Meghan, Duchess of Sussex's insistence that she is being hounded by paps in her Canadian hideaway looks a lot like her 2016 claim that she was being hounded by paps in Toronto.
In both cases, it seems likely that Meghan conspired with the photographers, both to obtain publicity and a percentage of the profits from selling the photographs to media outlets. (Meg's mother Doria, father Thomas, and ex-husband Trevor all appear to have done something similar.)
Now the Sussexes have issued a legal warning via their lawyers, Schillings, saying "this type of continual harassment...obviously raises serious safety and security concerns and is causing them considerable distress."
So what is Meg playing at? Does she think that the public can't figure out she's using the paps to boost her profile and merch her yoga pants, baby carrier, beanies, and dog leashes?
Or is she trying to create an incident in order to make the case that the British taxpayers should consider to pay her security expenses? If she is trying to create a "security incident", how far will she go?
Or is she trying to create an incident in order to make the case that the British taxpayers should consider to pay her security expenses? If she is trying to create a "security incident", how far will she go?
Making the wrong people angry
Meanwhile, what does making the pap photographers angry really mean for the Sussexes? Unlike the bad old days of Jackie O and Ron Galella, today's paps don't need LIFE magazine to publish their snaps.
It would be easy for an angry pap to publish unflattering images of the Sussexes - having a fight? holding a doll? co-ordinating a paid pap shot? - directly online without any major media involvement, and then simply direct people there with Twitter. There is no gatekeeper.
It's better to have paps as friends than enemies.
Jesal Parshotam, a young British photographer who was the first to report that Kate was at the hospital to give birth to Prince George, is known for his gallant refusal to take a photo of Kate in labor as she arrived at the Lindo Wing.
Today, Jesal has been tweeting about the Sussex pair. "'Lawyers say there have also been attempts to photograph inside their home using long-range lenses and they accuse the paparazzi of being camped outside the property.' This is a lie!," Jesal tweeted.
"These lawyers always fabricate and use emotive language to win over opinion," Jesal added. "They also syndicate these “private letters” to the press in order to gain media attention and spin the situation into their favour."
In response to another Twitter user's comment that Meg had perhaps arranged the pap shoot without telling Harry, Jesal tweeted "It wouldn’t be the first time a public figure has tipped of the press without members of their family or partners knowing."
What will making an enemy of the paps mean for the Sussexes in the short, medium, and long run?
Comments
Yes, I do agree with the article that there should have been more preparation time: a long engagement and gently being introduced to royal duties, getting to know the UK and British people and customs and history, and integrating into the family.
However, Meghan grabbed that ring, wanted the huge wedding, and wanted to have as much exposure as possible, plus rode roughshod over any British and royal family traditions. She grabbed at everything and was insistent on doing things her way.
Harry's family told them to slow down and that simply caused a rift.
So, in my opinion, the article is correct, but fails to point out that this is what Meghan wanted and Harry was fully supportive. They caused their own problems so I have no sympathy for their whining and victim-hood and am appalled at their destructive disrespect of others.
Kate and William chose their path because they genuinely love each other and wanted to take time to build a solid relationship with each other and with respective families, plus to think about what they wanted to do with their roles, what kind of parents they wanted to be ...
The Queen and everyone in Harry's family would have been supportive if Meghan and Harry had chosen to do the same. Meghan had no interest in forming deep and lasting relationships; she is much too shallow for that.
Harry and Meghan chose the path of extreme suffering, no, insisted on it by throwing petulant tantrums, manipulation and being oh so very greedy and smug, against the advice of everyone around them.
The kind of attitude they have does not bode well for their future, but there are plenty of stupid and shallow people in the world to support them and gush over them, so I do think that they will have moderate success outside the BRF.
For Harry and Meghan, Canada media's respect for privacy is good news
Despite recent paparazzi photos of the family, journalists set a high bar for intrusive stories: ‘We kind of leave people be’
The general gist being only foreign press are interested enough to be there to get stories. Private lives of H & M aren’t going to make it into Canadian news.
Sandie, I haven’t had a proper chance to read your reply re astrology and introvert. 😀
Thank you A Narc’s Daughter for the YouTube link for Meghan’s alternative birthdate, very interesting! I know a lot actress’s lie about their age, so this is a credible theory. I think both birth charts work for her (Meghan). However, I do find it hard to believe the royal family would allow her to lie about her age and use a false birthdate. Wouldn’t this invalidate anything she signed (if the false birthdate was on there too)? 😳
*************
With regards to Meghan’s family and their warnings about her prior and after her wedding. I always believed Samantha and Thomas Junior. I could see right through Meghan before the engagement interview. Red flags for me was the November 2016 statement released by Harry, and the very boastful Vanity Fair piece on her, and the things she said. Just not done. 🤔
@NeutralObserver, that is funny about my avatar. It does at first glance give that impression. I wanted to put a pic of one of the landmarks of my city but was too lazy. I may change it later.
@CatEyes, I am also sorry about your brother and will pray for him and you.
Dementia is so hard to deal with and he is blessed to have you to advocate for him.
The Economist is the prescribed exercise material for those taking the UN YPP exam's precis-writing segment.
The reason being, the publication uses big fancy words. So if you're trying to practice your precis-writing skills, try working on precis-ing an Economist article (it's challenging enough that once you actually *sit* the exam, the UN's actual exam material will feel significantly easier). That's how I got hooked on The Economist anyway...
I'm not an ivory tower a-hole, tho, I promise.
I don't think the Economist is "business-oriented", though? It's always been a very "public sector" publication to me? IDK. It's what all the fancy pants aid workers read.
Yeah it can be a little pretentious (but not *completely* insufferable) and I'd rather date/marry an Economist writer than a Guardian writer. (SAVE HUMANITY!!) Bleeeeeeeerrrugh.
And now I am craving weiner. 🌭
(Both literally and euphemistically...)
Hikari posted a good description of introvert vs extrovert and pointed out that the narcissism is masking her authentic self. Her birth chart does show some interesting things (i.e. her relationship with a non-nurturing mother is the problem, not her father) and perhaps some things in her character that has led her along the path of extreme narcissism ...
As for her true age ... too many people would have to lie and too many records would have to be falsified for her to be older than the age given. She probably told some fibs somewhere along the way, but the birth date and her age as given in the media currently is correct. Samantha would have spilled the beans, and her father is so hurt and resigned to never seeing her again that he would tell.
There are two Duchess of Beaufort, Tracy Ward, sister of Rachel who lives in Oz, claimed the title on the death of her f/in-law even though she was separated from her husband. The present Duke, her ex, has since remarried, a Telegraph journalist. Looks like murky will be a Duchess forever unless the Queen does something??
However, that does not explain Harry never even having met his future father-in-law before the wedding.
It has always seemed to me as if Meghan wanted to keep her father and Harry as far away from each other as possible. Why? Because her father was probably the person who knew her best. I think Meghan has always been afraid he would tell Harry all her secrets. The annulled first marriage, her yachting past, the rumoured pregnancy in her teens and who knows what else she was hiding regarding her past, her behaviour, her character. That is why no one from her immediate family was invited to the wedding. They would have smashed her carefully constructed image. Doria was the only family member who could be trusted not to talk.
Interesting, very interesting. You’re very good at joining the dots, I’m hopeless. You’ve just brought memories back of The Thorn Birds.
I remember enjoying my break from it. I got back into it because I worry that if everyone takes a break, they'll carry on their merry way and take the BRF with them. The BRF is only spooked into action when they can see that crucial public consent to their existence is being undermined.
Regarding TM do you honestly believe that PH knows what a normal family is? The RF do Royal well but as a family, my view is that they are dysfunctional. PH I am sure never read The Tig and it is always in the realm of possibility that MM told PH that she was abused as a child, I for one would not put this past her as she lies and seems to want to live the strange fantasy that is going on in her head.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7924071/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markles-attempt-trademark-Sussex-Royal-brand-blocked.html
This whole ordeal is getting hilarious. I think most have seen this about the Australian doctor blocking their use of their`trademarked (it is all good, so H$M thought) Royale Sussex. Just when they were gearing up, this Doc throws a few pounds of gravel in their gearbox. An MI6 deniable dirty ops? Anything is possible at this point
I'm actually old enough to know who Ryan Giggs is.
And remember when David Beckham & Posh Spice both had centre-parted hair.
Byyyyyyyyyye~
It really is a tacky mess that William saw coming when he first met Meghan!
There was a comment on the DM article about this from someone who lives on Vancouver Island. From the way they wrote I would guess they were staff in one of the establishments there.
They said that it is impossible to see the house from the road, and that there are no paparazzi camped out on the island. The people that own properties there have their own security and wouldn't allow that.
Someone else's comment about the park pap walk was that they know the park well and where the photo was taken, there are no bushes for the paps to hide in.
It's reminding me of the way the flu pandemic is thought to have started in the closing stages of the First World War, in the military camps in Northern France, where people were living in very close proximity to birds and livestock and at the same time huge numbers of people were moving long distances, in a way that was uncommon then but normal life now.
>>>It has always seemed to me as if Meghan wanted to keep her father and Harry as far away from each other as possible. Why? Because her father was probably the person who knew her best. I think Meghan has always been afraid he would tell Harry all her secrets. The annulled first marriage, her yachting past, the rumoured pregnancy in her teens and who knows what else she was hiding regarding her past, her behaviour, her character. That is why no one from her immediate family was invited to the wedding. They would have smashed her carefully constructed image. Doria was the only family member who could be trusted not to talk.<<<
Yes, to all of this . . The Markles do not have a filter, and Tom and the sibs may have let Meg's skeletons slip, not necessarily maliciously, just 'getting to know him' chat after a few drinks, perhaps assuming that he knew already.
This couple did not know each other well at all. Prior to getting engaged, they'd shared 5-6 months of bimonthly transatlantic booty calls, one trip to Africa (allegedly), followed by a break-up of several months. Harry tried to break away and thought he had, only to be reeled back in at the Inskip wedding. Beyond the conception/existence/custody of Archie, the biggest mystery here is HOW exactly she forced an engagement and wedding in record time after he'd broken up with her. Or why he was so accepting of her ban on him meeting anyone from her family besides her mother.
After the Markle family saga kicked off, my thought immediately ran to 'Rachel filled Harry's head with (fictitious) tales of all the sexual abuse her father subjected her to. Along with Tom, Jr., probably. Samantha watched and cheered them on, 'cause she's a bully.
Lobbing the grenade of sexual abuse would be guaranteed to keep Harry away from her father.
I don't think Tom is guilty of this, mind you. But given Rachel's hypersexualized behavior, her continued 'Lolita' presentation at nearly 40 years old, and the environment she grew up in, I think it is possible that she was molested by someone, perhaps someone on the set of Married With Children where she spent thousands of hours hanging out as an unaccompanied minor. Dad would have been busy working and not watched her every minute. That show was raunchy and not the best environment for a pre-teen girl. Or perhaps one of the people that were in and out of Tom's house.
Whatever ails her, she's broken for life. Too bad she's such a poor actress or else she could play herself in a psychological thriller. She is one of the most f*cked up pathologies I have ever encountered in a public figure.
ROFL! True, very true. I've started reading about personality defects because of her, and I've been thinking, well, take part of this personality defect, and 3 parts of THAT personality defect, and is she bipolar? Is she borderline? How many dashes of psychopath and sociopath?
Then I start to wonder what is wrong with ME because I've started to obsessively follow HER antics. (Back to reading to diagnose my defects...)
Although I am struggling to visualise a situation whereby Harry would visit Thomas' house for 'getting to know each other drinks' and Thomas accidentally telling Harry Meghan was married twice before. Or about her yachting past. I think Harry would have been out of there before the snacks were served.
Another good point you brought up is how Meghan managed to get engaged, married and pregnant so bloody fast. It seems she does everything at top speed. She wasn't even in the BRF for 2 years and now she is already out. Why the hurry in everything she does?
What is your interpretation?
Good catch on DM!!
I'm wondering if this is when Doria became openly gay/bi?
>>>>Another good point you brought up is how Meghan managed to get engaged, married and pregnant so bloody fast. It seems she does everything at top speed. She wasn't even in the BRF for 2 years and now she is already out. Why the hurry in everything she does?<<<
I think because deep down Rach knows she's a fraud. She joked about it on camera once with a laugh (yes, it's a criminal fraud to lie about having a SAG card when you don't, but she's not bothered, 'cause laws are guidelines for other people she is free to ignore) . . but since her persona is entirely constructed of lies and poses, she knows she can't sustain her facade for very long. She knows she can pretend to be fun and caring and a good friend on the surface for a little while, until she's gotten whatever she wanted from her target(s) . . but her worlds (different groups of people she's told various lies to meeting one another, all with different 'information' about Rachel) are at risk of colliding without constant ruthless culling of acquaintances who might talk if they get too close to each other. She's got to keep her circles of control tightly managed. Right now her circle is down to Harry, and possibly two poor dogs and a baby. I'm hoping the dogs and baby are fictions for their own protection.
As to the tea being spilled by Rachel's family, that's why none of them were invited to the wedding. But it shows a distinct lack of initiative (or what we call balls) from Harry that he did not insist on meeting her father beforehand. They could have taken a holiday to Mexico and traveled to Thomas. Haz really is a dim bulb if alarm bells didn't go off re. the secretiveness of his future bride about her family and why he wasn't allowed to meet any of them except her conveniently on-brand mother.
Harry's run away from his family and stuck two fingers up at them all, but those antics do not change one iota of this truth: WILLIAM WAS RIGHT, YOU KNOBHEAD. WILLIAM IS ALWAYS RIGHT AND WILLIAM WILL ALWAYS BE BETTER THAN YOU, HARRY. YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CAN'T HIDE FROM THIS FACT.
The editor of Vanity Fair was Markle'd, losing his position the day after the issue hit the stands. Yet, the engagement still went forward. Quizzical.
It's too late now, but Elizabeth, when presented with a wayward grandson who was determined to marry an American hussy with an indeterminate number of ex-husbands and a 'colorful' past that made Camilla Shand's past look white as snow, needed to employ the delay tactics she's now belatedly using. Harry was required at that stage to obtain her consent for the engagement. The Queen should have required the engagement be delayed until the birth of Louis, given Harry's place in the succession. The couple should have also been informed that owing to the bride's divorced status, not to mention her buffet-style approach to religion, that a huge televised white wedding in a COE church was not in the cards. She could not give Harry what she had denied to her sister and her own heir. But she would not deny the *marriage*, provided they wait a year. Eugenie's already-scheduled wedding would not be interfered with. In a year's time, they could marry in a private ceremony followed by a lovely lunch at Windsor. If they wanted to have a dance party for their friends afterwards, fine. But no huge church extravaganza. If they defied her and ran off to marry . .or if they had already done so, or if the bride was already 'pregnant' . .all the more reason to keep the marriage on the QT.
If Rachel had been made to wait--nothing to do with racism--protocols relating to the Duchess of Cambridge's pregnancy and a formerly scheduled family wedding--and denied the Princess Bride Fantasy--again, not racist--Canon law re. the status of divorced persons wedding in COE church, something not bent even for the future King . .Rach's racist card would have been blunted. The Queen was not denying the *marriage* . .only setting terms which *everyone* has to abide by, I think Rach would have buggered right off and found herself a thick-necked footballer with twice Harry's fortune and no stupid protocols.
The Queen has screwed herself and her house for years, if not decades to come, all because she didn't play hardball with this grifter while she still held all the cards. She's given away her power and they will be paying for it long after she and Philip pass on. Caving into a blackmailer is poor statesmanship and a losing position. By trying to appease the Markle ER has made herself into a Chamberlain. Trying to be a Churchill now with the 'Separation dictum' is 'Too little, too late', Ma'am. If she'd been harder-nosed two years ago, we would not be dealing with the toxic consequences of her being too welcoming to a poisonous snake in the bosom of her family.
Good idea. I will look for treasure map with a visible X marks the spot. For my identifier icon here.
I don't agree about the Chinese government not caring about the citizens' well-being completely.
I grew up in China. I do believe the communist party would do anything to hold on to power. The Chinese government finally realized they had to open the door to the western world during the late seventies. They are not going to piss off the majority of the Chinese citizens because the Chinese economy depends on the international trades. They don't want to face economic sanctions like Iran.
There is no effective drug to treat the coronavirus. The only way to control it is to quarantine the patients and people who have been exposed to the virus. This Saturday is Chinese new year. It is the biggest holiday in China and the busiest travel time of the year. They had to do something to stop the virus from spreading.
From the DM:
Meghan Markle has told her inner circle of friends she is planning to give her first interview to Ellen DeGeneres after the two have become close, insiders exclusively told DailyMail.com.
'Ellen and Meghan have already discussed a sit-down interview. That's been in the works for quite some time now,' a source at the Ellen Show confirmed.
The two met by chance years ago at a dog shelter in Los Angeles where Ellen encouraged Meghan to adopt her first dog Bogart, and the women have stayed in touch.
Ellen and her wife Portia de Rossi even took a trip to London to visit Prince Harry and Meghan after the birth of Archie over the summer, remarking on her talk show: 'I see them get attacked and it's not fair. They are two of the most down-to-earth compassionate people, they're doing so much good for the world.'
It's because of their friendship that Meghan wants to give Ellen her first interview, as a friend told DailyMail.com: '[Meghan] said Ellen understands her pain and suffering. That she epitomizes authenticity. [Meghan] feels like they are kindred spirits.'
So who's the "insider"? Jessica/Messica? Scobie? Whomever was trying to get charity appearances for Meghan in Canada claiming to be her assistant and using a hotmail account?
No, he sure didn't. Why did I interpret that as simply 'groom's nerves' at the time? The whole thing was a bigger sham from start to finish than the Charles-Di fiasco.
Well, this is very possible. But proof should have been demanded, not least of all by the future daddy, if she was using a claim of pregnancy to blackmail the Royal Family into marriage. Did Harry not demand to see test results? And, if the divorced bride is in fact pregnant, OK, agree to let them get married--but not in a virginal white dress with 22-foot hand embroidered chapel train, on television. That makes a mockery of the proceedings and the Queen is complicit. *WAS* complicit.
The Queen has screwed herself and her house for years, if not decades to come, all because she didn't play hardball with this grifter while she still held all the cards. She's given away her power and they will be paying for it long after she and Philip pass on. Caving into a blackmailer is poor statesmanship and a losing position. By trying to appease the Markle ER has made herself into a Chamberlain. Trying to be a Churchill now with the 'Separation dictum' is 'Too little, too late', Ma'am. If she'd been harder-nosed two years ago, we would not be dealing with the toxic consequences of her being too welcoming to a poisonous snake in the bosom of her family.
Less blame on the Queen due to being over 90 years old. The Queen is so old her life forces are not what they used to be at age 75. Charles and Andrew got rid of her best, strongest adviser. If the loyal and long serving Lord Geidt was still with the Queen he would have stopped M$H's rebellion and nonsense early. Geidt would have seen right through Meg's manipulative practices. Thus Charles and Andrew get lots of blame for the current M$H situation.
>>>The two met by chance years ago at a dog shelter in Los Angeles where Ellen encouraged Meghan to adopt her first dog Bogart, and the women have stayed in touch.<<<
OMG, I am laughing so hard I can barely see. What luck Rachel has for completely serendipitous encounters with famous and influential people (who just happen to share the same PR firm she has). Sure. And she just ran into Amal Clooney one day at the checkout line in Target!!
So . .on the very day aspiring starlet Megsy goes to a shelter in L.A.--one of a hundred or so in the city, I imagine . .there's TV star Ellen deGeneres, just hanging out to offer encouragement to whoever's walking in that day to get a dog. This same Ellen who is going to pay her scads of money for an interview on TV and who represented a desperate attempt to bolster Meg's claims of Archie's existence . .that Meg?
Does anybody happen to remember if Portia and Ellen were guests at the wedding?
"Years" is characteristically vague. Surely one remembers the very day a famous celebrity encourages one to adopt one's first shelter dog and can put a date to it. How old is Bogart? Why not say, '5 years ago' or 'in 2014'?
I admire the Queen very much, and am sad to see her dedicated reign of 6+ decades poised to end in such a tawdry fashion, with the twin scandals of Andrew and Megxit. I have compassion for a 93-year-old woman who is tired. But if she is so tired she can no longer make clear decisions, she should have stepped down. As long as she remains Elizabeth Regina, the power . . and the ultimate responsibility . . .rest upon her. She has raised Charles and Andrew to be what they are; she forced the marriage of Charles and Diana which was a very poor idea, and not even in hindsight . . it was baldly obvious the two were not suited. The union produced William, though, so not all bad.
The Queen has always let her children run amok and relied on Philip to make the family decisions. In his absence there is now a void of leadership which should be *hers*. ER allowed her children to oust the only advisor that could have helped her be firm about the whole Meg/Harry situation. Yes, Charles and other members of the family share blame, but it is precisely because Charles is so limp that his mother should have been a firmer hand with Harry. *She* is the top--it doesn't get any higher.
It looks increasingly like her house might die with her, and I'm sure that's not something she wants for her legacy after 70+ years of unflinching service to her nation.
I’m embarrassed to say back in the day, I was a Oprah fan. Mind you, I was a pre-teen and eventually I learned to be more discerning. For Ellen, I never got the love bug. I thought I was a weirdo when everyone couldn’t stop gushing about her. She always came across as cold and insincere to me. When the rumors started swirling of her infidelities and her nasty behavior to her staff, I felt a little happy my instincts didn’t steer me wrong.
Possible MM told PH she was pregnant, remember PH is not very smart or worldly wise, yes most men in his position would of asked for proof or denied it, if the circumstances of their first encounter are true. He went over his father's head straight to Granny who said yes. Hence the mess, MM then told him there was a miscarriage or whatever, he had no experience with someone who manipulates like MM does and we can see clearly what is going on. Close up and personal not so much. To the idea that PA and PC conspired to get Lord Geidt fired, HM has over ridden PC for years, if anyone was involved it was PA and one or two others. PA wanted HM to over rule PC and get his daughters accepted as working Royals, therefore on the paylist. PA's thing is money, money money and if he could have sold himself as per his ex Sarah, he would have done so a million times over. Royal or not.
And is Janina Gavankar getting markled as well?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7924817/Meghan-Markles-friend-shares-quote-not-available-things-make-feel-s.html
https://www.besthealthmag.ca/best-you/wellness/how-ellen-degeneres-convinced-meghan-markle-to-adopt-a-dog-and-more-from-our-may-cover-star/
" I didn’t grow up with dogs. I was in LA and I went to this dog rescue [shelter] and they had gotten him and his brother. They found them in an alley in this neighbourhood called Downey at five weeks old. So I saw him and I was sitting there with him and then Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi walk in. Now, I don’t now her, but Ellen goes ‘Is that your dog?’ And I said, ‘No,’ and she’s like, ‘You have to take that dog.’ And I said, ‘Well, I’m deciding.’ And she’s like, ‘Rescue the dog!’ It’s sort of like if Oprah tells you to do something. I’m sitting there holding him and she’s like ‘Have you thought of a name for him yet?’ And I said, ‘Well, I think I’d name him Bogart,’ and she’s like ‘You’re taking the dog home.’ And she walks outside to get into her car but instead of getting in she turns around and comes and taps on the window glass and she yells ‘Take the dog!’ And so I brought him home. Because Ellen told me to."
Ellen is a fame ho. She probably got back in touch after M married Harry and this interview became known.
Seems she and Meghan would get along well that way.
Ellen has a larger audience than Oprah does, and is more relevant these days. And she actually has a talk show now, unlike Oprah.
Will be interesting to see the ratings. Should be some curiosity following Megxit, but I doubt it's sustainable.
In the documentary...
Thomas was asked: "Why was it you think that she wanted to come and live with you?"
Thomas replied: " Erm, I'm not certain, erm, maybe because I had a little more time for her. She had been with me for most weekends and during the week, so I said 'Do you wanna come live with me?' and she said 'Yes' and I said 'Let's go look for a house, find a place,' so together we went and found a place."
So basically, we are none the wiser!
Aisle, the church wedding, the FC furnishings, etc. Is he a wimp or just feeling guilty about his son’s childhood? My bet is that he just wants to look good or is he the narcissist in Harry’s childhood?
So who's the "insider"? Jessica/Messica? Scobie? Whomever was trying to get charity appearances for Meghan in Canada claiming to be her assistant and using a hotmail account?
Reading Obie's latest twitter, it seems he is backing away from being M's mouth piece. Obie bills himself as a Royal reporter which means he is more interested in covering K&W now.
>>> . ..someone else here mentioned Meghan came to live with Thomas at 11, but no reason was given as to why. Perhaps someone in Doria's orbit was the abuser and Meghan chose to live with Thomas to get away from the abuse. It's possible Thomas and Doria don't know, but the damage caused by the abuse has something to do with her current behavior.<<<
I didn't watch it, either, and I won't. The whole saga makes my stomach hurt and my blood pressure shoot out through my head.
Meg coming to live with her father at age 11, though high school corresponds to the unaccounted for period when Doria dropped out of sight for a number of years. Some say she was in jail for financial fraud having to do with the management of her late father's care and estate. Others think Doria was in a cult during this time. Maybe she was just off getting high . .both sides of Rachel's family are weed enthusiasts at the minimum. Casual drug use plus relaxed standards at either home about who was invited over/had access to Meg as a child means that sexual abuse has to at least be considered. It would explain a lot of Rachel's anger and her subsequent career choices. Sexual abuse in childhood is something that a high percentage of prostitutes have in common.
@SwampWoman
I don't agree about the Chinese government not caring about the citizens' well-being completely.
I grew up in China. I do believe the communist party would do anything to hold on to power. The Chinese government finally realized they had to open the door to the western world during the late seventies. They are not going to piss off the majority of the Chinese citizens because the Chinese economy depends on the international trades. They don't want to face economic sanctions like Iran.
There is no effective drug to treat the coronavirus. The only way to control it is to quarantine the patients and people who have been exposed to the virus. This Saturday is Chinese new year. It is the biggest holiday in China and the busiest travel time of the year. They had to do something to stop the virus from spreading.
Great! You can read the tweets and keep up with the latest (although I know that it is a crime to post non-governmentally-sanctioned news from Best China, so there is that).
What China is saying and what they are doing are completely different animals. "We have it under control, no big deal" and quarantining 14 cities and 43 million people with tanks and armored personnel carriers on patrol to enforce it would seem to indicate differently.
If this were Hong Kong, we'd all shake our heads knowingly because authoritarian governments gonna authoritarian and that they were using a virus as a pretext to shut down the protests. I am surprised that it is not in Hong Kong. Uighers rounded up and put into detention camps is another interesting data point. I would expect the virus to hit Xinxiang first in mainland China, et voila! I just checked, and here is a story about that: https://news.yahoo.com/wuhan-coronavirus-hit-xinjiang-where-110649227.html
That Wuhan has a level 4 biosafety containment lab is an interesting data point and (adjusting tinfoil hat) maybe something got into the city that they were planning for Hong Kong and Xinjiang. (Taking off tinfoil hat.) That couldn't possibly be, though. I cannot conceive of anybody being that reckless unless the unrest in China is a far greater threat to the communist government than I thought.
Whatever happens, it will sure knock Megs and Harry off the front pages!
"I have compassion for a 93-year-old woman who is tired. But if she is so tired she can no longer make clear decisions, she should have stepped down."
I have been feeling like she/they have been waiting until William is settled enough to take the reins. Seems like PP was the control on the money - but with him obviously too old and Charles seems to be disinterested in actually controlling anyone...
Just IMO -- but I think they are waiting on Wills to gather speed.
>>>Thomas was asked: "Why was it you think that she wanted to come and live with you?"
Thomas replied: " Erm, I'm not certain, erm, maybe because I had a little more time for her. She had been with me for most weekends and during the week, so I said 'Do you wanna come live with me?' and she said 'Yes' and I said 'Let's go look for a house, find a place,' so together we went and found a place."<<<
Very telling comment on a number of levels . .
1. The 'erm, uh, not certain' is stalling from a dad who knows very well WHY his pre-teen daughter came to live with him. That doesn't happen every day. He'd remember why, particularly if the court had initially awarded Doria primary custody and suddenly, she's no longer able to mother Meg. This is obviously a landmine he is not allowed to talk about in detail.
2. He's a successful Hollywood professional in his 40s, the adult here, accepting the responsibility for the full-time custodial care of a preteen daughter who's a handful, and *he's allowing an 11-year-old child to dictate where they are going to live? I thought she'd moved into his existing home. "Together we went and found a place" sounds like he was house-shopping with his new wife.
Even at age 11, sounds like Meg was calling the shots.
This family is really weird.
>>>I have been feeling like she/they have been waiting until William is settled enough to take the reins. Seems like PP was the control on the money - but with him obviously too old and Charles seems to be disinterested in actually controlling anyone...
Just IMO -- but I think they are waiting on Wills to gather speed.<<<
Passing the buck to William, essentially . . who seems to be a more decisive person than his elders. Prince Philip was plenty decisive, but he was also a bit hamstrung officially by being only the consort. William has more constitutional power than his granddad to make things happen.
Bearing in mind that Wills' getting settled in and gathering speed enough to take the reins is entirely predicated on the death of the Queen . . he can't assume any more control over decisions officially until that happens, basically the Windsor game plan appears to be "Let's just procrastinate until the Queen is dead and then this mess, and lighting a firecracker under Charles's bum will be William's problem."
The problem is that the Queen has longevity on her side. She could quite reasonably live and reign another 8, 10 years if she is as long-lived as Mummy. If the desire is to have William get stuck in, as he has been doing more of late, they need to accelerate his scope of authority. Perhaps the Prince-of-Wales in waiting takes over the Duchy of Cornwall now, since his father is assuming more of the monarch's duties. The point is, William will not have any influential power over decision making unless they give him some and not just drift along with things as they are until Gran dies.
Were I Elizabeth, spending time with my 98-year-old husband would be the priority now. She is already entrusting William with nearly all of the investitures--not Charles, who'd be next in line, but William. That denotes a level of trust in his abilities to represent her. Time to ramp it up a notch and give him more actual power than passing out medals.
Thomas also made a point of saying something along the lines of the 'home' was 'plenty big enough for them to have their own space... which was necessary.' (paraphrasing here!)
It was a 2 floor house and they had the top floor apartment.
He was forced to share a house on account of having to pay for Meg's super-fancy private school.
Thomas Markle is a bit like a low-rent Lear to me.
"How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child!"
I posted a video link to the documentary yesterday but unfortunately it has already been taken down by youtube!
I am totally with you on this one. Queen commands respect but when she can't control her own house any more I question her stubborn resolution to sit on the throne until death parts them.
I don't think she handled the crisis well.
"I think they are waiting on Wills to gather speed."
Maybe. While both Will and Kate appear to be doing a good job these days (especially compared to Harry and Meghan) they've been considered **full-time** working royals for less than two and a half years.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4835038/Prince-William-Kate-time-working-royals.html
It wasn't that long ago alot of the headlines about Will were about being "work-shy" and lazy. I don't know what it looked like from the inside the RF, but it wasn't all roses and accolades from the outside. H&M did alot for W&K's reputation though.
Re coronavirus overtaking Sussexees
I understand the corona is akin to the Spanish flue of 1918 that killed several million people worldwide, because our bodies don't have defenses against it. So far fatalities are 2%, which is comparable with bad flu.
Do your know that "corona" means "crown" in Russian? I see a very good joke from the Almighty in it. The "crown" virus wipes HazMeg from the front pages after they stayed at Russian oligarch's Overlook castle.
Really Ellen? In what way? The constant narrative-pushing by these two and their newfound close friends is really getting on my nerves. Their inauthenticity is so glaringly obvious to me, and it baffles me that some people buy into their nonsense.
It has been my understanding that until Phillip crashed his car (broke his hip, got cancer or whatever) due to being super old - he was in control of checkbook and real estate apportionment, who's in and who's out...even if the announcements and official word had to come from Queen - Phillip made a lot of the decisions and enforced them.
I heard He was the one who banned Fergie...and decided that daughters wouldn't get a regular gig with pay from RF.
But now he isn't up to it...and Charles has displayed very little interest.
Charles won't. William must.
But I am keeping track of this from the US so...just a regular American who got up at 4 am to watch Charles and Diana get married when I was in Jr. High...
The politics in China is quite complicated. I have to admit that I don’t understand it completely either. Most people I know in China just want to make money, enjoy life and stay away from trouble.
I could be wrong but I don’t believe the Chinese government engineered the Coronavirus in their labs. The Chinese economy takes a big hit because of this epidemic. The first month after the Chinese new year is the biggest shopping days in China.
Harkles are just soap operas and the story line is getting a little bit too predictable. I think many people are having Harkle fatigue right now.
Did any of you watch the new 4 part series "Inside the Crown: Secrets of the Royals" on ITV last night?
This lingering charge against Wills and Kate from the earlier days of their marriage has always struck me as really unfair. In the early days, they were living in Anglesey while William worked as an air ambulance pilot. Even if he didn't go out on a life-saving run every day, it could be successfully argued, I think, that being a highly trained pilot saving lives is far more valuable actual 'work' than anything the monarchy does to pass the time and justify itself. If William saved just one life in an air rescue, that overrides every ribbon cutting and balcony appearance ever undertaken by any royal since the history of time.
Also the young couple had the Queen's full blessing to have a light schedule as newlyweds and new parents in order to focus on their home and family life. TQ looks upon her (all too brief, alas) years in Malta with her young family, where she could at least pretend to be just another of the naval wives, as the happiest period of her adult life. She knows at firsthand the burdens and the cost of being forced into heavy responsibilities too early. Catherine's determination to be, as her #1 priority, a hands-on Mum to her three children is the better course . . no amount of 'official duties' will make up for the precious few years she gets with her kids when they are little.
I'd only call the 'work shy and lazy' labels justified if the Queen had expected/ordered them to do certain things and they had refused in favor of taking lavish vacations and lying around their royal residence. I don't think W. and K. have ever 'refused' the Queen. If they didn't appear more during their first years of marriage, it's becasue she did not expect/order them to appear. In this family it appears that you wait for your Sovereign's command . .you don't haul off and 'volunteer' yourself for things and go off on your own bat to show how hard you've 'hit the ground running'.
Hopefully that smear about the royal laziness of the Cambridges is being put to rest now that they have most definitely stepped up.
I doubt it, a lot us of us have more sense, especially ITV, especially after the pity party documentary. They are one of those broadcasters that if they son't have the facts "make it up".
Totally love your avi BTW, and the meaning of your name! I always enjoy how your clever commentary sheds light on this awful situation.
IMO she claimed to be pregnant. That would explain the loose wedding dress, Harry's nerves, and the BRF's faces during the ceremony.
How else does a woman get someone to marry them quickly? I think it was a "shotgun" wedding.
Oprah ... Ellen ... decisions, decisions
Who is more current? probably Ellen. Who had a bigger rolodex? probably Oprah.
Hollywood has long memories and is profoundly good at faking closeness. Or letting information slip that people might not want released. I see it as another bad move ticking off people whom you might not want on your bad side.
I imagine when Ellen and Portia ventured to the UK last year, they did talk about a sit down interview. This is probably one of the major reasons they made the huge move to leave the Firm...they couldn't do interviews like this. Ellen proposed an interview, and Meghan started seeing dollar signs.
China, like India, & Iran & other nations, is very ancient & has been overthrowing rulers for centuries. When they do it, the dynasties are ground into dust, never to reappear. That is what is so impressive about the survival of the English & Japanese thrones. I don't know much about Japan's imperial family, but the British royals seem to have been able to adapt to cultural & social changes over the centuries. A few have lost their heads, but some semblance of continuity has been maintained. Would hate to see selfish small timers like the Harkles bring all of that tradition down. It has been my impression that that much of the wealth attributed to the Queen, palaces, land, antiques, art, jewelry, etc. actually belongs to the nation, & is held in trust by the RF, & the RF is well aware of this. Charles is often portrayed as a pampered airhead. If he had managed his younger son better, he could probably secure his monarchy by allowing firmer divisions between what actually belongs to his family, & what belongs to the nation. Now I fear that there is some danger in William becoming Mr. Windsor at some point. On another blog, posters have speculated that the Cambridges might actually welcome that. I have no idea how they feel about their roles, but any fool can see that being a royal is a luxurious & gilded burden. Fascinating to watch. Keep thinking about what happened to the Tsar's family. I hope we're beyond that kind of brutality.
Thank you. Or as my avatar the Electric Geisha would say, "Arigato gozaimasu!"
@MBee,
>>>Phillip made a lot of the decisions and enforced them.
I heard He was the one who banned Fergie...and decided that daughters wouldn't get a regular gig with pay from RF.
But now he isn't up to it...and Charles has displayed very little interest.
Charles won't. William must.
But I am keeping track of this from the US so...just a regular American who got up at 4 am to watch Charles and Diana get married when I was in Jr. High...<<<<
I agree that Charles won't and William must. I'm sure William is itching on a number of levels to take charge particularly of the allowance and housing situation for the traitorous Sussexes . . but his personal inclinations and strongly worded suggestions as part of this committee will only stick and hold weight if he is awarded actual authority. They need to accelerate his promotion to Prince of Wales duties NOW, even if he will not officially use the title until Dad becomes King. The fly in the ointment is Charles, who apparently has always been jealous of his elder son's popularity with the people. The fact that William favors his mother so strongly probably doesn't help, either. But just as Chas was jealous of his late wife's ease with people and greater popularity, he's transferred this animosity to his sons. So goes the scuttlebutt, anyhow.
I would think that a King would rest easy knowing that his heir is a safe pair of hands, and a man of character who will be a good ruler. Her Majesty has not had this kind of assurance during Charles's lifetime and perhaps she plans to outlive Charles, or at least make his reign as short as possible.
It saddens me if reports that the Wales boys do not get on with their father is true. Of course, there is Charles's involvement, however tangential, in the death of their mother, but I'd hoped they'd gotten past that in the years since. Evidently not. If Charles had been more meaningfully involved in his sons' lives as teens and young adults, things would be very different now, perhaps. Harry might have come to respect his role in the family and chosen a different wife, and not carried around so much psychic pain that made him so vulnerable to exploitation by an unscrupulous woman. Harry looked far happier at William's wedding than he did at his own, that's for sure.
I don't blame Charles completely for his parental failures . . what other model of parenting did he have? His own parents ignored him for years at a time, too. The system that produced this much interpersonal failure amongst its members is not the fault of one or two individuals, but an institutional failure. It's just really, really sad all around and makes me thankful for my much more modest upbringing. Money can't buy happiness and the Royal family is proof.
"This lingering charge against Wills and Kate from the earlier days of their marriage has always struck me as really unfair."...
"Hopefully that smear about the royal laziness of the Cambridges is being put to rest now that they have most definitely stepped up."
A number of people posting online have said that the Queen gave W&K a light schedule for two years because of Malta. But we don't really know if that's true. Will hasn't said that publicly, Kate hasn't, and certainly TQ hasn't. It may be true but we don't have direct evidence to show it is.
Will did do an interview and was asked about the work-shy label. He said TQ would need to tell them directly if they weren't doing enough. So while one could certainly infer that they weren't "refusing" to do things (& I didn't think they were) that's not equivalent to TQ suggesting they actively avoid engaging in public activities on their own. And while H&M's approach wasn't team-oriented, BP has said multiple times each royal largely keeps his/her own calendar--that people don't depend on BP for "orders."
I think the interview Will did was after the kerfuffle over his working hours at the EAAA service when he and Kate lived at Anmer Hall. His KP spokesperson said he had to "rest" when not working 20 hrs a week for that company because of air regs. So he couldn't do royal duties. But that turned out not to be true and civil air folks spoke up. And it turned out Will supposedly wasn't showing up for EAAA duty because he claimed he had to do royal work. For example, he took 4 weeks off at Christmas 2016. But by nearly the end of February 2017 he'd done only TWO royal engagements that year. https://www.thedailybeast.com/is-prince-william-too-lazy-to-work
Even if there was a Malta agreement for two years post-marriage, the above time period was nearly 6 years after W&K married. And I can imagine colleagues being pretty ticked off at a part-time employee deciding to take 4 weeks off over Christmas. Air ambulance demand doesn't go down over holidays-- it probably goes up.
Philip was quoted as saying on one of his birthdays (93rd I believe) he'd retire but no one else would step up and do the work.
There were some other problems--- Will publicly admitting to not reading briefings when he was a part-time royal, a couple of pretty bad speeches when he was clearly not prepared....
So it's unclear to me what was going on behind the scenes during those years. Certainly Will has stepped up. I think he's doing a very good job under difficult circumstances. And he and his son are the future of the monarchy after Charles. But if there were issues, or even if there were no issues but Will is still very new to full-time work, I can see why the RF might not see him as its immediate savior today.
Doesn't she realise that goading the British people still further is incredibly stupid given they're effectively on a year's probation? After that, they will get their report cards from the Queen and it won't be good, going by the past two weeks. She makes stupid judgement calls over and over again. Why can't she see this?
I think the comments about the speed at which she operates are very interesting. It's like running on thin ice, very fast, desperate to get to the opposite bank before sinking, but instead of running to the opposite bank, she's heading out across thin ice towards the ocean. We're left standing, watching her, asking "WTF?"
"Meghan’s narcissistic need for control, especially to control Harry. That’s the bedrock of their relationship. She keeps Harry on a short leash to control him, and control of the title she holds only due to their marital bond. If Harry is traveling around the world without her, she’ll likely cheat on him, and she’ll feel entitled to do it. After all she’s a narcissist.
"But she likely won’t allow Harry to play the field and cheat on her. If he fell for another woman, especially one who loved him instead of his title and money, perhaps someone similar to Chelsy Davy, he’d dump Meghan and move on."
That's what Snowden did to Princess Margaret. He cheated on her for years with different women; only when the tabloids got pics of her with Roddy in the Bahamas and the scandal blew up did he come to the queen crying foul. (Apparently Margaret's relationship had gone on for a few years before and he knew and didnt complain because it wasnt in the press.) Then afte divorce from PM, remarried quickly and then fathered a baby with another woman after a time. As long as Harry can keep it ubder the radar...but a lover or "just a good friend" for MM would make for a lot of publicity!!!
And remember: each of Harry's parents cheated on the other, same with maternal grandmother who divorced Diana's father and married her lover; also an aunt (Anne was cheated on and got rather too close with a bodyguard); Andrew making way with Epstein-provided girls; rumors and stories about Philip. Even stories about the Queen! So it's an aspect of life he is familiar with, and who knows what stories from friends and army buddies since cut off from contact. And William? Maybe Harry will take his turn...give her grounds, drop her that way.
Ellen "understands her pain and suffering!" HA HA HA
Ellen is so "authentic" so they are kindred spirits. O.M.G!
Well Ellen is rumoured to be a real b*tch and horrible to her staff, so perhaps they ARE kindred spirits.
Not gonna lie... I'm DYING to watch this interview, heehee!
The editor of Vanity Fair was Markle'd, losing his position the day after the issue hit the stands. Yet, the engagement still went forward. Quizzical.’
My Mum said to me today, what if the monarchy ended because of Meghan etc., I said then so be it. The Queen should have never ever sanctioned the wedding. Meghan was entirely unsuitable for a long list of reasons, they could have said no and pulled it off without coming off as racist, even if it meant Harry had to renounce his position within the family (if he insisted he wanted to marry her). Someone at the palace said yes, for reasons we can only guess at. 🥴 What happens now (to the royal family) falls squarely on the shoulders on who allowed this marriage to go ahead. 🤔
Then I read the comments suggesting that the `RPOs’ weren’t RPOs after all and we’re back to what I’ve been wondering for quite a while – that it’s been recognised, possibly from the start, that she has a major mental disorder, as well as the personality disorders we’ve chewed over endlessly.
Perhaps she genuinely believes she was pregnant? That she has a child called Archie, who appears in the flesh from time to time? That she has come among us to tell us how to save the world and to buy her merchandise? That she was born biracial, then mysteriously became Sephardic/Mediterranean/ Caucasian and then finally, and equally mysteriously, was transmuted into Black? Most important of all, that any criticism is down to racism.
Is there any way this disaster could have been handled any better? The days of the RF quietly locking up crazy blood relatives are past; although the law allows it, as it does for ordinary families, politically it'd be tricky. What might have been done with publicity-seeking, grasping, paramours from other countries these days?
oh, dear.
I'm not sure that it is a failing of the institution per se. It isn't just the monarchy where we see problems with the kids. Hollywood star families where mom and pop are off on filming for months at a time often have drug abusing dysfunctional kids. Politicians, too (see Hunter Biden). Preacher's kids are legendary for their dysfunction. CEOs, business owners, partners in high-powered law firms, many of these have problem children. And then there's Thomas Markle. He wasn't a rich guy, but he sure has a seriously defective daughter.
She just can't stop telling us how wonderful she's always been!
More historic Insta posts. I'm going to need an Ophthalmologist soon to dislodge my eyes from the back of my head.
The arisocracy have a rather Victorian attitude towards marital infidelity - so long as it's discreet, it's fine. I suppose it's comes from a long tradition of marrriages being arranged for pragmatic reasons (wealth, social advancement) rather than love. So it was only to be expected that you look for love elsewhere, and provided you were discreet about it, nobody would bat an eyelid.
That's why I disagree with all those who completely write off any possibility of Wills cheating. I'm not saying he did cheat, but it certainly wouldn't be in any way unexpected for a man of his social class and family history.
I’m watching it now, I recorded it. Very good so far. 😋
He may not have been rich, but he practically gave all of his money to her/for her. So in essence, she did live as though her daddy was rich. I believe he's in mexico now because he's on the run from creditors. Don't quote me on that, but I read that early on in this whole saga.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/harry-meghan-wallis-simpson-edward-inside-crown-documentary-royals-a9297221.html
The author, Hugo Vickers, always tries valiantly to be fair to Meghan and lets her off the hook too much (he's such an English gentleman) so the separate extracts below are quite bold for him. Unfortunately however, misplaced good feeling towards Meghan and her objectives remains evident if you read the article.
"Prince Harry claims to seek a more peaceful life. This is unlikely to happen. Nor do I get the impression that the Duchess of Sussex is seeking peace and quiet."
"They now rely on the promise of funding from different sources, which may or may not come, but will certainly come at a considerable price. Royal life has areas of protection. The Royal Family are not paid for what they do. They do their work for free. Their expenses and security are covered. Prince Harry may not enjoy the demands made in contracts in return for sponsorship."
"I suspect Prince Harry would have found his life easier, and indeed more peaceful had he worked within the system. Would this have happened had he not married? There you have the answer."
But the 'throwbacks' are getting increasingly pathetic. Is that all they've got to work with? That and a few unglamourous pap walks? They really need something of substance - or what passes for substance chez the Harkles - and they need it quickly.
That's why I disagree with all those who completely write off any possibility of Wills cheating. I'm not saying he did cheat, but it certainly wouldn't be in any way unexpected for a man of his social class and family history.
Except that William did marry for love. Catherine certainly brought nothing to the marriage, in terms of wealth or family name. I am one of those people who will completely write it off because of what infidelity did to his parents marriage, of which he was a big player since his mother chose his shoulder to cry on. He wasn't on the periphery of all that, and I unless he's a cold individual, I cannot see him doing that to Kate. I very well could be wrong, but I have a very hard time believing it with his own history.
Not that I'm complaining. Oh no.
"Except that William did marry for love. Catherine certainly brought nothing to the marriage, in terms of wealth or family name."
Actually you could argue that a woman from the middle classes - albeit a privately educated one from a very wealthy family - was exactly what the royals needed to show that they were 'moving with the times'. Other than Charles first marriage, none of the queen's children or grandchildren have married aristocrats. Not saying that's why Wills married her, but her solid middle class background was an asset to the family.
"I am one of those people who will completely write it off because of what infidelity did to his parents marriage, of which he was a big player since his mother chose his shoulder to cry on. He wasn't on the periphery of all that, and I unless he's a cold individual, I cannot see him doing that to Kate."
None of us really has a clue what goes on behind closed doors. I'm sure many of us know couples who appeared very happy, only to find out that one of them had been cheating for ages. Even worse, lots of people are stunned to find out that their own partner had been cheating for years and they had no idea. It happens. Relationships aren't always what they appear, and a royal couple has an obvious incentive to appear happy for public consumption.
Again, I'm not saying Wills did cheat. I hope he didn't. But given that he comes from a long line of men - on both sides of his family - who never for a moment considered themselves bound to one woman, I certainly wouldn't rule it out.
As for her true age ... too many people would have to lie and too many records would have to be falsified for her to be older than the age given. She probably told some fibs somewhere along the way, but the birth date and her age as given in the media currently is correct. Samantha would have spilled the beans, and her father is so hurt and resigned to never seeing her again that he would tell.’
I’m off to read Hikari’s comment now. I had so many comments to catch up on! 🥴
I did read something ages ago that Meghan’s mother Doria said something to her, along the lines of ‘it’s okay to use people to get to where you want to go etc.’ (paraphrasing). 😉
I think Meghan’s DOB is correct, yes too many lies and cover stories would have be told. Agree, her family would have outed her real age long ago. 😁
I think Meghan inherited the worse traits of both her Mother and her Father. 😟
Have you all noticed how often the UK press runs general analytical articles about the Sussexes and their future using the photos of that awful sweat-stained jumper with satin skirt and bare legs in January? That has to be in the running for the worst look of all Meghan's official events (though there's a lot of competition). They could go with any photos of them really. I know it was their last official event to date, but still ...
Not that I'm complaining. Oh no.
----
Me neither!
Agreed, ageed! Samantha definitely would have.
Someone on here, sorry, forgot your name!-- posted information from the online State of California birth records. Done.
Keep whining Markle. Keep being the victim.
"She [Meghan] did live as though her daddy was rich. I believe he's in mexico now because he's on the run from creditors. Don't quote me on that, but I read that early on in this whole saga."
Sorry for quoting you Jen :) but while I agree about Meghan, I kind of doubt that's the reason Thomas is in Mexico. In 2016, he filed for bankruptcy in the US over debts of $30,000. (His 3rd bankruptcy) So unless he had debts that weren't discharged or couldn't be discharged (e.g., taxes, alimony/child support, student loans, personal injury debts) I doubt he has any creditors to flee from. I think he's there because it's cheaper than California.
Supposedly he collects $1,500 per month from a retirement account and another $2,700 in social security. That's not a ton of money in CA.
https://theblast.com/meghan-markle-thomas-markle-selling-stories-royal-wedding/
Re: Will cheating-- I have no idea if he has or will in the future. Lots of people do. But I'm not buying he wouldn't cheat because of seeing what it did to his mother.
Anmer Hall is where Charles and Camilla met for many of their trysts. If I was in that situation, and was bothered by the cheating, I wouldn't be comfortable living where it happened. I know the house was a gift from TQ, but I cannot imagine it was a surprise gift.
Blogger holly said...
The DM article....MM was amazing before she met Harry and became a Royal. She's going to continue her amazing-ness and does not need Harry to do it. Message sent.
As in, so go away and amaze away....elsewhere? Or is it a paid shot across the bow...she's a duchess now, she don't need no stinkin' prince! (Borrowing a classic line from the old movie Treasure of the Sierra Madre). Except she does need him for the title and the romantic story (its like she rewrote The Prisoner of Zenda and the royal *does* ditch the "cares and duties" of being a royal, all for love of sweet Meghan. What she may think, anyway, with her rescue from the toxic fam schtick)
But for heaven's sake Zsa Zsa Gabor when elderly married a prince of some European country that ditched its royal family by 1945 if not by 1918 so she could "legitimately" call herself a princess.
The DM article....MM was amazing before she met Harry and became a Royal. She's going to continue her amazing-ness and does not need Harry to do it. Message sent.
Yep. Except flying to Africa and India and doing a bunch of photo ops is facade management , not charity and without the royal title , she's nothing.
Also from "the files of unfindable articles" is more recent. I saw a couple of them when Megxit first went down saying Harry wanted to see "Granny", not PC. Which made me think HM was more likely to give him what he wanted.
And from the land of articles I CAN find : Charlie Hunnam has come out favorably for the Harkles,he wants to work with her although he doesn't want to comment on his willingness to do love scenes with her (shudder)
https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/17/charlie-hunnam-prince-harry-meghan-markle-megxit-movies-acting-star-together-film-romantic-comedy-sex-scene/
https://www.ettv.to/torrent/784052/thomas-markle-my-story-2020-hdtv-x264-linkle-tgx
He would probably be better off in a midwestern or southern state where the median household income is the same as his (or lower). If I wanted to be an expatriate, there are many other places I'd choose over Mexico.
Mexico probably wouldn't be my choice either. But if TM wanted a warm climate, and needed to be close to the US for medical care (Medicare doesn't work overseas) Rosarito is only 10 miles from the border. And apparently a number of US retirees live there.
Seconded! And i can't be the only one.
I completely agree. He saw what his own mother went through, I don’t believe for one minute he’d inflict that kind of pain on his own wife, nor do I believe Catherine would put up with it. The Middleston’s are supper close and supper supportive to both Catherine and William, I don’t think they’d treat him so kindly if he was guilty of infidelity. 🤔
I definitely remember reading that Portia de Rossi denied she and Ellen had met Archie, let alone had a cuddle etc. I've just searched online myself and cannot find any reference to this, but found dozens and dozens of syrupy Hello-style accounts of said cuddles, all from Ellen's viewpoint. So much sugar coverage even Meghan couldn't complain. Correction, shouldn't complain.
Sinister.
Gayle made affirming noises. Neither actually piped up about how much they were looking forward to working with the Harkles very soon. Harry had been in talks with Big O. about doing a mental health documentary for OWN . . but that was when Harry was still part of the Royal family and in with the established Royal brand. It would have been a valuable coup to get a Prince of the Realm (and DON'T FORGET . . He's Diana's son) on camera speaking honestly about what life is like for him. He'll always be Diana's son, but in the last 2-3 weeks, we have seen Hazza demoted to 'unemployed slacker/ungrateful grandson who broke his grandmother's heart and is now mooching off a foreign government and couch-surfing at a dodgy Russian's house."
I figured that Oprah would still go ahead with the project anyway, and then an astute poster--thank you, please remind me if you said it--pointed out that Thomas Eagleton, the 1972 Vice-Presidential candidate was also *supported 1000%* in a public statement by his running mate George McGovern after admitting that he'd had electroshock therapy for depression . . before being dropped from the ticket a few days or a week later.
If this is what Oprah was referencing, being old enough to remember that incident . . well, I have to commend her on her subtle shade. Neither Haz nor Meg were born then, and it's doubtful they would know American election history even if they were.
Otherwise, Oprah's expression of support is just more meaningless Hollywood hyperbole.
This recent development with Ellen makes me wonder if the Harkles are forced to go with the B Team. Ellen may be more popular at the moment in terms of ratings numbers since she still has a running talk show . . but it's a celebutainment show of the fluffiest kind. Oprah has far more clout in the business, not to mention deep pockets . .to fund projects of substance that she cares about. Ellen's got an afternoon talk show; Oprah has her own media empire . . what is Ellen but just an employee of CBS? O. is the better bet for the long term--she herself could fund global outreach in Africa and has. If Oprah is now repudiating the Harkles, I don't foresee too much work after that Ellen interview airs.
Ellen might even get Markle'd and lose her show after backlash, depending on how much the Harkles whine and accuse the Queen of gross cruelty towards them.
Let's hope they cap off their whinefest with some spontaneous dancing and it's captured for posterity. Rach is a bad dancer; I've seen a clip.
I can just see Meghan choking over her cornflakes - sorry, freshly blended Acai bowl loaded with plenty of fresh sliced fruit, chia seeds and hemp hearts - at two English ladies, one middle-aged, one elderly, hogging her spotlight.
Ellen:
-has current talk show
-show can be watched by anyone with basic cable
-supports animal charities
-fluffy celebrity type content
Oprah:
-passe?
-has own network- but not every cable package has it
-supports "girls" charities
-harder hitting content (usually)
-black
I just did a run through and read a bunch of articles about Ellen and Portia de Rossi - and none of them ever actually say that Portia "met" Archie...they imply it but never SAY it.
They say that Ellen fed Archie at their cottage, and that Ellen and Portia met up with MM and PH in Windsor to discuss wildlife...
My point is only that Portia may have refused to participate in a fraud involving a baby and then was accidentally honest when she may have said "I didn't meet Archie"....
I had read a while back that Ellen and Portia didn't have kids because Ellen didn't want them. If so, it can be hard for a woman who wants/wanted kids to hang out with babies...even if they are someone else's photo props.
I found it ODD that there were NO "photos" of Ellen with the baby - but again, I don't see her actually exposing herself to baby spit.
Love your hypothetical interview of M&H by Ellen. Only one thing to add
Ellen: Hey Meghan, how's that dog doing that I told you to adopt as a puppy? I think you said you planned to name him "Bogart?"
My Thoughts
This parting of the ways has long been planned but was not meant to be implemented for some months, I also think if the time frame has been better PH would have been ditched as well. It was all too rushed, something or someone spooked her at the Canada House set up meeting. MM was planning on getting the Foundation, SussexRoyal branding, talks and merchandising deals set up before she made a move. Now that has fallen apart. Notice most photos with PH and Archie are weird and/or obvious photoshop, why? Not one photo seems to exist of MM and PH doing anything (except Official duties) with other family members, cousins etc in the same age group. Were they never invited anywhere in 18+ months, again why?? because if they had been it would have been splashed all over the tacky IG account, which seems to be MM's own. Now I have worked overseas and papers in other countries Commonwealth and other often print Papped photo's of all sorts of people, photo's that would never see the light of day in the UK, yet there never seem to be any of MM and PH, except for the obvious staged ones, again why? ? These are the sort of questions that need to be answered and at present there are far more questions than answers. Added to the fact that MM appears to be running about like a headless chicken. Silence from PH???
>>Re: Will cheating-- I have no idea if he has or will in the future. Lots of people do. But I'm not buying he wouldn't cheat because of seeing what it did to his mother.<<
William is a human man and not a paragon; I'm sure there have been temptations, and his parental history is no Teflon protection against making the same mistake(s). I'd sure hope it would be a powerful deterrent. Lots of kids of alcoholics grow up to be drunks; probably just as many never touch a drop. There seems to be a healthy contingent of folks that insist that the Cambridges have some sort of open marriage and/or don't really like each other and are just playing a public role really well. I don't subscribe to this theory, but if it's true, both of them are stellar actors, considering that neither of them has any drama school training . . unlike someone else we know.
>>>Anmer Hall is where Charles and Camilla met for many of their trysts. If I was in that situation, and was bothered by the cheating, I wouldn't be comfortable living where it happened. I know the house was a gift from TQ, but I cannot imagine it was a surprise gift.<<<
I was not aware of this. My, the royal circles just get more and more incestuous, if William is potentially sleeping in the same room where his father cheated with his mistress. Catherine gets the hand-me-down ring from a toxic marriage and the hand-me-down love nest, too. Nice. Though, perhaps the thinking is that just as she has redeemed that ring and given it a new life on her finger, the Cambridges can redeem Anmer Hall by making it a happy family home where the partners are faithful to one another. Perhaps William was not in a position to reject Anmer Hall (if the alternative was Frogmore Cottage, haha).
But I wouldn't read his acceptance of the Queen's gift as a tacit condoning of what his father did there or his plans to do the same . .or that the house could influence him to cheat in some way in the manner of The Shining.
Do we suppose the Queen was aware of where Charles and Cam had their trysts? If so, she is decidedly not the sentimental type to let a big house go to waste over it.
How does a high profile royal, who is under protection and surrounded by servants 24/7 even manage to conduct affairs and keep them clandestine? I mean, I know it's possible, but it's such a gamble. A number of people on staff would have to be aware of what's going on, from the RPOs, to the drivers who deliver them, to the equerries who clear the schedules, to the maids/footmen who serve and clean up. Royal staff are supposed to be discreet and are, but somewhere, some time, something would slip. If Rachel was the source of the Hanbury rumor, where'd she get it from? Or whom? Rachel never met Rose or her husband and has never socialized with the Cambridges since she's been married. Yet, the rumor has legs because she accuses a close friend of Catherine. It's not like Charles or William could just disappear for an afternoon like a suburban dad claiming to go to Home Depot and nobody would know otherwise. So many eyes and ears watching and listening to their every move.
https://www.amazon.com/Housekeepers-Diary-Charles-Before-Breakup/dp/156980057X
The Housekeeper's Diary by Wendy Berry had me riveted in the 1990s. The author was the housekeeper at Highgrove from 1985-92 and along with the rest of the Highgrove staff was abruptly dismissed after the separation was announced. She spills all the tea about the bulimia, the state of various underthings . .dirty laundry, literally . . and the number of times Camilla was 'entertained' at Highgrove, sometimes missing Diana's arrival by mere minutes. She is not a Diana fan, and has stories about Di's visitors, too.
One's spouse may not know about a Royal affair but it does not follow that no one knows. I guess Wendy's book is banned in Great Britain. A Markle tell-all will be forthcoming, I'm sure of it. She's got nothing left to sell but the dirt.
By shagging the girl next door (in posh people terms) who as a very rich married aristocrat would have little to gain and a lot to lose by letting such an affair come to light, and who as a member of the upper classes knows how to play the game, ie, with the utmost discretion. Again, not saying they DID have an affair but IF they did, Rose would be pretty much the perfect candidate.
"Royal staff are supposed to be discreet and are, but somewhere, some time, something would slip."
Something did slip though. The papers were hinting about it fairly heavily last spring. They wouldn't dare talk about it directly, certainly not if an injunction was in place, but there were several 'nudge nudge hint hint' stories about 'Kate falls out with posh friend Rose' all of a sudden.
Philip allegedly had a string of affairs which have only ever been hinted at. Some even say the queen herself might have had a fling or two. Diana's affairs didn't come to light for a long time after the event. And so on. It's not like Rose - if they did have an affair - is going to blab to the The Sun and they wouldn't print it even if she did. So the hints and insinuations sound fairly typical of how these sort of rumours - true or false - would be handled.
A number of people believe that the rumour was put on twitter by a member of the so-called "Sussexsquad" you know that group of deranged people (some in their forties) who slavishly follow MM and are forever posting about death and destruction to the Cambridge's. It was suggested that this person received the instruction from a certain person who resides in Canada., so arms length. What these lovely people don't realise is that they are being monitored. Surprise, surprise
Could the rumour have been a test kite sent out by the Cambridges to see if Markle would leak it? They're documented as having done this in the past to see if friends could be trusted or find the source of other leaks.
Explains Enty's West Coast obsession with that rumour.
It also explains William's fury.
I bet that what she has over them is proof of Philip's racism.
Putting out a rumour that William picks his toenails or that Kate has had a boob lift?
Maybe.
Putting out a rumour that the future heir cheated on his (pregnant?) wife with a named married mother of three, a woman who is in frequent attendance at royal events with her husband, who happens to hold an important ceremonial position at court?
No chance.
See new Tweets
Conversation
Richard Palmer
@RoyalReporter
·
3h
I remain a huge fan of The New York Times and have met some brilliant reporters from the paper. But I have been disappointed to see how it and other US media have taken a jingoistic “how could they treat our princess like this?” approach to the Harry and Meghan saga.
Quote Tweet
Tim Shipman
@ShippersUnbound
· 4h
This is a very good piece about a very sad phenomenon at a paper which really ought to know better https://unherd.com/2020/01/what-has-the-new-york-times-got-against-britain/
Richard Palmer
@RoyalReporter
For me, one of the obvious parallels between Harry and Meghan’s approach to UK royal correspondents and their newspapers is Donald Trump’s efforts to exclude CNN, the NYT, and other media organisations and deal instead with those who rarely challenge or scrutinise him.
12:58 PM · Jan 24, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
14
Retweets
195
Likes
Alecia Carey
@AleciaCarey
·
3h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
That's an... insane comparison to make.
Richard Palmer
@RoyalReporter
·
3h
You’ve been let down by your media if they have failed to make it. The Sussexes only want to deal with sycophants. We’ve also seen our main political parties trying to exclude mainstream newspapers that don’t support them, as our union warned.
Journalists should not need the royal seal of approval if reporting on the Duke and Duchess of...
NUJ members have voiced concern over the decision of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex not to participate in the royal rota for reporters and instead to “provide access to credible media outlets”.
nuj.org.uk
5 more replies
WindUpBird
@MickieMo
·
3h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
That’s a pretty bad comparison. Trump wants to destroy the authority of mainstream media because they write accurately about him, which because of who he is isn’t mostly favorable. H and M are dealing with tabloids writing in bad faith without regard to the truth.
1 more reply
Library of Life
@HLibraryofLife
·
3h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
Well, Meghan's never had an original idea in her life.
westcoastwoman
@westcoastwoman7
·
3h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
Very much so. They are very different, but they both only want positive press, while also throwing everyone who disagrees with them under the bus. For public servants, that's not how it works.
★ sᴜᴘᴇʀ ᴅᴜᴘᴇʀ’s ᴅᴇʟɪɢʜᴛ ★
@dupers_super
·
3h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
Funny you said that, my husband also drew parallels between Meghan and Trump, they are, in his view, similarly narcissistic.
1 more reply
Marie von Astra
@marievonastra
·
1h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
Most honest Americans knew a woke, Leftist "actress" marrying into the BRF would eventually play the race card. Stateside, it's what Lefties do when they're not playing the victim card, the gender card or calling Conservatives like #Trump & the 63M who voted for him "Nazis."
Louis
@LML_96
·
3h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
And yet the irony is, though Trump or H&M might “dislike” certain media, and certain media may “dislike” Trump or H&M, they’re relationship is interdependent. They need the media to continue to stay relevant in public, and the media needs them for viewers/ratings etc.
"But I wouldn't read his [Will's] acceptance of the Queen's gift [of Anmer Hall] as a tacit condoning of what his father did there or his plans to do the same."
No, I wouldn't think it meant he planned to cheat either. But if I were him I wouldn't have wanted to live there. Let someone else exorcise the ghosts.
But maybe there wasn't a choice....I don't know how many separate properties there are at Sandringham. I do remember reading the apt they have at KP isn't the one they were offered initially by TQ so I think Will would have spoken up. And AH was leased out until 2017--the tenants had to be evicted-- so it wasn't sitting empty and rotting like Frogmore. (The evicted tenants didn't live there when C&C used it-- that was when Charles's friend Hugh van Cutsem leased it.)
I don't know how royal affairs get hidden. But they do. Even Diana's didn't come to light immediately and she tended to be a bit careless.
As to how M could have known dirt about Rose would catch fire, I suspect staff shared between the Sussexes and the Cambridges could be the initial source. Or just reading about Kate's life. I mean I've never met Kate and never met Rose but I knew they were Norfolk neighbors and supposedly friends. In fact, Rose is the only Norfolk neighbor I know by name.
You make a good point. But I don't think it's a "no chance", necessarily. For the ruse to work, it would have to be something salacious and within the realm of possibility, and the participating parties duly warned etc. I'd not heard about Kate being pregnant when it supposedly happened.
Rose also appeared with Steve Mnuchin at a state banquet, and he's said to have hung around Markle...could have been a message to her.
They would have known it was a risky move, but they also may have hoped to trust Meghan.
Who knows? We're all just speculating, after all...
I recommend the Daily Squib's report on the Walk in the Woods:
https://www.dailysquib.co.uk/entertainment/35179-happy-meghan-markle-beams-as-she-takes-dogs-and-archie-for-walk-in-vancouver.html
PP may have been a man of his times, whatever that means, but he was caught on media, before royals threatened to sue anyone who would print stuff not charming to them.
Why would Rose willingly allow her reputation to be slandered and doubts cast upon her marriage and even potentially the paternity of her children? With her husband a laughing stock on his frequent appearances at court? Just so Wills can play games with the media?
No way.
The rumours may or may not be true, Meghan may or may not be responsible for spreading them, but the idea that William deliberately took the risk of such a highly damaging rumour being made public is a non-starter for me.
Re: Philip's racism
His actions during the war and his mother protecting Jews at that time aren't relevant to this speculation.
Meghan may have evidence of his racism directed at her specifically. We've also heard nothing of Harry and Philip, except that Philip left Sandringham before Harry arrived. So, Harry may be furious with Philip, too - something is going on there.
Blind Gossip told of the BRF being afraid of material that she's collected.
I'd say it's much more likely to be the other way round.
Philip passed on his role as Captain General of the Royal Marines to Harry in 2017. Harry barely lasted 2 years before jacking it in to merch on Instagram. For a man who was a war hero and who gave up his beloved military career to walk 2 steps behind his wife, Harry must seem like a despicable little brat.
Not saying that Philip is a wonderful guy by any means. He has all the prejudices of a man of his age and class. But really, nobody outside of the ever dwindling circle of Meghanistas would care if she has 'evidence' of his alleged racism towards her. Philip has been caught saying all sorts of unpleasant things over the years and it hasn't affected him or the royal family in the least. She'll need more powerful amnunition than that.
In June 1989 we knew things weren't going well between the Waleses but C was getting most, if not all, of the blame. Then I heard that Diana had been caught out on the town with someone she had no business to be with - and I certainly don't move in elevated circles.
You see, I shared an office in a university in the south of England with a young conservationist, I'll call him S. He'd contacted a national daily about a rare plant he was working on, a photographer arrived to get a picture of S with the flower and S got him talking about life as a freelance and the money that some photos can be worth.
That led to the story of how the photographer had encountered Di by chance one night as she and others, but not Charles, left a night club and he had taken a compromising photo which would have been worth a small fortune. Anyway, Di pleaded with him and he nobly exposed the film - not that his sacrifice was appreciated, her attitude changed in an instant, S was told. From the doe-eyed beauty we knew so well, she seemed to become someone much, much harder...
I haven't heard this story from any other source, that's from the chap involved, to S, to me.
https://www.dailysquib.co.uk/entertainment/35179-happy-meghan-markle-beams-as-she-takes-dogs-and-archie-for-walk-in-vancouver.html
Hilarious! So are the others by the same author near the bottom of the page. Thanks.
@YankeeDoodle...gross.
They should never have made Charles marry Diana. IMO - as unattractive as Camilla was compared to Diana and unsuitable as she may have been...they should have let him marry Camilla to start with.
But then we might be stuck with Andrew?
Starbucks of the Day goes to you for HAMS. Briils! I will use that in future if you don’t mind...Harkles is getting old.
If Rachel is planning to wait until Philip passes to unleash the worst of her dirt, then let us band together and pray that PP is around to 103. Interest in them is waning so fast I don’t think her shelf life is even a year never mind 5. Frankly the revelation that the Duke of Edinburgh said something un PC to actress he advised Harry not to marry is a wet squib. This is the man who insulted African royalty to their faces. I think this thread is Rachel’s retaliation for the “one steps out with actresses, one does not marry them” remark. Which was not race specific.
Rachel is going to be a half Black professional victim forever.
On the contrary, what better way to quash the rumours?
"I know the Windsor’s and the aristocracy are good at putting on a positive and stoic public front, but surely neither the Cambridge’s nor Cholmondeley’s would partake in such a farce if there was a glimmer of truth in it all?"
Why not? We're talking about aristocrats. Their attitude towards marriage is... different. Upper class men have traditionally seen it as a form of flattery for kings or princes to take an interest in their wives. Plus, the Marquess is decades older than his wife and is rumoured to be gay, which has led many to believe their marriage is an arrangement of sorts. Since she has provided him with 3 children - 2 of them male - she would be deemed to have fulfilled her side of the bargain and a discreet - with the emphasis on discreet - affair with the heir to the throne might not be something her husband would be overly offended by.
Posh folks do things their way!
There was never any question of Charles marrying Camilla.
She married Andrew Parker Bowles - considered quite the catch back then - in the early 1970s, years before Charles met Diana or seriously considered marriage to anyone. Camilla was not interested in marrying the goofy Prince Charles when she could get the dashing, handsome Parker Bowles (rumoured to be the inspiration for Jilly Cooper's Rupert Campbell-Black character). In fact, many believe she never really wanted to marry him even in 2005, but there was simply no other way for them to continue their relationship.
This suggest any number of tasteless jokes playing on Philip’s Greek heritage. Without speculating further, I will just mention that on the charlatan Duchess page she’s got a photo of Harry and Charles standing side-by-side; Harry looks to be in late teens or Sandhurst era. It was like seeing young Philip in mirror image. He and Harry have the same profile, the same smile and even similar body language along with frame. Harry is almost as tall as William But much slimmer belt. I assumed the Mountbatten genes skipped a generation and landed on Harry. Either way you slice it, Harry is not a Hewitt.
Yes I know this is one reason why they might do it (for show) and I was alluding to that, I don’t buy into the alleged affair. Not that I consider William a paragon of virtue in anyway, I just don’t think he would, especially not with Catherine’s friend. 🤔
‘Why not? We're talking about aristocrats. Their attitude towards marriage is... different. Upper class men have traditionally seen it as a form of flattery for kings or princes to take an interest in their wives. Plus, the Marquess is decades older than his wife and is rumoured to be gay, which has led many to believe their marriage is an arrangement of sorts. Since she has provided him with 3 children - 2 of them male - she would be deemed to have fulfilled her side of the bargain and a discreet - with the emphasis on discreet - affair with the heir to the throne might not be something her husband would be overly offended by.’
I’m very aware of how the aristocracy and royals have carried on behind closed doors over the centuries, and in the not distant past, but I like to believe things have moved on slightly. Call me naive! 😀
I wouldn’t be surprised about David and his ‘preference’, he needed heirs and I don’t think Rose minded marrying up and gaining a title.
Interesting tweet stream. I will read it all in a bit.
The NY Times is not what it was which was a well respected paper that leaned liberal but had good reporting. Now it's trying to be the Huffington Post. I still subscribe to the Times but prefer the wall Street Journal for clear reporting.
HG Tudor at Narcsite lists both M and DT as narcissists.
I see some competition for Meghan there - and also what her future may look like, selling low quality products.
Wonder if that is because Ellen is currently doing the Markle interview.
I’m watching it now, I recorded it. Very good so far. 😋
I was saddened by the previously unseen photo of Diana crying/wailing in the open topped car whilst Charles looked in the opposite direction. (Australian tour, I believe?) It seriously looked like she was heading for a nervous breakdown. Very distressing.
Also, the letter from Princess Margaret referring to her change of heart re Peter Townsend, (dug out from the archives) was news to me too!
Overall, I enjoyed it too. :)
Re: Coronavirus
This is actually a very common virus, but the particular strain itself is what makes it complex. This one, if I remember correctly, is avian derived and avian strains (including Influenza and SARS) are more unstable and prone to mutation. In microbiology/pathology, diseases that are similar to each other but have minor mutations that make them different strains (types) are dubbed Antigentic Drift, meaning that the base DNA/RNA is still similiar enough to prior strains that you have a solid enough immunity (especially herd immunity) in place to prevent mass pandemics and catastrophic outbreaks. However, if you have what's called Antigentic Shift, then you have a bigger issue. That means that the virus has evolved to a point where the building blocks are so dissimilar from prior strains and exposures that most have no protections against it.
This is why the 1918 Influenza Pandemic (which was an H1N1 or porcine/swine derived strain) was so devastating. There was very little immunity in place prior to the outbreak. Coupled with the devastation and poor hygiene wrought from WW1 (dysentery and typhoid were rampant issues in trench warfare), along with chronic food shortages, and it was ripe for the taking. The same thing happened with the Bubonic Plague/Black Death - it came on the heels of the Last Ice Age/Little Ice Age, which had crippled Europe's economy and sanitation (the constant flooding affected their ability to grow proper crops and food insecurity can affect future generations and reduce their immune response).
With this particular virus, while virulent, it's nothing dissimilar to what we have seen arise lately in response to Global Warming/Climate Change. These kinds of epidemics and outbreaks will continue because warmer climates prove better breeding grounds for pathogens. China and Asia are no stranger to redcurrant outbreaks of Bubonic Plague (Yersinia pestis) as it is; the bacteria has only evolved to make it more difficult to treat. I am actually quite happy that China has taken action to enforce such a strong quarantine in light of their holiday weekend. This will absolutely affect their economy (Lunar New Year is a big deal and we are talking billions of dollars in travel that is being lost right now).
Fun fact: the Coronavirus family gets their name from the ring or crown (corona) of protein surface structures. :) It's also a type of virus that can cause Kennel Cough in dogs. We have lots of Corona-type viruses, especially amongst animals. However, the human types tend to wreak havoc on our immune systems (see SARS and MERS) because we have little to no immune response in place.
The joys of zoonotic diseases. Personally I find all of this utterly fascinating as pathology and public/global health were my focus at Uni.
@Swamplady - the Bio 4 Level unit is normal. I don't see any tin-foil hat issues here. Now if this was Vector, then I'd cast a few side-eyes. ;)
Posted on DM regarding Markle and her self-congratulatory IG post (Just look at what a charitable person I am!), and quite apt, thinks me.
That is some serious shade! I salute you!
I recommend the Daily Squib's report on the Walk in the Woods
OMG. That photo. Simply hilarious!
I take some interest in the 1918 virus. My grandfather’s first wife and three children died within a day of first symptoms. Thus, in a macabre way, I am alive due to this virus, as my grandfather later married my grandmother, resulting in me.
I was watching a documentary a few years ago, in which frozen bodies were found, all of whom had died from the 1918 virus. There were questions about digging up their perfectly preserved bodies, as it might unleash the 1918 virus, which came and went very quickly. New information says Americans did not die from American troops returning from Europe, but from other contagents. . Nobody knows exactly what caused this disease, and there are theories, not facts, floating around.
Theories about what caused bubonic plagues to break out during the 500 year long Little Ice Age, which probably began from huge volcanic ashes entering the atmosphere, causing an immediate drop in the Earth’s temperatures, from 1300 to 1860s, continue today. . People were forced indoors, due to drastically cold temperatures, and in such close contact, fleas were able to jump and bite humans. There were bubonic plagues noted in Roman times, and then two plagues in the 1300s that killed off at least thirty percent of the world’s human population, and more than 40 percent in Europe, ended the feudal system, gave us the summer of winter which resulted in MaryShelley’s “Frankenstein” and much small and large CT’s and consequences.
Viruses and plagues have been with us since Marco Polo trading, and thousands if yeas before, when there is new human contact. Heck, when white peoples visited the Cook Islands (today Hawaii) our 80 percent of native Hawaiians died from chicken pox, which is seen in the Western world as something minor.
I am going to China and other Asian countries in two weeks, unless my tour is cancelled.
"Sources close to the Sussexes have categorically denied that they have agreed to do an interview with Ellen or anyone else."
Now HAMS (like it) have been shovelled to one side by everybody, we're getting to the meat of things.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10786607/prince-charles-harry-meghan-duchy-of-cornwall-money-norman-baker/
Why are we getting so much fake news about this couple? Is it put out by friends to keep the public interested in them or are the tabloids making stories up?
Either way it is not doing them an favors.
I'm asking myself the very same question. It's madness!
As is this one:
https://www.dailysquib.co.uk/world/35227-how-harry-and-meghan-ruined-poor-archies-life.html
@Lt. Uhura
That is some serious shade! I salute you!
--------------------
Aw shucks, *kicking toe in dirt* :)
Also:
A Savanta ComRes poll on the British public’s views on the monarchy leads tomorrow’s paper.
Give me strength and pass the liquor cabinet.
Isn't there an unwritten rule somewhere that anyone trying to flog their brand should stay out of politics? We've repeatedly seen established world-wide brands crash and burn when they either got political or even when they try to stay impartial. I can't think of a brand that got involved in politics and came out unscathed.
How to destroy your brand in 1 easy step.
I don't necessarily buy into the rumors about the 1912 Influenza Epidemic being a bit of biological warfare. The technology simply wasn't there for that kind of stuff. Heck, even Smallpox blankets were difficult to use for biological warfare and only worked because Native Americans had no exposure to the disease to begin with (much like I mentioned earlier with the lack of immunity bit). Then you have to different types of immune systems (helper T cell types if memory serves) which can either warrant a stronger protection against infectious disease or it can be stronger against parasites.
That said, like Jen mentioned earlier, I do think it absolutely perfect that Markle's newscycle could be shelved due to an aptly named "crowned virus." *snorts* It's almost too perfect if you think about it. The Crown always wins ;)
Just more attention seeking and pretending she "matters" on the big stage. No one cares.
https://people.com/royals/harry-and-meghan-will-continue-to-receive-diplomatic-protection-expert/
Looking for more information as it seemed to indicate more blanket protection than I thought mandatory for government, I found a rejected FOI request regarding Metropolitan Police protection which included a request for "A comprehensive list of persons currently guarded by Royalty Protection". I can see why this could not be answered, but in the Met's response I was interested to read a formal description of their duties in this area. It says:
>>>>> Royalty Protection (SO14) provides protection of the monarch and other
members of the royal family. This unit us divided into Residential
Protection, Personal and Close Protection and the Special Escort Group who
provide mobile protection.
Royalty Protection is responsible for:
* Personal protection for the Royal Family, both nationally and
internationally
* Protecting royal residences in London, Windsor and Scotland
* Protecting members of the public who visit royal residences
* 24-hour uniform security and protection operations at some royal
residences
* Personal protection for European Royal Families visiting the UK
* Mobile protection for protected persons and related property, high
risk prisoners and vulnerable property within London and for
cross-border operations
* Planning and co-ordinating joint protection operations
The wording "Personal protection for the Royal Family, both nationally and
internationally" seems very loose. "Royal Family" could be defined very widely indeed. But if so, why did Beatrice and Eugenie lose their state-funded protection? They're both HRHs. Blood princesses. Yet a later item "Mobile protection for protected persons" is more restrictive. Didn't HAMS refer to thenselves as 'protected persons' and then removed that reference quickly?
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/protection_command
(Background on the site in question: WhatDoTheyKnow is "A site to help anyone submit a Freedom of Information request. WhatDoTheyKnow also publishes and archives requests and responses, building a massive archive of information." Run by volunteers.)
I've been fighting a little rearguard action for months against DM readers who think of Duchy funding as Charles' own money so we don't have a right to be cross about his spending on Meghan. I end up sounding like a Russian revolutionary c.1917 when I'm not at all. I hope I'm around to see William become king. I think he'd be a good one. But the extravagant life of PC offends me. I know he does a lot of good, but he needs to deal with the echoes of the Prince Regent. He already looks a complete Hanoverian. No need to behave like one. The 21st century won't wear it.
M and Ellen If it goes
I think she is going for the American market which might not have had a lot of exposure to the SA one. And people can be quite good about convincing themselves that this time will be different than the last one. Ava - interesting visual of her running towards the sea instead of the opposite bank.
Portia not meeting Archie
I don't remember that. What I remember is the timeline which made it almost impossible time wise for them to have met and had a chat. Both couples were traveling a lot all over Europe in those couple of days so it didn't make sense for them to have really met up.
Didn't HRC meet up with Archie about then? or did she only talk about how supportive of M she was? If M steps in politically, this might get really interesting from the US point (and knowing that getting involved with politics is not keeping with HM's values).
side note: I have always been intrigued by the plague and more recently the great flu epidemic. Quarantine comes from Italian for 40 meaning the plague took 40 days to show up. The Italian city/states would all spy on each other for this and other reasons. The intel was most accurate when talking about a 3rd party and least accurate about themselves as the announcement of plague would mean the city gates would close and commerce would cease for the time being.
We are also far more of a meritocracy than before. Why should someone like Prince Andrew be driving around in cars that are never less than 6 figures and have a chalet worth millions?
There is also the growing anger across the world about widening inequalities and obscene levels of wealth, together with climate change and environmental issues which are inevitably leading us to consider how we live, personally. How much we take and what we put back.
I know my thoughts have changed radically over the past year or so, although I was unaware of the speed and degree of that change until recently. I'm suddenly thinking differently. Not buying as much. Avoiding plastic. Living more simply. This has then hardened my views about people like Prince Charles. Hypocrisy is becoming the defining sin of our time and the public are growing more and more angry with people who don't practice what they preach.
The Royal Family is facing multiple pressures that are only going to get worse. The last thing they need is the Sussexes exposing their weaknesses. They need to get their house in order fast.
Follow the rules, especially keeping your political views to yourself.
Now she wants to get involved in politics, a huge no-no for the royals. Her narcissism is in overdrive now, and it will only get worse as time passes, as if it was possible for her to be one bit more profoundly narcissistic.
She just doesn’t get it, does she? If she was smart, Meghan would realize she’s now going to be under even closer scrutiny than ever, especially until the first anniversary after the official start of the separation agreement this spring.
Meghan is all but sending HM, PC, PW and the Prime Minister a hand-calligraphed request to be tossed out of the RF onto the street with NO title whatsoever and a bare minimum financial settlement.
She seems bound and determined to destroy the source of her life since marrying idiot Harry. But then, look at her track record, narcissists are one-person wrecking crews, and Meghan seems to be bolder and more determined than ever now.
In the movie Moonstruck, Cher’s character tells Nicholas Cage’s character, “Don’t sh!t where you eat.” Or, in more polite phrasing, “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.”
Meghan has been sh!tting in the royal trough that feeds her since manipulating the engagement ring from Harry just over two years ago.
What will be the last straw that gets her tossed out with little or nothing?
Hillary is a grifter, as is Meghan. And Hillary has lost a lot of her cache, so she'll attach herself to anyone and anything that she thinks can help her grift further. They're actually made for each other, I think.
Meghan does fit with the "woke" script of many liberal figures. So they use her because they think she's popular, and she uses them because they are famous. Mutual grifting society. I'm sure people on the right would do the same with her (grifter types) if her script was more right leaning.
Also, Meg supported Hillary in 2016. So there's that.
To begin with, American citizens are not allowed to use a title given to them by a foreign state, unless they give up their citizenship. The days of Grace Kelly are gone. The Queen gave Angelina Jolie a Dameship (or hood?). Does Angie go around calling herself a Dame? She would be a laughingstock. Ralph Lauren, the American clothing designers, was knighted, too. Does he call himself Sir Ralph? Or Bill Gates - I haven’t seen his knighthood on any shareholder papers. Sir Bill? And then the knighthood given to to a real hole, Kevin Spacey. How about Steven Spielberg?
Meghan can go before an American judge or panel, to formally change her name to Her Royal Highness, the Queen of England, America, and Canada. But that name has been registered in the American Kennel Club. Will she sue dogs next? Why not? Sussex has been used as a title in the Westminster Dog Show already.
Meghan is not a Duchess. She legally cannot hold that title, no matter how many tantrums she and Harry throw. She is an American. She is not part of the Commonwealth. Her probable legal name is Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor, if she took Harry’s name in marriage, on a legal document. Harry has voluntarily given up all HRHs, thus he is just Prince Henry. I saw that name in an orange juice can once. Meghan is not Princess anything, even Princess Henry. She is not, and will never be a British Royal. She is not a Duchess. He cannot hold onto Sussex. Why hasn’t this subject, lol, of a non-subject, especially an American, whose country fought the Royals to become a Republic?
If she is "going to intervene", she had better take the gloves off. It's getting late. I can guarantee Trump will be ready for her. Will US citizens vote for a member of the royal family? I think that would be a stretch, but I believe wholeheartedly that this is her goal and if she, by some fait accompli, wins, she certainly won't be bowing to the Queen. What will PH do? I almost, but not quite, feel sorry for him.
"To begin with, American citizens are not allowed to use a title given to them by a foreign state, unless they give up their citizenship."
I don't believe that's true. There is a federal law prohibiting anyone who has a foreign title from holding public office, but I don't think they have to give up their citizenship to keep the title... just can't hold an office.