New Idea, an Australian publication, recently reported that Meghan Markle was considering a run for US President in 2024 - a story widely picked up in other media.
Unfortunately, New Idea has a reputation for making up stories out of whole cloth - not a credible source.
Which sources do you consider trustworthy when it comes to information about the Sussexes?
Choose up to three.
Unfortunately, New Idea has a reputation for making up stories out of whole cloth - not a credible source.
Which sources do you consider trustworthy when it comes to information about the Sussexes?
Choose up to three.
(If the embedded poll isn't working for you, here's a link)
Comments
I would love to see MM lose her title. If there ever was someone so unworthy of a Royal title it's her! I think HMTQ and her inner circle are playing the Long Game. She is doing everything she can to show a positive picture but I think behind the curtain she's very astute and knows exactly what she is doing. She's an amazing lady that's for sure...
I mostly lurk but will occasionally post a comment or two. Had bad experiences on other sights. So many vicious keyboard warriors so I'm cautious.
Saw the new photo Kate took of George. What a cutie! I admire Kate. She has taken all the doo doo thrown at her in a very Queenly manner. But we know who her mentor is.
Nitey nite Nutties :)
I find the subject very interesting. Popular destinations are popular for a reason. Distance, cost, beauty, good accommodation, good food, good value for money, good service etc.
For instance Russia has vast beautiful spaces but outside of Moscow its infrastructure is poor, visa process is not exactly a breeze and value for money is not good. Add corrupt officials and developing massive international tourism there is questionable.
Many of the poorest places are also commonly known for disease and poor infrastructure too. Unless you have business there would you like your family go through inoculations?. Also many travellers are elderly, would they go to destinations like Sahara desert?
I find the whole travalyst thing is a mammoth task aimed at changing the international consumer behaviour and I am not sure Harry is the right person to tackle it.
The Gruesome Twosome will try anything to separate people from their money without thinking of how it will affect the natives in those destination places where gentrification is sure to follow.
Ok, I can sleep now lol.
"A commenter on CDAN claims that royal correspondent Chris Ship tweeted last September that the money to pay Sunshine Sachs came, not from the BRF, but from the now-defunct Sussex Royal charity."
That makes sense in that haven't H&M ALWAYS claimed SS doesn't represent them personally but represents Travalyst? (Not that I think that claim is true but if they are spending charity money, there's a reason to say that....)
I will be interested to see what happens with travel destinations for the elderly. For example, so many members of that demographic like to go on cruises. But after the COVID experience, will those people ever want to get on a ship again? And if they do, will they have to sign a waiver saying that they won’t blame the cruise line if the trip gets delayed or if they have to be quarantined? And will travel insurance even cover cruises in the future? Because governments cannot continue to pay to rescue people from cruise ships. This is for certain. I think that particular segment of the population is a major opportunity for the travel industry going forward, but you are correct about inoculations as well as the riskiness of many travel destinations.
(a) If I wanted to go to a hellhole/third world country, there are plenty of places here in America/western hemisphere that qualify complete with rodents, bedbugs, and high crime rates, and
(b) Most of us that are getting on in years aren't as adventurous in that way as the younger generation for we have found out by now that we are not bulletproof.
(c) There are a lot of people at the theme parks in Florida, so I know they would be lined up for the cruises as well. Neither is my thing, but it seems to be popular with my demographic.
Harry’s ‘statement’ via lawyers is not the typical British ‘i am an open book and didn’t do anything wrong, so have at it’ response.
They should have released a mature statement saying they welcome the inquiry and are confident they have always done right by their financial transactions. That’s a normal ‘business’ statement.
Harry takes everything entirely too personal. The idea that because he and Meghan ‘say-so’ is entirely inappropriate.
Their penchant for threatening legal action is getting out of control.
If they don’t want to play the PR game that they keep losing at, they should retire to regular jobs in corporate settings where real bosses are able to handle the situations they find themselves in, and take note.
Harry’s ‘statement’ via lawyers is not the typical British ‘i am an open book and didn’t do anything wrong, so have at it’ response.
They should have released a mature statement saying they welcome the inquiry and are confident they have always done right by their financial transactions. That’s a normal ‘business’ statement.
Exactly. They should have teams of people doing the paperwork and making sure everything is as it should be. Harry makes it sound like they're hiding something which always piques the wrong people's curiosity.
Thanks for the suggestion on the RT article and the link.
It was indeed worth a read.
My heart does a little happy dance every time I see evidence of the Sussexes perfidy coming to light.
And perhaps the avalanche of financial shenanigans has begun.
The US government is sanctioning some Chinese firms for forced labour and human hair collection.
Someone should ask Markle if the hair she buys and is so proud of is cruelty free.
According to royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams, Meghan Markle could use her huge influence to speak out during the upcoming US Presidential election later this year
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-intervene-joe-bidens-22390831?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar%E2%80%AC
........
When will she just SHUT UP!!!
How in the world is she paying for all this PR?????
PLEASE...Your Majesty, Prince Charles, Prince William's scarf, MI5, Scotland Yard, Boris Johnson, the palace advisors and lawyers, Donald Trump, someone, anyone, get these two off the world stage NOW!!!
That’s been the issue all along. Instagram won’t let them ‘pivot’ their Sussex Royal followers to Archewell (or anywhere else.) That’s why they currently have no social media presence.
I was aware of that, but the DM article makes it sound as though H and M might be able to migrate those followers after all. Or is it just more idle speculation by a pundit?
I laughed out loud when Unknown pleaded with TQ,PC, ETC.ETC. to silence these two. I feel the same, but couldn’t come up with such a perfect line!
No chance they will be able to migrate their followers. That account technically belongs to BP/KP/The RF. It makes sense the RF won’t let ‘followers’ just blindly go to non Royals.
Next year, I had hoped to have a big trip to Iceland for the 50th anniversary of my first visit. Out of the question now? Over that time the country has changed dramatically - from being somewhere once perceived as at the back of beyond, (when one was advised to check in at our Embassy if one was going into the wilds of the mountains, and to let them know when one was safely back!) to one now apparently over-run with tourists, especially from a certain eastern country whose inhabitants have only recently been allowed out.
This has brought greater prosperity but over the last few years serious questions have started to be asked about the environmental damage being done. Example, this video about whether Justin Bieber's visit to a certain beauty spot is responsible for the greater interest and hence damage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v0EuNO_-u4
I can't remember which environmental organisation (Greenpeace? F.of the Earth? Someone else?) recommended that if one wanted to be environmentally conscious and not destroy the beautiful, precious, places, one should go to Benidorm or elsewhere on the Spanish costas, because they'd been ruined already and one wouldn't be doing anymore damage!
Twenty years ago, we went hillwalking in the Carpathians, the bit in an eastern country of the EU. Beautiful country but near the top of the list of corrupt EU countries (4th out of
27 now). Our experience was of awful sanitation (I'd have preferred to have dug my own hole), terrible food, uncomfortable atmosphere (walking around the capital we were at risk of extortion from both fake and real policeman. We talked our way out of an encounter with the former but others in our party lost £200 to the latter).
Clue: they built their car industry on old Renault machinery - the place was full of Renault 12s under a different, patriotic, name. We'd had one 25 years before - didn't like it!
Harry's prickly response is quite telling. I watched one of the `how to spot a liar' videos (one from a former CIA person) and she made the point that an angry response from someone being questioned suggests a liar, as does `I never dream of doing that'. Funny how we use those tests for narcissists as well - Venn diagrams of the two categories would have a very large degree of overlap, I believe.
Why are Harry and Meghan so set on wielding a sledgehammer to crack a republican nut?
The way the Sussexes have made a meal of a complaint against their charity work by republicans is just giving the anti-monarchists publicity
By Hannah Furness
It has been three short weeks since we learnt the true extent of the Sussexes’ frustration with the palace PR strategy.
Laid out in court papers was the belief that Meghan was left "undefended" by the institution, with a "no comment" policy on what their lawyers described as "hundreds of thousands of inaccurate" stories.
Well, there are certainly no such restrictions now. And here, side by side, are the old and the new in action: two royal households, and two very different reactions.
The inspiration? A not-very-scandalous story, told in a brief 227 words on Tuesday, in which a republican campaign group asked the Charity Commission to look into The Royal Foundation and Sussex Royal, over grants given to the Sussexes’ former UK charity and Prince Harry’s travel project..
The complaint may be investigated, it may well be dismissed within days. To which the only sensible response is words to the effect: it’s completely legitimate for high-profile charities to be scrutinised, please go ahead, but you won’t find anything amiss here, guv.
The Royal Foundation – representing the Cambridges – replied with two sentences roughly to that effect, briefly explaining how they were "fully in line" with rules.
Prince Harry issued a statement via lawyers detailing how insulting, defamatory, salacious and unjust it was, with a promise it will be dealt with with "the weight of the law"
It conjures the impression of personal hurt, and the idea that, yet again, he is being cruelly targeted by critics who do not understand his true calling.
The language too is becoming familiar. A "hunger for media attention", an "attacking agenda" and the "impact and success" of his work – all echoes of recent efforts to 'set the record straight', including in the Duchess' own upcoming court case.
This time, it seems a sledgehammer to crack a nut (and that’s not to cast aspersions on the people of Republic, misguided though many might find their cause).
The campaign group – which hardly makes a secret of its anti-monarchy aims – could not have hoped for better publicity.
The true nature of its complaint, which in fact centred on the Cambridges' Royal Foundation, has been eclipsed by enough noise that the casual observer could think it was all a direct criticism of Prince Harry.
There is a time for noise, and no-one can rival Harry and Meghan for whipping up attention for good causes.
But there is time for "no comment" too. In their new freedom, which will make them happier?
The Sussexes may resent the palace's PR strategy. But the truth is, sometimes it works.
"Travalyst does not meet the criteria set out by Article 24 of Company Reg.
No.: 12077679 [Sussex Royal] shouldn't have Transferred Funds out of 12077679 until 12546940 [Travalyst] was ready, in terms of Articles Association being compliant."
"Probable Ethics & CoC Breaches."
And regarding the threats to sue for defamation...
"The complaint turns upon the Liquidation & the operation of Art. 24 for the Company in Dissolution [Sussex]. There simply aren't tenable Grounds to sustain an Action for Defamation, if that's what ensues from the bellicose rhetoric. It'd be daft."
Registering as a charity confers a number of tax privileges, especially in regard to VAT (Value Added Tax on goods and services - UK had to drop `Purchase Tax' on items perceived as luxuries for this broader category, which gives a very much bigger tax take for the Treasury, when we joined to EU - and is a heavier burden to those of limited means, compared with PT). Also, charities can benefit from Gift Aid, and claim back the tax that donors have paid on their subscriptions/donations.
There are rules about what does and does not count as a charity but I gather they are fairly generous when it comes to paying salaries and expenses for officers and employees. Cynics might say `if you want to get rich, start a charity' but I fear there's some truth in it, judging by the number of tiny operations that have set up as `charity shops' where I live.
Nevertheless, charities have to set up separate organisations if they trade according to HMRC's definition of trading, for example, there's National Trust and National Trust Trading, also Oxfam and Oxfam Trading.
I've been involved with Country Markets, formerly WI Country Markets, to sell surplus veg from my garden. See https://www.country-markets.co.uk/about-us
The Women's Institute used to run these markets, from around the time of the First World War, for small producers, eg gardeners with surplus veg, to sell. It got more food to the population and helped preventing food having to be composted; this was always called `the WI Market'. The WI took a percentage, to cover expenses - hire of space, HQ office staff, stationery insurance and so on. The taxman, however, in the late 90s, thought the main organisation was generating too large a surplus from the markets and the WI's charitable status was jeopardised.
The markets had to become a separate legal entity under legislation for community non-profit endeavours, ie the organisation doesn't make money - producers are permitted a modest profit for their efforts & costs which, if they are energetic producers, has to be declared in their tax returns. The current commission my local Market charges the producers is about 11%,IIRC. tho'it may have gone up, depending on what has to be paid to hire the church hall.
Btw, the cooks and jam-makers have to have valid Food Hygiene Certificates, and their kitchens may be inspected by the local council as well - on the veg stall, we only need a notice reminding people to wash what they buy. We have insurance cover as well. I've no idea when we'll open again, it depends on the insurers.
I wonder if Travalyst is registered as a Travel Agent (ABTA member) or has an ATOL licence? Does anyone know about Booking.com - how does it protect its customers?
As for its aims, at https://travalyst.org/ - it sounds like greenwash to me, and very profitable greenwash too.
Thanks for the welcome!
@Wild Boar Battle-maid
Harry's prickly response is quite telling. I watched one of the `how to spot a liar' videos (one from a former CIA person) and she made the point that an angry response from someone being questioned suggests a liar, as does `I never dream of doing that'. Funny how we use those tests for narcissists as well - Venn diagrams of the two categories would have a very large degree of overlap, I believe.
That response was so badly written, I assumed that Meghan dashed it off in the middle of a fit and refused to allow anyone to edit it!
As for "I never dream of doing that" -- didn't she say something like that before? "If I do something wrong I'd be the first one to go, 'Oh my gosh, I'm so sorry. I would never do that.'" Well, okay, but which one is true? That you did something wrong and are sorry, or that you would never do that and so the other person is mistaken?
@WildBoar
I did voluntary work there in an orphanage 1990/91.
Was based in the far north, Bram Stoker/Robin Hood
style settlements!!
The cars were “different” but nothing, nothing
compares to the terrifying flight I took, tiny propeller
plane, over the Carpathians!!
Held onto my seat, closed eyes straight ahead!
I travelled back via train.
Beautiful countryside, painted exterior churches.
Quite dark, and scary in parts.
Here is the notice to creditors for the sussex foundation:
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3590623
And link to pertinent charity regs:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-close-a-charity
Re Travalyst: exactly. I was just going to write about these hell holes becoming too popular when I read your post, WWBM. If so, then this will ultimately defeat the purpose. This is just what you said about Iceland now being overrun with tourists. I hasten to say it's not/was not a hell hole (never been but have seen films shot there). Remember, Dubai (my idea of hell) used to be a small fishing village.
Sanitation's excellent, although at the famous beach near Vik it's only accessible by bank card! The payment's minimal but it was still a surprise.
Coffee's good - if you're in central Rvi'k, try the artisan bakery in Frakkastigur for pastries and coffee (assuming it's still there) - it was in 2017, even if you have to fight your way through the crowd! I'm in ecstasy just thinking about their cinnamon twists straight from the oven. The smell of them wafting into the street was irresistible!
Whether the country's affordable depends on the exchange rate - in 50 years, there was only one trip when we felt we could spend freely!
I admit, it's nice to able to go into a visitor centre and get coffee when cold and wet - rather than firing up the Primus stove - but it was a privilege to have seen the country before the Ring Road was completed across the southern sandur. We had to fly to Fagurholsmyri by DC3, now one can drive.
In those days (1971) they could get away with a small Bailey bridge at the south of Jokulsalon (so little meltwater then) compared with what's there now - the lake is so large.
Pity Harry doesn't focus on educating people about the changes that have happened in 50 years. The days when polar bears could make landfall in Iceland, having walked down on sea ice, ceased in the 1970s, well within my time there. Now the poor creatures are starving.
Beware though, if you're bitten by the Iceland `bug' as I was, you'll find it hard to keep away.
No, I wasn't just saying the Republic merely tries to create trouble over perfectly legit charity. People are right to be suspicious about Harkles after they tried to monetise royal status to make money for themselves.
I was saying charities can be quite complicated in their set up and investigation should be left to the competent authorities.
I also think Republic simply manipulated PR to their advantage and idiotic Harry played right into their hands.
"Whatever the legal position this looks unethical and underhanded. People donate money to a charity expecting it to be used to fund the charity's objectives, not to be given away to support a patron's other projects."
Any breach in charity law would relate to removal of funds from Sussex Royal and not to the oriiginal grant to that charity. Unfortunately the first accounts for Sussex Royal that would show the transactions would be for the year ended 31 July 2020 so H&M have filed for insolvency before accounts due. The funds transferred with Travalyst were from Restricted Funds thata is money donated by donors who have imposed restrictions on how the funds are used so presumably some donors wished their contributions to the Royal Foundation to be used for Travalyst
If the only 'charity" left is Travalyst does that mean it supposedly went there? That was only a year ago but Sussex Royal wasn't fully set up then was it?
@Piroska mentions transfer of "restricted" money being transferred to Travalyst. Did that include the Dusney money?
This is starting to remind me of that shell game played with a ball and 3 cups. It may not be illegal, but it sounds like maybe the Disney money went to the Royal Foundation (to park it) and it could count as a charitable donation for Disney. But it has now been transferred to Travalyst? Which may or may not be a charity? Do I have that right?
However, the couple are not seeking a wholly private existence away from the limelight, claims royal author Victoria Murphy.
'[Harry and Meghan] have stepped back not in search of a totally private life but for a different kind of public life,' Victoria said.
'A public life where they can have more control over who gets access to them and what they spend their time on.' (DM)
So now they've changed their tune? Does this mean they want more money??
I agree completely - threatening to sue somebody who asks a legitimate question about your activities is completely stupid. It immediately puts you under more suspicion - by your own actions!
Taking people to court is another marker of the difference between our two cultures - many Brits are astonished at some of the cases we hear about from the US while US citizens are equally amazed at our reluctance to sue.
My husband incurred a minor injury in the flume at a Disney theme park and assumed that all he needed was a Band Aid. So he asked an attendant about it.
Instead of the matter being dealt there and then, he was sent to hospital by taxi, still in his Speedoes (aka `Budgie Smugglers') for some exquisite needlework by a doctor, then, was taken back to rejoin his very anxious 1st wife, who said `where the Hell have you been?', and a couple of frustrated kids who were cross about the flume being shut down.
It was near the end of his assignment when he was telephoned at work by Disney's lawyers, asking `When are you going to sue us?'
He gave a very British reply to the effect that he could see no reason why he should. The cut, or whatever it was, had healed perfectly and that was the end of it. They continued to insist that he had to sue, saying `US Law, sir, is based on British law and we'd expect you to sue us.'
Husband explained that he was going back to the UK very soon and had no intention of getting embroiled in a US court case.
`In that case, sir, if you’d like to sign a declaration that you are not to sue, we’d like to send you a gift we know you will enjoy.’
He agreed, ,just to bring the matter to a close. Sure enough a packet arrived. It contained a Mickey Mouse watch by Bulova Accutron .
Which brings me to my main point – is this yet another instance of Megsy assuming British law is the same as that she learned by playing a character who was playing Meghan?
The usual British response to threats like that is to call their bluff - `All right, I'll see you in court'.
Do you remember, `That money was only resting in my account!'?
Yes.
So what supposedly happened to the Lion King Disney money? Not the voiceover money that was supposed to go directly to Elephants Without Borders, but the Lion King donation that was reportedly earmarked for H&M's "upcoming environment & community initiative?" Wasn't it $3 million?
H$M were at their heights with idiotic initiatives, charities, grift-o-ramas, etc. in the pre-Covid era. Back when Disney forked over a few million, for no good reason at all. Estimates are 1-3 million but no one knows for sure. This is between Bob Iger and the Gruesome Twosome. We will never know, but I am sure this sum has padded their (read Megsy's) publicity expenses for many months.
Could be but if Disney deducted that as a charitable contribution and it was known in advance "wink wink" it wasn't, that's not good. It wasn't Bob Iger's personal money, it was corporate money, I assume. I know even if it was $3 million, that's not much for Disney, but these days I don't know if stockholders and the IRS would care it wasn't much. Of course, Iger did step down suddenly while claiming it had been planned for awhile.
It is possible that the $3m Lion King money was the source of the restricted funds. I do not know the exchange rates at the time but the amounts are similar. The entry in the accounts submitted to Companies House and the Charity Commission that according to the notes to the accounts relate to Travalyst are;
Income Donations £250416 Trading activities £15231 Total £265647
Expenditure Grants £144901 Other charitable activities £113791 Total £258692
Net movement in funds £6955
that's interesting because in Shakespeare's time, the English were very litigious. In fact, we know much about Shakespeare, his father and colleagues from court case documents. I am citing Bill Bryson in his book Shakespeare: The World as Stage
I wonder if Meg and Harry can use the charity funds for PR because it spreads the word on their charitable efforts. It perpetuates 'education' about their actions to do good, like the zoom calls and media pieces about their participation in food delivery. Maybe they can even stretch the concept that they themselves have to receive media attention to keep them newsworthy, popular so their charity, Sussex Royal and Travalyst will achieve attention and therefore gain benefactors and donations,
However it seems a big no-no to let Travalyst a private company have funds intended for charitable efforts. But doesn't charities all the time spend money to private companies for supplies, everyday needs and even PR. Could the HAMS make a case that Travalyst needed the funds so they can help these impoverished areas needing tourist travel. In their reasoning could they argue Travalyst is needed to help ecotourism?
IMO I would like to think PW is not responsible for anything wrong in these transactions but don't we see big shot Political donors here in the US run afoul of the law when they contribute money outside the scope of the election laws (eg. contributing too much or contributing to a politicians pet projects in an attempt to disguise a political campaign).
Please note: I am not trying to put UK charitable laws on the same level as the US campaign finance laws though. I really don't think PW would do something wrong as he has excellent advisors I'm sure.
Maybe they are claiming they need the money to travel to different places to help know where to sell people on the idea of going there?
I saw the DM article on how they felt they needed to take control of their time, efforts and access. Oh man.
I think they are trying to generate public roar over not being able to move their Instagram and perhaps, given how angry/vocal people are right now might help apply pressure. maybe?
I did have to laugh a little at the phrase about their "... latest charitable organization." I am reminded of the quote from the Wizard of Oz (just substitute worthy cause for people). "People come and go so quickly here."
Love reading Bill Bryson. Hadn't read that one yet but I am in the middle of Ben Crystal's Shakespeare on Toast.
And I had a great laugh from Got To Pick A Pocket Or Two. You spurred me to see on you tube, and from hard to believe 1968. So thanks Wild Boar Maid. Now Iceland is in my mind.
Oh my. DM article about how MM wants to leave LA for her birthday, would require everyone (only close friends) to be tested for covid but that she also doesn't want to look careless or irresponsible. Top comment in DM was about how that look is a little too late.
Do we think Harry is astute enough to look into the "charity" transactions and be able to judge if they are dodgy? I doubt it.
He may not be deliberate but I have no doubt he can be dragged into all sorts of schemes with charity money that can appear legit but no royal trustee would approve of them.
Harry is a baby in the jungle now, surrounded by clever manipulators who feed on his royal status. And he already lost the public's trust.
Most of the news I trust about H & M comes from the Daily Mail. Before you laugh, I just have to say that so many of the stories and tidbits that they drop, turn out to be either completely true or have some vein of truth to them. Not all, of course. Any of the stories in the American publications like People or US Weekly are almost always Meghan's PR stories. The DM tried it's hardest to be respectful to Meg at first, she might disagree, but I believe that the DM has their tentacles everywhere in the Royal Family's courtiers, that the truth about Meg was starting to unravel.
I was reading yesterday about Kim and Kanye ( a whole other hot mess of a story) and the author was saying that Kim and Kanye have always had this issue with where they live, which according to many 'experts on relationships', is a huge sign of discord, even if the couple doesn't actively fight. Moving around frequently, just staying somewhere like with friends or family, and refusal to permanently buy something and establish roots is typically always a harbringer to divorce. So I was thinking about Meghan and Harry. They don't have near the money that Kim and Kanye have, but really, why the hell are they still squatting at Tyler Perry's house? Just waiting.....waiting... for what?
Now I read Meghan wants to have some birthday party in Montecito CA (I think that's where). At who's house is she having this stupid party? And it seems she is trying to influence the public narrative that she has lots of friends. I can only imagine the butt kissing she is doing to her friends right now as this court case is going on. Especially the Mystery Five. Interesting to see how it will play out!
Happy Birthday to Prince George! I love seeing his pictures. I so wonder what kind of man he'll be. If I could guess I would say he'll have a quietness about him, but fun loving and compassionate. I see him being a strong leader and a very, very good King. I sense Meghan has a lot of envy with the Cambridge children, most especially George. I can imagine her seething as she watched the Cambridge children with Uncle Harry. I am postitive that's a relationship she has NOT encouraged.
So he is suggesting that Prince William put pressure on the 9 trustees of the Royal Foundation and that these trustees,business men and women including a chairman with a net worth of around £125m a former Prime Minister a former diplomat, a civil servant now permanent secretary at No 10 Downing Street and a corporate solicitor caved under this pressure and ignored the responsibilities imposed on them as trustees of the charity and directors of the company.
"I sense Meghan has a lot of envy with the Cambridge children, most especially George. I can imagine her seething as she watched the Cambridge children with Uncle Harry. I am postitive that's a relationship she has NOT encouraged."
I don't doubt you are correct about M's jealousy. But really, I'm not sure Harry has ever had much of a relationship with the Cambridge kids even pre-Meghan. We've certainly not seen it in photos. We have seen the Cambridge kids interact with Zara and Mike and with Autumn. And we've seen W&K interact with those folks' kids. Harry, not so much.
My favourite comment from DM
Does anyone know MMs mailing address? I want to send her some birthday gifts. I know they are broke now, so instead of the usual fou fou, I am sending some practical gifts. A horse brush for her new hair and a bicycle pump to blow up her new lips without any expensive visits to the plastic surgeon.
I was reading yesterday about Kim and Kanye ( a whole other hot mess of a story) and the author was saying that Kim and Kanye have always had this issue with where they live, which according to many 'experts on relationships', is a huge sign of discord, even if the couple doesn't actively fight. Moving around frequently, just staying somewhere like with friends or family, and refusal to permanently buy something and establish roots is typically always a harbringer to divorce. So I was thinking about Meghan and Harry. They don't have near the money that Kim and Kanye have, but really, why the hell are they still squatting at Tyler Perry's house? Just waiting.....waiting... for what?
Well, with Kim & Kanye, it's pretty simple--Kim doesn't want to live in Montana & never had/has any intention of living in Montana. I can't think of a girl LESS designed for country living. Even MM appears to be comfortable in boots some of the time.
Montana was a really weird choice of a place for Kanye, as I wouldn't peg him for a country-living dude either, but I suppose the privacy and the vast spaces appealed to him for a break from the LaLa Land fishbowl. Which is what his wife and her clan thrive on. If they have to do without papp/tabloid attention for even 5 minutes, the entire family will spontaneously expire. At least Kim & Kanye own their various properties, so they can choose to stay in them or not, as they please.
It's a bit differs in Harke-land. I suspect they are going to squat at Tyler Perry's until he kicks them out, which is what I believe happened with their Russian-oligarch Canadian landlord. They haven't found their own place because I further suspect that they are broke, at least in terms of the kinds of accommodation Meg would think herself deserving of. If they'd really desired a quiet, private life in America, their income would stretch to a modest one-family home or condo, even a rental while they try to figure out their next move. These two don't have any moves. Have you noticed the proliferation of stories about how much Harry is regretting the move to the U.S.? How much he misses everything familiar he left behind? That's quite obvious by his demeanor, but articles like that fly in the face of how much they are supposed to be 'lovin' their new L.A. life and 'fresh start' with Baby Archie!!! (and dogs!!!! . .and Doria!!!!) Sometimes these will be side-by-side in the same publication. Meghan's PR is like some kind of Manchurian Candidate indoctrination program calibrated to drive us all insane.
Piroska- If Oprah is still talking to Meghan, I am sure Meghan is desperate to massage that 'friendship'. If Oprah holds a party for her I think I will barf LOL.
Hikari- It does show that they are broke- Staying at Tyler Perry's. Letting Oprah have a party for her. But this is what Meghan always does, broke or not. She seems to constantly seek out connections for herself. Someone more rich, someone more connected. Like when she let basic strangers like Gayle King have that extravagant shower for her. Oh and hahaha at Meghan's PR is like some kind of Manchurian Candidate indoctrination program calibrated to drive us all insane. Perfectly said!
So, I wonder how this works. How does Meg manage to find celebrities to grift favors from? Does she spend all day from morning to night working the phones and hitting the rose?
Tyler Perry is a FOO (Friend of Oprah), so there's the connection, but who exactly first floated the idea that the Harkles stay in Mr. Perry's vacant mansion in the Hollywood Hills? Did Meg call up her new BFF O. (who has been really silent lately) and wheedle her to call any of her friends who had a big vacant house to loan them that met Meg's list of requirements? Did O. immediately think of her pal TP, or did she try several people before she got to him? Tyler is based in Atlanta and doesn't appear to have spent much, if any, time in the Hollywood place in the three years since he bought it. Odd vehicle for a tax shelter . . he couldn't possibly have known that 21/2 years later, that house would be needed to house two homeless refugees fleeing persecution in the husband's homeland. Nor could Oprah. O. lives in Chicago and who knows how long it's been since she's hung out with Mr. Perry, to be up on all his real estate holdings and which were currently vacant and suitable for Housing the Harkles, with their (potentially fictional) 2-dogs and 1-baby, assorted security detail and their very real and incessant drama.
Likewise the Vancouver Island property . . secured through Megsy's schoolgirl acquaintance with the wife of mogul David Foster, who must have been the one with the connection to the Russian oligarch-owner. MM and Kat McPhee were at school together, but seeing as McPhee was several classes behind, not close then and certainly not in contact since then until a few months ago. Is it Sunshine Sucks arranging all these little gladhander arrangements . . ? And what do the likes of TP and Foster-McPhee-the Russian expect from MeMe and Hapless in return for their generosity? Is this were all that money went? Wtf.
The shower, yes . . that close knit celebration of impending motherhood . .played out in the tabloid media, and including people who had never met the mother to be. Meghan's mother conspicuously absent, however, which is tres froid. Who excludes their mom from their baby shower for the first grandkid?
If you want my opinion, that shower was some sort of delivery exercise, perhaps to go pick up the surrogate's baby. That was mid-late February, and would jive with the projected actual birthdate of the baby we have seen which has always seemed several months advanced of his published age. Meggy was very sloppy in forgetting her Bump in the hotel room as she stepped out on the town, though she remembered it coming and going . .and a week or so later, in Morocco, she'd bloomed to full-term proportions in just a matter of days. All the better to fill out that Valentino caftan which cost approximately 3 years' salary for me.
No, there haven't, and isn't that odd? The Harkles were at Louis's christening just a couple of months after their wedding--when she famously wore the loden green wool dress to a summer event when everyone else in the photo was wearing shades of blue and white, including her spouse. I suppose Uncle Harry must have been at George & Charlotte's christenings, but it's been making the rounds for quite a while now that William does not permit Harry to be around his children, and that was in place before Meg, due to Harry usually turning up drunk, high or both when he visited. When Wills made an exception, so that his kids could meet Uncle Harry's new girlfriend . .that's when she allegedly tried to sneak photos of a Cambridge child.
Meg never does anything for a wholesome reason, so we can imagine what she planned to do with any such images.
I hate to say this owing to Diana's memory and the fond recollections I have of that ginger-haired imp he once was, but it would have been better for Harry if he'd never been born. And it would be a sight better for everyone else in the world if Markle had never been born.
About nil-ish, unless Cory is an incredibly forgiving and namaste kind of person. She left Bogart behind when she set out on her 'Bag a Rich English Guy' quest circa May 2016, and never looked back. Question is, what kind of life did Guy the Beagle have during this period, and with whom?
"Harry must have been at George & Charlotte's christenings..."
Harry attended George's christening but not Charlotte's in 2015. He went on a 3-month private conservation trip to Africa instead that started the month before.
At the time there were reports he was in a huff because he wasn't chosen as a godparent. But in reality, a parent's siblings usually aren't chosen as godparents in the RF. (Neither Pippa nor James Middleton were chosen for any of the Cambridge children.)
Something went sour between the brothers circa 2015. Markle wasn't on the scene then, but she has certainly exploited the pre-existing rift to her advantage and made it much worse.
I think Harry is too maturationally compromised to really understand that his actions and attitudes have consequences. He's treated his family like toys flung out of the pram in a fit of pique, but thinks he can pick them up again when he wants to.
King William cannot forget nor forgive these injuries done to him by a most perfidious and disloyal younger brother. I wonder if Harry realizes that he's basically killed the closest tie in his life--that of a brother who shared his tragedy of losing a mother. Harry has been indulged, covered for and protected now past the point of saving--he's the scorpion in Wills' bosom and William is going to protect the Crown even if it means sacrificing his little brother.
Thanks for revealing the about how litigious Shakespeare's dad was - I haven't read that particular Bryson.
I used to like him but went off after `The Road to Little Dribbling'- he seemed to me to have become a miserable old git, just like the spoof of Will's father in Ben Elton's sitcom `Upstart Crow' - an `everyday life of 17th century Stratford folk'perhaps?
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upstart_Crow -
Henry Enfield's John Shakespeare is described as `formerly wealthy' - I know very little about how law was practised in England at that time and wonder if a run of legal suits would account for the `formerly'? Going to court may have been less expensive, per case, than than it is now but, if he made a habit of it, that could have reduced his circumstances. As well as the roistering in the tavern a la Falstaff.
This video says it all:
https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/upstart_crow/videos/2/
Now, I wonder what Travalyst does that could be considered as `trading'?
HMRC uses several definitions, depending on the context and which tax is involved - all rather beyond me apart from saying it usually involves providing goods and services in exchange for money.
So I looked it up and discovered this:
https://www.taxjournal.com/articles/back-basics-trading-or-non-trading-reliefs-company-status-25042012
"Speed read
`There are a number of reliefs which shareholders of trading companies are entitled to but these reliefs are dependent on qualifying criteria, one of which is if the company meets a trading test. What is meant by trading is not the same for each of the reliefs and for advisers this can make tax planning perilous. The restructuring of companies and groups can preserve one relief while losing another relief. Therefore understanding the client’s objectives is critical to ensure that any structure meets them.’"
It's not clear to me what Travalyst actually does, beyond providing H with a platform to spout hypocrisy - that we should do as he says, rather than do as he does.
I agree with your response at 5:47pm. I despise the HAMS but was just offering a context in which they may try to legitimize the transfer of money. Yes it is even worse because t heir charity 'Sussex Royal' could be plundered for money for themselves personally but try to say it was really for the charitable purposes.
I am in with those who think financial shenanigans will be one of the reasons the Harkles will take a big fall, along with their misguided involvement with politics, their penchant for suing over nothing, etc...the list is almost endless and yet this sh*t show has really just got started in the big scheme of things in barely a year.
Charles has his own Kingly ego wanting the Crown and Prince Wills is right behind him. Charles is cultivating Wills to run the Duchy. They both have a monetary base to operate from called the Cornwall Duchy which has endured for seven plus centuries.
"The duchy (the oldest in England) was created by royal charter on March 7, 1337, by Edward III for his eldest son, Edward the Black Prince, and for such of his heirs as would become kings of England."
Harry will be treated strictly once Charles ascends, and Charles will consult with William on what to do with wayward Harry. Megs and Archie will be on their own (written off) with a very minimal divorce payout. Who needs Archie/Merchie when there will be so many other grandchildren and I mean Prince Andrew's
@Christine
Montana was a really weird choice of a place for Kanye, as I wouldn't peg him for a country-living dude either, but I suppose the privacy and the vast spaces appealed to him for a break from the LaLa Land fishbowl.
Piroska- If Oprah is still talking to Meghan, I am sure Meghan is desperate to massage that 'friendship'. If Oprah holds a party for her I think I will barf LOL
The Hollywood elite and other wealthy movers and shakers have gravitated to the Yellowstone region (southwest Montana and northeast Wyoming) since the 80s. It’s one of the most stunningly beautiful landscapes in the States. Our family used to go to a low key ranch in the area every summer for fly fishing, horseback riding, and hiking in the 80s-early 90s. Local land owners whose ranches had been in the same family for generations were beginning to sell out to the uber-wealthy then. The property next door to the one where we always stayed was the primary shooting location for Robert Redford’s acclaimed film, A River Runs Through It. We rode horses through the set on one of their “off” days. Anyway, Kanye West and Kim Kardashian’s purchase of the Cody property falls in line with this decades-long trend of Hollywood types using the region as their playground.
Re Oprah hosting a bday party for Meghan, I don’t buy it. But Ellen Degeneres also has a home there, and I wouldn’t be surprised if she offered the use of the place to M and H.
The latest Harry Markle is excellent. I didn't realise Travalyst has no official phone or email.
HM also nailed it people who donated to Royal Charities not necessarily want their money spent on travel advice. They didn't put a restriction on use because it never crossed their minds.
Harry spent considerable amount paying "consultants". Although legit and openly done by others is still has a sour taste it the light of his scandalous spending on wedding, private vacations, cottage, Canada move, LA move, litigations etc.
The point is the public doesn't trust the Harkles and is prepared to believe they can break the law to benefit themselves. I think it is a rock bottom for the former royal golden boy Harry
I am looking forward to Eugenie or Beatrice (or both!) announcing their pregnancies and giving births. Public will be relieved to see the protocol followed and royal traditions observed.
Not to mention all the oohs and ahhs that will follow and take attention away from Archie, Harry and his wife.
Fresh pictures of the happy royal christenings are desperately needed to erase the memory of the Harkles cloak and dagger show.
Bogart - I think the "friend" she left him with was a Toronto animal shelter. He was not the favored dog for some reason and she made an excuse to leave him. The logical answer to taking back a dog that had been rehomed 3 years prior would be to say he is loving his new home and it would be too disruptive to take him back. Instead we get this dog-hates-Harry narrative. Was she afraid Jess would spill the beans on the return to shelter and had to come up with a story that would put her in a better light?
Backtracking on privacy - The "we want privacy and hate the press" narrative ground their opportunities in LA to dust (along with the pandemic). Charities don't want "secret visits" with copyrighted pictures. They want famous people talking up their great work and lots of free press. The Harkles positioned themselves as just the opposite in their SA whinefest.
I hope to get to Yellowstone before I die, if Covid will cooperate. What a shame the likes of the Kartrashians & Kanye have to spoil the bucolic landscape with their Hollyweirdness. I read a piece that stated that Kanye would love to live there full-time, but many arguments ensue with his wife, who hates it. Rest assured that however many millions they've spent to create a glamping cabin paradise there in Montana, it'll be too rustic for KK.
@Fairy
Yep, Harry Markle does her usual meticulous job with the Sussex Foundation mess.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/07/22/the-problems-with-travalyst-and-the-sussex-royal-foundation/
***************
'Member right before Hazza bolted for North America with Megdusa, he hosted a 'Travalyst' summit to talk all about his great new sustainable travel initiative? I got the impression that there were actual other people there, too, in attendance, as investor-partners. Where these, like the elusive Merchie, hired actors? Because what, exactly were they supposed to be investing in . . a start-up company with a labored-sounding name and a 'board of directors' but no actual offices, website, email or phone number?
That is just transparent grifting . . a DIY 'charity' set up in a few days in order to glom onto Harry's share of the money donated to doing good works in Diana's name.
Harry has no head for business; he's got no heart for charity, either, from the looks. He likes to pet elephants and kick a soccer ball around with HIV positive kids in developing countries, but he's got no intrinsic ability to be the captain of his own ship in any endeavor. I don't know what his level of culpability is with this shell game they've been playing with the musical charities . . Sussex Royal! No, Travalyst! No, Archewell!! The whole thing smells like a scam.
I would lay money on William being strong-armed by his elders into adding HAMS to his charitable foundation . . .in the interests of *unity* and harnessing the power of the *new star couple of the Royal family*.
OR
To strive to prevent *JUST* what has transpired with the whole Sussex Royal business. But Megsy got her way anyway. Separate charity, separate Instagram . . Now she's trying to run 'Sussex Court West' from Tyler Perry's house---ALL the items the HAMS were flatly denied the first time they brought up the plan to be part-time glamorous International royals that lived where they pleased and turned up where they liked--have come to pass. Sh*tt*ly, but still, Meg rammed them through anyway. The word "NO" is just like "YES" to her, except it takes a bit longer.
If Harry had had a normal wife, having the two couples make up the Royal Foundation would have worked well. Harry has no ability or really, intrinsic desire to be the CEO of his own charitable arm. He would have been content to work on his own stuff under the Royal Foundation umbrella. What about Invictus, Harry? Or Sentabale? You care for them as much as you do the Royal Marines. If adding the Harkles to William's foundation was an attempt to keep Markle's grasping mitts off the money, it's failed abysmally.
Travalyst was so, so clearly meant to be Harry's big money-making scheme . .that went nowhere, because there was no vision, no real plan. Neither of the Harkles seem to understand that most of the wildly rich people they aspire to emulate actually worked incredibly hard at setting up their businesses or putting in the sweat equity to hone their craft in their discipline. Money didn't just rain down upon them from above--it had to be cultivated. I don't think these two are ever going to get that. They will be couch surfing forever, though in decreasingly grand accommodation.
Waiting for the other shoe to drop . . . wonder when it's gonna.
Just like clockwork, Meg has to try and ruin another birthday for a member of the RF.
Isn't it really odd, and more than a little juvenile, that a woman who is so avoidant of aging, who was 36 seemingly for about six years, who dresses and talks like the 24 year old she still wishes she were, is *obsessed* with her birthdays? Specifically WHO is going to throw a birthday party for HERSELF and how grand it's going to be?
I haven't fantasized about birthday parties since I was around 10. Just how high *is* Markle's mental age? It's like taking over a classmate's birthday party when she was a kid and demanding that the other kids all call her Queen. This almost-40 year old cannot cope with a 7 year old boy celebrating a birthday, as though his birthday takes away something that belongs to her.
Memo to Meg: You are not seven years old. Some of your cosmetic procedures may be that old but you are not.
One year later. Delete Queen, insert Oprah. Delete Balmoral, insert Montecito. The cake is a question mark.
Also, still strange that there was zero, zilch, nada about Harry for Father's Day last month.
_____________________________
Yes. I wonder if Harry is not being gradually 'phased out', I mean maybe it's to get us used to the idea that he's not around much, this being a 'precursor' to a separation/divorce announcement? Has he outlived his usefulness? Not impossible.
"I would lay money on William being strong-armed by his elders into adding HAMS to his charitable foundation . . .in the interests of *unity* and harnessing the power of the *new star couple of the Royal family*"
I agree it was a bit odd Meg was added to the Royal Foundation. It would have been quite natural for the newlyweds to branch out then and wouldn't have screamed "rift" so maybe there was encouragement to keep them with the Royal Foundation.
But the Royal Foundation wasn't "William's foundation." It was started by William and Harry in 2009 with money from the Diana Memorial Fund. Will may have done more work on it back then than Harry....or may not have. At the time the foundation was begun, William was in the RAF and living in Anglesey. I expect the foundation wasn't very active for a number of years but was set up when it was to receive the Diana money with the idea it would become active when W&H became "working royals."
Kate was added in 2011 and prior to the marriage, a "gift fund" was set up within the Royal Foundation for members of the public to give monetary charitable wedding gifts if they chose to do so. But Will didn't leave the RAF until 2013 so I'm still not sure the foundation did very much until the Heads Together stuff was put forth.
As for Meg PR: she's noticing her star is fading, so she's planning to pull a Paris Hilton. Create photographic media of being happy and popular. The 'bday' article is a sign for things to come. Great. eyeroll.
As for Harry, oh well. Of course she is going to leave him.
At this point, I dont think she cares if she is infamous or famous. She's clearly hellbent on trying to 'be somebody' without doing the work.
And, "How does Meg manage to find celebrities to grift favors from? Does she spend all day from morning to night working the phones and hitting the rose?"
As an ENFJ, yes, that's all she does.
"Sometimes these will be side-by-side in the same publication. Meghan's PR is like some kind of Manchurian Candidate indoctrination program calibrated to drive us all insane."
..............
LOL!!! You win the prize for the comment of the day!!
What I have never understood is how some of the papers could publish ridiculously opposing stories about her on the same day and not have any qualms about doing so! I guess they want the clicks from both MM's fans as well as the Megxiteers!
IMO the Daily Express is the worst of all the tabloids for posting schizophrenic stories on old Megs. They are definitely her mouthpiece and apparently accept her PR stories but yet also print negative articles for those clicks as well.
I've been following this Harkle story since the beginning and have found the Daily Mail to be the best place to find legitimate info. They do print some PR junk but you can easily pick out what is obviously truthful. Both Lady C and Andrew Morton have used some of the DM's info in their books.
Some of the DM articles I found the most interesting (especially in light of what we now know) are:
-the early reports on what MM's brother and sister had to say about her
-the stories about her father and his staged photos in the lead up to the wedding
-the interviews with ghosted best friend Ninaki Priddy, her ex-agent Gina Nelthorpe-Crowne, and her ex-pal Liz Cundy
-the various biographical stories
-the People magazine letter stories and articles on the lawsuit that followed
-any and all stories written about her bad behavior!
One Daily Mail story I did NOT like was when they participated in the doxing of some of the Megxiteers - JerseyDeanne and several other bloggers were named in an article about supposed 'trolling' of the poor duchess.
And yet Markle says the RF never protected her. That doxing article came out at the same time the RF changed their social media guidelines to tighten up on all the negative commentary being left about Meghan. I don't think that DM doxing would have happened without approval from the palace and was most likely done at the request of the Harkles.
Waiting for the other shoe to drop . . . wonder when it's gonna.
It really is beginning to feel like Waiting for Godot. There should be a $1/equivalent in pounds per head betting pool among us Nutties as to the approximate date of the collapse of the Harkle House of Cards. It would make the wait a little more bearable.
I hope you do make it to Yellowstone, Hikari. It is definitely not to be missed. (An aside: I goofed and wrote “northeast Wyoming” when I meant northwest.)
A birthday party is a great excuse to hide a meeting of the five friends involved in the letter to People magazine and the lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday.
It will allow everyone to coordinate their stories. No electronic trail of texts on their phones. No social media trail either because they’re face-to-face at the “party.”
Meg’s lawsuit is going to be up for another court date soon, and Meghan likely wants to make sure her transactional friends all tell the same story if they are called as witnesses.
Hmmmm. Witness tampering and perjury anyone?
I'm amazed at his and HMTQ's dedication to their many roles as Queen and Prince Consort. One can only hope the newer generations can have such staying power. I expect Charles and Camilla to die in their roles and I also feel William and Kate will also have staying power as they seem to have been very well mentored. The others I wonder about especially with all the talk of a republic. Of course we know the GrTw's couldn't last two years without pulling a runner. Shocked, I'm not.
Prince Phillip was a bit of a naughty boy in his youth and had/has questionable humor but I have to say I admire his tenacity in staying with the Queen. No doubt his upbringing as Greek aristocracy had much to do with his sense of stick-to-it-ness, I would think. That he married THE Queen was a great gig and still is. That she has always been besotted with him cemented his place in her life and his position. He made quite a few inroads as we know and I just adored Matt as Phillip in the Crown. He captured his charm, elan, and his indifference which IMO can make for a mysterious man!
I have grown to like the man warts and all. What I would give to know his real feelings and thoughts concerning Meg the Merch. I'd pay BIG money to know! But again as we all gather, they will never see the light of day. Darn!
Thoughts on Phillip Nutties?
Also to those discussing the sad decline of great destination/tourist spots ie: Iceland, I have to say I agree. Some years back someone I loved dearly took me to Skellig Michael in County Kerry Ir. We lucked out as a boat was able to take us as it was weather permitting. I have never seen such a glorious place which burst with spiritual energy. We walked up 600 stone steps layed out over the centuries by the monks that inhabited that monastic outpost for centuries. Needless to say, it is one of my all time grand memories of my life. Sadly, it has been "discovered" by Hollywood when it was used in one of the current Star Wars episodes. I was not happy about that at all. Such a place like Skellig Micheal (Big Skellig especially) should have always been left a mystery of wonderment IMO. I am ever so grateful that the Irish Tourist Board, with the Government's full approval, has continued to be strict about tourism to the Skelligs. I find it tragic that such a deeply spiritual pilgrimage spot was tainted by the movie people. Sacrilege. I wish the Irish PowersThatBe would have said a flat out NO to the idea. My sons however are thrilled mom was actually there!
I live in my home town which is also a tourist attraction destination spot so I am not to keen on exploitation of communities for tourist purposes though I admit it is fun and quite fulfilling to go to certain places. I try to keep in mind how the original people of those areas feel.
So I guess I'm trying to say I do think the Harry's would more than likely have no qualms about exploiting such wonderful spots for their own financial gain as it has been said those foundations/charities are set up to put maximum $$$ in the developers pockets; in this case the Harry's (or is it the Meghan's) pockets. I do not believe William knowingly would be a part of such a scheme. I am sure his people handled it with care especially now that the magnifying glass is on them to a burning point.
A final note before I turn in (I'm far from Britain): Smithsonian Institute has a new doc coming out on the Queen Mother. That's another show, ha! Can't wait to read your thoughts on that as she was certainly a colorizing figure. Apparently she loathed Phillip. I'm getting my popcorn ready!
Off to zzzland.
Meant to type polarizing figure!
I had a bit of a turn when pictures of Edo’s ex Dara Huang popped up. This is my first time seeing her, and I think she bears a startling resemblance to Meghan...Younger and more attractive obviously, but if you go back to the photos of meg circa 2017 at Sandringham Christmas, she looked Asian. Dara is American as well; I assumed that she was British.
https://youtu.be/bGy7D3dAi6U
Pink Peony, re. Philip
He is certainly a character for the ages, and created his share of brouhaha in his time. But the Queen still looks at her Prince the same way now, after 74 years of marriage, as she did when she was a 20 year old bride to be. Their love story is epic. What will the world do when they are gone? Nearly every day now for the last several years I wake up and wonder if this is the day we learn that Philip has left us. He and Captain Tom Moore, two greatest Gen veterans Keep defying time. I don’t think we will see men of their like again.
When you get to that age, every day is a precious gift. That’s how we should all be thinking, no matter how old we are.
I saw George's birthday photo on the DM. Adorable. George looks HAPPY. Young kids his age can't fake that. I looked at some other photos of Kate and Wills with their kids and noticed something: They know how to hold an infant and a toddler. They both look comfortable with a baby in their arms or on their hip. In every pic of Meghan and Archie she looks like she has no idea how to hold and support a child. That photo of her at the polo match holding newborn Archie looked so awkward. And the video of her reading the book to the poor kid.... again, AWKWARD! (We won't even discuss the photos of her in Canada walking her dogs with Archie in the baby carrier because that was a doll that hung at an odd angle in the harness. Not so much awkward as surreal.)
Re Meghan wanting a trip to Montecito for her birthday: I think she is dropping a big ol' hint so someone (preferably Oprah but Ellen would do in a pinch) will offer their lavish home as a free hotel in which she can park her flat rear end. But I don't blame her. Poor thing must find it claustrophobic to be cooped up in a 25,000 square foot house. In a wooded, exclusive neighborhood. With a pool.
Re: Meghan’s desire for a birthday getaway.
A birthday party is a great excuse to hide a meeting of the five friends involved in the letter to People magazine and the lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday.
HappyDays, I strongly suspect that Meghan herself is four of the five friends. Jessica was the fifth. Serena Williams may have been one, but she has since bounced. I guess she was Markled.
Wonderful to see Prince Philip looking so well,
still dapper.
For a man of his generation, and character,
always playing a supportive role to his wife/Queen
walking 3 steps behind her etc,
can’t always have been easy.
Shows the calibre of the man.
I admire him, and his stoicism.
The very fact that when he stepped back is when the family went to pieces speaks volumes, too. Although Andrew's upbringing was during P's prime; can't explain that lapse!
Yeah (she said, drifting further away from the topic at hand), I don't think any of them shine in the parenting department. Any of the older generation, that is. Anne must have raised herself. She could do it! : )
No way would Oprah have a party for her. First, Oprah is very paranoid about her health. Secondly, she would not take a chance of any backlash from hosting a party for Megs. She is very aware of what's up with them. The press they are receiving. And hosting a birthday party during Covid with all the shutdowns in CA? Nope, won't happen.
.....................
While I agree Oprah is paranoid about Covid based on the story about her dog's trip to the vet and subsequent banishment, I'm not sure what her true feelings are on the Harkles.
I would not be surprised if she is supporting them especially if it somehow suits Oprah's own agenda. She may not be making any public statements about them but she is apparently helping them behind the scenes...
-We know she showed up at the wedding despite having never met Markle.
-She gifted Archie with a year subscription to a book club / book collection.
-Doria was seen attending a function with Oprah prior to the pandemic.
-The owner of the home they are squatting in is a friend of Oprah's who also allegedly arranged a flight on a private jet to whisk them out of Canada.
-Oprah's online magazine regularly posts fawning articles on Markle and promotes her word salad speaking engagements, and has also spread the idea through commentary that she was mistreated in the UK due to racism.
Here are some of the articles found on Markle in Oprah's magazine:
https://www.oprahmag.com/search/?q=meghan+markle
Philip and his Lilibet
Were destined from whence they first met
To love and support
to abide by the court
the rules that they both knew were set
But he can't have been an easy father to have, at least where his sons were concerned. If I were a child in the BRF, I'd want Prince William for a father and Prince Philip for a grandfather. (Prince Charles can squeeze in there as the eccentric philosopher uncle with a passion for gardening. Of all of them, he'd be the most likely to own a wardrobe that sometimes leads to Narnia.)
I've been reflecting on our experiences and what I learnt about `sustainable tourism' in poor countries. Having seen what car maintenance was like there, I feel for you in that plane! All respect to you for the work you did though. I couldn't have done it.
We went a trip run by a company that specialises in mountain holidays so much of the accommodation is in simple hostels and huts, no frills.
Two weeks of Transylvania were enough for me - having to put boots on to go the the loo in the middle of the night when camping is one thing- to have to do it when the loo was `en suite' is another. The one clean loo was in a Macdonalds - it was the only place where our local guides thought we wouldn't get food poisoning - goodness knows what the other places were like if they were worse than some of the cabanas we stayed in!
That old Cabana Crascu, for example. It had dormer windows, like the Overlook Hotel in the film, and the atmosphere was similar!
It had an outside loo - Husband discovered, when he went to use it in the small hours, that we'd been locked in and all our windows were barred. Emergency measures required - the jam jar the spoons were kept in had to be called into service! He managed somehow to empty and clean it before coming back to bed any nobody was any the wiser. The custodian swore blind that the door hadn't been locked and, anyway, it was to keep the bears out...
That was also where I believe I found pieces of dog in the soup - a heavily in-whelp bitch had been wandering around – she was very nice animal – but there was no sign of her next morning. I suppose they could been puppy parts.
Husband & I were careful what we said, even though Ceaucescu had been dead 10 years. We even felt we couldn't trust our local guides, as well as not liking their attitude to us -
I'd got just one piece of `respectable' clothing, a North Face jacket bought half-price in a sale 3 years before, also a good rucksack of similar age - I'd been to charity shops for everything else. Nevertheless, they seemed obsessed with us being rich.
One of them pulled at my jacket sleeve and asked `How much this cost?' It was the same with the rucksack.
So I lied and halved the price again, they still thought that was a fortune and it was clear that they had no idea about relative costs of living or exchange rates.
Other group-members, unwisely IMO, had come in new clothes so they had to put up with even more interrogation.
Our guides also displayed an intense dislike of the Roma - Costin's lip would curl as he said `They are geep-sees'. Talk about Racism.
I concluded that there was a view that foreigners were rich and that they were entitled to help themselves to what we had.
I couldn't relax until we were out of Romanian airspace. Never again. We did meet some decent, hardworking, honest people but concluded that anyone smartly dressed has got their money by dubious means. Transylvania gave me my fill of `undeveloped' places.
It wasn't until Romania (other former Warsaw pact counties as well) joined the EU that Victoria Coach Station in London had to take serious action against luggage thieves by installing a curtain of water through which arriving buses had to pass.
VCS was the usual arrival point for passengers travelling cheaply overland from the east and they'd identified an opportunity lurk outside then dash in and grab bags as the driver unloaded the hold but before passengers could get there.
Of course, all this talk of future travel is hypothetical - our local airport is silent. I'd love to go to Guernsey again but I'm a rotten sailor - mal de mer... Flying's the only way for me and the regional airline that flew the route has gone bust, thanks to the virus.
So, what price Travalyst?
I've been to western Ireland twice - in 1968 and in 2010, when I spoke to an old gentleman in Lisdoonvarna and said how disappointed I was with the Cliffs of Moher now. The first time, I went with a friend and I recall having this wonderful location to ourselves - the wild Atlantic and the drama of the cliffs themselves made a deep and lasting impression on me.
The next time - oh dear. Huge car & coach park, massive visitors' centre and a massive stone wall snaking along the clifftop to prevent suicides from jumping. The atmosphere had been destroyed.
The old gentleman's opinion? `They should have left it as God made it.'
As for the Ring of Kerry, one takes one's life in one's hands on that road - the buses give no quarter. Incidentally, in '68 I was there at the `peak' of the tourist season, in 2010 it was right at the start of the season. Perhaps November would be the right time now?
Poor lad was covered in confusion and embarrassment when he realised that HM had heard.
She turned to him, smiled, and said something like, `Don't worry about it. Remember, I'm married to a sailor and I've heard it all before!'
@WildBoar
I was housed in a converted shed,
part of the municipal buildings.
Wonderful tiled fireplace that gave good heat.
Water was turned off for much of the day.
It had a bathroom of sorts, left the plug in the bath
and tap on to gather water when it was on.
Took our own dried food, relied on new volunteers
to supply top ups.
I did six weeks, pity the poor souls in the orphanage,
and the old peoples home up the road.
Hell on Earth
On another note, I've just seen this quotedmin OK! - I never read it and am not sure it's very reliable:
new! magazine's insider says the royal couple are at loggerheads, with Harry keen for Meghan to “make amends” with her former pal – but she’s refusing to back down. With Meghan, 38, said to be feeling lonely in Los Angeles, where she’s staying at Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry’s mega mansion with her hubby and their 14-month-old son Archie, new's insider says Harry is eager to defuse the situation for her own good.
“Harry has urged his wife to make amends with Jessica and at least talk to her in a bid to thaw the ice,” new! magazine's mole claimed. “He doesn’t want her to add to her already heavy burden caused by fallouts with other friends and family members.”
.....
“Meghan doesn’t agree with Harry’s advice and they are split on how to handle the situation, which seems to be causing tension between them, too,” the insider claimed.
So Megsy is feeling lonely in LA? I thought that's where she wanted to be? Where are her friends? Are they going to decamp somewhere else?
And there are tensions between her & H? I wonder if this is to prepare the ground for an eventual split. Trouble in paradise??
Prince Harry 'is a much less intelligent character' than Meghan Markle and 'goes along with whatever she says' because he's 'desperate to please his wife', according to Lady Colin Campbell.
She said that the Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 38, who are currently living with their son Archie, one, in LA, 'have a very strong relationship' but that Meghan wears the trousers because her husband is 'besotted with her'.
MM definitely wears the trousers! Not sure about a 'very strong relationship', though...
Welcome.
I agree, Philip would not have been an easy father.
He had a harsh upbringing, no real home till
he married.
Charles I feel, was a hands on dad,
but often absent, working.
@Maneki
Megs has been knock knock
knocking on hollywood heavens door,
they aint letting her in!
Looks like Harry is going down, again..
Harry and his strange quiddities
adds more to his many perfidities
Known for deceit
Whilst he nuzzles the teat
of those that still finance his treacheries
Thanks!
@Maneki
That's an interesting leak, if true. But then who leaked it? On the one hand, I see how it bolster's Meg's "woke" cred: It further distances her from Jessica's scandal, while simultaneously throwing Harry under the bus. Even the mention of the "fallout" with family and friends reinforces the victim narrative.
On the other hand (and this was my first reaction), this also shows her as a ruthless ghoster -- with Harry coming across as more human and sympathetic. Dare I see this as foreshadowing of Harry reaching out to alienated family and friends? Perhaps after Meg ghosts him?
I'd have given anything for standard dried rations! You were spared the tiny hard cheeses and the sausages that one of our party swore were `case-hardened.' We became very aware of how animals suffer there but the human suffering we didn't see must have been far, far, worse.
We still felt we were under surveillance. The on-street money-changers in Bucharest seemed to be in cahoots with the police. Two of our number were tailed by the police on our last morning and then intercepted.
They were two chaps travelling without partners, one was a widower, the other's girlfriend had been booked but had dropped out because of illness. At the hotel, they were asked if they minded sharing a room - no big deal, we'd all been bedding down together in the huts.
They declined the offer of female companionship when a `lady' knocked on their door, not that they realised that she was be `working' in league with Reception!
I think their refusal of the entertainment marked them out and they were reported as gays, not that it was illegal to be one, but to be active attracted severe penalties. That's why I think they were followed and propositioned, again unsuccessfully, by another `lady' next morning, finally stopped by the police and relieved of their cash. Had they resisted, I think they could have disappeared.
When they told out guides what had happened, they were not believed. Guides swore nothing like it had ever happened before (as if!) Likewise they refused to believe that we'd had to get out of a difficult situation too.
I hope things are better nowadays, as it all made for a very uncomfortable trip.
I have a lot of respect for PP. His mother was deaf but was able to read lips in four languages (Greek, English, French and Russian). Impressive.
He didn't have an easy childhood. It would have been tough being one of his kids.
Welcome to the blog!
I don't know who leaked the info in new! magazine reproduced in OK!. The article says 'a source' and 'new! magazine's mole'. Interesting if true, as you say. The 'source' is very often none other that MM herself... And yes, she is a ruthless ghoster, as you say. Maybe Harry has been ghosted...
Yes, Meg has been knocking on doors. According to the article I quotes, she's been feeling lonely. Where are her friends, then? Maybe she's trying to find a generous friend to let her have his/her mansion for her birthday? I think we can safely say Balmoral is out of bounds, covid or not. Perhaps the Queen will bake a cake and have it delivered?
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2013/dec/03/princesses-elizabeth-margaret-pantomime
In the Grauniad - amazing
Countries that are cruel to animals are cruel to people. And vice versa. Former Soviet block was one of the cruelest regimes in the world, Communist China too. I wonder if Travelyst understands that hell holes of the world will take a lot of development and billions in investments before people will actually want to go there.
If I were an investor i would not want to invest into a dictatorship or a corrupt country.
Travalyst is either a poorly thought through do goodie or just another search engine.
There is a new Toronto Paper up as well.
--------
Sounds sinister but the idea that such a place as that referred to here exists is highly questionable - dismissed as a false report by other sites.
Thank you Nutties, for all the wonderful thoughts on Phillip. I love to hear what you all have to say about the RF. That's why I am here. It's nice to compare notes!
@Hikari I agree completely E &P's love story has been "epic" What a great way to describe it. I too admire the great commitment they have held on to for all these years. Their commitment to each other and to the throne/family has been the glue for that family over the past trying decades. IMO that is. That is why it is so appalling that H&M skipped out on the family and put them in one of the worst disgraces of the century. I have come to feel it's even worse than the Wallis and David show though the abdication was a horror no doubt. Meghan makes Wallis look like a Sunday school teacher and a fashion icon in one throw! Lol. Yes, nothing but the deepest of respect for Sir Tom Moore and his generation of a dying breed of men...hats off to them.
@Magatha Mistie, @Teasmade, @abbyh, @Enbrethiliel,
I so agree PP was not the easiest father. I suppose he felt he had to toughen up his children less they be coddled since he had it so tough in his childhood. As @Teasmade put it, I will paraphrase: what happened to Andrew, is certainly the big question..??? Anyone know if the time line shows that was when he was caught up in affairs (as the gossip goes anyway)?
@ Teasmade I so agree that PP is the type of man that does not suffer a fool and is outspoken. He always had that ability to cut through BS not just now as an old person. I am getting there now as a younger senior. I cut through BS more now than before. Ha! And your line that Anne raised herself. Bravo! What a line! If anyone could raise themselves, it would be Anne!
@Magatha Mistie, thanks for your poems. I enjoy them! :)
@abbyh,
Great thoughts on PP's mother. She was known to be a bit of a mystic and sometimes they are not the most sound of mind as they get a lot of messages that most cannot understand. I agree! She was very intelligent in many ways. She was a kind old gal I understand. It must have been hard for Phillip to have such an esoteric mother, especially in those days.
@Enbrethiliel,
I too absolutely refuse to believe Phillip had anything to do with Diana's death. For one thing he loves his grandsons and his son. Why put them through that? He had a very Orthodox upbringing and if it's anything like mine the mental mother and father stay in your brain making it difficult to do bad things (not to mention the clergy!). I just do not think PP was and is a sociopath. He would have had to have been one to do that to his daughter in law in light of his commitment to his family. It makes no logical sense.
I love, love, love your description of P. Chas. and the Narnia wardrobe! True. :D"But he can't have been an easy father to have, at least where his sons were concerned. If I were a child in the BRF, I'd want Prince William for a father and Prince Philip for a grandfather. (Prince Charles can squeeze in there as the eccentric philosopher uncle with a passion for gardening. Of all of them, he'd be the most likely to own a wardrobe that sometimes leads to Narnia.)"
Part two coming soon.
IN TOUCH magazine
Tara Reid Says She ‘Loves’ Meghan Markle and Wants Her to Star in Her Movie: ‘I Think We’d Get On’
NEWS
May 20, 2020 1:37 pm
By Sam Silverman
Exclusive
Talk about an iconic duo! Tara Reid says she “” Meghan Markle and wants her to star in her new horror movie Masha’s Mushroom. “I think we’d really get on,” the Sharknado actress exclusively tells In Touch of her potential friendship with the Suits alum.
“One of my first offers for Masha’s Mushroom was to Meghan,” the blonde beauty, 44, reveals, adding that the former royal, 38, is “producing a bunch of stuff” as well. “I was on the phone to her agent trying to get her in the movie, trying to find out the price,” she says. However, Prince Harry’s wife is one busy gal.
“We could afford the price, that wasn’t a problem at all, but her agent was like ‘Tara, she’s booked,’ but that was before quarantine,” the Big Lebowski star says, referring to the coronavirus pandemic. “Who knows, things may have changed? I’m going to put an offer out to her again.”
Tara, who is teaming up with Vivica A. Fox for the new film, has been working on her movie project while in lockdown. “It looks pretty good,” the American Pie alum reveals. “We have the finance and I think Universal will distribute so we’re in good shape with that one. We’ve done all the pre-production.”
While Tara has been utilizing her time in quarantine to work on “business” for her movie, she admits social isolation with her boyfriend, Nathan Montpetit-Howar, has been “tough” as they both struggle to adjust to their new normal. “It is a make or break kind of thing because you’re always together and we argue because there’s no break, but we’re getting through it,” she explains.
[SEE HOW MEGHAN MARKLE'S STYLE CHANGED ONCE SHE MET AND MARRIED HARRY]
During this time, Tara is also participating in a campaign called “Love & Hope” created by artist Narine Arakelian. With the hashtag #LoveXXL360, the artist aims to donate N95 masks to hospitals in exchange for celebrity social media posts. The program is using the proceeds to help families who are struggling amid the coronavirus pandemic.
“I just hope everyone stays safe and strong and try any way they can to be happy,” Tara says. “A According 2Taz of people are lonely at this time, so I hope people reach out to each other and check-in.”
--END--
So,a role in Masha Mushroom co-starring with the star of Sharknado, which was Tara's comeback vehicle to Z list statusa few years back
I recall reading some time ago, that Harry was angry over something that happened between the brothers when they were at school together. Although Harry was a few years behind his brother I think he expected to be included in William's circle of friends and to be protected by his older brother. I also read that although William was popular in school, Harry was not as socially successful. I think he harbors some sort of grudge over this.
Ah, the 'failure to protect' theme stretches way back before Megsy. Damn if she didn't just find the *perfect* patsy for herself! Harry is just like Meghan in so many ways. They are a perfect storm of entitled, selfish, weak, greedy attitude.
I wonder if Harry's grievances were from the Eton years, or even earlier. Boys go to Eton at 12, 13 years of age, so if Harry's still cheesed off at something that happened when he was 8 or 9, he's been holding grudges for a very long time. His expectation that he could glom onto his brother's 'circle of friends' and shadow William entirely at school was not dealing in reality. The boys are 2 years and 4 months apart. Wills has a summer birthday and Harry's is in September. Depending on when their terms started, William may have been three classes above Harry at school. The grade levels don't mix like that. Each would have to stay with his year for classes and activities. And beyond that, William couldn't dictate to his friends, at 15, 16, that they *had* to include his 12, 13 year old brother and furthermore, *like* him.
The more we learn about Harry, the worse it gets, really. We always knew he struggled academically, but also knew (we thought) that he was a lad's lad, with plenty of friends, and excelling at sports. Guys like Tom Inskip, Guy Pelly, the von Staubenzees . . Harry's posse, all rugger mates from Eton. Weren't they? Or was this just more PR gloss? Because it always seemed like Harry had plenty of friends, and furthermore, could handle himself physically, so why would he need to cower behind William and need William's friend circle?
This sounds exactly like it must have been when they were small boys: "William, let Harry into the sandbox with you. Let him have the truck, there's a good boy. (Harry crying) . . All right, just let him have all the toys. When you're King you can buy more toys."
Harry has been William's burden his entire life. A load that will continue deep into the future. All my sympathies in this situation are with the Cambridges. They are the ones who are going to be left with the messes their grandparents and their father's generation has left for them.
Thanks!
@Pink Peony
What happened to Prince Andrew? Someone recently pointed out to me that he and Prince Harry have something really significant in common and it's not that they have been "spares." It is that their parentage has been called into question for years. That can contribute to making one feel like an outsider, even if one really isn't. That Prince Harry now resembles a young version of his paternal grandfather is a blessing. I haven't heard anyone dredge up James Hewitt in a while. The Lord Porchester story, on the other hand, persists.
@Magatha Mistie, @Maneki Neko,
Yes so good to see Price Phillip out and about looking refreshed for a change. It was worrisome for awhile there. I suppose he is relieved and came out of hiding once the witch left for L.A.? Lol...I know I would have gone incognito too. Yikes!
@Wild Boar Battle Maid,
Sad but true what the elderly Irish gentleman said about the decline of his country. The tourism has had much to do with the last of the Ireland the old folks remember, as is true with many cultures. In the Covid free future, I would avoid going to Ireland during top tourist season. If so, tt's always best to stay with someone you know there and not do the tours. I would especially avoid the main spots and Ring Of Kerry is one of the worst! November is certainly cheaper but very cold. Heck it's cold in July especially in the North. Unless someone really has a dream of seeing the Skelligs, spring and summer are too crowded but necessary to actually get to the outpost because the waters are very choppy and not often mild during colder days.
I got a larf off of the story on the workers cussing not realizing TQ was present. Like the trooper she is, she had a cute, cheeky response. That's one of her traits that makes her so lovable IMO.
Oh dear. I hope I got everyone's comment straight or haven't forgotten anyone. So many nice thoughts on Phillip. I'm not feeling well right now so I am not clear headed in all the many posts. We are in a pandemic and now is the time my body decides to give me an outbreak of shingles! I'm extra tired right now so I'll say good day Nutties. Hugs to all :)
Tara Reid, aye? I can't imagine Meghan being happy with the association.
Particularly devastating, I think, is the line: "We could afford the price; that was no problem at all . . ."
And, "How does Meg manage to find celebrities to grift favors from? Does she spend all day from morning to night working the phones and hitting the rose?"
As an ENFJ, yes, that's all she does.
Viewing fame and notoriety as exactly the same is, to me, a very blatant sign of profound mental disturbance. The inability to distinguish between positive and negative attention is not the conduct of a well-adjusted person. I see you are a student of Myers-Briggs, as am I. I'm not sure we can correctly type someone via this scale who suffers from pervasive, multi-layered mental disorders. We're all armchair shrinks when it comes to Meg, but a normal person would not have behaved as chaotically and destructively as she has. The only thing consistent about her is her knack for creating anarchy, pain and confusion.
There's plenty of anecdotal evidence suggesting that MM likely suffers from a combination of these:
*Narcissistic Personality Disorder
*Histronic Personality Disorder: Like Borderline, with an enhanced nyphomaniac element
*Bipolar Disorder: characterized by profound mood swings between mania & depression
There's a lot of anecdotal/visual evidence as well that she & Harry indulge in controlled substances, based on their appearance/demeanor at various engagements.
I'd throw in Body Dysmorphia as well, given her extensive plastic surgery and other extreme attempts to appear Caucasian. She's skirting Michael Jackson territory now.
The idea of Meggy as an ENFJ is interesting. I'm going to unpack that in the next post.
Protagonists are natural-born leaders, full of passion and charisma. Forming around two percent of the population, they are oftentimes our politicians, our coaches and our teachers, reaching out and inspiring others to achieve and to do good in the world. With a natural confidence that begets influence, Protagonists take a great deal of pride and joy in guiding others to work together to improve themselves and their community.
People are drawn to strong personalities, and Protagonists radiate authenticity, concern and altruism, unafraid to stand up and speak when they feel something needs to be said. They find it natural and easy to communicate with others, especially in person, and their Intuitive (N) trait helps people with the Protagonist personality type to reach every mind, be it through facts and logic or raw emotion. Protagonists easily see people’s motivations and seemingly disconnected events, and are able to bring these ideas together and communicate them as a common goal with an eloquence that is nothing short of mesmerizing.
The interest Protagonists have in others is genuine, almost to a fault – when they believe in someone, they can become too involved in the other person’s problems, place too much trust in them. Luckily, this trust tends to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, as Protagonists’ altruism and authenticity inspire those they care about to become better themselves. But if they aren’t careful, they can overextend their optimism, sometimes pushing others further than they’re ready or willing to go.
Continues . . .
WEAKNESSES:
Overly Idealistic – People with the Protagonist personality type can be caught off guard as they find that, through circumstance or nature, or simple misunderstanding, people fight against them and defy the principles they’ve adopted, however well-intentioned they may be. They are more likely to feel pity for this opposition than anger, and can earn a reputation of naïveté.
Too Selfless – Protagonists can bury themselves in their hopeful promises, feeling others’ problems as their own and striving hard to meet their word. If they aren’t careful, they can spread themselves too thin, and be left unable to help anyone.
Too Sensitive – While receptive to criticism, seeing it as a tool for leading a better team, it’s easy for Protagonists to take it a little too much to heart. Their sensitivity to others means that Protagonists sometimes feel problems that aren’t their own and try to fix things they can’t fix, worrying if they are doing enough.
Fluctuating Self-Esteem – Protagonists define their self-esteem by whether they are able to live up to their ideals, and sometimes ask for criticism more out of insecurity than out of confidence, always wondering what they could do better. If they fail to meet a goal or to help someone they said they’d help, their self-confidence will undoubtedly plummet.
Struggle to Make Tough Decisions – If caught between a rock and a hard place, Protagonists can be stricken with paralysis, imagining all the consequences of their actions, especially if those consequences are humanitarian.
I recognize a little bit of Meg here, mostly the negative stuff. The positive aspects of the Protagonist personality are definitely how she WANTS to be perceived, and that's what her relentless PR is trying to create.
There's a fine line between 'optimistic' and 'delusional', for instance. This is who Meg wants to be, but this aspirational wonderfulness is not her reality, because her Narcissism is so deeply embedded in her in overrides any other impulses. She is ALL about 'MeGain First' . . the very opposite of the philanthropist humanitarian she's pretending to be. I would be willing to lay a bet that Meg has visited this site or one like it when she was constructing her 'brand' back in college and picked this one. This sounds like a script she's been reading from, but since it's not authentic to her, that becomes more and more obvious over time that she's faking it.
I doubt Meghan ever received much-needed mental support therapy as a younger person, but if she did, I doubt her temperamental assessment was this glowing. There may be a number of troubling incidents in her school files we will never be privy to. I think any competent therapist would smell a case of NPD walking in. Those are entirely resistant to treatment, so Meg's never going to change. Certainly not into the vision of humanitarianism, and caring charismatic leadership that she's currently trying to hawk so that people will send her money.
Reportedly she was determined that Will and Harry be treated the same within the RF. I understand a mother would not want to see one son favored over the other. I get that. But she also supposedly called him "Good King Harry." That goes beyond eschewing favoritism to creating a false equivalency.
It's natural for there to be some competition between sibs, of course. And I'm sure it's worse where first sons have added "institutional" advantages over second sons. But by insisting Will and Harry have essentially the same role within the extended family, that likely made it worse.
I don't get the feeling Harry was ever really encouraged to develop his own strengths independently of Will when he was a child. So Harry was set up to fail. Will was older so he would be better than Harry at all kinds of things, Will was more adept in traditional school subjects, and whether it was talked about all the time or not, Will was going to be King.
It's also pretty astonishing Harry's learning disability (if he has one) was not diagnosed. I mean, he was born in the mid-1980s, not the 1950s. LD testing was hardly "rocket science" in the 1980s.
Anne knew she'd never be Queen and it seems to me she was able to develop her interests more fully because she wasn't treated the same as Charles. Of course, being female made it easier to treat her differently.
Yes that Porchy rumor has been revived I think due to The Crown and Harry as you know rumored to be the son of Hewitt which I do not believe. He's a Mountbatten/Windsor through and through. I agree he's the spit of Phillip though Phillip was a bit better looking and Monumentally more tasteful in his choice of a wife!
I also feel Andrew and Harry, for some God awful reason, are spoiled brats. I wish I knew a least a resemblance of an answer of what the hell formed those two brats. Lol.
(I love the York girls though. They are coming out pretty good. And Archie, well my mental jury is out on that one. He's the big mystery of the RF but La Markle likes it like that, the weirdo. Ha! I feel for the poor kid if he exists).
Any ideas what formed the anomalies in Harry and Andrew, Nutties?
There were articles that Meg had offers but didn’t want to lower herself. I imagine she views Tara as a bygone and one of those
Projects. So the agent rejecting Tara claiming Meghan was completely booked is nonsense. Clearly Meghan is doing nothing, and now Tara sees this and is being a bit petulant lol. Good. Funny even.
I think Megs should do the Tara film. That’s where she belongs in that world.
There are a lot of children that feel entitled to anything they want without putting forth any actual effort towards it even if they aren't royal and live in a castle. (I blame Dr. Spock.) My oldest, for example, begged to trade in the beater truck that he was driving for a brand new truck that he would make the payments on (he was 17 at the time). We, as parents, were doubtful, but pointed out that he would have to pay the insurance, too. As soon as he got the truck, he started missing payments. He told us that since we were rich, we could make the payments because he didn't know how expensive the insurance would be once he got a couple speeding tickets. Oh, really? He wanted to make his behavior my problem? Bad move. (He was not raised like that and really should have known better.)
I did make the payments. I also took the keys and the truck. I pointed out that if I were going to pay for it with my money (that I worked very hard for) then it was my truck. Whenever he felt like being a responsible person and earned enough money, he would pay cash for whatever used truck he could afford and keep the insurance current. In the meantime, I hoped he liked riding bicycles because I've got things to do.
That was a really nice 4WD truck with all the options. I sure did like it. I would have never paid that much for one if I weren't making a point because I hate to put money into a depreciating asset.
@KC
Tara Reid, aye? I can't imagine Meghan being happy with the association.
Particularly devastating, I think, is the line: "We could afford the price; that was no problem at all . . ."
________________________________
Yes, the bit about the price bothered me too! Maybe MM has had to lower her expectations - beggars can't be choosers - but wouldn't a horror film be beneath Madam?
Personally, I get really annoyed when I see in the press (usually in the comments - I'm not annoyed at you) mentions of Harry's parentage and also Andrew's. I don't think that either Diana, let alone the Queen, would have been stupid enough to get pregnant by somebody other than their husbands. In any case, Harry looks very much like Charles (eyes, nose), also Philip. Just because he's got red hair doesn't mean Hewitt is his father! It's not even the same shade of red. I remember seeing a photo of Harry some years ago when he was in the army, wearing a camouflage helmet. I thought it was an old photo of Charles.
Maybe both Andrew and Harry have been too indulged all their lives.
"There are a lot of children that feel entitled to anything they want without putting forth any actual effort towards it even if they aren't royal and live in a castle."
Exactly. Yet I'm wondering,about the spares who are granted the freedom from putting in any effort even though they *are Royal and living in castles. Is this what is causing their flakiness?
@Enbrethiliel said, "Someone recently pointed out to me that he and Prince Harry have something really significant in common and it's not that they have been "spares." It is that their parentage has been called into question for years. That can contribute to making one feel like an outsider, even if one really isn't"
It's an interesting question. Perhaps they felt as outsiders because they doubted their parentage. Perhaps they felt cheated because they were the spares, but perhaps they struggled because they *were the spares and had more freedom. What has caused Harry and Andrew to be dysfunctional, when Charles, William are solid blokes even though they carry a massive load on their shoulders and the younger brothers are allowed to be happy flakes? Example: The Crown took liberties by depicting Charles as NOT wanting to do the investiture but he knew he had to and did it even though the thought of it bothered him. IRL the brothers could say nay I'm not doing that and walk away. Charles and William could not. When David (a Monarch!) tried it and did it (walked away), he was dust. It really is an interesting question that warrants analyzing if anyone in interested in doing that. It may be too much along the lines of how many angels can stand on the head of a pin? Lol :)
She seems to echo what has passed through my mind - it's a scam to benefit the H$Ms. Just speculation - but what do Nutties think?
"I don't think that either Diana, let alone the Queen, would have been stupid enough to get pregnant by somebody other than their husbands"
I get annoyed too why the ongoing questions about those two and who the real fathers are. It seems evident that it is who they are. Charles and Phillip.
I read Enbrethiliel's comment as she is thinking on the commonality of Harry and Andrew. I think I expounded on as to why they are so different than their brothers the heirs. What makes the spares problematic when they are "spared" excuse the pun, the big load of responsibility of the Throne?
Sorry E if I unknowingly hijacked your comment!
I agree that certainly the Queen would not have allowed herself to be pregnant and carry a baby from another man! She's been much too dutiful to do such a foolish thing. Plus she has always adored Phillip. It's so obvious he's her one and only. Even though I loved the beautiful man who took me to the Skelligs years ago, if he came into my life today, I'd have to pay him dust because the love of my life is in the here and now and he's the one who is my person, my penquin. Phillip is TQ's person, so I can't see the Porchy thing even if she cared for him.
Diana and Charles are a whole nother show.. I think the Hewitt thing has been disproved over the years and yes Harry often looks more and more like Charles as he ages. all just IMO. :)
You are on fire today!
I'm seriously impressed with your poetic acumen. I enjoy poetry but my brain doesn't work easily in that form. I'm more of a novelist . .(rimshot)
This is one of your best. Double chip Frappacino for this one:
Harry and his strange quiddities
adds more to his many perfidities
Known for deceit
Whilst he nuzzles the teat
of those that still finance his treacheries
The scandal goes much deeper as there was a foundation which was administering the charity, and they were more involved in other activities, etc. I don't want to bore you with the details.
I was interested in the "Canadian scandal" and did some googling. I see the finance minister is in hot water for not repaying C$41,000 for trips he and his family took with the WE foundation to Kenya and to Ecuador. From a Bloomberg article:
"Morneau said he wasn’t aware he had incurred the expenses at the time, and only realized the “error” after a recent review of the trips."
I guess that's how it can work. Take your family on two overseas trips and "not realize" you incurred expenses. Hmmm. Guess that's why foundations need oversight!
Re: Harry Markle on Travalyst
Agreed! looks like yet another scam attempt to persuade people out of "donations" and to try to make H&M look like they are doing good for the tourist community. AKA a nothing burger.
SMH...
OOOhh this is getting juicy. I hope it blows open the Soho House money laundering (and more) BS that MM, JM and MA have been involved in for quite some time. That Justin ne'Castro is involved says volumes. The doo doo is about to hit the fan but JM had to go down first.
Just speculating ;)
Thanks for the scoop!
Yes. I agree with your whole post Harry & Andrew).
Fascinating re the latest Trudeau scandal re We Charity and SoHo house. I had seen an article about this million dollar contract, but no mention of SoHo house.
Harry and Meghan attended a big WE event last year and there is a picture of them with the WE founders-- placed prominently on the WE website. In fact the first picture on the website, I believe. I wonder if there are any links between the WE charity and the Harkles 'charities.' Meghan and Trudeau's wife are supposedly friends, are they not?
Trudeau always has struck me as do as I say, not as I do type of guy. But, that is my perspective slightly south of the 49th parallel.
While it's a bit unfair to blame a dead woman, we've blamed everybody else for Harry's issues so---I think some issues relate to Diana.
Now that we know Diana more fully posthumously, rather than the saintly image the press helped her cultivate while she was alive, we can see all the ways in which her now-adult youngest is like her. Unfortunately, most of those ways are all negative. Harry used to have an easy smile and a jocular manner with the press and public, but now I'm wondering if it wasn't all a bit of an act, aided and abetted by Palace PR. Harry has gotten a lot of mileage and forgiveness for his screw-ups for being that poor little bereaved boy walking behind his mum's cortege, but as much as my heart broke for that boy, the fact is he's grown up into an insufferable tool. And worse, if his shenanigans with his wife are criminal and damaging to the monarchy.
If William has gotten the best of both his parents, then I fear Harry got all the worst. Diana's neuroticism & learning difficulties mixed with his father's (perceived) lack of initiative and problems with confidence. Harry's got the addictive personality as well; seems like he was set up to fail by not only his upbringing--spoilt, with no expectations put upon him--with his own intrinsic traits. A struggle all 'round.
Reportedly she was determined that Will and Harry be treated the same within the RF. I understand a mother would not want to see one son favored over the other. I get that. But she also supposedly called him "Good King Harry." That goes beyond eschewing favoritism to creating a false equivalency.
It's natural for there to be some competition between sibs, of course. And I'm sure it's worse where first sons have added "institutional" advantages over second sons. But by insisting Will and Harry have essentially the same role within the extended family, that likely made it worse.
Diana didn't do Harry any favors in the long run by creating, if inadvertently, jealousy and bitterness in her second-born over what his brother would have that he wouldn't. Rather than try to equate H. fruitlessly with an heir, he needed guidance to another path, which we thought was the Army, but he turned out to be a disaster at that, too.
He never should have been sent to Eton to compete there in William's shadow. The top prep school in the country was a place he was certain to feel inadequate. Charles had a terrible time at Gordonstoun and was adamant that his sons would go to Eton--possibly the only time he stood up to Dad--but Eton was not the best fit for both his sons. If they were eyeing the Army for Harry, he should have been sent to Gordonstoun. They might have molded him into officer material. By the time he slid into Sandhurst with sub-par scores, it was too late. I think it was at Sandhurst that he called fellow squaddies racial slurs.
If Harry had been groomed from very early into a Commonwealth ambassador role, and steered to the Navy rather than the army, it might have turned out very differently. His learning disabilities may be so severe that he was never going to succeed to the level people expected of him.
Anne knew she'd never be Queen and it seems to me she was able to develop her interests more fully because she wasn't treated the same as Charles. Of course, being female made it easier to treat her differently.
Being Daddy's presumptive favorite child probably helped. Anne has been blessed with her father's temperament, and his self-confidence. Charles is more like Mummy. What a shame they can't reign as a double act .. together they'd make one whole sovereign.
Harry should have been a girl, and it probably would have been better all around. Even if he'd been equally dumb as a girl, they could have probably gotten her married off to a European aristocrat with money. Best of all for us, no Markle.
Can you imagine if Meghan ever got her hands on some serious cash like that?
@Unknown who said . .
I recall reading some time ago, that Harry was angry over something that happened between the brothers when they were at school together. Although Harry was a few years behind his brother I think he expected to be included in William's circle of friends and to be protected by his older brother. I also read that although William was popular in school, Harry was not as socially successful. I think he harbors some sort of grudge over this.
Ah, the 'failure to protect' theme stretches way back before Megsy. Damn if she didn't just find the *perfect* patsy for herself! Harry is just like Meghan in so many ways. They are a perfect storm of entitled, selfish, weak, greedy attitude.
I wonder if Harry's grievances were from the Eton years, or even earlier. Boys go to Eton at 12, 13 years of age, so if Harry's still cheesed off at something that happened when he was 8 or 9, he's been holding grudges for a very long time. His expectation that he could glom onto his brother's 'circle of friends' and shadow William entirely at school was not dealing in reality. The boys are 2 years and 4 months apart. Wills has a summer birthday and Harry's is in September. Depending on when their terms started, William may have been three classes above Harry at school. The grade levels don't mix like that. Each would have to stay with his year for classes and activities. And beyond that, William couldn't dictate to his friends, at 15, 16, that they *had* to include his 12, 13 year old brother and furthermore, *like* him.
The more we learn about Harry, the worse it gets, really. We always knew he struggled academically, but also knew (we thought) that he was a lad's lad, with plenty of friends, and excelling at sports. Guys like Tom Inskip, Guy Pelly, the von Staubenzees . . Harry's posse, all rugger mates from Eton. Weren't they? Or was this just more PR gloss? Because it always seemed like Harry had plenty of friends, and furthermore, could handle himself physically, so why would he need to cower behind William and need William's friend circle?
This sounds exactly like it must have been when they were small boys: "William, let Harry into the sandbox with you. Let him have the truck, there's a good boy. (Harry crying) . . All right, just let him have all the toys. When you're King you can buy more toys."
..................................
@Hikari
I think what I read was in reference to their time at Eton. I recall reading about it in more than one place online but don't remember the exact details. I *think* it had to do with the time period when Hazza first started at Eton. I'll try to see if I can find it again as it was very interesting.
I do think Harry ended up being popular with a large group of friends but he may not have been as successful as William was at meeting Eton's various acknowledgments of achievement in standards even outside the academics.
I also seem to remember seeing what I had read confirmed by Harry in a documentary when he made a couple of comments to his brother about their time at Eton. He was joking but seemed whiney about it and William did not look too pleased.
Do any of the other Nutties recall any stories about Harry complaining about William at Eton?
A billion would not be enough for Harkle, she would want more!
Keep us posted on these developments!
That only confirms that Harry should have been sent to Gordonstoun. A hale and hearty program of athletics & physical and mental toughness. Pragmatic curriculum with an eye toward turning out soldiers, not academics. All the way up in rugged Scotland, Harry could have been the only Wales enrolled and not had an upperclassman brother-future King on campus, casting his shadow.
If William was hands-off with Harry, it's probably because he didn't *want* to be accused of favoring his brother or smoothing his way because of who he was. Other sibs would regard that as interference/intrusion. I would bet 100 pounds that that's exactly what Harry thought when he was 14 years old, but with the passage of time, he's decided to make himself a hair shirt and find 'wounds' and 'injustices' in the light of hindsight. Egged on by his wife.
Eton's various acknowledgments of achievement in standards even outside the academics
Things like honor code, integrity, sportsmanship, not calling fellow students racial epithets? We know that he (in collusion with his father, likely) railroaded a teacher into cheating for him on his art project. Also that he was busted for underage drinking and smoking marijuana while at Eton, habits he picked up the summer before he started school at 13 years old.
In the wake of his mother's death, Harry needed to be sent to a nurturing residential program for survivors of trauma, not thrown to the wolves in an uber-competitive boarding school, with all its hazing rituals and emphasis on the stiff upper. The mess we see before us now is the product of benign neglect. He needed intensive remedial tutoring for his academic difficulties and intensive therapy for his issues of depression, rage and self-hate, underneath. He didn't get any of that, so he was easy, bleeding prey for an opportunistic grifter.
But his cries of victimhood at school ring hollow. My money's on Haz being the bully, rather than the bullied. Because what could his targets do about it? He was a prince.
A biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex dubbed by Palace insiders 'the gospel according to Harry and Meghan' is set to plunge relations with the Royal Family to a new low.
Sources believe the 'resentful' couple will use the book – extracts from which will be seen for the first time this weekend – to 'settle scores'.
.....
Harry and Meghan claim they were 'spectacularly unsupported' by what they have described as the 'institution of the monarchy', and it is expected that senior staff will be in their firing line.
'Regardless of the truth, it will make headlines worldwide and give a fulsome airing to the Sussexes' long list of grievances, yet again,' one well-placed figure said.
Another source told the Mail that they had been warned to expect a 'revisionist' version of events concerning their engagement, marriage and brief spell as working royals.
'It's going to be the gospel according to Meghan and Harry, so to speak,' they said. 'Everything that has happened in terms of Megxit will be seen through the prism of their take on events.
Can they sink any lower?
Meanwhile, The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have launched a £1.8million fund to provide grief trauma counselling and support for more than 250,000 emergency workers affected by coronavirus. Which is more than H&M have done. Bet MM is fuming she didn't think of something similar.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8554437/Harry-Meghan-biography-plunge-relations-Royal-Family-new-low-sources-say.html
My thought is that although it will be a time they will use to settle scores, the round is not over yet. We won't be there at the annual review of Megexit but I would bet money that it is already penciled in the agenda.
Harry and Meghan sue unnamed paparazzi for photos of Archie at home
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2020-07-23/harry-and-meghan-sue-paparazzi-after-photos-of-archie-at-home%3f_amp=true
Royals were not immune to bullying, no. Among upper class males in particular, hazing at school appears to be a rite of passage, and being Royal doesn’t insulate one. This is why until very recently in the scheme of things, the nobility was always privately tutored at home so they wouldn’t have to mix with, and be attacked by, their social inferiors. In the 20th century they began to mingle with their commoner peers in regular schools. Where there seems to have been an unspoken agreement to not coddle the highborn, But to let them take their lumps along with everyone else as a character building exercise. I’m sure children of American presidents have experienced the same. Charles was an exceptionally sensitive boy, shy and artistic. I think he thrived at Cambridge, where he joined the dramatic society and was able to find some like-minded fellow students. He likely would have been hazed anywhere he attended as a prep school student, but he and Uncle Dickie has been looking forward to his matriculation at Eton, just down the road from Windsor Castle. Philip’s insistence that he attend his alma mater Gordonstoun almost precipitated a crisis in the Royal marriage but Philip got his way, and the Queen had promised him autonomy over the children’s educations. Philip believed, with justification, that Charles needed toughening up if he was going to be King. Those were Hellish years for Charles, And tear soaked letters arrived home with regularity from Scotland to his granny and maybe his mother, I doubt he would have dared whine to Philip in print. This episode did cause permanent estrangement between father and son that endures to this day, but Charles stuck it out and I think it did to him good in the end. I think it took a lot of courage to endure, more than for a more easily athletic and outgoing boy.
I had always assumed before now that Harry had more of his grandfather’s Personality and talent for sport which would’ve made Gordonstoun an easier adjustment for him, but it appears I was wrong about that. But if he truly enjoyed the structure of army living, Gordons town is a junior version of that. If he’s telling the truth and not just blowing smoke, The appeal in army life would be in having his days regimented for him and all decisions about how he would spend his time also made for him. Haz Re-created his army days by rotating only two or three outfits for his entire wardrobe. By having so few clothes, he doesn’t have to make any decisions about what to wear. Unlike his dad, and his brother, Harry doesn’t give a toss what he looks like. He dresses like a penurious I university student at a state school Because most of his allowance is probably going up his nose or for video games rather than close so he can be decently turned out.
I have a feeling that Harry’s learning difficulties were never sufficiently addressed but rather swept under the carpet and he continually passed along because it was undesirable to admit publicly that a Royal was “defective”. Harry needed an IEP and a therapeutic gap year
After his mum’s death instead of rushing headlong into a school environment he was doomed to fail in.
A list Hollywood Directors are not beating down her door and she can’t merch Sussex Royal. Lawsuits or her proposed income stream. She’s filing left and right because she’s imagining hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. Having to actually be a persuasive witness improve her case in court...That part seems to have eluded her.
Oh, I forgot to mention that as they will be letting out extracts out this week end - could we please have a new post for that? and the first to spot links, please copy them for us?
thanking you in advance (and looking forward to the revisionist history about to be unfurrowed onto us).
That thought had occurred to me too!
Did you ever notice there are no pap pictures with Harry and Archie ?
Did you ever notice there are no pap pictures with MeMe and Archie where Archie's face is showing?
No pap pictures of Archie until AFTER Doria moved in?
I'm thinking this is MeMe bending the rules again. She isn't allowed to profit off of Archie but Doria can. And IIRC suing is how payment is made in some pap circles. Gives the illusion of violated privacy when in fact it was ordered.
And why does she always file suit, never Harry????
You're right that I'm looking for commonalities. Although I myself discount those rumors, there was a time when they seemed very plausible. Were they then rubbed in the young princes' faces by their respective peers? If so, how much of it would they have internalized? ("Well, everyone thinks I'm a bastard anyway, so I might as well . . .") And if they already felt too stifled in their older brothers' shadows, the "legend" of having a different father anyway may have sparked something in the imagination.
On the other hand, I may be barking up the wrong tree. Perhaps Prince Andrew and Just Harry have only superficial things in common and we can't really view their lives in parallel.
Nevertheless, thank goodness there isn't a whiff of scandal over Prince Louis's parentage!
(As for the York girls, I'm also really loving them! It's a shame that they aren't allowed to be take on the roles they were raised for. In the light of what I wrote above, it kind of makes me wonder how much of Prince Charles's plans to streamline the BRF is true strategic vision and how much is a point scored in an interfamily struggle that has spanned decades, with the poor York girls as collateral damage.)
Charles had sympathetic listeners and
readers though! The Queen Mother would helicopter over to Gordounston and take him to lunch where he poured out his woes. Lady Anne Glenconner said in her recent autobiography:
"Our connection to the Royal Family was close. When I was in my late teens, Prince Charles became like a younger brother to me, spending weeks with us all at Holkham. He would come to stay whenever he had any of the contagious childhood diseases, like chickenpox, because the Queen, having never gone to school, had not been exposed to them. Sixteen years younger than me, Prince Charles was nearer in age to my youngest sister Sarah, but all of us would go off to the beach together. My father taught him how to fish for eel in the lake, and when he got a bit older, my mother let him drive the Jaguar and the VW Mini Minor around the park, something he loved doing, sending great long thank-you letters telling her he couldn’t wait to return. He was such a kind and loving little boy and I’ve loved him ever since—the whole family have always been deeply fond of him."
"Prince Charles used to write long letters to my mother from Gordonstoun, saying how much he longed to come home and complaining of the endless weeks without a holiday: the longest term was fourteen weeks." (See above, grandmother hanging on his every word with a sympathetic gaze she was famous for, from about his eighth year.)
It really seems like his parents parked him on people a lot. He had a gap year at Timbertops in Australia, went there several months early to stay with somebody. Not family.
if he truly enjoyed the structure of army living, Gordons town is a junior version of that. If he’s telling the truth and not just blowing smoke, The appeal in army life would be in having his days regimented for him and all decisions about how he would spend his time also made for him. Haz Re-created his army days by rotating only two or three outfits for his entire wardrobe.
Yes Ken Wharfe who handled Diana's security for a few years said Harry was always begging him for a military task.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2020-07-23/harry-and-meghan-sue-paparazzi-after-photos-of-archie-at-home
I am still waiting for them to take photo's of the Choppers & drones constantly flying over their house for pics. They need to take those pics to prove it's happening. I sure would.
"It really seems like his parents parked him on people a lot. He had a gap year at Timbertops in Australia, went there several months early to stay with somebody. Not family."
That's interesting. Do you think it was a conscious parenting decision by his father and mother? It reminds me a little of fostering in the Middle Ages. (I believe the idea behind it was that children learn better manners in other people's houses . . . but now that I've typed that out, it sounds less medieval than Victorian!) Or were they either too busy or too uninterested to have Prince Charles around when he was a teenager?
https://www.tmz.com/2020/07/23/prince-harry-meghan-markle-lawsuit-paparazzi-photographer-archie-photos/
Not sure if this is the Doria/Archie photo's they are talking about or new photo's being shopped around (saying they were taken in Malibu).
Also claiming photogs have cut holes in the security fence to be able to see better??? Where's the pics of the holes cut? Are there not any security cameras at the residence?
@Hikari
Thank you, very much appreciated,
as are your intelligent, insightful posts. Cheers!
I saw your comments, thank you. We were sharing a brain wave at the same time! I think Charles had such a visceral reaction To Gordonstoun, He wouldn’t have entertained it for H. I can’t recall now if harry started at Eton The same here his mother died or the following year, but it might’ve been 97 because he would’ve been 13 by the time the fall term started. The royal family is the a pitta me of the British aesthetic to keep calm and carry-on. The queen displayed that the week after Diana’s death, and despite her construction speech to the world and her nation, she has not altered her opinion That duty and action are preferable to blubbering and laying around in cataloguing one’s miseries. Harry was likely already enrolled and sent off with the idea that a new school routine would help to take his mind off his grief. An additional pressure for Diana‘s boys was that they had to grieve publicly, and hardly a week has gone by in the last 23 years where someone does not invoke Diana to them. So they will never be allowed to get over this wound Of their childhood. But Harry’s mental damage seems a whole lot worse in the last year or two since Meg has been on the scene.
Like most eldest children, myself included, Charles always seemed to get on better with the adults around him then with his peers. He was praised for his impeccable manners, and Impressed a great many people Who met him; it’s his own parents who seem to rate him low. I guess it’s not a parents function to be impressed, but I’ve always thought they could’ve been more encouraging. Charles does not seem to have been able to impart too many manners to his younger son. That’s some hard and rocky ground there.
So, I don't think they sent Charles abroad to get rid of him.
Hikari, you don't mention how the Queen Mother tried to get between Charles and his parents. I think this is a very important point in his upbringing.
The father of a close friend since childhood was at Cambridge with Charles. He used to go on and on about how Charles was only there because of who he was. My friend’s father was at Cambridge on scholarship and brilliant. He considered Charles to be dull/ not particularly bright.
Diana for all her admirable qualities was not remotely academic. She had an abysmal school record.
I wouldn’t assume Harry has a learning disability. I’ve always assumed he wasn’t very bright or remotely academic. William clearly got the brains.
I think there’s something about second children and royal families. Edward and Anne were always too far removed from the throne to not be raised with the expectation of a different life then their oldest sibling. William, Charles and the Queen were being prepared from a young age for the throne and its responsibilities. Andrew, Harry and Margaret were all raised with great privilege and no responsibilities. I wonder if the fact that both George V and George VI were both second sons played into everything. Until the spares were adults, the possibility that they may one day occupy the throne was real. As they got pushed down the line of succession and further from the throne, the resentments and bad behavior seemed to grow.
I do think it has to be weird to be Charles. He’s way past the normal age of retirement and has yet to begin his career. Andrew’s role is even weirder. His big chance would only have come had something tragic befallen his mother and older brother. I know he had a naval career, but his main role was as an understudy or the somewhat obsolete role of a royal duke
I just found another article on Meghan's plans to get involved in the upcoming presidential election by Tome Sykes at The Daily Beast:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/meghan-markle-set-to-fire-up-the-youth-vote-in-presidential-election
Although this article dated the 18th claims to not know if she will come out in favor of a candidate, the one I linked to earlier in the thread did theorize she might support Biden:
Meghan Markle may 'intervene' in Joe Biden's bid to get Donald Trump out of White House
According to royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams, Meghan Markle could use her huge influence to speak out during the upcoming US Presidential election later this year
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-intervene-joe-bidens-22390831?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar%E2%80%AC
Since the Harkles are still connected to the RF via their roles in the Commonwealth, their Royal Patronages, their titles, the money they accept, and their agreement to not embarrass the Queen, I thought they were still supposed to avoid this type of political activity. They are still actually representing HM.
Does anyone else know anything about this?
I just have a really bad feeling about Megalo's political plans and think she is very dangerous. I agree with the author of 'Harry Markle' that her last "speech" basically incited anarchy.
Pasted below is a recent post from someone on LSA that I thought was interesting and funny but made me even more concerned. Meghan's climb into the royal family has not only generated great fame for a previously unknown actress, but it has also given her a "CLEAN SLATE" and possibly provided protection from more recent shady business if what she has pulled off as a member of the RF is never revealed...
From LSA:
I am gloating "I told you so" for a while now, but needed to catch up on all posts before replying. I finally did, so, here we go:
Meghan has always been (a) political (wannabe). She even mentioned it in an interview. After the engagement, I told my fellow Meghan loathing friend that the biggest benefit of joining the royal family for her was, (besides money, fame and followers) that the BRF scrub her clean, wipe everything off the web, pay people off, and build a better public image. She needs that, in American politics. And in this case, she didn't have to pay for it. She needs to be that heroic victim, and critical media need to be silenced. Or she will endlessly cry racism. The celebrity friends (Clooney is also political) will endorse her. And now this stunt with the NAACP is all about getting their backing, for when she runs.
She even made a point of calling herself an American on a diplomatic tour abroad and the times she sung the British national anthem, she was completely not interested. Lord knows I would belt out the opera version on the royal balcony, just to be proud to represent my new country. She simply didn't care.
And just now it hit me! In her "style" (and life) choices, her big inspiration was / is: Claire Underwood. First Lady and later president in Netflix show House of Cards. A woman who loved beneficial relationships, political games and power plays, and dresses accordingly; minimalistic business chic, preferably in 1 colour. Check out the necklines! The cuts! The styles! Girlfriend has been sending us messages all along!