there to be a super injunction, it must be quite a bombshell.
The existence of the super injunction was noted on tv before the bombshell dropped Saturday the 18th about the Sussexes losing their HRH titles, so perhaps this is what the super injunction covered up.
However, I have some ideas about what else could be the subject of the super injunction:
1- Archie’s conception and/or the pregnancy was not a standard conception or pregnancy. It could be a number of combinations.
Here are just a few of the possibilities.
Possibility 1- Meghan was desperate to get pregnant asap to produce a child to entrench herself in the RF deeper and to further lock Harry into the marriage.
As some of you know, Harry was born with an undescended testicle. He had surgery when he was about 2 or 3 years old. The testicle was retrieved from his abdomen and placed into his scrotum.
Generally, men born with this condition go on to be able to father children, but some are infertile, at a higher rate than men who did not have this problem. As an aside, men like Harry also have a higher rate of developing testicular cancer, so I hope he checks himself and has regular exams by a physician.
If Harry has a fertility issue, I would not put it past Meghan to have gotten pregnant by a sperm donor via artificial insemination and then presented her pregnant self to Harry.
Because narcissists are inveterate liars, she could have lied and let him think he was the father via natural means. She also could have told him how lucky they were to conceive so quickly, not telling him she used a sperm donor. Perhaps he later found out via a DNA test, but by then the pregnancy had been announced and he was essentially cornered into a deception.
Oddly, during their Down Under tour, Harry made a bad joke in public in front of Meghan, alluding that he might not be the father of the child Meghan was allegedly carrying.
Also, if Meghan had an issue that prevented her from becoming pregnant or carrying a fetus to full-term, she could have talked Harry into using a surrogate, hence, the ever-changing bump. They would be the biological parents, but iMeghan never would have been pregnant.
There are other variations of this scenario, but if they hid anything from the RF and the public about the circumstances of the pregnancy and if Archie is not the biological child of both Harry and Meghan, it would be a massive deception.
Possibility 2-The Sussexes are separated or already in the process of getting a divorce.
Possibility 3-Meghan has had more than one previous marriage. It’s been rumored for a long time that Meghan had a husband before Trevor, but the marriage was annulled. It would also be deceptive if this was not revealed.
She is no longer royal though. The HRH adds the prestige and connection to royalty. It a bit like behaving the cart without the horse, it’s pointless and useless.
I hope when Harry and Meagain do meet up someone has hidden the knives!
1. There was no mention of a super injunction.
2. They were talking about the court case over the letter.
3. Watch the whole tape. The comment about things that cannot be discussed for legal reasons is after 5 minutes. Someone else interpreted it as Harry and Meghan being angry with the royal family and the reasons cannot be discussed for legal reasons but when we hear the story during the court case we will understand. (Kind of like blackmail.) However, in the context of the discussion (about Meghan suing media outlets for publishing parts of the letter to her father), I think he is referring to the Markle family being angry with the royal family and we will find out why during the court case. Or is it Meghan and Harry being angry with her family? It is not very clear to me.
4. Whatever it is, it is not the story that has grown legs (i.e. that Meghan and Harry are hiding something and there is a super injunction to keep it secret). There is no super injunction. It is part of the evidence that will be presented at the court case and I assume that it is because of that that reporters cannot discuss it.
Here is the video (sorry that I do not have the whole programme but only this clip):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn4iNk8ar5Q
I note that the use of the verb `will' as in `...they will not use' HRH; one false move on the Dumb-dumbs' part and I bet that'll change to `They shall not use...'.
A very big difference.
I had written off Frogmore cottage as they hardly used it. To me , the Queen asking them to pay for the renovations , sounds all in order. If you borrow , loan or hire , one should repair or replace or pay for same. So no qualms here. But where do the public see the proof of this? Also if they never used it, they could refuse to pay.
I suspect that Phillip requested or insisted that Harry be stripped off his military qualifications. Phillip was at Sandringham earlier on the day of the crisis meeting, he must have given the Queen his orders, and he left without meeting Harry.
As far as being invited back to special events such as Trooping etc, I think for now, they must know that having being ostracised from family events in subtle ways before, future family events will be open game to them. So even though they were and still are the " blacksheep " ( this term is used in my family for members who go against family values, anti social crimes, infidelity...) they will crash future family events just to see the look of horror on the others. It happens in my family. Also these crashers once they hit the jackpot, they are only too happy to rub it in .
Someone asked about the Nolan Principles regarding trading and finances in the UK. What happens out of the UK?
Are the existing royal finances subject to these Principles? Can the DM ask the man who brought this into law for his comments ( if he is still alive ).
Having read Penny Junors books , i am really disappointed with her supposed perception of events. Why does she do this ? Is it to secure future work opportunities ? Well, then with her portrayal of the fairytale wedding and magic dust surrounding the Harkles etc, she really is totally off the mark. I'll think twice about reading her books or articles.
Why was the Queen not harsher with the two blackmailers considering what we know about ransom and kidnap stories and what experts can tell about negotiating in such times ? All things considered, i think she will not want to be remembered as the greatest monarch of a racist Britain. Therefore she has given in , so her statements have effectively shut down any such accusations.
Charles was never going to cut them off without a penny. Their titles were never going to be 'stripped'. We might think all of this should happen but that's not the same as saying it would happen, because that's just not how these things go.
However:
- they have lost the HRH
- they can no longer be part-time glamour royals
- Haz has lost all his honourary military titles
- their security is up for review
- they will have to pay for Frogmore (at least on paper)
- they can no longer represent the queen
In other words, they're out. Hard Mexit. Sayonara, tiara.
Then, English, reports, came Meghan.
"When I congratulated him on the happy news that he and Meghan were expecting their first baby while covering the tour of Australia in 2018, he just scowled," she writes.
English doesn't point out that this is a odd reaction for someone who had waited a long time to be a father, and was very eager to have a child of his own.
Here's the link:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7896645/REBECCA-ENGLISH-reveals-touching-insight-Prince-Harrys-personality.html
But I think Dan Wootton's report that William and Harry had a "furious clash" the night before the polo match might be significant.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10731823/prince-william-harry-furious-row-polo-event/
Wootton pointedly doesn't say what the clash is about, but that was the day Archie and Meg turned up unexpectedly at the match, with Meg strangely dressed and holding the baby very awkwardly.
Pure speculation, but perhaps William didn't want his family to have anything to do with Archie and communicated to Harry that they were not to attend the match, which made Harry furious.
It is the only time the Cambridge kids have been photographed with Archie, and I believe there is a story out today saying this is the only time they "met" their cousin.
I have a strange (and totally baseless) feeling that Tommy Robinson is involved somewhere in Meg's blackmail accusation.
Robinson's name is so toxic that I read today that Facebook is deleting the accounts of anyone who shares information about him. Not just deleting the post, but deleting the entire account.
If some Royal - any Royal, even one of the forgettable old ones - had met with or expressed sympathy for Robinson, or heaven forbid sent him money, that would be a very potent thing for Meg to release. Prince Michael's "racist brooch" would be pretty minor compared to an association with Robinson.
That said, I have zero inside information and could be just talking out of my hat. I'm just trying to think of something that would be damaging enough to make blackmail effective.
As I understand it, `will' and `shall' depends on who is speaking, 1st person or not.
In 3rd person, `will' is `mere futurity', `shall' implies determination/compulsion.
eg `All unwatered plants will die ' compared with Henry VIII speaking, perhaps, of Anne Boleyn `She shall die!'
Vice versa in 1st person: `I shall go there at 2pm, rather than 3pm' but `I will have my own way.'
I'm not a lawyer, I just try to be what my dictionary calls a `careful speaker of English' but I don't always get it right
Please add "Tainted Love" to the playlist. For Harry to sing:
...Once I ran to you, now I run from you, this tainted love you've given, I gave you all a boy could give you...
...Don't touch me pleaaase, I cannot stand the way you seeeize...
At any rate, one tactic might be to destroy Meg's credibility as soon as possible.
"The woman who faked her pregnancy and walked around rubbing her moon bump" is less likely to believed if she starts releasing damaging information.
That new video of Harry saying he doesn’t want to voice Lion King’s Scar, the brother who usurps the throne from his brother and nephew. Talk about a poetic development. Although Harry looks really bad, Meg looks worse because he’s plugging for HER. Why would he do that if not for her and her inability to get it on her merits. Meg’s credibility is getting shattered on so many fronts.
If this is true, it shows the depths to which Harry has fallen. I hope the merching opportunities are worth it, Haz.
It was expected, as is the norm for the younger son of the sovereign, that he would remain in the military until his 40s, as Andrew did. However, he left after 10 years. Some say this was for security reasons as his location was revealed by the press, but this doesn't convince because the British army serves in more than one location and he could easily have been transferred. Others say it is because the next step on the ladder woudl have been a desk job for which a written exam was required. Anyone familiar with Harry's 'academic' record knows this would have been shall we say, challenging for him.
There have also been rumours of the special treatment he received while in the service. Now that the gloves seem to be off regarding what the media writes about him, I suspect we may hear more about this soon.
http://www.sussexhouseschool.co.uk/
I'm not too knowledgeable about this area, but does this copyright text at the bottom of the page mean there could be issues if they want that particular name?
© 2009-2015 Sussex House, all rights reserved. Sussex House School is a charitable company limited by guarantee.
While I was looking, I stumbled across this article which is quite interesting reading:
https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/risks-sussex-royal-unauthorised-eu-trademark-application-targets-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle
I'm still undecided about the outcome and who it will benefit most, so am sitting on the fence for the moment.
Whilst I sit on that fence, (hoping I don't get splinters) it appears that not only Thomas senior is speaking out but so is Thomas junior.
He discusses Trevor and his reactions when Meghan is mentioned in this article from the Sun.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10769999/meghan-markle-dad-thomas-daughter/
‘ HUGO VICKERS: I pray Prince Harry knows what he's doing.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7903275/HUGO-VICKERS-pray-Prince-Harry-knows-hes-doing.html
Not only tacky, they suggest she has a preferential treatment from Trudeau because of her connection to his wife.
Round three fallout, Canadian is now looming. I wonder what else the media is sitting on.
Pap photos of the loving couple strolling arm-in-arm by the sea within the next few days?
Oscars appearance for Meghan - or crashing one of the after parties at the very least?
Move to LA by summer?
Some kind of sponsorship deal to show that *someone* thinks they are good spokespeople and their whole plan was not ridiculous.
Away Luggage, maybe? They already co-sponsored Meg's NYC shower.
"When I'm on the road, I need luggage I can count on." Cut to shots of Meg and Harry in Canada, Africa, and maybe Europe, but not the UK.
"Sayonara, tiara". Love it! Would have made a great newspaper headline, but I guess only people like us who've watched them like hawks would truly appreciate it.
Saw a montage of UK front pages today - hard Megxit indeed.
Maybe a chain of eco-friendly hotels.
"Seeing the planet shouldn't mean hurting the planet. That's why I stay at Green Suites." - Harry, Duke of Sussex.
"On Saturday night, Netflix's chief content officer Ted Sarandos also admitted that the streaming giant would be interested in working with Harry and Meghan.
Speaking at an event in Los Angeles and asked about Harry and Meghan, he replied: 'Who wouldn't be interested? Yes, sure."
Diana slipped more and more into tawdry celebrity. She still did work of value and still had tremendous potential. She could bring so much to the table because of her unique abilities and the bond she had established with the British people over more than a decade. She had paid her royal dues. Yet she was already on her way down. Her tragic early death obscured all of this. If Diana, with blood far more blue than the royal family, immaculately dressed, beautiful, empathetic, professional and well-briefed could not succeed in her exile, what chance does Meghan have?
https://twitter.com/BrexitPartridge/status/1218651288298311680/photo/1
Priceless! LOL
And how about the two Toms in the Sun article posted above. Tom Jr goes on at length with new material.
Apple TV is also spending mad money and can toss some Megs way.....I mean they have a hundred billion or more in cash reserves to dip into. From their phones, where they get most of their profits. Computers earn them only 16% of their total profits.
"Netflix has confirmed its interest in working with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after they sensationally quit the royal family.
Following a period of intense negotiations, it was announced yesterday that the couple would be giving up their HRH titles and would be known as Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex going forward.
This means they are free to strike lucrative contracts and Netflix's chief content officer Ted Sarandos has now admitted that the streaming giant would be 'interested' in a production with the Sussexes.
Speaking at an event in Los Angeles and asked about Harry and Meghan, he replied: 'Who wouldn't be interested? Yes, sure.'
The couple would be following in the footsteps of their friends Barack and Michelle Obama, who agreed a production deal with Netflix to make film and TV projects. "
The Obamas signed their Netflix deal in May 2018, and I don't think we've seen any premieres yet from them.
One option might be to piggyback Meg and Harry on an existing deal, say a soon-to-premiere documentary called "The Elephants in Africa" which could instead become "Meghan and Harry see the Elephants in Africa." Fly them in for a few days of stand-ups and then edit them in.