Let's try this again...
Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce. And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before? which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away". That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice. But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance. Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei
Comments
The Archbishop of Canterbury should either apologise for disbelieving Meghan Markle’s secret wedding claims - or lose his job.
He's not going to let this go - is he? 😄
I am sure the Duchess of Cambridge as well as the Duchess of Sussex read here. Perhaps they would care to comment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AAv6w8Mjs4
A comprehensive, calm, polite yet utterly damning debunking of the Oprah interview. Especially the interview with Valentine Low of The Times who is doing sterling work. He emphatically stands by his reporting as he recognises how litigious the Sussexes are. His research is "copper-bottomed".
Also the interview with Ken Wharfe, former RPO to Diana and her sons. He made the same point now that applied to Diana's death in 1997 (though he didn't say so). Giving up her royal protection literally cost her her life. He goes into detail about the differences between RPOs and hired security in California. If anything tragic happens in future, Harry will blame everyone but himself. Interviews such as this one with Ken Wharfe are therefore important to have now.
If something comes out later today, I'll do a quick blog post on it.
Titles taken away? Line of succession questions? We'll see.
Could be something, could be nothing.
"BRF are always controlled and meticulous — not chaotic. Planned and patient, not petulant. Most gracious and humble to consider allowing the pair to re-gift the gifted titles back as a gesture of goodwill. Diplomacy whilst also removing the titles is ideal."
@Acquataine, I always look forward to reading your incisive posts. Please do that more often. Your understanding of PR is great and yes, Meghan studied Kate's PR and positioned herself as a contrast to her. Back to their interview, I've noticed that in the PR release of how she wants to do a home Birth, the sentence "Their baby who would be a princess when her grandfather ascends the throne....". So that's basically it. They are now leaking left, right and center that their kids will be made prince and princess when Charles becomes king and they used the interview to force Charles hand. Because if they aren't made prince and princess, people would say that Meghan was right and it's because of racism. What do you think will happen and how should Charles handle this issue? I read that it's not automatic that Harry's kids will be prince and princess and I would hate that the Sussexes blackmailed Charles to get their way.
For the US fonts, do you think the Sussexes have damaged the reputation of the RF in the US permanently?
__________________
Prince Harry Only Has Eyes For Meghan Markle While Announcing Their Engagement
28 November 2017
by GEMMA CARTWRIGHT
First Published: 27 November 2017
https://www.popsugar.co.uk/celebrity/photo-gallery/44301848/image/44301842/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-Engagement-Photos
I welcome challenges because i dislike echo chambers more than i dislike people disagreeing with me. And i try not to make it personal or take it personally if there are disagreements.
Now about Charles and those Sussexes, i want an announcement that makes it clear that the children will not get any princ(ess) titles.
You are right that the Sussexes are seeding the ground to force his hand, and he is quite clearly the weak link, so i hope William and The Queen see him (them) off by forcing the announcement before Charles is King.
Right now everyone is hoping Megxit anniversary brings an announcement, but i prefer it to come when they least expect it.
And they should time it before she has the baby because she'll be doing lots of princess / Diana Sussex PR which will turn into racism PR if they make the announcement after the fact.
However,Harry and Meghan are using the same Diana and her HRH playbook to bully the royals and i think they should respond in exactly the same way that they did with Diana...amend/create a Letters patent that says that if you walk away from the family, you lose the lot. Just as they did with Diana and her HRH.
Frame it as the new Way ahead initiative whereby Harry is removed from all titles including ducal titles, ADC, counsellor of state, potential regency,line of succession and definitely no prince titles for his kids. Make it applicable to entire family so it removes the sting from the PR storm the Sussexes will throw up.
Just as they did with Diana, divorce and HRH.
As Harry lost his right to 'of Wales' on his marriage, he becomes Prince Harry Mountbatten-Windsor. This last point has to be made very clear because alot of people don't know or understand that he lost it and assume that if he loses his Ducal title he reverts back to Harry of Wales. He does not.
Please look at @MaierDlamini and comment:
From 8.144pm yesterday @MaierDlamini
"Curiouser and curiouser:
A Tweet from the 11th Marquis: Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini 3 days ago:
Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini
"funny how quiet critics get when they realize they were wrong
all i ask is that you search your souls for your true intentions
oh and you can totally fuck off now"
god save the queen"
Flag of United Kingdom
GIF (of HM)
The Tweeter claims a connection with Northern Ireland, follows a strongly Unionist Twitter a/c, uses the Union Flag, has a nice gif of HM and adds `God Save the Queen'
So was this a `gotcha' aimed at the Independent, to show that they desperately wanted it to be true? Certainly, the Unionist flavour suggests someone who is not a sugar! Someone who'd be known as `Scotch Irish' on the west side side of the pond ie fiercely loyal to the Crown.
If this is so, well done, Sir! Had you posted on 1st April, it might have been too obvious!
PS There's an Annaville in Corpus Christi TX but the name is used for several new housing estates in Co. Meath (the R of Ireland) - geography suggests just one builder naming them in honour of a beloved family member."
Of course we know what she is. She's a gold-digging slut that can't achieve anything on her own because she doesn't have the talent or the personality.
Unfortunately, the person behind it seems serious and he's actually been published with that byline in a somewhat legitimate publication in America.
I still can't believe the Independent fell for it.
Perhaps they are so deep in their republican stance that they don't bother making cursory checks.
All the monarchical outlets tend to check for titles as a matter of course, and they trumpet any and all non-white aristocrats as a 'look how multicultural Britain is' agenda.
Before reading his story or checking other things, i immediately checked for the title.
The immediate red flag was that he labelled himself the ELEVENTH title holder which means googling the title should throw up the other TEN title holders preceeding him and a history of the title itself.
He was also very specific that it was a title in the Irish peerage - no such village or town or county in Ireland.
And even if it were a bought title, it would be grounded in the reality of a geographical place in Ireland.
Nah. As the country folk would say, they're both as lasting as a fart in a windstorm. Nobody cares about them; they're a momentary diversion from our very large problems and the anger of our population.
I hope Feinstein hangs in and Newsom is recalled because in this crazy world, I really can see him appointing Meg even tho she's unqualified, lying and highly divisive. She's just the kind of figure the Wokies will love to champion and it will give her the appearance of winning.
Lady C's video yesterday unmasking Princess Anne was her best, most revealing...at least as far as I've seen.
This side of the pond, you don't see them really in the magazines at the check out at the grocery so I think that although they would like to think they have the US beside/backing them, it is more like most people would be: Who? pause and then Oh, that interview. That is not a groundswell of increasing support and name recognition.
SirStinxAlot - A lot can happen in 8 years for her given her history of ghosting, ditching any family except her mother (so far), leaving when it becomes uncomfortable and the lawsuits. Add into that now the discrepancies about what she said in the interview are becoming louder and more wide spread. All any opponent has to do is play the interview where she "misled", point out the truth and end with: She can't be trusted. Or She lies. And she handed them the evidence. At that point, her campaign is trying to playing defense to undo the damage. (or people will raise money to have Piers follow her around speaking out against her. People who were mad enough would chip in gladly and he would no doubt take that mission on with some of his own money).
Those are big hurdles even running as dog catcher.
Aquitaine - ah but didn't they already seed the ground that they wanted Letters Paten that it was no longer an automatic title upgrade? Will and the men in grey need to work on HM now. Charles will have enough to plan/take care of at the time and just after the transition and a heavy pestering by them might lead to some push back (we wouldn't see) to undo it. If he could cut off his son in mid 30's financially, then this might be possible.
Out of the succession if you are going to go so far at the titles.
Also, you mention that you prefer to have it hanging over them and when they least expect it. Yes. I guess now when I see a little bit of flurry which seems out of place, there will be a part of me which will wonder if they were just told bad news and this is the push back from them to try to regain control of the story.
Wow, the idea that HM et al needs to apologize and placate Meghan now, not necessarily her husband, for failing to be supportive when she was feeling suicidal. Like they knew? The person who allegedly knew was her husband, not them.
I don't believe she talked in the interview about how she has since had therapy to undo all that. Or marital to deal with him dragging her to some event when he couldn't trust her to be left alone. (the snarky in me noticed that that event was a lovely example of Harry displaying how the show must go on, maybe some stiff upper lip).
@ Nelo: The Queen may be an Ostrich about these things, hut she's quite decisive when she wants something done and very obstinate about changing her mind on it.
Charles is definitely the weak link. Abit of flattery and he is yours. Almost every single one of his scandals can be filed under 'easily led'. Increasingly, i'm convinced Harry inherited his 'easily led' trait from that corner. He is also governed by such a degree of self-interest that he has harmed his own family, including his sons, to gain his goals. Another trait displayed by Harry. Though Harry is also burdened by the traits inherited from Diana.
William has turned out to be more thoughtful and proactive than either of them. He is just as obstinate as The Queen once he decides to do something. Definitely not easily led like Charles or Harry.
William and Queen have reached a point of similar alignment as far as the monarchy. Charles is still as self-interested as ever - look at the PR he is putting out post-Oprah interview about *his* desired approach to the Palace response. It's all about himself rather than the family or the institution.
The only way Charles sticks to any plans William and Queen draw up is if they make it clear that his position is under threat if he gives in.
It's incredibly frustrating to see that he still doesn't get the game the Sussexes are playing.
Harry repeatedly demonstrates that he doesn't know how or what his family is or what they do. I think he is still in shock that The Queen is an actual thing, so he wouldn't understand the implications.
And Meghan would only understand that she would remain a Duchess (as long as she remained married to Harry).
The rest of the world would understand immediately how far they'd fallen.
Btw, forgot the other thing they need to remove - Prince of the UK.
He keeps Prince style, but if he must use it on official papers, to be described as Prince *from* the UK thus rendering it completely meaningless.
Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu, who described herself as a “political and women’s rights activist”, defended Meghan’s comment.
Meghan was right! Sussexes defended over 'second wedding' row despite Archbishop blow
MEGHAN MARKLE'S claim she married Prince Harry "three days before" their public wedding in May 2018 has been defended by a racial justice activist.
I have seen/heard this woman on TV, she is the biggest turn off after Meg.
No idea why they continue to invite to give an opinion.
I tend to switch over.
"William and Queen have reached a point of similar alignment as far as the monarchy. Charles is still as self-interested as ever - look at the PR he is putting out post-Oprah interview about *his* desired approach to the Palace response. It's all about himself rather than the family or the institution."
Maybe. I'm not sure.
It's also possible the "leak" about Charles preferring a point by point rebuttal was done with the agreement of HM & Will. It shows the palace has "receipts" too, it implicitly acknowledges some members of the public wanted that approach and shows it was considered but not adopted at least not right now. Finally, it may have encouraged rebuttals by interested press. So I don't know. Speaking with only "one voice" isn't always the best approach.
Gosh, I forgot about today being the 31st. I hope it isn't a big nothingburger. I fear it will be. It's 3:45p in the UK now, so if anything was going to happen, it probably would've happened already, yes?
Lack of a public announcement does not indicate that nothing has happened.
There are so many leaks coming from them from so many directions that it didn't need an extra Charles has a point by point rebuttal. Valentine Low at the Times can't shut up for one. Regardless of the professional kudos, he is on a one-man mission to call out the Sussexes and is framing it as speaking on behalf of the traumatised victims of Meghan's bullying. That may be true, but he would not be going on his global press tour without palace sanction nor would the palace allow it.
And the Palace are allowing it because of Judge Warby's decision to award the SJ to Meghan. They immediately put out statements that showed their disappointment and then oopsies....a times journalist stumbles on internal emails about Meghan's bullying.
That said, most of the UK media is so pissed at being labelled racist bullies that they don't need any nod from the palace to debunk the Sussexes.
It's turned into a crusade across the board. Even the daily star is at it. The daily star being on a par with The Globe.
I will say though, that William's,'We are not a racist family' needed to be said and specifically by him because he is the only one in that family who remains publicly untarnished by scandals linked to moral failings.
That one had to be addressed directly and not via leaks or palace statements.
IMO, if it needed to be said that there was an itemised rebuttal discussed, but discarded, framing it as a family effort would have been better.
Show of solidarity.
Like the Mafia.
And then proceed with the itemised rebuttal leaked in the way it is happening now - one item every few days and weeks.
Death by 1000 cuts.
It still felt like a break from rank in how it was worded. As if Charles was continuing to disagree with Palace policy.
Perhaps today was the deadline for Harry to return his titles, and if he doesn’t gift them back then they will be revoked shortly. They’re always letting the duo decide how to conduct themselves, after all.
Frankly, their personal family drama is extremely lengthy and I can see why people are aggravated by the way the BRF has handled the situation.
William is of the generation that understands social media and its implications, I think the Queen and Charles didn’t realize the level of destruction a commoner could do nowadays.
You are probably right. But I tend to see things through American eyes even though I know it's not comparable. For example, (this isn't political, at least not in the fighting sense) during an election season often (not always but often) both parties like having their VP candidate be more of an attack dog while the presidential candidate mostly floats above the really dirty fights in a more cerebral and wise fashion. But it's desired by the campaign both messages be heard. That's what I thought could be going on here.
While there's only one Monarch, "The Monarchy" is more than one person. HM isn't going to climb down in the mud pit. But in their own ways, both Charles and Will can.
Indeed. They can do it the easy way, or they can do it the hard way; regardless, it will be done. I have to say that it is rather amusing to watch Meghan run headfirst into the castle walls.
Maybe the Windsor titles could become the official BRF booby prize. "You are now officially beyond the pale for life."
Re: the various comments higher on this page, it was curious that immediately after Warby gave his inexplicable decision, we heard that the Palace was not objecting to ex-employees giving their side of the story, since they had been deprived of their day in court. Then, a few days later(?) it was widely briefed that the Palace wanted a wall of silence and everything was to be dealt with privately. I can only suppose Charles and William were in the vanguard to begin with (Charles wanting his point-by-point rebuttal and William answering that are you a racist family question emphatically, completely against protocol). Then the Queen shut it down.
On a minor matter, does anyone else get Warby and Welby mixed up? I have to check every time. Two oldish white guys Meghan DOES have time for I expect. Ultra-establishment. Blind as bats about her.
If anything is going to happen it may be later today/tonight or failing that next week due to Easter.
"@Acquitaine - Wouldn't it be funny if they are encouraged to swop out Sussex for Windsor?
Maybe the Windsor titles could become the official BRF booby prize. "You are now officially beyond the pale for life.""
YES!!!
🤣🤣🤣😂😂
I see Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu as a great pain in the anatomy - never lets facts get in the way of her opinion.
@Aquataine - my whole point was that this episode of the piece in the Independent seems to have been planned to catch out a newspaper that is so keen to push its anti-,monarchy position that it doesn't bother to check out its stories before publication.
We had already demonstrated that the title was bogus and I added that the `place name' existed only as a name for several new housing estates in Co Meath, in the Irish Republic.
All the signifiers he flashes around (eg Union Flag, Ulster flag, gif of HM, `God Save the Queen)) suggest he is anything but `R/republican in any sense, as does the Twitter account he follows.
He may be deluded as to the veracity of his `aristocratic title' but he has done those of us who wish for the Kraken to be released quite a service, I think, for showing that the Independent publishes any old garbage that supports their stance, true or not.
-even if he is surprised to be regarded as `non-U' or `not PLU', as Nancy Mitford might have said, or simply `below the salt',
- or the likes of Mos-Shogbamimu choose to ignore it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_and_non-U_English
This is where the media and various surrogates can be very helpful to the palace by being the attack dogs while the Palace does a combination of ignoring and gaslighting in public while making moves behind the scenes.
My favourite gaslighting Palace reactions to Sussex tantrums;
1. Sussex put out their SA documentary. Palace responds with 'We are sad to see fragile Harry and worry about him' (paraphrasing)
2. Sussex accuse the family racism, mental health, lack of support. Palace. Palace responds with 'We are sad that the Sussexes struggled. Recollections vary.' (paraphrasing)
Both responses provoked very public, angry lashing out from the Sussexes which revealed to the public that they were the problem and tarnished them instead of the intended targets.
I think my only frustration is how slowly the palace responds to crisises, but in this scenerio they heed to stand their ground, continue to gaslight the Sussexes while removing all the toys that anchor them to the family. It's quite clear that the Sussexes will never stop.
Lady Colin Campbell claims Princess Anne is royal accused by Harry and Meghan of asking about 'Archie's skin colour' - but she insists it was actually a misunderstanding about 'culture'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9422631/Lady-Colin-Campbell-claims-Princess-Anne-royal-accused-racism-Harry-Meghan.html
"“I think she has a good chance of getting into the White House,” he insisted — noting that the role could finally see her reuniting with the royal family she ripped in her TV tell-all."
Tom Bower,
Yeah but who cares what an old white dude thinks, right? ;)
Is this some reverse psychology at play here? Personally, I think Megs has no chance winning the primary never mind taking the top prize. The media doesn't represent the people. America is pretty centrist and torching your family and your husband's family is not a good look. Plus, most of us are sick to death of ID politics and playing the victim.
A couple weeks ago, a fellow poster mentioned that they were reading 'The Queen Mother' by Lady Colin Campbell, and being rather curious, I picked up a copy and am about half way through.
What I am gathering is that MM is rather similar to Elizabeth Bowes Lyon and perhaps her daughter and grandson, being sentimentally fond of her, were thinking we've seen this type of personality before and we can weather through and make it work.
Just a few lines from the book that stuck out...
Elizabeth gave interviews to the press after her engagement, "The reaction at Buckingham Palace was horror to anyone associated with the Royal Family would actually do something as infra dig as give interviews to the press of their own free will."
"She was raised with the belief that she was a marvelous person for a variety of reasons..."
Bertie was..."neither intellectually gifted nor educationally capable."
Elizabeth was...superficially sweet but hard as nails...a hypocrite..
...lacked the warmth that children pick up on and respond to instinctively...
... a self-promoting actress whose charm concealed a lack of sincerity...
...authoritarian personalities cannot stand, however, is authorities appointed over them...
...propensity towards exaggeration, control and convenience...
But the main difference is character. Though Elizabeth wanted to marry David and settled on Bertie, whom she was not attracted to nor did she love..."Whatever her original aims and feelings, she had embraced her destiny with admirable wholeheartedness, demonstrating that no matter how self-interested she was, once she had struck a deal, she fulfilled her end of it to the letter. This signified an honorable as well as a decent sense of obligation, and if she were cheating anyone in this marital transaction, it was herself rather than her new husband."
Elizabeth also came from a very happy and loving family whom Bertie enjoyed spending time with.
Too bad they could not dump sentimentality and go with the ever practical Anne's intuition.
I had never heard of her until I noticed a paragraph in one of the UK papers about a ding dong between her and Piers Morgan.
I tend to switch off shouty people, figure if they need to shout they aren’t worth listening to.
I keep up with what’s going on in the UK via online newspapers.
@Este..
Yeah but who cares what an old white dude thinks, right? ;)
Love that line :D
One passage I highlighted in the book brings Meghan to mind:
"Elizabeth [future QM] would later on show a disturbing propensity for intrigue, and for covering her tracks so well that she should have been called a phantom operative".
She was better at scheming and revenge than Meghan, which is why so many people failed to see through her. Still don't.
She was also monumentally selfish. George VI died long before he expected so he failed to make provision for Princess Margaret to have an independent life. It would have been unheard of for her to work in those days and her mother failed to provide her with a proper education anyway. The QM was left with enough money to give her younger daughter a life of her own, but kept her unhappily in the same house. I'm sure it's one of the reasons PM made a hash of her romantic life. She just wanted to have an establishment of her own, as Jane Austen would say. I know PM was no angel but friends say she was interesting, funny and could be kind and thoughtful (sometimes). She was let down by those who should have had her best interests at heart. I make allowances for her failings even though they are remarkably similar to Harry's failings. Harry is in the 21st century. He has freedom PM never had and his family have been nothing but kind, forgiving and patient as far as we know. He made his own bed so he can lie in it.
Oops! Missed your earlier post where you reposted the link to the 60 Minutes Australia video.
Much obliged. :)
Agree with you that both Valentine Low and Ken Wharfe made excellent points.
Thanks for the post about Page Six. Here are the first paragraphs:
'Meghan Markle’s new biographer thinks the duchess has a “good chance” of becoming US president — but will “struggle” under the microscope of politics because of her “clear sensitivity.”
“The prospect of Meghan running for president is possible and I’d even say likely,” Tom Bower, who reportedly signed a six-figure deal to write about Prince Harry’s wife, told Closer magazine in the UK, according to The US Sun.
“I really believe it’s where she sees herself going,” the biographer told the mag.
“I think she has a good chance of getting into the White House,” he insisted — noting that the role could finally see her reuniting with the royal family she ripped in her TV tell-all.
Markle, 39, would “perhaps visit the UK to have tea with the Queen one day as President of the United States!” he remarked.'
-------
Standing a good chance is not the same as 'going to be'. If he thinks she stands a good chance, I don't think he's very shrewd. Could she ever go past the primaries? As for being POTUS and having tea with the Queen, she'd have to be invited to the UK, unless she invited the Queen. Not a likely scenario, in my humble opinion.
Pimlico Academy, a private academy with a very diverse student body, and run by a conservative peer and his wife erupted in protests today. The Union Jack was pulled down and the grounds were defaced by graffiti "Run by Rascists!" among others. Teachers and parents joined in the protest which was in response to new dress code rules, mostly.
--Certain Afro hairstyles have been deemed unsuitable for school. This discriminates against Black students who are having their freedom of expression curtailed.
--Islamic female students have been asked to wear black hijab only and cover their hair completely if they are wearing one. This stifles self-expression among young Muslim women and if they aren't wearing their headscarf properly, it's mean to point it out because they are still exploring their religious identity and might not feel like wearing it correctly some days.
--The administration beefed up the history curriculum and reinstated study of the kings and queens of Britain.
--The administration failed to observe Black History Month and pay homage to the BLM movement.
--A transgender student who was born a bio-female and identifies as male (surgical status unknown) was compelled to take girls' gym class.
--Any form of gender-based uniform requirement discriminates toward students who are still discovering their gender identities and whether they are in fact human and not some other form of life. Being compelled to wear any form of clothing whatsoever hinders natural self-expression.
OK, I admit I made up the last half of that sentence . . but that will be a future grievance at the next flag-burning--you can count on it. Surprised that it wasn't raised as an issue today.
*******
The school received an 'Excellent' rating in 2011. Presumably it no longer does. I don't think any instruction was achieved today seeing as the police needed to be called in.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9422507/Students-Pimlico-Academy-London-stage-protest-racist-uniform-policy.html
Following on from my last point about titles - the succession is what matters. It is simply not safe to have Harry in the succession as a possible future regent or king. If the worst did happen, it is not hyperbole to say that that would be the end of our monarchy. The Queen has to recognise this risk and deal with it.
@Ava C: You and everyone else here who are commenting on Charles’ weaknesses making him a poor King are spot on.
The best outcome would be for Charles to pass before HMTQ and William becomes POW. The UK wouldn’t have to be subjected to a feckless narcissist like Charles and the issue of titles for the Harkle’s children as grandchildren of the monarch would become a moot point.
Meghan said in the OW interview that titles held little meaning, so I’m sure she’d be relieved that her children will have ample opportunity to live as private citizens.
But to be honest, at least we’d know that any gushing tears, gnashing of teeth and wailing by Meghan if Charles passes before he assumes the throne would be as close to genuine that a profound narcissist like Meghan could ever be.
With no King Charles, her kids would be SOL when it comes to titles and, still married or not to Harry, Meghan would be stuck dealing with William.
In light of the damage Meghan has caused to William’s relationship with Harry, the royal family reputation, the monarchy as an institution, the citizens of the UK, and damage to the world reputation of the UK, it’s highly unlikely William would let bygones be bygones. Meghan would read forgiveness as a weakness and continue her destructive tactics as if nothing had happened.
Kaepernick was a charming, likeable guy, who was extremely popular until started dating a political activist who convinced him that he was getting less playing time because he was black ( he is half white) and NOT because he was performance on the field was faltering.
It happened in the midst of a lot of civil unrest and the rise of BLM, and I think Kaepernick turned the racial tension to good account, knowing he could accuse management of wanting to trade him ( or let him go, or even not give him playing time) because of his activism. (Much like I think the timing the Harkles interview's was intentional)
Oh I beg to differ :)
https://www.the-sun.com/news/1151813/meghan-markle-dumps-rescue-pooch/
@Snarky the Beast: "i think bower is baiting her or sucking up to get people around her to open up. He does have a book to write and sell."
I'm with you there. It's like he's out-Megging the Markle with his double speaking Markle dust.
Markle Unicorn Dust. It looks like rainbows and sunshine but smells like manure.
I don't understand this, from either standpoint.
I would also like to know which particular "Afro hairstyle" would be considered inappropriate. I have a very large bee in my bonnet around this particular subject, having been employed at a place that wouldn't allow black women to wear natural hairstyles that undoubtedly looked a bit wild, but is just how their hair grew, while at the same time allowing white women to sport that good ol' fashioned "big hair" so beloved by me and my fellow Southern women, which definitely took some "doin'" to achieve.
Looking over Alexander J. Maier-Dlamini's twitter account here's what I found:
Mar 8 his tweets were:
1. 'It is NOT appropriate to ask about the colour of a baby’s skin.
Like ever.
No matter who you are.'
2. Reacting to this tweet by Yamiche Alcindor:
'No title. No security. And multiple conversations about how dark Archie was going to be? I can’t. I cannot.'
He says:
'If this is true, no one should side with the monarchy.
This, if true, is disgusting.'
3. 'My knee jerk reaction is to defend the Duchess of Cambridge, and I truly want to.
Sadly, the allegations of bullying to the point of suicidal thoughts during the Duke of Sussex’s PREGNANCY is just an disregard for both their lives.
The British have a race problem.
Period.'
4. But there's also this on Mar 7
'The official relaunch of my new newspaper the @VoiceOfUnionUK
is HERE!
Our headliner today is an amazing tribute to one our hardest working Royals, HRH the Duke of Edinburgh by @BarbaraRKay
.
Her work is amazing but if you feel “offended,” bugger off!
-----------------------
He mostly retweets articles about race, inclusion and social justice and seems to keenly follow the Quebec French paper La Presse.
Alexander also wrote this article in Sept 2020:
https://thepostmillennial.com/on-being-black-gay-and-conservative-in-america
Perhaps what happened as it does with many newer journalists - an online profile is all they check to see who has a 'valid' voice to offer a take on a current issue. Alexander check many boxes - identity and race activist, young and a conservative. How the aristocracy bit - the calling card for the Independent article - came to be is a mystery.
I have to laugh. He my understand the RF, but he certainly doesn't understand American politics.
It WAS terribly vogue after Trump was elected, for the billionaire class to want it too...and although several said so, and a few even declared and tried..........and failed, it is SOOOO 2020. Not a chance in Hell. Michael Bloomberg spent close to a billion of his own bucks trying to win the NOMINATION....and failed. Even the supremely self-impressed over-confident blow-hard Mark Cuban has given up the dream.
Gavin Newsome has his own problems in Cali right now, without mademoiselle trying to bigfoot DiFi's seat in the Senate. That won't happen either. Newsome is hanging on for dear life facing down a recall. He won't jeopardize it to appoint Megs....she needs him far more than he needs her...nothing for him to gain, personally or professionally, it's not going to happen.
Finally, I don't think Megs could be elected Dog Catcher. Not in Cali, not anywhere. People here are over this "starting at the top" nonsense. It's not the American way.
Re. Queen Mum
I want to read Lady C.'s book and I'm sure it's well-written and researched. But the prospect of having the 'Bertie-Elizabeth' love story pulled down pleases me not at all.
I know Bertie wasn't her first choice and she had in fact turned him down a number of times. No attraction and I suppose she was holding out for a more impressive man. Doubtless she thought she could do better. In between refusals of Bertie's proposals (he may have been 'educationally incapable' but he was persistent--shades of inner steel hidden behind a diffident manner which is evident in his elder daughter) it must have dawned on E. that being Duchess of York was probably as good an offer as the second-to-youngest of nine could hope for, particularly if she was not the Earl of Strathmore's issue as has been intimated. What does Lady C. have to say about this?
QM seems to have been far better educated than her daughters, going by her Wiki info. Her education was a mixture of public and private instruction at home. She seems to have impressed her London teachers with a knowledge of Latin and passed the Oxford Local Examination with distinction at just 13. By that age, her elder daughter was the Heiress Presumptive to the throne of Britain and therefore has never apparently had to sit for an examination of any kind.
It hurts to consider that QM never loved the husband she 'settled' for, even though his sun, moon and stars completely rose and set on her for the rest of his days. If that's true, then I surely pray that Bertie went to his Maker certain of his wife's love. I don't think *he* was faking.
That she had an overbearing personality I can believe; the current Queen seems like she was under her mother's thumb for as long as Mummy lived, Sovereign or no. My sympathies are with Philip--imagine marrying in and having the Dragon-in-Law (neither of Lillibet's parents thought the Foundling Prince was good enough for their girl) flanked by Princess Margaret whenever he wanted to see his wife. That would have shriveled the testicles of a weaker man. It's a pretty common plight to complain about the in-laws, but for Philip the in-laws were *always there*.
Wasn't QM initially interested/invested in David?
Your HotRob avatar is delicious! Makes me smile every. single. time.
These are only averages, however, and while some women may expire sooner, others will last longer. If all HM takes after her mother in this respect, she should keep going for a longer than average time. We don't know how long her father might have lived, had he not smoked.
Charles has parents who are both long-lived but there's no knowing - he may have been unfortunate and inherited enough deleterious genes from both parents to jeopardise his chances. He isn't wearing well - I know I'm biased but my husband's significantly older than him but looks a darned sight younger.
Yes to all! The damage that narcissists inflict on their children is tragic. They are so very blind to the needs of others. I believe she was jealous of Margaret, saw her as a competitor and not a daughter.
Perhaps the 'chip' on Elizabeth's shoulder was that she was born of a French cook and not the lady of the manor, David brought that fact to light because E intimated that Wallis learned her sexual skills in a Chinese bordello. This is why he gave the nickname 'Cookie'. Lady C refers to Elizabeth and her brother, the two youngest in the family as 'Benjamins' a biblical reference to the Old Testament where (?) had children with his servant because his wife was barren. Also referred to as 'jackets'. Lady Strathmore wanted more children, I believe there were about 10 in all, but because of health/emotional challenges, did not feel that she could endure any more pregnancies.
As I've read it, after the 8th child was born, her mother was strongly advised that another pregnancy could kill her. Sadly, that little girl died and her mother was inconsolable. So the Earl of Strathmore fathered a child on the French cook, Marguerite Rodiere, as sometimes happened in those days, all with the blessing of Lady Strathmore. The young Lady Elizabeth was a great consolation to Lady Strathmore.
That is why, it is said, one of her names is Marguerite and also why Wallis called her `Cookie'.
Sudden thought - HuMbug shares a birthday with the Queen Mother - what's the betting she'd read the story and used it as the blueprint for Plan Archie? After all, there's as much, if not more, doubt about her birthplace doubt than there is about Archie's.
Damn' woman hasn't got an original thought in her body.
Guess what? Lady Strathmore was a similar age to HuMbug when she `gave birth' to Lady Elizabeth. If she and Lord Strathmore could get away with it, why not the HuMbugs?
In her mind, she's not only is she Diana 2.0 but Elizabeth Bowes Lyon 2.0 as well.
Ava how to remember the difference:
Warby law
Welby Church of England
"The King and I quite understand [...] what is going on [i.e. Elizabeth pondering yet another of Bertie’s proposals of marriage]. I confess now we hope nothing will come of it as we both feel ruffled at E’s behaviour.’"
Lady C writes that "she was now being rendered unsuitable, due to her behaviour, for any royal marriage whatsoever. The window of opportunity which she had had for the last few years was now closing rapidly, and would soon lock altogether. When it did, it would never re-open. That was the royal way, and everyone concerned knew it." So she turned it around very quickly.
George VI is one of my heroes for his fortitude in taking up a role for which he was so unprepared and unsuited and - in my mind - was a fine king who guided and comforted the country through perilous times. So in a way I don't mind about QM's real self as he was happy with her. He wasn't disillusioned.
I've written before how I had a long period of terrible panic attacks on trains, when I was commuting daily between Cambridge and London. I had to get off at just any station until I felt able to continue my journey. I even ended up in hospital once. I kept a book about George VI with me at all times as he was my talisman. I thought if he, with his speech impediment, could speak to millions of people, live, I can get on that train.
Now THAT is supporting someone with mental health difficulties. George VI helped me. By example. By working and pushing himself to do what was required of him in two periods of enormous pressure. The Abdication and WWII. He would have had no time for preaching and hypocrisy. He would have been utterly mystified by Harry, as Prince Philip is today.
On a different note, was at the grocery the other day and saw a pic of DC on US mag. She looked 50. It was a horrible pic and obviously badly shopped
I think its going to be hard to combat the narrative over here that mm and jh are pushing. They have most of the important media behind them. I also think she does have a great chance at a political career here. Our media will suppress everything negative about her and our elections are corrupt. Here in NC you don't even have to have a voter ID. Been this way for years.
Though of course the world has changed since then.
I see there was a spate of reports in the MSM in early January this year that the Cambridges hoped to visit the Sussexes in California as soon as lockdown was over. A lot as changed since then as well. Only a couple of months ago. Thanks to you know who.
JennS said...
@Hikari
Wasn't QM initially interested/invested in David?
March 31, 2021 at 9:37 PM
Ava C said...
@Hikari - in Lady C's book on the QM she says she nearly missed her chance with Bertie. She was aiming at David (future Edward VIII)
March 31, 2021 at 10:25 PM
"Brutchey told PEOPLE. 'It was just amazing how they were able to connect and how their compassion, in just a short conversation, really made an impact and is going to forever inspire her.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9422003/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-surprise-teen-Zoom-mentoring-session.html
Because, as we well know, the Harry Meg, can't do ANYTHING without broadcasting it to the world! I guess this is what Sunshine Sacks is getting paid the big bucks for. Who needs George Clooney or the Beckhams or your family or his family, when you got some rando US teen to talk up your "compassion in action." That she knew to run to People after one glorious, earth shattering, life affirming, transformative word salad zoom session, just shows you how spontaneous and unrehearsed it all was. You, not for the camera, not for the world, just "for us."
On a serious note, is this the new normal for their PR?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1417588/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-Archewell-website-update-latest-Duke-Duchess-Sussex-new-project
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have given the website for their foundation a makeover.
It now features a stories section with articles from Meghan, Harry, their Archewell team and the "community".
The section includes Meghan's piece for The New York Times in November 2020 opening up about her miscarriage.
And it includes an article Harry penned about social media for Fast Company last October.
There is also a news section with updates such as Harry's two new jobs.
Blogger Maisie said...
@ Ava C
Yes to all! The damage that narcissists inflict on their children is tragic. They are so very blind to the needs of others. I believe she was jealous of Margaret, saw her as a competitor and not a daughter.
I have been hoping that there will be no child in evidence. There is a woman here that, I've been told by her family members, is a diagnosed narc. She is a highly wealthy and successful businesswoman. Her five children, though: Two have committed suicide, two others attempted suicide and one came so close as to be hospitalized for awhile. The girls have *never* had a relationship because they were constantly told they were too stupid, fat, ugly, and lazy to ever attract a man. The youngest is in her 40s and has always been treated as mentally retarded. The older daughter is currently in hiding from the mother who went to her house, physically attacked her (because she was renting her own place), then tried to have her arrested for elder abuse. She would have been arrested and jailed had an elderly neighbor not watched the entire thing out of her kitchen window and called the police. The only "child" living a somewhat normal life is a recovering alcoholic and is in therapy two to three times per week.
Her husband is a poor broken shadow of a man that waits on her hand and foot. It is never enough.
Those "children" are in their 40s and 50s. Even middle-aged children of narcs do not magically go on to live carefree lives; they carry that baggage with them always.
During the Covid year we've seen Catherine baking, wheeling a breakfast trolley, gardening at a hospice, talking to little children who are happy to be with her, meeting NHS workers, packing baby supplies etc. etc. In photos of her in the rain she's still smiling. She appears to enjoy even the most mundane things. Not once do I feel she's exploiting people or doesn't care. If Meghan Zoomed into my workplace to feed her PR addiction I'd leave in protest.
That was my father for 24 years until her Munchausen's did her in with a blood clot at 67. My 90 y.o. grandmother got the bitch's number before anyone else and put my name on her best antiques before the wedding. Her sons were doormats to their multiple wives.
it all sounded very California Wokeish Trendish, new ageish to me. but I got a listtle queasy at the end with the Placenta avacado toast at the end. I’ve read thas a thing, and BG didnt say J/K. so I’m still a bit queasy.
ick!
and certainly not vegan!
" it's mean to point it out because they are still exploring their religious identity and might not feel like wearing it correctly some days."
I don't understand this, from either standpoint.
I would also like to know which particular "Afro hairstyle" would be considered inappropriate. I have a very large bee in my bonnet around this particular subject, having been employed at a place that wouldn't allow black women to wear natural hairstyles that undoubtedly looked a bit wild, but is just how their hair grew, while at the same time allowing white women to sport that good ol' fashioned "big hair" so beloved by me and my fellow Southern women, which definitely took some "doin'" to achieve.
The article did not go into detail about which hairstyles were banned, though Black students said the rules unfairly targeted them. I have no idea what constitutes 'Natural' to the community. A black coworker of mine sported bright blue elaborate braids for the first half-year I knew her. It was yarn. Is that natural? A lot of schools prohibit hair that is dyed neon and other colors that don't occur in nature, for all racial demographics, so it would be inconsistent to disallow Billie Eilish green hair for the white kids while allowing the Black students to have green yarn braids because it's a natural hairstyle.
It looked like a racially mixed group in the photo.
As for the headscarves, the students were objecting to not being allowed color and pattern that they were allowed in the rest of their clothing. No idea if students were allowed any sort of scarf or wrap for fashion, rather than religious reasons, but probably not.
I guess the whole notion of a 'uniform', in which the idea is that everyone looks the same and represents their school, class and year rather than hewing to their own personal tastes in all matters will be an age-old debate. I thought school uniforms were too restrictive (never had to wear one at my suburban public school but the preppy clothes that I wore were basically a uniform or what passes for campus wear at a lot of schools today. When I taught in Japan, where uniform culture is standard, for schoolchildren and adults both, I came around to seeing the benefits.
I would not want to be a school administrator today. The students may have some valid points but I don't think defacing the national flag and their school building over cornrows is the best way to get their grievances redressed.
Started with an article (can't recall which paper) claiming that Kate and Rose had fallen out and Kate had removed her from their circle.
Over the next few days, media wrote lots of speculative stories about possible causes, editorials about Rose, her husband and their marriage.
Then Richard Kay wrote an article, clearly sanctioned by William, which was essentially a cease and desist notice to entire media.
Story died.
Except for a twitter conversation between journalists from various UK outlets speculating about the real reason for the Kate-Rose break up.
Out of the blue, Giles Coren inserts himseof into the twitter convo with a tweet saying it was an affair between William and Rose.
When he was challenged on his information, he replied, 'everyone knew about it that even he had heard about it'
Giles had recently written a column about spending time with Meghan at Soho House party in Amsterdam.
Afew hours later he deleted his tweets.
A couple of hours later, Laineygossip published a blog post based upon the screen grabbed tweets claiming the story * must* be true as Giles Coren was posh and in aristo circles.
Cue the entire thing spreading like wild fire across the internet.
A day or two later a known Meghan fan from America writes a long twitter blog post that was porported to give a backstory to the Rose - William affair and claiming it was the true reason for the fallout getween the brothers as Harry was disgusted with William for cheating on Kate.
Her story also spread like wildfire across the internet.
A week or two after that the Meghan fan deletes her blog post claiming she was simply having fun with a rumour, editorialising it into fanfiction and there was no truth to her story.
The immediate response is that she must have been threatened in order to delete her blog post.
Several months after the story had died down except within the SS fandom, Tom Sykes writes an article about aristocratic circles and mentions casually therein that he'd heard about the Rose rumours at a dinner party in Norfolk and that it was open gossip amongst the Norfolk aristocrats.
After the Cambridges appeared with Rose and her husband at Sandrigham, all the rumours stopped.
You only get them in comment sections of various news outlets.
This rumour has been dissected to death on here. Many don’t want to talk about politics which is relevant to the Duo, but you’ll post off topic stuff like this? William saw the pain his Mother went through, I’m certain he’d never put his own wife through it. :o(
Even if William strayed earlier he's surely 100% focused on his role, his wife and his family now. That really comes through, compared to his father who I know is as set as ever about his future as king but always seems a bit scattered. Pulling in different directions. No killer instinct. I think successful monarchs need to be like surgeons, especially those before the days of anaesthesia. Keep their nerve. Do what has to be done, quickly and decisively, despite the pain involved. Being hesitant is more painful for longer. If I had a word association test for "William" it would be "adamantine" now. He can't be broken.
If Meghan did plan to destabilise William with this rumour, she's obviously failed. If it starts again all fingers will point to her, even if she's innocent, such is her well-deserved reputation.
The only comic book series i loved as a child. And saturday morning tv cartoons.
Hate to break it to you, but the placenta eating/doula born at home thing IS a real thing out here on the West Coast.
Sometimes it’s dried & then baked into a cake. NOT anything I’ve partaken in personally BUT it is very much “on the menu” for a certain sort of progressive, suburban mom who LOVES GOOP and lives an organic, spiritual life with the help of Adderall and A LOT of wine.
I wonder how Diana would have "hit the ground running", for example, as the wife of a cattle rancher or a dairy farmer.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14516574/archbishop-harry-and-meghan-secret-wedding/
;-)
Edited
Off topic:
Are you Cajun? You never discuss your heritage.
I have family there in Louisiana who are Choctaw Apache. They eat alligators. It taste like chicken LOL!. If you eat the heart or drink the blood, you are empowered with the warrior spirit of the gator is what we believe.
I am curious if you consider the gator your spirit animal since you seem to invoke the alligator on occasion...
Lawsuits ready??
In contrast to some others, I quite enjoy your contributions. Thank you for all the updates & articles.
another fun april fools joke:
https://blindgossip.com/the-baby-part-2-the-deal/
hmmmm now that would quell the surrogate rumors!
What happened to Lady C's son? (and the original guy who was with her too while I am at it)
Thank you to (Hunter? I think 🤞) who suggested to speed up playback. After it was mentioned how slow she speaks it was like omg true! Couldnt listen for longest time but now 👍
Clash of personalities I suppose as "hotRob" is silly fun and makes me laugh when he is mentioned. Jenn provides lots of content , I appreciate You! and other's opinions, along with ability to scroll through what does not interest me.
Fun blog! Thanks everyone 🙂
Fun blog!
We need to get Hot Rob to come join us for a tea time, soon. I’ll work on it and see if I can make it happen!!! More HotRob and less personal insults please. This blog is fun and informative- I learn something from everyone!
Thank you xx
Blogger xxxxx said...
OT-Prodigal son by Ry Cooder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEUIZWyieAk
You have stellar taste in music,x! I saw Ry with Roseanne Cash at The Ryman just before the lockdown. What a show!
His guitar work is simply extraordinary.
Sorry for the OT all
You recently took part in Express.co.uk's poll conducted in the wake of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell interview to Oprah Winfrey. We had a staggering 150,108 submissions between March 8-15 and the results are now in.
A huge 80.52% of respondents said their opinion of Meghan and Harry has changed for the worse in the wake of the interview.
Just 5.76% said their opinion on the pair had improved.
Some 12.83% said their opinion had not changed following the interview, and 0.89% said they did not know.
On whether the Royal Family's reputation has been harmed by the Sussexes' claims, 49.32% of respondents said no.
Some 41.1% said yes and 9.57% did not know.
These results indicate that Meghan and Harry's interview hurt them more than it hurt the Royal Family - despite a number of incendiary claims.
Meanwhile 63.89% of voters said the UK's reputation has been damaged following the allegations made by the couple.
About 30% said the reputation of the country has not been damaged, and 5.89% said they didn't know.
A staggering 90.92% of voters said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had disrespected the Queen following their bombshell interview. Only 8% of voters believed the couple did not, while just 1% said they didn't know.
During the interview, the couple revealed their 2018 wedding at Windsor Castle came three days after they had a secret ceremony.
More than half of voters (58.26%) said the couple should have told the public about the secret wedding.
Only 29.14% said Meghan and Harry did not need to tell the public and just 12.60% weren't sure.
Out of those questioned, 67.42% said the Royal Family institution does not need to change in the wake of the interview.
Another 20.42% said it should and 12.16% didn't know.
Also, with the revelations of the California placental cuisine, did Medusa dine on Archie's placenta? If not, why not, if she's planning on dining on DianDorachel's placenta? Is she sucking out Harry's blood, too, and that's why he looks all shrunken? Can somebody explain to me how this is even vegan? Do we only care if paint is vegan since we'd rather eat paint than placenta? (This California cuisine stuff can be confusing.)
@KCM1212
A fellow Ry Cooder fan! I live nowhere near The Ryman auditorium but have walked by it (all red bricks built) on a visit to a relative in Nashville. Will Harry become the Prodigal Son? We shall see.
Those numbers lean towards younger crowd but other percentages seem more in line with wiser folks. Interesting all around
Who funds the British Monarchy? I know tax payers but do all the commonwealth countries contribute or Brits only? Just curious as to what it costs each taxpayer a year strictly to fund royals, best guesstimate by those in the know, if possible
Lol Jenn @ 1.75 speed. Too funny! Goodnight all!
Well that's my breakfast ruined then, April fool or not!
(For example,btw, the daughter of a friend was a heavy smoker, even in pregnancy - after a safe delivery, the midwife cut open the placenta to shock her with how black it was from the tar - it didn't have any effect. Only being diagnosed with lung cancer did - her GP didn't like the look of her fingers and ordered a chest X-ray and they caught it in time.)
Goodness knows what might be in a Californian placenta.
BG2 - Does anyone else have to sit through that cringey film `To Janet, a Son' either in biology lessons or at pre-natal classes? I can still here those violins and the `It wasn't like this with Susan...' Still, it was sensational to film a live birth in those days.
As far as witnesses are concerned, not only were witnesses once needed for royal births, they had to be present on the wedding night to testify that the deed had been done. Just think, that could have put paid to our suspicions about whether the HuMbugs marriage had been consummated!
As for the `three of us', I couldn't help remembering that the rumours about the sex tape involve a threesome...
@Snarkyatherbest - Thanks for the link to
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14516574/archbishop-harry-and-meghan-secret-wedding
Brilliant! Just one tine detail they missed - a cope doesn’t have sleeves
Perhaps cannibalism is OK or doesn't count in this case?
Oestrogone
Whilst posed, legs astride, yoga mat
Megs will pull Duck Rabbit 2, from her hat
So easy, and cushy
She’s done it before
Here comes her encore
As Diaria megxits her tushy
Surely Welbis belted out
“She’s the devil in disguise”
Many years ago the placenta was
fried and given to the mother.
Or planted beneath a tree/veg plot.
Megs could use her leftovers on her
lemon/avocado trees, and organically
water them, piscatarian?
@Swampie 🐊
Crocovile
In the swamps of Montecito
Lives a deadly, sly, mosquito
Known to ride on backs of all caiman
She’s a well known fabricator
With teeth like alligator
Eradigator now, tick-tock, Amen
Justin Time?
Welby’s now said
Only once he did wed
Prancelot and his Cunningsmear
Not a surprise
Just more of their lies
Reveals more of their crumbling veneer
Perhaps it should have been Cliff Richard, chief Evangelical singer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgomTOOgl8M
`Devil Woman' the HuMbugs theme tune. Or should it be `Living Doll'? or does Harry commemorate Diana with a `Shrine on the Second Floor'?
Wow! I'd forgotten how good Cliff was! I only once sneaked into the flicks underage, to see X rated `Expresso Bongo' - I'd love to see it again. It was scheduled for TV showing but Celia Johnson died and we were given `Brief Encounter' instead. In EB, Cliff sang `SotSF' with absolute sincerity, apparently he was devastated to be told it was being used to reveal the cynicism of the music industry. How appropriate for the HuMbugs
(BTW when he was Harry Webb, Butcher's Boy, he used to deliver meat to my aunt in Cheshunt. He'd chuck it over the fence, much to the satisfaction of their GSD)
My you are on a roll today :))))
An opinion piece from today's DT -
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/31/justin-welby-has-forgotten-spiritual-point-church/
Main points:
`…When it comes to the political side of his role, Archbishop Welby has not been shy to make his views known. .. Yet, in a pandemic people surely want to hear more from the senior clerics they would once have turned to for guidance on spiritual matters.’
`… “What do you think?” I asked a reporter from the BBC. “I’m not particularly religious,” came the reply, “but I like religious leaders to be spiritual, to seem like they’re in touch with God, and this one’s, well, a bit corporate."
"Being interviewed by La Repubblica enabled (him) to remind … those running the Vatican, that he should be seen as equivalent to the Pope in terms of global reach.
Given the difficulties facing the Church at home, however, this may be seen as a strange choice. The Church of England’s equivalent of the poor bloody infantry, the people in the pews and their vicars, could be forgiven for wondering why he does not have more to say to them. "
“She won’t be allowed to be a black princess,” sociologist Kehinde Andrews told Newsweek. “The only way she can be accepted is to pass for white.”
Georgia Chambers, a British journalist who is also mixed-race, agrees. Holding up Markle, who straightens her hair and has fair skin, as an example of British racial tolerance “excludes many of us who do not have this commonly assumed “beauty privilege,” she writes.
Markle may be open about her racial identity, but it will take more than a few isolated mixed-race relationships within the British monarchy to break through the United Kingdom’s troubled legacy of slavery, colonialism, and racism.
This is so typical of the muddled thinking of liberal media and academia about Meghan - oh, let me throw in those deluded female MPs at Westminster too. Meghan is 'open about her racial identity'. Yes, now when it suits her. They acknowledge she straightens her hair and has light skin and that it excludes those who can't follow her (talk about mixed messages) but say "she won't be allowed to be a black princess". Who is stopping her from looking the way she naturally would, now, apart from herself? All-powerful Meghan, in the Montecito mansion she should rename Mount Olympus.
I've also yet to see Meghan paying any heed, at any point, to what anyone else wants or requires. She disregarded protocol, ordinary standards of formal dress, rules about merching, rules about engagement with the media, rules about litigation or rather avoiding litigation. Who was going to stop her deciding how she wants to style her hair? I also found it very interesting that she was pale when Harry's girlfriend, slathered in bronzer when a working royal (just see those photos of her with Catherine on the balcony at her first Trooping the Colour) and pale again now, having finished with the planting evidence in the BRF phase.
People such as those quoted above just can't see how Meghan is exploiting their naivety. She appropriates then twists their ideology into something it was never meant to be, while they stand there, patting her on the back and fighting her corner. There are far worthier and more important things to fight for.
I don't know how things work in the UK. But in the US rumors do circulate among neighborhood "cliques." That doesn't mean the rumors are true but they do happen. I can't imagine things are all that different in Norfolk among W&K's "Turnip Toff" friends. I'm also not so sure that Will would never cheat simply because he saw the effects of parental cheating as a child. He wasn't known to be 100% faithful when dating, after all. And people often do things as adults they didn't like their parents doing. Finally, Will does live in the house (Anmer Hall) where Charles and Camilla used to meet. I know it was a gift from HM but I expect it wasn't a surprise gift.
Honestly I don't have an opinion about whether he has cheated with RH or with anyone else. He and Kate certainly appear to have a very solid happy marriage these days but none of us can really know from the outside what goes on inside a marriage. On the India tour back in 2016, he did appear to lose his temper with Kate at least twice in public. And if he were my spouse, I'd have been pretty mad about the alcohol-fueled lunch and evening "dad dancing" incidents in Verbier. So I personally doubt he's all that easy to live with. But that doesn't make him a cheater.
Adriano Celentano - Prisencolinensinainciusol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VsmF9m_Nt8
There are other videos of it - apparently the `skill' goes back to the Commedia del Arte.
The first time I heard it I was helpless with laughter - but perhaps this is what real Word Salad is like? The comments liken it to being in dream/ on a trip/ having a stroke.
Enjoy!
Cheers D1, enjoying meself 😉
@WildBoar
“a bit corporate” nails Welby,
not to the cross, heaven forbid.
I liked John Sentamu.
Relatable, personable, and
in touch with God, in my eyes.
Was he ever in the running?
Alex Beresford, the weatherman who rowed with Piers on GMB has Jonathan Shalit, (Meg admirer) as his agent!
Snipped from DM article:
According to the insider, Alex also told his agent Jonathan Shalit that he wants to 'crack' America as he doesn't want to be resigned to the position of a weatherman or breakfast TV presenter for the rest of his life.
@Magatha
Oestrogone, piscatarian, a deadly, sly, mosquito, Prancelot and his Cunningsmear: I don't know what you had for breakfast but you're in top form again! Thanks for your very witty poems :)
Simply brilliant as always! 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
If so, I fell for it. 😐
O/T Age was against Sentamu - he hit 70, the clergy retirement age in 2019. he's have been a good choice had he been eligible. There's been a bit of a hoo-hah over him not keeping his seat in the Lords after retirement- apparently it's not automatic but the Government has said it will happen.
I think he could have made a bigger contribution to national life than some of the Lords Temporal we've seen recently. Needless to say, there have been accusations of Inst.R-ism. I wonder who JS upset?
So presumably that's a poisson d'Avril.
Sadly, it looks as if Piers may be having us on too. Pity.
Meghan might hope for something a little less impromptu [than Zara's home birth] and is hardly alone in dreaming of the perfect California home birth. Although in 2017 only 0.75 per cent of births in the state took place at home, there are signs the pandemic is prompting more West Coast mothers to rethink their options. Last April, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that pregnant women in the Bay Area were “turning to local birth centres and home birth in unprecedented numbers”.
The average expectant mother considering a home birth in these times will be motivated by Covid. But for California’s one per cent, there may be additional reasons for wanting to curate your labour the same way you would your Instagram feed. For the (sometimes) privacy-hungry Sussexes, a home birth would allow a degree of control not otherwise possible.
As one wife of a celebrity told me, the name of her child had been leaked within hours of her having given birth in a Los Angeles hospital. Delivering at home, with only your husband and an expensive army of midwives, doulas and birth photographers on hand, would mitigate much of that risk.
'Curate' your labour?? Is this Californian speak? 'Birth photographers on hand'? I wouldn't put it past them, while they're bleating on about privacy.
Still not convinced. There might be a dramatic (couldn't be ordinay) rush to hospital for an emergency caesarian, but then that might be difficult/more difficult with a surrogate.
He is a professional race baiter who thinks UK is still living in Empire and colonial times.
History for him started and stopped at the British Empire and specifically how it affected Afro-Caribbeans and Black Americans. No other history exists for him nor does he acknowledge any improvements within his specific area of interest. No acknowledgement of the tapestry of contributing factors or contributors or even how it ended. Doesn't acknowledge any civil rights, independence movements or even specific individuals who helped improve the situation regardless of race.
And in his purview, it oppressor vs victims. Always and forever.
Which is a pity because he is employed by Birmingham University as Professor of Black Studies within the Social Sciences dept.
A professor of Social Sciences who has no feel for Social history.
Thank you @Maneki
Much appreciated, you’ve always
supported me, cheers 😘
@Miggy
Thank you X
if they REALLY want privacy, and to do it safely , in a hospital, considering the pregnant mother is high risk at such an advanced age, they should go to the UK. they have stricter laws and keep information on Royals private, I havent heard much about PP’s hospitalization/ condition, only tth length of time he was in.
on the other hand , they are 100+ multi millionaires, they can afford to outfit a few of the rooms on their estate with all the latest medical equipment and a surgical room in case of problems.
S’morgansbored
Piers is still laughing
Despite his ‘unstaffing’
Released from his chains, ITV
He’s not daft
I’m sure there’s a raft
Of companies eyeing his CV
I'm wondering now if Piers is playing an April Fool's joke!
If so, I fell for it. 😐
******
Don't worry if you have, we've all been caught out over the years.
I stay away from newspapers until late evening as I can never figure out which stories are true.
"@WildBoar
“a bit corporate” nails Welby,
not to the cross, heaven forbid.
I liked John Sentamu.
Relatable, personable, and
in touch with God, in my eyes."
Ugandans have a very strong spiritual attachment. Regardless of deity of choice.
Whether that translates into better behaviour is irrelevant culturally.
It is neigh on impossible to find a secular, atheist Ugandan.
Therefore Sentamu's public persona in so far as being spritual even when discussing secular things always read to me as very typical of his country of birth.
CoE in Uganda is not at all like the dry CoE in UK where churches are poorly attended and the priests are corporatists rather than spiritualists.
That doesn't mean you don't get rogue priests, but on the whole, they all try to present like Sentamu.
"....I stay away from newspapers until late evening as I can never figure out which stories are true..."
I try to catch the first edition of a news articles and then the last edition later.
It's always fascinating to me how articles are changed or updated.
Sometimes due to a genuine change in circumstances requiring an updated story.
Most of the time, if the story involves politics or celebrities, it's a response to public opinion on the original story. what they remove or reframe is fascinating.
@WildBoar
All Welbyeing
“something nasty in the woodshed’
you’ve always
supported me, cheers
--------
You're very welcome. You bring us a smile and a laugh and bring some much needed sanity into this sordide Harkles saga 😆
Wow @Aquataine
“Whether that translates into
better behaviour is irrelevant culturally”
What are you saying?
I met John Sentamu outside a fish shop
In York. I liked him. Full. Stop.
What I find typical of the articles now is that she is pitched as I can't believe she would bully, she was such a sweet girl but followed with she had a determined streak, strong ambition and then something about an unwillingness to follow the expectations without realizing that any attempts to help guide her to success within the parameters of the job would be met with that strong ambition pushing back and, with the power of job title, a history of being a tad pushy might spill out into bullying to people who are trying to do their job which is making her a success.
As for the he rarely saw the father, if this teen BF basically saw her at church or church activities, that was probably weekends when her dad might not have had custody (so Doria doing the transporting) as her dad seemed to have more custody during the week as she grew up (in terms of being on the sets but I might not be remembering this correctly).
Meghan Markle is an excellent illustration of the ills of race politics. Under the thinnest veneer of compassion and crusade lies a naked ambition that would ruthlessly torch her own family and that of her husband's for the sake of her will to power. For a short period of time, I was part of the "woke" crowd and movement and saw, first hand, this naked ambition. People didn't come to serve or make the world a better place but to try to seize power for themselves, power unearned. It was an ugly scene and I fled it like a stink bomb had been detonated.
Meghan Markle is also an excellent illustration of the nature of the press these days. The truth means nothing. Whose doing the talking means everything and white culture is constantly attacked and belittled.
The truth of the matter is, we live in a debauched culture where the only sane response is to check out of it and refuse to subject our minds to its filth. Don't support its corruption in the media or its vile entertainments. And yes, vote out the left politics, every chance you get because this corruption is being championed by their politics, not the politics of the right. I don't love everything the right stands for and personally I couldn't stand Trump. But that doesn't change the fact, the left is Promulgator in Chief of a debauched culture that has set its sights like a bull's eye on the family, on tradition, on morality, on religion, on personal responsibility, on Western culture. Is it little wonder the Royal Family is under attack? WAP and Montero are fitting illustrations of the gutter which of woke-ism and the filth they are peddling as empowerment. Resist the filth and don't let it drag down your mind and spirit.
/Now for a heavily caffeinated beverage as I stomp through the house like an apex predator dinosaur that does NOT want to get on with the feeding of the livestock OR the cleaning of the toilets OR the cooking of the breakfasts. Perhaps I'm just framing it incorrectly. "What's for breakfast, honey?" "Fried chicken placentas, poached chicken placentas, or maybe a nice chicken placenta omelet!" "Now that I think of it, I need to go to the parts store, so, um, I'll just pick up a sausage biscuit from Hardees..." "You know that sausage is just ground up a**holes and eyeballs, right?" "You really need more coffee..."
That was priceless..
I didn't know whether to laugh, throw up or do both :))))
"Wow @Aquataine
“Whether that translates into
better behaviour is irrelevant culturally”
What are you saying?
I met John Sentamu outside a fish shop
In York. I liked him. Full. Stop."
When someone appears to have deep spirituality, we expect it to be reflected in their behaviour. And vice versa.
This type of expectation is deeply ingrained in how Ugandans present because spirituality is part of their cultural norms irrespective of tribe or religion or behaviour.
So when you say that Sentamu seemed very spiritual to you, my comment was to point out that is not unusual given his origins.
And with that background, it's unsurprising that he appears to take his calling much more seriously than the current AoC.
It would have been interesting to have him as the AoC because of that spiritual understanding rather than the current incumbent who seems more politician than religious leader.
It was discussed here a bit ago that Meghan probably had her sights on Harry earlier than we thought (something about a SoHo House in Istanbul? I may well have the location wrong), so with that in mind, even if the rumours did start earlier than originally assumed (especially if they occurred after the Istanbul(?) date), there's still a chance that they came from Meghan.
It's also been suggested she was aiming for William before she got hold of Harry, so a "pre-Harry" rumour about William having an affair could even have been a way to try and force a W&C split to leave him free for her to pursue. We're all aware of the issues she has with W&C since she got together with Harry, so the continuation of the rumour even though she now has Harry could be a form of revenge.
Having issues transferring thoughts to writing today due to painkillers, it made sense in my head but now I've read it back I'm a bit unsure lol
I wonder what amount of time is a proper amount for these two, who have obviously been working their fingers to the bone, er rather their public relations team members are working their fingers to the bone.
And as long as this is touching on the impending birth of little Diana, I am expecting that of indeed Meghan has actually been able to become pregnant or if it is a surrogate, the home birth will be carefully managed, lighted, documented black and white photos to emphasize the facade what a deliriously happy couple they are and manage the facade of Meghan as the ultimate madonna.
How will that scripted home birth will all work as her perineum is ripping during a labor that we will be told was without the assistance of pain meds?
Like Idi Amin?
I've also come across clergy who are so heavenly-minded they're no earthly use.
She seems very sure of her surgically-enhanced allure (shrug) which I believe is ill-founded at best. I do think that you are correct in that she wouldn't want to take second best IF she had a choice (which she didn't). I would think, though, that she would want to elbow Camilla out and glom onto Charles with The Claw (tm). After Charles survived Diana's crazy, though, I doubt he'd want to jump back into the crazy pool. After all, Meghan could *never* compete with Diana in terms of personality or (natural) beauty.
I just want to hear what she calls Harry during the transition. Bwahahaha. Or maybe what the surrogate calls both of them.
I went to school at Pimlico Academy back in the early 1980's, it was called Pimlico Comprehensive then and they banned school uniform whilst I was there. It's a very mixed school, it used to have a very good music course which attracted the middle & upper classes yet at least 70% were very diverse multi cultural working class. Having no school uniform seemed like great fun to begin with as I transferred over to Pimlico from a all girls catholic convent school. The upper & middle classes used to dress down (Flip Store, American style) and the working class went all out for brands, Farah, Burberry, Aquascutum, Lois etc. We even had names for the two groups Melons and Casuals ('melons' being the upper classes/people on the music course & 'casuals' being the working class) I believe the recent complaints about banning afro hair is actually 'big hair' is banned (that obscures view) rather than just afro hair.
Interesting fact that Diana was working right next door to Pimlico Academy in the Young England Kindergarten when she became engaged to Prince Charles... that's where she had that photo taken of her with the sun behind her showing the transparency of her skirt. There was a paparazzi photo of her running past an Indian restaurant on Lupus Street about 20 yards away from the kindergarten, which the Indian restaurant framed up and put in their window for years, no idea if it is still there now.
I haven't posted in ages and I'm still behind but I just want to say thank you to everyone for their posts during and after the interview , there are too many people to thank personally but I think Jenn S went above and beyond in taking one for the team in watching the interview and for all her postings of various articles both before and since.
Could Meghan be President? - I doubt it, there are just too many people joining our side now. I've been reading Harry Markled for ever (thanks to a comment on DM's comment page) and we were a small number to begin with but with the couples endless antics more and more people are coming over to our way of thinking.
I am worried though that race is being used by many to divide rather than unite. Cancel culture is rife.
Re: Interview - ANL disputed the doctored UK headlines with ITV, does anyone know if the other headlines (from US and non UK publications) were also doctored to give a racist slant?
I always understood that the Elizabeth Bowes Lyon was certainly her father's daughter, if not that of her mother.
As I've read it, after the 8th child was born, her mother was strongly advised that another pregnancy could kill her. Sadly, that little girl died and her mother was inconsolable. So the Earl of Strathmore fathered a child on the French cook, Marguerite Rodiere, as sometimes happened in those days, all with the blessing of Lady Strathmore. The young Lady Elizabeth was a great consolation to Lady Strathmore.
That is why, it is said, one of her names is Marguerite and also why Wallis called her `Cookie'.
Thank you. I had read that story before but my brain got garbled over exactly where the QM's rumored illegitimacy originated. If she was a Strathmore, I suppose that's all anyone cared about. Apart, perhaps, from the child's natural mother. Whether she was a willing surrogate for Lady Strathmore (hopefully handsomely compensated so that she could leave service, because the whole thing would have been awkward for all concerned to have her continuing to work in the kitchen--or whether she had some romanticized notion that her Laird would marry her--I guess it all worked out in the wash. If Elizabeth Angela Marguerite had a baby brother . . what of his provenance? Did Cookie bear his Lordship a son, too, or did Lady S. risk death to try one final time? I wouldn't judge the principals if they came to a surrogacy arrangement in the days before it could be strictly made clinical . . but I always wonder how the surrogate mother can hand over her baby in a transaction like that. Regardless of what the courts say or who provided the genetic material, the woman who carries the child and gives birth is the mother. I'm sure this happened more often than anyone would admit to. Naming the baby after her natural mother was a nice gesture, and they certainly weren't trying to hide it very well if QM's parentage was a topic in London circles.
This may be the reason that EBL was ruled out for David. Good enough for Bertie, but not the Crown Heir. Haha, ain't life funny? She pursued David with her eye on becoming the Queen. 'Settled' for his younger brother and the Duchess of York title. Then--Bazinga! Events conspire to make her Queen and Empress of India. Like a storybook!
The animosity QM had for Wallis is more understandable now. Really, she should have sent the woman who made her Queen of the British Empire flowers every day.
Sudden thought - HuMbug shares a birthday with the Queen Mother - what's the betting she'd read the story and used it as the blueprint for Plan Archie?
I do not credit Mugsy with that much interest or forethought regarding Harry's ancestors, even the quite recent ones. I'm pretty sure that Mugs' blueprint for Plan Archie was Amal Clooney & her surrogacy contacts. What I wonder is if Mugs was fully aware of the legal implications of this plan, viz. UK surrogacy laws and not being the automatic legal mother of said issue. If she was working with Amal, a UK barrister with specialty in international law, you'd think that would have been made clear to her.
Whatever Mugs knew going into the plan, it seems pretty certain that her intent was to deceive the Queen that Archie arrived the usual way in order to get him a title, more money and the attention for 'being pregnant'. The whole thing was a colossal dupe on the BRF and the world, because if the couple had to use surrogacy due to fertility issues and had been straightforward about the why, they could have announced the news *after* Archie had quietly arrived, without the Moonbump show.
@Aquataine
I did not say that John Sentamu seemed
spiritual to me.
Your words.
I said that I liked him, related to him.
You’ve been wrong before.
"'@Aquataine mentioned ` ingrained in how Ugandans present because spirituality is part of their cultural norms irrespective of tribe or religion or behaviour.'
Like Idi Amin?"
Do you use the same response to Germans? Or Italians? Or Russians? Or any other country that has a dictator in their history?
Let's tarr them with that brush.
This blog is going back to the guideline of politics are only allowed in so far as how the Sussexes are directly involved. Please keep that in mind going forward. Feel free to see Nutty's message on the previous post. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Meant to include this above--If Lady Strathmore was not the baby's mother, there is an alternative explanation for why His Lordship was so late--almost too late--in registering the child's birth, other than grouse shooting or the forgetfulness of a 9th-time father. He got chastised by the registrar, at least as much as a lowly civil servant can chastise a peer for being so tardy, all for sport. Convenient for him that it was grouse season.
Is is possible that the child's natural mother was having seller's remorse and was reluctant to have her child registered as the baby of her employer? Knowing that once that legal document was lodged with the authorities and her name was nowhere on it that she'd have no more claim on the child of her body?
"@Aquataine
I did not say that John Sentamu seemed
spiritual to me.
Your words.
I said that I liked him, related to him.
You’ve been wrong before."
I'm not sure what you are getting at.
I'm explaining a cultural norm which came from your comment that Sentamu appeared to have a personal relationship to God (paraphrasing). That's what i meant by spirituality.
The cultural explanation would be the same way i'd say someone presented as french as an example. Meaning they presented in a way that ticked all the cultural stereotypical behaviours that make them french.
It doesn't take anything from them to be described that way unless your specific POV is negative about those characteristics.
Therefore i presume you are objecting to my saying that Sentamu is culturally spiritual.
------------
I'm of the opinion that she tried for both of them, would take whichever one bit first.
Remember how word early on was that PC found her 'charming'. And there were photos of her making charming eyes at him, and touching his arm. Reaching out to touch him as he passed by, much the same way she touched the arm of the athlete at that last Commonwealth Service and that same look on her face.
He did seem quite taken with the new young woman for a while, but in a gentlemanly, good-mannered kind of way. I think she saw his gentlemanly good manners as a weak link, a possible opening for other things.
I was actually a little worried that she was setting him up for a #metoo claim. FIL a little too interested kind of thing.
But now I think she was testing the waters, to gauge how much interest there was, to see if she could get anyplace with PC. Probing. If there had been an opening she would have been all over it.
I suspect all that was firmly shut down by Camilla once Camilla tumbled to it. I think Camilla scares mm just by existing. Camilla wouldn't have had to do anything overt.
Mm then firmly set her sights on PW. Which is interesting because he absolutely showed *no* interest.
There were no returned smiles, good eye contact, standing a little too close, etc.
__________________________
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9426189/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-proper-time-daughter-arrives.html
A break from what? Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'will both take some proper time off' to spend 'real quality time together' after their daughter arrives in the summer, source tells Vanity Fair
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'will both take some proper time off,' after the birth of their daughter in the summer, a source has claimed
Duke of Sussex's paternity leave was cut short when Archie was born 6 May 2019
Three days after the birth royal flew to the Netherlands for work engagement
By CHLOE MORGAN and KATE DENNETT FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 05:00 EDT, 1 April 2021 | UPDATED: 08:16 EDT, 1 April 2021
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'will both take some proper time off,' after the birth of their daughter in the summer, a source has claimed.
For the Duke of Sussex, 36, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California, this would mean taking time out from his first job in the corporate world where he recently took an executive position at a Silicon Valley start-up that claims to be worth $1.7billion.
The royal is 'chief impact officer' at mental health services business BetterUp, where he helps promote an app used by corporate giants including Hilton, Facebook and oil firm Chevron to improve the wellbeing of their staff.
The company's chief executive Alexi Robichaux has declined to say how much the royal is being paid, although similar roles at other California firms would command six or seven-figure salaries.
Prince Harry's paternity leave would also mean temporarily stepping back from his multi-million-pound deals with Netflix and Spotify - which he told Oprah Winfrey he was persuaded to sign when he was ‘literally cut off financially’ from the Royal Family.
You don't have to like what someone wrote or like the person but being a jerk about this means your post will be deleted. And if you cannot stop attacking other posters or saying things to set them off, your posts will continue to be deleted. And, if you insist on continuing, the moderators will be forced to stay on moderation.
Thems the rules. If you don't like it, leave.
stomping through the house like an apex predator dinosaur
I like your use of metaphors! Gave me a good chuckle.
I don't see any articles on anyone elses' personal life plans. How does something like this even make it to print.
Nutty and us Mods strive as much as possible to make this a welcome and friendly blog. Please do keep in mind that everyone posts with the risk of potential dissent, criticism, and unpopularity. We depend on Nutties to keep this place respectful and hopefully fun.
Guidelines for this blog is as follows:
- Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
- Be civil and courteous in discussions.
- Anonymous posts are not allowed.
- Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
- No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
- De-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject.
Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
HappyDays said…
Has anyone seen the new Blind Gossip item? Says the birth of little Diana is going to be a live tv event.
------------
My first thought was, please God, no.
Now I wonder if it's not an April Fool's day post.
Didn't they do something like this last year, where it had just enough plausibility that it could have been true?
I think it was she used PA's donation for her IVF?
Lady C on Meghan nuttiness; race & Piers Morgan/Sharon Osborne; BBC endangers Alex Belfield
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkPjZ_jg4A4
Moderator: you can remove the two parts of the Blind Gossip post. Even for the Harkles, this would be going waaay to far.
All of that is a prelude to advising WBBM not to return to Expresso Bongo but to keep her teenage memories intact. I am of course decades younger than WBBM and never saw Expresso Bongo until fairly recently (like two decades ago) on television. I lost patience with it and with Laurence Harvey's awful stab at a Jewish accent - far too much oy vey oy vey.
Never really, like most men, understood the female devotion to St Cliff of Richard though he still does not look more than a day or two over thirty. How does he do it! Maybe he should be the next AoC and one has to admire him for his 'coming out' as a Christian which was in England considered pretty much career death for a teen-focused entertainer. It is not that we hate Jesus but that we just don't want to hear you mentioning it. (Likewise of course the Harkles telling us how bad we are and how greater their unction). As T Blair said: 'we don't do religion' and we don't care either to be lectured by the uber privileged. Maybe that sort of thing goes down better in the United States where enthusiasm is seen as a desirable asset.