Prince Harry appeared today in Edinburgh, Scotland, to promote his rather formless "Travalyst" project, ahead of a busy week for the Susssex duo. (And perhaps trio - nobody seems to know whether or not Archie will make an appearance.)
Harry is supposed to hit Abbey Road studios tomorrow to record a charity single with Jon Bon Jovi, a single that absolutely no one asked for. I've got nothing against Bon Jovi, who I think has aged very well, but who wants to hear Harry sing?
Probably not the Invictus soldiers the record will supposedly benefit. These are men and women who have made enormous sacrifices for their country, only to see their founder and patron jack the whole thing in to live in luxury someplace else.
The Invictus chorus will also perform on the song, and Bon Jovi has an eager fan base among ladies in his age group, but really - who else is going to buy this thing? Or stream it?
Probably not patriotic Brits, who have had enough of the Sussexes. And I don't think Bon Jovi is a big draw for the younger generation. If the Invictus people wanted some serious sales, they should have brought in BTS or Post Malone.
He was papped at the train station looking surprised by the photographer, and the mechanics of that interest me.
Did he book the paps? Did Meg?
What about the informal agreement that Royals are not subject to unscheduled paparazzi photos? Harry is, after all, still a Royal for four more weeks.
On March 5, Harry is back (temporarily) supporting the military again, appearing at the Endeavor Awards, given to wounded veterans who have taken on extreme sports challenges like mountain climbing.
Two years ago, this might have been a good fit for Harry. Now, not so much. It'll be interesting to gauge the energy level of these tough, highly-motivated injured soldiers when they meet their runaway leader.
Meg may also attend, although I'm sure they couldn't care less. Vain, self-centered, and certainly not self-sacrificing, she's not really the military type.
This was just hours after her famous quote to CNN about how she and Harry had "single-handedly modernized the monarchy."
It would be hard to top that, although Meg had someone leak to the Daily Mail today that she feels "picked on."
And it's questionable whether Meg will show up at all to the Mountbatten Awards, because this is not a crowd that can be trusted not to "boo" her.
This is Harry's final engagement as Captain General of the Royal Marines, and it would rather spoil it to have to defend his wife from the very British citizens which God supposedly has appointed his family to command.
If I were Meg, I'd limit myself to controllable events like the injured soldiers, who are honorable enough to at least greet her politely while complaining behind her back.
This is interesting only to see how many of Meg's "woke" followers are still interested in having her support their cause.
After the Sussexes' bitchy note released over the weekend, it may be dawning on even the most rabid Meg fans that the problem is not the 'racist' British media or the 'racist' Royal family or the 'racist' British public, but Meg herself.
Edward Enniful of Vogue is still singing Meg's praises, so maybe he can help her find a good feminist place to appear.
That'll be a happy group of people.
Let's see if Meg can top her dress from last year, which was a spectacularly inappropriate "chains" pattern, never a good idea when both countries you represent have been involved in the slave trade exploiting many parts of the Commonwealth.
Harry is supposed to hit Abbey Road studios tomorrow to record a charity single with Jon Bon Jovi, a single that absolutely no one asked for. I've got nothing against Bon Jovi, who I think has aged very well, but who wants to hear Harry sing?
Probably not the Invictus soldiers the record will supposedly benefit. These are men and women who have made enormous sacrifices for their country, only to see their founder and patron jack the whole thing in to live in luxury someplace else.
The Invictus chorus will also perform on the song, and Bon Jovi has an eager fan base among ladies in his age group, but really - who else is going to buy this thing? Or stream it?
Probably not patriotic Brits, who have had enough of the Sussexes. And I don't think Bon Jovi is a big draw for the younger generation. If the Invictus people wanted some serious sales, they should have brought in BTS or Post Malone.
Papped in the train station
Harry's showed up last night in Edinburgh after ostentatiously taking a train there to prove he doesn't fly everywhere by private jet, although I had to wonder if he was granted a private train car. No London North Eastern Railway 36 pound specials for him.He was papped at the train station looking surprised by the photographer, and the mechanics of that interest me.
Did he book the paps? Did Meg?
What about the informal agreement that Royals are not subject to unscheduled paparazzi photos? Harry is, after all, still a Royal for four more weeks.
6 days off
After the Bon Jovi single is recorded, Harry has 6 days off before his next engagement, and it would be interesting to know how he will use it. Meet with friends? He's cut off most of them. Meet with family? Bea and Eugenie, at least, wouldn't be too pleased to see him, and William is travelling to Ireland with Kate. Maybe pay his respects to Prince Philip?On March 5, Harry is back (temporarily) supporting the military again, appearing at the Endeavor Awards, given to wounded veterans who have taken on extreme sports challenges like mountain climbing.
Two years ago, this might have been a good fit for Harry. Now, not so much. It'll be interesting to gauge the energy level of these tough, highly-motivated injured soldiers when they meet their runaway leader.
Meg may also attend, although I'm sure they couldn't care less. Vain, self-centered, and certainly not self-sacrificing, she's not really the military type.
Boos at the Royal Albert Hall?
Meg is also supposed to come along to the Mountbatten Music Awards at Royal Albert Hall, the site of her odd appearance in late October, when she did a victory lap through the crowd wearing a giant wig and a Barney-the-Dinosaur-colored purple dress.This was just hours after her famous quote to CNN about how she and Harry had "single-handedly modernized the monarchy."
It would be hard to top that, although Meg had someone leak to the Daily Mail today that she feels "picked on."
And it's questionable whether Meg will show up at all to the Mountbatten Awards, because this is not a crowd that can be trusted not to "boo" her.
This is Harry's final engagement as Captain General of the Royal Marines, and it would rather spoil it to have to defend his wife from the very British citizens which God supposedly has appointed his family to command.
If I were Meg, I'd limit myself to controllable events like the injured soldiers, who are honorable enough to at least greet her politely while complaining behind her back.
International Women's Day
Meg is also supposed to make an appearance commemorating International Women's Day on March 8, although no details have been announced.This is interesting only to see how many of Meg's "woke" followers are still interested in having her support their cause.
After the Sussexes' bitchy note released over the weekend, it may be dawning on even the most rabid Meg fans that the problem is not the 'racist' British media or the 'racist' Royal family or the 'racist' British public, but Meg herself.
Edward Enniful of Vogue is still singing Meg's praises, so maybe he can help her find a good feminist place to appear.
Spectacularly inappropriate dress
Finally, on May 9 the Sussexes are scheduled to appear at the Commonwealth Day service at Westminister Abbey with all of the family members they've been leaking poison about for the past six? ten? 24? months.That'll be a happy group of people.
Let's see if Meg can top her dress from last year, which was a spectacularly inappropriate "chains" pattern, never a good idea when both countries you represent have been involved in the slave trade exploiting many parts of the Commonwealth.
What are you most looking forward to during the week ahead? What are you dreading?
Comments
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8062859/Security-headache-Meghan-Markle-plans-leave-baby-Archie-Canada.html
A- Archie is a useful object for Meghan. She is withholding him from HM, PP, PC as a power and control play. A sort of “You didn’t cave in to my demands, so you won’t get to see Archie.” She had him mostly as a bargaining chip. He has traveled with them in the past, so it’s not as if he never travels. She’s just angry. “If you won’t play by my rules, then I’ll keep the ball at home.”
If they divorce, watch out. The RF will have to pry Archie out of her grip.
I too am on the fence re of the body... MM certainly gained no weight in her ankles, wore those bumps, and both her and 'arry generated little press or comments re Archie both during and after the pregnancy and this from a couple who are willing to generate real or fake news on a daily basis. She did gain a significant amount of weight in her face and upper torso--as the Disney dress demonstrated. I think she would have no problem getting pregnant to seal the deal, but the exact time frame and DNA involved? I think the BRF knows...I would love to know too...maybe that will be revealed before next January.
My other thought... everyone says when the Queen steps down, the throne will be diminished...people already state that they support the Queen, but after that no more monarchy. The monarch will have less pull with the press, elites, and all those who want to get those letters behind their last name. With the changing of the guard coming do you think there will be one final push to further oust the duo...
Here's a good link about why royal births used to be witnessed.
https://thehistoryofparliament.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/the-warming-pan-baby-james-edward-francis-stuart/
I agree, definite plot twist/trouble starting from Eugenies wedding with Megs maternity coat,,
& rolling her eyes at Harry in Church.
Three days later they arrived in Oz & formally announced the pregnancy.
We have since heard from Royal reporters that Harry was rude to them from the start of the tour
“Thanks for coming, even though you weren’t Invited”
& scowled at them throughout.
Others reported that H & M constantly argued on the trip.
I don’t believe she was pregnant, I do believe she is capable of anything, anything...
truth is stranger than fiction.
As for BP requesting details re Doctors etc, nah, no need to, they have All the info, & more.
The fact BP announced she was in labour when she’d already given birth, & the subsequent confusion,
was a master stroke.
Shows BP were not au courant with the situation, no fingerprints Elle!
Something’s rotten in the state of Sussex...
Of course, a narc must dominate and control everything to the point of absurdity so, nope, Meghan was not going to follow tradition (no consideration or empathy for traditions, the monarch, the BRF or the British taxpayers). Harry, of course, was finally going to have his own child so he was going to go along with all instructions from Megsy without question (and she had had a year of marriage to drill him into shape in terms of following orders!).
A joyous occasion for the British people, media and BRF turned into a bizarre confusion that sprouted conspiracy theories just to try and make sense of what the heck was going on.
Narcissist are unaware and unable to change and don't care what damage they do to others (the only restraint they have is if they put themselves in a position of losing something they actually do care about, and they can put on the charm to get something they do want). To her, she is doing nothing wrong and everyone else is to blame for anything and everything. Narcs are a nightmare but some do stay married for a lifetime, albeit in a toxic co-dependent relationship, as Harry and Meghan have.
I just do not picture her as the kind of adoring mama who seldom lets the baby out of her arms. She strikes me as the type who would like to have her children brought to her for half an hours' visit in the evening after they've been fed and bathed. Plenty of opportunity to pack his little clothes and toys for the plane ride and leave. Presumably, Charles or HM is paying or the nanny as well, so that'd be even easier. Would she even notice for several hours? Heck, they could do it when she went jaunting off somewhere.
I doubt they'd do it unless the divorce got ugly, but isn't he technically Crown property? Or is that just direct heirs to the throne?
Sorry! Try these links.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22983365
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2373851/One-tradition-wont-missed-Home-Secretary-longer-required-witness-birth-royal-child-ensure-isnt-imposter.html
At the moment, neither parent is fully and consistently and reliably there for that child.
@Elle, Yeah 2019 can bite my patoosh, I suddenly lost my job but have a new once which starts in a few days - my brain is going a bit bezerk, I am dying to investigate something! So as @Charade mentioned, I should trawl through the stuff and see what the go is with Archie :)
@Magatha - I feel for you, NBN sucks - from my understanding the infrastructure just hasn't been equipped to deal with promise speed. Out of Australia there are essentially two main channels out to the gateway, which is why Telstra used to have the market monopoly.
To those enquiring about fires - finally the fire threatening us is out - I can't say enough the appreciation to emergency services keeping us safe. Now this bitch of a summer is done.
Now I get to read back to the comments, I will post more in topic I just wanted to thank you all for the good thoughts and wishes - it means a lot. :)
This article about Kate and William buying bots for their IG account
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/style/meghan-markle-instagram.html
is by Caity Weaver, who is a friend of LaineyGossip, who is a mouthpiece for Meghan (they go way back).
Proof of the link:
https://www.laineygossip.com/caity-weaver-investigates-whether-or-not-prince-william-catherine-buying-instagram-followers-to-compete-with-sussexes-and-intro-for-february-28-2020/63687
Meghan and Lainey ...
https://i2.wp.com/jerseydeanne.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2017-08-30.png?resize=584%2C580&ssl=1
Cheers, nearly 2 weeks & still no internet!!
Good luck with your new job.
I also agree the BRF eventually knew about the faux pregnancy and I'm inclined to believe DD & TP that the surrogate baby has been confiscated by the BRF and is being taken care of by somebody worthy.
For this reason, I strongly believe the BRF invitation to "bring Archie" across the pond to the UK during their visit was a deliberate antagonism of MM, which I absolutely love.
Why seven years of therapy could be making Prince Harry’s trauma worse
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/mind/seven-years-therapy-could-making-prince-harrys-trauma-worse/
It's behind a paywall so I am going to copy and paste:
PART 1.
When Prince Harry spoke about being in therapy to overcome the trauma of losing his mother at a JP Morgan event in Miami it didn’t strike me as particularly newsworthy given the couple’s interest in mental health. What did was the fact Prince Harry said he’d been seeing a therapist for the past seven years.
As a survivor of trauma myself this set off alarm bells in my head. A lot of questions have recently been raised about the efficacy of talk therapy, particularly the open-ended kind, and particularly for trauma. “Trauma is something you absolutely don’t want to remember,” says Besel Van Der Kolk one of the world’s most respected trauma experts and author of The Body Keeps the Score.
“Neuroscience research shows that very few psychological problems are the result of defects in understanding. Therefore, improving one’s understanding doesn’t help. Most psychological problems originate in deeper regions of the brain that drive our perception and action.”
The entire country’s heart went out to the twelve-year-old Harry who had to appear in public so soon after his mother’s tragic accident. The fact that Prince Diana’s death was exacerbated by other factors including being chased by paparazzi in a car driven by someone intoxicated -would make the grief even harder to process.
I was also twelve when Tasha, my 14-year sister, was murdered on the grounds of her school in Mclean, Virginia. I too was forced to attend- in my case an open casket funeral-and to kiss her cold face which was covered in sticky make-up. The fact that my father was then working for Henry Kissinger at the White House and that the murder took place at a well-known private school made us household names. Therapy wasn’t a thing then and we got through it the way people have for millennia; by moving on with our lives, and also moving cities.
It wasn’t until I saw a psychotherapist many years later who suggested I talk about what happened that I started to exhibit symptoms of full-blown PTSD. Like Harry, my story wasn’t simple. It took a series of things to go stratospherically wrong for my sister to be killed. Unpicking each layer in therapy made me angrier and consequently more traumatised. I imagined myself in her shoes. Tasha was sexually attacked by a man who stood 6 feet 7, tied her to a tree and left her to die in the freezing rain. My father was the one to find her (after several failed attempts by the police). Whatever healing had occurred to date was immediately undone by all the horror I envisaged. I now felt terrified from morning until night.
Like Harry, I had also waited 20 years before seeking help. My issue was a deep sense of foreboding that accompanied any happy moment. On the first day of my honeymoon in Africa, for example, I tried to open the door of the cockpit to jump out. It wasn’t rational to assume the plane would crash because I had found the love of my life but that’s what was happening. Happiness is complicated for trauma victims; strong memories become “fused” together and what should feel good suddenly feels terrifying.
I wanted to tackle the symptoms: my therapist wanted the backstory. I needed lessons in self-soothing; he wanted fact-finding. This therapist was like the plumber who tells you what’s wrong with your sink then mentions he doesn’t have any tools (but still bills you).
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder comes with a range of excruciating symptoms from hyperarousal, anger, irrational fears, difficulty concentrating to numbness, flashbacks, suicidal thoughts and intense physical responses of reminders of the event. For this reason, “treatment is meant to be short and sharp” says trauma specialist Joshua Dickson, clinical director of Resurface UK. “Often going into too much detail will trigger a client out of their the window of tolerance and can become overwhelming, with the client often distressed or ‘re-traumatised’.
We now know that trauma lodges itself deep in our cells and in our intestinal walls. According to Van der Kolk, trauma patients often have abnormal activation of the insula, a small region within the cerebral cortex. The insula transmits fight-or-flight signals to the amygdala when necessary. In people with trauma, these signals are firing all the time without any conscious influence.
A college friend who survived a terrible car accident where another friend died which left her with hideous injuries told me that she might have been better off had the hospital not sent in a psychiatrist. Over the years she visited many therapists but it wasn’t until she started practicing meditation and yoga that she began to recover. “Gratitude really does help” she says. “What I felt when I saw Prince Harry and Meghan in that documentary was just how little of it they have” she says. “Here they were travelling across Africa where people have miserable lives and what they showed was a brazen display of ingratitude”.
[IMG]
We know now that trauma resides in the limbic part of the brain that only has four responses: fight, flight, freeze and dissociation/submission. Modern treatments like EMDR (eye movement desensitization and reprocess) which involves a therapist directing a patient’s eyes as he talks help to reset the software. It’s in this dual attention state that positive messages (I am safe. I am loved) can seep in. EMDR is now the treatment of choice for Organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the American Psychiatric Association (APA). Many patients report benefits from just one session.
My issue with talking therapy is that it’s a form of storytelling where many conclusions are possible. A good therapist can change someone’s life: a bad one can ruin it. There are no Trip Advisor reviews you can scroll through before committing hundreds if not thousands of pounds to let’s face it, a business relationship. The more naïve the patient the more extreme the psychological hold can be.
A therapist persuaded a friend to leave her husband after she discovered he was having an affair. Her instinct was to protect the family and heal the wounds; the therapist disagreed. She later discovered her therapist was married to a serial philanderer who seduced his clients. She quit therapy and saved her marriage.
One has to wonder what sort of advice Prince Harry’s long-term therapist is providing. After all, he’s fallen out with his friends, brother, waged war against the media and quit his job and country. He’s lost his title and fallen out with his Grandmother. In my mind, a good therapist is one who teaches you to get along with the world, not to blow it up. The fact he’s still there after 7 years also says something. “I see a good therapist as someone who helps a client to become as autonomous as possible,” says Dickson.
Of course therapy can be an effective treatment, especially when we get stuck in ‘faulty’ thinking about ourselves and others. Many people have difficulty accessing emotions or are afraid to admit them. Therapy can be a safe place to let go, and form a sustaining relationship, which is a large part of healing.
Your post has to be the funniest thing I read in a year!!!!! Oh my...I gotta read it a few more times to let it all sink in, every last hilarious detail!!!
Re: Harry, I think his emotional maturity was stunted way back - maybe due to narcotics or other substances. I think his rapid change in mood isn't just coincidental to the timeline. Sparkles gets off on being relied on - he needs someone to rely on (I get the impression it was William and Kate who provided this). It is a classic unhealthy co dependent relationship and I strongly feel he needs some alone time with his brother - where they can hang out without partners and cameras - I also believe William can get through to him, which is why MeAgain is alienating harry from them.
I really hope Archie isn't with them, their actions show no regard for a child - if you saw their activities and didn't know about Archie, you wouldn't even know they have a child. Out of all this shitshow, if there is a Archie I really hope he is looked after but others who really care and nurture him. I grew up with abusive and narc parents and I will be lying if I said it didn't have a effect.
I am horrified and going to down a great big glass of strong red wine (no light weight white zinfandel will do for this) , crawl into bed, turn off the lights, lock the door and not come out until somebody does a wellness check....or until I die (preferably).
kindness (def.): the quality of being friendly, generous, and considerate; Kindness is the quality of being gentle, caring, and helpful; A kindness is a helpful or considerate act; the quality of being warmhearted and considerate and humane and sympathetic
good deed (def.): to do something kind that helps someone else + an intentional act, especially a very bad or very good one
@Sandie - I actually don't think they are aware at all. They have shown to show a complete lack of abilities to have insight and the capability to comprehend the consequences of their actions. It is very impulsive behaviour = it reminds me of kids and this was actually why were are laws in place that children cannot be charged as adults for a crime (odd exception to that). It is generally known that a child's brain doesn't develop the part that gives this insight to around 16 - 17 years old. This is why this age group is the preferred recruiting age for defence forces and terrorist groups.
@Ozmanda
You too are killing me...I just spit out my white Zin laughing so hard. Oh ya'll are priceless!!!!
Seriously Mimi, I hope repost your story (you might want to sometime copy your comment before you post in the event you lose it or in this case delete and want to repost).
Lurking: I was actually thinking of Joe Kenda but that is an interesting video thought.
Elle: I think you have something. All seems to lead back to Archie. What is happened around the end of the month: Palm Sunday is April 5 and Easter a week later.
But Nutty mentioned something along the lines of two birthdays for HM and Charles may want to have some decks cleared before dual regency. Something along those lines might be in play behind the scenes now. If so, then Everyone who is in line not only moves up but will be assuming a greater role in current events (well, the kids not but William would and he is not described as a big fan of her actions). People are not going to want to have this side drama in play in addition to not just the ceremonies, knowledge transferring to the next generations and day to day current events. The grandchildren rule would kick in which might factor into the costs of guarding him (is that a noose tightening about needing to lower the protection costs - if you live here, we pay, outside the country, you pay?).
Mimi - you have a great plan about how to do this, a sense of humor (hazmat gear).
Sandie - After I've been around some people (figure out who they really are), I think that situations like this are more about what they think they should be receiving from others than what what they are actually passing out to others IRL.
Mimi (reposted by request)
What at-risk, first time mother to a royal heir would decide to have her baby AT HOME with a midwife delivering and only her husband and mother present?
I would want to have the absolute finest prenatal care and the absolute best doctors in the world at a hospital where other royal babies are born.
The whole world would have known my ever single pain, twinge, “discomfort “, nausea, craving, emotional meltdowns,gas, etc. from the minute the pregnancy result came out positive. And even if it showed negative, I would have insisted on being monitored DAILY, just in case the stick was faulty!
I would have a nurse or a doctor by my side morning,noon and night. No flights to ANYWHERE. mostly bed rest and pampering for me for however long it took. My vitals would have been taken hourly and would have practically been attached to a fetal monitor the entire time. I would have sent out copies of my first t sonogram signed by the entire administrative staff at the hospital were I was going to deliver and dropped copies to the british people via helicopter. I would have picked out a name even before I conceived!!!!!!! Everyone in the world would know I was working on having a baby from the moment I walked out of the church on my wedding they.
I would have sent out DAILY updates and tons of EXTREMELY tasteful pictures of my growing abdomen every week!
All t.v. channels around the world would stop to announce at my very first contraction. I would have requested sedation/epidural/chloroform and any and all forms of pain relief...STAT! A female professional videographer would have taken extremely tasteful and discreet video for our personal viewing only. Fireworks, cannons, rifles would have gone off as soon as the baby was born. After a few days with the help of makeup artist, hairdresser and LOTS of pain medication I would appear in a BEAUTIFUL couture robe with fuzzy slippers with a bit of a heel, on the steps and my husband and I would hold him up in only his diaper for an hour for the whole world to see!!!!
After that I would flood the internet every single friggin day with pictures of me with husband and baby and later with ALL relatives that could come to see and hold the new baby while wearing hazmat gear.
And that’s how “ I” would have done it!
And with each new thing either one says or does it just makes me more angry than I already am. . I thought Hairy looked fine at the Bon Jovi non-recording but others thought he looked liked hell. I just don’t have it in me to debate, discuss or disagree.
What was once a mild form of entertainment for me became an obsession and now that things are moving along at a snails pace I feel I have wasted waaaaay too much of my time on those two eejits! This blog (and the markle debarkle) has taken on a darker tone and I am not liking it and hope to just let it go completely....some day.
The only enjoyment I get out of the blog now is simply reading and keeping up with my favorite people and off course when T, G, and PG show up and wreak havoc.
p.s. I am mortified that my sarcastic comment turned up in between Sandie’s horrifying revelation about her sister. I can’t........I really CAN’T.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/the-truth-about-tasha-6741564.html
Harry and Meghan are pathetic, but they will soon be gone into the world of celebrities without talent but who think an awful lot of themselves ...
I any case it was a horrifying story and I will look it up when I can summon up the courage.
Interestingly, though, George Resch (Tank) also is the Director of Influencer Marketing for the marketing company Brandfire. Brandfire's clients include Coca Cola, Budweiser, and Netjets, a private jet leasing company, among a large list of other major corporations.
So, this is no little feel-good site. It's owner is part of a PR firm. Its focus is branding.
http://brandfire.com/dev/our-team/
Thank you so much!!! for reposting @Mimi's outrageously funny post. I am impressed you were able to retrieve it. I need a good laugh.
@Ozmanda I think your idea about whipping out cat photos is great. I need to carry some photos of my critters and show them when people start talking about their grandkids.
@Sandie
I can really relate to what was said about therapists/talk therapy and I am going to search out info on the treatment, EMDR (eye movement desensitization and reprocess). It sounds promising.
LOVED your hilarious post! Looking forward to more.
LOL @Mimi excellent! I wish you'd married Harry FKAP (for his sake, not for your own lol)
@AbbyH, so maybe then I'm not completely crazy? I just keep thinking that all of this chaos is either BSCville or extreme diversionary tactics, rather like Operation Mincemeat. Of course, Rach could never pull off anything as well done as that operation which is why this has been such a spectacle de merde, it's hard to imagine that anyone could stir up this much drama in such a short time for no apparent reason.
@Ozmanda, the past few months have certainly been "interesting", but thank goodness you & your kitty are doing well post-fire, you are both safe, and you have a new job that will allow you to work so that you can give your cat a better life :) I'm convinced that is why my cat thinks I'm working lol.(And I'm not even a cat person, but I'm an animal lover, so here I am stuck with a cat.) I look forward to your thoughts on Archie and this week when the circus comes to town. In addition to @Charade asking, I left you a Spidey-Sense inquiry as well.
Ellen DeGeneres
February 19 at 12:42 PM ·
"Tank.Sinatra is a brilliant meme creator… so I gave him his own ellentube series. Check out the premiere episode of "Think TANK" with guests Kristen Bell and Monica Padman!"
It all comes full circle, doesn't it? Connections upon connections upon connections...
Merching and influencing is all she can do.
This new collaboration does not surprise me but she is using the Royal Sussex brand, still has an office and staff at BP, is still funded by the British taxpayer, and supposedly still represents the Crown ... until the end of March.
It is unethical.
Based on their past actions, it doesn't surprise me, either.
But if they are posturing themselves as world-wide icons of truth and justice, they should to disclose the details of who they partner with.
To gloss over the fact that their feel good website of the month is owned the a director of a PR firm is outrageous. Especially one that could possibly provide them with free travel through Netjet. Backroom deals are being made all in the name of The Harkles being do-gooders, and they expect people to believe what they preach?
Does anybody really know how Travalyst is supposed to work, even after Just Harry's speech (reading of a script)?
Last month, they did the same thing with another feel good site which, when people looked into it, was a merching site and connected to another branding firm.
This is wildly unethical whether they are still royals or not.
The Harkles were trying to start their own foundation, but was shut down by HMTQ. Now, they are going to run their own charities, where full transparency is of utmost importance, yet they pull these stunts?
It's as clear as day, and people should be furious about this.
Their Instagram should have said, "We have partnered with PR firm Brandfire, whose Director of Influencer Marketing is George Resch. Resh, known as online as Tank Sinatra, also runs a good news site, Tank's Good News. We urge you to check it out!
That's transparency.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1249660/Meghan-Markle-latest-news-Prince-Harry-baby-Archie-security-Sussex-Royal-Family-update
The Good Morning Britain host said: "It struck me as slightly odd that both parents would be in London and this little nine-month-old baby is left back in Canada.
"On the financial aspect of this, that means that Archie has to be protected in Canada while both his parents have to be protected here."
The former royal protection officer responded: "From my point of you Archie is probably the biggest threat to the family than the parents in the sense that there is a real threat of a kidnap here."
The security cost part:
Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan asked: "This figure of £20million to look after the family, is that accurate?"
Mr Wharfe replied: "I think it is accurate, it is a bit of an unknown environment they are moving into here.
"If you look at the average salary of a protection officer currently it is about £100,000.
"If you’re looking at their security Meghan, Harry and the baby you are looking at two per person minimum so that is £600,000.
"That doesn’t include the accommodation, the travelling, the administration of actually running something like this."
-----
Also, has the history of the Dumbarton title been discussed? I know one of Harry's titles has, but can't remember which one it was.
‘More than 90 per cent say taxpayers should not have to pay Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's £20m security bill, Good Morning Britain poll finds’.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8064505/More-90-cent-say-taxpayers-not-pay-Prince-Harry-Meghans-security-bill.html
I always look forward to your copy & pastes while I scroll through
A last hurrah. Confirmation from Buckingham Palace that both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be at the Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey on March 9. They will join the Queen, Charles and Camilla, and the Cambridges at the service.
We aren’t talking about a normal people within a normal family though are we? We’re referring to an immensely powerful family, the crown, not a normal family in any way. The Monarchy and all that entails, is a law unto itself. Laws regarding privacy may come into play with regard to general treatment and illnesses etc., but when it comes to the line of succession I believe absolutely not.
I’m absolutely sure a new protocol or procedure was already implemented when the Home Secretary was no longer required to be present for royal births.
When I said the crown would make it their business to know (what’s going on) I’m referring to people who make it state business to know facts on behalf of the crown in order to protect its integrity etc. 🤗
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/mar/02/which-superhero-should-meghan-markle-play-duchess-of-sussex
I am personally convinced that a surrogate was used (whether with M/H's DNA or not) but I see that some other posters are still on team 'born of the body'.
Just for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we never saw the ever-changing, shapeshifting baby bump, the squatting in heels while heavily pregnant and the lack of water retention in face and ankles. Let's disregard the travelling to Zika areas in the first trimester and the excessive flying back and forth while heavily pregnant to New York and Morocco.
So let us just assume Megs WAS pregnant when she announced her pregnancy on October 13th at Eugenie's wedding. I ran Meg's pregnancy through one of those due date pregnancy calculators. Considering she supposedly gave birth on May 6, she was only pregnant 8 weeks and 5 days at Eugenie's wedding. Considerably less than the 12 weeks mentioned a few days later when the couple arrived in Australia for their tour. Not to mention the 16 weeks she spoke of herself during the tour. Why did she not know her own due date or how far along she was?
Again, for arguments sake, let's assume Megs was exaggerating how far along she was because of her incessant need for attention. Let's also assume she was padding her belly (sloppily and inconsistently) on some occasions for the same reason.
It still does not explain:
- how Archie could be so large in every photo (christening, polo, private jet) if he was indeed born on May 6th
- the secrecy surrounding the birth (incorrect information to the press, extremely fast birth for a first time geriatric mother, no-one saw Megs or her protection officers entering or leaving the hospital, odd birth notice on the board, no signatures on birth certificate)
- why does Archie look like a different baby in every single photo we have of him?
- why Archie is being kept away from his family, the British public and the press now. Why is Megs not merching his baby clothes?
- what kind of mother leaves her child with a nanny and a few RPO's when there is a kidnapping risk, to jet off to the UK herself? That is inconceivable to me.
Another possibility is that there is perhaps something wrong with Archie. I just hope the little boy is okay and well cared for by someone who loves him.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/03/02/new-neighbours-rally-round-harry-meghan-keep-paparazzi-bay/amp/
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Canadian neighbours have asked officials for new trees and signs to protect the couple's privacy, amid signs the couple's presence has increased community tensions.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markle-snubbed-disney-role-21608786.amp
Meghan Markle 'snubbed' for Disney role as 'she needs them more', says film boss.
Former Suits actress Meghan Markle has reportedly been 'snubbed' by Disney, who 'have limited plans' to work with the Duchess because she's too 'controversial', a source has claimed.
Just because I believe she gave birth doesn’t mean I think the Sussex’s haven’t been unhanded in how they’ve dealt with Archie’s delivery, christening etc. Again, I think it’s mostly to do with smoke and mirrors with the media, and their downright arrogance to think they can behave in such an appalling way, with no regard whatsoever for The Queen and Britain . 🤔
- she had got wind that Eugenie expected to wear the Grenville tiara for her wedding? Was the bid for the Vladimir an deliberate attempt to out-bling her?
- was it her intention from the outset to walk up to the altar on her own? We've seen, at the RAH do, that she has a taste for the triumphant entrance. Perhaps it wasn't so much that her old Dad wasn't good enough for her, rather that no man was good enough, she wanted the attention all for herself. I wonder if pressure had to be brought to bear to enable PC to do it?
Far Lefties & Nazis (from German `National Socialists')- I think the only theoretical difference between them is who they regard as the `enemy'. The far left sees things in terms of vertical socio-economic structure, so it's the upper classes and `class traitors'; Nazis `think horizontally', as it were - it's those on the other side of the racial/national frontier, regardless of their class. Apart from that, they are remarkably similar.
Both equally hypocritical where their own interests are concerned. I believe `right wing' originally denoted a position within the spectrum of Communism.
Former Suits actress Meghan Markle has reportedly been 'snubbed' by Disney, who 'have limited plans' to work with the Duchess because she's too 'controversial', a source has claimed. ‘
I so hope this is true! Wow, she’s at last seen as ‘controversial’! 😀 This is bad news for ole Megsy! 😁
New neighbours rally round Harry and Meghan to keep paparazzi at bay
The Sussexes have been embraced by fiercely protective locals with calls to guard their privacy
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Canadian neighbours have asked officials for new trees and signs to protect the couple's privacy, amid signs the couple's presence has increased community tensions.
Residents in North Saanich, Vancouver Island, were quick to embrace the young family on their arrival following their decision to step back from royal duties. The community has actively sought to thwart even the most imaginative attempts to clap eyes on them.
The latest salvo has come in the form of a request to the council for new trees and signs to protect their privacy.
One local has requested some new rhododendrons to be planted outside the Sussexes' waterside house to create a fenced-off area.
Another suggested signs reading "local/resident traffic only" be put up on roads leading to their rented home.
Others urged the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to step in against what they see as paparazzi intrusion.
One member of the fiercely vigilant community has formed a Facebook group to identify the locations of paparazzi. Others are said to have delighted in toying with journalists.
When one 83-year-old neighbour was asked if he had seen "them", he mischievously replied: "Who? Oh, right, them - yeah, Archie's been keeping us up all night with his wailing."
Deep Cove Market, a café where the Duke has been spotted buying sandwiches, has declared itself a "press free zone". Such Herculean efforts have not gone unnoticed by the Sussexes.
Miles Arsenault, who runs a taxi boat from nearby Deep Cove, received a personal phone call from the Duchess after it was reported that he refused to ferry Japanese photographers keen to shoot their home. She was "sweet, real and sincere", he said.
One photographer, who asked not to be named, said paparazzi had been intimidated by locals and even threatened with being beaten up.
The Duke and Duchess have been renting the £10 million Mille Fleurs mansion on Vancouver Island since they arrived in Canada in November.
The finer detail of their plan to step down as working members of the Royal family is understood to have been put together at the waterside property with a small group of American advisers.
According to local sources, the Duchess has been spotted shopping at Whole Foods, near Victoria, and at a fish market in the village of Sidney.
The family is said to travel in various cars, flanked by separate vehicles for their security. They managed to keep their location under wraps, not least thanks to the discretion of the locals, for several weeks.
One woman suggested that signs reading "local/resident traffic only" could be put up on roads around Mille Fleurs to create grounds for police to act. However, the council replied: "The areas in question are public highways and public rights of way. Unfortunately, these legal means do not have the ability to restrict use to non-residents."
ENDS
https://uk.style.yahoo.com/meghan-markle-attend-2020-met-102200349.html
Harry, you've had it...
https://www.change.org/p/uk-parliament-stop-uk-funding-and-remove-all-titles-for-meghan-markle-prince-harry
It's odd though. The numbers keep going up for a while, as you watch, then they stop dead and stay stopped until you refresh/revisit. Number seems low going by the scale of public anger. 14,000 voting this morning on Good Morning Britain alone, showing over 90% are against taxpayers' money for the Sussexes (as other Nutties mentioned earlier today). The BRF surely has to pay attention to the degree of unrest about this.
The finer detail of their plan to step down as working members of the Royal family is understood to have been put together at the waterside property with a small group of American advisers.
American advisers. Well that's interesting.
We Nutties have long lamented the absence of proper investigative reporters. They needed to get onto Meghan's case as they would for any other major issue. Just as they would devote their energy to exposing a fraudulent bank or company, they needed to investigate her background, report dispassionately on her actual philanthropic record and the timeline leading up to her entry into the royal family. Compared to the 2008 crash surely it is chicken-feed.
They had a duty to find out. We had a right to know.
I use past tense as much of the damage has been done now. Damage that could easily have been avoided if there had been due diligence and a willingness to face down the woke warriors. Sensible straightforward people far outnumber that relatively new and uncontrollable force and the tide is beginning to turn now. Poor Lawrence Fox has really suffered, but he was in the vanguard. The mood is changing week by week now. People have had enough of being lectured and judged, and Meghan will suffer from this change.
Going on to a related area but in the present, the BRF needs to recognise the vast differences online when trying to read the public mood. Twitter is insanely pro-Meghan (haven't checked recently as I refuse to look there now). DM readers' comments are the opposite, as are Telegraph and Guardian readers when they are allowed to comment. I thought Instagram would be like Twitter, but I keep an eye on Kyle Dunnigan's Instagram page and there's a real appetite and appreciation for his snarky Meghan skits. It's a complex picture, but I would say DM readers are the BRF's natural constituency and the BRF should be deeply worried by the scale of their anger.
Getting back to my original point, proper investigative journalists are needed now, because of that anger. This is threatening the future of the BRF and therefore the whole constitution of this country. William and Kate may be fine, and Harry is only sixth in line, but we have King Charles III to come first. A success as a Prince of Wales but a failure as a father. Harry was neglected from 13 onwards and this is the result.
As King, Prince Charles will need to manage the family more effectively than the Queen has done and is doing. I shouldn't say this, but I think the bar set by the public will be higher for an elderly male sovereign than it is for an elderly female sovereign. The public's chivalrous inclination to protect the Queen is the saving of her at present, and Meghan's undoing.
EE is said to be escorting her to Met Ball...
https://uk.style.yahoo.com/meghan-markle-attend-2020-met-102200349.html
So Vogue will be paying for Megsy's admission. Megs the Sussex moocher Royale. EE is Edward Enninful, the editor-in-chief of British Vogue. A few here called him racist. No doubt Megs found it easy to hook into EE via their shared blackness. Of course Megs blackness is minimal, fake and a joke, she uses it to put one over on people. Over a few nights, Hapless found her to be an exotic creature in a tent in Botswana.
Hapless, what have you done!
Prince Harry, 35, embarked on his final round of official royal duties last week
The Duke will be joined by Meghan this week for five further official appearances
It is an 'emotional time for him,' a friend has claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8065443/Prince-Harrys-round-royal-duties-UK-emotional-time-friend-tells-Vanity-Fair.html
-----------
Nacho is that you!? You polo playing fool!
I do not understand that H is assigned only two RPOs. Do they work around the clock? I think at least six or eight cover him; perhaps one or two are used to patrol the grounds. Then there are the police patrolling in boats around the waterfront mansion. Of course, does M have her own RPOs? And Archie? Some of the group of RPOs live in a home near the mansion; others are housed elsewhere. How in the world does Harry get away with this crap? And of course every two weeks a new team is flown in. Others travel with the increasingly separated HAMS.
One thing never mentioned is the large number of bears living in the area. I was once hiking near this area, and saw a bear in the distance. I turned and ran. Do the RPOs carry “bear spray”, tranquilizer guns or rifles and guns with bullets?
The finer detail of their plan to step down as working members of the Royal family is understood to have been put together at the waterside property with a small group of American advisers.
American advisers. Well that's interesting.
Americans know nothing about the BRF. Americans know *nothing* about how ruthlessly The Firm operates when faced with a severe challenge. In my case, until a year ago I figured Harry was next in line after Wills. I would not be shocked if Megsy thought the same, back when she was stalking-shadowing-pursuing-barging in on Hapless Harry. With the Thomas Inskip wedding being the hilarious example. This wedding in Jamaica, the M and H interactions being documented in candid photos.
I took the 'Archie keeps us up at night wailing' thing to mean that the question was stupid - and the actual locals haven't been bothered.
The Japanese paparazzi may be trying to get pictures (but really, how many Japanese press can their be) but most of the "crowd" - however large it may or may not be...was invited by Duchess difficult.
>>>Americans know nothing about the BRF. Americans know *nothing* about how ruthlessly The Firm operates when faced with a severe challenge.<<<
While we Americans do not grow up steeped in the culture of deference to the Royal family like Britons do, I think we have a fair idea that the Firm can, and has, been ruthless down the generations when it comes to protecting their interests. The Queen is the sweet public face of the Firm, but behind her is a whole machine dedicated to one thing--the preservation of monarchy. Diana was a loose cannon, but I could understand the leeway extended to her and the pains taken to shield her mental problems from becoming public knowledge. Diana was a future Queen Consort and mother of the heirs, and until the bitter War of the Waleses gave the Firm 10 years of service by which she burnished the brand brilliantly. Not since the Coronation had there been a time that captivated people outside of Britain and the Commonwealth than the romance of Charles and Shy Di. Ever since then, the BRF has enjoyed the affection of Americans, who transferred their fascination with Diana onto her boys. So I wouldn't say that we know 'nothing' about this Family. The most surprising aspect of this whole saga is why it was allowed to happen, frankly, and why the Firm has bent over backwards to accommodate such a transparent grifter who they *knew* absolutely was bad news before the wedding day. The fears of being charged with racism seem a bit too glib to me. If HM had disallowed the marriage, or at least the Wedding Show on Meghan's terms, she may well have been charged with racism--and I think they could have weathered that storm. The entire foundation of the monarchy is frankly based on racism and bigotry--'We' are intrinsically better than 'you' because of the circumstances of our birth, so we get to live in palaces while 'you' struggle to feed your children living in a council estate. The vast wealth of the Royal family is directly traceable to the subjugation of colonial peoples, and a bit part of that was benefiting from slavery in various forms.
I"m not singling out Her Majesty as a racist in her beliefs--just pointing out that the entire system that gave birth to her, and which continues to keep her and her heirs in great style and privilege is, at heart, based on the dictum that 'all men are NOT created equal'. That's racism.
Bending over backwards for Meghan has been all for nought, because they gave her everything they could and still, she's lobbing the charge of racism, bullying, sexism . . any unflattering thing she can dream up. Because a Narc is insatiable and also without honor.
Elizabeth could have refused Harry this marriage, or stipulated that he must wait a full year, and that owing to the divorced (twice) bride's status, a full CoE wedding would not be in the cards. Even Charles did not get that for his second wedding. Harry could have gone off and eloped any way, but the Queen did not have to make him a Duke for such blatant disrespect as he showed to her in the run-up to his wedding and since. She bestowed all the goodies on an ungrateful pair of tossers and she's reaping their 'thanks' now.
I suspect that if the Queen had steeled herself for disapproval and put more obstacles in Meg's path to the altar, she would have buggered off and set her sights on a target with more ready capital and not so many 'rules'. If only Elizabeth had engineered Megxit *before* she got a claw in . . how much more peace she, and we, would be enjoying now.
In my case, until a year ago I figured Harry was next in line after Wills. I would not be shocked if Megsy thought the same, back when she was stalking-shadowing-pursuing-barging in on Hapless Harry.
Whoops, I forgot to respond to this in my last piece.
May I ask why you thought 'Harry was next in line after Wills'? What of William's three children, all born prior to Meg's wedding? I'm not sure I'm reading you correctly--are you being facetious here? Because if not, it's rather dissonant with your charge above that Americans don't know anything about the Royal family. Some may not get the order of succession, but most of us do realize that Harry was not going to get close to the throne once William had children. In any case, Charles comes first, giving William's kids time to grow up. Uncle Harry was never even going to be appointed Regent for George.
They both have the same overall layout as the first one I saw. The images are different photos, but all have Harry in various blue suits and Meghan wearing something white.
1-
Harry Wants to Help People
New Project From Harry and Meghan.
Only for UK
zelmaid
(this second one had me laughing, I think they meant it to mean that British people can pay their own bills without needing to work, but my first thought was "but we already pay H&M's bills....")
2-
Royal Family Make UK History
Harry and Meghan offer the British a way to pay their bills without working!
jofeleten
-----
Nothing that matches comes up in a Google search for zelmaid, apart from a mermaid-with-devil-horns image on a DeviantArt account. I did however giggle at one search result for a tumblr account named zel-art. Could we see this as a replacement for the moon bump? ~cackles~
ZEL - Maid Zombie Boobies
Maid Zombie Boobies. squigly maid skullgirls haloween or is it too late?
Jofel Eten & Drinken seems to be a restaurant in the Netherlands.
One interesting thing I noticed is in between those two I had a couple of non-H&M ads in a similar layout, both for a branding company called ZeBrand which appears to be a legit company (their Twitter blurb "Build your ZeBrand. We’ve made creating a brand simple, so you can stay in control. A new day, a new way. Brand your way."). I'm still too paranoid of scams to follow any ads to see where they take me but I'm wondering whether the H&M ads are related to this company?
I am actually surprised the security estimate for them was so low at 20 millions a year. There was a very good analytical article about what this actually involves. I don't remember everything but the short content is like that:
In UK the royal security protocol is well established and it's framework tried and tested. Surveillance cameras are in place, buildings are prepared, agents are in place, communications and monitoring personnel are in place, police/RPOs cooperation tried and tested, emergency protocols tested and established.
Any new location especially outside of UK needs the following:
- Initial check ups;
- Cameras wired in, installed, monitors and personnel at monitors set up;
- Panic room in each house set up and tested; alarms set up and tested;
- Cooperation with local police established and tested;
-Patrolling of the perimeters established and maintained, any possible breach points found and reinforced;
-Personal bodyguards selected, transported, accommodated, insured, fed. They work certain hours each so several are required every day; those working nights paid at higher rates;
- Vehicles selected, delivered or acquired, checked, wired for surveillance and monitoring, every route is checked and approved beforehand;
- Emergency protocols for each scenario established, tested and approved;
- Weapons should be certified, approved by local authorities, special locations for safekeeping arranged and certified;
- Emergency evacuation protocols established, contracted, tested and approved;
- Medevac protocols established, contracted, tested and approved for each location;
- 24 hours communications between the mobile unites and the hub (in UK presumably) set up and maintained, computer equipment regularly checked and vetted against hacking;
- in case of a remote location satellite communications should be contracted, equipment bought or rented and maintained.
- every location they are about to visit should be checked, approved and tested for escape routes and weak points;
- every person they will come in touch with should be vetted. There is a lot more but even the above in mind boggling.
This a huge, absolutely enormous amount of work and it is unbelievably expensive. So by leaving UK with its established system the two spoilt brats placed a huge burden on the taxpayers, police and other departments. Like everything they do they never gave it a thought and never looked at the predictable consequences of their actions.
Remember you said you were pretty sure journalists read these sites? I can prove they do.
Harry Markle's latest post has a screenshot of Chris Ship's tweet in which he reposted a picture of Harry as a mermaid somebody else saw, photographed in Buenos-Aires and posted on his/her personal page.
Now it will spread further and faster.
>>>The Good Morning Britain host said: "It struck me as slightly odd that both parents would be in London and this little nine-month-old baby is left back in Canada.<<<
This is some well-mannered British shade being thrown here, I think.
>>The former royal protection officer responded: "From my point of you Archie is probably the biggest threat to the family than the parents in the sense that there is a real threat of a kidnap here."<<
This is playing right into the narrative Megs wants to spin, to ensure that they get top-notch security paid for.
Concerns about Archie being kidnapped must be the reason she has to dress up a doll like her baby when she goes out with him. A mother truly concerned about kidnap risk to her baby would not: 1. Make sure his location in a remote, semi-rural area was publicized or 2. Call paparazzi to capture staged walks in public parts with alleged infant, all the while grinning manically at the cameras and limply holding dog leashes.
Archie could be best protected in Windsor with the RPOs, not in a deserted Shining mansion on a Canadian island.
All this guff about the Vancouver Island neighbors rallying around the Sussexes to 'protect' them is more desperate Narc PR spin. First of all, photos of the mansion/compound where they are allegedly staying shows no neighbors anywhere around them. The nearest neighbors are probably a quarter mile away. And secondly, Meg and Harry are suddenly so chummy, welcoming, friendly and kind to *these* neighbors, when they gave their Windsor neighbors a bullet list of demands: Thou shalt not look at us, speak to us, ask for photos, touch our dogs or ask to babysit Archie.
Meg is several sleeves of crackers short of a mock apple pie . . what amazes me no end is that the media dutifully prints all her rantings like it's actual real information.
My gut tells me that Meg and Harry do not have a baby. I believe that someone gave birth via surrogate to a child that may have Meg's DNA, Harry's or both, but that they were denied custody of him after a psychological evaluation and/or drug test. The reason we have seen so little of Archie is because he doesn't live with them. The little baby we saw in the christening photo (color) is the same little boy from South Africa, with his distinctive wonky eye. People say that he looks like Harry as a baby; to me, he looks like Meg as a baby, with features of her dad, too.
I don't know where Archie is, but it seems to me that the RF let the Sussexes go rather blithely if they in fact had an infant in their full-time custody. HM obviously had to put a kibosh on 'Sussex Royal', but I feel like other terms might have been made more attractive to keep the Sussexes in the UK and on a bit of a leash so there would be more oversight of this child, if he in fact is theirs. He was barely, or not at all, mentioned as a talking point in the Megxit negotiations. Only now, with the impending end of their free security, is the spectre of 'kidapping Archie' suddenly in play.
I pray with all my heart that this little baby is with other people who love and care for him--not nannies, but real parents, not just bio-donors who wanted a merching accessory. Don't we think that Harry would be behaving differently if he were the father of a long-wanted child? Some suggest that Archie is living with the Wessexes, who know how to keep things on the down low, and that's why there is such an apparent lack of Royal concern over the welfare of this baby. Because if the Dumbarkles *are* his custodial parents, it's long past time for an intervention. This eats at my mind and I hope there is some clarity soon. I'm pinning all my hopes on this month.
I have no idea over the accuracy of the amount, the British press have reported that amount a number of times. The costs jumped disproportionately for their lowly status within the royal family. £20 million, £7 million etc. is still far too much for any British tax payer expected to pay, which I am. I’m hoping the The Royal family and the Home Office listen to the deafening disquiet over this couple of self-entitled hypocrites. 😖
didn't these neighbours see her psychotically beaming at the paps she called? it was front page news all over the world.
seriously, this is why I believe that MM's fans have disturbingly low IQs: you would have to be a houseplant not to see through her. She's a complete idiot and her spins are eye-rollingly primitive and simplistic.
DATE - June 1st, 2020
Dearest Harry,
I hope all is well in Malibu with you, my grandson Archie, Meghan. I am notifying you that you have 30 days to contract with a private body guard service. Due to popular displeasure Old Boris cannot continue the UK paying 25 million annually for your Royal Protection Officers. Boris was spooked when he was burned in effigy outside 10 Downing last week, by a mob of bloody anarchists wearing Guy Fawkes masks. The despicable Daily Mail covered this in detail for four days running, with 50 photos and videos. Surely you read about this in your new sunny climes.
I have included Sylvester Stallone's private cell phone number. He is willing to help you out with body guards. He is most kind, I met him at a few of Her Majesty's garden parties. She confused him with 007 James Bond.
I will be sending $700,000 annually to pay for your family's professional protection. You can keep any monies left over. Aside from this I will pay for your California weapons training, concealed carry licensing. Self defense classes, such as Krava Maga. I will pay for Meghan too.
Sorry to skimp on you old boy but money is tight for the UK Treasury. Virus expenditures are soaring, City fund traders have been jumping out of windows.
Pip Pip. Talley Ho, and do Carry on,
You father Charles
‘Meghan Markle will feel 'trepidation' about returning to the UK to 'face the music' and the reunion will be 'bittersweet' because she 'gave up so much to move here', royal expert claims.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8065923/Meghan-Markle-feel-trepidation-returning-UK.html
Regarding the former officer’s comment about the threat of kidnapping, I also took his words as criticism of MM and Harry. They’ve endangered their baby by taking him away from the place where he could be beat protected, and then left him on the opposite end of another continent. Their actions in general are increasing the threat to their baby. That’s what I got out of his statement, but I agree it does play into her demands.
I feel badly for HMTQ. MM is creating drama after drama to keep attention on herself and to get what she wants, and she’s causing real hurt. I hope this will resolve soon and then media will stop paying attention to her.
I was not joking about my ignorance of the line of succession. I will adjust it to 24 months ago... But before this I figured Harry was next after William. This was was based on Harry being "the spare" back when he and William were boys.
This aside, I have always casually observed new events with the BRF. I have never disliked them. They have always been OK with me. That they are a good fit, useful to Great Britain/UK.
I’m not British, but the nonstop chaos being caused by this unimportant, unbalanced narcissistic woman is starting to get old. I have enjoyed watching her narc behavior displayed for a global audience, in hopes she would be put in her place, and the publicity would make understanding of narc behavior more common. But, the real damage being done means her 15 minutes of fame have concluded. From comments on every article, it sounds like people have had their fun watching and now want order restored. I hope it will be, and hope Archie will be okay and Harry restored to his family.
You get the Starbucks Latte of the Day for 'Charles' letter to Harry'
. . .Sorry to skimp on you old boy but money is tight for the UK Treasury. Virus expenditures are soaring, City fund traders have been jumping out of windows.
Pip Pip. Talley Ho, and do Carry on,
You father Charles . . .
Haha! I would change the part about the anarchists outside No. 10 wearing Guy Fawkes masks to them wearing Harry 'Hazardous' Dumbarton masks. Hazza is at that level of caustic ridicule.
******
WalkHumbly,
IF there is no Archie in the Dumbarkles' custody, then perhaps this talk of 'kidnapping' is an attempt to smoke Megs out in her fraud.
If Archie was a surrogate baby, conceived that way either because Meg knew she'd have difficulty getting pregnant at her age, or knew she couldn't, he is still a vulnerable baby deserving of love and protection. My issue with Meg isn't really that she used a surrogate; it's the incessant, increasingly ridiculous lies and deceptions that get to me. If Archie is their baby, living with them as a family . . as normal as this family gets, anyway, she could have fostered so much goodwill toward the both of them if she'd just be honest about how he came into the world and show him to us. Cute Archie photos--a real baby, not a lifeless doll hanging like a sack of potatoes from a too-small carrier--would be guaranteed to knock Bea's wedding & the coronavirus off the front pages, if that's what she's after. There is nothing now preventing her from lining up lucrative photo spreads in Kneepads and other mags to show off her adorable little guy. She can't use Sussex Royal, but there is no stipulation at all against 'Baby Archie'. She'd just be another celebrity mom showing pictures of her cute kid.
Is it the threat of 'kidnap' that keeps her from even featuring him on Instagram? Ha.
Given Megs' pathological need for attention and one-upmanship, I think the only reason she's not showing Archie off is because she can't. I had floated the idea that staging a kidnap for ransom wouldn't be too outrageous for her to attempt, in order to keep herself, the 'distraught mother' in all the papers. The problem with that scenario, though, is that she would have to produce a baby, living or dead, eventually. Madeleine McCann has been a 'presumably kidnapped/missing person' for 13 years now. I think we all know that that child is dead, and most likely never left the resort she was staying in alive. But the seventh in line to the British throne can't just go 'poof' and be a missing person for a decade-plus. I don't know if it's crossed Megs' mind, seeing as she seems to really suck at a long game--her attention span for any con never exceeds more than 2 years, a span of time that has actually passed already, if we count the engagement period--as to how she was going to handle "Archie Growing Up" if she in fact does not have a real child in her custody. Having him kidnapped and never recovered would take care of that little problem, as well as ensuring that she'd be the top news story of the year, and years to come.
Meg's shell game (Where's Archie? Is he over HERE? Or is he over THERE? . . ) has to come to an end some time. The first birthday is usually a big deal. People are going to expect birthday snaps. A person with the raftloads of 'friends' that Meg's got (ha) would want to mark this milestone occasion with a party, wouldn't she?
This command performance in March was HM tightening the screws still further. Of course Meg is going to 'leave Archie in Vancouver', because she can't very well present a ReBorn doll to Her Majesty *this* time as her bouncing, almost one-year-old baby boy.
After March 31st, I think at the first sign of Suxsy misbehavior, the Palace needs to drop the bomb about Archie. The flaw in the theory that the Wessexes have Archie (though that would ease my mind no end) is that were this true, Meg would raise a huge stink and retain Gloria Allred as her celebrity attorney to wrest her son from the clutches of the toxic RF. She wouldn't keep quiet about *that*. She used Archie as a pawn, 'keeping him in Canada' in order to extort more favorable terms for herself in Megxit, but this has kind of backfired on her. Now she is being forced to paint herself as a negligent mother, depriving Archie of parental care as well as the final opportunity, likely, for either of his great-grandparents to see him. It's not a good look.
There may be an ocean and a continent between London and Vancouver, but if the Queen had grave concerns about the safety and security of one of her heirs, whether from terrorist threat or negligent parenting by his two tosser parents who are very likely into recreational drugs . . her agents could go fetch the bambino . .even if an involuntary mental health commitment had to be levied on both parents first. HM has publicly acknowledged Archie in the succession and as part of her family . . he is, even without title, a property of the British state.
So . .why is the Queen so apparently cavalier about Archie . . where he is, who is caring for him and if he is safe? Maybe because she *knows* she's got no cause for concern.
I wish she would enlighten us, if that's the case. The truth will out about Archie, eventually . . My hopes are on Tom Bower, planning a scathing expose of the the Dutch-Ass, but hopefully something will break before then. Meg's got 2 months before his first (alleged) birthday . . let's see how she handles it. Also, let's see if George Clooney reaches out to wish Archie Happy Joint Birthday.
A night at the Met Ball, a role in a superhero movie…? So much for the quiet life, Meghan!
By Celia Walden
o Meghan Markle is reportedly attending the Met Gala in May. Because where better to celebrate your newfound privacy and “space” than at the “the party of the year”, “the Oscars of the East Coast”, “the Super Bowl of red-carpet events”?
What could be more perfectly suited to anyone fleeing “intense scrutiny” and “commoditisation” than an annual mega-bash to which anti-commodification activist Kim Kardashian once turned up dressed in a nude-effect wet-look Mugler dress? A celebrity Pavlova, where the 225 assembled photographers will take an estimated 50 shots a minute, before blasting millions of images out into the ether?
Although why this is more appealing than a royal visit to the Mumbles Lifeboat station in south Wales is anyone’s guess.
According to sources at the weekend, Markle is to leave Prince Harry at home for the night, so “she can establish herself once more in Hollywood”, attending the Met Gala with Vogue’s editor, Edward Enninful. This makes about as much sense as a woman who craves the quiet life asking her LA agent to find her a leading role in a superhero film, “something that pays big” – which is exactly what one Sunday paper claims Markle has done.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8065923/Meghan-Markle-feel-trepidation-returning-UK.html
>>>> ... according to royal expert Katie Nicholl, the return will be 'bittersweet' for mother-of-one, who gave up her home, career and nationality to immerse herself into the royal family.
The expert believes Meghan will 'feel sadness' about the way it panned out, and will 'put on a brave face' for the engagements.
Katie told Ok! magazine that Meghan would feel 'some trepidation' at returning to the UK, claiming: 'She has come back to face the music here, and she'll feel a sense of duty.
'It's bittersweet for her because she sacrificed a lot to move to the UK. She gave up her home, her nationality and her career and fully threw herself into royal life, so there will be a sadness about the way it all panned out'.
She added: 'Even if she's feeling uneasy, she won't let it show. She can put on a good front, so we will see plenty of that megawatt Meghan smile over the coming days'. <<<<<
Not that many comments yet but those there are (you can guess the responses) are getting 3-4K likes. People are basically frothing at the mouth, as I would be if I wasn't so exhausted by all of this. I so want to never read about her and never see her photo again, but if we all switch off we've given in.
As the Sussexes fly back to Britain to complete their final official engagements as working members of The Firm – and come face to face with the Royal family for the first time since The Statement, the long, petulant Instagram post from a fortnight ago in which they whined about dropping plans to use the “SussexRoyal” brand as there was no legal case to stop them trading on the name abroad but, okay, they promise not to – the pair may have no choice but to brazen it out.
Anyone with the gall to question the Queen’s authority in this way might not find that a problem. “Who made you Queen?” the statement effectively sneered, “you don’t own the word ‘royal’.”
I’m not sure the Sussexes will understand just how colossal a miscalculation that statement was, or how transparent the motivations beneath the legalistic jargon were until they’re confronted both by the Queen, and a great British public that is increasingly bemused by the couple’s conflicting words and actions.
Reduce the statement to a human level – without all the titles, castles, formalities and traditions – and it’s more shocking still. After all, you have a young man and his wife turning on a 93-year-old grandmother at one of the toughest moments of her life.
You have them disregarding the pain and sadness prompted by Prince Philip’s ill-health, Prince Andrew’s involvement with a paedophile and her beloved grandsons falling out – all because they have a brand to promote. Is there any way back from that?
Had you asked me a month ago, I would have said yes. Despite the acts of clumsiness and the missteps we’ve witnessed over the past two years, I would still have said yes. So they invited a bunch of A-listers that they’d only met once to their wedding. How many of us would do the same if we knew George and Amal would actually come?
Was their dispensing of certain Royal traditions really so bad? The insistence on Archie’s christening remaining private and the setting up of their own “breakaway” website? Harry has always been his own person. At this point, one could still push a convincing narrative that these two were “breathing new life” into an outdated institution.
Certainly, many will have understood the couple’s decision to wage war against the British media, and tried to tune out the cynical voices in their heads when they went on to try and manipulate that same media to their advantage.
But the precise moment the couple began to lose the public’s sympathy wasn’t when they chose the hospitality of a billionaire in Vancouver Island over that of the Queen at Christmas, or indeed when they decided to make the desired “break from royal duties” permanent.
No – that moment can be charted back to a lament the misty-eyed Duchess of Sussex made in the ITV documentary charting the couple’s African tour last year: “Not many people have asked if I’m OK.”
Because that single sentence managed to eclipse everything the couple were in Southern Africa to highlight – from the 1,000 minefields that have yet to be cleared in Angola, to the abject poverty in Malawi and HIV-hit children in Botswana – and make it all about Markle.
We can only ever guess at what’s going on inside other people’s relationships, and it may be unfair to blame Markle any more than Prince Harry for these recent missteps. But one thing is certain: neither the words nor the sentiments in The Statement appear to be those of a happy young couple, revelling in the joy of each other and their nine-month-old baby.
And I worry that something is unravelling behind the scenes. Because if their intention were really to enjoy a quiet life, why would they care about a title that can only ever be used for professional profit and status? Why would the team of LA-based agents, lawyers and publicists be necessary and the showbusiness parties and blockbuster film roles so appealing?
Anyone can tell them that you don’t need those things or grand branding to live a serene and peaceful life. But solid family relationships? They’re essential.
End.
In polite euphemism, he was extracting the Michael.
Yes, the British Constitution is what's at stake here, not helped by that bl**dy Mantel woman sticking her oar in today resurrecting `unconscious bias' and so on. She was rather unpleasant about the duchess Catherine, I recall - funny how she wades in just as her latest novel appears - pure synchronicity, of course.
Not only are significant parts of the country under water, we, like almost everyone else, have the dreaded lurgi taking hold. Just what we need...
JocelynsB - you brought up a good point regarding full disclosure of the sites they are sponsoring. I have had the tv on and have listened to many an ad which discloses that they are a paid speaker, not a lawyer for an ad about call for legal advice. Non disclosure has a way of being more shocking if it slips out after a while.
Elle, you, I and many others are not crazy. That we keep looking at this and saying - there is something really wrong with this picture (we can often disagree about what is wrong - ex: Archie of the body or not) there is something really wrong somewhere, somehow.
I think the idea of misdirection feels reasonable as well. This saga has the same level of not able to pin down details like I used to feel watching Lost. Don't look at the left hand - my right hand is waving a banner at you - that's what I want you to focus on.
Possible snubbed by Disney. Controversy? They don't do that. Think how slow they have been to respond to cultural changes in how people view skin color or what is "funny". It would also explain the lack of listing on IMDB.
And the neighbors banding and showing support on FB? That's funny. Really funny. The idea that the local government needs to invest money in buying bushes and trees to block the view of a house for people who may not be living there any more/ending the visit soon AND are losing their Canadian protectors soon. How big can these plants grow to do their job in a month? Will the local council have enough time to vote on a measure to curtail traffic on roads few travel already (let alone have the time to make and put up the sign for them to be impacted).
All this (described as herculean) efforts to keep the press off kilter and we still got the "walk in the park" and so on which was counter intuitive for the driving idea: we need privacy.
Notice, the talk of roughing up the press has tapped down once there was talk that that could possible be illegal (meaning sue for damages).
How much do you stay in contact with your neighbors? and, my thought was (could be wrong) that this was more a summer holiday kind of place and less winter sports so I'm wondering how many people live there year round if that is true. I know my neighbors and have a few phone numbers but it is for contacting on emergency basis (hey, there is burglar who broke in two houses from you. Did you know yet?). We are all living our own frantic lives and don't ask for a cup of sugar.
@Longview
Your comments were spot on. Although I would have replaced "convincing " with " conniving ".
Vancouver Island is a bustling place with the focus on the waterfront where the ferries come in and the Empress Hotel. Lots of shops, restaurants, tourist activities year round for us common folk. In the area where they live, it will be a combination of full-time residents and some people who have summer homes, but mostly full-time residents. People take the Victoria Clipper boat from Seattle. It will get snow, but the ski areas are not that close.
The press makes it sound like this is just an island full of trees. Here are photos of the downtown area, overall area photos, Parliment buildings and the Empress Hotel. You'll see what I mean.
https://www.shutterstock.com/search/victoria+inner+harbour
Technically, H was never a “Spare” to anyone. Prince Charles is the heir, and for over twenty years, Prince Andrew was the “Spare to the Heir.” When Prince William was born, he became the “Spare to the Heir” and Andrew was downgraded to third. H’s birth meant that H was third in line, and Prince Andrew fourth, followed by Princess Beatrice, fifth, Princess Eugenie, sixth (as H is now), then Prince Edward, seventh, his children, Princess Anne and her kids, and on and on.
Once the “Spare to the Heir” Prince William and Princess William produced more heirs- Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis, and “kicked” everybody down the line of succession. Unless William and Kate have more children, H will stay sixth in line. In the hopefully far future, when the Queen passes on, Prince Charles becomes King, and William, quite quickly, will be the Prince of Wales, and the heir, with his “spare” being Prince George.
Americans do know something about the British Royal Family. We all can learn from each other.
I know that they have probably moved on, but it has been suggested that Archie is still in Saanich, so, of course, we must believe what she says, right?
Saanich News
44 mins · ·
"On Monday morning the third earthquake with a magnitude higher than 4.0 in 2020 to hit B.C. coast On Tuesday morning the third earthquake with a magnitude higher that 4.0 in 2020 to hit B.C. coast
Monday morning earthquake was the third with magnitude higher than 4.0 to hit B.C. coast this year"
Wouldn't that be highly concerning to most new mothers? Wouldn't they want to make sure that their child is with them at all times when the ground is literally shaking beneath their feet?