Could it have been only a year ago that Meghan guest-edited the vaunted September issue of Vogue UK?
Yup - it was the September 2019 issue of Vogue, Meg's "Forces for Change" issue. She was so pleased with the issue that she handed out notebooks embossed with the Forces for Change message, accompanied by handwritten notes in her trademark dreadful calligraphy.
Fast forward twelve months - past a messy departure from the UK and a festival of lawsuits against the media.
Today the September 2020 issue of Vogue UK hit the stands. It focuses on Black activism, with a fold-out cover featuring 18 faces of influential Black celebrities.
Meghan, apparently, is not among them.
Ed Enninful used to love Meg
Has Meg fallen out with Vogue UK editor Edward Enninful? This time last year, Enninful was calling his co-operation with the Duchess "a special time in his editorship."
In a video clip that accompanied the 2019 issue, Ghana-born Enninful emotes, "I remember walking into Kensington Palace and I was so excited. And I was like, 'Lovely to meet you, duchess." And you were like "Call me Meghan."
Enninful doesn't seem so star-struck any more. In fact, he was recently quoted busting up Meghan's favorite narrative by saying that he doesn't feel that criticism of her was due to racism.
"She did get a very unfair treatment, I thought," Enninful told SkyNews last week. "It was harsh, it was harsh. But I wouldn't just blame it on racism."
That's rather unhelpful, at least from Meg's point of view, because the idea that Britain rejected her solely because she is (a little bit) Black flavors all of Meghan's multiple lawsuits and much of her publicity.
Portraying herself as a victim of racism is also Meg's best hope for US-based celebrity in a time when racial tensions have proven very profitable for the media.
Not really an activist
Anyway, Meg's apparent absence from the new September Vogue does make sense, because she isn't really a Black activist.
Arguably, she's not an activist at all, just a follower of the cause of the week. (Speaking of which, there have still been no arrests in the Althea Bernstein case, and apparently no new information over the past three weeks either.)
But it raises a bigger question - now that Enninful appears to have moved on, precisely who is still in Meghan's corner?
Bad news for celebrities who back Meghan
A year ago, Meg still had the support of celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres and Jessica Mulroney, both of whom have had their own falls from grace since then.
Serena Williams, who is currently preparing for the US Open tournament beginning August 24, wasn't pleased with Meg's stoned-looking appearance at the 2019 Open, which included an incident in which Meg apparently showed her panties to Serena's husband.
It's a good bet that Meg won't be welcome in Serena's box at this year's open.
Even Oprah, who has been in the news recently talking about racism, doesn't seem to be in Meghan's corner any more. The last statement Oprah made about the Sussexes - defending their decision to leave the Royal Family - was in January.
Are there any powerful people still backing the Duchess of Sussex?
Comments
@Wild Boar, et al
So the D-K effect is just "stupid people don't know they're stupid"
Or brain-damaged people do not know that they have brain damage.
Re. A social services problem with this family
I pray each and every day for the best possible outcome in this sorry saga—to wit, that the Child Known as Archie is not in the custody of the HAMS. I don’t know who the babies are who have been pictured with Meg and Harry....I say babies because The little tyke we saw in the christening photo Is plausibly Tutu baby, But is most decidedly not Duck Rabbit baby, Even allowing for growth. The child that Harry was holding in the legend new year photo is neither of these children. I am not a pediatrician, but I have to call it like I see it. Duck rabbit Archie is a beefy toddler, large for his age, whatever that may be, blonde and very fair. The christening baby/Tutu baby Was much more delicately featured, With a small head and decidedly brunet coloring. Babies grow of course, but their head to body ratio would stay proportionate.
.
If the HAMS have custody of a child, his life is going to be emotionally unspeakable even if he is well cared for physically. On both of the occasions we have seen Meg in possession of a live infant, He was a healthy happy active curious bouncing boy. Neither of these happy babies displayed the slightest emotional or personal bond with either Meg or Harry. I believe these two states can coexist if Meg has been borrowing them for a brief time for photo ops, but is completely unknown to them otherwise. I can’t explain the logistics of it, but we have seen enough evidence that both parents are completely self absorbed, emotionally unstable, lacking in judgment, and showing many indicators of regular drug abuse. Archie is just a bit over a year old According to his parents of record… How many temporary homes has he been bounced between? How many nannies? How many countries? The BRF is famously laissez faire when it comes to the scandals And non-performance of members who just can’t cut the mustard—-They’ve known all of Harry’s life that he is one such, and they’ve covered for him. Would such a hands-on policy extend to allowing them to remove a great grand child of the crown to parts unknown in the careless custody of two druggie slackers who are unfit? Surely if the British social services were involved, they could put a word in with the appropriate agencies in L.A.? They have a duty of care toward an innocent baby, even if he is a product of a surrogate and not actually legitimate. Could they be so cold?
The apparent lack of concern from the royal family toward Archie—He was never mentioned as a piece of the mix it negotiations at all —Makes me up to think that the RF is well aware that Meg is using prop babies. Megxit was rushed forward because It dawned on Meg that once Archie was no longer a tiny infant, sustaining the ruse of his existence in England was going to be impossible. I believe she attempted to procure a surrogate baby, but the adoption fell through due to grounds of unfitness Both mental and chemical, and she’s been scrambling ever since. Hence the flight to another continent and bleating about privacy. They had to get away from Harry’s family Who were asking too many uncomfortable questions about their business. If you stop on your tin hat and entertain the theory that all of the photographs with Archie and his royal family members have been staged events that were digitally manipulated by MM, The distinct possibility arises that none of the Royals have ever seen Archie in the flesh. If so, they are covering for Meg too, But hopefully not at the expense of a real child.
Reading between the lines in her book, and in the videos I saw, I reckon Lady C knows the truth, that there is no legitimate member of the succession born to the Harkles, but daren't say it publicly.
@Barbara - :` Of course, the whole problem could have been avoided in the first place if HM had not given MM the titles in the first place, and I'm wondering why she did...'
Quite right about avoiding the problem but has she not done so I daresay the Harkles would have kicked up a stink, calling it `racism', given the precedent of the Cambridges. They'd never have accepted that it was just because she was not a British subject.
But another option may be available that would rest on the current state of MM’s naturalization. HMQ could request that the House of Lords review the granting of courtesy titles to the non-citizen spouses of any royal within a certain degree in the line of succession.
@Theramenes: Brilliant idea!
It’s fairly obvious Meghan never had any honest intention to take the role of a working royal in the UK. Narcissists do not like to play second banana (pun intended) to anyone. In Meghan’s mind, she was destined to lead HMTQ, PC, and Cambridges and their children into the glitzy 21st century while tossing a thousand years of history to and tradition away because jolly olde England and the rest of the UK and Commonwealth don’t fit her view of who and what are good enough to be deigned “Brand Meghan” as she calls it.
Meghan’s swift entry into the BRF in what amounts to a quick smash-and-grab theft of a royal title and all the cash she can wring out of Charles and the taxpayers will go down (Oh, I love puns!) in 21st century history as a con job to rival that of investment swindler Bernie Madoff.
It’s my guess she thinks that under the threat of being called racists, HMTQ and the government would never dare remove the courtesy titles and allow her to monetize them as she flits around the globe spewing her uber wokeness to all while taking cheap shots at the RF and anyone else in the UK who crosses her while she establishes her own royal court in Los Angeles to compete with the real one in London.
No matter what happens, Meghan will always be a thorn in the side of the RF and UK, so instead of allowing her to fester and continue to inflict more harm on the monarchy, she and her enabler Harry need to be dealt with swiftly so she won’t know what happened as she and Harry sit on a street curb in Beverly Hills wondering what just hit them.
I think it’s the issue of Archie, more than any shenanigans with the royal foundation or inept attempts at getting involved in American politics That could bring the Harkless down for once and all. I thought Meg’s time had come last July When she dawned that green bivouac tent and paraded a dolly around the polo ground. She was in the throes of a full-blown narc mania meltdown that day...Probably high as a kite at the time which made it seem like a fantastic idea to grab some Pap attention for herself. After all it had been over two months since the “birth”. And her previous outings at tripping the color and Wimbledon had certainly not gone well.
The heirs to our Duchess of Sussex is mental, and I don’t think there could be clearer proof than those pictures, which show all of the onlookers absolutely gob smacked Add this witchy wraith Drifting around like a mad woman of Chaillot clutching a doll. Clock the faces of Harry’s friends—The married couple who stops to speak with her, or Catherine’s the music expression looking up at Meg from her seat on the ground. If it’s so blaringly evident from a few still pictures that MM was barking mad, what must it have been like in person?
I thought to myself, “This is it—Meg has finally screwed herself with the equivalent of a running through the village naked moment. They have got to do something about her now.” Imagine my shock and surprise that there was no announcement forthcoming that the duchess was resting comfortably in a sanatorium After that little performance—Only more of her paid PR cooing about how chic she looked in the bivouac tent and designer sunglasses, And where we could buy them for oursel. More claptrap about her doubting motherhood and snaps of the happy family walking toward the car. Happy family my arse! Harry with a face like thunder could not bring himself to even look at the plastic child clutched in Meg’s zombie embrace—Swaddled in a hot looking blanket on what was a stiflingly hot July day. I began to fear I was losing my grip on sanity! Surely MM needed ito be sectioned for her own good??
Apparently William and Harry had a blazing row prior to the match, And Kate was under strict orders from her husband to not approach the mad woman or let her anywhere near the kids, Because it was such an obvious Papp walk for Cuckoo.
What stumps me know end though is HMTQ’s tacit approval of that weird presentation photo..To the point of including it in her Christmas speech. That thing is fake as hell, and yet here is TQ herself lending it legitimacy. What a coup it would’ve been for Meg to get a shot of TQ Holding the baby—Of course it would not do to hand HM a swaddled doll. I believe the christening photo is bogus too, for what that’s worth.
As I see it the RF have lost their opportunity to be rid of this scourge. They could’ve ended this last May by unmasking Meg’s pregnancy
lies, And stated publicly that they were getting the duchess the mental health services that she so desperately needs. They have added an inverted the Harkles in all their lies—Maybe through the best of intentions, loving intentions—But they have in some part made the bed that they have to lie on now. Meg seems prepared to go on with this Archie lie ad Infinitum—Bringing a lawsuit on the behalf of a baby who may not exist, Over papp shots she herself arranged—-Shots furthermore of a doll.
What further proof of insanity do we need? And this woman thinks that she is going to run for American president while wearing a gifted title of English nobility? It truly boggles the mind.
Not having your little child go out to get some fresh air on a daily basis is not something that 99% of people would do. I think that there is a very good reason for all this need for "privacy".
To let this charade go any longer will indict TQ of complicity in a fraud on the good UK public. Her Majesty knows full well who these people are and they are not friends of the Royal family and in fact are nothing short of enemies despite Harry's inherited genealogy and Meghan's professions at the time of marriage. If these occurrences has had happened just a few hundred years ago they very well may have been punishable by death. Traitors they are whether they fulfill the description of the law but it remains to be seen if the Archie debacle may be their undoing. Has the TQ aided and abetted the Archie fraud because that would be a blight the Monarchy may not recover from. Why would the family help cover such a lie if indeed it is. Whatever the story, the truth needs to come out sooner than later.
In a short 4-5 months we may see facts that will rock the institution and bring such disrepute and maybe that is why nothing is being done. Or the BRF is strategizing and hoping for things to work out without them having to actively intervene. Maybe hoping for Harry to return to the fold; having Meghan self-destruct completely. Surely, the BRF has intel that enables them to make the wisest choices that we may not see or understand. It can't come soon enough to see the sorely deserved comeuppance of the Harkles.
I still think of the Coat of Arms designed for Meghan and the coronet encircling (choking) the songbird. I believe i=it to be prophetic as she will be gagged and the elements on her CoA was intended to show her communication background. But now we see her alleged strength has ended up being her downfall in so many ways. Even the lion portrayed on her arms (representing her husband side has a metallic crown-like band upside down around his neck) appears to be constrained and is roaring back.
https://meghanpedia.com/duchess-of-sussex-coat-of-arms
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/25/europe/duchess-sussex-meghan-markle-coat-of-arms-intl/index.html
Your quote had me wondering who first penned that so I looked it up. Sir Walter Scott. Aha. Plus the reference states that it is often mistakenly attributed to Shakespeare. Kinda interesting.
When I do think of "Oh what a tangled web we weave..." which was one of my mom's favorite quotes, I also think and attribute Megs behaviors to "...come into my parlour said the spider to the fly..." So appropriate.
Some of the PBS stations are running a show of Prince Charles at 70. I will try to watch it (background information as it came out Nov 2018 so it will be interesting to watch what JH, PW all have to say in general and then think about what was happening in their lives at that time).
The comment about not seeing Archie. Wow, this is shocking as this is the epicenter of SOCAL. I remember it seems like the sun is always shining, the weather is always lovely and, everyone is always out and about working on their exercise before starting their day. Life was geared so that there were double shifts for workers who might need to communicate with someone on the East Coast.
CELEBRITY NEWS
Prince Harry Tackles Systemic Racism In New Interview on ‘GMA’
August 9, 20202 Min Read
https://kyrnews.com/celebrity-news/4466/prince-harry-tackles-systemic-racism-in-new-interview-on-gma/
I think we may be witnessing this in these two, except sadly I think it may be substance induced. It really makes no sense for them to demonstrate such hatred towards the institution that financially supports them. She seems so greedy and cruel, still accepting money from them. I wouldn't believe a person could act that way, except that she seems equally cruel towards her father, who paid for her to have a lavish lifestyle.
I'd add this one, for both the Harkles --
"How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is To have a thankless child!" (Shakespeare, King Lear)
And just how much does Harry know about systemic racism in the U.S. after living here all of four months?
When I was my daughters’ age, my friends and I, and every girl I knew, followed the royals, and loved Princess Diane. I have not met one person my age today, or my young kid’s ages, who even know about the HAMS. That is why it is only magazines targeted for older readers, like People Magazine, who try to make the HAMS something more than anybody cares about now. Harry is not even close to being cute anymore, and his youth, laugh, and looks have degraded so much, that he isn’t “followed” by any under 40 people. Looks are everything in America, and a broken tooth, balding, red bearded man with a funny nose, bad clothing choices, and constantly berating young people whom he thinks is his target audience, but sounds, as my son said, just like an angry Dad, will never succeed in America. Yuck, he has meth teeth said a daughter, just like some of my patients!
i always read about ‘ugly americans’ the rude tourists/ foreigners that denigrate the country they are visiting/ living in. ihe’d better not start knocking the US. what happened to his non-bullying, be kind, inclusive, dont be mean attitude or does that only apply to others?
when i travel i make a point to be nice and always say to the locals how beautiful, interesting the country is that i’m visitng. i’m a guest there, not a taxpaying citizen.
every country has their problems, issues, culture and wonderful qualities. who am i to judge and tell others how to live their lives / culture/ government. if they want to change it they will.
it’s very condescending and ‘colonial’ to start critizing other. countries
She went ahead with the wedding and it was lovely. It was similar to Beatrice’s wedding. She got married in a small church, wearing her grandmother’s wedding gown and had the reception in an intimate restaurant. The marriage was not lovely at all. I can’t remember how long it lasted (many years), but one morning I showed up at work (coincidentally, it was my birthday). There was a bouquet of flowers on my desk with a card that said, ‘Happy Birthday, you were right, I left him.’
Fast forward many years and she eventually met and married a woman. (I had no idea that she was bi-sexual, and I don’t think that she did either, although I think the thought had occurred to her if that makes sense.) But they have the exact same relationship as she did with her husband! (Her wife is the passive one, and my friend makes all of the decisions. The wife and former husband actually look alike; both very short and slight and fair.) The main difference is that I like her wife and they truly love each other. But I haven’t seen them in years. They have such a co-dependent, sheltered relationship, that it became impossible to get together or even talk on the phone. (Unless she needed something.) We live about three hours away from each other now, so I finally just gave up. It’s not as if I can meet her for a quick cup of coffee. She’s a friend of mine from college, and literally nobody in my circle of friends is in touch with her anymore. She’s just disappeared.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-charles-keeps-door-open-for-dramatic-return-of-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle
How is it even possible for one man to be eat up with so much dumbass? In case you're reading, Harry, people don't like your wife due to her color (oh, wait, that's white!) but because she's an unpleasant bitch even by Hollywood standards where unpleasant bitchery is an art form. The "racism" meme is trotted out every presidential election and frankly people are getting really tired of it.
I forget where I read it but the question was something along the lines of what if Harry was prince from middle east . Would GMA still have him on? I butchered quote but sane sentiment. This really ticks me off. He has no basis to speak on such issues and certainly not in US
Harry: I lost my mother when I was 13 years old. I have suffered more than my older brother, since he will be King. He is a bully, and nasty, because he will be king, and I will soon lose my titles because my mother, Diana, died. William probably set it up, along with my entire family
.
GMA host: so your brother is behind the death of his mother? Breaking news! We are the first to know that Prince William killed his mother!
Harry: I mean my older brother set it up that he would be born first. However, if you want to say he killed my mother, go right ahead - William is always going right ahead of me, and my precious love, the daughter of the Emmy-awarded set director, Thomas Markle, who we hate because he won two Emmys and my pushy wife could not get a Z lister nomination.
GMA host: Just H, so Prince William killed your mother because...?
Harry: Because he will be King! And his wife “lost” some precious jewelry when my precious love, Meghan, was visiting when the jewels were pinched. As if Meghan, the ex HRH Duchess of Sussex, would ever take what was not hers officialky, but really she should have the jewels, as Catherine knows my wife should be Queen, anyway!
Interesting timing on this one
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2020/08/08/kate-and-will-thank-school-in-spains-costa-blanca-for-their-support-after-prince-george-was-mocked-on-american-tv/
Loved the story of your friend who sent you flowers after she split from the husband you warned her about marrying in the first place.
Personally and professionally, I’ve known people who when they get married, you just KNOW it’s going to eventually be a train wreck to one degree or another.
Harry was ripe for picking by a nasty piece of work like Meghan, and unfortunately, as long as they continue to receive funding to stay afloat, their marriage could limp along for years.
I’ve seen men and women under the total control of narcissistic spouses, but from what is probably just the surface of Harry and Meghsn’s relationship, when it is dissected and studied years down the road from now, it will likely be revealed to be quite ugly and abusive, with Meghan as the prime abuser of Harry, Archie, and and other children that appear on the scene.
The best bet to pull the plug on the Sussex debacle will be William, who can cut them off or reduce their allowance to a enough to buy not much more than a new set of tires for their Range Rover or Escalade.
However, as long as Charles is around, he will continue to be guilted into funding them. And of course, Harry will receive an inheritance when Charles passes on, which will be promptly spent if the Sussexes are still married.
When the money runs out, Meghan will run out too.
It ‘s too bad that both Charles and Harry are weak men, but fortunate that William and his line seem to have it together pretty well.
I understand that HRH and other royal titles are only bestowed on UK citizens, so why make an exception for MM?
Because she is half black.
.
The RF are desperately afraid of being labeled racists. IMO they are also cowards.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1291792464110444545
They were just as likely being sarcastic because they didn’t care one iota about them. ;o)
Meghan Markle helped guide Prince Harry on his very public 'woke' journey, the authors of the couple's upcoming biography Finding Freedom have claimed.
The Duchess of Sussex, who is currently residing with her husband in Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, played a pivotal role in helping her husband become more attuned to racism, according to authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand.
Speaking to the National Public Radio in the United States, Mr Scobie said: 'Harry's journey to wokeness has been very public.
'We've seen him learning and educating himself along the way, but this experience of witnessing Meghan face racist remarks and commentary would have been the first time he'd seen someone in his life or someone he was particularly close to affected by it in a certain way.
You can imagine what's in the book. Has Harry not got a mind of his own? (apparently not). This is so embarrassing. As for the floozie, she is despicable and stark raving mad.
We’ve have Megsy knocking the Brits, neither she or Harry see any harm in publicly criticising a country they are living in or appear aware how badly it comes across. He’s also forgotten that royals are supposed to be apolitical, Both Harry and Megsy are as atrocious as each other. They’ve publicly battered and criticised their families etc, neither know or appreciate kindness. In just about everyway they are two of the biggest hypocrites on the planet.
I hope the GMA interview is a massive flop and it backfires (as it should).
We’ve had Megsy........
'The book has never been a massive talking point between them and Charles is determined that it is not an obstacle. '
Well, it bl**dy well should! If Charles is still willing to bankroll H & his abhorrent wife, then there's no hope. I just hope the Queen is made aware of the worst sections of the book and brings the review ant their situation forward.
'The book has never been a massive talking point between them and Charles is determined that it is not an obstacle. '
This seems too unbelievable and I’m not sure I believe this. I’m sure it’s a massive talking point and has caused serious issues.
It comes off as a PR thing from the nasty duo....just like the one they had no input into the book itself. SMH.
Yes, too unbelievable and I did wonder how they know that Charles is 'determined that it is not an obstacle' but maybe he's keeping his cards close to his chest for now. Let s just hope the Queen sees is as a major obstacle.
We never know what goes on when the PM has the regular Tuesday audience with HM but it's a fair bet that that the matter of accusations of racism at the highest levels has come up. I imagine that the Government is concerned about what the knock-on effect could be. It's not just about the RF being besmirched, I imagine. Right now, even the slightest hint of `profiling' by the police raises howls of protest.
Btw, I've found it embarrassing when travelling in other English-speaking countries when well-meaning folk praise British politicians whom I detest! Safest to say nothing, good or ill, about politics in other countries, other than in private.
Recently I have been wondering how many royal wills have been rewritten and trusts revised to ensure his wife cannot get her greedy little mitts on the money.
@Maneki@Raspberry
I agree, I’m ashamed of/for him.
I believe BP will be furious.
So Charles zooms them, they chat about
the weather, Archie counting backwards
in Latin and Megs new toes.
No mention of the book, hahaha.
Pull the other one, hard, its attached to Megs!
Prince Charles in good cheer
Sees no obstacle we hear
About the book that Megsy helped write
This can’t be true
As the scheming old shrew
Writes nothing but great piles of Sh.te!
@WildBoar
Love Donna Quixote!!
Hildisvini/Freya/St Hilda?
Still chuckling over your mum being ‘nicked’
by a fixed bayonet, and strafed by bullets
atop a London bus!!
Child actors can forget or fluff their lines, (innkeepers who tell Mary and Joseph there's plenty of room at the inn, for example). It doesn't matter with filming but it's different in real life.
One witnessed shout of `You're not my Mommy!' would take some explaining. Their rigid control of their image can only go so far before serious questions are asked.
I remember with shame how, aged 5, I arrived home from school only to find what I thought was a complete stranger opening the door to me - I pummelled her thigh, sobbing `You're not my Mummy! You're not my Mummy!'
It was Mum, of course - she'd been to the hairdresser's and had got rid of her 1940s `roll' and moved into the 50s with a sharp gamine/pixie cut.
Imagine that happening with Megsy...
@Piroska
I’m sure BP has always had strict trust funds etc in place.
No one will leave penniless, but no one will get their
mitts on the fortune, not even Megs!!
You're getting warm but I think we'd better stop there! As a Loyal Subject of HM, I'm happy for Special Branch/RPOs to turn up at the door but I've no wish to be found by sugars!
One day, when all this is over, and it's safe, I shall reveal it - that's a promise!
Lol @YankeeDoodle nice! (I agree!)
Interesting timing on this one
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2020/08/08/kate-and-will-thank-school-in-spains-costa-blanca-for-their-support-after-prince-george-was-mocked-on-american-tv/
__________________________________
Thanks for the reminder -- I thought it was lovely that little Prince George enjoys dancing. Not only does it give him an appreciation for the arts, but also agility and coordination.
Of course, if it were one of the "wokesters'" children having that said about him, there would be screaming and hair-tearing in the press for a solid week, at least.
@WildBoar
Loose lips sink ships, or land a Prince 😉
At https://counsellingresource.com/features/2016/11/15/manipulators-crazy-makers/
Why Manipulators Are Crazy-Makers
Dr George Simon, PhD
Part 1
Skilled manipulators can get the better of you while preventing you from knowing for sure who they really are or what they’re really up to.
Dealing with a manipulative person — the folks I call covert aggressors, can make you feel pretty crazy. There are many reasons for this. For one, skilled manipulators are talented at looking good on the outside, while harboring ill intentions underneath. They’ve refined the art of what some psychologists call impression management. That’s the very reason I titled my seminal book on the topic, In Sheep’s Clothing [Amazon-US | Amazon-UK](?). These character impaired individuals can have you doubting and questioning yourself because while they’re most certainly aggressive personality types — determined to get what they want and without proper concern for who might get hurt in the process — they keep their aggression “under cover.” Your gut might tell you they’re trying to get the better of you, but they’re subtle and deceptive about how they go about it. It’s hard to objectively prove what your gut suspects. And that’s what makes you feel crazy. Some mental health professionals these days call this “gaslighting,” which I first wrote about in “Gaslighting as a Manipulation Tactic: What It Is, Who Does It, And Why”. Gaslighting is not so much a particular tactic (although it can be a manipulator’s specific objective) as it is the effect of any and all of the tactics a manipulator might use to get the better of you while cloaking both their true nature and their agendas.
The tactics manipulators employ carry a virtual one-two punch. When they use one tactic (or a combination of tactics), you go unconsciously on the defensive. But while you’re feeling uneasy, like you’re under attack, you can’t readily and objectively point to why you should rightfully feel that way — and that’s precisely why you end up feeling crazy. Of course, a manipulator can set out to drive you crazy, but that’s not usually their intent. Instead, their intent is to get the better of you without you knowing for sure who they really are or what they’re really up to.
Let’s take the tactic of guilt tripping as an example. Perhaps you’ve confronted a manipulative spouse on their treatment of you. Perhaps the vulgar names and hateful words they just spewed your way cut like a knife, and you called them on it. But they come back with how you “never have a nice thing to say” about them. Or perhaps they complain that you’re more critical of them than “anyone else” they know (a likely exaggeration). You might start thinking this is a reasonable justification for their actions. That’s because they’ve combined the tactic of inviting you to feel guilty with the tactic of rationalization or excuse-making. Before long, they’ve cast themselves as the victim and you as the perpetrator. (Playing the victim role while vilifying the true victim are two other very effective tactics!) Then you start to feel bad. Maybe you’re actually the bad guy in the situation, you might say to yourself. What if you have it very wrong? You couldn’t stand to see yourself as the heavy, but in your heart of hearts you might still feel they’re the one who’s crossed the line. You’ve just taken a course in Gaslighting 101: crazy-making, manipulator’s style.
In the book I mentioned above, I talk about the most common tactics which covertly aggressive people use to have their way with you and still somehow manage to look good while doing it. And I explain how some of our most popular notions about why people do the things they do — notions handed down to us from traditional psychology paradigms — can put us at a serious disadvantage when it comes to fully understanding the folks among us who possess various disturbances of character. Last month, the book celebrated its 20th year in print, and while it’s been updated a few times, for all those years it’s been a true bestseller. (In recent years, that’s been true not just in the US but also in many foreign countries and languages.) I think that’s largely because many of those who have read it, and who once felt “crazy,” finally came to see their manipulator for the wolf in sheep’s clothing they truly were, and were able to wrest free of the gaslighting effect.
Date of article: November 15 2016
The first time I met her, I met her in white
All in white all in white
She kept me up all night
Down in the valley where nobody knows
The next night I met her I met her in red
All in red all in red
She told me “I give good h..d”
Down in the valley
Where goes the good hoes
The next time I met her I met her in bed
All in bed all in bed
Thats what Markus said
Down in the valley
Where Harry now goes
Be Like Dad - Keep Mum (that enraged Labour MP Edith Summerskill - naturally!)
and
Keep Mum - She's Not So Dumb!
Astonishing how Harry continues pouring dung over UK and royals apparently do zero to stop the slander. Simply no words.
@WildBoar
Thank you for Edith/Shirley Summerskill.
The UK has had ‘feminists’ for many
years, long before Megschism appeared.
Mary Wollstonecraft 1759 to 1797, writer,
philosopher and advocate of womens rights.
We don't need an American show girl
telling us what to do.
Neither do the Americans need a British, poncey
prince telling them what to do.
Warning! There is some vulgar language but definitely worth the watch
https://youtu.be/IbFl1HSkqU8
I agree on all counts. It's only Part 1 but it is a pretty detailed breakdown of "tells" during the engagement interview. Well done. I especially enjoyed the moment when the interviewer asked "the million dollar question!" The look on H's face and M's raised chin--caught like rats in a trap! They brazen it through but...that moment is indelible. Liars. Not particularly good ones.
Some of the comments in the DM article about how she has guided him into Wokeness
"What an embarrassing wet lettuce of a man". cutting.
I thought it funny that she, who had no real use for her heritage in her acting career would pull it out of her tool box and try to lead the world into change.
Watched the BBC PC at 70 (first shown Nov 2018) so it would have been fairly early in JH&M's marriage
They edited it nicely - how JH&M held back on the honeymoon to be able to be at the garden party (saw some shots before the walking out to give the speeches about 600 people waiting and how PC was hoping to be certain to try to greet them) and the goodby from Camilla (which I don't remember seeing before). Focus was on PC, not JH&M so much of that kurfuffle was not shown. It did give a nice show of how that garden party was the big deal.
The pieces I found interesting was they had some nice shots of JH and PW talking about watching their father make some speeches years before they were born which were focused on the environment (way before it was popular).
They got to go on walks to and pick up litter (I suspect the stabby sticks were quite popular when they were little boys).
A deliberate comment about how each parent taught them.
It seemed to me, that PW talked about how his father was basically an early adapter while JH talked about it in regards to electricity and turning out lights when not needed, how his wife (M) would get upset with him as she felt it was too many being turned off.
Roll this around in your mind that JH&M were/maybe still are pushing something along the a save the planet idea but chose not to go in the direction that where PC has already beaten down an easier path to walk.
JH also would make a funny seemed involuntary grimace at the end of each time he spoke about his father. That was jarring and I would have liked to watch that in slo-mo and have someone who knows about these kinds of things comment on it.
Astonishing how Harry continues pouring dung over UK and royals apparently do zero to stop the slander. Simply no words.
Reading GMA’s twitter announcement, I didn’t get the impression that Harry’s interview is was solely about the UK....it’s inclusive of any country, organisation, institution or person he sees fit to criticise. So at a guess, all those in America and the UK and anyone else he wants to throw in the ring to criticise and lecture.
You are very polite. Some of us would (maybe have) said he had his head.... up... somewhere else!
Re. Loose lips to land a Prince
I think we can be certain that Meg knows how to keep her lips nice and tight when it counts.
Plus she is expert at all kinds of backdoor boudoir deals.
That’s how to hook a Prince as dim as Harry.
In the immortal words of the Mistress of the House from Les Miserables, “There’s not much there”, upstairs or down. In prior days, the Royals would’ve kept such a Halfwit behind palace walls with a minder, But this Halfwit is going on American TV this morning. Can’t wait for that clip.
@unknown
I’m sure that the Queen, and Charles are
fully aware of what’s going on.
God Save the Queen
Prince Harry, 35, who is currently living in Tyler Perry's $14 million mansion in Beverly Hills with Meghan Markle, 38, and their son Archie, one, having stepped back from royal duty in March, is set to speak about the topic in a new interview for the Colour of Change initiative.
In a clip released of the interview on Instagram, Prince Harry praised the younger generation for 'acting, rather than just saying'.
Pray, what is the meaning of Colour of Change initiative? (You'll have to excuse my ignorance). As that wife of his was white until recently, how is he qualified to speak? Perhaps this is the meaning of Colour of Change initiative? You can go from one colour to another?? He shouldn't interfere at all and is just making things worse. He has now made himselftotally repugnant.
The Queen is still very sharp, she keeps herself informed. I'm sure Charles is equally aware.
I did find your 'scheming old shrew' very tame and polite (very restrained) ;). Love all your witticisms.
@ Maneki Neko:
According to Wikipedia:
"Color of Change is a progressive... nonprofit civil rights advocacy organization in the United States... It was formed in 2005 in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in order to use online resources to strengthen the political voice of African Americans.[8] Color of Change is a 501(c)... advocacy organizing with an affiliated political action committee"
`affiliated political action committee" - hmmm.
Harry speaking with a forked tongue . I haven’t heard that expression in years .....but how true and pertinent!
They can't just bung her in a mental hospital if she doesn't want to go and is not a danger to herself or others. We've only heard (strong, yes) rumors of ONE teapot-throwing incident, and there's an NDA covering it apparently. She can refuse treatment if she wants and if she is not a danger to....I'm repeating myself.
In the meantime she has been careful to behave somewhat better, no more flinging the crockery (that we know of) and no more meltdown (you called that right!) at least not in public where people can see. She''s clean, fully dressed, wears a mask in public. She's not on welfare and her husband does not seem to be the sort to address the issues we here see. For his own reasons no doubt. As her closest relative, it would be on him, or on Doria to agree to have her evaluated or take steps in that direction--at least I would think so.
You really do seem distressed that she needs help, not just that she is screwing up and that is kindness, but I doubt she wants it and would not/did not take it if it was offered.
I'd say Color of Change looks pretty political.
According to their website, here are a few current initiatives/campaigns:
Defund NYPD, defund the police in Philadelphia, stop evictions/foreclosures in several states, stop Facebook's support for "white nationalists," advance diversity in the music industry (?), demand Facebook create a permanent civil rights infrastructure, demand mayors support and adopt a Basic Guaranteed Income....
They can't just bung her in a mental hospital if she doesn't want to go and is not a danger to herself or others. We've only heard (strong, yes) rumors of ONE teapot-throwing incident, and there's an NDA covering it apparently. She can refuse treatment if she wants and if she is not a danger, etc.
In the meantime she has been careful to behave somewhat better, no more flinging the crockery (that we know of) and no more meltdown (you called that right!), at least not in public where people can see. She's more or less clean and fully dressed, wears a mask in public. She's not on welfare and her husband does not seem to be the sort to address the issues we here see. For his own reasons no doubt. As her closest relative, it would be on him, or on Doria to agree to have her evaluated or take steps in that direction--at least I would think so.
You really do seem distressed that she needs help, not just that she is screwing up and that is kindness, but I doubt she wants it and would not/did not take it if it was offered to her.
@Maneki@Hikari
I try to stay squeaky clean
Not tut tut, or obscene
When speaking of Twat’ers
and Thot’ers as squatters
I’m sure you know just what I mean?
@JHanoi: Harry needs to zip it! I’m not interested in hearing his opinions on anything. He is, quite frankly, a dolt. (If he had only zipped it a few years ago at SoHo House, he wouldn’t be in his current situation.)
Agreed. Harry is well born and famous for it. Oh and now he is a former racist who will lecture the rest of us on the errors of our ways.
Thank you for enlightening me. Normally I would have have looked it up but didn't think of it.
@Lizzie
I agree it certainly looks very political. I did look it up and one look at their website was enough.
@KC
'She's not on welfare and her husband does not seem to be the sort to address the issues we here see.' MM might not be on welfare as such but she's certainly on a form of welfare as she seems to live off Harry & Charles's money. I’m not sure about the issues we see 'here' (UK?) that H addresses.
I'd say Color of Change looks pretty political.
According to their website, here are a few current initiatives/campaigns:
Defund NYPD, defund the police in Philadelphia,
Harry supporting some Color of Change initiative. How Clintonesque. Their Foundation always had initiatives. We need more police there was lots of looting in Chicago last night into 3AM. Is was organized as caravans of automobiles showed up w looters. Huge crowd Looting
@Nordstrom
Here was the twitter feed and videos from last night>>> https://twitter.com/hashtag/ChicagoRiots?src=hashtag_click
Hikari asked: What further proof of insanity do we need?
"They can't just bung her in a mental hospital if she doesn't want to go and is not a danger to herself or others."
Are we talking about the US or UK here?
Under UK law (MHA) I'm sure it could be argued that she's a physical and psychological danger to Harry, before we even get around to the danger to the RF or the British Constitution.
There are, however, political constraints on doing this which don't apply in other cases.
She is a US citizen - potential diplomatic repercussions there. Also if it's personality disorder that's legally different from mental illness, or it was some years ago.
Detaining my demented aunt under the MHA (she'd taken a knife to her daughter because she didn't recognise her) wasn't going to upset the Ship of State, nor did `sectioning' my paranoid cousin who decided she'd been given to the wrong mother in the maternity ward and was also incapable of looking after herself.
It might be legally possible to section H but again, not a good look.
The alternative would be to arrest both of them for High Treason and detain for medical reports - again, imagine the repercussions.
Yes, you are right to say he was aiming at every country in his global mission against "racism". But combined with Scobie's recent public claims that racism has driven Markle out of UK it is pretty clear to me he was heavily hinting at their "experience" of "racism" in UK.
I find his behavior extremely dangerous and divisive, especially in the foreign country facing elections.
I am curious how far royals are prepared to go with their tolerance.
Chicago looting -
Yes, we had taste of that a few years ago in London.
It was extraordinary to see rich whites involved:
London riots: Millionaire's daughter Laura Johnson jailed - BBCwww.bbc.co.uk › news › uk-england-london-18203338
Meghan’s public behavior is very erratic, particularly during the staged papp walk incidents with Archie-doll. Her behavior that day was not that of a woman with her hands firmly on all the marbles. She repeated the performance in Canada during her “Walk in the Woods”. Since MM wants us to believe that she’s got a real baby in her custody, legitimate questions should be raised about potentially negligent care of Archie. I think we have seen enough of her Narc acting out by now to conclude that she may very well present a danger to a young baby. Harry too, but he’s hardly better. The RF May be in possession of more knowledge than we have about psychiatric conditions and substance between these two. If they are, they don’t seem to be taking any action to address these.
There is such a thing as an involuntary psych hold for a 72-hour eval. Meg’s behavior can’t be called normal on any level. The English have a long tradition of indulging eccentricity, but Meg and Harry have exceeded eccentricity and should be considered dangerous to a 15 month old baby at the least. The fact the the BRF has said “Go fly off to America and do what you like,” encourages me that “Archie” is a figment.
Harry and his pocket rocket
He put into a well worn socket
We’re all now aware
She just wanted the spare
To climb up into Williams left pocket
I am curious how far royals are prepared to go with their tolerance.
Totally agree, although I don’t think a foreign national should publicly lecture any country they are living in at any given time; it’s downright wrong on every level, moreso coming from spoilt moron like Harry. I’m hoping our America based Nutties can gives us an update on the interview soon.
Even though I still believe the long game will pay off, it’s feels like it’s too long now and waaaaaay overdue. We just keep waiting and hoping they will be de-titled or in the very least cut free financially. I do think there is lots going on behind the scenes, but changes won’t happen till the yearly review, unfortunately.
"As her closest relative, it would be on him, or on Doria to agree to have her evaluated or take steps in that direction--at least I would think so."
Well I can't speak for how they do things in California but here in Texas, a Justice of the Peace can sign an order committing you to a mandatory 3 day hold without any relative testifying, just merely the words of a Law enforcement personnel stating (with their alleged facts) you may have a mental problem that needs evaluating. Seems hard to believe but it can and does happen. Your only recourse is that the hospitalized person has the right to be brought before a Judge and plead they're case to be released. That is assuming the hospitalized person has any knowledge of their rights.
I would think California would not be so disrespectful of basic human rights. If anything, I think the Harkles need to be careful about how they treat Archie. It would be extremely unwise of them to do anything that could cause them to fall under the radar of Calif's Child Protective Services, an institution known for being zealous and tough (at least when I lived in California 2 decades ago). I will say my sister in Calif. and her husband had a contentious marital relationship and during one particular bad period he made charges against her and the children were removed (and she was told to leave) from the home despite there not being any evidence of child neglect or harm. It was a case of act first and ask questions later. This despite the husband was a well'known and liked physician and she was a former nurse and stay-at-home mom. It took a good 6 months before things were returned to their prior status.
So Note to Harkles: 'Keep your house in order' or things could go south for you in a matter of a heartbeat if a CPS complaint is filed.
Social services might take a peek if credible reports about Archie's care were made but I think there's no chance of hospitalization based on what we've seen so far. People have to be pretty "bonkers" to be held involuntarily even for a 72-hr hold. It's not the days of sanitoriums and Zelda Fitzgerald any more.
I think we can be fairly sure there is a child, because the queen publicly acknowledged "a new great grandson" in her speech. Having lost much of my respect for her I still don't believe she would lie to the nation.
I am firmly in surrogate camp tho, because too many weird things passed around this child. I am also convinced his birth was a factor in the Harkles hasty escape from the family.
Agree completely. But will we ever know the truth? Will HM ever come clean that this grandchild is not "of the body"? I still can't believe taxpayer dollars (through PC and his Duchy) are supporting Woke and Joke. while they use their "expert" knowledge and experience to criticize the perceived behavior of everyone else.
I don't really know much about the Claudia Conway situation. But I do know she's 15. M is 39. So I think the ease of getting a psyc hold would greatly differ. In practice minors do not have the same rights nor is the same degree of "danger" required for action. (Teenagers are assumed to already be vulnerable.)
-----
@Fairy Crocodile,
If the RF knew there was no Archie, I too doubt TQ would have said that. But there's knowing vs suspecting....
What about Liketso, big man?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/833542/harrys-forgotten-girl-tragedy-of-12-year-old-who-moved-prince-to-tears-then-abandoned-by-his-aids-charity/
You just keep outdoing yourself! This one's a keeper--
"Harry and his pocket rocket
He put into a well worn socket
We’re all now aware
She just wanted the spare
To climb up into Williams left pocket"
A well-worn socket indeed.
Well, The Queen and Charles may be willing to tolerate this nonsense out of indulgent love for a grandson/child. Privately, they must be torn up over this situation. However difficult/mean/nasty/rude/troublesome Harry has been, he's still family. However, the time is past due for the BRF to separate familial indulgence toward a troubled member and the *professional*/contractual obligation they hold with the British people & the Commonwealth. The exploits of Harry and his wife are damaging the monarchy by the day, and it keeps getting worse and worse. There seems to be absolutely nothing--not the Queen of England nor a global virus that will put a muzzle on Meg. Harry is her hapless dupe.
What the Queen and Charles will not do, I think William would not hesitate to do--disown treacherous, traitorous Hazza as a real threat to their way of life. The question is, the longer Queenie and Charles dither and allow Harry to waste their money and make buffoons of them abroad, will there even be a throne for William to ascend to? I feel like I may see a Republic across the water in my lifetime. Maybe this prospect doesn't trouble William, who from most accounts is lukewarm on the idea of being King anyway. In a Republic he'd have to let all those lovely houses go, so he should think about that. His wife is the daughter of a multi-millionaire earned on his own initiative, so he would still live very well . . I don't think his sense of duty will allow him to let the monarchy go without a fight.
The family that is so sensitive to being called racist seems worryingly oblivious to how the Harkles are eroding Royal stock around the world. I'd like to believe that matters are well in hand, but I wonder. Perhaps if H. was enough of an arse on American television this morning, that will prompt another crisis summit at BP. Lame, fuzzy Zoom videos on the Internet are one thing; a platform on one of America's biggest and most influential morning programs is something else again . . .millions will have seen that.
Agreed. Am quickly losing faith/admiration for HM and PC. They need to put a firm stop to JH either through pulling titles or funds. Preerablely both.
A random thought: IIRC Gayle King is associated with Good Morning. Perhaps this is quid pro quo for the baby shower invite (as she did not even know MM when she was invited to her intimate baby shower)?
A fellow Nutty said they found it on YouTube, but I don’t know where in the world they were viewing it from.
There’s two recent documentaries on Anne, they both might viewable via YouTube now. Sorry I can’t help more.
Lame, fuzzy Zoom videos on the Internet are one thing; a platform on one of America's biggest and most influential morning programs is something else again . . .millions will have seen that.
The morning programs are hardly influential. If you look at the ratings, GMA and Today shows typically have about a 1-2M viewership per show. For something like Harry's clip, maybe add 1M more (being generous) watching repeats online.
Two things to bear in mind: 1) Network TV is floundering in the age of digital streaming, and 2) the U.S. has 320 MILLION citizens. So hardly anyone is watching in the first place!
"A worker in the garden who this former actress must have suspected didn't speak English, because she would assume such things overheard her calling her husband n idiot and that he can't even get a two minute speech memorized. She has to have it written out for him which makes him look dead in the eyes."
Ooof, harsh. Blind is here: https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2020/08/blind-item-6_10.html#disqus_thread
Anybody read The Guardian review on Finding Freedom that was posted today? Ouch. They just got body-slammed by a newspaper that was one of their biggest proponents.
I have a few minor objections, but a witty and solid review. She got Thomas Markle wrong and blames him.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/10/finding-freedom-by-omid-scobie-and-carolyn-durand-harry-and-meghan-and-the-making-of-a-modern-royal-family
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1141545/Prince-Harry-ordered-anti-racist-training-Paki-slur.html
Anne at 70 was on ITV. I don't think you can watch UK TV programmes from abroad. Here is the link which you could try.
https://www.itv.com/hub/anne-the-princess-royal-at-70/2a7622a0001
Once read that you can use a VPN. IBM not technical myself but this is what a technical website says: "A VPN service masks your real IP address and replaces it with one from your chosen country. So by connecting to a UK server, you'll be able to watch British TV channels as if you're in the UK, from anywhere in the world."
Good programme, well worth watching.
You put your leg half in;
You put your leg half out;
You put your leg half in;
And you fake it all about.
You do the Joke-y Woke-y;
And you burn it all down.
That's what Freedom's about!
Here's a link -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTSOV1sOC0I
Sometimes she seems OK with the Cambridges; others, like today, she comes across as full of gratuitous snark.
Magatha - what's the view of her in the Southern hemisphere?
Published on Aug 10, 2020
Omid Scobie, co-author of “Finding Freedom,” gives an inside look at the couple’s side of the story.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2sAHHOZk8L8
I did not watch GMA. I watched the teaser on YouTube where Harry was having a Zoom chat with a BLM supporter group, and he said if we don’t act we are part of the problem. Yeah, no Harry. That’s not how it works works. It’s the typical ‘if you’re not with us, you’re against us, AND you’re bad!’
He forgets, while he and Meg are 12 emotionally, they are speaking to adults on an adult program. Not Cartoon Network. So, I realized he once again has nothing useful to say, falls flat, and decided it would be best to skip the program. I don’t even like GMA -he probably
Got the hook up via Jessica, let’s be real. She hasn’t gone anywhere as they still need her. Lol.
Any ideas?
Their review is in March '21; HM will be 95 at the end of April '21.
There has been speculation that Charles may become Prince Regent, having responsibilities of the Monarch but HM keeps the throne, although able to `retire'.
If this is the case, might Charles be hoping that the Harkles will come to their senses and return as reformed characters? He has been reported as having reckoned on the support of both his sons when his turn comes, so he doesn't have to call on anyone else. We've heard he's in favour of a `slimmed down' RF but it may seem to him that if they don't return it will be positively emaciated.
Is he pinning his hopes on them redeeming themselves? Those of us with experience of narcissists know there's no way that this could happen, although they might `Hoover' him. That is, feign sweetness, light,remorse and being reformed, in order to get what they want Once their feet are back under the table, they promptly revert to type. We've all seen it in our own lives.
Charles is a decent chap who loves Harry but he probably can't get his head around their behaviour - thoroughly gaslit, no doubt. We can see what's going on but it may not be apparent to the Heir Apparent.
I have no idea if Charles would be able to keep the Dukedom of Cornwall were he Prince Regent or whether he would, or could, relinquish it to William. I'd expect fireworks were William given control of the purse strings - Duchy money is not intended to support the duke's siblings but his children.
https://www.fraudmore.com/2020/08/10/prince-harry-meghan-markle-and-prince-andrews-social-media-accounts-wiped-from-royal/
Apparently, the RF has delisted Meghan, Harry, and Andrews social accounts from
royal websites today.
The day before to Finding Freebies release ...hmmm.
My pleasure. Hope it works.
"No it won't reveal her vulnerable side. She would first have to have one."
and:
"Bizarre. Grown A woman decides to complain about her life choices of joining the rich, fabulous, and wealthy. Grown woman, who has been divorced before, can easily divorce her current spouse if she feels that abused and victimized. Grown woman, does not want people to know she is a grown woman fully capable of owning her own life choices and consequences. General public does not want to read about Grown, privileged, woman complaining about unrealistic expectations and lack of adoration of the masses. Grow up, grown woman."
and:
"Meghan has controlled what is written, so that it portrays her in a good light. A very one sided woe is me book. I am not demading and did not announce my pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding, to get my own back for not being able to wear the emerald tiara that had been promised to her first. I did not say the Royal family were toxic, a friend mkisheard me. I only shouted at three year old Charlotte and made her cry because she touched my dress. And I simply forgot to ask my father if he was OK when having his heart attack, in that letter I wrote: the one he refused to mention until I gave a copy to friends. And I did not tell Harry to tout Disney for a vloice over assignment, I simply suggested it, when telling him we could not go to other Marine thingy. And I just never think to ask others if they are OK but always expect them to ask if I am?"
The morning programs are hardly influential. If you look at the ratings, GMA and Today shows typically have about a 1-2M viewership per show. For something like Harry's clip, maybe add 1M more (being generous) watching repeats online.
Two things to bear in mind: 1) Network TV is floundering in the age of digital streaming, and 2) the U.S. has 320 MILLION citizens. So hardly anyone is watching in the first place!
I'm going to respectfully disagree that the morning TV shows aren't influential. Maybe they are not influential amongst HAMS' target demographic of 18-35 year olds . . Gen Z and the Millennial contingent . . but an appearance on GMA or the Today show is still a desirable 'get'. The audience is primarily going to be older women, stay at home moms or those working from home. GMA would have featured extensive coverage of Harry & Meg's wedding, just as it did for all the Royal weddings. I'm never watching these shows except in the event of a Royal Wedding because I'm usually working, but it's a fair wager that the morning TV show audience would tend to be comprised of viewers more favorably predisposed toward the Royal family. It's not going to be a young, woke crowd, most likely, but these programs still do have clout. If they didn't, scandals among the ranks of the talent (eg. Matt Lauer) wouldn't be such huge news. A berth on a morning show is a pretty big deal and the political machinations behind the scenes (eg. Ann Curry vs. Lauer) always make the news
Maybe it's aunts and grandmothers of Harry's target demographic that were watching him this morning, but he was seen . . and by an audience that probably isn't watching as many grainy Zoom videos on their iPhones as the audience he's gone after until now. Sure, these shows aren't as big a deal as they were before the Internet took off, but an interview on GMA is still a decent coup for a no-talent foreign dilettante to score. More importantly, that clip is going to be picked up and circulated among all media outlets, so even non-viewers of the AM circuit will see it. I haven't seen it yet, so I can't speak to whether this appearance bolstered his image or made him appear more of a dolt than he has already. But this one appearance could conceivably lead to others.
What a tasty prospect that is . . not . . .
https://soyummy.com/prince-harry-favorite-flavor
Prince Harry Was Obsessed With A Surprising Flavor Growing Up
BY: OLIVIA HARVEY
JULY 09, 2019
kensingtonroyal/Instagram
Every kid has a favorite food, be it spaghetti and meatballs, pizza, or in Prince Harry’s case, banana-flavored everything. According to the former chef to the royal family, Harry loved all-things-banana as a kid. And his favorite banana desserts are actually something we’d expect a much more mature person to enjoy. Harry, your royal upbringing is showing!
Darren McGrady, who cooked for Queen Elizabeth and later Princess Diana and Princes William and Harry, talked to Hello! in 2016 about Diana’s parenting style when it came to mealtimes with her two sons. “She wasn’t strict at all,” McGrady told the publication. “She let them be boys, young boys!”
Although William and Harry loved themselves a junky meal — like loaded potato skins and fried chicken, as McGrady mentioned — they were more so into sweets than savory
And Princess Diana, being fairly relaxed compared to the boys’ nanny, let Harry and Will have whatever they wanted.
“They could have chocolate,” McGrady said of the boys, “there weren’t special treats because if the boys were home, the Princess wanted to spoil them.” She often spoiled them with banana desserts, McGrady told Hello!, knowing that banana was a favorite of both Harry and Will’s, but especially Harry’s
... these programs still do have clout. If they didn't, scandals among the ranks of the talent (eg. Matt Lauer) wouldn't be such huge news.
Eh, fair enough, I guess --
___________________________________
@Nutty Flavor -- I don't know if it was a live interview or a clip of something else, sorry -- I can't bring myself even to look at still pix of the Harkles. I just hurriedly found a YouTube video and copy-pasted the link.
@Raspberry Ruffle was going to watch it and "take one for the team" I believe.
Now I get the banana obsession Meg has. Apart from its phallic shape (which made it such an inappropriate vehicle for atta-girl sentiments to sex workers), I was wondering how anybody could have gleaned "Meg and Harry are knocking boots" by a random photo of two bananas spooning on her Instagram.
I personally don't regard banana-flavored desserts as particularly mature or sophisticated unless they are doused with alcohol and set on fire. Banana puddings, cakes and cream pies are just like nursery food. I think almost every infant is a big fan of the pureed bananas.
That was for the documentary shown in the UK on Saturday, both WBBM and I watched it. It was biased and not worthy of our time. ;o)
Nutty etc., is referring to the GMA one with Harry, I’m in the UK so I can’t view it live or otherwise. No luck with VPN’s to date. :o/
Gayle’s on the competitior netwrok CBS morning show.
@ Lt. Nyota Uhura,
That was for the documentary shown in the UK on Saturday, both WBBM and I watched it. It was biased and not worthy of our time. ;o)
Nutty etc., is referring to the GMA one with Harry, I’m in the UK so I can’t view it live or otherwise. No luck with VPN’s to date. :o/
_______________________________________
Oh, sorry :( !
In the US I'd think there's very little chance M could be involuntarily hospitalized even if it could be proven beyond doubt that at least twice twice she's paraded around with a doll implying it was her son. These days, psychiatric holds are ordered only if there's evidence the person is an imminent threat to self or others.
I rarely speak about this, but because of this discussion and my identity being anonymous:
One late December day I received an abrupt letter from my landlord that I was being evicted. I was always scrupulously current in my rent and had lived in the home for 11 years. No reason was given. At the time, I was over 55 years old, had been laid off due to my company’s loss of a large contract, no fault of mine. My unemployment and Cobra health insurance had run out. I am a cancer survivor and that was before the ACA where my prior history blocked me from getting health insurance at any cost.
I was distraught, and cried for days. I didn’t want to burden my friends, so one cold Sunday evening I called a Help line I found on the internet. I talked with a woman for over 30 minutes, and she was a good listener but had nothing but platitudes to offer, no good ideas that I could use. So I said “Thank you but this isn’t helping me. “ and hung up.
Twenty minutes later there were EMTs, a fire engine and a police car flashing lights in my driveway. I talked with them, told them the whole story, but they insisted on taking me to the hospital where I was forcibly stripped against my will, given blood tests against my will, held in the ER Naked in a gown on a hard chair for about 6 hours, bidy searched and then processed to a room with only a bed in it. All of my belongings were removed from me, searched and a few returned to me the next day.
It took 2 days for me to be scheduled to see a psychiatrist. Evidently I had been held on an involuntary 72 hour hold. As soon as we talked for a few minutes he ordered my release. But the trauma stays with me.
I think the hospital is involved in these actions. I received a bill for over $1800. Of course I have never paid it, have written untold number of letters, etc. but that unpaid bill stays on my record.
I would not wish involuntary incarceration like that on anyone, even MM, unless she cuts her wrists or takes pills or takes other actions against herself or others. Out of about 50 people I saw during that experience, most had bandaged wrists and some said they had taken pills.
If this is any indication of tomorrow's GMA interview ... there are no words, literally grasping, this is past pathetic ...
https://twitter.com/i/status/1291792464110444545
August 10, 2020 at 7:49 AM
We are all your good friends here, tho we too are "anonymous." Thank you for being brave enough to share.
@Leela -- I'm so sorry you had to go through that terrible experience. G-d bless you.
We are all your good friends here, tho we too are "anonymous." Thank you for being brave enough to share.
Thank you so much!
Yes, Anne at 70 was on YouTube a couple days after airing on ITV. I was lucky enough to catch it. I went back a couple days later to show a clip to a friend, and sure enough it was gone!
I too was shocked by your story. To be traumatized by people who are supposed to help must be one of the worst violations. Thank you for sharing, and best Nutty wishes to you. xo
Thank you for sharing such a painful episode. Do you suppose the 'anonymous' help line traced your phone line?
I am sorry if my mentioning the involuntary psych hold triggered bad memories. In MM's case I do believe she is psychically disturbed on a number of levels. I suppose her erratic public appearances with 'Archie' are a matter of opinion as to whether they constitute evidence of acute mental disturbance rating a psych eval, but that would depend on factors that really couldn't be ascertained without one--my concern is first and foremost for this elusive baby they call Archie. If a real 15-month old baby lives with Meg and Harry, I do have concerns about his safety and ability to thrive in their care. I am fairly certain at this point that Meg doesn't *actually* believe that a plastic doll is her baby on these occasions, but the pretense, and seeming to have an ironclad belief in her ability to convince people that it's a real baby is by itself an indicator that she's not playing with a full deck.
That's a narcissist for you. There is a possibility that on the dolly walk occasions, MM had overindulged in chemical substances that temporarily made her irrational. Nobody who abuses drugs can be trusted with small kids. I just hope that if there is a real and present danger to Archie or Harry, but particularly a baby that people are aware, and wouldn't allow harm to come to Archie because his parents have run away from home and are holed up in a borrowed mansion with zero oversight of their actions.
I'm leaning toward the RF taking the attitude that they can get stuffed because there is no baby. He would be my only concern in this sordid, tawdry saga if he is real.
How awful for you.
Even if they believed you were likely to harm yourself, that's no way to proceed. I've no idea of how it would compare with a similar event in the UK - but at least here UK nationals wouldn't be hit with a bill at the end of it.
As Lt Nyota says, thank you for so bravely sharing it with us.
Btw: If anyone is interested, here's the link to what the NHS says about sectioning under the MHA:
https://www.nhs.uk/using-the-nhs/nhs-services/mental-health-services/mental-health-act/
I do wonder what might have happened had I called the police/ambulance the last time my recent narc raved at me. I did think of it...
That sounds horrible. I'm sorry that happened.
If that was before ACA it was before 2010. And except for clear suicide attempts, credible homicide threats, or an obvious inability to care for oneself (including basic hygiene) it's pretty hard these days in NC to get holds. I would think it would be even harder in California.
We often hear about the competing interests (protection of a person's individual liberty vs potential protection of others) when there's a high-profile crime committed by a mentally ill person (or at the very least, a disturbed person.) Too often we hear family members tried to force the person to get help or tried to have the person committed. But when the person is an adult, there's usually not much a family or anyone else can do unless there is imminent danger and even then....
I can see both sides of the issue but come down on the individual liberty side most of the time. So no matter how "sick" some of M's antics may have been, I still say no chance of an involuntary hold.
This is a person who is giving (theatrical) speeches at virtual events and while we call her speeches "word salad" they are not psychiatric word salad. She manages to get botox/fillers and apparently has doctors willing to do plastic surgery, she manages to purchase new clothes/jewelry/wigs and slather on makeup some find attractive, she lives in an $18 million house (whether rented or slumming), she prances around doing one-off charity gigs with a photographer in tow when she's not conferencing with her attorneys about lawsuits....
No one is going to lock her up.
Love your name, BTW. In sanskrit it means play and is often used to describe the entire cosmos as leela or creative play by divine energy.
Harry and GMA -
I keep thinking about the phrase: first time in the jungle.
Where or how on earth does he think, never really having a job outside the family or military, think that public corporations have never heard of how to be sensitive to races or any other inequality or harassment and he or she needs to be the one to lead the CEO into enlightenment?
I cannot speak for others but where I and family have worked, we have experienced mainly annual reviews of this kind of thing so it is something on people's minds and in their actions.
Wishful thinking: That the CEO doesn't have access to this knowledge of how to stay legal/avoid lawsuits? This hasn't been part of the company/HR for the last how many years or something? And that somehow they ought to ignore their stockholders and somehow use the profits toward changing their principles - how?
How do you expect that to work/function at a company where you have never worked either at or within their field?
(ignoring profits) It certainly isn't going to be one of those selling points for why you need to hire him on the lecture circuit.
As for picking that particular group to align with ... one wonders why them and who else was looked at and why none of them worked out.
They've just used different tactics for different situations? The only scenario I'd reject is that she was genuinely pregnant and had actually given birth.
Thinking back to the supposed time of the birth, and Harry's gaff over `they change so much in a fortnight', is it possible that the `Archie'in the photo with the gt-grannies & a gt-grandpa was a living child? Born of a surrogate sometime earlier but had only come into their possession a fortnight earlier?
The `baby' at the TV interview could have been a doll, known as `Darren', who could withstand the poking and prodding they gave it. Did they hope that they'd be able to get away with the deception in that situation but didn't dare to show HM anything other than a living child. They would have had to have had their fingers crossed that HM wouldn't look too closely and see it didn't have that `newly-hatched' look or think that it might still be a tad large for a newborn.
Doll also at polo match and on pap-walk in Canada
The `birth certificate' could have been a `second' one, dated to when the child was handed over and took their name.
Subsequent appearances in SA and with Duck Rabbit, also child in buggy (LA) - were they hired children? Or was that photoshopped from a photo of baby Meghan?
The pretty child in the double-bobbled hat, which they let us believe was Archie although they didn't actually state it, was, I suspect, a girl. Perhaps a photo taken in Turkey & the child the daughter of Harry's friend.
I did read a rumour, at the time when M cleared off to Canada ahead of Harry, that there was a child being looked after/adopted in London and that H had had `bonding' time with him. Was he left behind? Did anyone else see the report? Does that seem feasible? Has Harry fessed up? Is it Harry's child or not?
Perhaps Baby Sasquatch of that Christmas card is the only true image we've seen - he wouldn't have had to have been in Canada, the pic. could have been emailed to them.
I hope that if there is a real child he is here in the UK and is being cared for properly.
All smoke and mirrors, as we've said so many times already.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/meghan-markle-prince-harry-finding-freedom-career-acting-media-a9663256.html
Ah-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *drawing quick breath* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
*Wiping away tears of mirth*
Well, she knows how to sue them, anyway, LOL -- and I'm sure Scooby Doo would have taught her everything there is to know *grin*
Oh my, I feel not only very sorry for your horrible experience, I feel outrage too. I had written upthread about the possibility an involuntary psych. hold can be done without much if any 'evidence' through a Justice of the Peace court here. I did not want to add much detail because I live in a rural county of Texas and Meghan lives in California where I would think rights are respected more. However, I know of 3 cases where an unwarranted psych. hold was forced on someone and one of the situations involved circumstances very much like you described. Except this person was talking to Adult Protective Service on the phone rather than a Help Line and the staff person misinterpreted an answer which made them appear at risk.
Yes, if there suspected suicidal intent (or certainly if there's an attempt), no problem with a hold usually. But that's not M's situation.
You'd hope that Child Protective Services would investigate anyone no matter who they are if a credible report was made. But CPS is always overworked everywhere.
And it's really bad in CA apparently where according to the NYT article below from 3 days ago, "One in seven children in California is reported to a child abuse hotline by age 5, and at any given time nearly 90,000 children live under the oversight of California’s county-run child protective services agencies."
When the cost of living is taken into account, CA has the highest rate of child poverty in the nation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/us/virus-child-abuse.html
The danger some of us here see for Archie is real I believe. But it isn't an imminent danger---like that he'll be beaten to death, die of starvation because he's not fed, be burned with cigarettes, spend his days covered in feces, be allowed to accidentally eat meth....
I'm not saying M isn't "sick" and Archie isn't "in danger." But if any were to come to official attention I agree it's most likely Harry for being a danger to himself because of substance abuse. Doria is a shield for M too.
No, Meg will never harm her self, leaving out obsessive cosmetic procedures and routine drug use that is. She will harm Harry, and is already doing so in fact. He appears to enjoy the pain. A woman who is capable of tossing over her father, former lovers, and every friend she’s ever had...”friend”...Has no maternal instincts. Guy the beagles fate awaits Archie if Meg feels threatened. If he’s real, that is.
I just marvel at the whole “empress has no clothes” Aspect to this whole circus. The media both tabloid and main stream, prince and celebrate any old site that she wants to dish out. She brings in naked all out in a crowded public area in full view, with pictures, and not a single publication whatsoever questions Her bizarre appearance, The obvious tension among all the onlookers, including Kate and Harry Or the sinister stuff inertness if Meg’s newborn. Instead no she is celebrated as a style icon for wearing a $600 bivouac tent.
OK. I know gaslighting when I see it. Thanks to Meg and COVID-19 and politics, I know distrust every single item I read in print, and I don’t care what the publication is.
@Leela
I too was shocked by your story. To be traumatized by people who are supposed to help must be one of the worst violations.
Thanks, Nukleopatra, that’s a very insightful point I hadn't thought of.
Besides suicidal threats/attempts, posing a credible imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to an identifiable person or being unable to care for one's basic safety/health needs could also result in a hold. But IMO no one is going to lock up M because she's a manipulative ___ or because she could experience narcissistic jealousy over Archie's relationship with Harry (or with one of the dogs, or Doria, or a toy, whatever-- all are possible, I expect.)
The kinds of threats to Archie you are talking about are likely real IMO (assuming he's real, of course.) But they are the kind of threat that most likely might land him in a therapist's office years down the road for extended therapy. The kind of threat that would result in M getting a hold or result in CPS being seriously interested are the kind that credibly would put Archie in a grave in the next month.
In a free society people with mental disorders or personality disorders who are outwardly pretty functional don't get locked up involuntarily except under F'ed up circumstances. Neither do less-than-ideal parents. And that's true regardless of how "famous" the individuals are. And on the balance, that's best IMO. I understand others may not agree.
I will try to be brief. Let me preface by saying my incident was more born of stubborness. I was a retail manager for 20+ years, last 10 one store. All I did was work. No exaggeration 80 hours a week. I honestly loved it but too much for anyone and at the same time I was having relationship issue. I ended up moving out on my own. One day I just snapped and quit my job. I had enough savings to not work for a year. As money dried up ,by that time I was really isolating myself and facing eviction. I ignored all calls from my family. They would knock at my door I would not answer. My self esteem was sh*t
I was in total denial of utter mess I was in
Eventually it progressed to where my family had police come. I would state I was fine and just wanted to be left alone. By this time my family knew I was facing eviction. After 2 or 3 visits of cops coming and since I refused to sit and have conversation with family they told me my dad was going to petition court to make me seek help. I basically dared them and sure enough next day cop showed up with papers to take me away
I was not suicidal, deeply depressed (obviously) and pissed but I refused that meeting so here I was. They had court order and led me to cop car in handcuffs
I chatted up the officers entire way and was just pissed I let it get this far. It was to be that 72 hour hold once I met with doctor. I was dropped at government "crazy place" and sat at desk with intake nurse where next step was to wait for doctor. They led me into where the other patients were, like a day room and oh my gosh Leela my heart aches for you because it was like being dropped into the set of One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest.
I met with the doctor and I was released half hour later where they arranged for one of the workers to shuttle me the hour back home. I was angry. I was angry when I looked at papers and saw my dad had went to a judge and said I wanted to kill myself. Never happened. I became downright furious when whole night I got texts from dad and sister (my mom has passed) "we just want you to get help, doing what is best for you"
My dad went there following day and that is when he found out they never kept me.
Since that time I am well and relationships are wonderful but it was dark time and I never told anyone so thank you Leela as I think maybe I needed to get it out of me. I feel so much for you and I hate that she ruined word thriving but I really hope that you are.
Like I stated previous whole mess was me being stubborn and immature I have since rebuilt and am well. I was never at level of commitment and am thankful I was able to convey that otherwise I would have very easily been stripped and tossed into that fluorescent white room. Had I been I don't know how all else would have played out as that would have been trauma beyond words. So again Leela stand proud you are a warrior
To conclude, with a convincing lie and law enforcement I believe anyone can get taken in but as in my case, I was able to get out. Stand tall Leela as what I can tell you made it out of hell and back and may the Angels continue to bless you, me too :)
Ok everyone :-)
I am good now and wish not to discuss ,aside from legality of it if any so inclined. Big hug between us. Ironically us nutty sisters :)~
Leela if ever you want to talk say the word I will pass along my email. I am not really a giant goof I just play one on the internet . All my best ❤
Thank you too Nutty and Nutties for allowing this space. Who is next? *grin*
Leela,
Thank you for sharing such a painful episode. Do you suppose the 'anonymous' help line traced your phone line?
Hikari, yes that’s exactly what happened. I think the “counselor” on the phine thought I might be upset enough to harm myself, but I never uttered one word like that. I was trying desperately to find a job and said so. I think she was just a bad counselor.
Even worse they stuck you with a bill
Another hug :/
And Leela say the word if you ever want to talk
Goodnight!
One of my nephews was going through a rough time when he got out of the Marines. Smoking lots of pot, lazing around, not working, etc. He was living with his parents (who will never get any ‘parent-of-the-year’ awards.) I’m 3000 miles away, and was trying to help him in any way possible—suggesting potential jobs and/or college courses, sending him books on choosing a career, being available to chat with him, etc. He was not at all suicidal; just sort of ‘stuck’ and I think having difficulty re-entering normal life after being a Marine. He had decided that his military career was over once he finished his enlistment, but hadn’t decided what was next.
I was researching ways to help him and found a call center for ex-Military members, if they just needed to talk. When I recommended it to him, he absolutely flipped out on me. He told me that he would never call them because they traced callers, even if they were just calling to ‘chat.’ Turns out he was correct. So obviously, he never called, which is too bad.
On the issue of Meghan and Harry maybe neglecting Archie and what can be done...the Child Protective Service agency takes anonymous complaints and if there was anything the Harkles were actually doing something to Archie any number of people could call in and make a confidential complaint. If such a thing has happened we may not know, but the authorities would be on it most likely. So maybe we should rest assured Archie is protected as I am inclined to think if any abuse occurred or was thought to occur wouldn't the BRF report the Harkles to CPS. The list of potential people reporting Meg and Harry confidentially could be endless, anyone from former nannies, security personnel, friends, physicians, nurses, household staff, etc...
Queen Elizabeth allegedly scolds Meghan on video call and tell her she's not family
I think Cass using the word 'Crazy" is acceptable as I have seen it used on this site innumerable times and no one expressed offense until now. I remain neutral on 'Mental' as it is part of the term 'Mental illness' which is used by health care professionals. Maybe you can explain why either of these two terms are unacceptable to you I will learn something I hadn't thought of.
A timely example (one of the innumerable ones) of a Nuttie using the word "crazy"
"The Polo pics were just crazy" @ 4:50am
Hmmmm, written by you just a few minutes before Cass used the term
@CatEyes: Both terms are derogatory. And calling someone ‘Mental’ is not the same as referring to ‘Mental Health’ or ‘Mental Illness.’
In the lead-up and months after the wedding, I started occasionally commenting, mostly on the DM stories, and noted that I thought she was exhibiting narcissistic tendencies. There were so many complaints to the DM about my comments thst they would be removed snd I’d receive regular admonishments from the DM moderators. You’d think I’d tossed a stink bomb into the comments sections. Eventually they banned my account.
I have to chuckle because commenters on the DM and many other media outlets where comments are allowed, people constantly write things that are accurate but would have gotten them banned in 2018. So I just figure I was part of the small number of people that has grown exponentially into a worldwide discussion and dissection of their dysfunctional relationship.
Think of yourself as being ahead of the learning curve.
In attempt to be politically correct I looked up definition
Cra•zy
mentally deranged, especially as manifested in a wild or aggressive way.
"Stella went crazy and assaulted a visitor"
Honestly I was not far off. I saw crazy. I suppose it is up to ones own interpretation. Meg looked unwell at polo event but something tells me in different setting she could morph to "crazy"
I think I caught up on comments and poster who discovered the banana link. Spot on! I really do think Meg caught and ran with that. Wow .
To Cass' point. I do not remember specifics but I do remember long ago not alot were on board with Meg faking pregnancy or being "crazy" . There was alot of going back and forth about what you all were watching (I didnt talk much) but many heated conversations to say the least
And I do not mean to call anyone out but it seemed to swell when tatty came aboard. As I recall she was a strong voice in not so much defending Meg but offfering alternative view point, didn't go down too well here. It is just how I remember it. Again as stated I don't remember specifics but I remember Tatty. She pushed the envelope and it wasn't so much what she was saying it was more of her delivery that stirred the pot
I stirred up trouble myself at times and I am sorry (to the one who wishes I do not name) but I humbly apologize and hope we can move on
I blame the cappuccino blast :)
https://youtu.be/ZTSOV1sOC0I
It was less than 3 minutes and it was like a promo. Featured more of interview with Colors of Change guy than Harry. There was no new Harry just clips . Anchor stated "the full interview will be available Monday"
The anchor was overly animated, almost giddy with excitement that Harry was using his "enormous platform" to "shine a light" on issue. Yes she used those quotes.
I think the anchor turned me off more than anything else. I was wishing for carboard cutout of nazi Harry to streak across the studio to knock dynamic grin off her face.
She appeared borderline startstruck. Maybe because it was morning she was so uppity
It was bad but we have been through far worse
I rate it 4 of 10 on vomit scale
🤮🤮🤮🤮
I've been doing so much research into narcissism in the past year that I may seem to use the word "narcissist" much too casually these days. But I never use it without careful consideration.
I also have Meghan to thank for starting me on my studies. Perhaps one great good that will come out of this disaster is that more people will be aware of the signs of narcissism in others and will be better equipped to arm themselves against it.
I think we all can agree PA is way involved in this scandal. Whether or not he is held to account remains to be seen but despite our feelings H&M may not be the priority we desire them to be.
'PENIS' POOCH Prince Harry and Meghan Markle mocked as their dog Pula’s name is Romanian slang for ‘penis’
AND
PRINCESS AND THE PEE Prince Harry was ‘delightfully surprised’ when Meghan Markle ‘peed in the woods on luxury camping trip’
Why doesn’t she do herself a Favor and divorce Harry?
Ya know?
Pula and Lupa 🐺
Loopy and Droopy 🍌
Thanks so much for your kind words, your encouragement and for sharing your story too. It is healing yo let it out.
I now am fully happy, with great work, income and Excellent health insurance.
Thanks again, everyone who offered empathy and support. This is a great group here on this Nutty blog.
I received no follow up but somehow I climbed out of hole and fully functional. How well is up for debate haha but I am feeling good! After I quit I literally laid on couch for 3 weeks. I remember giant knot in my hair. I was so burnt out, so spent. I was doing well but then as money dwindled I grew so insecure and just became shell of myself. I alienated everyone. I think I was on par with Aquagirls brother, down and out
Sharing with you made me stop and realize just how far I have come. I gave myself 4 solid months of hell but I got new job, less hours. Same pay (imagine that!) First time in 20 years 2 days off a week. I am currently laid off but drawing a paycheck so all is good.
Very wonderful to hear you are good too! Thank you too to poster with Cleoptra-like name. Ugh sorry. I will see you again and then I will know :)
Kind words appreciated
To Nutty I sent quick email . Check soam folder :)
I hope you all have wonderful day/night .i will too :)
PRINCESS AND THE PEE Prince Harry was ‘delightfully surprised’ when Meghan Markle ‘peed in the woods on luxury camping trip
How bizarre. In all my years of venturing into the wild, I have regarded going behind a tree, rock or bush as routine. Just a tedious fact of life, and a very chilly one in the Scandinavian winter (I always smile when we're informed that the Met. Office has issued a `Yellow Snow Warning'. To me, that means `Never eat yellow snow'!)
And there I was, imagining them snuggling up in a 2-man (sorry, person) tent & cooking up K rations over a primus. Silly me!
Did they each have monogrammed latrine tents, labelled `Bwana' and `Bwana's Bit of Stuff'(or whatever the Botswana equivalent may be), each with its own personalised chamber pot, all dutifully carried by African servants whenever they set foot outside the immediate confines of the camp? Was that why `going bush' was considered so odd?
Or was the Sun hinting at sexual proclivities?
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry net worth 2020: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's combined wealth and where it comes from
Stephanie Takyi
Evening Standardyesterday
You forgot to mention (perhaps you didn't see it) that Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad, it is revealed in their bombshell biography, Finding Freedom, which hits shelves today. (DM)
So this is what attracted him to her?? His soulmate, based on that fact? She probably did anything to appear to be on the same wavelength as him.
At this rate, there's no need to buy the book, it must have been serialised in its entirety.
Beach Star Ibiza as this picture was fe on their twitter site in February 2016
@BeachStarIbiza twitter
They object to allegedly unauthorised photos `invading their privacy'when they are fully clothed but it's OK for their mouthpiece to reveal intimate details that, not only did she relieve herself in the wild but that Harry approved of it? Tasteless information that presumably came straight from them? Or were the servants watching?
Or is she now going to sue Scoobie Doo and his partner in crime for invading their privacy, just to `prove' that they had nothing to do with the book?
Harry must be away with the fairies if he thinks it demonstrates a `down to earth attitude' - to me it suggests that she's damned if she's going to sink so low as to use a composting toilet, when there's one available.It's not to everyone's liking but surely better than unnecessarily baring one's backside in the bush.
Away from facilities, one has to do it without making a fuss.
It does imply that Harry has a particular quirk; a while back we did wonder if that was her speciality too.