If anyone knows how to build up a tabloid story, it's The Sun.
The London-based paper is at the top of the tabloid game, even though it loses an enormous amount of money, year after year.
Like the New York Post, which has also lost money for decades, it's mostly an influence organ and vanity operation for its owner Rupert Murdoch, a plaything for a billionaire.
It was The Sun that published on Tuesday the first transcripts of a phone call in which Prince Harry believed he was talking to environmentalist Greta Thunberg; the Russian pranksters who made it confirmed that the "rights to the recording have been transferred to the British media," presumably The Sun.
Getting those right must have required a substantial payout from Murdoch, who has been positioning the paper as a reliable source of Royal scoops - it also broke the "Megxit" story in early January.
That's why the release has been broken into two, with the second half scheduled for release tomorrow (Saturday), according to the pranksters.
It will be just in time for the Sunday UK papers, including the Murdoch-owned Sunday Times. And just enough time for Tuesday's release to have maximum impact.
In the December 31 conversation, he took a quick shot at the Queen, who in her Christmas speech had just recommended "small steps" towards a better world, and his brother William, who had announced his Earthshot environmental prize that very day. "Small steps or giving out prizes doesn't make any difference these days," Harry said.
Instead Harry, like his Uncle David, recommended extreme political action to influence public opinion. "People need to be woken up and the only way to wake people up from what effectively is a consciousness crisis, I think, you need to be doing extreme things," he told the persons he believed to be Greta and her father Svante.
In addition, Harry made a fool of himself by offering to use his network to save some penguins suffering on a boat docked off the coast of (landlocked) Belarus and return them to the North Pole.
Penguins are native to the South Pole, not the north one, something Harry might know since he went on an Antarctic expedition himself in 2013.
So, the first transcript made Harry look both dumb and craven.
What in the world can be in the second transcript, reportedly from January 22?
I'm guessing it's a doozy, because The Sun knows how to set up a story.
They've informed the world about the transcripts, and every Royal watcher is waiting for the sequel.
Also, if the January 22 date is correct, the Russian pranksters had a whole month to come up with questions.
When they managed to get through to Harry the first time, no doubt they couldn't believe their luck. With a month's preparation time, surely "Greta's" questions for Harry will be even more provocative.
My guess: there will be specific references to William - what does he really think of his brother? - and specific questions about the "racism" the family has shown to his lovable wife Meghan.
What's your guess about what will be in the second set of transcripts, the "Saturday Stunner"?
---------
Many posters have expressed an interest in discussing the Corona Virus pandemic. I've created a new Nutty Virus board for precisely that purpose.
The London-based paper is at the top of the tabloid game, even though it loses an enormous amount of money, year after year.
Like the New York Post, which has also lost money for decades, it's mostly an influence organ and vanity operation for its owner Rupert Murdoch, a plaything for a billionaire.
It was The Sun that published on Tuesday the first transcripts of a phone call in which Prince Harry believed he was talking to environmentalist Greta Thunberg; the Russian pranksters who made it confirmed that the "rights to the recording have been transferred to the British media," presumably The Sun.
Getting those right must have required a substantial payout from Murdoch, who has been positioning the paper as a reliable source of Royal scoops - it also broke the "Megxit" story in early January.
Maximum impact
Given what Murdoch must have paid for the Greta transcripts - which seem fated to take their place in Royal lore along with Diana's "Squidgy" tapes and Charles' taped calls to his then-mistress Camilla - he wants them to have maximum impact.That's why the release has been broken into two, with the second half scheduled for release tomorrow (Saturday), according to the pranksters.
It will be just in time for the Sunday UK papers, including the Murdoch-owned Sunday Times. And just enough time for Tuesday's release to have maximum impact.
Column inches
Despite that other big story in the media these days, there have been numerous column inches devoted to Harry's insistence that he and Meghan "operate in way of inclusivity and we are focusing on the community. And so we are separate from the majority of the family."In the December 31 conversation, he took a quick shot at the Queen, who in her Christmas speech had just recommended "small steps" towards a better world, and his brother William, who had announced his Earthshot environmental prize that very day. "Small steps or giving out prizes doesn't make any difference these days," Harry said.
Instead Harry, like his Uncle David, recommended extreme political action to influence public opinion. "People need to be woken up and the only way to wake people up from what effectively is a consciousness crisis, I think, you need to be doing extreme things," he told the persons he believed to be Greta and her father Svante.
What's in the second transcript?
In addition, Harry made a fool of himself by offering to use his network to save some penguins suffering on a boat docked off the coast of (landlocked) Belarus and return them to the North Pole.Penguins are native to the South Pole, not the north one, something Harry might know since he went on an Antarctic expedition himself in 2013.
So, the first transcript made Harry look both dumb and craven.
What in the world can be in the second transcript, reportedly from January 22?
Waiting for the sequel
I'm guessing it's a doozy, because The Sun knows how to set up a story.They've informed the world about the transcripts, and every Royal watcher is waiting for the sequel.
Also, if the January 22 date is correct, the Russian pranksters had a whole month to come up with questions.
When they managed to get through to Harry the first time, no doubt they couldn't believe their luck. With a month's preparation time, surely "Greta's" questions for Harry will be even more provocative.
My guess: there will be specific references to William - what does he really think of his brother? - and specific questions about the "racism" the family has shown to his lovable wife Meghan.
What's your guess about what will be in the second set of transcripts, the "Saturday Stunner"?
---------
Many posters have expressed an interest in discussing the Corona Virus pandemic. I've created a new Nutty Virus board for precisely that purpose.
Comments
I am going to sound cynical and cruel but will still say this: given how much Megsy relies on sex scenes in her acting and how much sex is in pretty much all movies now plus to increase attention the filmmakers can deliberately insert very juicy episodes into any movie Megsy can land.
Imagine the "Duchess" performing intimate acts on screen? If she refuses what else a 38 years old former actress can offer? She is no Sarah Bernard or Grace Kelly.
1. Harry and Megsy brazened out the appearance at the Abbey and Harry was even offended that William and Kate did not say more than a curt hello. They must have known that his family had heard the recorded phone calls, surely? I think those two are so out of touch with decency and respect and caring that they would brazen out an appearance at Bea's wedding. They just seem clueless and completely lacking of understanding why his family may be upset and why taxpayers may be up in arms about funding them in any way.
2. I suspect that Megsy and Harry were alone in Canada for New Year's Eve and if there was anyone with them it would have been Doria. Harry would have needed something to bolster his self esteem as whoever was with them (or not), they were there for Megsy and he was cut off from his family and friends and home. He also needs to show Megsy how important he is. New year's Eve would have been just the right time when he needed a phone call like that one. Regard for others in terms of timing? See above!
3. That Harry would not have visited his grandfather and, indeed, spent time alone with each one of his close family is so very sad. Did he go back to Canada with Megsy or did he stay behind and use that time alone to visit each of his formerly close family members? I doubt that William and Kate invited him over!
4. The coronavirus is bad timing for the Harkles. Unless they start making videos to post on IG, how are they going to be visible? Are they going to bring out their secret weapon to get attention ... Archie? Because without attention they have nothing. Projections are that the virus epidemic/pandemic could be over within 2 months but could last another 6 months. It is difficult to make plans under such circumstances.
Oh dear, I sound fuddy duddy but I don't mean to. I think it's fine to still have sex scenes, but only if the actors and actresses (I'm not giving up that word) want to. And how can you really know that they want to?
But yes, the tacky side will still go on and Meghan may gravitate there when all her other options are gone, but if so she'll need to get there fast as time's running out. Of course the virus will be a great accelerator here, as a number of us have pointed out.
Speaking of which I went to the Sun website this morning for the first time ever, to see if part two of the latest Harry saga had come along and was astonished to see a page three girls item. I didn't know any paper still did that kind of thing. Last time I saw it I was a teenager and now I'm in my 50s. I lead a sheltered life ...
I knew there was someone else I wanted to thank for sharing their narc experience, but I couldn't find it at the time.
Thank you. And I'm sorry for the oversight.
@superfly
Yes! It does sound like cocaine. And trying to get those talking points in before MM gives him "the look" She gave him in the car.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-not-making-acting-21691487?fbclid=IwAR1FrF91nXMK2Nwy6DfdcaZen_lZnbYYpEiNA0XSTZv8bRx3sz2ehFQVfR8
I could be happy never seeing or hearing from her again. Just want her to away and quarantine herself in the woods.
Lololohell no and yes! The Duchess Does Dallas. So many possibilities.
This shower of `Royal Experts' must be the ones he was thinking of - no more experts on the Royals than I am!
There are no bald patches in SussexRoyalLand
Part one
Welcome to the Magical World of SussexRoyal Instagram, which is like Disneyland, only with less gritty realism. If I need a little fantabulous make-believe in life, it’s always my first stop on a grey winter morning.
So come with me now through the golden prism of Harry and Meghan’s own social media PR machine. This is their main conduit for communicating good deeds to the outside world, primarily their own.
These days they are accompanied by their own film crew and photographers so only the most burnished and flattering images are sent out to their fans. In SussexRoyal-Land Harry’s bald patch is as elusive as the unicorn — it is simply never seen!
Meanwhile, every filmed vignette finds adoring crowds hanging on Meghan’s every word and laughing uproariously at her jokes. Honestly, it is the Pravda of the internet age, only with a little more polish.
This Insta account is followed by 11.3 million people, who surely must have noticed that nothing bad ever happens in this virtual, happy-ever-after reverie.
There is no mention of hoax phone calls, royal rifts, sister-in-law Kate’s thunderous face at Westminster Abbey, private jet travel or secret lives of luxury. In this land of make believe, the Sussexes are forces for inclusivity and change, just like they told the fake Greta Thunberg. What rot!
PS Those pranksters are so naughty, but the Queen and Princess Diana have also been caught out, too. Prince Harry survived his prank call almost unscathed. He clearly sees himself as a misunderstood maverick, but isn’t really very bright.
To give them his mobile number along with his email address and to not be suspicious when they talked about the island of Chunga Changa? What a sillybilly. ‘I know a man in the North Pole,’ he claimed. Don’t we all, Harry! He is called Father Christmas.
I am old enough to not only remember the women's lib movement of the last century but also was a part of it (but for me, it was equal opportunities and pay at work and equal rights across the board). Sexual liberation happened round about the same time and was certainly helped along by the invention of the pill as a contraceptive, plus there was the hippy love and peace movement. Couples living together instead of getting married became fashionable and sex before marriage came out of the closet.
It was a double-edged sword because as women liberated themselves they were also used, and nudity and sex, for women, became mainstream in movies, TV, stage and print. Women's liberation and the open sexual exploitation of women went hand-in-hand.
The Me Too movement is extreme in some ways but I see it as ultimately trying to sort out an imbalance, i.e. to liberate men from toxic masculinity just as the feminist movement of the last century aimed to liberate women from being second-class citizens. The feminist movement was aimed at changing the lives of women; the Me Too movement aims to change men. Of course, nothing is that clear cut because men and women are forever intertwined and what happens to one affects the other.
Seeing the Duchess in a sex scene would certainly help sell a movie the first time she does it, just for the novelty factor, but how unbecoming and tacky. I think as a california-girl actress she may no know how tacky and undignified it is. If the pay is high enough and the role isn’t an adult movie, she’d probably do it. Of course once she does one, then any role offered would demand nudity.
Wonder how JH would feel about it? Supposedly he’s the type that sees someone on TV and totally falls for them, which is how they met up for their ‘date/ yacht’ encounter. He must have seen her ‘acting’ and been OK with it, so is he the type that gets off on something like that, the type that just accepts it as part of the job, or the type that gets jealous.
Harry proved again he is dim and cannot be trusted. He bites the hand that feeds him. I was wondering who in his right mind will pay him to make a speech. He could take your money, turn around and start to bad-mouth you to a stranger.
He ranted about a US president to a stranger. Whoever want any favor from Trump have to distant themselves from Harry now. He made fun of the wealthy crowd in Davos. These are the people they supposedly should suck up to. He probably ruined Meg’s chance to get her next meal ticket.
Seems as though JH has finally left for Canada.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1255148/prince-harry-news-flight-canada-meghan-markle-archie-harrison-royal-family-latest
There are no direct flights from London, England to Victoria, BC.
I doubt that he took a commercial flight from London to Vancouver because of Covid19. He might have used a commercial flight on a propeller plane on the short trip from Vancouver to Victoria.
@Fairy Crocodile
You’re not cruel, you’re just realistic :-)
@Sandie:
I don’t think they are lacking of understanding, I think they just want overshadow other members of the BRF, they want their revenge.
I think Prince Andrew will prevent them from going and spoil Bea’s happiness. He knows they are ruthless and they could try to upstage Edo & Bea.
Andrew has lots of defaults but I do believe he wants to protect his daughters.
I also think things are very bad between the 2 of them. They don’t get along any more but they want to maintain the illusion of this happy couple.
We’ll see more and more of these solo trips because Harry wants to escape from an atmosphere which is now suffocating.
She will try to stay relevant posting older pictures of her secret meetings/visits or throwback.
Of course, she will post photos of Archie for his 1st birthday and for the mother and the father days. There are also the usual shenanigans she likes so much (nasty comments, pity party…).
It is recommended by the BC Minister of Health that anyone returning from outside Canada self isolate for 14 days. This would also apply to Smirkle. No surprise visits to women's shelters.
On the other hand, in a 'freedom of speech' world, the Internet and all sorts of media are awash with speculation, gossip and fake stories. But, it actually is a fundamental human right for people to speak their mind without being threatened or shut up.
The BRF try to strike a balance between protecting themselves from damaging false stories, protecting a reasonable right to privacy and supporting the free flow of information (and sharing of opinions) and transparency (for public servants especially but anyone who is funded by the people). They don't always get the balance right, but it is a reasonable and realistic approach.
If a government did what Megsy and Harry are doing in how they treat the press it would be bought down by a revolution. As private citizens they are freed from any kind of obligation to the UK and its people (but that taxpayer-funded security is a little bump in that road) and can do whatever they want to promote and maintain an image for themselves and to get private people to keep them awash in the luxuries they think they deserve. Criticising and smearing others (as they are increasingly doing) is dangerous territory as they put themselves at risk for being labelled as untrustworthy and of having their own tactics turned on them.
Kate had and has the right approach (Megsy could have learned so much from her), as does Camilla: develop a thick skin but don't let it make you cynical.
I think Megsy fleeing from the UK and the BRF was all about control and domination. She does not want to be dependent on taxpayers and Charles for her life of luxury because then she is not in control of what she does when and how; she does not want to be in an institution (The Firm) where she is not the top dog in charge who can not only be free to do whatever she wants but also instruct others; she does not want to be surrounded by palaces and jewels and all sorts of luxuries that she does not have access to; she does not want to fit in with the traditions and cultural norms of others but wants to set her own and not only get everyone else to follow but also get adoring praise for everything she wears, says and does ...
As for acting ... what the heck could she do? All she has is the curiosity factor as a selling point and that will wear out after the first movie. I find her voice very annoying a d grating so why anyone thought it would be a good idea for her to narrate a documentary about elephants really puzzles me. Celebrities must stop using Africa for their self-promotion (I assume they are African elephants).
***
PART ONE
How the Royal Family's love of photography kept the monarchy alive
A Kensington Palace exhibition will include unseen photos of the Queen and Prince Philip, and royal childhood albums
They are among the most photographed people in the world, from historic state events to the personal family moments they choose to share with the nation.
The Royal Family’s penchant for photography is not just light entertainment, but key to the very survival of the British monarchy, it will be claimed, in a new Kensington Palace exhibition.
The exhibition, Life Through A Royal Lens, will show how the early adoption of photography was critical in boosting the monarchy’s popularity, in a tradition embraced by members down to the modern day.
It will include family photo albums which have never been shared with the public before, as well as a new image of the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh previously considered a little too intimate for release.
The exhibition will aim to show how the British Royal Family’s acceptance of photography and work with the media has seen them strike a “very careful balancing of intimacy and splendour, relatability and mystique, tradition and innovation”, its curator said.
Tracing 180 years of history, it will go on to show that the subject matter of royal photography has changed little, from Victoria and Albert’s albums of their children to the Duchess of Cambridge’s shots of Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis.
Intriguingly, it will include one previously unseen image of the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh, taken as part of a set by Matt Holyoak for their 70th wedding anniversary in 2017.
Then, the picture of the “completely relaxed” Queen, sitting in a chair and smiling directly up at her laughing husband, was seen as slightly too intimate for an official photograph.
Her Majesty has now “very kindly agreed” it can be used in the exhibition, curators said. It will not be released as part of publicity material, so those curious to see it must attend the May exhibition in person.
Other unseen pictures to go on display include a photo album assembled by the young Edward VIII, with snapshots of ski trips, garden games, bicycling royal children and George V and Queen Mary in “relaxed mode”.
In a section entitled Monarchy and the Media, visitors will see shots of Diana, Princess of Wales and her son Prince Harry walking through the minefields in Angola decades apart, and a wide image of the Lindo Wing with press and public waiting eagerly outside for Prince George’s birth.
Some of the earliest items are an 1860 photograph of Princess Alexandra of Denmark, sent to Queen Victoria when they were considering a bride for the then Prince of Wales, and 1858 series of Victoria, Albert and their eldest daughter taken just before her wedding.
Queen Mary is seen digging a potato plot at Windsor in 1917,the Queen Mother, ethereal in white in the Buckingham Palace garden for a 1939 shoot with Cecil Beaton, and the Queen with her mischievous older children in 1954.
Family shots from Lord Snowden’s archive will also be made public, along with a reminder of Prince William’s famous cover of Attitude Magazine and his wife in British Vogue.
The most recent images include Prince Charles’ 70th birthday picture featuring the Cambridge family and Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in Pakistan, and Prince George posing for his mother’s camera for his 6th birthday.
All relevant members of the modern Royal Family have given permission for their images to be used, while the Queen has signed off items from the Royal Collection to go on display.
Claudia Acott Williams, curator at Historic Royal Palaces, said the exhibition would explore why British monarchy has survived while others throughout Europe collapsed, highlighting how photography was “vital” to their success.
“What made British monarchy so powerful in its presentation was very much established by Victoria, “she said. “It was an amazing show of domesticity; this very careful balancing of intimacy and splendour, relatability and mystique, tradition and innovation.
“The British monarchy were huge pioneers of photography. They very quickly understood its potential as a medium, not just for documentation and enjoyment but also as a tool.”
Life Through a Royal Lens opens at Kensington Palace on 15 May.
***
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/03/13/royal-familys-love-photography-kept-monarchy-alive/
As I stated before, no one understands really unless they have been a victim. I'm so saddened HM and family are suffering with this, it must be especially hard for William. I wonder if he knew Harry wad a narc?
Sophie Trudeau, who has Covid 19, posed in a photo with Lewis Hamilton on March 4. Harry met with Hamilton on March 6.
But Princess Changa Chunga must be livid that there is no Purell available anywhere. (Although she can afford the $100 bottles still on Amazon)
That exhibition sounds fabulous! I hope they will take it in the road as well.
Lol, now I'm dying to see the photo of HM and PP!
I wonder if the sussexes are a part of the show? Probably charging KP to include them.
This is an interesting breakdown of what it will cost for their elite lifestyles. It does not take into account taxes, upkeep of property, food, entertaining, toiletries/beauty treatments, jewellery, entertaining, insurance ... what else?
NOTE that everything in the above article is in Australian dollars. Here is the exchange rate on two major currencies:
1 Australian Dollar equals 0,50 Pound sterling (so divide by 2)
1 Australian Dollar equals 0,62 United States Dollar (so multiply by 0,62)
OR just use an online calculator undated to reflect current exchange rates!
https://www.google.com/search?q=conversion+australian+dollars+to+pounds&rlz=1C1CHBD_en-gbZA782ZA782&oq=conversion+australian+dollar&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l7.8385j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
I’m with you, PCG. I keep looking for signs that Harry has realized the truth. I was sorry to read that he’s gone back to Canada. In the case of the narc victim in my family, she reconnects with us whenever we see her, but the narc creates drama and cuts her off again. With time away from him, I think she would heal, but the narc won’t allow it. He sees her reconnection beginning and breaks it, every time.
I keep watching the Harry story in hopes he will heal and maybe other victims will learn from this public story.
Harry has left the country (the UK) and is back with Meghan and Archie, their RPOs and household staff.
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-3178#post-55720440
The HAMS will be in financial trouble soon, if not already. Although Charles has his Duchy money of about 20 million pounds (or is it dollars) per year, he must detail how he spent what some people think is his “own money,”. If it truly was his own money, the public would not be allowed to see how much he is paid. If it is seen that he has given the HAMS more than, say, $2 million, it will be the last time, as taxpayers will scream. The Queen will then have to say how much of taxpayer money she gives to them, if not all grandchildren, from the Royal funds she directly receives from taxpayers. These millions do not include security costs, mind you. Charles knows he needs to cut off HAMS, especially now when the world is reeling from a pandemic. He will be pummeled in the press.
The only silver lining from the last months of the awful appearances and disrespect in both words and deeds from the HAMS is that they are like the Corona Virus itself. Nobody wants to touch them with a ten-foot pole. They are seen as disrespectful to an old lady and sick old man, who are his grandparents and Granny is the Head of Government. Hollywood looks upon them as damaged goods, not attractive physically, mentally and are liabilities. Any public company seen paying them will have angry shareholders. HAMS are surplus to requirements. They will probably go on Oprah, and the only way she would get ratings, would be to ask questions as in “Why didn’t you invite your black family members, Meghan to your wedding or your white family too, at least cousins you have said you live like sisters? Why was I given seats that should have gone to the Spencer family, Harry? Why me? What was so awful about being a Prince? You do know I would never have come to a wedding of people I do not know unless it was a Royal wedding. Why were you setting up to leave before the ink dried? You married a mixed race woman who has nothing g in common with you, other than wanting a title. How can a non-British or Commonwealth citizen be legallly called Her Royal Highness, or a Duchess? I was called the Queen of Daytime tv, but frankly, M, I never referred to myself as such. I am self-made, a multi billionaire. You lived like a billionaire in GB. Why give that up for what? You think people care now that you are a Haz Been?
When I was a young girl the surrounding I grew up with taught me nudity, sex, having lovers are all acceptable parts of the modern life and part of being liberated. It is fine to have sex with men if it takes you higher in society, gives you material things, travel, better jobs and more money.
When I look back I understand that I could have avoided many mistakes if our society stuck to more traditional values and taught them to younger girls. The whole bedhopping for success have always felt wrong, but it was everywhere, so I just looked at people doing it and thought this is a part of modern life. I never used man for gain, though. There was some sort of internal block I never stepped over. And I am glad about it now.
That is why I am so concerned about media turning Markle into some sort of icon of success. If I believed she is in love with Arry it would be a different story. But she isn't. She is using him to advance herself in life and she would have no qualms dropping him for more successful alpha male if she meets one.
So young girls choosing her as a role model will get the message it is fine to use sex for gain, the most important thing in life is your looks, you can lie and pretend to get what you want, you don't need to respect anybody as long as you have sufficient amount of "fans", if you create loud enough scandal you may end up in a movie or a book. This may be a glittery road but it is not a happy one and it always, always ends in disappointment and depression, because there is always somebody with better appearance, more fans and more influential sex partners, and if you make this a measure of success you never feel you achieved enough. That is why Megsy hates Kate.
Why so many modern "influencers" are drug addicts and alcoholics? Because drugs fill in the internal void.
I didn't mean to bore you, sorry, just some thought on why Meghan feels so wrong and dangerous to me.
This is a strong point, which I have not seen or thought of previously. Thank you. It needs to be shared.
Jan's Moir's reference to Pravda (`Truth) was a real blast from the past. The USSR had Pravda & Izvestia (`News') as its papers (are they still published?), hence the saying
`In Truth there is no news and in News there is no truth '
Well done, Jan!
Ava C: I can just about imagine Queen Mary digging potatoes - but it's surreal! How the whalebone must have creaked.
I recall my father's stepmother, born c.1880, in the early 1950s, wearing a long black skirt, white high-necked blouse and a velvet ribbon with cameo around her neck. To this day, I'm not sure if it was fancy dress for Christmas or her normal garb.
Yet I've been told that Dad's grandma,(1835-1930) wore widow's weeds, like Queen Victoria, until her death. She had, apparently, a complicated little lace cap, which had to be unpicked whenever it was washed, otherwise it couldn't have been ironed. The oddest photo of her showed her slumped in a deck chair, fast asleep.
Presumably, elderly ladies found the cap handy to conceal thinning hair and to keep the scalp warm in a chilly house.
A picture of Hazza in such a lace cap has dropped into my mind!
I'll be watching the review of tomorrow's front pages at 10.45 this evening but have no great hope of any dramatic revelation.
A technicality, but an important one:
The Queen is Head of State (non-political); her Prime Minister is Head of Government (political). All part of the delicate balance.
The separation happened in the reign of George I, who, barely speaking English, preferred to spend his time in Germany (Hanover), leaving his Prime Minister to get on with it here. Parliamentary elections were a very ramshackle business then, and were for a very long time afterwards, but we'd had enough of would-be absolutist monarchs, aping how things were done in France, with the Stuarts.
This arrangement suited PM Walpole very well and, with a group of his own party, he set up the first `cabinet', the pattern for how things are done today.
Until Charles I pushed his luck too far with the House of Commons, provoking the `Great Rebellion (ie Civil War), the monarch had been heavily involved in politics. Charles II was more diplomatic/crafty but his brother James II interfered more widely in matters that should have been left alone, putting his own placemen into the judiciary and even the colleges of Oxford & Cambridge.
Thus the Monarch is a figurehead for the State, no political power but may guide/counsel the PM in the weekly audiences - Elizabeth draws on very long experience but she doesn't tell the PM/ Head of Government what to do.
https://countesscuriosity.tumblr.com/post/612592429657358336/i-find-it-hard-to-believe-that-the-times-would-get#notes
As requested by the person who posted this article from the Times, I am sharing the link and not copying and pasting the article.
https://66.media.tumblr.com/f80cf56091b5dbbbd5eabe3e7e1d3161/d8148bab7ec26274-0f/s1280x1920/b654a3952aa7435a9eb8b91bed2df376d5038959.jpg
Any thoughts?
"Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is set for a Scottish jaunt and the Queen will spend precious family time with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and her great-grandson this summer, as Harry and Meghan holiday at Balmoral this year".
Is it true? What is goin on?
So you can insult HMQ, you can complain about your "toxic" family who "crushes your soul" and that's ok?
I'm not allowed to say but BP are about to blow everything out of the water. Harry won't get a lookin tomorrow unfortunately.
Perhaps BP put a stop to the release of the second recording (of the second phone call) because they want to shut down this embarrassing episode. It makes Harry look bad and I suspect that what is on the second recording is far worse than what is in the first.
There was no news today (Saturday) that would have overshadowed the publication of the transcript of the second phone call.
I suspect that the leak about the Harkles visiting the Queen at Balmoral in the summer (with Archie) was a BP PR leak. They are trying to stop the downward spiral of Harry, and Meghan is part of the package. Watch smug Megsy get some concessions - more 'events covered by her team' at BP, more stories of how beloved she is and how it is a devastating loss to the monarchy that she has left, that everything was about Meghan being the victim of racist bullies. The stories won't all come from BP but they have opened the door and Meghan will walk right through. As for the security bill and paying back the renovation costs for Frogmore and paying rent for Frogmore ... all will hope that everyone will just forget about it, after all coronavirus has everyone in a panic for now and by the time that subsides, all the fuss about the Harkles will be old news that no one will remember. That is what they are hoping for. The Queen has told the Harkles to sit tight and stay low ... can Megsy bear to stay out of the spotlight?
As for any sense of shame about what was said during that phone call ... the Harkles are shameless. Meghan will put on the innocent and deeply wounded look, shed a tear (it is on tape that she boasted that she can cry on cue in a moment) and just win everyone over (not the Cambridges though).
On the other hand, this may be a false story planted by the Harkles in a desperate attempt to hold onto that all important royal link.
March 4, 2020
Don't believe the hype. The alliterate about to be former royal was not offered that per second deal that is all the buzz.
---) Meghan Markle return to Suits
It is slightly more reliable than the papers that print stories about people who have discovered aliens in their backyard, or claim to be born of a woman impregnated by a demon.
That being said, they occasionally break huge stories. VERY occasionally, like the last time was the John Roberts mess in 2007.
I doubt very much that Nutmeg told HM to drop dead to her face. I would not be surprised at all to learn that she really did she tell someone that Camilla could eff off for all she cared.
Sorry, I can't remember who here posted the link to this video.
I took a look and was surprised by how fawning these Daily Mail Royal Reporters were of the Smirkles.
Even if she shows up there imagine the frosty atmosphere! Expect teary leaks about "soulless royals" and "outdated furniture". Do they seriously want to expose themselves to this?
Too late to make a good face now, everybody knows they are not a part of the family, Harry himself stated this, so what is the point of the show?
My missing post speculated about the probability of a Regency - HM is 94 next month - enforced postponement of engagement etc = useful window to make change?
I hope to goodness the tweet about Balmoral is fake - that would certainly give Duchess Catherine grief.
A lot of people dismiss them as tabloid gossip - but they famously broke the John Edwards cheating on his cancer-ridden wife story which brought down his campaign and kept him from being elected president.
They are dismissed because people "want" to dismiss bad stories and they disguise actual nuggets with fluff and dumb stories about celebrities like any tabloid. They rarely lose a lawsuit and never retract stories so....?
Because they are obviously "tabloid" news - in the 70s and 80s they got lumped in with the "National Examiner" in people's minds - which had the "I gave birth to Elvis's alien baby" stories because they were right on the same rack. They are at least as good as TMZ and other online gossip - and better IMO. Actually - way better than people (who most people totally believe) and US magazine because they don't really do paid PR "kneepads" kinda stuff.
Also it seems like the trip to Stanford was a last ditch attempt to save their foundation before it even began. Maybe the delusional couple have told the hard truth about unfeasibility of operating the foundation that they have in their warped minds. One that allows them murky finances and ability to claim nonprofit status. That or they've found very little takers in funding seeding money for such an aspirational grift. It's funny to see how their once lofty goal of establishing the foundation is now reduced to barely mentioning it.
Things must be less optimistic on the hordes of projects they were expecting too. If these lucrative projects were being made, then why is Meghan putting it out there that she'd like to return to acting either in TV or movie roles? Even if she lands a role in a franchise Marvel movie as a secondary character, it might make her a few million dollars. Acting gigs will not generate the range of $500 million to $1 billion dollars that was being bullshitted around as how much the Sussex brand is worth. Producing is where a lot of money can be made, but who in their right minds would let them sign on as producers in lucrative projects?
Even if the Goldman Sachs of the world continue to offer obscene amounts of money for the Sussexes as speakers, that well will eventually run dry. Harry will find it stressful to have to constantly line up one project after another because sustaining public interest today is a different beast than even just 10 years ago. Platforms and celebs come and go, tastes change and cycle rapidly, and the level of scrutiny is higher than ever. Is Harry cut out for the cutthroat industry that Meghan wants to muck around? In the fake Greta interview Harry says that he's led a more normal life than people think. Well just how much normalcy does he think celebrity lifestyle in LA, hustling for projects and fake friends with people who'll give you the next gig?
They uploaded the 1st part of the recording. I think it may have been private for a couple of days.
I thought they would upload the 2nd part.
Apparently, the 2nd release is postponed. It would be published in a couple of days (or never)....
The National Enquirer. Jeff Bezos decided to drop it and hope it went away. Their reputation works against them - even if they are right.
BABY COME BACK Harry and Meghan to bring baby Archie to spend summer with Queen at Balmoral :
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/baby-archie-to-holiday-with-queen-at-balmoral-s6j6tqwgb
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11174648/baby-archie-queen-balmoral/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8112837/Harry-Meghan-accept-invitation-Queen-join-Balmoral-summer.html
Must have had some backlash from her luvvies. Or maybe PC threatened to cut them off.
The world is having a pandemic and she puts this out. What a tool.
Of course they will be invited to Balmoral - everyone in the family is. The whole extended family also turns up on the balcony for Trooping the Colour (if you are in town, you appear and reporters have fun trying to identify who is who).
If Harry and Meghan turn up at Balmoral with Archie they will have two problems: how do they get photos and stories out for PR, and how do they avoid the rest of the family (because, especially with them getting old, Balmoral in summer is busy with visitors for the Queen and Prince Philip)?
If Harry and Meghan turn up for Trooping the Colour they will have two problems: how do they secure a ride in a carriage and if they don't will they be visible enough, and how do they secure a prime spot on the balcony so they can get photographed? They will brazen it out with family for the short time they will be in the same venue as them but there is no point in being there if it does not make good PR for them and 'raise their profile'.
Meghan likes hustling; Harry does not. Meghan is brazen about telling lies; Harry has to believe that what he is saying is the truth. That marriage must be a nightmare!
We don't know where any of the various people, the countries they are in will be with Covid 19 at that time. Given that TQ, PP, PC and C are all in the age bracket for greatest morbidity, I (who am not a medical doctor) would think that their medical doctors would express caution in making plans (short and long term).
That would be sound medical advise (all those pale, stale and male doctors M felt were not capable of handling her pregnancy).
The comments are going too fast for me to comment quick enough.
I still think the prank calls amount to a huge nothing. Its a prank. Nothing will come out of it. Its a prank. For goodness sake , when did we start discussing prank calls and analysing them.
The Murdoch mystery, well he is an octogenarian, at that age why would he be revengeful? I mean Bill Gates is stepping down now. No. I don't think Murdoch is behind this. Sounds too far fetched for me.
As for the BRF and the virus , I think that from decades of being exposed to the public, they are fully aware of health risks etc.
Tomorrow's bombshell , well , I can guess , but since the virus affects older people very badly, then maybe the bombshell news is that ALL ROYALS OVER 60 now retire.
Hmmmm.
The very minimum is a stern denial "I have huge respect for the Queen, HOW DARE YOU". Legal action is better.
If nothing comes out even cynical skeptical me will begin to think there is something in the story.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11174648/baby-archie-queen-balmoral/
If a sugary article or two appear I start expecting a good kicking in 1-2-3.
Lets see if the sequence works this time.
or maybe that will still be rolling in the money. it’s one industry that wont be affected by the travel/ public places ban. people stuck at home have little to do wil probably entertain themselves with tv. for now though alot of those productions are closed down like everything else.
i don’t see how the harkles will be making billions.
He made two interesting points: 1. Brad Pitt before Angelina Jolie would say in an interview that he is an actor and would not pronounce opinions on stuff beyond that. A very different Brad after his marriage to AJ. He says Harry is like Brad. 2. Meghan and Harry are not experts and are going to be taken in/misled and basically make a hash of things. This was before phonegate so he was spot on about that. 3. Meghan, fully knowing what she was getting into, waltzed in and set about changing a 1000-year-old institution. Wallis Simpson would have been better suited for royal life because she respected the customs of royalty and high society.
The bit about the Harkles starts at 24 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhAZRzJk514&feature=emb_logo
I hope your theory pans out.
i can only hope the truth about Rach and Archie comes out at some point. I still think he's faux or they don't have him.
I really think the CV19 has overtaken the headlines and until under control will remain there making frivilous HArkle stories fall to the bottom of the page. They are saving it for later.
Lemon Tea here
Some of my comments were posted indirectly on another site. Not sure how you feel about that. For me, as I am not a journalist , it is amusing. But if that person is reading your blog , why did that person not comment on your blog?
i just saw that the Harkles are planning to bring Archie to see the Queen this summer.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11174648/baby-archie-queen-balmoral/
They have no invitation and they won't be getting any. This is pushy PR from the Dumped Dumbarton Dummkopfs. Designed to embarrass the Queen >> "She is such a racist meanie!" "She won't invite us, her own grandson and great grandson to Balmoral"
These blockheads are not wanted at the Queen's vacation palace in the cool Scottish highlands.
Perhaps they will show up at the gates anyway with their rubber Archie puppet. These moochers will be turned away.
Do you think the Royal Family had read/heard BOTH phone conversations between H and the Russian pranksters before the Commonwealth Service? If so, would they have wanted to protect Harry and therefore file for the injunction? Or would it have come solely from Harry?
I am confused, obviously.
This is a very odd story for The Times to print. Why is The Times doing this?
The Times gets a lot of big Royal scoops, so they generally play along with what the RF wants.
I like the idea that it’s a preventative measure against a “Queen is racist and doesn’t welcome Meghan” story.
Perhaps Harry makes this type of accusation in the second half of the Greta tapes.
My view is, since we cut and paste from other sites to this site, it’s hard to complain when others do the same to us.
I agree, however, that it would be preferable if people made their comments here as opposed to elsewhere.
The two solo engagements with the Queen Megsy got so early unlike anybody else in the family pretty much killed "Queen is racist" notion at the point of conception. Markle got a truly special treatment and managed to dump it into a garbage bin right after the fact.
I am wondering if this special treatment by the Queen got to her head so much she truly believes she is higher than Kate and Camilla now.
I don't know if the delay is due to Covid 19 or if there is something else (hence Balmoral story and so on).
I agree with you. I do NOT believe the story at all. I was just passing on info I saw in The Sun.
With COVID-19 they are not going to get much, if any, attention at all. More important matters to worry about in the world right now than the Dumped Dumbarton Dummkopfs and Rach's quest to monetize her fleeting, short-lived, tenuous connection to the BRF.
She really blew it in so many ways.
I am American. I do remember Rach's early special treatment by the Queen. As I wrote above--she blew off so many opportunities. Not whip-smart by any stretch of the imagination.
I only started following the Harkle story because of a very similar situation with a narc spouse turning my brother against his family. Now I'm hooked though. Fascinating family and history.
I’m thinking of Americans who follow the story only tangentially, maybe flipping through celebrity magazines at the hairdressers. No way they remember a train trip in summer 2018.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11175256/queen-coronavirus-quits-buckingham-palace/
Only exception - Express ie Sunday Express with secondary article `William Harry feud more toxic than ever'
BBc News 24, at 10.30 pm
Otherwise, zilch, nada, nothing
(Can't compete with `All over 70 asked to stay at home'
`Troops to guard supermarkets' etc
I agree with others that H$M are a pre-Corona Virus phenomena. No one wants to know about these Blockheads with a down economy for a while (months and months) and a national medical emergency. No one wants their "Travalyst - Sustainable Tourism" - That is so pre-Corona thinking. Megs and Hapless rode a bubble that has been pricked. Hollywood has no use for them and if they do get a Netflix contract is will be pay as you go. Meaning they only get paid for productions they (she) can put together. And Megs will fail at this. Netflix will not pay them in advance.
Harry making a fool of himself will have to wait for another day.
I think that everyone in the close and extended family gets invited. The Queen is there for a few months so everyone has plenty of opportunity. It is her personal property, not Crown property. That the Harkles blew off the invitation 2 years in a row was unprecedented. Even Kate and her family visited Balmoral before the marriage.
I think that on a family level the Queen is very forgiving and tolerant. Family is family. An invitation to Balmoral should not be seen as approval. People get confused about that. The Queen going out riding with Andrew was seen as support for him. Nope, he had to step down as a working royal and has faced some humiliating situations since then, and the Queen had done nothing to spare him that. But he is still her son and she will spend time with him (and encourage him to go to church!).
After the divorce (if that happens), Megsy will not get another invitation but Harry will always be invited to family events. After the separation, Diana never visited Balmoral nor was on the balcony for Trooping the Colour (the latter is to celebrate the Queen's birthday so it is actually a personal occasion and the Queen likes her family to be there).
Megsy ghosts family when they no longer serve a purpose for her; the Queen does not do that, not as a mother, grandmother or great-grandmother (she must be very perplexed about how Meghan treats her family). But I doubt that we will ever see Meghan at any official royal function ever again.
Mail not Express
Fallout not feud
I hear you and agree with you. Are most Americans even interested in Rach and JH? I doubt it!
I posted on the other thread the Escaping the Crown special was extremely biased against the BRF. The views expressed were how the Brits were racist against Rach from the very beginning and the poor little thing did not have a chance. "The BRF and Brits ran her out of the country!"
I like the idea that it’s a preventative measure against a “Queen is racist and doesn’t welcome Meghan” story.
Perhaps Harry makes this type of accusation in the second half of the Greta tapes.
That was my first thought when I read the story and comments. It's not Rach, it's the BRF putting it out. And it has to be fresh. A 2018 train ride isn't going to cover it. Our collective attentions spans in this country are measured in news cycles, and only the most recent ones matter.
Whatever is in that second recording is so damaging that Kate ignored them at the Commonwealth service. Kate, who sat with that two-faced cow twice at Wimbledon, allowed the "actress" into her house at Christmas, and faked a Christmas walk for the good of the family, that Kate, who never puts a foot wrong, publicly ignored that toxic waste of Dumpbarton. Someone described Kate as having a face like "thunder" which is quite unusual for Kate who managed to look lovely and drink tea the day after her breasts were printed on the front page of newspapers. Something happened that matters.
The National Enquirer was most recently intimately involved in the Jeff Bezos/Lauren Sanchez cheating, text message and pic scandal...and guess who did NOT get sued?
@MB: The Enquirer also broke the story about presidential candidate Sen. Gary Hart cheating on his wife with a woman named Donna Rice aboard a boat aptly named “Monkey Business,” and also at his Washington, DC home. It ended his bid to be president.
@Elle
I agree “Something happened that matters”
I reckon BP pulled the second “act” super injunction.
Will we ever get to hear it?
@FairyCrocodile
Yes, the media have a definite pattern of putting out sugary news
followed by less flattering coverage. Tall Poppies, build em up
& chop em down.
As for loo paper, I have a pile of H&M newspaper cuttings,
perfect for an exRoyal Flush.
"Meghan Markle ‘plots acting return this autumn as she holds talks with TV and movie agents’ after quitting royal life"
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11172287/meghan-markle-acting-return-talks-with-tv-and-movie-agents/
@FrenchirLiv: But does it really count as real if they’re imaginary talks only going on in Meghan’s imagination?
Don't you see? She is playing Diana scenario again. The favorites get to follow and have juicy pieces of her "soul" to be exposed in their un-critical reports. She is also trading her photoshopped pictures for flattering articles.
It also reminded me so much about "Diana forced to quit public life by the icy royal family" brouhaha - orchestrated by Diana herself.
This is getting so spooky I am almost expecting to learn she made a visit to a certain grand estate in UK to a certain island for an inspirational seance.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8112837/Harry-Meghan-accept-invitation-Queen-join-Balmoral-summer.html#comments
Meghan and Harry presented Archie at a press conference (only specially chosen media) in Windsor Castle (unprecedented for anyone in the BRF other than the Queen so why this was allowed I do not know). Why was Doria there, all dressed up? She was not part of the press conference. Did they have tea with the Queen and Prince Philip after the press conference and Doria was invited? Why was a photograph taken of what was a private meeting, and why did the Queen allow it?
https://www.tasteofhome.com/article/new-girl-scout-cookie-2020/
Harry's wedding was more expensive than William's; nothing was spared. "We mustn't upset Harry, he is delicate". It is their default position. But Harry left such enormous pile of manure after himself that even his overindulgent family begins to get tired of him and his wife.
Lets see how long Charles can part with significant portion of his income to maintain 35 years old Harry and his nearly 39 years old wife.
I don't think the other shoe has dropped yet (i.e., either the second half of Harry's phone conversation with the pranksters OR whatever BP was going to use to knock it off the front page). But it might be for a very prosaic reason. Maybe BP and the Sun or the Times are still negotiating terms? If it's come to legal action, maybe BP needed more time to file for an injunction? I'm willing to bet our source Chrissy is correct, and it's coming, but there's been a delay. The Queen's decamping to Windsor Castle is not the big story we got a heads-up for.
And to belatedly add something to the discussion of the National Enquirer, I'd like to second the poster who described them as the most legitimate of the American tabloids. In my lifetime, they took down Gary Hart, a one-time Democratic presidential nominee, as well as John Edwards, by exposing their extramarital affairs. And if my fellow Americans can check me on this, I believe Jeane Dixon, once a well-known American psychic who "predicted" Kennedy's assassination, was one of their regular columnists. If you're going to look for a credible American tabloid, it's the National Enquirer, and yes, they also run some more typical tabloid articles alongside their legitimate reporting.
Having said that, I think their article about how MM told the Queen to "drop dead" -- which essentially means, "go to hell" -- is more likely to be true than not. They assuredly got it from a courtier, but the National Enquirer would have gotten confirmation of it.
Some things are starting to leak out. Notice the mention of the dress fitting fight in the current DM article about Wills and Harry. That's been one of the most tightly held pieces of gossip around, assuredly because it involved Charlotte.
Rach morphed into Medusa! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Perfect description!
Has anyone heard any other reasons?
I am watching the Escaping the BRF "documentary".
A lot of talking heads, mainly people whose names I don't recognize but have some interesting takes on it all.
I'm only 12 minutes in and learned from Omid that not only was the staff upset that she was sending emails at 5 am but that she didn't want to called by her formal title name. My impression was that she appeared to very status focused. I don't remember that second part, does anyone else?
Agreed-- Rach destroyed their relationship. How evil to come between the three of them who often looked so happy together.
I heard he was booted out for constant insubordination?
@Unknown
I remember a postcard in the 80’s for shampoo
depicting Medusa with multi penis for hair.
The caption was
“I’m gonna wash that man right out of my hair”
Duchess Dickhead!!
Thanks for your post about injunctions and super injunctions. I would tell the judge that it is in the public interest for citizens of the UK (especially) to know what a complete bonehead the 6th in line to the throne is.
Another Omid one I don't remember hearing before:
Apparently she was shocked at how much food was tossed from the food people at the Suits set so then the food was being sent to nearby homeless shelter.
According to Omid, this is how the nickname: "Meghan gets shit done" came about.
Anyone?
I'm watching it and taking lots of notes.
I do not remember the second part, either. In everything I have read Rach is VERY status focussed and treats people "under her" very poorly including the ppl who work for her and waiters and waitresses in the hospitality industry. In fact, I read that before the wedding Doria and Rach treated the staff at the hotel they stayed in before the wedding very poorly.
Ugh! How rude, entitled, and "up yourself" can you be?
Third Omid -
We saw a piece Could you imagine this woman with dreadlocks sitting with the Queen for tea?
What is the source of his quote? Because I don't remember that one. I'm certain it would have stuck out for me because she's not known for the dreadlock look.
Why am I doing this? Well, I got the impression that the BRF and the people really tried to welcome her and that I wasn't (in what I was reading) seeing all this racist plots against M ... so I wanted to see what specifically they are pitching as the racists against her. I only wish I hadn't given up alcohol for Lent.
ex BBC building. Looks like they will be leasing from Soho works, yes part of Soho house!
Apparently Travalsty already has its office there?
I cannot speak of Oprah today, but her smirking at the wedding of Just Royals was funny. She hates disloyalty, quitters, and people who forget those who helped them up to the top. She made Tom Cruise look like the idiot he was, as she hated that he fired his PR person, and let his sister and religion take over his life.
Oprah will deal with the HAMS sooner or later. She will be using them.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1255293/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-Royal-Family-Kate-Middleton-Prince-William-news
... and this is the opening paragraph:
MEGHAN MARKLE broke down in tears just minutes before she went to Westminster Abbey for her final engagement as a working royal and where she was dramatically snubbed by Prince William and Kate Middleton.
1. She changed her outfit so it was not minutes before she left for Westminster Abbey. Besides, she would have ruined her make up if she broke down and cried, and it would have taken time to fix it.
2. Meghan has boasted on camera about crying on cue and then demonstrated.
3. Anyone with the smallest amount of sense knows that Meghan and Harry did/said something that broke the camel's back for William and Kate. Since there seems to be a super injunction on reporting what it was, Meghan and Kate can pretend that they are innocent victims.
I kind of wish that William would leak what it was that Harry said in that second phone call and then say to them: 'prove it was me who leaked the information to the press and sue me'.
It seems to me like the lull before the storm.
Big sugary build up, then crash bang, all hell let loose... I hope.
Maelstrom Megs strikes out.
Maybe the number 2 they were about to drop is
much, much worse & they were only allowed number one?
A mutual agreement due to the scarcity of toilet rolls 😉
I do think the story we got from the Daily Mail on William and Harry's relationship was excellent, and later today (time permitting) I'll set up a new blog post to discuss.
In addition, I have created a new March 15 Corona Virus post Discussion Board.
https://nuttyflavorvirus.blogspot.com/2020/03/corona-virus-discussion-board-march-15.html
I’m leaning towards Rupert being discouraged from releasing No 2.
News is news, deadly, world devastating virus wouldn’t normally stop
the hacks in their tracks?
Regarding the leaked report of them accepting invitation to spend time at Balmoral, I'd be weary if I was the RF. If true, that would be a recon mission for Meghan. She'd be taking photos and secretly recording them on her phone in hopes of using the contents against them in a tell-all book. On the other hand, they may have only accepted the invite as way to weasel back into the family after pretty much telling them to f-off. Dangle a baby in front of elderly relatives in attempt to ingratiate and seek favors. This tactic works on the elderly a lot of times because many are of the mindset of forgive and forget especially when there's baby there to beg the case. It happened with the elderly mother of a family friend, she got duped out of signing away her home to her ex-DIL. Her son had to hire a lawyer to sort through all of the borderline illegal stuff that was pulled. The lawyer told our family friend that he sees scams all the time committed by married-in relatives. It's usually the case that the scamming relative was able to pull off the scams, or nearly so, because the targeted family are good, decent people who'd never dream of such unsavory characters let alone those marrying into the family. The BRF has had opportunists (looking at you Sarah) but not a grifter on the level as Meghan. The Queen should not be left alone with Meghan and Harry, who knows what sort of stunt or coercion they'd pull with her and Phillip.
News is news, deadly, world devastating virus wouldn’t normally stop
the hacks in their tracks?
A call from the Queen would have done it. Rupert is a great admirer of HM.
It could have also been done at a lower level, a call made by one of the courtiers. "We'll give you a great scoop next week if...."
MEGHAN MARKLE broke down in tears just minutes before she went to Westminster Abbey for her final engagement as a working royal and where she was dramatically snubbed by Prince William and Kate Middleton.
Typical Express headline inflation. When you read the story, it turns out she was slightly tearful saying goodbye to her staff, which was much earlier in the day. "Just minutes" if you're talking in hundreds of minutes.
Didn't Harry already attempt this during the Megxit saga? He wanted to speak directly to his grandmother, and was told no.
Apologies for the source looking for news
The offices at the old BBC centre in White City the Sussex duo are supposedly setting up in London are reportedly connected to Soho House and are an offshoot enterprise run my Marcus Anderson the article states ?
I agree with you re Harry.
But, the Queen isn’t daft, she is fully aware of what Meg is.
The Queen is “killing her with kindness”
Meg screams racism, being excluded.
The Queen reinforces the fact that Meg was/is warmly welcomed,
and is still welcome.
The Queen will remind us that Meg enjoyed privileges that Kate never had,
such as being invited for Christmas before marriage.
Megs first Christmas with “the family she never had” came about because
she complained to Harry that she felt excluded, not part of the family.
Harry demanded & the rest is...
Did you mean "Meghan and Harry"? I do see Kate as an innocent victim.
And oh, yes, wouldn't this be wunderbar:
I kind of wish that William would leak what it was that Harry said in that second phone call and then say to them: 'prove it was me who leaked the information to the press and sue me'.
Something significant happened, and it is written all over Kate's face.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/harrys-war-the-ugly-truth-790316.html
She’s protecting the rest of the RF re Chunder chunder 2.
Just the way Megsy saw an opening to brainwash Hapless.
And right about Megsy using any visit to Balmoral to take photos, videos, record royals and others. SO NO from the Queen. A resounding no! To any visit by the Gruesome Toxic Twosome.
Could have been the tantrum re the order of service,
sit yourselves down.
Or the F off to Camilla/Queen.
Maybe the “hoax” call?
Whatever it was, it caused pain to the whole RF.
She is craving for this photo in the car with HMQ.
She will also certainly publish pictures of Archie with HMQ. If she can be there for her birthday, she will tell the tabloids she had a very special birthday.
All the speeches for dodgy banks and billionaires they were supposed to participate will be cancelled.
Same thing for Invictus, London marathon and every single event which could have offered them a major media coverage.
Throwbacks, mother day, father day, Archie birthday would help her to update her IG but she won’t be happy if the Cambridge can do better.
Because of Coronavirus and her controversial image, she has few perspectives outside the BRF…
Nope, the Toxic Duo will not be allowed entry to Balmoral, for thoroughly Modern Maleficent Megsy to vampire off the Queen and the Royal Family. Will not happen. Gotta hand it to H and M. They are ensconced in their bolt hole far away from the Maddening Crowds of the virus panic. I doubt it registers on them.
In my case, decades - not until I consulted Sigmund Google two years ago.
1968- 1976: rages from my mother, triggered by my engagement and marriage no 1. I didn't accept that this was narcissism until I read Terry Apter's book `Difficult Mothers', 18 months ago.
1972 -1976 rages from SiL, but assumed she was `just' mentally ill
1981- 1989: rages from husband no 2 (11 months with him, rest of time trying to get divorce but blocked by him). I worked out that he probably had a personality disorder in '89 - '90 but only because I had access to a university library.
2018: after 30+ years of no contact, I `made it up' with Sil, only to be raged at after her domineering and attention-seeking behaviour at my art Degree Show. Went straight to Google, tugged at the thread called `emotional blackmail' and pulled out `narcissism'. Had to have 6 sessions with an excellent counsellor (ex NHS) to clarify that I wasn't imagining what was going on.
Despite having degrees in science and history (and being near end of art course) I couldn't have got an answer without Google. Incidentally, I now attribute getting my `extra' qualifications to never being able to satisfy my mother's expectations - I'm always trying to prove I'm good enough.
If it took me that long to discover what was going on, what hope for those who encounter one of these vile people for the very first time?
The looks on Wills & Kate’s faces said it all.
They are finished regarding the RF.
Goodness, how happy we are who managed to avoid meeting a narc in our lives. They are deadly. I am sorry to hear about your mother. Instead of being your rock she was the source of turmoil? As for Harry - two ways:
1. Harry is not a narc and will be destroyed by her. Unlike you he is not a strong personality.
2. They are both narcs and the stronger one will destroy the other one. Probably Markle.
Any way the future is not rosy for Hazza.
The absence of the Royal family at this terrible time is really glaring. Why doesn't William do a video, showing him telephoning old people at home to comfort them and give them company? Kate could do a video showing the kids at home doing simple things, like drawing with crayons. Really, this is his time to shine.
Also, if I were Bea and Edo, I'd go get married right now at the smallest chapel at Windsor Castle with no one but the Queen, their parents, and Eugenie and Wolfie present.
That would be a great display of the old British motto, Keep Calm and Carry On. People would love them for it.
https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1239130238958829568
The Queen is at Windsor - as is quite usual - this weekend. And not because she’s escaping London and #coronavirusuk.
Despite being 93 - and therefore in the high risk group - she’s expected back at Buckingham Palace next week - again, as normal
The article wasn’t about why Harry left the army, it was about why his (operation) army tour in 2012 was cut short, (due to the details being being to on the internet), which we were told at the time). 😉
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/serena-williams-self-isolate-coronavirus-102931137.html
It should have read (due to the details being leaked on the internet)
Weird, because if they're really on Victoria Island, they're kind of isolated anyway. Seems like it would be a no-brainer.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/kate-reveals-she-is-up-to-carrying-out-that-royal-duty-bearing-a-grudge-against-harry-meghan
Read only if you have a strong stomach.
The comments from H$Ms about their targets being `cold' brought back how the SiL accused me of the exact same thing when I tried `Grey Rock' on her all those years ago (back then, I didn't know it was called that).
Sil wailed in distress `Why are you so cold to me?' but I nearly said `Why the H*ll do you think?' but PiLs were there - I'd already been labelled the `jealous' one and I thought better of it.
What chance does any target stand the first time it happens to them? When they don't know what's happening? Far too easy to beat oneself up for lack of tolerance, patience, understanding or love.
I'd love to know just how long it took for other Nutties to cotton on?
Could be. The question is - what might have made Kate look so totally done with Meghan and Harry - or, as Elle said, Something significant happened, and it is written all over Kate's face.
An insult to George, Charlotte or Louis?
I mean, this is a woman who put up with "Waity Kate" memes for a decade. I don't think Harry or Meg insulting her personally would be enough to make her so angry.
Unless, perhaps, Harry somehow blamed her for the break between the Sussexes and Cambridges.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8113967/Meghan-Markles-estranged-brother-urges-high-horse-let-dad-meet-Archie.html
I don't think Harry would stoop to the level of saying something hurtful about the Cambridge kids. His beef is with his brother not accepting his chosen wife. Perhaps he made fun of Kate being a social climber, waity katey, door-to-handle thing before she married her prince? It would hurt to the core for Kate to have Harry himself say those words. Harry may try to bring Kate down to the level of Meghan.
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/kate-reveals-she-is-up-to-carrying-out-that-royal-duty-bearing-a-grudge-against-harry-meghan
She must think the whole world are idiots with microscopic memories, because we haven’t forgotten that she was invited and welcomed to Balmoral for each summer and Christmas of her marriage...at least four opportunities, And each time, she and Henry threw two fingers up at the Queen’s invitation. Harry used to love Balmoral as much as Granny does. He’s not been there since he took up with Meg because the primary activities are stalking and shooting. Meggy knows that it appears prestigious to be invited to the Queen’s favorite place, so it seems to be an open invitation for anyone in the family, not a sign of extra special regard, but can we imagine Meg having a grand old time in a drafty rustic castle in rainy Scotland while H roams the moors shooting things? She doesn’t ride, and contrary to her recent PR, hours long hikes in the mud and the drizzly rain... not her style. She doesn’t ride. Sitting by the fireplace with a cuppa making chitchat with Camilla sure wouldn’t be inviting to her. So she’s convinced Harry That Balmoral is boring and decidedly not Woke enough to condescend to go there. Last summer’s “The Queen loves Meg so much she’s giving her a special birthday tea and a whole wing of the castle fell flat as a lead pancake. Also with Archie potentially not being a real baby, it’s particularly brazen to Keep dangling him like a carrot as if the queen is a horse that’s going to fall for it. Since were nearly 5 months out from the queens Balmoral season, that conveniently leaves a lot of wiggle room for Meg for “something to come up” which will lead to “her decision not to come to Scotland.“ Now that Archie will presumably be old enough to travel on a plane, she’ll still be able to milk the coronavirus until then at least.
The brazenness of this hussy is only matched by her utter predictability.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/legal-removal/11175237/prince-harry-meghan-secret-office-london/
Prince Harry and Meghan plan to open new office in London at ex-BBC building
HARRY and Meghan are secretly planning to open a new charity office in London — despite relocating to Canada.
The couple, who decided to quit as senior royals, are searching for a new UK base after they leave their offices inside Buckingham Palace at the end of this month.
They are understood to have selected a space at the iconic former BBC Television Centre in White City, where ITV now films some of its hit shows.
The pair are said to have set their sights on a floor run by co-working space Soho Works.
It’s a venture opened by Soho House, a hotel and members’ club chain run by one of their close friends, Markus Anderson.
Prince Harry’s “sustainable travel” group Travalyst already has offices in the building.
The former TV centre is secure, which would suit their needs, with access to all the floors protected by card access-only doorways.
Facilities also include podcast recording equipment as well as a loft for private events.
A source told The Sun on Sunday: “With Meghanand Harry’s well-known links to the chain, this seems like the perfect choice.
“It would give them the privacy to do their charitable work but also a space with a bit of buzz. They would be able to get in and out without anyone noticing, with three exits and a drop-off point. It’s a no-brainer for them to put their charity there.“
“Although the family has moved to Canada they still fully intend to maintain charitable activities here and felt it was vital to find a home for a new office in London.”
The couple have a long history with Soho House venues, starting with their first date at its Dean Street Townhouse in West London.
Meghan is thought to have held her hen party in the very private Soho Farmhouse in Chipping Norton, Oxon. She is also best friends with Markus, a consultant for the elite club brand.
Even if it isn't, it sounds like a "hot desk" enterprise. Not really where you'd want to put a charity that depends on donor trust.
Even if it isn't, it sounds like a "hot desk" enterprise. Not really where you'd want to put a charity that depends on donor trust.
I expect to be getting calls any time now saying in a strongly accented voice: "Allo. My name is Hendry. I am calling because you have outstanding warrants from the IRS and police will be taking you to jail unless you pay the sum of $500 immediately. You can not go to jail if you donate right now to the Sussex Charitable Fund by gift card."
The Queen should not be left alone with Meghan and Harry, who knows what sort of stunt or coercion they'd pull with her and Phillip.
Didn't Harry already attempt this during the Megxit saga? He wanted to speak directly to his grandmother, and was told no.
---
That literally gave me gooseflesh
I just realized that Harry's Nazi cosplay took possessive when he was 20 yrs old!I
I'd had always assumed he was like 15 or 16
I get those calls too, usually someone telling me that my Windows system needs immediate repair. (I use a Mac.)
I immediately switch to my local language, which makes these callers very angry. Speak English! they say. Hey, buddy, you called me.
I can't stand it now and I don't think it's me that's changed. It's sole driver seems to be its political agenda, bash the other party at all costs, politicise everything regardless of the truth.
For me, the change in its tone was apparent about 20 years ago, when I worked in the library of our local `land-based' college, what used to be called an agricultural college, when I compared it with the other `heavies' to which we subscribed.
It was obvious, for instance, that it took a metropolitan viewpoint, profoundly antipathetic to any issues to do with life in the countryside, as if they detested farmers with the hatred that characterised Soviet attitudes to the kulaks.
That attitude, and others, persist.
Pure bigotry
I wonder if Meghan thought the half in half out ideas was actually going to work?
I wonder if they have any regrets over the "fishing" media they have been putting out over the past 2years? (ie Balmoral, birthday party, baby shower, billionaires etc.)
I wonder if Meghan and Harry have any regrets about smearing the RF in the media the past 2 years ? It has kept them on the front page but they have lost much of their popularity.
I wonder if they will be allowed to participate in the Queen procession next year or just sat on the sidelines?
I wonder if they are realizing the grass may not be greener on the other side of the pond? It's green where you water it.
I wonder how well the British/Canadian/American public will take the news when one or more secretly continues to pay their excessive security bill? Will there be protests, petitions, or riots in the streets?
Will the UK get rid of the monarchy completely after QE passes?
When will Meghan start pap walking Archie again? Sooner or later?
- Megs deliberately walked all over Camillas function. Didn't curtsy to her
- Told HM or Camilla to f**k off
- Mocked both the "small steps" and Earthshot prize
- The slavering Scobie articles about how uptight the RF is, especially Kate.
- "The Escape from the Crown" propaganda
- Refusing to use the court circular and Royal Rota .photographers (hey, into March 31st, right?) I'll bet they are missing the $from that "in love" photo. And Medusa Megs speaks for itself.
- Her patronage by having "secret" meetings and then only taking publicity for herself in Ig
- The hand holding at the Marine Band function
- Under/inappropriately dressed and silly at all functions
- The Commonwealth Temper tantrum (they should have lost the Commonwealth positions for that alone)
- The Archie lie. She never was going to bring him
- I'm sure Charles paid for all this. So he got slapped as well.
GRr. At what point is somebody going to grow a pair? Even narcs back off to somebody stronger
Nutty - when I get those calls from Microsoft, I tell them I have a Mac. They finally wised up and tell me that they will switch me to the Macintosh division. I just laugh at them.
Does Meghan thinks she is some kind of legal expert because she had a supporting role in an American legal series?
If an article is factually incorrect, simply issue a denial. What is so difficult about that? (There is no truth to the speculation that the Sussexes are opening an office ...). What do I know though? I am from an African country and that is how it works here. (Of course, some politicians issue outraged denials and a while later we find out that the story was 100% true, so we do not always believe denials ... depends on who it is and what proof they have!)
This story that if you deny one thing you have to deny everything and if you deny everything than what you do not deny must be true is actually quite childish.
For example: there are big headlines about the Sussexes being invited to Balmoral, as if this is a major sign that the Queen supports them 100% ... a major PR win for the Sussexes. Since the Queen invites all her close and extended family (plus others, such as the PM) to Balmoral in the summer, there is no point in denying the story as it must be true. However, that the Sussexes will accept the invitation when they have never done so in the past may be not true but it is actually not important to deny this. When no photos emerge of the Sussexes at Balmoral in the summer (as happened the last two summers), the truth will become obvious and royal commentators will become more wary (we hope) of drinking the kool aid the Sussexes dish out.
If the story of the Sussexes opening an office in a building alongside Soho House is not true, then issue a denial. If it is true, what is the problem about this being public knowledge? What kind of people open an office and then keep it a secret and then threaten everyone with legal action if they talk about their top secret offices?
They are being funded by taxpayers as their very expensive security (as the three are often in different countries) is paid for by the British people.
What is wrong with the Sussexes? Have they no sense of decency at all? And why are their people who support such behaviour and, like the Guardian journalist, insist on spreading the false narrative that the British people are all racists and that Meghan has done nothing wrong but is brilliant in every way? By the way, the Guardian journalist is classicist - I am sure there are people in the UK who have never forgiven Kate for being middle class, and they accept Meghan because she is biracial, which is somehow a magic acceptance card.
As for the second hoax phone call, I sensed from the start, when it was first mentioned, that the Sussexes would use legal action to stop it being released (it IS damaging and it DOES show Harry insulting the Cambridges big time). How can a legal super injunction be justified? Have they convinced the court that it was information about a personal family tiff and was thus of no interest to the public? Why should the public continue to fund the Sussexes and tolerate them in the public space if they have shown themselves to be actively working against the Cambridges (an heir to the throne)? Besides, they are going to be holding out the begging bowl for donations to fund their luxurious lifestyle so I think what was said during that phone call is of public interest. They are NOT self-funding billionaires but publicly supported wannabe royals without the hassle of being accountable to anyone.
Magatha, indeed they are trying to kill them with kindness. I do wish that there’s a limit set as to how far Meghan could go short of wishing the Queen, Kate, and William to be dead. A line of decency should be drawn so that these sorts of abhorrent behavior do not become the new normal. You don’t directly diss the Queen and future King(s) and expect not a rebuke but invitation to summer in Balmoral. I think this is emboldening Meghan. Meghan in turn uses it to brainwash Harry into thinking she powerfully has the RF twisted around her fingers. She says jump and they respond “how high”. It only serves Meghan’s purpose and plays into her narrative that she’s a force to be reckoned with.
Hi xxxxx, I also think Harry is dumb enough to believe Meghan, that he’s so unique and powerful that his own family are jealous haters because of those things. She’s built him up so much that his mind is operating like that of a gambling addict. The addict has invested so much money, time, and energy into winning the big jackpot, that it’s impossible to walk away without admitting tremendous guilt and letdown. So he keeps betting more and more because to turn back would be to more devastating under that mindset than just walking away with dignity intact. At some point in the past couple of years, Harry has decided to roll the dice with Meghan for that big payoff. His fragile ego cannot admit that he’s made a life-altering bad choice in Meghan.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8113741/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-plan-open-new-charity-office-London-former-BBC-building.html
Here is some advice from a Londoner (from the comments section) - not the top rated but delightfully practical:
So this is Just Harry, now totally out of his depth, falling back onto the only thing he knows: how to be a Royal. Sorry but the last thing you need to be doing right now is wasting money on setting up a charity. You have to earn money, to the tune of US$33m per year. You and your wife seem to have about two years' living expenses as your net worth and it takes about six months to get plans moving, and another year to two years for a business to become profitable. You do not have time to set up charities. You need to be setting up a business - something easy that you can run, preferably a going concern with a good profitable track record. You've exposed yourself as being not too wordly, so something where you can be 'behind the scenes' is best. You are out of time - so stop wasting it, buy a business, and learn how to keep it going. It's now your only hope of meeting your expenses.
Since we had a trip to NZ a few years back, my chap has been a dedicated reader of the NZ Herald, not least because its news breaks 12hrs ahead of ours.
They are not constricted by the need to be sugary/avoid racism charges (at least in the UK context)
Here are some articles re Harkles that may interest you – all costs are in NZ$.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12316739
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12316844
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12315017
Of course, `for good’ has 2 meanings - `permanently’ and `for the better’. Your choice!