Over the next three days, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are scheduled to appear at what may be their final engagements as senior members of the Royal Family.
Today, Meg and Harry will appear at the at the Mountbatten Festival of Music at Royal Albert Hall, where they will hear the Royal Marines Band play a selection of music to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the end of World War II.
Tomorrow Meg has some kind of activity for International Women's Day - I don't believe a specific engagement has been announced, please correct me if I'm wrong - and on Monday she and Harry will attend a church service for Commonwealth Day.
Putting on their best face
Duchess Meghan and Duke Harry have been putting on their best face recently. In their appearances so far, they have been well-dressed and apparently sober.
Will they be able to keep it up for three more days worth of appearances? And do they have an ulterior motive? Are they looking good so British citizens will be inclined to pay for their security, because they have a deal in the works, or because they want to come back to the Royal Family?
Meanwhile, media coverage since their return has been almost uniformly flattering. Is this at the behest of the palace?
Finally, Meg's court case against the Mail on Sunday is still out there. Will her next trip to the UK be to testify against her father in court? (Harry's phone hacking suit against the Murdoch empire is also ongoing.)
Let's discuss.
Comments
________________________________
The unmitigated GALL of Harry, daring to show his and his strumpet's face at such an event, after he A) dared to call the Greatest Generation "out of touch" and B) avoided a memorial for the Royal Marines in favor of "The Lion King" and celebrities.
Finding it hard to find the words for this, me.
Can't wait for the Commonwealth Service, mainly to see what the Douchess turns up wearing. I can't decide if I'm hoping for something wildly inappropriate/ridiculous, or for her to continue on looking relatively nice and put together, as she almost was at the Endeavor event.
Of course the Scorpio in me is hoping Kate trips her as she goes down the aisle, but I daresay that won't happen, damn it anyway.
I've lost all respect for that woman. Quite frankly, she deserves the misery she has sown from the over-indulgence of problem children and taking the rest for granted.
Farewell HRH MADAME MARKLE OF SUXSEXESS.
*waves hanky*
Dang I'm glad that was none of *my* tax dosh!~ 💰🍹💜
I wish that the Royal Marines would just put their instruments down and refuse to play to boycott Harry after the Lion King stunt. I'm sure that all of those brave Marines who died in action would agree. How he has the gall to show up to this event is incredible.
@Ian's Girl,
I nominate Camilla to do the tripping. She would do it with such a twinkle in her eye.
"I've lost all respect for that woman. Quite frankly, she deserves the misery she has sown from the over-indulgence of problem children and taking the rest for granted."
________________________________
As have I. So much for "as my life is long or short". She has undermined the whole thing in one short span.
And I'm an American who has revered the Royal Family all my life. I can only imagine how Britons feel.
@ Lt. Uhura,
I wish that the Royal Marines would just put their instruments down and refuse to play to boycott Harry after the Lion King stunt. I'm sure that all of those brave Marines who died in action would agree. How he has the gall to show up to this event is incredible.
____________________________________
He has proven he has the gall. What saddens me is that the Queen allows it to go unchallenged. Simply because he is a favorite of hers.
It is this kind of thing that will finally make the monarchy a thing of the past after 1,000 years. No Briton has the willingness to keep on paying taxes for a wastrel who not only leeches off of his subjects, but spits in their faces as well. Her Majesty is going to rue the day.
Supposedly Prince Philip and his wife told friends that they were hanging on to power as long as possible because Charles simply wasn't up to the task.
I don't think it's a coincidence that things began going off the rails when Prince Philip, who has long been responsible for family matters, became infirm and Charles presumably took over.
I haven’t lost faith in the Queen, she will do the right thing by us all, slowly, slowly...
Knowing Megs I wouldn’t be surprised to see her conducting the band, no need for a baton, her claws will suffice.
As for her make up, that was what’s left of her soul, leaking out of her eyes...
I understand that there is a great deal of frustration with the Queen, but I do think much of the blame for the Sussex case belongs with Charles. He has not handled things well.
_________________________________________________
I understand.
Charles is the fly in the ointment, as I see it.
And it will be he who underscores the end of the monarchy, whether the Queen laid the foundation or not. (The long arm of Prince Philip has a major part to play.)
Regardless, if the monarchy goes away, the world will be the loser. And if I were Charles, knowing my role in this, I would not want to live in history.
@Ian's Girl said...
I was afraid they were trying to worm their way back in......
There are reasons for their current charm offensive. Looks like they are trying to make a friendly farewell and un-burn the bridges M has burned / Haps being along for the ride. They definitely want to keep the Froggy cottage option open DUE to them not finding all those presumed Hollywood deals there. And no frinkin way did Disney fork over a few million to an imploding/ Queenie blocked Sussex Foundation. Money was pledged at Lion King but how can it be sent to a mirage of a foundation?
Kate and Will are 75% genuine. Sure they are a bit phony but they like their role and try their best. They recently took their children on their rural tour (Wales?) to connect with the land, farmers and animals. The children saw some lambing iirc
Wills and family are taking after Charles in this. Yes, Charles was into sustainability ages ago and I respect-like this kind of eco-awareness. Charles practices this with his tenant farmers in the Cornwall Duchy. Wills will soon be taking on Charles role to run this Duchy when Charles is elevated to King.
Kate and Will are 75% genuine while Megs and Harry only 25% these days. I cannot condemn H and M 100%. They are trying in their own very flawed ways. And with their recent re-staking their claim to Froggy Cottage, who knows. They might be back in UK and ready for Royal duties within a year or two. (15% chance) This all depends on how much they fail in Malibu/Hollywood/Merching. I am POSITIVE that they finding a very harsh world out there in Canada and (soon) Malibu outside the Royal cocoon and without Royal logistics and free Royal security. Paid by UK taxpayers of course. Oprah ain't picking up the phone!
Hikari should be put in the line of succession. Maybe number #4? She knows our lovable Royal doofuses better than they know themselves. Eminence Gris Hikari at ELF (Edward Lane Fox) and Lord Geidt level. OK I am having fun here and even Megsy with all her bod length rear zippers fails and messed up eye shadow (raccoon) is lovable to me today. If she has Piers approval, she has mine! (temporarily, like Achilles)
Think about it. Megsy is trying like all of us. Only problem is the swath of chaos and destruction she likes to leave in her wake.
----------------
Geidt for Nutty connoisseurs >>>
MARKED MOVE Queen brings back loyal aide to ‘keep an eye’ on ambitious Meghan Markle and be Her Majesty’s ‘eyes and ears’
The Queen has appointed Sir Christopher Geidt as her Permanent Lord in Waiting
Becky Pemberton
23 Mar 2019, 10:23Updated: 23 Mar 2019, 10:48
This is a real conundrum for me. On one hand, I'm angry with HMTQ for not kicking The Harkles to the curb, telling them to leave with no help from the BRF and to not come back. That's what I'd do, but I'm not a 93 year old woman.
On the other hand, I think this would play right into The Harkle's plans from the very beginning. Harry is so bitter and still unrightly blames the BRF for killing Diana, prodded by MM.
MM would LOVE to go down in history as the woman who ended the British monarchy, and she's been pushing that agenda. Talk about trying to break the internet. Breaking the monarchy is even bigger, and I don't want The Harkles to get that glory in the history books.
I can't look at HMTQ and not see a very elderly woman who should hand over the reins, but she knows that Charles is a wimp. As Nutty said, I believe that she is going to try to outlive Charles (or at least try to reduce his years on the throne by living as long as she can), knowing that he will be a weak and ineffective king. If William was on the throne, the Harkles would have been long gone.
I want to wait until they leave, and see how HMTQ progresses with this. She may surprise all of us. As I said, it's a conundrum for me. There are too many variables at this point. I just know that I don't want it to be The Harkles who bring down the monarchy.
Okay -- Let's say HM the Queen passes tomorrow (G-d forbid).
Charles ascends to the throne.
Britons are not that thrilled. He is an adulterer, and his strumpet threatens to become Queen. (Luckily, she has indicated she will be Princess Consort.)
Not a stable platform for the monarchy. Mind you, it was even more dicey when Victoria became Queen.
So, it could be argued that the monarchy will continue, despite. One day, William and his heirs will continue the line.
*heaving a heavy sigh* ………………… let's hope so.
Oprah is having a difficult time of it herself recently, with the controversy over her book club pick "American Dirt" forcing her to engage in self-criticism, just as she's kicking off her Apple+ project.
https://variety.com/2020/tv/opinion/oprahs-book-club-apple-american-dirt-episode-1203525972/
Plus her recent onstage fall.
https://nypost.com/2020/03/02/oprah-winfrey-wears-3k-ice-sleeve-after-taking-fall-on-stage/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/8703213/queen-brings-back-loyal-aide-keep-eye-meghan-markle/
Queen bringing back Lord Geidt, March 2019. He counteracted the H&M rebellion and Hollywood style Merching ambitions. He is former SAS. He brought in the best legal talent to destroy Megsy's Sussex Royal schemes. Megsy's American West Coast branding agents and PR agents were no match for Mr. Geidt who runs silent, runs deep. Runs on his home turf of the UK that American's are strangers in.
The press would go bananas and how Meghan would seethe with the indignity of being deliberately upstaged for a change.
And, as Nutty said, she's had problems of her own, including the failure of her OWN Network. When she is of no use to them, she is going to get Markled. Her power is dwindling fast lately, being reduced to shilling for Weight Watchers.
Looking forward to seeing the dubious duo’s interactions with the other ‘real’ royals at the Commonwealth Day Service. 😜
That court case isn’t going away either, but will she come back over when it’s hearing? I think it not, there’s not any good or positive PR she can garner from it. 🤫
Oprah hasn't been "reduced" to promoting Weight Watchers.
She's the second-largest investor in the company.
https://www.investopedia.com/news/oprah-makes-bank-weight-watchers-windfall/
I know. Oprah is one of the weathiest women in the world, but her popularity is going down, so she's putting herself out there by shilling for WW. The comments about her lately have been scathing.
I just saw her response to the American Dirt debacle, and it was the same social justice word salad that MM does. She's always been a fraud and a phoney in my book. Gullible to the core.
From Marketwatch,
Oprah's tour is sold out, and is expected to bring in $15 million, but her expenses for the tour are $20 million. Sound like somebody else we know?
The Queen can’t just kick them to the kerb, that would play right into Megs victim mode.
I’m sure HM would love to slap Meg, & Harry, senseless, Metoo!!
She can’t, the Queen has to be seen to be bending over backwards for these two,
anything else would be viewed as cruel etc... on a world stage.
Age is irrelevant, I know 93, but, the Queen has always, & will continue to do right by her people, it takes time.
Charles will be a good King.
He understands the role, understands the fact that he will never fill the role as his mother has, an impossible task.
A heavy burden.
Will & Kate should be allowed their family time, whilst upping their duties.
The Queen understands this.
They are proving to be excellent ambassadors for the country, & adept at soft diplomacy.
They will get stronger & more adept as time goes on. Kate is the jewel in the crown.
As for H&M, they’ve caused big problems, but, they are not that important.
No substance, & certainly no loyalty.
She's not Van Halen; she doesn't need a special stage or sound or light effects. Or dancers. Or, to my knowledge, special security beyond that of any person of her wealth and fame.
Anyway, I'll be interested to see Meg's outfits for the next few days. She's in her British fashion designer vibe now - will we see her in The Vampire's Wife label, as recently worn by Kate and Beatrice?
Speaking of which, the DM had an odd article about Bea and Edo leaving a restaurant yesterday. They ate dinner, who cares? I wonder if there's some subtext to the story I haven't decoded.
Remember the godfather kiss Lord Geidt gave to Meg.
Yes, he was brought back to counteract H&M palaver.
Seems to have done a good job so far.
The ending will be interesting. Remember we still have the court case.
Wondering how much information will be leaked,
but then the British press will release.
Hell hath no fury like British press scorned.
The question is why is she wearing British brands now?
She normally eschews anything British,
the odd hint via handbags ?
To suddenly be wearing everything/anything/altogether British is another
bent finger to the crown.
I agree. I think it may be the finger. She certainly doesn't deserve anything British after the way she has behaved towards them.
I like Camilla and think she will make a better queen consort than PC will make a king. Like Kate, she gets on and does her job, dressed appropriately (never occurred to me a royal WOULDN'T be dressed appropriately till Meghan). Good thought for the day - the next two kings have sterling spouses who won't let us down.
1) The Queen is bending over backwards to allow her favourite grandson his way, devil take the hindmost -- and with it, the monarchy, after 1,000 years -- or --
2) The long game, allowing the "youngsters" their follies, hoping they will fade away after a while, and all will be well after a while.
We shall see.
Of course the Scorpio in me is hoping Kate trips her as she goes down the aisle, but I daresay that won't happen, damn it anyway
The Scorpio in me is hoping someone spikes M’s wheatgrass and kale smoothie the morning of the event and keeps her curled up in the fetal position all day at Frogmore.
Well, weren't we just talking about how MM controls her photos & uses them to get 2 days' worth of publicity, when the convention is members of the RF get 1 day apiece - no overshadowing/limelight stealing?
So what does the bitch do? Cr*p on Camilla's big speech, that's what. When I said `Avenging Angel' the other week, I wasn't entirely sure why I used the phrase. Yet it seems I was closer to the truth than I thought - getting at Camilla gives them double satisfaction.
I just hope that Charles will at last take on board what a viper he has as a DiL. I'm sure Cam will do her best to spike the Dumb-dumbs guns through Charles.
G-d willing, the Harkles have scored an own goal here.
There's a Narcissist's Prayer -it's on several sites and I apologise for not knowing who the author is:
A Narcissist's Prayer
That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did...
You deserved it.
(One site says it's to do with `Napologies', a neat portmanteau word for the nearest you'll get to an `apology' from a narcissist.)
Just think, all this could have been avoided if Charles had been allowed to marry Camilla in the first place. I expect the fear of that history repeating itself, and the understandable relief that H had at last found someone to put up with him, plus the imagined benefits of a `biracial' bride were also factors at play when the RF accepted her. All that and the couple's refusal to split up, fear of racism, possible pregnancy and possible blackmail.
Poor HM. 1993 was her `Annus Horribilis'; 2017 onwards are truly her `Anni Horribilissimi'.
And now there's the embarrassment generated by the ruler of Dubai.
She doesn’t deserve anything British.
I’m appalled at her treatment of the Queen.
Surely any Director/CEO will look at her treatment of the Queen,
& public, & will realise that if this person is willing
to disrespect the Queen, she will disrespect anyone.
I am disgusted in Harry.
I am a normally peace-loving and diplomatic Libra. But Meg curdles my blood so much that I will out-Scorp the both of you and opine that sticking a foot out to trip Herself is far too benign. Though it might be interesting to see what would happen if she hit the ground hard. Would the wig fly off? The teeth? Would the too tight dress straining over the butt pads split open? That would be some good entertainment. But I have a very non-Libra fantasy that involves Lord G., former SAS and two professional taps to the head, if you get me.
Desperate times call for desperate measures; the first Elizabeth had her Lord Walsingham; early on in her Royal career, this Elizabeth had Sir Tommy Lascelles. Behind every successful ruler, there is a laser focused courtier who lives to serve the sovereign and will be ruthless to safeguard the Crown. Elizabeth needs her Walsingham now more than ever.
I love the Bourne movies, but admit to talk to the head is probably too obvious. A misadventure with a bathtub and a bottle of the Tig would have fewer fingerprints on it.
It’s really a shame that William rather than his father is not on deck to take over in a year. William is a Cancer, and you do not want to cross those people.
Definite home goal for H&M.
Camillas speech was very important.
Very important that it was highlighting domestic abuse.
Every week in Australia, one woman dies from domestic abuse.
I dread to think of the statistics world wide.
It was not that straightforward. Charles was doing his stint in the navy and was away at sea (and nowhere near being ready to get married to anyone). Camilla was being romanced by Andrew Parker-Bowles (a huge catch at the time) and she went ahead and got engaged and married. (She was genuinely in love with Andrew and probably did not want to take on a role in the royal family at the time so she may very well have refused if Charles had proposed. Like Wallis Simpson she was content with the role of mistress to the future king/king.)
Charles never got the opportunity to decide if he wanted to marry Camilla or not and the Queen never got the opportunity to refuse to let him.
If Camilla had waited for Charles and the two of them had dug in their heels, the Queen would have probably given permission for the marriage. However, I do not think Charles or Camilla realised at the time that their love would endure and strengthen.
Speaking of which, the DM had an odd article about Bea and Edo leaving a restaurant yesterday. They ate dinner, who cares? I wonder if there's some subtext to the story I haven't decoded.
The only thing I learned from this article is the Bea appears to have a tattoo on her wrist!
This visit is important to her ... she has to hold onto that link to royalty (Harry is not enough especially when he is so keen to ditch titles and palaces) and she wants the UK market and all it can provide for her (completely blind to how much people dislike her).
That manifesto described exactly what Meghan wants, and she does not give up but just finds a way to go round or eliminate people who stand in her way.
@Nutty
The question is why is she wearing British brands now?
No, my question would be: why is she wearing POSH SPICE??????
That's all i want to know....
___________
I'm worse than an actual ♏Scorpio Sun: I have Mars/Pluto/Saturn in Scorpio + Uranus/Jupiter in the 8th house (I inherited it from my Father who's a 5-planet Scorpio stellium & got my Gemini/Taurus cusp ascendant from my ♊Gemini mother). As you can imagine, it would have driven me WILD MAD if I were a British taxpayer. I'd be starting petitions to get my money back (demand evidence that cottage renovation was in fact paid back) and everything!! 😂😂
It's almost scary how *seemingly* BENIGN🌳 tree-hugging, chummy-withe-the-squirrels 🐿🐿, would-never-hurt-a-fox-on-a-Boxing-Day 🦊❤ with his tampon silliness Prince Charles is... when you take into account he's in fact a Scorpio.
You know they like being in control. And there we were joking around about how he would never take the Queen's place when the Dutch queen abdicated... one of these days Charles is going to snap. And it'll be scary. And messy.
It makes him all the more scary IMO. SHUDDERS. 🦂
My heart sank when I heard C was engaged to a 19-year old. I hadn't heard of Camilla but I had imagined someone like her as the sort of woman that would suit C - a countryside-loving woman for a start.
Di made sure her side of the story was all over the papers; Charles was damned whatever he did, respond or keep quiet. I guessed `six of one, half dozen the other' - until her interview with Martin Bashir.
What got me was that she was prepared to slag him off in front of the world, which of course, included `her' boys.
For one parent to damn the other to the children, in my book, is wicked. They are as much part of their father as they are of the mother; in attacking the father to win the loyalty of the kids, a wife is obliquely attacking her own children. It's bad enough behind closed doors, as my mother did to me; unforgiveable to do it in front of the world.
That did it as far as I was concerned. Add to that her telling the boys it was OK to be naughty as long as they weren't found out and she's laid the foundations for how Harry has turned out.
I suspect the difference between William and Harry is partly down to birth order.
We know what second children can be like. Firstborns and only children tend to share characteristics from having undivided adult attention, for a while at least. First-time parents are new to parenting; they may have higher expectations and be tougher on them than they are with subsequent children. First children are expected to be responsible `Big brothers and Big sisters' and they're less likely to be spoiled.
We're all flawed but the majority of us try to walk in the light. Confronted with those who do not may leave us nonplussed, not knowing how to handle the blighters.
HM is known to take Christian teaching very seriously so Harry may be seen as the Prodigal Grandson who, having wasted his substance with riotous living in a far country, finally crawls home from the pigs, starving but for eating pigswill.
The difference is that the probability of H declaring himself unworthy is very remote, as is the prospect of HM telling him never to darken the royal door again.
Like dealing with your dog when it finally comes back from having run off, punishment sends the wrong message to the offender. Harry'll only return when she dumps him, and that won't be until she's got as much of his dosh as she can.
It's too much to hope that the marriage can be declared null and void, and that `Archie' is thereby illegitimate.
I’m also Cancer sign, I agree, don’t cross us.
Tell me more??
Very happy go lucky.
Until...
H&M
I think yes, it could be because they want to convince the British public to pay for their security, but I don't think they have a deal in the works. Perhaps the opposite: they have nothing lined up so are keen to put themselves in the shop window as (ex) royals for hire. I don't think they want back in to the royals - I reckon it's more of a 'Look what you horrible racist Brits are missing' type of thing. Won't change the fact that most Brits are desperate to be rid of them at this stage.
"Meanwhile, media coverage since their return has been almost uniformly flattering. Is this at the behest of the palace?"
No. Britain still has a - sort of - free press. Supposedly the queen invited all of the tabloid editors to the Palace way back at the height of the Diana years and asked them to go easy on her. They all did the opposite. Journalists - even tacky tabloid hacks - don't like being told what they can and can't write. No, not even by the queen.
I'd say it's more of a pick your battles type of thing. Compliment her pretty blue dress and then get some digs in when it really counts. The tabloid version of 'There! I said something nice!" Not to mention that despite Meghan's whining about how awful the British tabs are, much of the press has always been pretty favourable towards the Harkles. There's also a touch of sarcasm behind some of the 'flattering' headlines. And the press have no intention of letting up on the real issue as far as taxypayers are concerned - the £10 million bill for the Harkles' 'security'.
Lets ask ourselves if Megsy's behavior damaged the monarchy. In my opinion yes, it did.
Now lets look at who leads the crown. It is a 93 years old woman who firmly understood that to do her job well means not to interfere with anything, not to express opinions and not to impose. It works as long as everybody around her plays by the rules. As one relative put it, "everybody defers to the Queen".
Now lets look what happens if somebody doesn't play by the rules. Diana, for instance. Queen chose not to interfere with Camilla+Chaz, after Morton's book, after Diana's sulky behavior during official tours, Squidgygate, tampongate, press manipulation. She let the UK's public opinion to get polarized to the extreme. It took a long time for the Monarchy to recover after that. And Diana didn't have a dirty past.
Did the Queen learn from that? I don't see that. Now we have Meghan and Harry and we observe exactly the same pattern. Things are not corrected until they have gone too far. Protocol violations, inappropriate dress, mistreatment of stuff, use of official tour to send the personal message, attempts of media manipulation, spending spree were all alarm bells and nothing had been done.
Same with Andrew. His behavior has been obvious for a long time and Queen didn't interfere until it all blew up in her face. Same pattern.
I am sorry to say this but if organization can't act decisively it has a big problem. So far I can see the Queen's half measures not working very well exactly because Meghan doesn't respect anybody and doesn't play by the rules.
Monarchy that can't protect itself will not stand.
https://66.media.tumblr.com/52f5f068163bff7b87731e4c2ad8f18b/eb67bf63e5e10b97-ff/s640x960/01fd19f657eea0788ddcbdb107d29def5a11c272.jpg
I like your above post. Yes, there is a reason why Harry turned the way he did. Looks like they never took trouble to explain things to him. Instead they sweetened, softened and gilded his life to the extent where he can't take responsibility for his own actions.
Wills has a brain Harry has a sense of entitlement.
Well, fancy that! I am astonished, astounded, amazed - who, in their nastiest nightmares, would expect them to do something like that?
As my old dad would have said, `That beats cock-fighting'.
I wonder what Prince Charles's thoughts were?
That image I shared above is about Harry and Meghan gate crashing a Prince Charles event when it really was not necessary. They have gone rogue and just do their own thing without regard to anyone else. Anyone planning to do business with the pair in future should take note ... they are not team players.
And clearly Harry’s fault as much as Meghan’s - frankly more. He knows the drill.
Anyone know if Harry has ever done investitures himself? I don’t see any on Google.
Anyway, if he’s really not up for life in The Firm, better to know that before the wedding.
He looked a little rough in the pictures, slightly unshaven, but perhaps it was a long evening or an unexpected pap.
Another very good observation from you. "It never occurred to me that a royal wouldn't be dressed appropriately".
You see what is going on, right? Megsy's behavior tests how Monarchy responds when its very basis is challenged. If the response is inadequate public opinion begins shifting towards republic, because what is the point in paying and respecting something that is not different to tinsel town.
The Crown will win. The Monarchy will
protect itself against all odds.
H&M, jokes.
You said you have faith that the Queen will do right by us slowly. I can only say Amen to that and I hope you are right and I am wrong.
So far Harkles pissed on the Crown and got away with a slap on the wrist.
Monarchy that can't protect itself will not stand.’
It’s still standing though isn’t it? Despite Diana and how she behaved in the end, despite the affair between Camilla and Charles. With Andrew and Meghan, things will settle down and move on, even if bruised and bartered. Throughout history, the royals have weathered and overcome far worse. 🤨
They've had their 'half in, half out' proposal slapped down, their HRH and Harry's military honours effectively suspended and their 'Sussex Royal' brand rejected.
That's a wee bit more than a slap on the wrist. It's about as much as the royals could realistically have been expected to do.
"It’s still standing though isn’t it? Despite Diana and how she behaved in the end, despite the affair between Camilla and Charles. With Andrew and Meghan, things will settle down and move on, even if bruised and bartered. Throughout history, the royals have weathered and overcome far worse."
Exactly.
The queen has been on the throne longer than most people have been alive. She knows how to play the long game. And in the long game, the Harkles are irrelevant. Sure, they're all over the tabs now, but give it 5 years - or less - and it'll be 'Meghan who?' Kate and William and their children are the future of the royal family. The Harkles aren't important.
Giving so much attention to the overshadowing of Camilla's event just put more fuel in her narc fire. She can pat herself on the back for pulling attention away from both the Ireland finale and Camilla's speech. Surely, by now, the RF is forewarned and forearmed. The Duchess of disaster is nothing if not entirely predictable.
Amongst all the confusion and gsslighting I noticed something rather heartening in the Canadian media which, to me, denoted a shift in attitude. "Prince Harry and his wife Meghan..." Nice. :)
But I just discovered this article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5598927/The-hunky-chef-Meghan-Markle-nearly-married.html
*Allegedly* she stole her boyfriend's recipe and took credit for It, claimed it to be her own during dinner (presumably right in front of his nose).
According to one well-placed source, it was Vitiello who initiated the break-up because he grew tired of Meghan's increasingly 'prima donna-like' behaviour.
When they went out to dinner or travelled together, says the insider, she would drive her unpretentious boyfriend to distraction by using her name to win better service. Matters are rumoured to have come to a head, somewhat farcically, when she and Cory had friends to dinner, and she passed off the recipe for the much-admired main dish of pasta with courgette spirals – one of her boyfriend's creations – as hers.
[SIDE NOTE: I love how the article uses the term "prima donna" because it tickles me to imagine HRH MADAME MARKLE OF THE SUXSEXXES in a ballet company, it would drive her mad to be a member of the corps. She'd want to at least be a soloist. I'm telling you it's pathological with some people....]
Horrible if true.
If I had a boyfriend who stole my ideas/writings, I'd lose my ish. And dump him!
But I guess that's what's expected of a normal non-narcissistic not-a-psycho person.
I only want to things in life now:
1. A boyfriend who looks/thinks/behaves like Laurence Fox 🦊🦊❤
2. Churros 🇲🇽
Orignally a little Essex village, it was swamped by 20th century development and is now effectively part of London, one of the least salubrious places to live in the SE.
Poor Dagenham, it's suffered enough, although to my English ears it's a more than appropriate title, given her lack of class. As my Scots husband euphemistically says, `Nae Culture',
I do agree that the monarchy, throughout history, has survived huge scandals. However, Meghan will not go away and behave herself in any way. She wants what she laid out in her manifesto (from the monarchy and the British people) and she will get it no matter what she has to do. With or without what she wants she will do harm in small and big ways. Personally, I think the best they can do is make her another Fergie (mostly achieved but now need to remove all funding and the RPOs).
1. The Diana/Charles scandal was excruciatingly embarrassing and immensely personal. The damage to Charles was huge. However, what people forget is that Charles and Diane were on civil terms with each other when she died and came together for their sons' school events in a way that was civil and actually showed them united as parents. Things had settled down. Diana was not an ongoing problem to the monarchy, and Charles' family had a much closer relationship with Diana than they have with Meghan (whom they hardly know at all). Diana was also not ambitious like Meghan and did not grab at every chance to sprout word salad in a speech or interview.
2. Sarah (Fergie) is a non-royal. She does not pretend to represent the monarchy in any way (everyone knows her story so no one thinks that 'Duchess bed linen' is in any way royal) and doesn't actually have any dirt to share (besides, unlike Meghan, she would try not to hurt her ex-husband/present live-in partner and daughters). She gets a lot of press but she never overshadows nor competes with the monarchy.
3. Andrew is an ongoing problem. I doubt that anyone can prove he did anything illegal at all. For him to claim that he saw nothing and suspected nothing is absurd, and his cover-up stories are more so. However, since no one can prove that he knew that any of those girls that were always around Epstein were under-age and engaging in sexual activities with Epstein he cannot be proved guilty of anything unless there is a very biased jury. Andrew is not going to risk that, and what are they going to charge him of to get him into court? (Of course, supposedly Epstein had cameras all over. Where are the tapes and who made them disappear?) To me, the big elephant in the room is powerful people in the USA who are being shielded and not being hounded for questioning. Perhaps Andrew is being targeted as a distraction as he is deemed as untouchable as the Queen's son? When the Queen and Prince Phillip die, the funerals and mourning and retrospectives will be HUGE and everyone is going to forget about Andrew.
Thank Goodness for this blog. I ventured over to another blog and was blindsided by how much support MM has gained and their gushing comments on how fab she looked. Pre return to the UK it was split between supporters/unsupported but now it's 80%+. The main reason - racist Brits and media were stated as why MM had to leave the UK.
Nutty and others mentioned that this is the last chance for them to position themselves to investors and backers that may finance them. They may get a few. The victim narrative MM has spun is working.
Piers Morgan, horrible old toad, has even been charmed by MM's return.
So, she will be front and centre at every event. The media will be fawning, slightly shady at times but there won't be any real truth drops - just vague hints.
I hope one day some of what the media is hiding will be revealed. It just does not seem right what she has accused the people of the UK of and it just doesn't seem right. Harry brought the Trojan Horse to the UK . ( apologies for any typos am struggling on the phone ).
As for the RF, I feel that support for them is falling fast. TQ needs to act, and soon. She cannot give in to their demands for RPOs because it would set a precedent in that other members of the RF could then reasonably expect the same. After all, I doubt anyone actually WANTS a Royal life & most would much prefer their privacy and freedom, so what would stop them ALL from quitting and leaving the UK taxpayer to fund an invisible RF who chooses to no longer represent us, but instead enjoying a very cushy tax-payer funded lifestyle?
Only TQ can sort this out. She has enormous respect from the people, even people who aren’t Royalists, but she needs to act now and strip them of everything. Charles seems to be neither popular, decisive or capable; Will & Kate have achieved their highest popularity ever, but only because of the H&M shitshow. I strongly suspect that if TQ doesn’t get this sorted, the Monarchy will be shelved when she passes. The Monarchy exists to represent and protect the people, and after many years of austerity measures, it cannot be seen to squander tax-payers’ hard-earned money and pander to two greedy grasping upstarts who don’t appear to possess any obvious talent, skill or quality between them. The cost of RPO protection is irrelevant, it wouldn’t make any difference if it was £20 per year, this is an argument based on principle – if you want out, off you go, we have done nothing to even try to stop you. But independence comes at a cost, and these two morons sure as hell shouldn’t cost the UK taxpayer a single penny ever again.
@Fairy Crocodile Personally, I think they will get what they deserve – in fact I think they’re most of the way there already, they just haven’t realised it yet.
@jenx the relentless overshadowing - yes, they’ll continue to do it as much as they can get away with, but are too foolish to see the bigger picture here which is basically that people are clicking articles to see the freak show that they bring to town, not because of any genuine interest in or repsect for them. Once they’re done, the RF will quietly plod on doing what it does, and interest in it will revert to pre-Markle days, much to the immense relief of the entire nation.
What would be a lovely turn-about-is-fair-play surprise would be for Camilla and Catherine to spontaneously show up to that Forces For Change event hosted by British Vogue that Meghan thinks is all hers and for which she is sure to preen.
The press would go bananas and how Meghan would seethe with the indignity of being deliberately upstaged for a change.
Oh, man. I like how you think! That would be lovely to watch video. Slow motion if possible. You can see so much more microsignals that way. The other way to catch microsignals is to watch something without the sound (it distracts the mind).
As a side note about the posters stirring things up. I have noticed that if we commenters slide into writing more negative unpleasant terms about the current situation (meaning using things like skank instead of trashy), then it seems we see an uptick in someone stirring our pots.
I suppose it's like out in the real world, where litter attracts more litter.
1. Was there anything in the two photographs that Meghan gave to be published that was not about 100% promoting Meghan?
2. The visit was published in the media on Thursday. The exhibition closed on the weekend.
Are the people at the National Theatre blind in their adoration or are they afraid to offend the Queen (after all, she handed the ROYAL patronage over to Meghan after holding it for many years)?
If the people at the National Theatre want a high-profile patron who will actually boost funding, choose Edward or one of the York girls if it must be a royal (they will actually turn up for opening nights and sweet talk donations out of some of their wealthy friends), or choose a high-profile person like Stephen Fry or the countless others in the British entertainment industry.
Wild Boar,
Starbucks to you for your encapsulation of the Wales marriage. Diana was only four years my senior, and 16-year-old me collected two thick scrapbooks of all the newspaper and magazine coverage of the engagement and wedding. They may still be in my mother's garage. She and I were up at 4AM on that beautiful morning in July to see the wedding.
It's ironic to look back now and see the nervous 32-year-old groom walking that long aisle at St. Paul's looking like he was on the way to his own execution. He'd been derided as an old fogey, possibly a lech too for choosing a teenager who turned 20 only weeks before the wedding. She was far too young, and even 16-year-old me wondered what they would possibly find in common. Turns out not much. Now that I am 20 years older than Charles was at the time, I have more compassion for him. He was younger than Harry was at his wedding--the prematurely aging 35 year old who's still hailed as 'the young royal'. Just goes to differing expectations vis. the oldest vs. the youngest, as has been mentioned. Charles has some impediments in his character, but he has done the best he can within them, and like his mother, always does his duty. That marriage was a case in point.
When it became obvious that Diana had issues of severe incompatibility that went beyond not understanding Laurens van der Post, I realized that Charles really was dealing with a mess. Despite everything that transpired, and how profoundly ill-suited the Waleses were as spouses, the marriage did bring forth William--would we wish him not to have been born? Harry also had my affection. Emphasis on 'had', but that's his own fault. I think Diana would have likely been unhappy and destructive (and unfaithful) in any marriage of hers; it's just that the problems in that marriage were being played out on the world stage for all to see. I was non-plussed very much by that comment of Di's about it being OK to be naughty so long as you didn't get caught. That is not the kind of moral and ethical behavior a good parent wishes to instill in her children. Diana gets praised for being the good parent. Was she a fun Mum? Yes. But there's an awful lot of evidence that she treated her children more like friends/peers than a parent, and used the classic triangulation method we are seeing played out now by Meg to turn their boys against their father.
Still, the way Harry has turned out is not her failure alone. She left him before he was 13 years old. In the 22-year interim, others have not done much to rectify his character. And now that he's a 35-year-old married man and ostensible father himself, he must take accountability for his own choices.
Meghan is manic -looking in the pictures from the Endeavor event. Looking at Harry inside the event - "bored" comes to mind.
I am wondering just what Harry and the Queen said to each other at the 4-hour lunch. Harry, IMHO, does not look as if he is enjoying himself. MM and her "daily dole" of pap pix really bit the hand that feeds them with encroaching on Camilla's big event. Charles must be livid, but what does the Queen say?
So i look forward to the next event, and seeing if Meghan's makeup cracks from all the smiling. And if Charles has William's scarf.....
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/03/06/prince-william-became-captain-sensible-royal-can-rely/
How Prince William became ‘Captain Sensible’ – the Royal we can rely on
As the Queen recovers from an annus horribilis, the weight of expectation rests heavily on the Duke’s shoulders
By Camilla Tominey,
ASSOCIATE EDITOR 6 March 2020 • 6:08pm
PART 1
It was the moment Prince William embodied his grandmother’s mantra of keeping calm and carrying on in the face of a crisis.
Reacting to the global panic about coronavirus, the Duke of Cambridge raised eyebrows by daring to suggest that the media coverage of a pandemic that has so far killed more than 3,000 people worldwide might have been “a little hyped up”.
Speaking during a tour of Ireland with Kate, the father of three spoke about the outbreak as he chatted to emergency workers at a reception in Dublin.
“Does it seem quite dramatic about coronavirus at the moment?” he asked paramedic Joe Mooney. “I bet everyone’s like ‘I’ve got coronavirus, I’m dying,’ and you’re like, ‘No, you’ve just got a cough’.”
While it is unclear how the paramedic responded, many watching were able to relate. With coronavirus having dominated front pages and the news schedules all week, William – like the professors and other public health experts calling for a sense of perspective – appeared the royal voice of reason.
The Duke, 37, had earlier commented during a reception at the Guinness Storehouse that the royal couple were taking advice on the coronavirus threat but planned to continue meeting people as usual.
He joked: “By the way, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are spreading coronavirus, sorry. We’re keeping an eye on that, so do tell us if we need to stop.”
A source close to the couple later explained: “He was making the point that they’d taken it seriously, while at the same time trying to calm people.”
The comments came after the Queen, who turns 94 next month, was spotted wearing gloves for the first time during an investiture on Tuesday, and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, joked that she was “self-isolating” during a visit to the Transport Museum on Wednesday, when she was photographed taking cover in a one-man air raid shelter.
The light-hearted remarks were in stark contrast to pictures of commuters wearing gas masks on the Tube, with one particularly paranoid woman even putting a Tupperware box over her head.
In speaking out amid the increasing hysteria over Covid-19, which has seen supermarket shelves stripped bare as people panic buy against expert advice, William is fast emerging as the House of Windsor’s resident ‘Captain Sensible’.
Naturally, the moniker could be used as a criticism of a couple who appear “safer” and perhaps less “Hollywood” than Harry and Meghan, whose touchy-feely appearance at Thursday night’s Endeavour Awards reminded the world that they remain a force to be reckoned with – even as they prepare to lose their royal status at the end of the month.
Yet as royal author, Phil Dampier put it: “The point about the Cambridges is that yes, they are safe – but that’s arguably exactly what the monarchy needs right now. That, and a sense of humour.
“The royals have to shake more people’s hands than anyone else so if they can do it with a smile on their faces, we all should.”
Moreover, following a second annus horribilis for the Queen, which saw her dragged into a constitutional crisis over Brexit, the Duke of York emboiled in a sex scandal and Harry and Meghan leave the Firm, William appears intent on spinning a positive message.
In December, he launched the Earthshot Prize, his biggest charitable endeavour to date, in a bid to galvanise a decade of action to repair the planet. Described as “the most prestigious environmental prize in history”, the initiative, backed by Sir David Attenborough, aims to encourage and inspire people across the world to find innovative new solutions to one of the gravest problems facing the Earth.
A multi-million pound prize will be awarded to five winners a year over 10 years, comprising at least 50 solutions to the world’s greatest problems by 2030.
According to a source close to the Duke: “It’s about creating a positive environment for change and saying: ‘We can do this,’ rather than feeling like it’s all too much of a daunting challenge.
“The Duke has no interest in telling people how to live their lives. He knows people need to fly and drive cars – he has to do the same and he is realistic. What he is trying to do is come up with solutions to the challenges we face.
“The Earthshot Prize is the biggest thing he has ever undertaken and it is already building a global coalition around the issue.”
Now back on speaking terms following a family summit in Sandringham in January, when senior royals thrashed out the details of the Sussexes’ “royal divorce” deal, all eyes will be on the body language between the quartet formally known as the ‘Fab Four’, for what will be Harry and Meghan’s last official royal engagement.
With the Sussexes embarking on a new life outside the Royal family in North America, the onus has fallen even more heavily on William and Kate to step up to the plate and take the monarchy forward without two of its star players.
As they prepare to become the next Prince and Princess of Wales – the next step to becoming King and Queen – and with Prince Charles and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall already in their seventies, the weight of expectation rests heavily on their shoulders. Prince George, six, Princess Charlotte, four and Prince Louis, one, will not be in proper royal circulation for another 20 years, meaning the spotlight on William and Kate will only intensify.
Royal watchers noted how “statesmanlike” William appeared in Ireland last week, insisting that the monarchy was “determined” to play a part in protecting the bond between the UK and Ireland, post-Brexit.
“Legal treaties are vital in underpinning the relationships between states. But relationships between people are equally, if not more essential, especially between the people of our two countries, whose lives, histories and futures are so deeply intertwined,” the Duke said.
He also notably repeatedly referenced the Queen throughout the three-day trip. The pair share the same introverted nature and HM continues to be his greatest influence as he carves his own path as second-in-line to the throne.
So what kind of king will William be?
One former royal aide described him as a “great leader” and “more compassionate than he’s given credit for.”
The source added: “He doesn’t wear his heart on his sleeve like Harry, but there is an innate compassion there, as there was with Princess Diana.
“Of course he is not perfect, and like all people in his position, there were times when he could be difficult. But he would always think decisions through. He would be very mindful of the institution and his role in it. He knew when to step forward but also when to step back.
“What struck me about him was whenever facing any decision, he would ask: ‘What is the right thing to do?’”
With so much having gone wrong for the House of Windsor in recent months, William appears to be leading the charge to put things right.
Some reporter is going to be chosen to get the big Archie reveal story. Is Camilla Tominey putting in a bid?
Nutty, it never seems to be one post and then all breaks loose. It's more like (in a stream) a leaf gets stuck around a branch and then other stuff builds up behind it and then it breaks.
What is nice is that people are commenting on trying to keep things on a more friendly tone in real time. This is a friendly blog, more like family having squabbles instead of people trying to outdo the last person in how snarky they can be. There is a blog for that, just not in in yours. (thanks for that by the way).
On a different note, does anyone have access to where and when the court case might be in the grand plan within the legal system?
Maybe the first day of public visits the press coverage was favorable for H&M, however it quickly turned negative after M sent photos of the theatre visit to the press thus upstaging Camilla's DV speech. Strange behavior for a so-called feminist stealing attention for DV awareness.
Here is a quote from a poster on the Mirror regarding M's behavior:
You know what they say in Hollywood even bad publicity is better than none, and she thinks like many loud Americans with her new TEETH.
As an American this made me laugh.
I also appreciate posters with differing views such as Tatty and Pi, neither of which are fans of M. This seems to be what Nutty wants and it also makes the blog more appealing to others who may be on the fence about M&H.
Personally I like Kate because she is not in the press 24/7 but accept she is far from perfect.
The one I can't understand is M unless she is auditioning for the role of a villain in either a superhero movie or revival of Dynasty where she plays the role Joan Collins made iconic. Can you image the Joan Collins comments?!
Piers Morgan is a savvy media personality who is willing to let bygones be bygones in order to have access to people interview, unlike Meghan who insists on burning bridges.
Just my opinion based on what I've gleamed from various media accounts.
https://airmail.news/issues/2020-3-7/disroyal-subjects?utm_source=share
@Sandie, with your post @1:04. Great insight into Charles and Camilla's attraction to each other and their individual situations in life. I hadn't considered much of what you said before, and I appreciate a new perspective after decades of extensive study on the topic.
@Fairy Crocodile, with your comment @1:46: Re: the system works so long as everyone plays by the Queen's rules. Diana, Andrew, and now the Harkles pushed against those rules (or simply don't respect/acknowledge them). I agree that a gentle slap on the wrist is NOT what is needed. Correction should have been swift, firm, and repeated as necessary. Smirks doesn't respect the rules, so categorically clear correction is needed.
@CookieShark @2:36: When I first heard Smirks laughing about lying her way into an acting gig and not being a member of the union, I was also extremely put off. Maybe that's a game that has to be played in Hollywood, much as it needs to be played in the regular working world (can't get a particular job unless you already have experience in the area, but how do you get that first experience?) but if so, you'd think she'd avoid bragging about it or taking such glee in having to cheat the system to find work. Hollywood is highly unionized. I found it very odd that she'd so blatantly and happily admit to cheating about union membership.
@Hikari @4:42: Agree completely! Harry lost his mum at an early age, but he's lived more than half his life since then, surrounded by people (sycophants? enablers?) who haven't seemed able to help him anchor himself and behave as expected. At a certain point, certainly by adulthood!, an individual HAS to take responsibility and say "parts of my childhood were traumatic and difficult, but I can now man up".
Harry may have done this for the few years pre-Smirkle when he was the face of Invictus, etc, but soul-sucker and emotionally damaged Smirks has supported every victim storyline for Harry she can muster to support their team approach to selfishness.
She has isolated herself from her blood family. She has encouraged Harry to isolate himself from his blood family. And together they are isolating little Archie from his. Cruel, cruel, cruel, and totally unforgivable in my book.
@Fairy,
>>>Lets ask ourselves if Megsy's behavior damaged the monarchy. In my opinion yes, it did.
Now lets look at who leads the crown. It is a 93 years old woman who firmly understood that to do her job well means not to interfere with anything, not to express opinions and not to impose. It works as long as everybody around her plays by the rules. As one relative put it, "everybody defers to the Queen".
Now lets look what happens if somebody doesn't play by the rules. Diana, for instance. Queen chose not to interfere with Camilla+Chaz, after Morton's book, after Diana's sulky behavior during official tours, Squidgygate, tampongate, press manipulation. She let the UK's public opinion to get polarized to the extreme. It took a long time for the Monarchy to recover after that. And Diana didn't have a dirty past.
Did the Queen learn from that? I don't see that. Now we have Meghan and Harry and we observe exactly the same pattern. Things are not corrected until they have gone too far. Protocol violations, inappropriate dress, mistreatment of stuff, use of official tour to send the personal message, attempts of media manipulation, spending spree were all alarm bells and nothing had been done.
Same with Andrew. His behavior has been obvious for a long time and Queen didn't interfere until it all blew up in her face. Same pattern.
I am sorry to say this but if organization can't act decisively it has a big problem. So far I can see the Queen's half measures not working very well exactly because Meghan doesn't respect anybody and doesn't play by the rules.
Monarchy that can't protect itself will not stand.<<<
**************
Wild Boar said:
>>>HM is known to take Christian teaching very seriously so Harry may be seen as the Prodigal Grandson who, having wasted his substance with riotous living in a far country, finally crawls home from the pigs, starving but for eating pigswill.
The Prodigal Son parable is powerful . . it illustrates how we are to treat people who disappoint us--forgiveness, regardless of grievous slights--because that is how God treats us. Elizabeth is a Christian lady and a loving grandmother. If she wishes to forgive Harry and do what she can to maintain a relationship with him, in the hopes that he will resume his place in the family, I'd say she is choosing the loving course which God has instructed. However, that forgiveness and desire for reconciliation is a *private* matter. It does not carry with it an obligation to reward the callous, poorly-behaving and disrespectful wastrel with very public shows of favoritism at great expense. Particularly when there is no evidence of repentance and self-abasement as was shown by the wrongdoer in the parable. Harry has shown no contriteness of spirit where he's willing to come back to live quietly in all humility and take the most dull and menial of engagements in support of Her Majesty.
Elizabeth may do all she likes to show love and forgiveness to Harry as his grandmother, but as his Queen, she has to exact the penalties he has earned for such poor performance and frankly, openly traitorous disloyalty. He'll always be her grandson, but the HRH, all the titles, the security, the allowance, et al, need to be taken away out of respect for her people. She needs to look dispassionately at the Harkles as two employees who were openly embezzling and fomenting a coup in leadership. Because that's what they were/are doing. Confronted by this, would a business owner who wished to stay in business tell the embezzlers, 'Oh, you two . . stop it. But you can keep working here, with your unlimited expense account, company cars and a free mansion."
This Queen has a history of delaying dealing with unpleasant realities, hoping they will pass with no effort required from her if she ignores them long enough. Before Diana, before the events of August, 1997; before Epstein & Andrew . . there was Aberfan. I have only recently learned about this seminal British tragedy that occurred in 1966. The Queen initially refused to visit the site, sending Philip in her place, and only finally going more than a week after the tragedy, despite daily entreaties from her advisers. Taking the most charitable view I can think of, I suppose she was terrified at potentially having to view the bodies of dead children. But she let her personal dreads interfere with her responsibility as monarch to comfort the grieving mothers of those dead children by her show of care. HM has called her response to Aberfan the greatest regret of her reign--but whenever there has been another crisis requiring her swift attention/action, she has taken refuge in the exact same inaction. It's like she cannot overcome those well-worn mental grooves.
Despite her love for Harry, HM has to see how his behavior, in concert with his wife, has undermined all the goodwill she has painstakingly built over 70+ years of service to the Crown. Thanks to Harry, this grandson whom she loves, she is in danger of being remembered as the dedicated monarch who became undone in the end by overindulging the most spoilt and disloyal members of her clan. Inviting the Harkles back for this final 'FU Britain' tour has been another in a long line of mistakes. Back in January at the Mexgit summit, HM should have stripped the titles then and said that Harry's presence at any further public events would not be required. He was always welcome to come privately for a visit, but not at any high profile events where he and his wife would overshadow the legitimate working royals. Because we see that's exactly what's happening.
@JocelynsBellinis
Neither Kate not Camilla can trip Megsy.
Why?
Because she has to walk BEHIND them both!!!! Bwahahaha!
@teacup
I would love to see them crash her party!!!
Especially after crashing the investiture ceremony.
Whatever they are up to it won't work long-term. They have zero strategic thinking. I suspect they have been reading all the negative press and came determined to make the mean old Brits "sorry". They both believe the narrative that they have been forced out.
I hate that the press is giving them one scintilla of positive attention. Of course, there are several great opportunities for them to screw up royally. I would think they might go to the Commonwealth services high. They will be very nervous about facing The family.
Was there any mention of Harry visiting Phillip during the "four-hour tea" with Grandma?
`He still has his brother' - Really? Where's the evidence?
Are the people at the National Theatre blind in their adoration or are they afraid to offend the Queen
I doubt it has anything to do with “respect” for the Queen, or any form respect for that matter.
Luvvies are not people of principle. Most of them aren’t, a small minority are.
They just want to appear “WOKE”.
Woke is the current currency to remain on the good side of those who can give the luvvies what those people crave: ATTENTION.
That’s why Ricky Gervais’ joke about “if ISIS had a streaming service, you’d call your agent, wouldn’t you?” was so spot on & HILARIOUS.
Because I don’t believe for one second that most London Luvvies believe in half of the things they say. They’re just PARROTING.
Wack, wack!!!!!!
If the “acceptable” behaviour in arts was suddenly to, say, become an anti-Semite, they would do it. They just JUMP when casting director/producer/whoever says “jump”.
Notice how once you declare yourself “Woke”, that any racist action you take is suddenly “for the greater good” even when it’s outright racist anyway. We see absurdities in TV shows done in the name of “diversity”, but in the end of the day it’s racist. And who does that benefit?
You have products of mixed marriages like Thandie Newton (born 1972) and Boris' ex (born 1964) which would tell me the the English were chill about inter-racial marriages for a VERY LONG TIME. Yet BBC one comes up with a show like they're in apartheid SA or segregation America or something.
Who benefits from spreading this idea that there’s intolerance everywhere in the UK, that it’s this scary racist place? Are they trying to scare me off From having crushes on on Englishmen? Who benefits from that, white supremacists? It’s not helping PoC like me...
But anything for more screentime, spotlight, adoration.
I switching to K-drama these days.
Selling your body for roles on a casting couch seems tame compared to feigning concern for socio-political issues just to stay popular, in my books.
I won't ever be flying over to the UK to see anything NT anyway. Who cares about supporting a bunch of out-of-touch disingenuous luvvies, Anyway? Let them live in their imaginary oppressive world of misery.
>>>Piers Morgan, horrible old toad, has even been charmed by MM's return.<<
I saw the headline in the DM but didn't read all of Piers' comments. Are we absolutely sure Piers was *really* charmed by her return, or was it more like an elaborate shade-throwing? With Piers it's sometimes hard to tell when he's being serious vs. snarky.
Frankly, given his level of animosity toward her, I wouldn't expect her turning up looking decent in a blue dress with her hair combed for once would be enough to 'charm' Piers. Not nearly enough. He may be appearing to stage flowery compliments before sticking his knife in again.
I've often wondered why Piers is so very hostile towards MM. It smacks very much of wounded masculine pride, as in, he experienced the Markle love-bombing when she was cultivating him as a useful contact. Perhaps sexual promises were made (and/or acted upon) during that 'friendly drink at Piers' local', only for him to discover that he'd been led down a rosy path and ghosted the next day. Yes, I know that Piers is married--to a fellow journalist who's more attractive than he deserves, and no dummy. All the more reason for him to feel used, betrayed and stupid for having fallen for Meg's con, whether or not he actually consummated any hanky-panky with her. We can be assured that she'd have done everything in her limited arsenal to make him think he had a chance with her, or at least have some dirty thoughts about her. His rage now is the humiliation of a guy who's another one of her dupes, and he's mad about it. Being duped goes not only to his personal ego, but also his professional pride as a journalist.
Let's hope Piers' 'charmed' is all part of a game he's playing. I do so enjoy him when he's eviscerating Markle.
I recall that Diana, as part of slagging off Charles, cast doubt as to his suitability as king. Her view was that the Crown should pass directly to William, once HM departs this life.
Now, that might seem an attractive idea to us at the moment but, Ye Gods, what effect must that statement had on Harry?
What a way to blow their relationship sky-high.
@ Sandie-
`He still has his brother' - Really? Where's the evidence?
I am assuming you are referring to an article I posted? IOW I did not say that!
Personally I think William and Harry are on such different paths and have become such different people that they are going to lead different lives from here.
“The Duke has no interest in telling people how to live their lives. He knows people need to fly and drive cars – he has to do the same and he is realistic. What he is trying to do is come up with solutions to the challenges we face.
OOOOOOHHHHHHH BURNNNNNNN 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
One DM comment, re the school visit. suggested that she be dubbed `Duchess of Dagenham'
I was reminded of my teenage Australian soap-watching days, and remembered that "dag" was a derogatory term used in the soaps. I've just Googled to refresh my memory and found the following, which is rather apt whichever definition is chosen:
Seems to have two different meanings. In SE Qld it strictly means someone whose clothing or hairstyle is bad or unfashionable. In Melbourne it doesn't seem to refer to fashion or appearance, but seems to mean someone whose behavior is weird or uncool or goofy
https://www.macquariedictionary.com.au/resources/aus/word/map/search/word/dag/Darwin%20and%20North%20Coast/
(quite an interesting discussion on the link with more definitions offered, I just used the main info at the top to save on blog space)
^ Apologies to native Australians if I've found a bad source of info, please feel free to correct me if this is wrong :O)
@KCM,
Neither Kate not Camilla can trip Megsy.
Why?
Because she has to walk BEHIND them both!!!! Bwahahaha!
That's true, but I'm willing to bet they have a sneaky foot ready just in case she thinks she can try her "me first" act on them as successfully as she does with Harry lol
They do remind me of folk who get to stay at home and continue using the company credit card, company car, company housing, company email account, and company security after resigning instead of turning up at the office and working 100% until the very last day of their time, and then handing everything back before leaving the office for the last time. Most decent people would do the latter. I have known people who have hustled their way into getting the former deal for strategic reasons (trade and corporate secrets) but by no stretch of the imagination does this apply to Meghan and Harry.
Unfortunately, already the furore about the money spent on Frogmore has died down and so will the outrage over the taxpayer-funded security.
I think it will be more of their tricks, after all that documentary is coming on Monday night I will not be surprised if she is a surprise interview. She already upstaged Camilla with he photos from her secret visit to NT and was begged and ignored to not release her photos. But it is Meghan now and her narcissism always wins out. As for Harry its just too bad that the Military has more dignity and respect for the uniform than him. They should turn their back on him and his wife who chose a movie premiere over them.
The sad thing they had a place and a good one but it wasn't enough for his wife and she picked the right man who was already unhappy with his life to begin with, sorry I am still waiting for the other shoe to drop. They've shown before how petty they are with the shenanigans since January and before that with the SA tour.
>>>Are the people at the National Theatre blind in their adoration or are they afraid to offend the Queen
Scandi replied:
>>I doubt it has anything to do with “respect” for the Queen, or any form respect for that matter.
Luvvies are not people of principle. Most of them aren’t, a small minority are.
They just want to appear “WOKE”.<<<
Last January, when Her Maj named Meghan patron of the NT, there was a rush by a great many subscribers to cancel their subscriptions, and new ticket sales went flat. This was very interesting to me. Meg had been a Royal for a bit more than half a year and was supposedly the glowing expectant mum. (The NT appearance, in a spring-suitable pale pink dress was the poorest possible choice if convincing people that Bump was genuine. Pictures of that visit depict about 3-4 different sizes and positions of Bump, including from the few steps from the car to the door.) But she was considered box office poison by a significant segment of National Theatre patrons.
A theatre is a temple of creative expression, but it's also a business. A business that is in this case, a national institution. No amount of wishing to appear Woke should ultimately overrule basic business principles. If the National can't retain subscribers and attract new ones, it will not be able to mount plays or pay staff to run classes . .or pay the actors, and it will be shuttered. If that's what Her Majesty truly wants, then by all means, Meg should be allowed to remain a patron. But why would the National want her? She's paid two visits to them in more than a year, despite having been 'an actress', and one would suppose therefore, particularly keen to be active in this patronage. Her second visit was unauthorised by the Queen and Megsie didn't have the decency to inform her patronage about her impending change in circumstances. Without being Royal any more, what use is she to the theatre as a 'private' patron, particularly as she will be residing full time in Los Angeles? To my knowledge Meg hasn't even attended a performance, never mind being an active and useful patron.
If the National wants to keep Meg on in name as a patron than in my opinion they deserve to fail. There are other theatres. This will hurt British actors and the theatre patrons who have been loyal to the National--but there's Meg, once again just doing her bit for Britain!
You are right that the parable of the prodigal son is very powerful one and teaches forgiveness. But you and I and the rest of people here can see what Jesus is teaching by this parable - do not reject somebody who repented and came back ready to change his/her ways.
This is the crucial element which is missing. I don't believe for a second Megsy can see where she is wrong and neither is she ready to make amends. Her ME ME ME behavior with Wills and Kate on a highly sensitive Irish trip and Camilla's very important domestic violence speech shows us deal with the same Megsy who cried Hollywood tears during the Africa mission.
As far as i am concerned she is a divisive controversial player aiming at the highest possible financial gain at the lowest possible personal effort. I sense you agree with this?
I have recently been ghosted (then gaslit) by someone (a business partner) with whom I thought I had a fantastic relationship. I was furiously angry for a month & a half and am still really frigging butthurt about it.
It not only hurts my pride and ego but it makes me question my ability to assess a reliable relationship and see people as they are. I feel stupid and I resent him for making me feel this way. I am embarrassed and insulted.
So if Piers feels any of this, I don't blame him and I understand. I don't think a sexual component is necessary though for context - I did have (rather strong) chemistry with this particular person which absolutely makes me even more furious, so take that as you may.
And runs away (ghosts) which I think is a coward move.
'The American Associates of the National Theatre (AANT) is a New York-based 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, which grants up to $4 million each year to support the work of the National Theatre in the United Kingdom and in the United States.'
Why does Meghan want to remain involved? She was never a theatre person (until she met Harry), so why is she trying to cultivate this image now?
@Joceyln
Agree about Oprah. She's on the downside. She's been tanking for a few years now, and I think it really kicked off when a movie she was in (A Wrinkle In Time or something) mega-bombed at the box office. She's still a star, but nothing like she once was.
@Sandie
Great article, thanks! The Cambridges will bring the monarchy back the glory it deserves, I feel.
@hunter
Hope things can go ok with your own 'ghoster.' I agree on Piers. Nothing will tick off a person more than someone being exalted whom the person KNOWS is a clown. Piers knows what Meg is from personal dealings. I agree with Hikari that Piers feels shame, but on the other hand I think Piers voluntarily brought up that Meg ghosted him. He didn't have to do that. I think he just wants everyone to know what she's really about.
I've said it previously here and will repeat it now. I see the Harkles as kind of on the same level as Alex Rodriguez and Jennifer Lopez, that couple. Except that JLo can sing and dance and the Harkles can't. J-Rod seem like grifters, too, and they also work the woke corporate speaking circuit. They always seem to thirst for attention, as well. So even though they have money and fame, they still radiate a desperate, C-list vibe. And I think that's where the Harkles are headed, at best. Famous people whom no one takes particularly seriously.
@Wild Boar,
One DM comment, re the school visit. suggested that she be dubbed `Duchess of Dagenham
_________________________
My vote, "the Hempress of Colney 'Atch"
;)
This is what the controlling NPD/BPD/ASPD do, but parent-child estrangement has also become a worldwide phenomenon in the younger generation. There are MANY families dealing with this heartbreak, parents kept from their beloved children and grandchildren because of the deceit and manipulation of what an expert in this emerging field calls the “influential adversary”. Families suffering this hurt don’t often talk about it because it’s humiliating, and the estranged child has often made humiliating (false) public accusations about the parents. Families are being destroyed and lives are in tatters. Estrangement from a beloved child, usually at the hand of a controlling other, hurts very deeply. It’s compared to mourning a still loving child. It changes everything. Then, if a baby comes along, the heartbreak deepens even more, as the child becomes another weapon to use against parents who want nothing more than a relationship with their child and grandchild. There are estranged children who go so far as to tell their children that the grandparents are dead. The true stories of what these narcs have done to families is shocking. My family has been walking through it for 3 years and counting.
Families in this crisis find one another as they search for answers and for help. There isn’t much yet written about it, nor are there many victories over it. The numbers are much higher than anyone could imagine, as culture influences young people to cut ties with their “toxic” parents.
This is how I first became interested in the PH/MM story. I had not followed them at all, but when I read about their leaving the family, it was obvious what they had done, and my heart broke for his family. Being played out on the world stage, it’s my hope that the story will lead more people to become aware of narc tactics to prevent someone from getting caught up in it, and maybe help some victims wake up to the bondage they’re in.
Harry’s family’s predicament is obviously different from other families’ situations, as HMTQ also has a responsibility to the monarchy and to her country. Boundaries must be drawn but you must remain the soft place to land when your precious child wants to return. I pray that one day, Harry will be free, be healed, and will use this terrible experience to educate others on this rapidly growing, yet hidden phenomenon.
>>> (Jesus was teaching): do not reject somebody who repented and came back ready to change his/her ways.
This is the crucial element which is missing. I don't believe for a second Megsy can see where she is wrong and neither is she ready to make amends. Her ME ME ME behavior with Wills and Kate on a highly sensitive Irish trip and Camilla's very important domestic violence speech shows us deal with the same Megsy who cried Hollywood tears during the Africa mission.
As far as i am concerned she is a divisive controversial player aiming at the highest possible financial gain at the lowest possible personal effort. I sense you agree with this?<<<
Hell to the yeah, I agree.
The Prodigal Son, as all of Jesus' parables, goes against the natural human grain. We are wired up for looking out for #1 and revenge. Jesus teaches that as God's capacity for forgiveness toward us is infinite, so should we be forgiving toward those who trespass against us. Our own response to other people's actions is all we can control. Though we are called to forgive, it is not ultimately loving to not hold people accountable for their bad behavior and to continue to give them the tools to keep behaving badly and hurting us and themselves.
Let's say that Elizabeth was an ordinary loving grandmother who opened her home and financially supported her otherwise unemployable grandson, and gave him a job and nice things. The grandson repays this generosity and love by taking up with a woman who colludes with him to fleece Gran and steal from her in order to finance their mutual drug habit. He refuses her entreaties to go to rehab and turns a blind eye to the activities of his woman. Grandson falls into addiction and starts staying away for months at a time, consorting with known criminals. When his criminal friends kick him to the curb, he shows up again at Gran's, demanding that she needs to give him his room back, along with use of her credit cards, and car and he's going to need the silverware and the TV as well, and if he wants to toke up and have wild parties in the house she has to let him.
Gran can forgive his past behavior and draw a line under it, but she'd be foolish to let him back in to trash her home and her finances again, not while being shown blatant disrespect and told she can F right off after she gives him the checkbook, because he's going to do as he likes. True love in this case is tough love. He should arrive back to find the locks changed and informed that the police will be called if he doesn't depart peacefully. If he ever genuinely wants to get clean, she will find him a rehab facility, but he will not get one thin dime more from her to contribute to his destroying himself.
I can't help feeling that ER is still giving her druggie slacker grandson the keys to all the candy, and she's going to regret.
I can't even read descriptions of the trailer and I'm furious.
I can only imagine how the average Brit is going to feel after an hour of being called every ugly thing in the book.
I'm sure they will know she is complicit in this thing. Even if not directly, she started the b.s. And she isn't threatening to sue Vice for "misrepresentation". In my opinion she probably wrote the script.
But they will be gone and rancor will remain. Which will renew efforts to strip the titles and the security funding.
I don't think the palace is directing the media to go easy on M&H witness all the tabloids carrying the story of Camilla's anger at being overshadowed by M and her photos.
Based on M's need for attention that was vividly on display this week, expect her to continue to upstage events.
Frankly, I can't see how she benefits from such behavior,it shows her thirstiness and makes her unlikable.
In the interest of balanced view lets say I would not be delighted with the family like Megsy's either. Neither would I be contented with constant scrutiny. I am not a great beauty and close ups of my face would not be a work of art. I would probably need expensive dentistry, some plastic surgery, a great hairdresser and a good dose of confidence to look the way expected from a public icon of glamour. Or a good dose of alcohol to make it all irrelevant.
On the other hand, Anne is not a great beauty but she is doing her job brilliantly and is unmistakably royal. She was born this way. hat off to her.
No, I can understand the pressure of living in a royal fishtank. My problem with Megsy and Harry is two-fold: hypocrisy and complete disregard to traditions, protocol and established way of doing things in exchange for public finds.
But I can sympathize with the stress. That is why I admire Kate so much. Three kids, huge stress, high expectations and still an effortless manners and charming smile plus complete reliability.
@Raspberry : I agree it won't matter what she does at this point, she's given the public the finger one too many times.
@Mischief Girl “ She has isolated herself from her blood family. She has encouraged Harry to isolate himself from his blood family. And together they are isolating little Archie from his. Cruel, cruel, cruel, and totally unforgivable in my book.”
I think that one the MOST is what made me really NOT like her, I laughed to be honest at the money she wasted on couture to look simply ridiculous in anything she wore and her contempt for any sort of protocol rubbed me the wrong way. But it was her systematic alienation of Harry's entire family from Harry and Archie is what truly turned me. What could anyone have done to her to make her behave in this way? Not allow her to wear Family Jewels after only being married a month? Not protect her from the Media something they have not done for any family member and they all get press? The answer is nothing if anything they did bend over backwards give her Patronages she wanted, etc. its simply who she is and what she is I find it noteworthy how Harry has now twice stated that "she is the same woman today as the woman I married over a year ago". Who is that statement truly for? The public OR truly his family who have probably told him more than once THIS IS NOT the Woman PC walked down the aisle. If only he will see it but I think this will go on longer and finally will crash and burn and the true victim will an innocent victim-less child.
https://the-charlatan-duchess.tumblr.com/
it is 100% pro M&K and talks about them jettisoning the elitism, snobbery, etc. i'm just stunned. I've never heard of this publication.
Nutty? what do you know about it?
"It smacks very much of wounded masculine pride, as in, he experienced the Markle love-bombing when she was cultivating him as a useful contact".
Good point. Yes, he was ghosted and would've been quite keen to keep MM as a contact. He had a working relationship I think with Diana and it was mutually beneficial.
I also see Piers Morgan as controlled opposition. He goes on rants about H & M but they never go quite far enough. He is one the main critics and a gate keeper. The Overton Window is never widened, hence why we don't have any real discussions about the "pregnacy" or about Archie.
>>>For the truth is that, in the beginning, the UK welcomed Meghan with open arms and a big heart. I should know. I was there on that frosty morning in Nottingham in the winter of 2017, when she made her debut as a working royal.
I remember that giddy day like it was yesterday, which it almost is, to be fair. I was standing on the High Pavement in the city’s historic Lace Market, among the thousands of cheering fans who were chanting her name.<<<<
It's hard to tell just how shady Jan really intended to be. She keeps on saying "I truly wish them nothing but the best" before lobbing another grenade.
I do not wish them 'the best'. I wish them a big old dose of reality and regrets. For Harry, at any rate. Meg is not capable of either, and so for her I wish a spectacular but quick plunge off the PCH. Lord Geidt could not be blamed for that.
Harry seems beyond redemption, but he deserves the opportunity to prove me wrong. After the inevitable divorce, his way back might be to humbly accept that green estate on the Welsh border which his father wished to gift him, and learn how to run it. I know this is likely a vain hope, but the alternative life for Harry will be ignominious and short. I am prepared to read news of his demise via a drug overdose in the papers any old time. Or he could hang around for the next 30-odd years to be a whinging thorn in the sides of his father and William, in the manner of Uncle David.
What really gets to me is the numbers of media outlets and regular citizens who are still buying their con. They aren't even *good at it* . . it's hopeless amateur hour from the both of them, incessantly. It's like we are all trapped in a virtual reality game of Meg's in which she is the gamemaster. Her version of reality bears no resemblance to the world I live in and yet people are still fawning over her? This 'return FU Britain tour' is a gargantuan embarrassment . . why is it being hailed as a successful return of the sexy young royals by anyone?
George Orwell (RIP) would recognize what's going on here. Turns out he was predicting the future, not just writing a work of dystopian fiction.
You can't run around insulting people whom you take money from, pissing and pooping on everybody in sight, and then cry that you're being bullied. It's too little too late.
What kind of person exactly, changes their mind about somebody's character, just because they wore a nice dress and took a great picture? A simpleton, a moron, an imbecile, that's who.
She can wear a million amazing dresses, and take a million amazing pictures, I still don't like her. Neither do I like her lapdog, half wit Just Harry.
Wow! The Sussexes are happy to take the money, use BP offices, Frogmore Cottage, RPOs and who knows what other goodies but are operating as free agents and refusing to co-operate with the monarchy in any way.
The rude entitlement of the Sussexes is not surprising from Meghan but Harry is doing this to his family!
@Jdubya: Private Eye is a satirical British publication. From Wikipedia: 'The publication is widely recognised for its prominent criticism and lampooning of public figures. It is also known for its in-depth investigative journalism into under-reported scandals and cover-ups.'
Their article on SUSSEXRYAL.COM is hilarious (they are making fun of them):
https://the-charlatan-duchess.tumblr.com/post/611947757543030784#notes
https://the-charlatan-duchess.tumblr.com/post/611947714489516032#notes
Smeg wearing VBeckham dress... an olive branch regarding drama caused by Smeg. She needs friends with connections, VB has many.
It's all about the image. Don't be fooled for a minute.
@Hikari, I see Cancers as fiercely protective more than anything else.
Thus William (Sun and Moon) and Kate (Moon) are doing their utmost to protect HM and The Crown now. Cancer has more empathy than all the other signs put together so William and Kate are really ideal for their roles in service to the British people.
But behind the scenes I am certain it is Charles the politically astute Scorpio who is dealing with the Harkles. Remember way back how he quietly removed their names from his Web site? Think he more than The Queen is running the Megzit show with the also protective Cancer Lord Geidt.
In ancient astrology the sign Scorpio had two symbols: the Scorpio and the Eagle. The unevolved Scorpio is capable of exhibiting that punishing Scorpio tail, the nasty retort, the retaliatory acts, the lashing out. Also capable of lifelong evolution and great positive transformation as well as a Phoenix-like rising from the ashes, some Scorpios become the spiritually evolved eagle who does not use that tail. Think this is Charles now. But that doesn’t mean Charles doesn’t still have that tail at his disposal. LOL
@ScandiSanskrit you are the Eagle.
That is it. That is the core of what is wrong with the world. $ 20 million tour to preach about how everybody should live their lives, be kind, be environmentally friendly, be considerate of others etc. And not a penny of this money will be spent to support what they are preaching about.
How many African wildlife sanctuaries can continue for years with a donation of 20 million? How many trees can be planted? How many old people can get support or remote hospitals equipment?
That is the bull's eye of why I dislike Harry and his wife so much.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8086047/Kate-Middleton-seen-Kensington-time-returning-royal-tour-Ireland.html
My vote, "the Hempress of Colney 'Atch" ;)
That made me really chuckle - though probably not for the reason you intended!!
Information only, Camilla Duchess of Cornwall is also a Cancer. Together with PC who is far more like his father than most people realise (PC has better self control) I imagine it could be a very lethal and deadly combination figuratively speaking. Literal would be more efficient in the long term.
However, allowing them to come back for this final round of 'duties' was a mistake. I understand that they had to allow some time to lapse before they became officially ex-royal, but once the 'half in half out' nonsense was rejected back in January, that should really have been it. Perhaps, like many of us - incl myself - they thought that Meghan would never show her face in public in Britain again and therefore considered it worth the risk in order to appear generous and magnanimous?
eg en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Albion_Parish_News
Tony Blair as an earnest vicar, trying to be trendy in Cool Britannia.
Then there was Theresa May as a Head Girl.
The Eye has long referred to HM as `Brenda', probably because someone thought it suited her.
He's getting at MM by parodying her own style.
For a hatchet job on Luvvies, do get hold of `Patronising B*stards* by Quentin Letts - hilarious especially when discussing Emma Thompson and the like.
Lt. Nyota Uhura & Lurking With Spoon: Hempress of Colney'Atch - I love it!
In Hertfordshire we used to joke "She went to 'Itchin (Hitchin) and came back scratchin'" but Colney Hatch (once a little hamlet) is better still because it was synonymous with an enormous mental hospital in North London:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friern_Hospital
Colney Hatch Lane was the bus stop on the North Circular where we used to get off when going to see my aunt who lived nearby!
In Hertfordshire we used to joke "She went to 'Itchin (Hitchin) and came back scratchin'" but Colney Hatch (once a little hamlet) is better still because it was synonymous with an enormous mental hospital in North London:
Now you know why I was chuckling!! ;-)
The hospital was always referred to as Colney Hatch by the locals.
>>>But behind the scenes I am certain it is Charles the politically astute Scorpio who is dealing with the Harkles. Remember way back how he quietly removed their names from his Web site? Think he more than The Queen is running the Megzit show with the also protective Cancer Lord Geidt.<<<
I would certainly desire Charles to demonstrate himself as 'politically astute', and prove categorically that he is not merely the self-pitying ditherer that his critics (who are legion) accuse him of being. In the years since Diana, I have done my best to try and see him in a more balanced way and recognize his strengths, because one day soon, he shall be King. Unless he dies before Mummy, which is not a scenario I want to entertain.
Charles has become a more visibly relaxed person since his youth, owing to maturity and probably most of all enjoying happiness in his marriage, having found a partner in Camilla who pulls the company cart without overshadowing him, unlike the high strung filly he used to be married to. He seems to relish his public role more than he did as a young man . .the speaking, the appearances . . and like his ancestor 'Farmer George' III really loves gardening and agriculture. He seems to get on very well with people that come to see him, and has a jolly mien on engagements which the younger royals would find a trial. As Patron of the Wool Board, he recently toured a textile factory and looked to be having a grand time. I think when things are going his way, he can be very genial and is said to entertain friends with a quick wit.
He came up with 'Tungsten', after all.
It's when things don't go precisely his way that we see the nasty Scorpion tail deliver its sting. Unless they have made up recently, Chas and Lord Geidt are not on collegial terms, seeing as it was Charles that got LG canned as his mother's private secretary--a post where LG had real daily influence over the Queen and Palace doings. The Prince of Wales did not take kindly to his mother's equerry calling a meeting at BP without informing his aides of it, even though the Prince of Wales was presumably not expected to attend; otherwise it's hard to imagine LG not informing Clarence House of a meeting where Charles was needed.
It's this kind of petty grudge-holding that has earned Charles his unfavorable reputation.
Lord Geidt was appointed by HM as her 'Permanent Lord in Waiting' before she shuttled him off to the Commonwealth Trust to keep an eye on Meghan. But that smells like a largely ceremonial appointment without the real power he wielded as her private secretary.
Why Elizabeth allowed her son to dictate who and who could not be her private secretary is beyond me. Just another example of Elizabeth's pathological avoidance of any kind of confrontation, particularly where her family is concerned. She seems to have no problem telling off her Prime Ministers, but she will never say 'No' to her own children, even at great personal and political cost.
I do not have children of my own, but if a mother isn't going to tell her own kid 'No', who will? Charles needed boxing on his prominent ears and sent to the naughty corner for his impudence, I don't care that he was nearly 70 years old at the time. If Lord G. were directing the BP staff and advising the Queen now, she might not be in quite so deep a mess.
Interesting that LG and William are both Cancers. Lord G. is still young for a courtier (born 1961). Let us hope that Lord G. is covertly advising the King-to-Be. Not too early for William to be assembling the staff to guide him when he becomes King. I don't see Charles having more than 10 years left in him, really.
Strange.
Thames Valley police is the constabulary responsible for general policing in the counties of Berkshire (includes Windsor), Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire ie along the course of the Thames/part of the M4 corridor.
RPOs are part of the Metropolitan Police which covers Greater London (apart from the City, which has its own police force).
Dealing with subversives is the role of Special Branch here; Canada has an equivalent section I gather.
I haven't got a LinkedIn profile so can't give you any feedback on that.
I agree and this reminds me of a revisionist book about the Brontës written by Juliet Barker. For pretty much a century Emily Brontë got the credit for being more savvy and practical than her sisters, the example always given being the long-term performance of railway shares left to the sisters by their aunt, which Emily took over responsibility for managing. Now Victorian railway companies would come and go and it was basically a jungle out there. However, all Emily did was leave the shares where they were in the first place. She did nothing at all with them and was lucky enough to continue to receive modest dividends. This was not the result of astute judgement either. Just chance. But reverent biographers gave her the credit.
Similarly, I sometimes feel the Queen receives more credit than merited, as her default mode is inaction and strict adherence to routine. The latter calms many of her subjects, but all the time, if there is a problem, that problem is bubbling underneath and nothing is being done. Like Emily, sometimes the Queen is lucky and inaction or incredibly slow action wasn't disastrous. At other times, such as Diana death week, her inability to respond to the changing situation was potentially ruinous to the monarchy. Prince Charles' inaction is more 'active' than the Queen's stately version as he is a ditherer. But the end result is the same. The inmates take over the madhouse.
I visualise the Harkles running riot in Buckingham Palace while William is in a form of dower house down the road, champing at the bit, desperate to get in there and sort it out.
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-3072#post-55502756
The conversation that follows is good and has details about that photograph under the umbrella:
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-3072#post-55503638
https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/1236369648792358917
>>>Camilla Duchess of Cornwall is also a Cancer. Together with PC who is far more like his father than most people realise (PC has better self control) I imagine it could be a very lethal and deadly combination figuratively speaking. Literal would be more efficient in the long term.<<<
I wonder if the Duke of Edinburgh has come to realise that his son is like him? PP (Greatest Generation) has butted heads all his life with his Woodstock Generation eldest. Most of the scathing criticism of Charles that has leaked down into the public domain came from his father. That's gotta hurt. That most likely explains why Charles is not publicly critical of his children, or their choice in wives. He excused Harry as 'C*ntstruck'.
After what happened with the boys' mother, Charles is hamstrung as being the firm voice of paternal authority. He probably felt that his own father had scarred him by being too much of a hard-a$$ and there was still enough vinegar left in the old goat to spread to his grandsons too.
Prince Philip (b. June 10, 1921) is a Gemini. William escaped being a Gemini by only one day (his birthday, June 21st, is the first day of Cancer). So one would expect a healthy dose of Gemini qualities in this cusp-child, and he may be more like Philip than Charles. Harry might favor his grandfather in looks, but he is an even bigger wet biscuit disappointment to the old man than is Charles.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8086571/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-arrive-Mountbatten-Festival-Music-London.html
Meghan (gulp!)looks nice. Again. Surely she can't be making a habit of this?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8086047/Kate-Middleton-seen-Kensington-time-returning-royal-tour-Ireland.html
If you’ve ever opened a window to help a trapped bee, only for it to ignore you and keep smashing its head against the glass, you’ll understand how frustrating it is to watch the Duke and Duchess of Sussex attempt to leave the royal family. The door is wide open. All they have to do is walk through. And yet.
As previously assumed, the Sussex Royal dream is over. Harry and Meghan’s plan—to recap: leave the royal family, slap the word “Royal” on every tchotchke imaginable, then swim in money like a pair of less meritocratic Scrooge McDucks—was stopped in its tracks by the Queen, who worried that it could erode the institutional integrity of the British monarchy.
It was a fight they would never win. The Queen is still by far the most popular royal. Even republicans have a small soft spot for her, thanks to her ability to remain in the same thankless job for such a long time. It’s the same begrudging respect you’d show to a man who’d had his arm stuck down a toilet for six months, for instance. Harry and Meghan didn’t stand a chance against her. The easiest win for them would have been to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and revert to plan B. The problem is that their plan B involved throwing an embarrassingly public tantrum.
In a statement that reeked of wounded ego, the pair argued that Buckingham Palace does not possess global rights to their brand, petulantly noting, “There is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas.” Right or wrong, the general consensus is that the statement came off as snotty and entitled.
For a better example of an easy win, let’s look instead to Canada, which recently announced it would stop helping with Harry and Meghan’s security costs. And of course it did. Wouldn’t you? A poll conducted in January revealed what a stupendously unpopular policy it was in the first place, with just 19 percent of Canadians supporting the notion of covering those costs. Forcing a pair of wealthy foreign freeloaders to pay their way might count as the surest political slam dunk in Canadian history, and this from a country that founded the modern concept of peacekeeping. It has even managed to make Justin Trudeau look good; something that has happened less and less since his strange decision to grow a ratty coma-patient beard.
A few speed bumps were always going to be inevitable on the road to independence, but this last week has been peppered with little news stories that have only underlined the impression that the Sussexes are their own worst enemy. For example, last week Harry spoke at an eco-tourism conference in Edinburgh. To signal his eco-virtue, he took the train home rather than fly—except he reportedly claimed an entire first-class carriage to himself, which not only ramped up his individual carbon footprint beyond all measure, but probably cost taxpayers thousands of dollars in the process.
Embedded in this article is a slideshow of various Markle looks from 2005 - 2016. It's hard to know what the real Meg looks like, given the amount of procedures she has had, but it's safe to say that she hasn't really looked like 'herself' since 2017 and joining the Royal family. Her pre-Royal look was much more consistent, and it's varied wildly in just the last 21/2 years.
As this slideshow proves, classy dressing has never been Meg's strong suit.
Where did you get the tumbler blurb about H&M waltzing through some of Prince Charles's investitures? The text kinda resembles Private Eye.
Then there’s Meghan, who has committed two major sins. The first was leaving her son in Canada during her most recent visit to the U.K., leading to tens of thousands of dollars in increased security fees, plus a sad Queen who doesn’t get to see her great-grandchild. The second, reportedly, is attempting to leverage her public platform by trying to get a role in a superhero movie. This last one seems especially egregious. Not only did Meghan get her last voice-over job after her husband cornered Bob Iger at a premiere, but we also shouldn’t forget that her highest-profile movie work to date was a 30-second cameo as Hot FedEx Girl in Horrible Bosses a decade ago.
And even one of Harry’s last remaining royal duties—helping Jon Bon Jovi launch the new Invictus Games theme tune—has backfired, because it turns out that Jon Bon Jovi is now the spitting image of Theresa May, and his appearance has forced us all to relive our old Brexit nightmares. It’s like they can’t catch a break.
To make matters worse, their reappearance in the U.K. this week only underlined how good they are at being royals. Appearing together on Thursday night, their first joint public appearance since their big announcement, it was almost embarrassing how easily they upstaged everyone else. Royal life is by all accounts a mind-numbing procession of factory visits and post-office openings, so to see Harry and Meghan beaming at each other in the pouring rain—each raindrop inexplicably becoming a tiny spotlight pointing straight at them—was to understand the glamour they brought to the family. The fact that they’re turning their back on something they do so well to flounder in the shark-infested waters of celebrity is confounding.
Words fail me.
It was from a Richard Eden column. Someone posted a copy.
Here's Richard Eden's twitter post about it ...
https://twitter.com/richardaeden/status/1236223517768716288
Yes, the red shoes and accessories are silly, but overall this is a great look for Meghan (damn her!) She looks best in sleek, colour blocked outfits like this and the blue Victoria Beckham.
Question is: Now that we know she can dress (or at least listen to those who know how she should dress) why the hell didn't she do this 2 years ago?
Harry looks like he's just jumped out of a toy chest in a production of "The Nutcracker" . .but I suppose that's the uniform.
Meghan, again with the capelets. Not a fan, but at least this cape was short enough to allow her to move her arms freely. The body of the dress looks good. I see the butt pads are in again today.
While acknowledging that this is one of her best looks to date, in terms of effort, I'd make a few tweaks. A smaller clutch bag in a complementary but not matchy-matchy color, with less bling on in. Red satin & a rhinestone buckle against a dress with that much strong red hurts my eyes. Ditto the matched red pumps. The effect is kind of 'Dynasty Meets Indian Wedding'. The garnet colored dangly earrings and Meg's new teeth really make her look more like Priyanka Chopra than ever. She can barely close her lips over those chompers.
These pictures were all taken outside. I wonder what the mood was like in the Hall. I suppose Harry's gormless grin might have been wiped off if he got booed.
rich tones. It baffles me how she could dress so poorly before when she has the pick of anything really.
I still can’t get over the matching shoes and bag. Huge fashion no-no.
Apologies if someone has already pointed this out.
https://www.safiyaa.com/
It is a very exclusive brand.
I think the obvious answer is... merching. She was loaned outfits for merching purposes and didn't much care if they clearly didn't fit or suit her (or the occasion). I'm no professional stylist but even I could see that she looks best in well-cut, unfussy outfits that don't overwhelm her - she doesn't have the height or figure that allow her to carry off more 'ambitious' looks but she DOES have a very pretty face.
Do we have a designer ID on this dress? It's interesting that she's been wearing a lot of British brands some of them at the budget end - on this 'farewell tour' when she never bothered before.
Have a look at the video before the article. Why was Meghan at the school and why was it a 'secret' visit?
Here's the dress on the designer's site:
https://www.safiyaa.com/collections/dresses/products/kalika-long-dress
Pretty reasonably priced by royal and certainly by Meghan standards. British desinger too. Oh Meghan why didn't you do this 2 years ago?
In my opinion this has nothing to do with whether or not MM "could" or "could not" do what she was supposed to do. It was all about the fact that she wanted the CHOICE.
It is about control.
Now that she is done, she is perfectly happy to look "Royal" since it is no longer "required" of her.
This is just like the toddler who is told "don't do that" and then proceeds to.....right away, do it!
Yeah, probably something as silly and juvenile as that. Sure I can, but only because I want to not because you're telling me I have to .... how adolescent.
And there's also an element of "Look at what you horrid racist Brits are missing! You could have had meeeeeee! Aren't you sorry now?" Erm.... no. Yes you do look good but please leave.
That comment he made (yesterday?) about how he is there to officially open a museum that was "already open" put the final nail in his coffin for me.
How pathetic....he finally has the strength to show his inner jerk in public. He just needed the strength of character of a malignant Narc to show him how!
Therefore -- regarding showing up Camilla, I am sure he was totally fine with it. She is doing what he never had the balls to do on his own.
That is not the sign of a good Royal these days, although it might have been normal in 1835.
Beginning with Victoria (or more specifically, Albert), the RF understood that they had to appear more "normal". This was upped by George V, who understood that the family would have to develop a more common touch if they didn't want to be turfed or killed like the other Royal families of Europe.
The Smirkles are not good at being contemporary royals.. they are pure celebrities. The dress up suit that Harried is wearing today doesn't fool anyone who knew that he bailed on a military engagement in memory of murdered soldiers in order to attend the Lion King premiere.
And those teeth!! The DM has one photo of her teeth and gums where she looks like she is a cartoon character.
https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1236352221928771584
They are a punchline at this point. And if they've lost the USA, then they are truly finished.
Markle has worn Safiyaa previously.. once in Australia (the same dress as today, but in blue) and a sleeveless top/skirt combo at the Royal Variety show in Nov 2018.
So, she knows the brand.
Absolutely. Let's hope this is remembered, and if it isn't, we can keep chipping away ourselves whenever we comment on reader boards.
@WalkHumbly - "I wonder if Harry knew Meg was going to upstage Camilla’s important speech, and how he reacted afterward, if he didn’t know. Harry knows the rules and the reasons behind them. I would love to know what Prince Charles thought and what he intends to do about it."
It's a mystery to me, Harry's upbringing. It's as if not a single thing penetrated his skull. All I can think is that he was so busy from toddlerhood on, thinking Wills would be king while he could do whatever he liked, that he thought nothing applied to him. He basically thought he had a get out of jail free card for life, that would always work.
Diana was busy all those years sweetening the pill for little Harry-the-spare, when it actually tasted yummy already. He didn't need pity. He had it all. Wills was the one who was suffering with the emotional load Diana placed on him when still a young child, and Wills is the one suffering now, but still doing his duty.
Re: Yesterday's blog posts. Wow, we seem to have been invaded by some what I call little 'c*mm** b*****ds.' Now, I feel I can use this term because little 'c*mm** b*****ds' upended a branch of my family's lives in the last century. Apparently they escaped death because they were actually pretty nice guys despite not being in the right class (working), but unlike some, we try not to hold grudges, but dislike wild statements containing distortions & blanket accusations of bad behavior.
Nutty, feel free to delete this post if necessary, but I was raised with strong feelings about such things.
Prince Andrew hires General Pinochet's former lawyer as he fights FBI Epstein probe
Honestly, the BRF is beyond parody.
Where else could she get a photo of people lined up to see her? They might have been children, and they were surely forced to line up... but to her it was just a photo of her adoring fans.
The important part of the school visit story is the children who were prevented from attending classes because they couldn't show ID. (How many kids carry ID?)
I could NEVER see Catherine accepting to visit a school if the students could not actually attend school.
It's hilarious. She can't stop herself. She has to know these videos will emerge, as they have in the past, yet she still can't restrain herself.
So glad we're almost done with this farce. April 1st can't come soon enough.
The purple dress? The one with the yak wig hanging in her face? Where she looked exactly like Caitlin Jenner?
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex received a long round of applause and a standing ovation from the Royal Albert Hall in London audience after taking their seats at the Mountbatten Festival of Music.
If true, the audience should be ashamed of themselves!
Because she’s contrary and she probably knows if she doesn’t behave, no money from her father in law will be forthcoming. The other option too is because she knows she isn’t going to perform anymore official royal duties, and so she’s rubbing her in-laws nose in it and really showing how contrary she can be. She really is a nauseating individual. 😖
It was a mistake they (the royal family) made by letting them perform these final duties, I’m guessing they thought (like many fellow Brits), she wouldn’t dare show her face on UK soil again. 🤔
Are there any closeups yet? Has she figured out how to camouflage the eyelash glue?
DC looked amazing in blue. Loved the side eye she gave the paps.
I think despite her claims she doesn't read about herself she actually does, and all prominent blogs are read. Thus she knows what so many people think about her dress sense and choices. So, this time she obviously relied on some advice rather than her own taste.
She also hopes the "nice" pictures of her last ever royal engagements will squeeze out the previous disasters. Her calculation proved accurate if judge by "she actually looks nice" comments even here.
I don't think she looks nice. She looks better than before, that is already a huge achievement. Dresses are wrong for the season. A ponytale is better than unkempt hanging hair that made her a picture out of the "Ring". Bronzer is gone and foundation is a lot lighter. But the make up is still too bright and heavy for the occasion and her halogen teeth are positively designed to make sure she is not hit by a car in the dark.
I would actually like to say OK, she made an effort, well done, see, not that difficult. But she is still well short of the mark.
I apologize if you think otherwise.
I think she saw Kim Kardashian's butt implant surgeon while on the West coast. Her rear looks as dumb as Kim's.
About the difference pre and post-Megxit - surely it's that she never intended to stay and make it work so why not grab that extra hour or two in bed then grab whatever's lying on a floor nearest to her and get out the door? Whereas now, she'll be thinking, "I'm looking great for meee-eeee-eee. My future! This is my time!",
Best funniest I have read in a while..... incisive .
Message to Megsy is stop playing your Suits sexy-flirty BUT I guess Haps is still captivated this way.
Agree on both counts. They probbably thought - as did I - that Meghan would never appear in public in the UK again and that they might as well allow Harry to fulfil the engagements that he was already scheduled to do. In retrospect, that was an error but I can understand the reasoning.
The Queen used her annual message to praise the diversity of 'worldwide family'
Monarch's speech will be printed for service at Westminster Abbey on Monday
Service to be attended by Queen, senior royals, Boris Johnson and congregation
Speech comes ahead of Harry and Meghan's last official event as senior royals
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8085993/Queen-says-diversity-makes-stronger-ahead-Meghan-Harrys-final-official-royal-appearance.html
Take heed at this gesture Megs. You can run with this. I want her to succeed withig the Royal Family. But all they get back is friction and an out of sight ego.
Cheers! We'll make it a party!
I haven’t lost faith in the Queen, she will do the right thing by us all, slowly, slowly... I hope, but WTH re a standing ovation? For what? For leaving? I'd give them one to GTHO, but otherwise???
DM headline at this moment.
"Duchess of Sussex wears a £1,300 Safiyaa gown to match Harry's Royal Marines dress uniform as they attend the Mountbatten Festival of Music in London on their final round of royal duties"
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle received a standing ovation and long round of applause tonight
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are attending a musical festival at the Royal Albert Hall in London
Harry is attending in his capacity as Captain General of the Royal Marines, while Meghan is wearing Safiyaa
The event bring together musicians and conductors of the Massed Bands of Her Majesty's Royal Marines
It will mark the end of Second World War and the 80th anniversary of the formation of the Commandos
By JACK WRIGHT and JAMES WOOD FOR MAILONLINE
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8086571/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-arrive-Mountbatten-Festival-Music-London.html
The bag is hideous. It looks like a tote you get for free when you buy $45 worth of Estée Lauder products. And it clashes with the dress. Just no.
Someone else commented about the smile (and the smile yesterday as rictus grin). Duper's delight. It's all about how fake the smile seems sometimes.
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/03/07/19/25667244-8086571-image-m-82_1583609673756.jpg
Hiding any potential "show of nerves".
PitGate hasn't traumatised me at all, honest! ~eyetwitch~
Forgive me for being indelicate, but he looks like one of those little mechanical monkeys that bang their cymbals together until their batteries run down.