I almost hate to make a post about Prince Harry's latest venture into the arena of woke politics.
Speaking to young Commonwealth leaders in a video released today, Harry focused on the negative aspects of the countries' shared history, saying that while many people had "done an incredible job of acknowledging the past and trying to right those wrongs, but I think we all acknowledge there is so much more to do."
It's all so tiresome, and reminds me of a McDonald's employee campaigning against the beef and french fry industries.
I'd have a lot more respect for your wokeness if you renounced your income from Dad and your inheritance from Mom, both of which are at least indirectly related to the profits of colonialism.
You can't change the past, Harry, but you can change the future.
Stop paying for private jets and cocaine with money from what you call "endemic institutionalized racism" and then we can talk.
Meg told the attendees at the conference that it was "not just in the big moments, it's in the quiet moments where racism and unconscious bias lies and thrives."
Perhaps Meg should make a commitment to a bias-free future by pledging that her son, Archie, will attend only state schools - nothing private - and that she and Harry will choose a school with a majority nonwhite student body.
After all, the Commonwealth is majority nonwhite.
When people really do take a moment to examine a long-held point of view, it's usually because someone they respect has urged them to do so.
Someone like David Attenborough or Dolly Parton. Someone known for talent, kindness, and a long career of good works. Someone not like Meghan Markle.
When Harry and Meg speak out on the issues, it always seems part of a plan to make themselves look better - not to make the issue itself look better.
All they seem to have achieved with their latest statements is increased profits for the Mail Online; the article about the Commonwealth video has 15,000 comments right now.
Speaking to young Commonwealth leaders in a video released today, Harry focused on the negative aspects of the countries' shared history, saying that while many people had "done an incredible job of acknowledging the past and trying to right those wrongs, but I think we all acknowledge there is so much more to do."
It's all so tiresome, and reminds me of a McDonald's employee campaigning against the beef and french fry industries.
What pays your bills?
Dear Harry: the fruits of those historical wrongs have paid for, and continue to pay for, everything you've received your entire life.I'd have a lot more respect for your wokeness if you renounced your income from Dad and your inheritance from Mom, both of which are at least indirectly related to the profits of colonialism.
You can't change the past, Harry, but you can change the future.
Stop paying for private jets and cocaine with money from what you call "endemic institutionalized racism" and then we can talk.
Like Nancy Reagan
Meanwhile, the video shows Meg looking at Harry adoringly, a bit like Nancy Reagan used to look at "Ronnie" back in the day.Meg told the attendees at the conference that it was "not just in the big moments, it's in the quiet moments where racism and unconscious bias lies and thrives."
Perhaps Meg should make a commitment to a bias-free future by pledging that her son, Archie, will attend only state schools - nothing private - and that she and Harry will choose a school with a majority nonwhite student body.
After all, the Commonwealth is majority nonwhite.
Is this impactful?
The question is, are Harry and Meg really convincing anyone to change their point of view on historical injustices?When people really do take a moment to examine a long-held point of view, it's usually because someone they respect has urged them to do so.
Someone like David Attenborough or Dolly Parton. Someone known for talent, kindness, and a long career of good works. Someone not like Meghan Markle.
When Harry and Meg speak out on the issues, it always seems part of a plan to make themselves look better - not to make the issue itself look better.
All they seem to have achieved with their latest statements is increased profits for the Mail Online; the article about the Commonwealth video has 15,000 comments right now.
Comments
Ignore what they say, read their actions.
The tell us how woke'n'wonderful they are; we see their monstrous hypocrisy.
Even in a bathysphere, we could not descend to the depths they plumb.
I'm not so sure - in her addled brain she's vastly superior to both of these. I wouldn't now be surprised if she sees herself as above the Blessed Virgin Mary, despite the nauseating displays of being equal to the Mother of God.
Re. Earl of DUMBarton and Baron Kilkeel
Yes HM The Queen was taking the piss when she awarded all those titles and everybody knows it.
I did have a laugh upon hearing those. Harry's Earldom in particular, how appropriate. His Granny would know. "Sussex" is even more devastating in a subtler manner . . Harry's predecessor in the title being a red-haired man cuckholded by his wife, numerous times, and forced to pretend his wife's lover's children were his own. A titleholder so ignominious, it hasn't been awarded for 200 years.
Then along comes 'Archie' . . whose sire's identity is still a bit dodgy. Could he be the surrogate-grown spawn of Harry's wife's VERY intimate friend and business associate, Marcus Anderson?
I wonder if it was her Majesty who set the wedding day on May 19th . . the anniversary of Anne Boleyn's beheading (for adultery) after around 1000 days as Queen. Markle couldn't even last half that long as a cut-rate Duchess.
And the cherry on the sundae was sending the same car that ferried the body of the last ignominious and morally fluid divorced American Duchess to the family plot in Windsor, Wallis Simpson. I think all of these subtleties would have been lost on the Dumbartons, but in royal parlance, all are les mots justes for Harry's strumpet.
The latte of the day to you for the wonderfully poetic
Even in a bathysphere, we could not descend to the depths they plumb.
Nope. These two are true bottom feeders.
As a resident of Sussex I’m horribly fascinated by the antics of this pair of fools. But they are getting worse- Harry’s comments about the Commonwealth are actually dangerous and will stir up all sorts of troubles for the Monarchy. Jamaica has already raised the subject of reparations. They are literally burning their own house down.
In their minds they are unstoppable and untouchable in their own self righteousness - They are on top of the world!
Sounds to me like Cocaine Brain.
In re. your question about the status of my book . . my account says the same as yours as of today. I have requested a refund in a nice, I hope, email to Book Depository. Since the book is due to be released Stateside in just two weeks, I'm going to go with Amazon. I will wait to pre-order with them until I hear back from BD.
I also paid US$27 and I see Amazon's got it for $10 cheaper.
I highly recommend this company as I've had only good experiences with them in the past, but this is the last time I place an international pre-order. The snafu could be beyond their control. Next time I will just wait.
someone who made a remarkable achievement.
someone with strength of character.
someone with an innovative approach to solving world problems.
No.
No.
And, No.
Apparently, it's available as click-and-collect at the nearest W's bookshop but I still hesitate to go shopping in person. I'll have a think about it.
It's good to know it's done so well.
Sorry, not very poetic this time!
She wants the whole world to just do what she says, at the snap of her fingers, at all times. Her record points to her inability to listen or work well with others. Look at Harry, the only employee of her enterprise. She has to hold a kid and a divorce and abandonment to keep a total of ONE person stuck with her. Look at how many strings she has to pull to keep ONE real follower. This is why he is a hostage. She has too much on him, then will say he’s also a giant racist. Would not surprise me if she records everything he says. Considering the stupidity that comes out of him publicly, she will finish him from Royal life if he ever tries to go back by releasing his ‘real thoughts’. Harry is *ucked. He bet on the wrong horse without vetting it.
Meghan, is like one of those infamous people in history that goes down for being a hindrance on society.
Where has her previous family gone? I imagine they are happy they are no longer the target and Harry’s family is.
Meghan might be right in that now she is using all her intel she learned against Them. She knows their rules and can bend public opinion to hate the RF, which is her mission. Victim and winner.
What are some strategies the RF can take to deal with her? Harry just told them she was going to go back to acting. That didn’t work so now she’s going to aim to be a politician.
What are they going to do to control this person now?
They should have cut them off from the get-go but since they didn’t, this is where we are.
L. Tekina
Aug 22, 2019
I once happened upon a sign that said:
Chocolate comes from cocoa, which is a tree.
That makes it a plant.
Chocolate is salad
TL;DR You're valid.
You're welcome. Now where did I put that Lindt bar....
My father's mother was born in Wisborough Green, both sides of her family were pure Sussex.
Let's stick up for the land of the South Saxons!
Not quite OT?
I think we need a few choruses of `Sussex By the Sea' to cheer us up - I like the online video of Noel Gumbrell singing it, although there's also the Sally Anne playing it as they march along The Old Steine.
When my husband went to sea, one of the ships he worked on was MV Sussex; they always played it over the tannoy as they came into port.
I wonder if `MM' will ever feature in effigy at Lewes on Bonfire Night, or elsewhere where there are Bonfire Boys? That, of course, would be racism although she'd be on equal footing with the Pope...
For non-Sussex readers, many people in Sussex (and in some Hampshire villages too) commemorate people burned at the stake under Mary I; it was seen as a betrayal by the local aristocracy, a reminder that savage treatment wasn't reserved for those of another colour back then.
Events at Lewes are increasingly subject to criticism (mutterings about torchlight processions). They should perhaps stick to being non-political on November 5th, having foot races with men, women and children carrying barrels of blazing tar, as happens in Devon!
New Harry Markle
Great cartoon “Sussex Sanctimonious Sermonizing”
"How appropriate is it for any member of a royal family in a constitutional monarchy, which has to remain politically neutral and respectful of the opinions of all its citizens, to take up with an aggressive, proactive, ambitious, opinionated, left-wing political activist? The Tig was visible proof that her beliefs and personality were incompatible with the royal role which she would inevitably have to fulfill if her relationship with Harry should end in marriage. The valid question which she and Harry managed to divert the press away from was a simple one: How will someone as vociferous as Meghan Markle, whose posture is that she needs to use her voice, fit into a role that requires the silent acceptance of viewpoints which do not accord with her own? It is interesting to speculate upon whether much trouble would not have been avoided if such issues had been addressed from the outset."
I agree. Another reason the wedding should have been delayed to give MM and the royal family to discuss the future.
"Hitting the ground running" full speed, full volume in the wrong direction is NOT progress.
Exactly. What will they discuss...
Yachting for feminists?
Bearding for B$tches?
Marrying your dream?
Black female lives matter too?
What fools pay to sponsor or attend this debacle (other than the tabloid press)?
Listen up, Harry!
But he’s as far in as Depp was.
The unfortunate part for Harry, is that this woman is older and on her second marriage. Harry’s also a lot younger in many ways. She isn’t going to push too far. She knows what she’s doing.
He won’t know what happened until he’s like 60. Imho.
But she’s just as greedy as Meghan so maybe not.
I too read the Depp story with a new understanding about narcissists that I (thankfully) gleaned from finding this blog.
I don't like Johnny Depp- never have- so I was inclined to believe Heard's story.
That's until I found this blog, realized what a narcissist was, then realized that I had been married to one for 20 years, that my eyes were really opened. Since I saw the light (thank you Nutty and all the Nutties here! Sincerely- I think you've saved my life) that I've been separating from my narc (it's hard because we have young kids and the narc rage is so strong in him :(
But anyways- his account of Heard's behaviour rings true, and I'm reminded of my narc trying to slander me and how helpless I felt to be in this he-said she-said nightmare. Everything he is, he accuses me of being.
I really hope Harry can learn about NPD and see the light. But my God, when he does... it's going to be absolute chaos.
Meghan will not go quietly.
(Sorry not an unknown just a tech phobia who hasn't worked out how to get a name!!)
You may post the link.
You were supposedly thinking of living in Africa to do some good for your causes. Instead, you ended up in an $18 million mansion on the Beverly Ridge Estate in Los Angeles. It is quite a diverse community, with a lot of non-white people watering the gardens and cleaning the pools.
This makes you look spoilt and vacuous and is not the ideal base from which to lecture others on equality and social progress. Oh, and doing all your Zoom calls in front of a plain adobe wall in the maid’s room is fooling no one.
I learned a lot of history about the Commonwealth I did not know before.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8500317/Robert-Hardman-Dear-Harry-check-history-making-howlers-Commonwealth.html
I hate to sound like an old biddy, but the lack of knowledge of history so many people have these days is shocking. Some stupid American football player is all over Twitter talking about his admiration for Hitler. The player is Black - has he ever heard of Jesse Owens or Joe Louis? He doesn't even know sports history, let alone real history.
https://www.pdfread.net/ebook/meghan-and-harry-lady-colin-cambell/
It’s crazy that Meghan is bashing the RF and RF institution (one and the same but she tries to divide it), primarily because during Megxit,
they claimed they wanted to stay in the RF (halvsies, represent the Queen still).
They were told that wasn’t possible and they had to make a clean clear choice. In or out. So they chose out.
To turn around and then bash the institution she wanted to also continue to be apart of, through the court case, makes absolutely no sense.
Anyone else catching this?
I feel like it’s late, but very important in shooting down their false narrative and revisionist history.
In light of that, it’s also incredible to me they are continuing to pretend to be Royal through these video engagements. Do they just not know what to do, since this was their initial plan? Halvsies?
For these reasons, I do believe their patronage’s will be quietly stripped at the end of the year. The RF is reading all of the articles about how insulting the duo is trying to preach to everyone, and something must be done to be sure the public isn’t mistaking them for HRH Royals any longer
Remember, Michelle also has been very warm and friendly with George W. Bush, said something about him being a favorite of hers.
@ Boomshakalaka
The throwbacks to the Duchess of Windsor are my favorites, Frogmore cottage, the car at the wedding. The courtiers were already having a laugh at her expense even back then. Do either of them ever read any history? (Rhetorical question, of course).
"To turn around and then bash the institution she wanted to also continue to be apart of, through the court case, makes absolutely no sense."
I agree. It also doesn't make sense for Harry as the former Youth Ambassador to the Commonwealth to bash it either (even as they continue in QCT positions)
I think it's pure sour grapes because they didn't get their way. Throwing toys out of the pram. Despicable and disgusting childish behavior.
But they are counting on their "fans" forgetting they ever intended to remain as 1/2 time royals. They both seem to have an attention span equal to the lifespan of a mayfly. And they assume their fans do too. And many may.
After all, it wasn't long ago H&M were going to act as a conduit for current COVID information and save the planet that way. They posted something from WHO on their SussexRoyal IG that mentioned "respiratory hygiene" (don't cough on people, do sneeze into your elbow), told us we could train online to be counselors during lockdown, delivered a few meals to medically vulnerable persons on behalf of an organization that wasn't accepting volunteers at the time but had a photographer handy, they supposedly zoom crashed a virtual mental health meeting, Harry proclaimed things weren't as bad as reported, and they went on their merry way to their next "cause" and to make another of their many videos proclaiming how proud they are of some group. Those groups are always composed of younger people (preferably not Caucasian) as no one over 45 ever did anything worthwhile in their eyes. (They also seem to assume the world sees them as "charming young adults" rather than entitled middle-aged whiners.)
One phrase stood out, I even wrote it down lest I forget it.
It was a toast:
`Perdition to faithless princes!'
I'll drink to that!
The Wikipedia entry on the novel is interesting - here's an excerpt which seems particularly relevant to our own distracted times:
`Micah fights at the Battle of Sedgemoor, which in a narrative aside Doyle obliquely acknowledges to be the last clear-cut pitched battle on open ground between two military forces fought on English soil. Micah also witnesses the bloodletting and indiscriminate hangings in the aftermath, is prosecuted along with many others in the Bloody Assizes of the notorious Judge Jeffries, is condemned to be sold to slavery in Barbados and is at the last moment saved from the very hold of the slave ship.
`Much is made of the role of Protestant ministers in recruiting the rebel army and in motivating its soldiers. Micah Clarke himself becomes increasingly disillusioned with religious extremism and ultimately expresses the view that toleration is a great good. Conan Doyle had himself been brought up as a Catholic and it is likely that Micah expresses Doyle's own thoughts on the subject'.
At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micah_Clarke (my emphasis)
Yes, rebels, and the innocent, were transported as indentured labour, tantamount to slavery even if in theory it was for a fixed term. I found an excellent account of the Bloody Assize, as it was known, here -
https://libguides.law.uga.edu/c.php?g=177206&p=1164802 Note the domain - Uganda
The same treatment was handed out after the battle of Culloden (1746):
https://www.scotsman.com/whats-on/arts-and-entertainment/jacobites-and-slave-trade-new-study-underway-605825
What offences, in their eyes, does, say, Malta have to confront? Apologise to Turkey for not giving in to the Ottomans during the Great Siege of 1565?
Are they poking their noses into the racial sensitivities of Malaysia and Singapore? The dreadful things that happened at the partition of India in 1947? What BLM to do with Cyprus?
Perhaps that only makes it more relevant?
I forgot to mention the Press Gang. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impressment
What do they expect us to do about that?
Sorry, I forgot, that wouldn't count in their eyes.
Life in the past was, as now, full of abuses. If anything is to be done, we should at least be aware of what they really were, who did what to whom, and not charge ahead in blind and wilful ignorance.
We're pleased to let you know that your order is winging its way to you, and is due for delivery according to the times below.
The Harkles claim their speech was supported by the Palace. It is a second breathtaking misjudgment of the public mood in a short time by the Palace
First one was the Queen's approval of nearly 2.5 million of taxpayers money wasted on the Frog cottage. Public reaction was explosive.
Reaction to recent insult to the Commonwealth is equally explosive.
The Queen can't pretend the gruesome pair is doing fine as Commonwealth officials, because they are not.
I did become convinced the video is spliced as per the guy demonstrating the technology. What really convinced me is the fuzzy double image around “Harry’s” hairline as well as the fact that the ears on the cartoon character are completely fuzzed out. You can see how the photoshop wand must have been put to use. Harry’s ears, like everyone’s, are quite distinctive. The fact that the lobe portion was smeared convinced me it was a doctored video. This is not to say that I think it wasn’t Hapless. He just wasn’t with Meghan in the flesh.
Every time he opens his mouth the look she tries to hide on her face is that she thinks he is extraordinarily stupid. Always there is a flash of anger and a near eye roll. This goes all the way back to the doll presentation at Windsor. Can you imagine being told how stupid and ineffectual you are every day all day?
The Harkles claim their speech was supported by the Palace. It is a second breathtaking misjudgment of the public mood in a short time by the Palace...
I don’t believe a single word of it. It’s PR nonsense from the disgusting duo.
For starters, why on earth would the palace sanction something they (the Duo) was historically and factually incorrect over? They just wouldn’t.
Meghan - the woman who can't tell the difference between fiction and reality
I've just had a shufti/dekko (Cultural appropriation warning!) at #UglyAmerican and the bit Scandi quotes -
My mouth dropped open at the video - there she is, playing herself! Telling us all about her character, in both senses of the word!
Or is she playing this role in real life?
Do we know where this comes from? When was the film made/released.
Remember `How do you know she's lying?'
Ans: It's when her lips move.
They're challenging HM to deny it and draw BP into an argument.
One thing I learnt in dealing with my narc ex was how powerful silence can be. They can't twist your words to make them into something they can then attack.
On the other hand, perhaps BP is happy that they've tightened the noose around their necks a little further?
---------
Assuming the clip is genuine, was the role written about her in the first place? She lacks the self-awareness to see how she is mirrored in the role.
Or has she's plagiarised her entire modus operandi from a film script?
She has spoken on the record in a disgusting way about HMTQ. She has also bullied others in the past.
The Girl Up Twitter page is full of comments from people shocked that Meghan is included.
It will be interesting to see what she says at the event. She has certainly quoted others in the past without giving them credit. If you watch the International Women's roundtable footage, it is clear she has neither the experience or the education and training as the other participants there. She really couldn't articulate anything substantial.
Didn't she fail the Foreign Service exam?
I have actually accidentally seen parts of that Masterpiece.
(My mother will watch The Hallmark Channel). I had no idea who she was at the time, but it was so annoying I finalky had to turn it off.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5364518/
The Daters Handbook 2016
As Bootsy said, they’re playing a game of chess. They’re waiting to see what the Palace says or does. They maybe disappointed or in for a very long wait. :o/. As Queen Whitby correctly remembered what Elle said.... who always maintained the RF would let the Harkles hang themselves and leave no fingerprints... I agree with Elle’s sentiments, as much as I want to put a swift end to these two’s stupefying shenanigans, it’s probably the long game that will win this particular game of chess in the end.
I do wonder how often Megsy actually utters the truth and/or without plagiarising someone else? They both lack self awareness on a momentous scale , do they not see that people laughing at them?
They must sit in there morning noon and night plotting and thinking about their next big thing to spout off about and whining about their woes.
How dare you to suggest that the Duke of Malibu and Duchess Difficult play chess! Not only it is a racist game with whites against blacks, the whites have the undeserved privilege of the first move! And the Queen can move in ANY direction! Outrageous.
No, they play the game of "Ches-SEX" and if somebody wins against them the result is automatically declared null and void and the winner is declared pale and stale regardless of skin colour.
Pardon me, I just couldn't resist this.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1306434/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-commonwealth-queen-elizabeth-ii-news-british-empire
So I either accept she gave up totally or she supports his opinion that the Commonwealth is the New British Empire.
Plus if you go to the Commonwealth trust page you will see a picture of gleaming Harry and Megsy, so very clearly the Queen still regards them as worthy representatives of the Commonwealth.
If Harry isn't in the same place as Meghan, where is he? Why is he living separately from Meghan and not reconciled with the family ( unless he is in rehab or in England plotting a divorce).
Of course, MM is in focus in the center of the video while PH is relegated to the background.
She appears to be "thriving". It could be beauty filters or cosmetic procedures. Perhaps yoga and avocado toast. Harry looks haggard as usual. At least he is wearing a clean shirt.
Some Twitter posters claim that many videos use a PH double. They have close ups if the eyes and ears backing their claims. Who knows....
Wonder if the RF delayed splitting the trust until a week before the US 2020 tax deadline to cause stress on the Duos accounting. It would be a similar tactic to blocking Sussex Royal after the Mexit. If so, the RF is playing a stealth long game. The Duo could be hit with audits and tax penalties at the same time their allowance is cut.
Suprised MM or her "friends" haven't said anything about LCC's book. Maybe MM hasn't gotten her copy of the book yet.
The RF is having a busy month with Maxwell's arrest and PHMM book releases. Andrew reluctantly cancelled his golf vacation. Wonder if Harry is also in England to protect him from tax/embezzlement charges.
I wondered why the crown allowed MM to keep her own business/PR teams. Perhaps it was to protect the RF and Harry. Any irregularities in the trusts can be blamed on MM and her team. PH can plead ignorance . Unlike MM, he never wrote a blog or had tax troubles.
The Dumbartons are a annoying puzzle.
So now.... Meghan is distantly related to former British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill...LOL
Meghan Markle is distantly related to a very powerful politician!
The former Suits actress lives in LA with Prince Harry and their son Archie
July 08, 2020 - 15:21 BST
Hanna Fillingham
The Duchess of Sussex may have married into the royal family, but they aren't her only high-profile relatives. According to MyHeritage, Meghan is distantly related to former British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, who was in power between 1940 to 1945, and again from 1951 to 1955. The pair are sixth cousins, five times removed. The mother-of-one and Winston were both related to a man named Zachariah Howe, who was born in Massachusetts, but a descendant of British settlers who were from Essex. What's more, Meghan also shares relatives with famous British playwright, William Shakespeare, who is her fifth cousin 13 times removed.
MORE: Kate Middleton's exciting news revealed
VIDEO: Inside Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's temporary LA home
Currently, Meghan is isolating in LA with Prince Harry and their one-year-old son Archie. The family relocated to the States at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic in March, and are residing in Tyler Perry's mansion.
The couple have been enjoying settling into their new life with their son, and celebrated their first Fourth of July in America together on Saturday.
READ: The Countess of Wessex makes surprise visit at local pub
meghan-markle-related-winston-churchill
Meghan Markle is distantly related to Winston Churchill
On Monday, Meghan will be joining more high-profile personalities, as she will be working with former First Lady Michelle Obama and actress Priyanka Chopra Jonas, at a three-day virtual event to achieve gender equality worldwide. Meghan will be one of the guest speakers at the event, Girl Up Global Leadership Summit, which takes place from 13 to 15 July.
meghan-markle-harry-archie
Meghan and Prince Harry are currently living in LA
We can expect to see a lot more of Meghan and Harry in the next few months, as the couple recently signed on with a high-profile agency in the United States for speaking engagements, the Harry Walker Agency, who represent Michelle and Barack Obama and Hillary and Bill Clinton.
It's understood that they will be engaging in keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums in future. Harry and Meghan will reportedly continue to focus on social issues such as racial injustice, gender equality, mental health and environmental concerns.
Just logged in for the first time today, but I'm awarding the Latte of the Day to you right now for this gem. Plus a pastry of your choice. Too brilliant. Thank you for refreshing some of the salient points of chess for me. I knew the Queen could move in any direction, but I didn't realize that White ALWAYS got the first move. That *does* seem like pastime devised by white privilege. Despite my own white privilege, I am intimidated by chess. I'm nowhere as dim as the Sussex pair but I never learned chess. No one to teach me and I have never wanted to work so hard at a game that's supposed to relax me. Solitaire on my phone app is my speed. :)
How dare you to suggest that the Duke of Malibu and Duchess Difficult play chess! Not only it is a racist game with whites against blacks, the whites have the undeserved privilege of the first move! And the Queen can move in ANY direction! Outrageous.
No, they play the game of "Ches-SEX" and if somebody wins against them the result is automatically declared null and void and the winner is declared pale and stale regardless of skin colour.
The Express isn’t worth the paper it’s written on, a complete joke like The Sun and The Star. Other online media outlets have stated it too, one foreign I believe. Online newspapers and the internet is full of fake news and untruths.
Regardless, The Express is Megsy mouthpiece. So no, I still don’t believe one iota that the Palace are anyway okey with this. Just because something is reported doesn’t make it true.
Until a statement is released from BP I’m dismissing this nonsense as PR fluff. ;o)
Yeah, not a fan of that. Doesn't seem of good character, or ethical.
Tempting, I'm sure, but it doesn't seem like the right thing to do.
The author deserves to be paid for her work.
Is that a copyright violation? Could cause Nutty problems.
I realize that violations are a problem and hard to enforce. Pirating a blog post is annoying and wrong; pirating a whole book seems even more wrong.
No offense intended.
Thanks for providing this. I don't know whether to laugh or cry, really.
So now.... Meghan is distantly related to former British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill...LOL
The Duchess of Sussex may have married into the royal family, but they aren't her only high-profile relatives. According to MyHeritage, Meghan is distantly related to former British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, who was in power between 1940 to 1945, and again from 1951 to 1955. The pair are sixth cousins, five times removed. The mother-of-one and Winston were both related to a man named Zachariah Howe, who was born in Massachusetts, but a descendant of British settlers who were from Essex. What's more, Meghan also shares relatives with famous British playwright, William Shakespeare, who is her fifth cousin 13 times removed.
William Shakespeare AND Winston Churchill? One, the greatest playwright in the English language, a cornerstone of Western culture. The other, the Bulldog of Britain, the nation's greatest statesman, and the Queen's beloved first Prime Minister.
W the actual F. Well, Meg and her family have told so many lies, I'd take this with a grain of salt. Presumably these illustrious gentlemen (both pale, male and irrevocably stale, being deceased . . a really long time in the case of Will) come through Thomas Markle's line rather than Doria's? In this crazy f*ed up world, anything is possible I suppose . . except for Meghan Markle to tell the truth.
With the blood of these, arguably the two greatest Britons who ever lived, running through her veins, one would suppose that Megsy would be a tiny bit more pro-British, innit.
I will gratefully accept your latte of the day (plus pastry!) if you and other great Nuttiers join the party!
And heck with the dieting.
Well, timing has never been my strong suit . . but I find it a tiny bit too coincidental that within approximately 2 hours after I had requested a refund on my pre-order of LCC's book from Book Depository, I got notification that my copy had shipped out and should be to me in 5-8 days.
I placed my pre-order back on May 27th, one month prior to the advertised UK release date of June 28th--now 10 days past. Why did it take 10 days to ship my order, when those copies should have been pre-packed and ready to ship out on July 28th or the next day? And why did I get no communication from the vendor about the status of this title, other than a "Awaiting Publication" on my account for the last 6 weeks--until I sent a request for my money back? Practically immediately after *that*, my book goes out.
I have a feeling that they underestimated demand and very possibly put their international pre-order sale customers at the end of the queue, even though I ordered mine back in May. Kind of negates the entire purpose of placing a pre-order.
Lesson learned. I am not ordinarily the type to pre-order stuff and I'm fine with waiting because the price often drops after 3-4 weeks after release. Heck, I just got my first iPhone last year . .an 11. I am never in the vanguard for anything. LCC's book was an exception because Meg and Harry drive me that nuts and I need the dirt.
Well, that's the report for today. Book Depository is keeping my $27 and I am getting my (tardy) order sometime this month, so they say.
"So clear that Meghan is emotionally abusive. That stare that she gives him, she wants it to look admiring and affectionate but instead it looks creepy and controlling to me. Like she's willing him to say what she demanded that he say."
Everyone I have shown the video too (no one I know is interested in them, or really knows who they are) says that same thing! 'Why is she staring at him like that?!'
Super creepy.
Agree, as well, that these antics will continue. Nutty started the blog post with, 'Sigh'. Which is the most accurate sentiment as these videos keep coming out. They are boring, weary, irrelevant, lame, and directionless. The limited audience they DO have, probably doesn't want another hostage video either.
Why are they trying to hide their location/situation so much with the brown wall?
But yes, boring stuff mixed with insulting word salad, coming from the wannabe half-Royals.
The guy's face says it all.
https://youhavebeenmarkled.tumblr.com/image/623086634161897472
No such thing as virtual calories! Have another pastry! Have a Frappucino!
Passing out virtual lattes and pastries is the most Starbucks fun I can have at present. The only Starbucks in my town at present is inside the lobby of one of our major hospitals--on lockdown to visitors since March. I was turned away at the door 6 or so weeks later when I made the foolhardy assumption that popping into the lobby for a to-go coffee might be doable.
No, it wasn't. Starbucks is barred to me until God knows when. I've been ordering coffee online like mad but it's not the same. Not at all. I need the esprit of Starbucks to make the experience complete!
I still have a Flip Phone. And I refuse to get a Kindle. One of these days my husband is just going to lock me in a room with a book, a radio and a candle.
Looking forward to (finally) receiving my order. But I don't think I will order from Book Depository again.
That picture is hilarious. Markle has managed to build her fauxmanitarian Duchess brand entirely off paid PR that has been pretty damn good, considering that anyone who has the misfortune of standing within 10 feet of her personally reacts to her like she's toxic waste.
Yet we never hear from any of those people . . . I'd love to dish some dirt with the fellow members of Markle's sole 2014 USO tour. Sharing the stage with her were Kellie Pickler, American Idol alumna, with albums and (now) a successful daytime talk show; a Glee cast member . . and some retired pro sports figures.
So . . People who could sing and dance professionally to a high level for entertainment purposes mixed with some sports figures the largely male audience of service members would enjoy meeting and hearing from.
And then . . there was Markle. Standing awkwardly in the middle of the group, laughing and shuffling awkwardly while everyone else was singing and *pointedly* ignoring her. It was so blatant. They had divided themselves into two groups and clustered together leaving Markle standing alone in the dead center where she'd obviously positioned herself.
They were scarfing and socially distancing her before Prince William and Covid made them 'things'.
So my question is, who did Markle have to blow to get that spot on the tour when she had(has) zero talent for entertaining guys with her clothes on? What was her contribution to the cast? Word salad? Double-jointed yoga poses? Simulating coitus up against a file cabinet with any and all willing audience volunteers? She stuck out like a polar bear in the Sahara. No business being there at all. She paid someone off very well for that spot. And she never got another one. You can only fool people with fakery for a very brief window. That's why Markle has to keep dumping friends, contacts and lovers . . she talks a great game to get a gig, but once anyone actually spends more than 10 minutes with her they understand they have been infiltrated by a toxic troll.
Was she married to Trevor or possibly dating him during this tour? I would guess he had to do something with it. The talentless Markle was so obviously alien to the rest of the team that it is embarrassing to watch.
I have no doubt the Americans, like Brits, will see through her the more desperately she climbs up. What was the first thing that struck you with her? My first immediate impression was how fake, unnatural and forced she is. She was acting all the time, very badly.
I still have a Flip Phone. And I refuse to get a Kindle. One of these days my husband is just going to lock me in a room with a book, a radio and a candle.
I am a librarian and this has forced me out of my Luddite tendencies due to professional necessity. I still resisted getting a Kindle for the longest time . . I have a confession . I bought it a couple Christmas seasons ago and actually, it's still in the box. I did take it out and look at it. I felt bullied into buying one by professional obligation rather than personal desire, since so many of our patrons now use e-readers, tablets and phones exclusively for their content. So many people were asking me for help in downloading stuff and I was completely ignorant of the process.
I have not had classes or 'been taught' how to use any of the rapidly-changing technology my job requires of me. It's sink-or-swim time, teaching myself by trial and error. The cell phone was another thing . . my old flip phone needed replacing and the tech world has moved on to the point where it's basically all smart phones now. Due to Covid, we are doing a lot of virtual events, filmed on Facebook with our own devices . . our director communicates via texts, etc. It was getting to the point that I could not fully do my job responsibilities without these devices, whether I wanted them or not.
Just the other day my two-year-old TV remote puked, and despite fresh batteries, is still dead. Without access to my DVD player, I signed up for HULU, and there's so much there I will never get to. I have been a dedicated DVD collector and have at least a couple hundred movies and TV shows. But we are in the twilight years of physical media and it's not going to be very many years before I won't even be able to play my DVDs. If my 20-year-old boom box dies, I won't be able to play my CDs, either.
Sometimes I get nostalgic for the old LPs--vinyl. Hell, a Victrola seems romantic to me. Digital media may be crisper and it's certainly reducing the clutter, but it lacks soul.
Looking forward to (finally) receiving my order. But I don't think I will order from Book Depository again.
Looking forward to (finally) receiving my order. But I don't think I will order from Book Depository again.
Book Depository has always given me good service before. I think LCC's book is a special case--a super-high demand new release with potential legal/customs issues holding up its stated release. I don't necessarily think the delay with this item was BD dropping the ball. Add Covid into the mix and I don't know what they were dealing with on their end.
I would recommend them. Just not for preorders.
I sympathise, my attitude to technology is very similar - friend hit the nail on the head when she said it was `black magic' (whoops!) to her.
In the days when the only job I could get was as a library assistant, I went to a day course on digitising resources. The question came up as to how long digital versions would last.
The answer? `For ever, or ten years, whichever's the shorter.'
The reason being that the rapid change in the technology mean the data would become inaccessible - example being little cassette tapes. Who now has the kit to play them?
It was embarrassing when we had to pay the TV repair man - he had a handheld card machine. He had to go up into the attic, open a Velux window and stand on tiptoe & stre-e-e-tch to pick up a signal.
I've given in on Lady C's book & have done `click and collect' from our nearest big city. Shall collect it tomorrow.
Powerful stuff, reassuring.
LOL
Thanks Seabee. Reality, checked.
What WAS she doing that entire time?
No graduate degree?
No children?
No work?
My best friend has worked at Starbucks for over 12 years.
I know it's not much of a consolation, but I could get her on here to chat coffee if you want.
Much love your way. I feel your pain. :)
I hope M. Obama figures out a way to completely ice out mm.
If we think about it, it definitely keeps any 'woke' sentiments at bay from the RF/institution.
I doubt Meghan and Harry would agree to this if they knew, but perhaps the RF is playing at something by letting these two detract attention from the RF 'woke' faux pas. It might even be WHY they are still front and center. (andrew, systemic issues, so on)
"Chatting with Lady C(olin Campbell) - Harry & Meghan's Commonwealth Caper, Jamaican HC, Mrs Thatcher"
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o_UCS4c6Tos&feature=youtu.be&noapp=1
Was she married to Trevor or possibly dating him during this tour? I would guess he had to do something with it. The talentless Markle was so obviously alien to the rest of the team that it is embarrassing to watch.
The divorce from Trevor came through in August, 2013, a year before this tour, so it wasn't him. She was involved with Cory by 2014 but as a foodie celebrity, I doubt he was connected at all to the USO tours. I smell Kruger-Cowne's fingerprints all over this--the same firm that got the grifting starlet-on-the-climb all those 'humanitarian' gigs to Africa and the One World summit.
I'm thinking that Gina K-C might have been able to slide her client onto this roster due to a last-minute cancellation by someone else and USO didn't have enough time to be picky about the replacement. Surely tour members need to be invited on the basis of some talent or pop culture standing they can bring? They are putting on shows--besides singing and dancing, comic monologues or even baton-twirling would have added something to the agenda.
The retired football players did a game job of singing the group numbers, but they would have been there to be 'personalities' to do meet-and-greets with the guys, participate in some scripted banter, sign autographs, possibly and just add some dude energy. Megsy at this time was hitting the lads' mag circuit hardcore, with her scantily clad burger grilling videos and such . . did she wear her 'Briefcase Girl #24' slinky red number onstage? I can't imagine any other reason why she would have been there.
In between bouts of fake bent-over-at-the-waist mock laughing (during the song), Markle repeatedly plucks at the sleeve of the burly football player beside her, obviously having honed in on him like a heat-seeking missile. He ignores her, as one should with any person over the age of 5 who is yanking on your sleeve for attention.
Kellie Pickler, ostensibly the lead personality on this tour with the highest profile of this group, positioned herself on the very edge of the stage, making sure that there were two bodies between her and Markle, when she might have reasonably been expected to take the middle. Kelly has a total of 12 USO tours on her sheet. Markle - 1 and done. Nobody wanted her back.
This awkward group video was a foretaste of what was to come on the BP balcony during Trooping the Colour 2019 when William, the future King of Britain took his family to the furthest edge of the balcony opposite the Harkles at the other end. Surely Will's position entitles him to stand next to his father and Granny, but that wouldn't have been far enough away from the toxic duo. Had Kate been any closer to the far edge, she would have gone over the side.
*This* is the effect that the Harkles have on people they have to interact with on a personal level. That's why COVID is actually Meg's friend right now. She can 'arrange' video conference high-jackings and word salads with impunity and stage papp sightings of their humanitarian missions of delivering food to the disenfranchised and visiting various charities . . .or did they??? Masks make it even easier for her to conceal shenanigans.
Oh, I think the average Americans already have sussed her, if they ever cared in the first place. The Internet is full of very active communities with passionate opinions about the Sussexes .. but this hyper-intense virtual reality is not reflective of how she's received in the real world. I was the only person, to my knowledge, in my organization who watched the wedding or honestly, has any interest in the Royal family. They are not topics of interest in the heartland where I reside. People like more mainstream American entertainment and have more prosaic concerns, like how they are going to pay their mortgage, rather than watching a spoilt English prince get hitched to some cable actress they had never heard of. Diana was a an undeniable star around the world but none of the other Royals have that kind of cachet, nor will again. Diana's boys both lack her glamour, especially the goofy-looking, sour-faced pasty red-haired one. Who Harry married or knocked boots with was of absolutely no consequence to the average American, even if a few more of us did acknowledge that William's wedding in 2011 was a much bigger deal.
Markle's support among Americans has been grossly overinflated by publications like People. One flips through People while waiting in line to buy groceries and it'd be a very small minority of that readership who gives a toss about the Duck-A$$ of Malibu. Celeb figures who've come out in support of Meg are all Has Beens or Never Beens who are fulfilling PR obligations to try to get media attention for themselves, that's it.
Americans do not like Meghan Markle, except for a vocal coterie of mentally-disturbed sugars and bought-off Hollywood types of dubious ethics. It's all very self-absorbed. I can't believe *any* WOC would fall for Meg's sh*t, she's so obviously exploiting her tenuous claim to black heritage for attention. Meg doesn't give a cr*p about the travails of black people no matter where they live . .this woman spent 35 years pretending to be all-white, until she snared a pasty Prince who made her look darker by association. Being biracial was her ace in the hole for insinuating herself into the whitest family in England and she took full advantage of it.
My impression of her was favorable at the engagement photo call, though I thought the nude strappy sandals and white trenchcoat were odd choices for an outdoor appearance in an English garden--in November. That was my first taste of Rachel's dislike of dressing appropriately for the season and the prevailing culture. She seemed like a lively, pretty girl . . I hadn't heard her speak yet. The wheels started to come off the illusion tout suite when I watched that incredibly awkward engagement interview. I was willing to chalk some of that up to nerves on both their parts and her more direct American manner not going to do the 'Look pretty and stay mute unless your Prince speaks first' kind of Palace MO.
But stuff started to pile up. I found the Harry Markle blog--and she's been on Meg's case since MM was just a girlfriend. It was there I first saw the infamous 'poop hat' pic of MM sticking her tongue out at her first Sandringham Christmas walk, and looking, unaccountably, Asian. Didn't look like the same girl, but anybody who would do *that* as a grown woman during a public appearance with her prospective in-laws who bent the rules for her to be there . . obviously a pathologically immature, attention seeking head case.
And . .Nothing has changed!
I always find your posts interesting and often you just nail things on. I never thought that COVID is actually a friend of Markle, but you are right.
She can do video "messages" using filters, editing, cut and paste and rehearse as many times as she needs.
Delivering the same message in person, among other people, is much more difficult.
Markle with her oversized high-heeled shoes, starlet mannerisms and zero genuine warmth towards people can not "work" the room full of intelligent people. She is not royal any more and they don't owe automatic respect to her, so she has to offer something more substantial than she has done so far via a camera.
Her biggest problem is she doesn't learn. She has been in public for two years and her performance has not improved. Same nonsensical word flow, bad gestures, bad timing.
We don't have to hear other Meghan PR interests via talking heads on TV, picked up News stories everywhere for clicks, red carpets and then the stylists PR associating them for a career boost, rumours and flashing lights at Charity Balls, and the rest of her Nuevo Rich antics.
In comparison to the media assault she WOULD be doing without Covid, we have been given a reprieve.
I actually monitor a successful site regarding the duo, and I can tell you people are only interested in the negative opinion and actions of Meghan, both in the Uk and in North America. The stats don't bode well for her internet Charity partnerships extraordinaire.
That's probably why she has no real distribution, pays heavily to get her articles in the DM, and releases a video every now and then that she also has to initiate. No one is interested. Would not be surprised, if she leans more on the Harry appearances from here on out.
She's been on the world stage for two years, and prior to that, ostensibly spent seven seasons as a working actress on television, while also making the rounds as a 'humanitarian speaker'. Only someone with a profound learning disability would fail to make any progress as a performer with a decade's worth of practice.
Diana engaged a speech coach to improve her public speaking skills, and she did get much more confident with more exposure to speaking. Obviously Meg would never accept that her skills needed any sort of polishing . . hell, no. She came out of the womb already knowing everything she'd ever need, and her degree in Theatre was just icing on the cake.
Meg's entire self is a house of cards with no substantial foundation, and her life is based on frauds, deceptions, half-truths and full-out fibs. She's hollow at her center, and there is no authentic self in there. That's why she is a terrible actress and is just so awkward and poor at connecting with people on an interpersonal level. For someone who's so fake all the time, she can't fake a personal warmth or interest in others she simply does not feel. I don't think she can feel it. So, really, I regard the way she is as a profound and incurable birth defect. Or we could call it a defect of her environment growing up . . Nature vs. nurture. I think it's both, in her case. Sociopaths are made . .but sometimes, I believe they are just born as well. Meg is the proverbial bad seed.
The inability to change negative patterns of behavior or learn new facts and skills in an authentic way is beyond her capabilities, I think. That's why she so often plagiarizes other people's words and appropriates their ideas, nearly verbatim. She lacks the capacity for original thought. Somewhere in her childhood, a window closed and froze her at that stage of mental development for all time. That's why her preoccupations and presentation is that of a much younger person. I think Markle is stuck at 18 or 20 in her head and no matter how long she lives, her body will age but her mind will not mature. Her character defects are getting more apparent now than when she was in her early 20s because most people expect very young girls to be a bit air-headed and reliant on their sexuality to get them things. It's OK to be a young 20-something still finding yourself .. dropping out of college or jobs, couch surfing with friends, going out clubbing without a care for tomorrow. They are still finding themselves. But when a person is approaching her 39th birthday, has been married 3 times and is ostensibly a mother, the dissonance between the expected maturity and the inner reality begins to clang.
Rachel likes to be a woman of mystery and nothing blows the lid off the mystery faster than folks seeing her in person. On some level she knows this too, though she'd never admit to it. People have been known to have entirely virtual careers--as Internet entertainers/influencers, and I think that's what Markle is really after.
It explains why Privacy is more powerful than celebrity, and once you have celebrity you need privacy.
Meghan does not have celebrity, and is trying to fake it under the 'need for privacy', to boost her celebrity.
So she can make money, by selling her privacy like Peter Philips. Also, clearly she and Harry don't have much money.
The core of her fakery.
TL;DR "I'm a minor celeb, needing to act like a major celeb, to increase my earning power by being able to sell important parts of my private life."
I've always thought she doesn't understand discretion and this article paints the entire picture (it's short, don't worry!)
https://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2010/06/28/privacy-is-the-new-celebrity/
On some level as an influencer, you HAVE to be authentic or you will get canceled.
Download was really quick. KBack later, gotta read!
Her biggest problem is she doesn't learn. She has been in public for two years and her performance has not improved. Same nonsensical word flow, bad gestures, bad timing.
----
I think that is because she is incapable of seeing herself objectively, Fairy. she can't edit or improve herself because she simply cannot see any part of herself or her performance as needing improvement. Except for those famous feet, I guess.
She sees what she INTENDED to convey: sparkling wit, sincere attention, approval. What we see is an aging ham who doesnt have a clue what she is on about and whats more, doesnt really care as long as everyone is looking at her.
Can you imagine what she would be like to direct in an acting role? There would be so much Norma-Desmonding and given enough grapes, the foot-stomping could flood the Napa Valley with wine. Thats the word out there. "Touch this diva and your picture may never be made."
Thank you :)
Meghan, aged 21-31
What WAS she doing that entire time?
No graduate degree?
No children?
No work?
Meg has been listed as a graduate of the Northwestern University Class of 2003 which would have been a few months before her 22nd birthday. Somewhere around this time she would have taken, and failed the foreign service entrance exam, and decided, rather than study for it again, to go home to Hollywood and become an actress. I think this was probably always the plan. The diplomatic service isn't nearly sexy enough, though there is the occasional dress-up formal dinner. Otherwise it's a lot of drudgery, meetings and visits with people you don't know and making small talk with them.
A lot like the Royal family. Really that's exactly what they do. It's called 'soft diplomacy' and Megs was a disaster at it.
She would have been going to unsuccessful auditions and likely making her first forays into the 'transactional' side of show business, getting hooked into the yachting circuit and having to kiss 'old guys with bad breath' to get ahead. She started her blog 'Working Actress' anonymously in which she complained about the indignities of the audition process & the travails of not having a reliable vehicle to get herself to auditions. I smell a lie even here, because surely Tom Markle would have bought his baby a car if she asked for it, and if not him, what about her boyfriend-future husband Trevor Engleson, who she took up with in 2004, just a year after college graduation? She moved in with him very soon afterwards, and it seems like Trevity-trev-trev would have at least bought her a reliable used car to use.
I don't think Megsy's struggling actress period lasted more than a year. She's always had a knack for finding men to pay her way. She got some acting work, though nothing of note: "Hot Girl on Plane"; a couple of really bad Hallmark movies that are a dime a dozen; the 'Deal or No Deal' #24 briefcase, where she lasted for exactly half a season. Interesting. Was she only hired for that few episodes, or was she ousted from the job because the other girls hated her and she was an on-set nightmare? Deal was a pretty good Deal for a girl who otherwise had no work and whose talent stretched to looking animated in a negligee and stilettos. She was not required to speak, nor was she in the front row, and neither condition would be acceptable to MM in the long term.
I think it continued like this . . She lived with Trevor for about seven years, waiting for her Big Break, ie. for her husband to make her a Star. They got married in 2011. A scant two years later, after he'd paid for a Jamaican wedding, she got the part on Suits and she gave Trev the boot and moved to Canada.
She must have been yachting the entire time she was with Trevor, with whom she spent the bulk of her 'hottest' years. He must have known about it . .how couldn't he?
"...they claimed they wanted to stay in the RF (halvsies, represent the Queen still).
They were told that wasn’t possible and they had to make a clean clear choice. In or out. So they chose out.
To turn around and then bash the institution she wanted to also continue to be apart of, through the court case, makes absolutely no sense.
Anyone else catching this?"
Missed that, thanks for connecting those dots!
that video was really interesting. Kate spoiled their shot, and then was firm, but polite.
And it worked! Not only did they leave, but they seemed a little embarrassed.
How different that encounter would have been with Megs.
She would have called them to begin with, and if that hadnt worked, french kissed a dog until they showed up. Once they had, she would have posed happily until Harry showed up. Then she would have sued them all for invading her privacy.
Have you ever spoken from the podium addressing a roomfull of smart, tough as old boots, successful people, who know their business? I had to do it once, and it was absolutely terrifying. My only saving grace was I spoke about the project I carried from the beginning, I knew it well, cared about it and thought nothing was more important. To me it was the biggest thing in the world.
Afterwords a seasoned tough chap told me he appreciated how strongly I believed in my case.
This was a lesson I learned about the public speaking. You have to be sincere and passionate about your case. The guys in the room will detect if you just do it for PR and they will make a note about it.
That is why people believed Harry when he spoke about saving animals and trees in Africa. The spoilt prince WAS sincere about this. And that is why nobody believes the woke rubbish he is spewing now. As for Markle she cares about nothing but herself and it shows.
Sorry, I got a bit emotional. They could do so much real good and it all fizzled out.
"Download the book for free so the author doesn’t get paid? Nice. Pardon me if I take your opinions with a huge grain of sea salt."
Yeah there is that. I downloaded but left my Amazon order in place. Goring Castle can't pay for itself if nobody is coming.
Thank you so much for the link to the Robert Hardman article on the history of the Commonwealth. It’s a real shame that the Harkles are unlikely to read it. They are sorely in need of an education.
I have no doubt the Americans, like Brits, will see through her the more desperately she climbs up. What was the first thing that struck you with her? My first immediate impression was how fake, unnatural and forced she is. She was acting all the time, very badly.
As an American obsessed with the Misadventures of Harry and the HoodRat, I cannot find anyone willing to talk to about them. Even ex-pat Brits. Most really have no idea who Meghan Markle is until reminded she's the starlet who married Prince Harry. Then the eyes glaze over and yawns are stifled. I can assure you, anyone with a pulse and an opinion hate Meghan and worship Catherine. Men, women and children. We are embarrassed Markle is the epitome of the American stereotype except skinny.
“ Markle's support among Americans has been grossly overinflated by publications like People.”
It will be very interesting to see how well Finding Freedom sells in the States when it is released next month. I’m crossing my fingers and toes that it is quickly consigned to the sale bin.
By Camilla Tominey, Associate Editor
Let’s just set the record straight
Dare I mention the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ latest video? I ask that in all sincerity since we have got to the point where some readers say they “have had it up to here” with Harry and Meghan, while others stand ready to accuse me of racism if I deign to give the couple anything other than positive publicity.
So let’s just set the record straight once and for all. I have no issue with them raising awareness of racism and unconscious bias. In fact, as I have argued throughout the 15 years I have covered the royals, it is precisely these sorts of causes that should be championed by people in positions of great privilege.
But it’s the refusal to acknowledge their own privilege, while preaching to others, that I think some find rather galling.
Wouldn’t it be more powerful if Harry addressed the actual racism and bias he has shown in the past, when he referred to a fellow soldier as a “P***”, before lecturing others on their behaviour?
And on the subject of the Commonwealth “righting the wrongs” of the past, did Harry and Meghan use their own privileged position to have a word with their friend Justin Trudeau after it was revealed the Canadian Prime Minister once wore blackface?
And what of Harry’s own fancy dress faux pas? While we are discussing these serious and complex themes, might that be worth a revisit, along with a discussion of Meghan’s best friend Jessica Mulroney’s recent behaviour?
Of course it is right that the couple attempt to tackle this issue, but to do so requires a huge amount of nuance and a deep understanding of history rather than a knee-jerk reaction to what has happened over the last few weeks with the Black Lives Matter movement. Are they supporting all of the movement’s aims, including defunding the police and dissolving the notion of the nuclear family? Or just some of them, in which case, wouldn’t a video spelling out the complexities of supporting the cause be more useful to their followers?
If Harry wants to be seriously involved in discussions about institutional privilege, then these discussions would benefit from a lot more substance Рincluding the acknowledgement that arguably no-one in the world has benefited more from it than his family Рrather than talking in sound bites and clich̩s.
Similarly Meghan did not do herself any favours when, in recent paperwork filed in her case against the Mail on Sunday, she described the couple’s wealth as “relatively nominal”.
Really? A multi-million pound home in Windsor, refurbished with £2.4 million of taxpayer cash, private jet travel, and jewellery and dresses worth tens of thousands of pounds.
It may be “relatively nominal” to say, media mogul Tyler Perry, who has let them record these videos from the comfort of his £15 million Beverley Hills home, but possibly not the average Brit on £29,000 a year. Surely the very definition of privilege is not realising how entitled you are?
I think it continued like this . . She lived with Trevor for about seven years, waiting for her Big Break, ie. for her husband to make her a Star. They got married in 2011. A scant two years later, after he'd paid for a Jamaican wedding, she got the part on Suits and she gave Trev the boot and moved to Canada.
She must have been yachting the entire time she was with Trevor, with whom she spent the bulk of her 'hottest' years. He must have known about it . .how couldn't he?
So Trevor knew she was out yachting. No wonder he refuses to talk about his Meghan years. Because in essence, he allowed her to go out and mingle, to charm other men and to boff them for her career advancement. I am sure Megs insisted and he couldn't stop her, she was a narc force of nature. After yachting episodes Trevs got Meg's table scraps. Trevor was the first Hypnotized Harry.
I have not done many formal presentations in front of a business crowd, but my job has very much an element of public speaking. You are right that the most important quality, beyond any superficial polish or big words, is two-fold: 1. Know what you are talking about. 2. Be personally invested in what are saying. Your audience can smell fakery.
Meg and Harry will be disasters as speakers--we've got ample proof that they already have been. Meg is really delusional. She actually thinks she should, and will, command the kinds of speaking fees that come to former First Ladies or multiple Oscar winners, or . . Bill Gates. She's got no knowledge to impart and can't even tell a good story. She played a sl*t on TV, then married a dim bulb whose estranged grandmother is the Queen of England. Does she propose to regale her audiences with gossip of life inside a Royal palace? MM has never lived in a Royal palace. I don't think she's ever even darkened the doors of a cottage adjacent to a Royal palace.
She'll be laughed off the podium
Harry is the real tragedy here, I agree. Markle was always going to revert to her level, after taking the Royal family and world press for a ride. Harry's life is essentially over. From the most popular royal to Hapless Handbag, international laughingstock in under two years. That is quite a dubious achievement.
I don't know if Harry really loved animals that much or cared about conservation so much. He loved to shoot many of those same animals dead with his big guns and called that 'sport'. The elephants were a safe bet since they weren't appealing targets for game hunting. I think Harry loves Africa mostly for the nostalgic feeling of good times there during his childhood, his place of escape after the death of his Mum. Whether Harry could have actually carved out a meaningful career as a conservationist of African wildlife had he not married Megs remains open to conjecture but I'm tending to think . .not. Africa represents play, not work, and Haz's attention span is on par for his wife's for anything requiring sweat equity. Maybe if he'd gone there directly after the Army and not played the louche bachelor party prince for a couple years before crossing paths with the Markle, he might have discovered a role for himself that would have let him do the 'part-time Royal' thing with Granny's blessing.
Had he done that, Meg would have set her laser eyes on some other dim, rich target and Harry would be a happier man today. Or at least recognizable as Harry of England, not just as an appendage to his wife. Meg spouts verbal diarrhea in support of Black Lives Matter, but they don't matter enough to her to actually want to live among actual black people of the Commonwealth. As a British journalist pointed out . . there aren't too many black faces in her current neighborhood unless they are clipping the shrubs or cleaning the pool.
so true!!!!
Harry, at least, could have made a difference.
Megs? No. She never had a glimmer.
Which is tragic, really. She thinks todays shes got it all, and she has nothing. Because tomorrow she will wake up and its not enough.
To be fair to Trev, we don't know what he knew of her extracurricular activities, if anything. Meg is a consummate liar, and I think she love-bombed Trev for quite a while, at least until it became clear that he wasn't going to suddenly become Sid Luft and turn her into the latter day Judy Garland. Trevor is respected in Hollywood, I understand, but especially then, 10+ years ago, he was still building his contacts and was at best mid-level. Not on a Brian Grazer level, hence not positioned to 'get' his live-in girlfriend of sub-par talent and only adequate looks by Hollywood standards a movie as big as, say "Pretty Woman". I believe he tried, to the best of his ability, probably because she hounded him daily and withheld sex if she was angry.
I was conjecturing that he *must* have had some clue about the yachting. Meg could have lied and said she was 'going away on location'. For what movie? Trevor knew better than anybody how little Meg was working at a legitimate job. I hardly think she told him she'd gotten a job at the Galleria. How to explain the lengthy absences, the obvious tan, the expensive gifts *he* had not bought for her? Did she flaunt it? If so, he was a masochist. Hollywood is a small town, and Trevor was bound to know some of the yachting clientele or know someone who knew someone who would have told him that his amour was seen aboard, sitting in the lap of a number of guys. She lived in Trevor's house for 7, 8 years. It would be incredibly hard to keep that a complete secret.
Maybe he married her thinking that would give her enough security that she'd stop the yachting and he could have her for himself? Poor fool. The marriage didn't even last 2 years and it sounds like she was an enthusiastic yachting companion right up to the summer she met Harry. So she was likely yachting while living with Cory, too. At least he dodged a bullet. Markle bagged a bigger whale in Haz and dumped Cory before he could propose, like he planned to. His two years with Markle might heal faster than the near-decade she messed with Trevor's head.
Sorry, I know nothing about the site. I was on Bing and entered the book into search and that was one of the sites that came up. I'm reading the book online until the copy I purchased comes to me. I thought it was a viable solution for anyone who had already purchased the book and was still waiting for it, as quite a few posters had stated before I even brought the subject up. And I'm not naive enough to think that literally everybody here bought it, or are willing to buy it, but I know enough of us have already purchased it that I felt comfortable in my assumption that the majority of us here have paid for the book.
I didn't download the book, myself. I'm just reading it online until my purchased copy gets here.
I'm a bit paranoid to download from the above link. I don't like to download programs i am not familiar with. Afraid of Malware or viruses. If someone downloads it with no problems, please post. Until then, i'll just wait til it's at my local library
July 8, 2020 at 11:10 AM
Jdubya, I've been reading books from this site for years, I just forgot all about it. As soon as SarcasticBimbo said that he/she had a pdf version a lightbulb went off and I went and found it. I was going to post the link but waited until Nutty OK'd it. She did and SBimbo posted so it's all good. It's a legit link, I've had no problems with it thru the years. I don't always download I usually read it online but this might be one of those I download :)
Steve Sailer wrote another couple of short posts about it today:
Althea Bernstein was set on fire by "classic Wisconsin frat boys" wearing Hawaiian shirts. What will the next roving racist hate criminal gang be wearing? Dockers? Brooks Brothers sports coats?
The US media here is calling these type of 'attackers' - the Boogaloo Boys.... an 'Alt Right' or 'Far Right' para-military group who like to wear Hawaiian shirts! Go figure.
Just thought you may not have heard that yet, it's even a bit obscure here in the US. Apparently the term refers to some group of tropically clothed break dancers from a 1980's movie.
Totally unsurprising that we're getting (dare I say it) even more bizarro hoax stories blasted nationally for a day or two, then they disappear. I knew it was fishy when I heard 'Boogaloo Boys' and white supremist hysteria in the same sentence, that's the big tip-off in the US, that media is ready to lay a whopper on the public. Hysteria and odd group names.
Thank you for such a lovely blog, where we can share little ficts and facts about our own corners of the globe, in relation to such amusing subject matter (the foibles of the gruesome twosome in their ceaseless attempts to become relevant).
One final item, here in the States, we would call them "band-wagon" fans...they jump on the (they hope) apparent popularity of certain causes. This term is mostly associated with college football teams, who are having great success. When the chosen team suddenly loses, the band-wagon fans jump off, and pretend that they never gave full support. I expect H&M to do the same, soon, re: the BLM's descent into violence. It's getting very bad here. And of course, H&M have offended everyone, Great Britain, The Commonweath, and the US, and most of their respective citizens.
And of course, H&M have offended everyone, Great Britain, The Commonweath, and the US, and most of their respective citizens.
Thank you for confirming what most already suspected!
Love this site. So many good thinkers.
However .... I am getting to the point that Markle is someone I can NOT stand to even look at. Am I the only one?
Interesting video! I wish the same person would do one that includes the latest video look (the video saying the Commonwealth sucks) as M looks entirely different in that one to me.
She looked so different at times to me when facing the camera in that video I'm not sure I'd recognize her without Hostage Harry at her side and without her irritating voice spouting BS.
I'm not sure why she looks so different--- but it does look like she's had more plastic surgery and/or has another new set of teeth. Something about her eye lids looks different and certainly her hairline seems to have moved back even more than it already had. And it's not just due to a change in weight, that's for sure. It's the sort of change that maybe could happen mostly naturally over time but not over weeks or even months. Years maybe. Quite odd.
If she really has had the number of procedures mentioned in the video, even if they do have custody, no wonder "Archie" doesn't know her! Not because she looks different but if she's needed 7-8 days of recuperation here and there since he was born, she can't have been very available to a baby who might be "grabby." And that wouldn't do after facial surgery. Heck, Harry almost punched that kid who grabbed her wig that time.
nice to see you! and I may be just about there.
The book download is in PDF format. I downloaded onto a laptop and used Foxit PDF reader to open it up. It looks like a competent conversion from Kindle format. Size is 3MB. I did a virus scan on it and it is OK. For reading on a phone.... I Suppose Chrome will open up a PDF. There must be Foxit for android and iPhone. iow- Foxit might display this better.
Hey @Lt!
nice to see you! and I may be just about there.
___________________________
Even nicer to see you, friend :)
Frankly, the Markle is actually physically sickening, to me. Never thought I would feel that way about a fellow human, but, well.
This "not protecting me while I was pregnant" actually makes Harry look bad. He couldn't write another letter to the press like when they were dating????
@MustySyphone: In past reading various sites about the “back off harassing Meghan” letter from Harry to the media. A lot of people think Meghan made up thevstories sbout the paps chasing her and even attempting to get into her townhouse as a piece of manipulation of Harry by pushing his “Diana” button and portraying herself as being similarly victimized like Diana, even though Diana courted the paps quite a bit. A fair number of people believe Meghan used this manipulation of Harry to get their relationship out onto the public stage, because prior to Harry’s statement, few people knew they were seeing each other and even fewer people had any knowledge of who Meghan was.
Many commenters at various sites have said Harry’s “statement,” much like Harry’s speeches since they married, was likely written by Meghan, but perhaps with the assistance of an attorney. Meghan played the damsel in distress to push Harry’s buttons and handed him the statement to publish so he could rescue the helpless Diana 2.0 stand-in because he could never rescue his real mother.
Meghan basically set Harry up with “the-paps-are-chasing-me” ruse to push their relationship public, which would make it more difficult for him to break it off in the future. Also, by this time, Meghan was likely softly, but relentlesly pushing the race card by making sure Doria was in the picture as a reminder and to create a sense of guilt and perhaps as a very veiled threat that Harry could be accused of being racist himself if he dumped her (Oh, so you’re dumping me because I’m biracial!) after their relationship went public via that statement.
I believe she held that tacit threat over the Harry’s and the RF’s heads as a means to insure an engagement and marriage.
Look at how much damage she’s done in just 48 months!
As we have seen since the marriage and during Megxit and now after Megxit, Meghan has no qualms about insinuating the RF, the palace staff, the UK media, and the citizens of the UK are all racists who left her and Harry no option but to flee to the welcoming arms of the woke folk of Hollywood.
Totally agree and am aware of the points you made. I'm just saying she and especially Harry (once again) looks foolish because he made the big fuss against the press to "save" her (barf!) and yes I believe she wrote the thing and had him submit it. Now by saying she was not protected during pregnancy *may* come across as "Harry didn't protect t me when I was expecting our child" because if he did it once surely he would "protect" her at this delicate time or at least raise a royal fuss. But no, she blames RF this time.....but really she is throwing Harry under the bus. The man could not look like any more of a eunuch if he tried.
MystySyphone - throwing JH under the bus by not protecting her? oooo nice connection
Wullie's Bucket - Funny you should bring up MLK next generation. I don't recall seeing the name in a long time, for years. The last time they came to mind was when the kids were all sueing about the control of his image, his words, his legacy and some objects he had (about 2014). I had even been thinking of MLKjr and wondering what he thought of how things were playing out in the last couple of weeks. Bottom line: the timing seems off. Is there an SS link?
The Robert Hardeman and Author Edwards ('JH lost the plot') articles are both very, targeted commentary. Nice reads. I doubted that HM was perfectly fine with the content so I thought it was probably another trial balloon like birthday cake and so on wanting it to be true. OTOH, it would likely be another item in the annual review accounting list we'll never get to see. I believe, like Elle, that anything from that side in response will have no fingerprints.
The book and downloading. I once offered to make a copy of a knit pattern for someone and they told me that they had a friend who had written patterns and that it was uncool for me to not allow someone like her friend royalties. I was put in my place. And I remembered that when I recently read about how MM felt she was put in her place by a staff person (who was supposed to be apologetic and nice about it). So ... as much as I want it, it will come pretty soon and I probably ought to finish her book on the Queen Mother first while I wait.
BP established social media guidelines to protect both Megs and Catherine from online trolls in March of 2019 (that feels like many years ago now!)
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-05/royals-appeal-for-kindness-after-trolling-of-meghan-markle/10870792
Both Meg and Harry blamed the British press for the rage in the comments on MSM and the DM. They heavily censored their own SM accounts and often deleted negative comments or disabled them. Megs wanted total control over her image and the people of Britain were not having it. what was honest criticism was interpreted as racism, of course because they cannot bear the slightest whiff of criticism.
This is an interesting article date December 2018 by Rebecca Desario. She was prescient in Markle behaviors that have since been confirmed.
https://madworldnews.com/queen-banishes-meghan-palace/
I remember the missive from B P as well. I know full well she was "protected" from media but the palace can't censor comments and what people really thought got to her. But again, she is throwing Harry under the bus by having him protect her while dating but, apparently, not while pregnant.
Do you get that Harry? You couldn't protect your pregnant wife--just look at her statements! Its not the Palace alone, its also YOU!
@Golden Retriever
Typo, should read Dox: The Duchess of Sussex
“Billionaire-backed private members' club Soho House received almost $22 million in coronavirus PPP loans”
This program is not aimed at businesses like Soho House. There was an uproar when employers such as Harvard University, which has an endowment of $40.9 billion, and the Los Angeles Lakers NBA pro basketball team took advantage of this loan program, but after outrage by the public and some members of Congress, they are returning the money.
The PPP (Paycheck Protection Program) is part of the multi-trillion , (yes multi Trillion-dollar) legislation package passed by the US Congress to help the economic damage related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The program is aimed at SMALL businesses with fewer than 500 employees, many of them mom and pop family operations, stay financially afloat and be able to keep employees working instead of laying them off.
The Paycheck Protection Program loans provide a direct incentive for small businesses to keep their workers on the payroll and to maintain their operations. PPP loans are eligible to be forgiven, so it’s essentially free money, provided certain requirements are met.
Forgiveness is based on the employer maintaining or quickly rehiring employees and maintaining salary levels. Forgiveness will be reduced if full-time headcount declines, or if salaries and wages decrease.
The loan will be fully forgiven if the funds are used for payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities (due to likely high subscription, at least 60% of the forgiven amount must have been used for payroll).
I’m sure Meghan and Harry will be thrilled to know their beloved Soho House clubs in the US are remaining open during the pandemic.
I hope the US government makes Soho return the money. Private clubs should not be eligible for these funds.
My money is on Harry having an affair away from uptight, insane Meghan. Those girls
Are a dime a dozen there. Meghan is in trouble.
As for what really changed her look?
She drew on extended eyebrows.
Here's a very detailed video illustrating the plastic surgeries. https://youtu.be/24fDuMoAJf4
___________________
https://youtu.be/24fDuMoAJf4 is very well done video! On Megs plastic surgeries.
A new reason loony Megs wanted to leave the UK. Plastic surgery. Too much scrutiny there. She could not get all the plastic surgery she craved with her new found Royal riches, without people finding out and it getting blown up in the UK Mail etc.
While in LA she can get all the plastic surgery that she has wanted for a few years, with her new bounty of Duchy money and maybe Harry's own. Get it done in privacy and she could hole up at Tyler Perry's if her face needed some days of recovery time.
The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.
IMO the RF staying silent about Markle is creating a dangerous situation for us all... especially with the recent hyper-focus on BLM.
Who cares what he said or thinks? The royal family don’t and won’t, the vast majority in the UK won’t or even care. Why should they? It’s got nothing to do with America or American’s nor what they think. The royal family won’t publicly get involved in any political issue, they are apolitical . Nor would they be held hostage to this kind of thing.
The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.
IMO the RF staying silent about Markle is creating a dangerous situation for us all... especially with the recent hyper
I think it would be much more damaging answer to those accusations. First, it would put the RF in the defensive position. Also by answering the RF open the space to a discussion and question another no no, especially given the rf and england history. The worst thing that the RF could do its to open those floodgates in my opinion. It wouldnt be able to control the narrative. Personally, I dont think that RF act in any racist way toward Meghan, but I can see how it could end up very bad very soon if they say something. I would say that H&M planned like that, but I dont believe they are that smart.
It does need to put shut H&M fast though.
Since when have in-laws been expected to perform what is the husband's responsibility?
I don't know about `the Crown always wins' - the Crown MUST win. If the RF act now, however, before the year is up, they'll be giving her more ammunition - broken promises, bad faith and so on.
My guess is that they are waiting for the court cases to play out, That might save them having to do anything that might attract more bile. The problem is that the law in England is like the mills of God - it grinds very, very, slowly - but eventually delivers `slow but certain divine retribution' (Wikipedia!).
It can get to the point where the adage `Justice delayed is justice denied' seems all too true.
Mind you, I can imagine His Lordship looking down at H, if he whines that his family failed to protect her, and echoing what the judge said to my narc ex, when he demanded that the Court send me back to him to `perform my duties as a wife':
`Really, Your Royal Highness? And what about your obligations as a husband...?'
Re the emerald tiaras, perhaps I've missed something but they do look very different. Apologies if I got confused.
Here is the Vladimir one that MM coveted:
http://www.thecourtjeweller.com/2019/07/the-vladimir-tiara.html
Here is Eugenie's:
https://www.tatler.com/gallery/royal-wedding-tiaras-in-history
@Maneki
Yes, I understood it to be the Vladimir madam coveted.
Said to be the Queens favourite.
The Queen was possibly misquoted,
she was referring to Megs provenance being unknown 😉
Yes, good point, 'provenance unknown', although I think the Queen was being 'r*cist' too 🙄.
Poor Megs, so hard done by, such a hard life!
I just want to add something regarding the PPP loans. They are NOT need-based. You can have $20 million dollars in your business bank account and still get a loan.
Meghan Markle: Naming friends who defended me is just clickbait that could damage their mental health
Duchess of Sussex has said in a witness statement that the Mail on Sunday is trying to “create a circus” with their “real lives”
The Duchess of Sussex has accused the Mail on Sunday of a “vicious” attempt to name five friends who gave an anonymous interview in her favour, saying it poses a threat to their mental health for "clickbait".
The Duchess claims the newspaper wants to “expose them in the public domain for no reason other than clickbait and commercial gain”, alleging the action is “vicious and poses a threat to their emotional and mental wellbeing”.
Calling them each a “private citizen and young mother”, she accused the publisher of trying to “create a circus” with their “real lives”, adding: “The Mail on Sunday is playing a media game with real lives."
The Duchess, whose five friends spoke to People magazine last year for a flattering portrait, has maintained she knew nothing of their cooperation until after the article was published.
Each has now been named in confidential parts of court papers, as the Duchess attempts to sue the Mail on Sunday for publishing parts of her handwritten letter to her father, which was first mentioned in the interview.
After its existence was made public in People magazine, Thomas Markle provided the letter to the Mail on Sunday, which published sections of it.
The Duchess’s lawyers today apply to block Associated Newspaper from naming the five anonymous friends, filing an application to the High Court.
In a witness statement submitted to the court, the Duchess said: “Associated Newspapers, the owner of The Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday, is threatening to publish the names of five women—five private citizens—who made a choice on their own to speak anonymously with a U.S. media outlet more than a year ago, to defend me from the bullying behavior of Britain’s tabloid media.
“These five women are not on trial, and nor am I.
“The publisher of the Mail on Sunday is the one on trial. It is this publisher that acted unlawfully and is attempting to evade accountability; to create a circus and distract from the point of this case—that the Mail on Sunday unlawfully published my private letter.
“Each of these women is a private citizen, young mother, and each has a basic right to privacy. Both the Mail on Sunday and the court system have their names on a confidential schedule, but for the Mail on Sunday to expose them in the public domain for no reason other than clickbait and commercial gain is vicious and poses a threat to their emotional and mental wellbeing.
“The Mail on Sunday is playing a media game with real lives.
“I respectfully ask the court to treat this legal matter with the sensitivity it deserves, and to prevent the publisher of the Mail on Sunday from breaking precedent and abusing the legal process by identifying these anonymous individuals - a privilege that these newspapers in fact rely upon to protect their own unnamed sources.”
The witness statement lists the Duchess of Sussex at the address of Frogmore Cottage, Windsor, and confirms that she understands "proceedings for contempt of court may be brought" if it is false.
The decision on whether to grant an injunction preventing the publication of names is now expected to be made by a judge at a hearing to come.
In paperwork filed by Schillings, the Duchess’s lawyers, her team request that information contained in the “confidential schedule” previously submitted “must not be used by the Defendant for any purpose except for that of these proceedings (and expressly not for publication in its newspapers)”.
They spell out that the Duchess’s confidantes - referred to as “the Five Friends” throughout - all have “small children who would be deeply affected by the unwanted presence of reporters/photographers at their homes and in public, and the effect this would have on their parents”.
Saying the interest in case in the media and on social media is “huge”, they claim it has “already had a significant impact on the private life of one of the Five Friends” and prompted a “guessing game” as to their identities.
In particular, it notes: “I am concerned that the publicity will intimidate one or more of the Five Friends and dissuade them from agreeing to give evidence in support of the Claimant’s case at trial.
“This would not be in the interests of justice and would give the Defendant an unfair advantage in this litigation.”
The Duchess is suing for undisclosed damages on the grounds of breach of privacy, copyright and data protection.
Earlier this year, she lost the first strike-out hearing, in which Mr Justice Warby ruled her lawyers would not be allowed to argue in court that the newspaper acted dishonestly, “stirred up” issues with her father, and had an “agenda” against her.
Associated Newspapers have wholly denied all claims against them, particularly the suggestion that the letter was edited in any meaningful way.
It's hard to argue that they approached People Magazine on their own initiative (all 5 of them) but would wilt like violets if their names were made public.
Particularly if one of them is Jessica Mulroney, a publicity chaser if there ever was one.
Saying they all have small children seems to take Markus Anderson and the weepy makeup artist out of the equation, though, as well as Priyanka Chopra.
I hope one of the 5 is J Mulroney and that she 'outs' herself against MM, perhaps in order to redeem herself.
But an insider with close knowledge of palace workings insisted the royal family's history of silence when it comes to news stories is because they don't want to heighten any situations."
Mental health again! This is getting as boring as her accusations of racism. And of course she's too thick to understand that silence might help.
She is now trying to twist things. If she cared for anybody she wouldn't have gone to court.
I expect the court may keep the names private, although it will not stay hidden forever.
Manipulating court will not work.
The Duchess claims …
“…These five women are not on trial, and nor am I…’ Has she never heard of Oscar Wilde?
`… It is this publisher that acted unlawfully…’ It is for the Court to decide what is and what is not lawful, not her..
`… the Mail on Sunday unlawfully published my private letter…’ That, too, is for the Court to decide.
“I respectfully ask the court to treat this legal matter with the sensitivity it deserves, and to prevent the publisher of the Mail on Sunday from breaking precedent and abusing the legal process by identifying these anonymous individuals - a privilege that these newspapers in fact rely upon to protect their own unnamed sources.” ,As we used to say, hark who says which!
It doesn’t go down well with the Court when the Plaintiff informs it about what is and what isn’t lawful. Even if she did once play a paralegal working under a different legal system.
`… it poses a threat to their mental health for "clickbait"…’ Medically qualified now, are we?
`small children who would be deeply affected by the unwanted presence of reporters/photographers at their homes and in public, and the effect this would have on their parents’ Who dragged them into it?
“I am concerned that the publicity will intimidate one or more of the Five Friends and dissuade them from agreeing to give evidence in support of the Claimant’s case at trial. This would not be in the interests of justice and would give the Defendant an unfair advantage in this litigation.”
Again, it’s up to the Court to decide what’s in the interests of justice, not her. it looks to me as if she’s going the right way to get them subpoenaed.
Silly cow, doesn’t even know to cover her backside with abundant use `in my opinion…/ I consider…/ I believe…/ it seems to me..’ /to the best of my knowledge and belief - and so on.
She might as well hold up a sign saying `I am a stupid know-all-nothing as far as making a legal case is concerned’.
The mental health of the five anonymous friends could be threatened by having to own up to what they voluntarily chose to do. They could be especially hurt by having to own their actions publicly because they are "young mothers." But it was fine for them to say whatever they wished about Thomas Markle for an article to be published in a national magazine. Thomas, an elderly man with heart trouble, was just supposed to roll over accept whatever was said and not react? Huh?
I have to say too until feminist Meghan came along I didn't realize pregnancy and motherhood were illnesses or such disabling conditions. Maybe we need to go back to confining women while they are pregnant since they are so fragile. And maybe mothers shouldn't work outside the home either as that could affect their mental health.
Being `requested' to give evidence doesn't apply - witnesses can be compelled by means of a subpoena, a writ issued by the Court, a kind of summons. The term `sub poena’ literally `under penalty’ It might not be necessary for a subpoenaed witness to attend in person - a video link might do.
I don’t know how tough the penalty for non-compliance might be but I imagine it comes under Contempt of Court rules and is taken seriously as it is defying the authority of the Court.
Subpeonas can be used in civil case, my solicitor was prepared to use it to get my GP to testify.
Take heart, folks. Most judges have seen it all before but I daresay she'll damn' herself in Court, just as my ex did. Not of course that he realised the judge was skewering him!
Well said, Lizzie!
I love your icon, Camper; do you live in the Duchy?
The image connects with identity issues in the SW of England. Putting the cream on the jam is said to be the Cornish way; there have been complaints, from west of the Tamar, about such images being used in connection with Devon tearooms, because in Devon cream is often used instead of butter and goes on first.
Even so, when I've had `Thunder and Lightning' in a Cornish tearoom (in Falmouth), the cream went on first, with the black treacle on top - delicious!
Don't get me started on Cornish pasties - the `designated origin' rules drive a coach and horses through the traditional way of making them with ref to shape.
Do other countries have such silly arguments? I'm wondering now what Devon tearooms on Dartmoor do? (on Duchy land but not in Cornwall). Or at the oval cricket ground in London?
This way madness lies.
Thanks for that.
I’m just going to sit back and wait for it all to unfold, some drama will happen on the cusp of the case!
I’ll let you into a secret, I live in a camper van and am spending the last day of nearly 4 months in a small village on the edge of Salisbury Plain! This weekend I’m heading to Ullswater and the beautiful Lake District. Meant to be on a year long tour of the U.K., picked up the camper on Thursday 19th March, went into lockdown on the Monday. Luckily we’d been staying at my sisters in the village we’ve been stuck in, having sold our house and left our jobs at Xmas last year...........good or bad timing you decide? We are heading to Scotland soon too!
Scones, cream teas, I love them. I always put on jam first (sometimes lemon curd) followed by a large dollop of clotted cream. It’s the Cornish way, but I’m actually largely Devonian in my DNA (I have proof ha ha). I like all scones though, even cheese ones!
Nice to see you back.
MM AND H are tiresome but they keep getting into even more antics, attention grabbing antics. My attention is waning a bit as each new speech, statement, etc. highlight how irritating,feckless and out of touch they both are.
I am hoping for their denouement sooner rather than later.
Did MLK III give any concrete examples of the racist reception that MM allegedly receive? It seems rather lazy to make such an inflammatory statement without many concrete examples.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8504569/Meghan-Markle-bizarrely-listed-DOCTOR-Companies-House-website.html
It's been put down to an `administrative error' and it's been corrected - but wasn't she fishing for an Hon Doc at Stanford?
Or has she used OPM to buy a dodgy doctorate elsewhere?
She's forty-something, hardly young. Young in my mind is in their twenties.
If they're that mentally fragile perhaps they should not be mothers. Maybe their children should be with someone who is more mentally stable.
(quote from the article)
The witness statement lists the Duchess of Sussex at the address of Frogmore Cottage, Windsor, and confirms that she understands "proceedings for contempt of court may be brought" if it is false.
Is there a chance this is a hint/warning? I know Froggy Cottage is supposed to be their UK official residence but are they still legally classed as living there if they've spent this long out of the country? I'm probably reading too much into it, but it made me wonder.
Well, is it really fair to say that they should be allowed to speak on record, without their names cited, knowing that this was to provoke her father into producing the letter, taking those pot shots at him and now claim they are too fragile to have their names associated with this mess now that is has gone legal?
Maybe this might be one of teachable moments to demonstrate to their kids of the difficulties someones one gets oneself into with social media ... and how to behave in the glare of photos.
Lurking - interesting detail which would bring into question about the condition of the interior, when did they move in?, for how long, when did they move most/all of their stuff out and so on.
And, MOS might play a long game (legally) of not releasing the names ... if someone else does it for them? (oh the joy of being able to say: no comment (and grin).
WBBM - you are ever so correct that often justice is redefined as revenge.
Lord, have mercy, chile.
Love this site. So many good thinkers.
However .... I am getting to the point that Markle is someone I can NOT stand to even look at. Am I the only one?
July 9, 2020 at 2:59 AM
Great to see you LT!! Like you, I too am so tired of seeing and hearing about the Markles. I'm tired of hearing what shenanigans they/she's up to on any given day. They're both just an irritation anymore. She is not royal, she's just a Z-list actress with too much time on her hands that loves to be "adored universally", be "admired" and if she doesn't get her way she throws a tantrum. I've known 2 year olds to act better than her. I've known from the day they said she's Harry's new girlfriend that she wasn't cut out to be royal. That speech at the UN sealed the deal for me. She wasn't ever going to toe the line and be a proper duchess. Ah the lost opportunities that she could have had. So much wasted.
I've always been a royal fan, been since the age of 14 (that was back in 1971) when I just decided my role model would be Princess Anne and been following all the royals ever since. Of course both my grandmother and mother were followers/fans so I'd like to say some of it rubbed off on me. Needless to say, she's not going to turn me from being a royal fan anytime soon but I do feel badly for the BRF, specially HM and the old Duke as they don't have many years ahead and they should be enjoying this time with their loved ones in peace and harmony.
Anyway, glad to see you back. I'll get off my soapbox now. Ya'll have a great day!!
/end rant
Wonder also if she is setting the ground for any of the five to back out of giving evidence (such as Jessica who may no longer be on her side). knowing Meghan she gave false promises that they would never actually have to attend court or give evidence..it won't come to that..and is now trying to find a way to keep their identities private, surely she should have thought of that before starting the case.
@Puds: I think that our favorite narcissist thought the MoS would be shaking in their boots and crapping their corporate pants at the thought of being sued by someone as lofty as HRH Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and offer her buckets of money for a quick settlement. But her plan appears to have backfired.
I hope all the underhandedness of Meghan and her five friends comes out in court. That, along with the probable attacks and accusations against HMTQ, PC, PW, Kate, and the rest of the RF in the Scobie screed to be published in August cause them to lose their funding and titles bestowed upon them on the occasion of their garish wedding spectacle.
If you only look at how she has treated her father and her husband’s family, it’s easy to see Meghan has a propensity of biting the hands that feed her.
There was a line in the movie Moonstruck when Cher’s character is admonishing Nicholas Cage’s character as he wallowed in a pool of self-pity and victimhood when in reality, he had a pretty good life. I often think of when I read about the escapades of Meghan and Harry:
“Don’t shit where you eat.”
The conversation ended with Cher’s character slapping Cage’s character across the face while yelling, “Snap out of it!”
Today Meghan applied for an injunction against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline claiming that: 'Associated Newspapers, the owner of The Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday, is threatening to publish the names of five women - five private citizens - who made a choice on their own to speak anonymously with a US media outlet more than a year ago, to defend me from the bullying behaviour of Britain's tabloid media.
'the bullying behaviour of Britain's tabloid media'! What abt her behaviour?
If I recall before she hooked with Harry she was looking to appear on a British reality TV show like Made in Chelsea. The life she has now created is one reality TV show. She reminds of the Kardashians with daily "news' about their antics, but they are usually showing selfies to push some product. No one else but other reality stars have so many "news" stories about themselves in the tabloids. I don't understand why she just doesn't sign a deal with Andy Cohen.
Meghan ultimately brought this on herself by sharing the contents of her letter with her so called friends. I still don’t by that all five of them went behind her back and went to people magazine and leaked it though. I really hope the judge throws out her entire case or forces the five to testify.
However, in the end all that she will accomplish is having all of her secrets exposed.
She's trying to keep someone sweet 'well I tried'. Wonder who it is?
She can't just 'say' the five friends spoke to People on their own accord. That has to be a proven claim.
Whether she likes it or not, People Mag and 'her fathers mental health' are central to this case.
She's such an unlikeable person.
It is the same as saying she wasn't protected while pregnant.
Didn't she refuse the service of the royal doctors?
It's not all THAT relevant in this instance, but I just think it's odd, so thanks for indulging me : )
Protected from what? Reading the newspaper?
And isn't this just more of a slight to Harry than anyone else? Why didn't they leave the RF before she had the baby, if it was so bad for her health? Where are the records of this? Is it because they had only JUST got married?
Regardless, legal matters are not emotional ploys.
It will be based on facts and evidence. She didn't have to sue them...
Pre-marriage I am sure the DM comments were more split and favorable to the incoming American woman, this Royal to be. But I would have to see a DM article to verify. Here is one from-- 27 November 2017--- and the comments are favorable on their engagement.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5121455/Meghan-Markle-stuns-white-Prince-Harry.html#reader-comments
I really hope the judge throws out her entire case or forces the five to testify.
If the judge throws it out, I hope if it’s possible under UK law that either the judge orders Meghan to pay court costs and the costs incurred by the MoS going through her vindictive dog and pony show, or that is not possible, I hope the MoS is able to sue Meghan for their costs in a separate legal action.
Do any of our UK legal eagles know if either of these routes to make Meghan pay the MoS are possible?
It would be a delicious turning of the tables on this devious, toxic, narcissist.
I still am shaking my head that she was so vindictive to her father that she wrote that letter in the first place. It’s obvious that she planned on it going public through Thomas running to the press as soon as he received it. When that Plan A didn’t go as she thought it would, she cooked up Plan B using her five friends, and this was nothing less than using these women, to send them to People to out the letter.
The fact that it has been revealed that Meghan sent the letter to attorneys and her public relations team, plus a discussion with Harry about it, shows she obviously planned on it being published. Because it is now documented she had these consultations with the aforementioned experts and Harry, it’s not far fetched to reason that control freak Meghan also discussed it with the five women so the information each one fed to People would neatly fit together in one package to portray Meghan in a positive light while simultaneously playing the victim card for Meghan as the six women conspired to publicly shoot down her elderly father.
That any of these women consented in the first place to participate in this mean scheme shows a complete lack of character in all of them. They should all be ashamed of themselves, but a person first needs to have a conscience to feel shame or understand right from wrong.
Chap2 p.27 - re friendship with Nikki Priddy:
`(Nikki said)... "1f you rubbed her up the wrong way, she'd make it known with the silent treatment.... I'd always be the first to apologise. I just wanted to be besties again. She was stubborn. She digs her heels in..." '
Ah yes, Silent Treatment. That's another narcissist tactic I don't think we've mentioned. I'm finding now that I'm recalling many of the minor narcissists I encountered in my schooldays - all of them a bit odd but who I thought I got on well with until I inadvertently upset them.
Thank you, Lady C, another piece of the jigsaw puzzle has found its place..
I am dyslexic. So please forgive my poor grammar.
They really should change things up, put him outside more or something.
Meghan looks like his captor in the first one!
We need more humor in all of this, this duo takes themselves way too seriously. Sometimes, as with the legal filing today, I have to wonder ‘seriously?’. Is it just for PR? For a friend? What?
I discovered that although my then-estranged narc husband had costs awarded against him, for blocking the proceedings, it was going to cost me more to get the judgement enforced. Whether he had the money to cough up my reimbursement was another matter altogether.
It wasn't worth fighting, especially as his plan was to see that I was bled dry by legal costs. If he couldn't get money out me, he'd thought he'd make sure I wasted what I resources I had got.
The law has many layers - even if you think it's one thing, there are attached provisions and exceptions that can go against you.
Whether the Mail would push or be merciful remains to be seen. I'd like to see her lose the brilliant white short from her back.