Apparently Prince Harry will appear on the BBC's The One Show tonight in a filmed segment, talking to the families of World War II survivors who suffered burns in battle. (You'll be able to see it here shortly after broadcast, which begins at 1900 British time, or 2100 Eastern European Time, which is the time on this blog).
He's a little late for VE Day, but better late than never, I suppose.
The suspense is terrific. Will he be filming from his laundry room again? Or will he sit in the beige chair beside the generic houseplant?
Meanwhile, Lifetime has announced its third Harry & Meghan movie, tenatively titled "Harry and Meghan: Escaping the Palace."
Which one are you looking forward to most?
Comments
I think it's a lousy thing to name a child for one's own purposes, a form of abuse.
A name can, I believe, celebrate the uniqueness of a child without being weird. It's possible even if the names come from a family `stock' as in the RF
Very insightful all you say
A former neighbour who's father deserted the family when sheceasca child The father remarried then named his daughter from that martuagecthe same name as my neighbour the very much alive Doris! Doris only discovered this as an adult too.
Your colleague was right to change her name
The realisation must-have been do hurtful when the truth emerged .
I think it's a lousy thing to name a child for one's own purposes, a form of abuse.
A name can, I believe, celebrate the uniqueness of a child without being weird. It's possible even if the names come from a family `stock' as in the RF
Very insightful all you say
Especially first male names being handed down over generations
A close.relative sucummed to this at her husbands insistence husband 2 son's all named after decreed grandparent all had the same 3 initials to confuse .Later all the family post was opened by the wrong people until the sons left home.They are now known by their middle name
A former neighbour who's father deserted the family when she was.a child The father remarried then named his daughter from that mariagethe same name as my neighbour the very much alive Doris! Doris only discovered this as an adult too her half sibling was unawares.
Your colleague was right to change her name after The truth had emerged
The realisation must-have been very hurtful when the truth emerged .Every child born deserved his or her unique identity poor Archie
Also, they cannot market themselves as Royal.
Further, Royal is something Americans care little about, so I am wondering why they are assuming continuing that play is going to equal more attention. They still get more attention in the UK than in the USA, believe it or not. I guess it's all they have going on.
Popping into a random Zoom meeting in Atlanta, looks like a quid pro quo arrangement with Tyler Perry. He has a lot of connections in the do-gooding space, where he spends a lot of effort and time.
If that's the case, this was pre-arranged when they arranged their housing. Now, it's interesting with what has transpired publicly, obviously, public perception has only gotten worse for the Duo.
I think what we are going to see, are people doing deals with them to get attention on their projects, like this one in Atlanta. And then the next, and so on. There is a lot of money involved in driving attention to causes, so it looks like this is how they are going to scrape by. Infamy or not, these charities will benefit from the 'clicks' the pair bring.
Now, it won't be grand-scale money. And nowadays with conversion tracking, their deals will be tied to ROI. Probably percentage based income. None of my calculations achieve a $3mm yearly income they need, though.
On top, I can't imagine them making much income from Charity Fundraisers, and Ball appearances. Those are all cancelled this year, when they are at peak popularity. As well, They are an inefficient use of marketing dollars since they are infamous and lack Royalty. Which brings me to conclude, the will only be invited to smaller time middle functions, that pay between 10-20k an appearance. This is obviously beneath Meghans ego, and if it's marketed as 'Royal' attendees the Queen will put a stop to it.
I'm at a loss as to how they are going to keep this going without full income support from Charles.
Taken from mediabistro.com interview
'You keep clients for a long time. What are you doing to make them happy?
Reply from Ken Sunshine
I can’t seem to get rid of them!
(
Wikipedia editing for clientsEdit
In June 2015, Sunshine admitted his firm had employed paid editors to edit clients Wikipedia pages to remove negative material about them, violating the Wikipedia updated terms of service. Sunshine Sachs said its employees failed to make public their relationship with the firm when making edits, and a key employee was unaware of Wikipedia's updated policies on paid editing. All employees engaged in editing Wikipedia now make appropriate disclosures, Sunshine said. Celebrities whose Wikipedia articles were edited by Sunshine Sachs include Naomi Campbell, Mia Farrow and Sarah Brightman.[13] References to the failure of Campbell's 1994 album "Babywoman" were removed, as were her relationship with Mike Tyson and assault convictions.[14] It was unclear if the celebrities themselves were aware of the edits.[13]
The New York Times said an email to clients stated that “Sunshine Sachs has a number of experienced editors on staff that have established profiles on Wikipedia,” and that “the changes we make to existing pages are rarely challenged.” Sunshine said that he believed that his firm's edits to Wikipedia prior to June 2014, when the policy was changed, abided by Wikipedia policy
I totally agree, and I’m a little bewildered as to why his name is being picked over and being referred to as unfortunate etc., as there are far worst names. It’s not a conventional royal name by any means, but it’s not unheard of in the UK. It’s Cary Grant’s real Christian name (though I think it was probably Archibald). I called my last cat Archie. ��
Wouldn't it be highly amusing if this happens and she is sued for the gross invasion of privacy? By the much more professional team with a much stronger case.
That would add to her record of shooting herself in the foot.
I think it will never happen though because events suggest royal family wizened up after not ding their homework prior to the marriage. There must be a dossier on her past.
What’s that saying: pick on someone your own size?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Colin_Campbell
I guess that makes her “exotic” aside from growing up white in Jamaica?
"It’s not a conventional royal name by any means, but it’s not unheard of in the UK. It’s Cary Grant’s real Christian name (though I think it was probably Archibald). I called my last cat Archie."
Meghan called her childhood cat Archie too. Not sure if I'd reuse my pet's name for a child but ok. Their choice.
Mostly though for me, I wouldn't have thought Archie was an odd name if that had been his nickname with a given name of Archibald. And if H&M hadn't come up with Archewell and tied it and Archie to all that Greek "source of action" stuff.
Correction (if I may): Lady Colin Campbell was not born a boy. She did have a genital malformation and was raised as a boy but she was a girl.
She adopted two boys and was only married to her husband for a year. She seems to be from a colonial family on Jamaica.
To be fair, I don't like Louis, either, ( especially given the way they pronounce it) but he was named after someone important to Charles ( and it's one of William's names, too) and it has an aura of European royalty about it.
I am so tired of these two. I do keep checking here for any further craziness, but I wish they'd hurry up and get a divorce. (Horrible thing to want, and I do feel badly thinking it.)
A) it’s not a common name
B) it was her pets name first
C) when announcing her charity/nonprofit (still not clear) offered the explanation that it was in honor of Archie, and came from Greek origin (debunked) of Arche meaning such and such word salad
D) ^ that brought the most confusion to the choice of the name
As usual, no one really cared about Archie the name, and while it’s not a common name, everyone has their own opinion on names in general. Names are of big debate in the baby crowd. And this baby is Royal.
But I digress, Meghan is the person who put the supposed ‘meaning’ of Archie / arche front and center, which would always lead to a discussion anyway. If she didn’t want people discussing his name, she probably shouldn’t be bringing deeper attention to it.
What an incestuous mess they all are.
I swear, I may never believe another word I read in the papers.
Louis also sounds kind of Bronx thuggy to my ears... "yo, LOOwey, come ovah heeyah and lemme tell yous somethin"
They are both delightful, adorable babies. Given the tendency towards long lives in the family, I suppose all the good names were already taken! I guess I was hoping for Alexander and Thomas :o)
Harry barely passed his classes (and cheated with help from others), and Meghan has seriously inflated her time at Northwestern. What do they have to speak about to these people besides, "Hi! Good work. Bye!"
I'm so tired of The Harkles getting involved with mental health issues, when it's obvious that they have serious mental issues of their own. The advice they give could be dangerous to people in a real mental health crisis. What can they offer to help these people, besides providing free PR for themselves?
My niece is a psychologist who works with burn patients. She worked hard for her doctorate, and The Harkle's PR stunt by calling a burn center, really made me angry. These burn patients are experiencing the worst pain imaginable, and their psychologists work so hard to give them hope, teach them to cope with the pain, and to ease their fears for the future-if they survive.
Please leave these things to the professionals, Harkles!
Mostly though for me, I wouldn't have thought Archie was an odd name if that had been his nickname with a given name of Archibald. And if H&M hadn't come up with Archewell and tied it and Archie to all that Greek "source of action" stuff.
--------
As well as the Prince George RPO Code name of Archie.
That's some serious creepy right there given Megs fixation on Kate.
OT but an idiot poster called me "Karen" last week and I just thought she meant some other person.
LOL Come to find out it's slang for "an elitist middle aged white woman". Hilarious!
They are uniquely qualified because they are ROYAL!
They Harkles may as well be asking if the listener has Prince Albert in the can.
These are the visits they couldn't be bothered with while they lived in the UK and it was their JOB.
I don't get it. Why the hanging on to the "toxic" UK?
Is this just more of the weird William and Kate competition? Do they think they will somehow "win" here, or have someone beg them to come back?
I'm sure everyone has had that one friends like this: the friend left their marriage after a series of petty slights that somehow morphed into an "unbearable"situation in the friends mind. They announced they are leaving, and the spouse said something like "have a nice life."
The friend then spent the next few years in a swivet trying to make the ex-spouse regret they lost her, while the ex-spouse has remarried and is enjoying a drama -free life.I
It's the only rationale I can come up with for H&M. The bad breakup revenge.
I equate Archie with the comic books and Archie Bunker, too. It's hardly a prestigious name here in the US, especially when the Archie series, Riverdale, is on TV. as for Louis, I think of the French kings.
@ Mel in SoCal,
I saw that Karen comment, too, and thought it was kind of a cheap shot, as it's become a meme. There wasn't much imagination put into that derogatory comment.
@Lt. Uhura,
I was thinking of our conversation about journalism professors last night and realized that you're probably much younger than me. My professor, who told us not to use "died suddenly," would be approximately 110 years old by now. Maybe your professor got that idea from him, as he was a world-famous journalist, as was his father, one of the original muckrakers?
Sometimes, I forget that I'm old!
I was thinking of the
I also think the whole archewell greek tweak is entirely made up and laughable but wow was that fun with the redirects to golddigger and many others.
I really feel alot for William in all this and of course Kate but that's his brother and it is really sad to me. sounds as though Harry was pain in the butt behind the scenes but I won't believe all the fun loving pics between them was pr. deep down that's your brother. I just think to that pic with Harry arms crossed brooding in the stands. what a jerk
@aquagirl thanks for the Enty reply! and re-entry was fantastic! <lie alert
Funny story...I wanted to name my son Alexander. Loved the name, and it was a family name on my spouse's side quite a way back. Unbeknownst to me, it was the name of my mother's childhood cats, Alexander I and Alexander II.
She was horrified that I would name my baby after a pet. And my grandma was beside herself. Just not done. After much laughter, we chose a different family name. Everyone's happy now.
That didn't happen here, did it Mel? The "Karen" incident, I mean.
I'm sorry if it did. This is one forum that generally rises above that kind of nonsense.
And yet, the pool is unfenced. With a toddler in the house.
They are unfit parents IMO
Blind Item #3
What does an insecure controlling person do? They isolate their victim. They remove them from their friends. They tell them to stop contacting their family. They make it harder to spend face to face time with the family. They do that to take away their support network. Moving you further from your home base also could mean a loss of job or purpose or schedule to keep you grounded. You start to rely more and more on the person who is insecure. The same in cults. I'm not sure the alliterate former actress could have picked a better scenario in her mind. What she may have forgotten from her time her previously as an actress/"model"/reality star is that Hollywood is a small town. Apparently she was ticked off an A+ list mostly movie actress landed a role that our former actress thought should have gone to her.
POSTED BY ENT LAWYER AT 7:00 AM 57 COMMENTS
Yes, the Karen incident did happen here. It's too bad, as we usually have a great group of people here. The same person admonished me, too, some time ago.
The unfenced pool worries me, too. We have a law in our state that all pools must be fenced. I hope the nanny, if they have one, keeps a close eye on Archie.
As for the screens, I think it's only to draw publicity. They do nothing to screen out onlookers. It also draws attention to the house they are squatting in. You can probably see it from space. They are so desperate for attention.
* It is very much a Meghan book.
* The publisher has edited stuff out of the book and toned down other stuff as the publisher does not want to face lawsuits.
* Meghan is going to burn bridges and, albeit in a passive aggressive way, she is going to throw Harry, Charles and Camilla under the bus in a major way through this book. Biting the hand that feeds you may not be wise but giving vent to her feelings of victimhood and entitlement and expressing her rage is more important to Meghan (almost a compulsion).
* Meghan is going to want to do an interview with every major talk show host, but most if not all will want Harry and she will not get booked in big shows as a solo act, as she would wish. (He is the royal who threw everything away; she is just a C grade actress who grifted her way into the royal family and then threw it away - another trashy celebrity in a town that goes through them by the dozens every month.)
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1282367/prince-william-prince-harry-relationship-latest-princess-diana-the-diana-award
Regarding libraries. This is a sticky issue. Publishers are limiting copies of books because it’s the only weapon they have against the amazon juggernaut. Publishers are hoping that a popular author will prompt the reader to actually buy the book in a bookstore. Of course, that can backfire on them if the eager reader buys it from amazon at heavy discount. Also, please note that amazon’s book division loses money all the time. They often sell books for less than what it costs to buy them from the publisher. Books are considered the loss leader for amazon. Anyway, I would imagine that Hachette (which I believe is publishing Markle’s masterpiece) will discount it heavily to basically break even, especially since there is now competition for the ‘truth.” You have have essentially two months to make the majority of your sales. These types of books, probably even less. And given the climbing COVID deaths (83,000 Americans in less than three months), I see the majority of her sales as an ebook, probably more difficult to inflate sales figures. Cry me a river, Markle.
If Markle thought she and Omid would be laughing all the way to the bank on the strength of these sales, she’s sadly mistaken. If the book dishes real dirt (say, on Andrew, what a gold mine there), then the BRF would issue a superinjunction and the book would never see the light of day. If it’s merely fluff, with more of that “No one asked me if I’m okay” crap, that type of whining went over like a lead ballon the first time. I think of all that Harry/Meghan memorabilia post-wedding, sitting on the shelves at deep discount. It will be the same with this book. IMO. I might be pleasantly surprised (or wrong about her popularity), but In light of the ridiculous shenanigans that have occurred SINCE that documentary was aired, I have great difficulty in seeing this as a money maker. Note that no one who was originally such a Markle megaphone (hee!), is making any commentary on this book.
Finally, libraries have become a godsend for authors as the indie bookstores were decimated by amazon’s cut-throat pricing practices. They have been making a comeback in the last couple of years, and I’m terrified that COVID will kill them off for good. I don’t know how B&N will hold on. They have been hanging on by their nails for years. So all these venues where authors used to connect with readers are gone, EXCEPT for libraries (and a lot of bookstores are now charging authors for hosting events). Every author I know makes the library circuit and hauls around boxes of books for sale, because it’s only the top 3% of authors who get actual marketing dollars. Everyone else has to hoof it on their lonesome.
Some how I don’t see Markle selling books out of the back of her car (what ever car is the chariot de jour at any given day)!
I think your predictions about the book are spot on. My guess is that MM will try to deny that she was closely involved in writing it or that she wrote it herself. She will play the doe-eyed innocent, saying that she didn't really know what they were writing. She didn't see an advance copy, but most of the things written in the book are true. She's going be be a sly one about this book. Another, "Who? Little demure me? I would never do that!" ploy, as in the African, "Nobody asks if I'm OK" routine.
The publisher's lawyers probably did go over the book carefully for possible libel, but the book will get the Harkle's point across, anyway. I agree that she will want to get every interview about it that she can.
One thing I've noticed about books is that there are always so many more coming out all the time. It's like the candies in the I love Lucy scene where she can't keep up with them.
The other thing about books is that not as many people read the way they used to and if they do, many go ebook.
More books all the time and fewer readers = less books bought.
We do read (and we used to go mainly used bookstores but also regular ones) at least once a month. Sometimes more but we are not the norm. At the used book store, it was very common to top $100. But even we are cutting back a bit. I'm trying to read down the stack before I add more.
Archie bunker who? You might as well mention Clark Gable, Martin Mull and Angie Dickinson lol.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
We old. We don’t count or matter.
Thanks for the info about book publishing. I know that independent booksellers have had a very tough time combating Amazon, and I hope that they can survive the COVID crisis. Browsing bookstores, and buying too many books, is such a joy!
Do you think Scobie (and we all know that MM would insist on getting her cut someway) got an advance?
@Mel cute story about "Alexander" i am sure you were kinda crushed but once you heard that you knew you just couldn't have name but now you have cute story . think how weird it would be, your son kinda named Alexander III . that is why the cat Archie combo is so icky
I have a confession. my name is not Lucy and I kid you not it is exactly what I would name my dog if I got another. I didn't correct poster because it was just too sweet she looked up my name day. so I am sorry but it's just too funny given the context of conversation. but yes my girl dog will be named Lucy and my boy dog Stu
I have old school name ,that I can appreciate now that I am older but as a kid it was a drag because I could never find pencils or keychains or absolutely anything engraved with it
I will say this . Edgar Allan Poe was referenced recently and though that wasn't reasoning for my name. it is featured in a beloved poem and that's all I will say on that. no guesses as I am private like that but I feel lousy over my "deception" I guess it could have been worse I could have went with "Stu" 😏
Thanks for the insights on the publishing world. I didn't realize how much damage Amazon has done to the book world. We have basically 2 independent bookstores (plus a few used outlets) in my hometown. And it's a fairly good sized town with several excellent universities. One would think we could support more indys. The joy of wandering through a bookstore for an entire afternoon......
But don't underestimate the value of a good beach read. Anybody who has lived long enough knows a comforting, fun beach read is a very great gift. We turn to books for lots of reasons. Sometimes it's simply to enjoy on a pretty day.
@jdubya
Thanks for the blind item. I wonder who the actress was and what role?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/05/14/prince-william-shouts-out-prince-harry-open-letter-diana-award/5195650002/
goodnight!
Which really sets her up for ridicule if you believe, as I do, that Archie is not "of the body."
I suppose it is possible to be depressed after the birth of an adopted/surrogate baby, but not with all the same biochemical markers experienced via a physical birth.
<<* Meghan is going to want to do an interview with every major talk show host, but most if not all will want Harry and she will not get booked in big shows as a solo act, as she would wish. (He is the royal who threw everything away; she is just a C grade actress who grifted her way into the royal family and then threw it away - another trashy celebrity in a town that goes through them by the dozens every month.)>>
I wonder which talk show hosts would want them. Ellen, perhaps, and Andy Cohen, if Meg really is a candidate for the Real Housewives.
Maybe the ladies on The Real, although they haven't been too complimentary to the Sussexes recently.
What about Jada Pinkett-Smith's Red Table Talk? Might be too high-end for the Sussexes.
The Mental Health appearance, the book, and Harry's Oprah Mental Health special/show/series etc in the works.
Having a baby (medical standard) in the UK is entirely different than in the USA. She is going to pseudo complain and look for sympathy around the expectations, private home nurses that come by (health visitors), the 'intrusiveness', the nannies (she fired many), the weighing etc. The general 'observation' time of visits after you have a baby in the UK does not exist whatsoever in the USA. Parenting style is also very different.
Meghan was out of her element to begin with, throw in a baby, and all that comes with it- particularly the 'loss of control' she would feel- and I imagine she lost her mind in the first couple months.
....But remember, it's not nearly so bad, as to not go to the Lion King Premier and haggle Igor for the Elephant part, and then DO the elephant part.
....And go to Africa 'No One Asks If I'm Ok' 'We Need To Thrive, Not Survive!' (most parents with small babies, are just surviving meghan, due to sleep deprivation.
....And move to Canada
....And release a Manifesto
....And quit the Royal family, absurdly, through internet negotiation
....
it's going to be tough to convince people her mental health was an issue, when time rest and routine solve those initial problems after baby...not completely uprooting one's life, and traveling the world.
However it doesn't matter and when they have refunded our £2.4M they can be decently forgotten. They have done us a favour flouncing off. We have no room and certainly no money for sub-standard, tacky, slovenly-but-expensive,ill-mannered and ill-prepared royals.
Everyone has to more than earn their keep in this Covid-19 world. Raise their game just to keep what they have or had before. Where do two sofa-surfers approaching middle-age with no marketable talents fit into all of this?
`Archie' is another matter.
On both sides of the Atlantic, it has comic connotations for an older generation and here it's nowadays seen as `a bit common' - that's a social judgement, nothing about frequency.
In the US, you have Archie Bunker, we had Archie Andrews, a plug-ugly, gingerish, ventriloquist's doll, used by Peter Brough (pron.`Bruff) a performer best suited to radio (he once asked Beryl Reid, who was on the same show, `Can you see my lips moving?' She answered `Only when Archie's talking'). To see what this Archie looked like:
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-the-ventriloquists-dummy-archie-andrews-50787961.html
It's asking for jokes about ventriloquism, especially when MeMe her hand up H's back - `Look!' I shouted (even before we agreed she wrote his scripts). `She's pulling his strings!'
In Scotland, where the name was more popular (eg Archibald Thorburn 1860-1935, the bird illustrator) it's often pronounced as `Air-chibald'
`Archie' is a diminutive but sometimes, as here, given a name in it's own right. It can only be shortened to `Arch'.
A rotten name.
I also don't like the Prince George angle, if that WAS his name for himself. Also not fair to little Archie. He has already been taken thousands of miles away from the other royal children who could have formed a bedrock of friendship and understanding for their unique positions. His parents also marked him as separate from all the others by giving him that name.
Dirk Bogarde in Sebastian (film, 1968) speaking of a new baby: `Jason? That's a name you'd give a dog!'
The stable where I used to ride as a child bought a pony called `Belinda'.
Somebody screeched `Belinda?! That's a cow's name!'
Naming a child after a trade mark, and an anagram at that, is pretty low but what else do one expect?
Louis is a name that's in the RF anyway, from Lord Mountbatten, Charles's uncle.
Hear! Hear! Ideal name for a companion animal.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/prince-louis-arthur-charles-why-explained-william-kate-royal-baby-name-latest-a8325251.html
@Lt. Uhura,
I was thinking of our conversation about journalism professors last night and realized that you're probably much younger than me. My professor, who told us not to use "died suddenly," would be approximately 110 years old by now. Maybe your professor got that idea from him, as he was a world-famous journalist, as was his father, one of the original muckrakers?
Sometimes, I forget that I'm old!
____________________________________________
Maybe your professor got that idea from him, as he was a world-famous journalist, as was his father, one of the original muckrakers?
It's possible -- my instructor was one of those lucky Marines, indeed, any service member, who got the military job of his dreams, as he was a journalist in real life with ambitions to write his own novel, and a voracious reader. He never quoted anyone, tho, but was a font of such examples as "sudden" death -- like "surrounded on all sides" ("If you're only surrounded on three sides, then you're not 'surrounded,' are you!"), or such made-up words as "irregardless" and "reiterate" (no need for the "ir-" before regardless, as its meaning is "without regard", and "iterate" means to repeat and stands on its own without the "re-" prefix. And don't even mention dangling participles and prepositions, LOL
Having said all that, it would not surprise me a bit if he wasn't inspired by your prof! I do recall him having Upton Sinclair and Charles Dickens as two of his heroes (both of whom were haters of "yellow" journalism and lovers of the "telling it straight and unvarnished" style of writing). Sounds like your prof might have been a kindred spirit :)
Sometimes, I forget that I'm old!
Nah. Plenty of people who are physically young but who feel old, for various reasons. And if you're old, then so am I, but I don't believe it -- I think you're evergreen :)
Meant to add (and to stay on-topic) that today's journalists are anything but. Look at the Harkle coverage as a microcosm of the profession writ large. Nothing but meaningless words strung together, with no other goals than to either push, thus create, a false impression, or to display such sycophancy of their "idols" that it becomes a coin with which they hope to curry favor into the future.
Omid Scobie has emerged -- or thinks he has -- as the Harkles' media champion. He epitomizes the man so willing to sell his soul and ethics in service of veniality that he loses his own identity along with those of the deeply (and irretrievably, IMO) flawed, false figures he idolizes.
This is nothing new, as scribes of old literally kept their heads by fawning over their masters in print. Sooner or later, tho, there is a "new kid in town," and the old masters fade out of memory, leaving the scribes twisting in the wind. I predict this for Scobie and his ilk.
Meanwhile, Gollum and her Precious, with Scobie's dubious help, grow increasingly desperate.
Hahahahaha! (Schadenfreude is such sweet ambrosia ;) )
Mohamed Hadid is building another giant mega-mansion - this one next door to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Beverly Hills hideout, DailyMailTV can reveal
The father of supermodels Bella and Gigi Hadid owns a 100-acre spread of land near Tyler Perry's $18M estate the royal couple is now calling home
Hadid, 71, started building the 55,000 square foot colossus that will boast four stories, 15 bedrooms, 22 bathrooms and two swimming pools
But DailyMailTV has learned Hadid recently ran into trouble with LA city planners over the mega-mansion
He was ordered to stop work on his giant project after city inspectors found he wasn't complying within conditions allowed in his building permits
Hadid is facing a similar obstacle at his other mega-mansion in Bel Air that a judge ordered it to be torn down over illegally expanding the colossus
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8311521/Mohammed-Hadid-building-mansion-door-Meghan-Harrys-Beverly-Hills-hideout.html
******* H/M have nothing to do with this. But it's fascinating that Hadid is building another grotesque mansion and violating building permits. Same as his project that is better known. That he has been ordered to demolish due to rank violations of building permits and laws.
Archie Andrews the dummy/doll is indeed rather ugly..,,
In America maybe, I’ve never heard of the programme or doll, so it has no meaning in the UK surely? Maybe Harry liked the name too. As I said previously I don’t mind the name, just not a suitable royal name.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2018/03/24/what-is-it-she-has-on-him/
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2018/03/24/intent-and-motive-are-key-factors-in-a-crime-and/
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2018/06/17/is-harry-a-victim/
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2018/06/22/aristo-anon/
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/02/14/was-kensington-palace-markled-again/
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/06/07/how-a-gold-digger-can-turn-into-a-grifter/
I believe I alluded to a sex tape involving Harry? It didn't seem too awful (not that I've ever done anything like it) but it all depends on who/what the other participants were...
I certainly haven't seen it!
LOL! Archie Andrews was indeed a British creation. It was a 1950's tv-show act with a ventriloquist and his dummy Archie. I don't know too much about it other than the dolls were sold on the toy market while the show was popular, and I found one here in America in a vintage shop.
We had a similar act in the US with a ventriloquist's doll and act called Howdy Doody...all way before my time but I'm involved in the vintage and antiques trade. Both dolls had red hair.
It's also a weird coincidence that Archie from the comics and Riverdale is called Archie Andrews.
Here's info on the British "dummy":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archie_Andrews_(puppet)
I stand corrected, it’s well before my time, probably why I’ve never heard of either doll or programme. lol I don’t personally know of anyone (even my Mum who’s 76) who made the connection between the doll and poor Archie and his name. Nevermind.
The general theme was that Archie was a cheeky schoolboy for whom private tutors were employed, Robert Moreton, Tony Hancock, Harry Secombe, Max (`I won't take my coat off, I'm not stopping') Bygraves.
Bygraves would sing a parody of the Louis Armstrong number `The Dummy Song'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl0IHaF86RM
I recall a lightly different ending sometimes:
I'll take the hands and face from some old clock
And Archie when I'm through
It'll cost more lolly
for that dumb-dumb dolly
Than Brough ever paid for you.'
(I can see some appropriate parodies here!)
Hattie Jacques was in it ( better known for Hancock's Half Hour (radio) & the Carry On films).
Also Beryl Reid, as the schoolgirl Monica with her catchphrase `... as the art mistress said to the gardener.' Another of her characters was Marlene from the Midlands, with a Birmingham accent that could be cut with a knife. Nevertheless, she was fine serious actress, best known perhaps for her role in the film `The Killing of Sister George' (1968) ,made in LA.
I discovered a very similar doll in the National Museum of Iceland, 20th century Icelandic life section, with a remarkably similar `life history' - used by a ventriloquist who was better suited to radio (TV was very late coming to Iceland, and very limited).
However Archie Harrison as "Harry's son" sounds...over the top. "The lady does protest too much" as it is said.
https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes/2020051589879/meghan-markle-prince-harry-la-home-tyler-perry-photos/
I almost feel sorry for Harry. I said almost.
Had Markle actually been the person that she thinks she is, then I think this book would have had legs. It had the possibility of being a very interesting read about an American nobody and who overnight becoming a member of the BRF. In fact, I think that if Kate Middleton were to write a book, it would be fascinating to see her perspective of growing into the person she is today. Unfortunately, because I believe that Markle is a narc, there is no such possible reflection. And what can you possibly say about a three-year stint as Harry’s side piece? She is a chao agent. Everything she touches turns to dross. Her only path forward IS to act as a victim. “I was going to save the world and they stopped me.!
I think that while Covid is hurting the possibility of sales big time, this has all the earmarks of being a Kindle special. I believe it will be heavily discounted, especially if their contract was signed closer to the marriage. She is persona non-grata in the U.K. So sales there are going to be dismal (think of the Vogue edition, already her “brand” was tarnished and that was shortly after the marriage), with the majority of sales as fodder for drinking party games. Take a shot every time the word “she” is mentioned. Sales in the U.S.? I’ve never been on the Oprah bandwagon so I don’t know how deep her fan base is, which I think is Markle’s fan base as well. Her reputation has been sullied given her close association with people like Geffen and Weinstein, and I wonder if this isolation she’s recently self-imposed is part of a ploy to have her NOT comment on this book. Based on how little she has been embraced by Hollywood since she’s arrive, there won’t be any star studded book launch parties for her. When she threw Jennifer Meyer under the bus, she slit her town throat. She has a history of stomping on the hands that have fed her, and up until now, that has been a viable strategy for her. But then those people needed her more than she needed them. The shoe is on the other foot, and I wonder if she’s realized that yet.
Frankly, there just isn’t a lot of “there” there. She was a struggling actress who never really made it, partly because she’s not very good and the camera doesn’t love her in a way that propels mediocre actresses to the top, and she positioned herself (pun intended) as a sex kitten, which is fatal when you start to age. Her “woke” endeavors seemed to be limited to whatever her PR firm could manage. I think The Tig is a pretty good indicator of who this woman actually is. Someone who wants to hobnob with celebrities, party at five-star resorts, and drink expensive wine while prancing around in bikinis and straw fedoras. She is not interesting enough to sell a book, frankly. Omid backed the wrong horse.
My husband had a Great Uncle Archie (ie Archibald), named after his maternal grandfather, born in another family where Archie was a traditional name. I'm going back to the late 19th century here.
I'd still think of it as an unfortunate name to impose on an English child today, but then, the wee lad we're talking about is Anglo-American. I'd still like to know what HM really thinks of it!
Meg must love it.
It's new!
None of that old musty stuff here!
The most expensive money can buy!
Private Fraser: `Ye'll have heard the story of the the auld empty barn...?'
(Silence)
Fraser:`There was nothing in it.'
It's very encouraging to have an author spilling the beans on the economics of advances and book sales. Thank you.
I believe this was a great source of fuel for her.
Now they are in the States and because of COVID, no one is asking them to come to red carpets or host events.
The more a "tell-all" is threatened, the less I think those invitations will be.
Hollywood is "edgy" but they are also conservative. They want their stars to be family friendly, even if they are divorced, like Jennifer Garner.
She may be a perfect fit for the Real Housewives, but she wouldn't do well in that environment She'd have to share it with other women who have rich husbands to shield from her!
Never heard of the doll Archie, but I’m not British... so...
Mohammad is building a new monstrosity? Aside from the other one they are making him tear down?
I've noticed that her celebrity "friends" who were so quick to defend her last year are now conspicuously silent. I loved Serena Williams' diss - "Don't know who she is. Never heard of her"- which, by the way, is exactly what she said about her half-brother and her other relatives. She's ashamed of them, just like she's ashamed of her own father because of his poverty and his appearance.
I find Kate’s fashion choices a little twee for me. Too much frill and a lot of lace, while beautiful on her, doesn’t match my aesthetic. Markle could have capitalized on Kate’s tendency toward the floral and frothy by being sleek and chic. There is a picture of her at one event where she’s wearing a white mock turtleneck maxi dress. She looked fabulous. If she had stuck with that look instead of merching her little brains out, then she could have made a fashion splash that Kate would have had a hard time competing against.
It seems obvious to me that Kate is a perfectionist and wants to get everything right because it might reflect badly on her and/or her family. She feels responsible for what is happening. Kate would rather hang herself than appear in public with her hair uncombed or needing a wash. Markle’s need to control is born out of the opposite compulsion. She wants to control the narrative to dominate your response to her. It’s why she doesn’t seem to care that she is wearing muddy shoes or her hair looks like a rat’s nest. Any response but the response she wants is immaterial, which is why I think details are beyond her (whereas I imagine Kate obsesses over details). Markle’s muddy shoes, the dresses that don’t fit, either being too small or too big. How she could let Harry out of the house with his military uniform so wrinkled it looked like it been balled up in the trunk of some car for two weeks is beyond me. But I can see her just not “seeing” the wrinkles because they weren’t HER wrinkles.
That is the difference between these two women. One is thinking of others, the other is thinking of herself. What did Markle gain by not wearing hose or a hat at BRF events, despite such requests from Her Majesty. This is such small beer and not the way to worm your way into your MIL’s heart. I cannot fathom being so cunning and yet being so stupid. It’s baffling.
I am willing to bet a large Starbucks frappucino with extra whip cream that Archie is referred to as "Prince Archie" in Scobies book.
You are so right. That is exactly the sort of crass b.s. She is going to pull. She seems to operate from the idea that "if it's in print, it must be true" (even though she is the one who put it in print) and that she can somehow force whatever she wants to be true. As if HM would see "Prince Archie" and realize that he must be made a Prince immediately.
My dog thinks in the same way. She is sure she has the ability to mind-control me.
It doesn't really matter, but I think Tyler Perry's house (at least the exterior) in the article is not the same one where they were building the fences. It kind of looks like his starter home (and a place H&M could realistically afford). It's actually much more elegant than the monstrosity in Beverly Ridge. There is no also a lot of roof detail on the Beverly Ridge home that is missing in this article.
Must be fun to have so many homes that others can't them straight.
There's also the chance that the book could become a form of high camp, a bit like the movie "Showgirls" - so bad it's good.
With all respect, Mags could have never outshine Kate because Kate is the future Queen.
Our current Queen doesn't need to compete with anybody in style, fashion or activity. Neither will Kate.
Megs could have become a style icon (yeah, right) or the biggest humanitarian in the royal family (yeah, right) but she would have never become the Queen Consort of the Great Britain. Not unless 5 people die altogether.
This is what she could not settle in her Hollywood head. In America you are told you can be a President one day if you try really really hard. In UK you can't be a King or a Queen if you want.
Megsy just couldn't accept that a commoner Kate who married the right guy did better than her. She sees no difference between herself and Kate and doesn't understand why she has to defer to Kate.
My dog thinks in the same way. She is sure she has the ability to mind-control me.
_________________________
She does! So does mine, LOL -- resistance is futile :)
MM, on the other hand …. the only "mind control" she's good at is strictly short-term, and it's not exactly mind control, but rather Mr. Johnson, if you get my drift ;)
Oh, and she's good at p***ing just about everyone off, so there's that … And we "haters" said she has no skills!
Meghan of course couldn't meet the standard required for an hour never mind a day. In fact she'd have failed before she even arrived at an event. I do think there are women in the world who could have made a success of it, but what on earth would they want with Harry?
You're right to draw attention to Kate and Meghan's characters and values. We could write a 'compare and contrast' essay on that! There was an article this week in the Telegraph beauty column, asking why Kate looks so great on Zoom, finding the answer in her brow maintenance and use of products. However quite a few readers thought it was her personality, enthusiasm and genuine engagement with people that made the difference.
Kate’s clothing choices are too Holly Hobby for me, or like little house on the prairie.
Her gowns are incredible, so it’s more of her every day choice.
But, I mean whatever. She is doing well and no one can fault her behavior so it’s hardly anything to complain about.
I suppose we can say that MeAgain has to be seen to be believed as well,
P.S. You'll have guessed I'm binge-watching The Big Bang Theory on Netflix.
Wouldn't they have had protections from such intrusions of privacy if they had stayed in the UK?
Caught up with https://ladygreyhound93.tumblr.com today and those photos from the Inskip wedding are there not far from the top. The ones where Meghan looked her most malevolent, when the mask slipped. Harry looks like he'd escaped and wanted to stay free but she's in the process of recapturing him against his will. I'll never work that out. What happened???? Will we ever know? Will Lady Colin Campbell pleeeeese tell us?
Above those photos on ladygreyhound are some choice ones of Meghan in her messiest royal phase. I'd forgotten how bad it was, which is surprising given the state of the reading to camera sorry Archie video.
https://twitter.com/Murky__Meg/status/1261356724121993220
She has been taken down from Twitter (it sounds nasty) but is live and kicking on Twitter.
Her most recent post & video are powerful - apparently Murky Meg has it on pretty good authority that MM has been blackballed in HW; the zoom call to the staff meeting is as fishy as Billingsgate; she might be about to write her tell-all from the diary without OS.
The comments are brilliant - one says `Oh God, let it be true'.
Read it quick, before MeGain swoops in again to destroy it.
Good grief. As several DM comments asked, who is next? Her podiatrist or bunion surgeon? Why do this? It convinces no one of anything good about MM.
I agree. It really is cringeworthy, but what does it tell us about the Markles?
1. Although they are paranoid about privacy, they do not seem to mind hairdressers, facialists and so on bleating on about her. (It is never about privacy and always about control.) When one is paying so much for a service, one expects the service provider to be discreet. I would expect it (and I admit that in the past someone got a severe tongue lashing from me for crossing that line), but Meghan encourages people who she sees occasionally as a business arrangement, and in her case whom she has not known for very long, to do PR for her. (When the hairdresser who did Kate's wedding hair used her to advertise his solo career she dropped him like a hot potato and he never had a whiff of royal business from then on.)
2. The best way to show that you have close friends is to be seen out with them not to have them bleat on about how wonderful you are on some social media. The latter is PR in the form of favours exchanged (i.e. a transactional arrangement) and the former is when the public get a glimpse into one's private world (e.g. the Cambridges going to church with their weekend party or taking the children to a soccer game with friends). The only time the Harkles have been seen out with friends (other than an event such as a wedding) is Harry when he goes out with friends when Meghan is not in town.
3. If Meghan was such a wonderful person and the Harkles were immensely popular, their social calendar would have been full, but no one wanted to go to the polo with them or some kind of horsey event or do lunch or dinner or go on holiday with them.
By the way, the story that Doria visited for Mother's Day is absurd. Paps would have staked out her home but no one saw her leaving and returning and no one saw the Harkles arriving. Visiting but maintaining social distance is not what lockdown is about and I sincerely hope they received a visit from law enforcement! Is it arrogance or stupidity with these two? Remember Meghan on their farewell tour - hugging everyone and shaking hands? Charles got infected and he was observing the rules.
Put that story up next to the picture of the polo pony that H dug into with spurs until he bled.
Wow. I was neutral on M at the very beginning and negative on H all along . . now I just . . . cruelty to animals? I have no words.
"This is the first I've heard of her killing the cat by feeding him frozen grapes--what was she, four at the most?"
It's not clear if the grapes directly contributed to the cat's death but she wasn't 4. The cat supposedly got fat from the grapes and died when she was at Northwestern. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9042097/royal-baby-archie-meghan-markle-cat/
(Pets can have individual reactions to grapes/raisins--they aren't always toxic-- but it's obviously better not to take the chance.)
Still I wouldn't name a kid after a dead cat. No way he won't someday find out about the connection. Think that would be more upsetting to him than what people on a blog think about his name!
@Fairy Crocodile This is rational thinking. I believe that with all the shade thrown at Kate by Markle's supporters and the deliberate attempts to sabotage any of Kate's initiatives via social media, that Markle has always seen herself in competition with Kate. And given the not-so-nice coverage of Kate over the years (Waity Katie, are they serious?) in the British press, perhaps Markle saw her as vulnerable. She might BE queen but that doesn't make her popular. That is Markle's metric. Although I must admit, she sure LOVES that title of hers.
@WizardWench, fantastic post on how Nutmeg could have positioned herself to shine alongside Catherine, especially since Catherine has more restrictions on her wardrobe, given her future position. Don't think I'll ever get over how badly Rach blew the chance of a lifetime. If you think about it, her rank is actually the best of both worlds; still high enough to be fairly important, but without what must be the almost suffocating responsibilities of being Queen Consort.
What a fool. I can't imagine what her ego must be like, to think she'd ever be more popular than the Will and Kate, let alone the Queen.
"Grapes are poisonous to dogs and cats..."
It's actually a bit unclear if grapes are toxic to cats. https://www.petplace.com/article/cats/pet-health/cat-health/cat-diet-nutrition/can-cats-eat-grapes/ But certainly it's best to avoid them just in case. (And regardless of toxicity, the woody stems can cause an obstruction that could be fatal.)
In dogs, the potential for grapes to cause kidney failure has been clearly documented. But even so, it appears not all dogs are affected (and it's not merely a matter of the amount eaten but may relate to genetics.) https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/grapes-and-raisins-harmful-to-dogs/
Still, as long as the potential for harm is known, why ever take the chance with either a cat or a dog? Back in the "way back" olden days, we used to give our family dog a cupcake for his birthday. Usually chocolate as that was our favorite. We didn't know better (and there probably wasn't much chocolate in the cupcake and what there was certainly wasn't dark chocolate.) But I'd not do it today. Maybe M didn't know better but she's much younger than I am!
Allium (garlic, onion, leeks, chives)
Chocolate
Grapes, raisins, currants (Vitis species)
Macadamia Nuts
And here is an article from NCBI on the same subject -
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4801869/
There are many articles all over the internet about this topic.
Comment on the Zoom rah rah happening.
The comment about privacy is vital. I knew people who did volunteer work at something in the same vein and privacy was something you were supposed to be never, ever be breaking/discussing or talking about ... in any way shape form or whatever. The way it was explained to me was that you were told highly personal information and you were not to ever discuss it with someone outside the organization. and, if you needed to talk to someone about what you learned (upsetting), you talked to the staff. This was pre-HIPPA rigidity.
I will say that the idea that you can just enter some private conversations about helping people on line (without any sort of training/education requirements) is in line with some other comments which came out of that camp about how to help people.
I do not know that organization which was in the Zoom call and cannot say if it was comparable to what I was told (long ago and far away).
Poisonous: macadamia nuts? at that price, who would feed them to the dog or cat?
"Ingestion of grapes or raisins has resulted in development of anuric renal failure in some dogs. Cases reported to date have been in dogs; anecdotal reports exist of renal failure in cats and ferrets after ingestion of grapes or raisins. It is not known why many dogs can ingest grapes or raisins with impunity while others develop renal failure after ingestion. The condition has not been reproduced experimentally, although raisin extracts have been shown to cause damage to canine kidney cells in vitro."
Believe me, I'd never feed grapes to dogs or cats. But the toxicity isn't clear-cut. And if I were developing a "foods to avoid" list for cat owners I'd include grapes. I mean if only an average of 5 cats out of 50 cats was affected, I'd still put grapes on the forbidden list. Who would want to unintentionally give a 90% safe/10% fatal treat anyway!
Thanks for the additional research. Yes, I did see that there is more established evidence on the toxicity of grapes in dogs than cats, but there is plenty of info on them being poisonous to cats as well. My veterinarian told me to keep grapes away from my cats after I reported my one cat's obsession with the branches.
My vet also told me during another discussion that many more studies are done on dogs as opposed to cats - more medicines are developed for dogs, more research is done on dog cancers, etc. This is most likely because it is more expensive to keep a dog than a cat.
I have no idea why your dog or Ian's dogs survived after eating toxic foods. Perhaps it was only a small amount, or maybe the reaction varies in some dogs or cats. They could have had a more minor reaction you were unaware of.
I was just trying to warn people, and thought it best to simply say - "these foods are poisonous to cats and dogs" - rather than...these may be poisonous depending on your dog's/cat's metabolism, or on how much you gave him, or on how much it was mixed in with something else, or on his size, or on his age, or on how frequently he gets it, or on the health of his kidneys etc!!
"These foods are poisonous to pets" is a truthful statement and I didn't think it necessary to define it any further.
The bottom line is why risk giving any of these foods to a pet?
I was quite surprised to see Meghan looking very dressed down in workman clothes and rather severe looking hair the past few weeks. It then dawned on me that again, like Amber Heard, she has decided to focus on social activism when Hollywood failed to open their arms to welcome her. It seems like if you can't make it in Hollywood through acting, you turn to activism and hopefully, acting jobs will come in. Well, it has not worked for Amber Heard and it will not work for Meghan.
I have major fears for Harry. Because I follow both the Depp-Heard and Harkles story, I see many similarities between Heard and Meghan. Unlike Depp who has proven his talent and is highly respected in his field and hardworking to boot; Harry is just dimmer than dim, with no discernable talent and lazy. I cried yesterday when I listened to the recording of Depp saying I love you, I've loved you for some many years etc etc and still trying to protect Heard after what she had done to him (he finally said "you never existed" meaning the woman he loved never existed) and I was thinking Harry probably does loves Meghan like Depp used to loved Heard. Amber could be heard taunting and gaslighting Depp throughout the entire phone conversation (through her sobbing and shouting) but he recognised it. She actually said that noone would believe that she would wear make for fake bruises for pictures and that noone would believe that she, a tiny waif like her could hit a big man like him and that Depp should just agree to everything she has said and the nightmare would end. Luckily, Depp recognised he was being gaslighted and excused himself from the call. I am not so sure Harry would know when he is being gaslighted. I am very certain that like Heard, Meghan has set up secret recordings and videos for the eventual blackmail. The sad part is the royal family will probably capitulate to her blackmail and pay, as the dirt she has will stick like it stuck to Depp even though they are fake and set up.
eahttps://www.springtimeinc.com
I heard of garlic's use in flea control and used it with my Great Pyrenees for years so I don't think it is toxic as some poster stated IMO.
my dog once ate an entire container of chocolate covered espresso beans. I didn't notice until after work and hours later. how she survived that I do not know as she never even got sick. she was a lucky one ♥️
let this serve as cautionary tail (hehe) to keep such items out of reach of pets, unless you own this dog. do not even bring into house 😂
goodnight!
https://youtu.be/KyQiPWufjwU
I am very curious as to why, all of a sudden, The Harkles are all over UK charities. I wouldn't want them back but perhaps the charities are still able to capitalize on them. Don't think MeGain has bothered with the Canadian charities she shamelessly used as photo ops. Drives me away but probably works for others.
Is it possible they are trying to work their way back into the BRF? They are not thriving in LA so perhaps they need to go back to UK to survive????? But that seems odd if they are putting out a "tell all (?)" book this summer.
I can't figure out The Harkles plan. Do they actually have one any more???
Thanks for that information - that makes sense and is very enlightening.😍
I'm not sure where I got the impression it had to do with money, although my theory could still hold water as a part of the reason. I always thought it was also due to dogs being more of the favored pet between the two species. I am a lover of all animals but do prefer cats to dogs just a wee bit more!
One of my cats developed mast cell cancer many years ago and I remember being frustrated trying to research it as there was so much more information on treatments for dogs than cats. I do believe it is a type of cancer that shows up in dogs more often than cats but the fact that I couldn't find much on the internet at the time for the feline version was very disappointing.
But I guess the point I was originally trying to make was that there may not be as much data on how toxic the list of poisonous foods mentioned are on cats as compared to dogs due to more canine testing done to the species considered more expensive to adopt/purchase and own.
Back to my Markle-free quarantine.
Just wanted to share that article because it's quite relevant here.
Stay safe & be well. 💜🍹
As for the supposed Greek origin of Archie's name, I think Meg got the idea to spin it that way while googling her in-laws and seeing this report on Zara's name:
https://www.hellomagazine.com/profiles/zara-phillips/
Prince Charles is reportedly the reason Zara was given a genuine Greek name meaning 'bright as the dawn.' Single-White-Female Meghan at it again?
LOL @tatty at only over 60s knowing about Archie Bunker :) I'm less than half that age and I know. To be fair, I love Pop Culture and studying the Humanities which I call "old but gold" Pop Culture. I also care what "oldies" think and do :)
Archie Bunker was covered in my AP U.S. History class. I remember occasionally watching reruns of an animated series of Archie Comics as a kid. I also know about Howdy Doody because it was joked abut on reruns of Full House I watched.
I'm convinced Meg chose the name because it's a loose anagram of Rachel. Archie Harrison is the Malibu Dumbartons' version of "Meghan + Harry forever" that teenagers might etch onto notebooks except we've got royal courtiers inscribing it on tapestries, parchments, and everywhere else they document the BRF's family tree.
Archie's name printed in the press and seeing it as *truly her own* probably fuels an innermost delight in Meg I can only guess at.
I grew up in a family that believed true charity was where the "left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing." When I see ostentatious patting on the back like Meg does all the time, I cringe every time. Nice to see research finally catching up to classic truths.
Musty I also wondered if hams is going to go back and play it off as “we needed a year off”.....
@tatty: Harry and Mayhem are now so reviled in the UK that I think there would be a huge uproar if they attempted to patch things up and return to the royal fold. I think HMTQ and William both know they can never be trusted, so they would always be the outsiders when it comes to matters of privacy in the RF, and they’d never be trusted with any sort of secrets.
The RF, Harry’s friends, and too many UK citizens know Meghan as a profoundly narcissistic woman, so she’d only be fooling her sugars, who will remain loyal flying monkeys to her until the bitter end.
They burned the bridge to the RF and the UK to a crisp with their Megxit behavior and the way they outright used the graciousness of the fabulous people of Canada as a convenience for a few months on their way to Tyler’s house in Beverly Hills.
I think Harry might be allowed back in the UK with Archie in tow after a nasty divorce. But his reputation is in the toilet and he is permanently damaged goods who would be tolerated, but not welcomed with open arms. Africa would be the best place for him with occasional quiet visits to the UK.
@Fairy Crocodile This is rational thinking. I believe that with all the shade thrown at Kate by Markle's supporters and the deliberate attempts to sabotage any of Kate's initiatives via social media, that Markle has always seen herself in competition with Kate. And given the not-so-nice coverage of Kate over the years (Waity Katie, are they serious?) in the British press, perhaps Markle saw her as vulnerable. She might BE queen but that doesn't make her popular. That is Markle's metric. Although I must admit, she sure LOVES that title of hers.
@wizardwench: People with narcissistic personality disorder are angry, spiteful and extremely jealous of people who have what they can’t have. Kate as wife of a future king, will eventually be queen consort. Meghan is married to the dimwit spare brother.
Look at some of the video and still images of the pre-wedding interview of the Fabulous Four when Kate was pregnant with Louis. Meghan gave some demonic looks to kill at Kate, which would qualify as narcissistic stare. It is the same stare she threw when she crashed Tom Inskip’s Jamaican wedding.
Meghan always planned to return to LA because after she snagged the title and Harry and Archie as a props because she thought she could be an instant international superstar A-lister in Hollywood who would be at a minimum equal to Kate, compared to always being second banana (pun intended) in the UK.
I and probably like most Brits just don’t think Archie it’s a suitable royal name, but other than that it’s really not important. Archie is way down the line of succession to matter. Do we really know why they chose the name and its meaning behind it? Should we perceive we do? It’s pretty subjective and besides most people have other/better things to think and worry about, then and now.
I'm not saying it's all Kate of course, but she is a powerful influence for good. We spend so much time focusing on Meghan's destructive power that it's a relief to turn around and appreciate the opposite.
His wife stuck by him and when the drama eventually subsided, Profumo kept his head down, reappearing only occasionally in public life, without a fanfare. His name was tarnished but he made a permanent, contribution to society and, to a great extent, redeemed himself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Profumo
That to me suggests a possible future option for Harry.
MM complains bitterly about the reception her behaviour has been given by the British public. What might we say if she has the gall to show her nose here again?
I'm wondering which outfit choices would match well with rotten tomatoes (other types of rotten fruit/veg is available), so she can plan ahead lol
Harry doesn't have the intellectual hinterland of Profumo, and it's likely he would see any rehabilitative activities and behaviour as transitory, whereas in order to work it has to be permanent. If the public gets the slightest sense that this would be a transaction of some kind, it fails and fails for good.
Harry's only hope is a damage limitation exercise assisted by BP, once Meghan is out of the picture. Followed by a lifetime in the woods at Balmoral or in Africa with occasional appearances at family events or to support Archie, who hopefully will have been rescued and brought home long before then.
Thanks @Trudy Blue for all that research on the name Archie. I had no idea some of the BRF would directly associate the name to a puppet. In that light, the BRF cosigning on the name gives fodder to the baby doll theories.
...........
No problem Charade. 😍 I knew most of it already and just grabbed a few links for "receipts". What are you thinking re the baby doll theory?
So much tangled strangeness with the Harkles. SMH
"Happy Birthday Emma Watson!🧁🎉🎈
via @unwomen Happy Birthday to our Goodwill Ambassador @EmmaWatson!"
Hmmmm...who was it that said MM was going to start focusing on humanitarian "work" now that she may realize Hollywood has closed its doors?
Neither hands nor face of poor dolly lolly
Will stop the jokes about Archie
His names in place, a bloody disgrace
Can’t blame it all on Brough, or folly
Are they trying to trying to wriggle back here via English luvvies?
We can see Archie’s lips move, unlike Harry?
@Magatha - I await new versions of the Archie's Education song!
😂😂😂
The “lady” doth project too much...
poor dolly lolly...
Bad hair, makeup, clothes.
She makes no sense in her dress, demeanour or intentions.
Lost the plot and has no idea.
If she was whip smart she could be dangerous.
She’s not. Just messy & very annoying.
@Wild Boar Battle-maid
"Are they trying to trying to wriggle back here via English luvvies?"
They may well wiggle back even Without English luvvies. The door will always be open for Harry to return in some capacity. MM is his wife and thus is still part of the family and will be part of the Harry & Archie package.
Duchess Shameless had no qualms returning to the UK in March when many thought she wouldn't dare show her face. I think MM will not return full-time but will pop up at the big events - Remembrance Day, Invinctus etc.
Lurking with Spoon
Unfortunately we will not be able to get rid of her until they divorce. And even then she will linger like a bad smell. In case of any high level event in the country she will be here in a blink. Coronation, God forbid,will give her a chance to poison the ancient ceremony with her cheap PR. She knows she will be guarded and will not be harmed in any way.
No, with a person like that you can only use one weapon-freeze out. Royals can't do that yet. Technically she is still a member of the family. Queen made a colossal mistake.
She is dangerous all right. With her racial agenda she is a huge dividing force, not uniting as royals might have hoped. Tensions in the UK society are huge, one more divisive high profile person may tip the balance into dangerous zone. She is totally unprincipled and totally shameless, she will try to use anything to her advantage, even people's violence against each other.
I hope they will show in the UK as little as possible. We need people who work to unite us, not to pull us apart.
She disgusts me for propounding racial comments.
She is divisive, nothing to do with colour, she is unlikeable.
Dishonour.
While on the DM, I came across an article in The Daily Star about a Royal Family video call to healthcare workers:
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will have felt a “deep sadness” at not being involved in a historic Royal Family event earlier this week, a royal expert believes.
And Russell Myers, the Daily Mirror’s royal correspondent, believes it would have been a sad moment for the Sussexes.
“I can’t help thinking that, as much as they have ‘found their freedom’, they will feel a deep sadness not to be involved in this,” he said on Daily Mirror podcast Pod Save The Queen.
“It’s the Royal Family at its very best – all coming together for a common goal.
“This is coming from the very top, the Queen has said everyone must have a united front
So they feel ‘a deep sadness’? Really? Couldn’t they have realised that before they left? ‘Sadness’ that they’re now out in the cold, more like.
In that same paper, there was a quote from Lady Campbell about her forthcoming book:
Aristocrat Lady C said: “I have seen marriages like Meghan and Harry’s very close up where a strong powerful woman – the alpha female – manages to wangle her way in with an alpha male who is weaker than she is.
“The husband is so strongly attached he can’t ever summon up the strength to leave.”
Maybe the first sentence is a backhanded compliment but I think the last sentence sums up situation nicely.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/tech-support/201605/the-communal-narcissist-another-wolf-wearing-sheep-outfit
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/finding-new-home/201812/the-communal-narcissist-new-kind-narcissist
Shirley Conran in her book `Superwoman' had a little quiz for those looking for a role in the local community eg would you describe yourself as `...helpful, very helpful or `the most helpful person I know'? She then describes those who revealed themselves as using the role for praise and recognition as having `Town Counciloritis'. I've met quite a few of those over the years.
They also tend to adopt environmental causes to make themselves look good on the surface.
According to
"linda-la-hughes -
"Camilla knows along with the rest of us that the only “friends” Rachel has right now is her Hotmail account and Covid Scobie…."
If she was “whip smart”
She could be dangerous
She’s not/isn’t.
If she was “whip smart”
She could be dangerous
She’s not/isn’t.
True, she could be dangerous😂. She has shown she isn't 'whip smart' (not as much as she thinks she is)
I didn't participate; it was just interesting to dip in to occasionally.
I am sure that H&M were furious about not being in the royal call for the nurses. In my opinion, their hope to "step back" was about technically allowing them to merch. However, they would have expected to be included in activities like this, because MM cannot tolerate anyone else having attention. I believe this is the reason there was a story she was "furious" around Christmas when Harry wasn't included in a portrait of the heirs.
I think they released their own video as a way to say "We can do this to," because she just couldn't stomach not being in the one for the nurses. Even now, after the huge kerfuffle of leaving the royal family, insulting the queen, and threatening a tell-all, I think she will still play the victim and say "We should have been on that call!
By all appearances, MM was spoiled as a child and a young woman by her father. I understand why it hurts him so much that she cut him off. But even though she was spoiled, she appears to never be satisfied. The amount of money spent on her clothing alone since joining the RF was outrageous. However, for someone so spoiled, first by her father and then by Prince Charles, I think she is deeply insecure. For her, there "isn't enough pie" for everyone. Someone else's happiness threatens her own, in my opinion. Genuinely secure and happy people are thrilled when others get married, have babies, get promoted, etc.
I wonder if Harry sees any irony given how she has treated his family, "the family she never had." But there is evidence that she was cared for quite well by her own family.
OR
The Harkles are trying to force the half-in half-out deal they always wanted. In their little minds they are showing how they can perform Royal duties remotely. As in "See? We don't have to live in the UK to be Senior Working (and totally funded) Royals. We can zoom it in as needed and everyone will be so grateful for our support!"
AND
New tin hat theory. Suppose Archie was born (I still believe via surrogate and possibly with only one or neither's DNA) earlier than May 6 but they wanted to keep his birth a secret (because of surrogacy and possible paternal/maternal legitimacy) so they started this whole "privacy" doo-doo. They created a false birth, birthdate, name, etc.
Say he was actually born in mid-April. They named him something like "Arthur Charles Phillip Harry" but told the world "Archie" (take that Prince George). They then have him Christened on May 6 (meta data on christening photograph). They make it very secret and have only some of the family there and photographed. Later the Cambs etc are photographed for a christening and the photos are photoshopped together. Remember Doria was in the photograph with the Queen and also at the Christening. No one saw her enter or leave the UK. Sneaking in twice? Hmmm. Much easier if there once, for a day or two, and get all this out of the way.
The Royal Family can't do a thing because they have been dupped. Archie has been photographed (accepted) with the Queen and listed as 7th in line to the throne. Everyone has to keep the lips zipped or admit Harry has gone mad at an unprecedented level.
The fact I can't get over is that there are no pictures of Archie with Senior Royals (or any Royal for that matter or Doria) holding him. Only MeMe and Harry. NO ONE ELSE. For his birthday, while the Royals posted pictures of Archie they had nothing more current than the Christening. 7th in line to the throne and nothing more current for the one year birthday then a picture at 3 months?
Something smells really bad and this time it isn't Archie's nappie!
There’s an article on the DM about Michelle Monaghan being outside, pointless article, however, in the photos there’s one from 2011 of Michelle, her husband, Trevor Engelson, and MM. As always, Megs is much closer to the camera, standing out. That photo really shows she’s had a (or several) nose job.
This is the photo you refer to. Meghan looks as "white" as everyone else in it. This is why her Hollywood resume said white or Caucasian. >>>>>
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/05/16/01/28443914-8324581-Industry_mingling_Michelle_and_Peter_left_have_been_married_sinc-a-16_1589590648394.jpg
The DM article is here>>>>>>
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8324581/Michelle-Monaghan-displays-midriff-scooter-shirtless-husband-Peter-White.html
For anyone who wants a laugh and to remember who we are dealing with, meet the coat flicking, smirking duchess (yep, she really did do this ... the woman is batsh1t crazy!):
https://66.media.tumblr.com/2f4b4abbc16de09e0558528f982acfc5/d33a11f236ce8da8-cb/s640x960/8f4b47b6d21e46939b14b925e18fc1eac6ccbdb8.gifv
A friend of the Sussexes reveals in Vanity Fair that Prince Harry feels 'lonely' in Los Angeles.
'Harry is missing a structure in his life, he doesn't have friends in LA like Meghan and doesn't have a job.'
The sad truth is, the Prince hasn't had a proper job since he left the Army five years ago.
Blind Items Revealed #1
May 8, 2020
Not being able to use his position for kickbacks any longer is putting a crimp on the lifestyle of the sex assaulting royal who also turned a blind eye when a family member was paid for involving yet another family member. Our royal won't ever go bankrupt, but he will need to get money from mom.
Prince Andrew/Sarah Ferguson (one of her daughters)/Queen Elizabeth
NO ONE crashes a Zoom meeting. You have to have a frigging invite. Truly, do they and their PR machines think people are stupid? I have a minimum of five Zoom meetings/week, and, wouldn’t you know, I need an invite to join.
They are like all the other Hollywood celebs who try justify (to us and themselves) their obscene wealth behind charitable endeavors. I’m not saying their hearts aren’t in the right place, but I cannot, in conscience, understand how someone can make $20 million a picture or sign a $14 million/year contract in sports without thinking, wow, who is worth THAT much. In the case of the Markles, however, I do not think it’s a sop to address their guilt. It’s obviously a ploy to say relevant in light of the W&K juggernaut that is steamrolling them into the dust. They are pathetic and growing more pathetic every day.
@Magatha. Oh, I think she is pretty smart. Northwestern isn’t the best college in the U.S., but it’s among one of the better colleges. So let’s assume she has more than average intelligence. Her problem is that her narcissism always gets in the way of her intelligence. She is unable to step back from herself and say, hmmm, how will this play down the road? I honestly think she maybe ADD, because her boredom’s threshold is very low. And perhaps that is another thing that she and Harry share. I believe he is dyslexic, and given that he has been coddled all of his life due to his position and his mother’s death, he’s never addressed it because he’s never had to. My BIL is severely dyslexic and through a ton of hard work and determination is now a big reader. I cannot see Harry putting in any effort in, well pretty much anything other than grabbing the neck of a champagne bottle and brining it up to his lips. He can’t even change his shirts!
@ AvaC I do not believe that Harry had a real job in the service. Based on all accounts, he was an abysmal soldier. It was more of a long PR move. I think it did give him structure, but it wasn’t a job the way we think of a job. There is enough anonymous chatter out there by people who served with him that he was a royal PIA, and expected and got special treatment from his superiors.
It's fascinating to think of how Meghan will react to that. What will she do next? They were already low-rent but this thin stream of PR drivel they have going on is simply making things even worse. She's at the level of a reality show contestant and not even a recent one. She's going to end up like the UK's Katie Price. Throwing away millions with nothing to show for it, a motley collection of relationships, a slovenly, chaotic way of life unsuitable to children.
I think I've quoted a bit of the following Caitlin Moran passage about Katie Price before, but I'm going to provide still more here, as it's so similar to Meghan:
"It became very clear that unless it was a book she’d ‘written’, current affairs she’d taken part in – such as selling exclusive coverage of her wedding for £1 million – or a television show that she’s starred in, Price had absolutely no interest in it whatsoever. Her world consisted entirely of herself, her pink merchandise range, and the constant semi-circle of paps minutely photographing this ongoing narrative of solipsism. No wonder her eyes were so blank – she had nothing to think about apart from herself. She’s like the ouroborus – the mythical serpent, forever eating her own tail.
"Perhaps because of this lucrative self-obsession, throughout our time together, she was never less than a charmless, basilisk-eyed tyrant, bossing her then-husband Peter Andre around as if he were a piddling puppy, squatting on her best shoes, and infusing every engagement with a world-weary contemptuousness – as if wearing dresses, riding in cars and talking to people was the pastime of a c**t, and she was furious she’s got landed with it. At one point she was so rude that Andre had to apologise to everyone in the room – ‘She’ll wear anything apart from a smile, ha ha!’ he said, trying to make a joke of it – as I stood and marvelled at the idea that someone whose sole career consisted of ‘being herself’ was doing it so unappealingly and gracelessly."
Maybe, but they can be hacked into, I gather. There have been a number of cases recently in UK where innocent meetings (eg town council sessions, even online teaching for children), have been gate-crashed by pornographic material. There are some very sick people around.
Thinking of which (ie the sickos), the clip that Sandie posted of the coat -flicking suggested to me that were MM a bloke, s/he would be suspected of flashing. Have a giggle at this Beryl Cooke image:
https://biblio.co.uk/book/my-coat-greeting-card-beryl-cook/d/110872408?aid=frg&utm_source=google&utm_medium=product&utm_campaign=feed-details&gclid=Cj0KCQjwnv7
If that doesn’t work, search `Beryl Cook My.Fur.Coat’
Ditto for below!
Blogger wizardwench said...NO ONE crashes a Zoom meeting
Maybe, but they can be hacked into, I gather. There have been a number of cases recently in UK where innocent meetings (eg town council sessions, even online teaching for children, have been gate-crashed by pornographic material. There are some very sick people around.
Thinking of which (ie the sickos), the clip that Sandie posted of the coat -flicking suggested to me that were MM a bloke, s/he would be suspected of flashing. Have a giggle at this Beryl Cooke image:
https://biblio.co.uk/book/my-coat-greeting-card-beryl-cook/d/110872408?aid=frg&utm_source=google&utm_medium=product&utm_campaign=feed-details&gclid=Cj0KCQjwnv7
If that doesn’t work, search `Beryl Cook My.Fur.Coat’
She has no love for Harry. She set him up to ditch his depression meds so that he is depressed and angry, and relies on Meg for a version of reality. She most likely took that photo of him playing with the dog, and sold it for cash. She releases hints to the media about Harry's mental state, and how he is feeling lonely and lost at sea. .
Meg most likely is actively searching for her next husband. When Meg finally dumps Harry, she will appear in the media, crying about how she tried everything in her power to help Harry, but in the end, she will tell anyone who listens, that she was powerless in the face of Harry's mental and emotional troubles.
Along with the above, I think she'll also publicly blame Harry for her lack of a Hollywood career, i.e., that he held her back, etc.
Psychopaths have no conscience. That's why they can so easily manipulate others. A psychopath can read other people, and what makes them tick. Markle does not have one shred of a conscience. Add in the narcissism, and it's a toxic mix.
And, yes, I'm qualified to name her as a psychopath.
Rustiee
CDAN
It is interesting. And, I agree, highly speculative about a lot.
I will say that it is where I first read of Nutty's blog. I will comment here. I don't there. If the only thing for me is that I learned of Nutty and the interesting, pointed questions and commentary, I'll take it.
I’m believing more of this. I’ve read on numerous occasions he was protected by Special Force troops for the entire time he was on so called operations, and yes a PR move. Do we also believe he actually qualified as an Apache helicopter pilot too? It takes some intelligence to do that job. How much truth is in these stories I have no idea, but given his attitude and showing us who he really is, makes it more credible by the day IMHO.
Regarding Zoom.They’e just implemented a series of measures to beef up Zoom’s security issues. These two are people who cannot even manipulate photoshop with any degree of competence. I sincerely doubt that they have the capability of hacking into a Zoom session, and to pay someone else to do it would be insane as it would be ILLEGAL. This was staged.
I think what a lot of people fail to realize is that despite Epstein’s first arrest, he was readily accepted back into NY society (and given his association with Maxwell, European society as well) with open arms. He pled to only one count of solicitation with a minor (although the evidence for him abusing other underage teens was enormous). He could easily have said, Oh, she looked over eighteen, and get the slap on the wrist that he did, in fact, get. To see photographs of the York sisters at parties where he was present or hosting doesn’t surprise me in the least. There are lots of pictures with him with lots of august personages (including Trump and Clinton) after his initial conviction.
But this is a far cry from a couple pimping out their daughters for $$$. I think it should be removed unless Enty has direct knowledge of this happening. It’s also one thing to commit financial fraud (which Andrew and Sarah are guilty of). It’s quite another to sell your children for $$$. And by all accounts, they are loving parents, despite all their, um, moral lapses.
I am sure that H&M were furious about not being in the royal call for the nurses. In my opinion, their hope to "step back" was about technically allowing them to merch. However, they would have expected to be included in activities like this, because MM cannot tolerate anyone else having attention. I believe this is the reason there was a story she was "furious" around Christmas when Harry wasn't included in a portrait of the heirs.
I think they released their own video as a way to say "We can do this to," because she just couldn't stomach not being in the one for the nurses. Even now, after the huge kerfuffle of leaving the royal family, insulting the queen, and threatening a tell-all, I think she will still play the victim and say "We should have been on that call!I
----
Thank you Cookie!
I have been baffled regarding the gruesome twosomes recent PR blitz. WHY are they going after British charities? If they are living in the US and want to build an American fan base, why are they only inflicting themselves on UK charities (aside from the Uber Eats silliness). Even the Save the Children donations were diverge to the UK branch.
Cookie helped me see it. They are still competing with Will and Kate! "Winning" with an American charity wouldn't "humiliate" those who treated them (her) so cruelly. Megs has to win in the UK to really win. And she has to beat Kate where she has been rejected and Kate is loved.
It's all part of her plan to make the UK understand just what they lost in her (and to a lesser extent, Harry).
I dont think she wants to go back. I think she wants make the BRF and the British public beg her to go back so she can finally flounce off in the style she wants. It's also why she is so concerned about being "understood" and having "her side of the story" told at last. If only she were truly understood, she would be loved and treated like she deserves. They would be the most important members of the most important family in the world.
She is an adolescent girl with revenge fantasies.
And even more leagues onward
All in the Valley of paps,
Rode the M staff of 609
Forward, to the light-minded Has beenwas told
Charge for Disney, M said
Into the land of paps, with a diminishing staff of six hundred,
Flew by private plane, the Three ex Oyals
Forward, screamed M!
Was H dismayed?
Not though this spoiled ex-soldier
Knew he had big blundered
H not to make reply to his prison guard M,
H never could reason why
His but to obey or want to die,
Into the valley of bulbs flashing,
H was wimped and resigned
Paps to the right of them
Paps to the left of them,
Paps in front of them, Flashed and chortled
Who do you think you are?
You 600 staff have left you,
Your guns are gone,
And you, H are becoming a bore
Without the
Charge of the British Royal Family
You will be shattered and sundered
But not, of course, with staff of 600
Who quickly found out
It is better to be, where you have a check
And not work for free
All the world wondered
Why a Prince of fiction, but still fun
Would choose to be nothing but,
A fake Prince
Who threw away,
All the reasons why
He ended up in LA
And not in the palaces and prestige
That the mighty leagues of his royal family
Are still to be.
>>>I must have missed this . . . has the virus blog (or the "virus" blog) been decommissioned?
I didn't participate; it was just interesting to dip in to occasionally.<<<
I was wondering the same thing. Maybe Nutty eliminated it because of all the raging arguments and ugly comments between some regulars (several here, one who just posted recently).
Funny no one is answering your question.
I think this is just an assumption by Jenni McKnight,'senior evening writer'. Why do we need to know? Is MM trying to show us she has friends? They've been strangely quiet and if they'd welcomed H&M, we would have heard about it. This list is just an invention or else a 'leak' by MM to show us she isn't friendless.
https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-lucy-hale-once-starred-in-unaired-tv-pilot-together/
She is desperate! And actually does not have the talent nor charisma nor actual achievements to generate organic interest.
Going back to the marriage ... why did so many people buy into the positive narrative?
There is a very insightful post at LSA (although stories were out there about the loutish Harry behind the PR charm offensive, that PR was strong and he does have a charming engaging side to him; although stories were out there of her ruthlessness, her narcissistic obsession with fame and 'stuff', and the appalling way she treats people when she thinks she no longer needs them, she was too unknown and destined to remain so for anyone to pay any attention or for any of it to be worthy of gossip).
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-3881#post-57891862
Do we also believe he actually qualified as an Apache helicopter pilot too?
This cannot all be a lie. This is too difficult to get away with. My guess is that Harry could (past tense) fly an Apache helicopter well enough for civilian situations. He was given three years training as noted below. Was Haps deemed capable enough to fly one into stress situations in Afghanistan or Iraq? Battle? No way!
More on Hap's helicopter days>> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6740878/prince-harry-raf-pilot-apache-helicopters-prince-william-sea-king-pilot/
Agree, it can’t all be a lie, he must be able to fly well enough to make him appear at least credible. I do believe there was a bit of hoohah
at the time he was being considered for training etc., not everyone thought it was credible or possible give his level of intelligence.
The King’s Leech
Prince Andrew reportedly watched a movie about his grandfather while having his feet rubbed by models; Harry and Meghan’s $18 million bolt-hole in Beverly Hills has a privacy breach
By Stuart Heritage
Part I
rince Andrew has been accused of some terrible things of late: sleeping with a teenager provided by his friend Jeffrey Epstein, fostering unsavory business deals with louche oligarchs, stiffing the owner of his luxury Swiss chalet. The list goes on and on. But now, thanks to a former model who spoke to the Daily Mail, we have been made aware of the oddest accusation yet.
During his now notorious visit to Epstein’s New York home in 2010—the visit Andrew claims was made with the sole intention of breaking ties—the prince, according to the unnamed accuser, received a foot rub from two Russian models as he watched The King’s Speech, the film that came out that year about George VI that starred Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush. The accusation lines up, since it matches an account made by literary agent John Brockman—who claimed to have seen “a British guy in a suit with suspenders, getting foot massages from two young well-dressed Russian women” during his visit to the Epstein house—but this is the first time we’ve heard which film he may have been watching.
If it’s true, we now know what gets Prince Andrew off. It’s having his feet rubbed while he watches a movie about his own grandfather. But, hey, honi soit qui mal y pense. Everyone likes different things. Andrew apparently likes being stroked by models while he watches his mother being played by a little girl on television.
But such is the torrent of news about Prince Andrew that this latest creepy nugget failed to make much of a splash last week. It was overshadowed by the decision to put a formal end to the Prince Andrew Charitable Trust, following an investigation by the U.K. Charity Commission over $380,000 of payments made to Andrew’s private secretary, Amanda Thirsk, who was also a former trustee of his charity.