Let's try this again...
Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event? Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th? Oscar's - March 10th? In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US. The IRS just never goes away. Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on). There's always another one. Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California. That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales. Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere. But. The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.
Comments
If this blind is indeed accurate, besides the obvious that she fancies herself a politician, it also seems to say in a more obscure way that Meghan isn’t getting any offers herself for work.
Yes, on paper they have the big deals with Spotify and Netflix, but they actually have to do the hard work to produce quality content of VALUE for these companies. Surprise Zoom calls wont fulfill their end of the deal for either of these companies.
I also think that beyond being a slacker who doesn’t want to put in the hard work and long hours, she likely knows very little of the myriad of details beyond sitting in a makeup chair, working with the wardrobe department and regurgitating her lines in front of a camera.
Producing any type of quality content takes experience, hard work, long hours and yes, money. If they were busy working on projects, we’d likely be hearing at least a little bit about them being busy at it, but so far, all we’ve heard is that they shopped themselves around asking for obscene amounts of money to be window dressing for various companies. Nobody was interested in Meghan, and the best they could do is get the gig Harry landed, but they’re not going to give him a big chunk of equity before it goes public, and they likely aren’t paying him much more than a million or two a year. And a lot of that will be eaten up in taxes, which doesn’t leave a lot for the upkeep of their lifestyle.
So I think that because she doesn’t really want to work hard, has no abilities beyond her acting, and she’s not being showered with offers, Meghan is eyeing the Feinstein US Senate seat like a vulture circling a carcass. Getting that seat would provide her with a job with status and more important, power and access of a high government office that behind the scenes she can sell to the highest bidders, who are people who are just like her, unethical and corrupt. She would make Hillary Clinton look like Mother Teresa as she screws over the people of California and the United States while shouting “racist” at anyone who dares call her out.
That kind of power in the hands of someone like Meghan would be just plain dangerous.
@Snarkyatherbest and @CatsMeow...thanks!
@Nelo...great break down of the finances. I whole heartedly agree that the spin that their "winning" is false and that their lifestyle is likely unsustainable. I can't even wrap my head around $500K per month in expenses and they still complain and want people to feel sorry for them?!?
It is a great illustration of the old adage that if you want to see the source of your problems, look in the mirror (excluding black swan events such as acts of war, terrorism, or disease outbreaks).
Back to the Sussexes, Nelo's very practical analysis has made me much happier this Easter weekend! Not very Christian of me to rejoice in other people's future downfall but, like a Victorian novel, they don't deserve to prosper after hurting so many.
From what I've read over the last couple of days, they've given real ammunition to those seeking Australian independence (which I'm not against per se) but also to opponents of the Commonwealth. The core of everything that's important to the Queen. She's given her life to it and, from what I've seen, it's a useful organisation.
The Sussexes are essentially wanton vandals but worse than your typical vandals as they are deeply connected to and still benefiting from the royal world they are vandalising. Hopefully William and Catherine will strengthen the defences and rebuild while the Sussexes discover the consequences of unravelling their safety net.
Crazy Days And Nights
SUNDAY, APRIL 04, 2021
Blind Item #6
The alliterate one has spent the past two weeks offering to host fundraisers for politicians in exchange for their public support for her appointment as a Senator, should the vacancy occur.
Also I am lol'ing at "50 cents"
*~*~*~*~*~Happy Easter Nutties!~*~*~*~*~*
I truly think Meghan thought her Quibi and other deals would work out, and bailed on the family with her Megxit demands. She didn’t foresee the fallout. I don’t even think she particularly cared about half-in/ half-out. She had just done Disney for $3mm. She assumed she’d get an entertainment deal everyone other month on her own. Harry would be the cherry on top. The sideshow to her grand Hollywood entrance. Why else talk to a micro video platform about building content and becoming the face of the organization/ poster actress unless that wasn’t what she wanted? It’s all she wanted. Hollywood Royalty.
So while her plans fell apart, and she fell from great deluded heights, Kate remained the same. Nothing bad happened to Kate. Hence more directed seething anger towards her during Oprah, unable to bring up anything relevant or timely except a rift during the wedding week (which even if true, everyone can relate too) some three years ago. That’s it. No further story. No further ‘Kate is mean’ evidence.
But she was left with a very angry Harry, who had arrived to Tyler Perry’s house wondering how he was going to pay for this lifestyle in California. He had been told it was all sorted out. They had deals with big internet platforms. The money would come from Meghan’s massive entertainment career she had always told him about. Now we know why he looked miserable and like a hostage last year. He was going to have to figure out how to pay for his idiot wife and her lifestyle. It never occurred to him he would *ever* have to do such a thing. ‘I was forced to sign Netflix, for my security’. It’s all about him. She didn’t just rid herself of her expense account, she rid them of the only things he cared about. Dysfunctional, to say the least. The one good thing of them leaving the Firm is that Harry can start to understand what real responsibility is like, what it means to be married and take care of a family, etc I don’t think it will last because it was unnecessary. It’s clear he doesn’t value Meghan. She knows this. Hence the mad dash to get to America.
I don’t know much about Cardi B, other than her career has a time limit. No one wants to see an aging stripper.
Good analysis. I wonder how much longer Megsy can keep up the pretence that they have a billionaire lifestyle. Something will have to give. Will she then turn on Harry for not being able to support her in the style to which she's become accustomed?
Maybe she'll rue the day she decided to leave the BRF where she had everything handed to her on a plate, proper security, a roof over their heads, an eye-wateringly expensive wardrobe, chauffeur driven cars and so on. Ah! I forgot, she didn't have a voice!
@ConstantGardener33
`In any pair of criminals, one is always the junior partner - it's never equal'.
Very true. And there’s certainly never been any doubt as to who the junior partner is in the Grip and Drip duo.
I love the Inspector Lynley series and wish they’d bring it back. Nathaniel Parker (swoon) and Sharon Small make a terrific team.
Yes. Hence seeking tech deals and political deals. Snarkyatherbest has it right. She wants to husband hop. Who would want to be with Harry in America? No skills, no work ethic, he has no status. He’s a washed up Royal complaining on national television daddy cut him off. The minute she thinks she can get with a Bezos, Harry is toast. It’s just finding the right tech shmuck who’s achieved some things and has mega bucks.
Perhaps the problems they had with the Royal Rota could be a tip. P 309. They wanted to include USA but they were told that despite her being from the USA, the focus was still on the UK.
Tie that in with their thing about how really popular they were.
p 262 Fears by some that M would eclipse Diana in popularity and so that could be a problem.
p 100 JH was clearly a force during his Caribbean tour before marriage.
p 237 The crowds during the Down Under Tour were described as "Beetle-mania sized". p 238 What made their crowds different was that people who didn't previously feel any connection with the BRF came.
p 300 Their popularity was increasing but no one seemed to notice or care. The NYT did some research which showed that 83% of the searches (Nov 2017 to Jan 2020) when compared to his brother and wife.
p 315 JH felt used for his popularity.
p 259 In a meeting about how they (unnamed courtiers) needed to design a system to protect the monarchy "... It's no secret, the future of this monarchy relies solely on the four people in Kensington Palace. The public popularity only lies with them... When he [the Prince of Wales] becomes King, the only way it lasts is if the four of them are not at war. We cannot have them at war."
Great analysis. I do enjoy your takes especially on how PR works, alongwith the insider tales.
The more is revealed by the press the better we are being able to piece this jigsaw puzzle. Meghan definitely counted her chickens before they hatched. I think she was sure that aided by her topnotch, cut-throat media team, Meghan would outdo anything the royal family could ever come up with which for her were mild garden parties, charity meet and greets and commemorations. Theirs wasn't the real world or the one that mattered, hers did and she would show these old timers a trick or two about celebrity. Hadn't she been doing just that with creating a profile out of nothing but appearances and advertising products.
"The minute she thinks she can get with a Bezos, Harry is toast. It’s just finding the right tech shmuck who’s achieved some things and has mega bucks."
That's exactly what Lady C said in her last video, but she said that Lauren Sanchez had better watch out as she isn't married to Bezos yet.
*****************************************
MM saw that Serena married Reddit millionaire Alexsis, and she wanted a millionaire for herself. Serena's wedding was in November,2017, and The Harkles announced their engagement that month. Interesting timing, huh.
Typical of MM to try to outdo her "friend" Serena.
"You only got a millionaire, but I got a millionaire AND a prince!"
I just put your write-up on Morton's Markle book on my blog. Thanks for giving the go-ahead! I don't have it open right now as it's a mess, but when I do your post is in the "Harkle library".😁
That was so nice of you to think of my post. Let us know when your blog is up and running.
Conversation starts as "do you know they ousted Sharon Osborne from the Talk?!"
👂😏
She was so angry, I indulged her rant and then I said what do you know of MM? "Well she says she is victim of racism by British Press and royal family.."
(..of course first thought, duly noted she mentioned press first)
Her tone along with lack of instant dismissal launched me into semi panic and rather than allowing the blind commentary I so eagerly sought. I cut her off 😕. (enter my rant) She was horrified. Not in pampering way, more like shocked. Rather understandable as if not regularly following, who is to know? Worse if impression is what you are fed by People,etc.
As conversation continued what really gave me hoot was my dad (who had been silently sitting in living room with us whole time) breaks his silence to say "she is not black" LOL
"Where are they even living?" he continues ..lol surreal moment as I am now fielding my father's MM questions.
Now just her and I are in kitchen fixing dinner , I continue on with her laundry list of vile sh*t and I honestly hit point where I felt like "conspiracy theorist". I stopped. I felt no side-eye but MMs tale is so twisted it must border on unimaginable to those who do not know. Clearly 😐
It ended with me saying I would send her links to fake bump. Now I feel like compiling complete dossier lol. As side note my sister was exposed to covid and did not attend. I still need her Oprah story. She is rather animated so scene is sure to be reenacted, non embelished but with great detail.
@WBBM
Regarding Easter date change I was under impression this was something JW proposed hhimself. I did not know it had been discussed (and agreed upon?) many years prior. Community of St. A appears a much appreciated, successful project. I enjoyed reading of it. As I bounce around web I tend to hone in on the less than flattering accolades. My opinion of him is shallow as I just do not know enough about him. Difficult for me to shake eerie vibe I feel from him. Nice to read something positive.
@Swampwoman
I am aware of Ukraine and my comments are political and ugly. But I will say I am deeply concerned as they are not only sending troops but shipping in weapons and machinery. China I am less informed, but equally concerned. Perhaps it is a test of new administration. Worse, a challenge. Grrr I want to say lots more
Lol sorry, says thee 🏃♀️
(I appear to be running wrong way hehe)😑
Nerves, my apologies. Came across these old gems. So weird. Meg, no words and not a good look for AofC. Not why I get sinister vibe off him, but this does not help
https://www.hellomagazine.com/imagenes/royalty/20210331110052/archbishop-of-canterbury-responds-to-meghan-markle-prince-harry-wedding-comments/0-531-97/meghan-markle-smiles-justin-welby-z.jpg
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/03/22/00/40487614-9387275-The_Archbishop_of_Canterbury_Justin_Welby_centre_has_so_far_refu-a-1_1616374437406.jpg
The date of Easter is a topic that has come up perennially for as long as I can remember.
It's determined astronomically - see this `simple' explanation from the Royal Observatory at Greenwich: "the method favoured by the Council of Nicaea in AD 325 gradually became the accepted method."
https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/topics/when-easter.
- yet it's not that simple - even deciding exactly when the Vernal Equinox occurs is problematic, it's not always 21st March.
Then there's the calendar complication:
The Western Church (Roman Catholicism and all churches that derive from it) use one date for Easter, using the Gregorian calendar adopted in the 18th C (This entailed `jumping' 11 days and putting in Leap Years to keep the date in line with Earth's journey around the Sun.)
The Eastern Churches (all the Orthodox ones) still use the Julian Calendar, hence their Christmas falls after those of the Western churches, and this is given as the reason why they celebrate it after us. The Orthodox Easter Day this year falls on Sunday 2nd May.
I don't understand it - the Equinox presumably falls on the same date for them as it does for us? Or isn't it recalculated?
Does Justin see himself as the great Unifier of Christendom?
Btw, the calendar change is the reason the UK Financial Year starts on 6th April - it used to start on March 25th/Feast of the Annunciation/Lady Day, when farm rents were due - 11 days were `lost' provoking riotous panic among those who thought their lives were being cut short. `Give us back our eleven days1,' they shouted)
After H snapped at her, the `tears' welled up, I'd say.
It's almost 10 years since I was talking, in Iceland, to a well-qualified technical chap from one of the Baltic states. He'd brought his family west and was now working as a bus driver. He'd left everything behind, and still had to pay a mortgage on a house he'd never see again.
He aimed to become an Icelandic citizen. I got the impression that he was too scared to stay in his homeland.
Happy Easter Nutties
Happy Pesach Charade
Jenns, indeed, what a difference a meg makes!!
The whole family looks shell shocked 😳
Wasn’t there a rumour that madam gate crashed
at the last minute? Most other rumours have
proven to be true.
@Lucy
As it’s Easter I’ll refrain from commenting
on the unholy trinity, lest fowl thoughts
come to mind...
Archewelbyeing
Just H and Just In
Joined together in sin
They dared to look megs in the eye
They’ll both pay the price
When they realise, she’s not nice
And most definitely not, a good bye
Lily pads have always been in my mind, and after all Meghan has turned a prince into a frog. Now, if he wants to keep enjoying the sun, he's doomed to jump quickly from lily pad to lily pad until he dies, exhausted, like an aquatic The Red Shoes.
@Jessica - great analysis. It all absolutely falls into place.
@JennS - inspired comparison of the Trooping the Colours. Says it all. The later one is nearly six months before Prince Andrew's disastrous Panorama interview. My first thought, seeing him standing there like a fat red candle that doesn't want to light, was his own issues, which of course have been running for years. However that didn't stop them all being happy - so happy - in the earlier Trooping the Colour. No, the culprit is standing there with that terrifying expression on her face. I guess if we'd ever been able to assemble her own family on a balcony - and dear Trevor and Cory - we'd see a similar trail of anger and devastation.
Although isn't it great to think of Trevor in his new, happy life? With a child? It's like seeing land slowly recover after a forest fire.
Hahaha @JennS
Your Rob in a Hat avi, priceless!
Thanks for the TTC photos,
wonderful, they all look happy, relaxed.
I love all the pomp and ceremony, perfect.
Makes me proud.
`his sense of duty is abandoned when he must decide to either face a gang of blackmailers alone, or stay in town with his new wife' - not quite what Wikipedia says!
@Ava C
“a fat red candle that doesn’t want to light”
Hahaha, love it, wickless.
Haha love your story! It took a whole year for my family members to see Meg in action during the interview to call and say, ‘oh, so this is what you were talking about.’ ‘She comes across as so jealous of Kate.’ Haha. Of course they don’t follow it, at all.
Now no doubt even Meghan doesn't see herself as a maker of presidents. She's more House of Representatives level (if that). But she's probably on the way there in her head. After all, she married into the Windsors as Pamela H married into the Churchills. Both set great store on their appearance as a way to seduce wealthy, older men.
But. Big but. Pamela H was more than just the greatest courtesan of the 20th century. She was intelligent in a useful rather than a twisted way. She could be relied on to be discreet. Churchill when wartime PM valued her extremely highly as a vital conduit to influential Americans at a time when we were desperate to get America into the war, and then desperate to keep support coming our way when Roosevelt was also fighting the war in the Pacific.
When you read diaries and letters of the time - the real day to day stuff - you begin to appreciate that history can be made by seemingly inconsequential things. Hidden away things. That's what Pamela Churchill excelled at. Meghan may be physically hidden away, but that's all. She couldn't be trusted to hold a cup of tea. Literally.
Meghan also doesn't have Pamela H's famed set of contacts. Her style. Her knowledge of how to live in that world. Most of all, she doesn't have her access to money. A mountain of money. How can you be a mover and shaker when you're struggling to meet your monthly bills? Your power coming from your marriage to a petulant, ignorant man-child rather than a famous multimillionaire with a heavyweight career behind him?
Was there ever such a slow-motion disaster like this, in the history of the royal family? Certainly not from someone as intrinsically insignificant as Meghan. Where 'lowly' people did cause havoc, it was only where their relationship was directly with the king or queen, not the sixth in line. That alone tells you that the Windsors need to get their act together. This saga should never have got this far.
Hell Dorado
When all’s said and done
Feckless Harry’s the one
He brought the wolf to the fold
She’s cast her net wide
With Haz, who’s on side
As they dream of great lumps, of fools gold
I think they dream of lumps of real gold but all they get is fool's gold. They definitely don't have the Midas touch they think they have.
@Ava C
Easier said than done.
The die was cast, Harry and his first proclamation.
That set the seal.
The RF had their hands tied from the beginning.
What could they do?
Refuse the marriage, Harry would have gone
ahead regardless, then painted them as racists.
Might have been better if they had.
@Maneki
All that glistens isn’t gold 😉
You can bet William was the polar opposite as he was older when his mother died AND saw the ruin caused when your heart rules your head. William learned from his mother's mistakes while Harry just goes on repeating them.
Harry's overtaken Diana on the royal crisis scale now, but that's only because her life was cut short. I still think she had an increasingly tawdry future ahead of her had she lived. Her divorce settlement wouldn't have lasted forever and worthy, responsible men found her too complicated to take on. So she was left with men like Dodi. Harry's writing the chapter she never got to write.
The Sussex Saga ~ The Status Quo
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2021/04/04/the-sussex-saga-the-status-quo/
@Ava C
Harry is his mothers son.
Lacks her guile, makes
up for it in malice.
Neither of them were/are very nice.
Crock a Mole
Megs ultimate goal
Is to fill her insatiable hole
There’s no easy fix it
Many caught up, betwixt it
She’s a mole, with no soul
Just a hole
Chilling, yet profound take. Is Harry carrying Diana’s torch, but not in the way he thinks he is? But rather, what she actually was.
Fascinating.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9437143/Minor-4-0-magnitude-earthquake-strikes-Los-Angeles-area.html
The Duke, London, United Kingdom, 44 minutes ago
Oooooooooooo. "Meg, Meg. Did the earth move for you?" No Har's. It's just my ego having a blast !" 😆
No Megs around so everyone is relaxed and happy. Harry is talking with everyone on the balcony. Harry is his happy impish self with lots of hair on his noggin. Harry could have stayed on this course with a better wife from England but he want exotic from America, from Los Angeles. He got it spades.
(Be careful what you wish for, you might get it good and hard!)
She linked to a video of a meeting held at 25 The Cloisters (where dat?) hosted by the CEO of the QCT Nicola Brentnall. The four minute video has clearly been edited so it might not have been quite as bad as appears - and the video being posted to the Royal Family YouTube site was this I wonder throwing shade at Markle with added plausible deniability? It commences with a nervous Brentnall greeting the Harkles outside. Inside, those present (an otherwise diverse body) sit down around a large table and Brentnall commences her introduction, still rather nervous I thought and in her introduction it has to be said full of all the approved buzz-words. (White woman in England informing the invited natives of how every one is equal). Then Markle, in an interminable word-salad breaks in and thereafter does not let up, poor Harry looking as if he hasn't a clue as to what she is talking about - or perhaps he is just embarrassed by her. Harry Markle sees Brentnall allowing this to happen as weakness, but I am afraid I disagree. If the Patrons of the QCT seek to upend the meeting (Harry the sixth in line to the throne doing nothing to restrain his wife) then in my humble opinion it would have been as wrong indeed impossible of Brentnall to call out Markle as it would have been for Bob Iger to tell Harry at the Lion Kong premiere to get lost. Calling out Markle would surely also have been construed as racist, no one ever told me, I was given no guidance, mental health issues, the weather in England is so awful, stuff. The rudeness or as it is now fashionable to describe rudeness, Inappropriate behaviour, of Markle is of course consistent with her other instances of poor behaviour.
What do you think?
Well, he certainly fell in with a thirsty fame whore like Diana did. Only her thirsty fame whore had lots of family money.
Princess Diana, 1970's - i've never seen this video before. It is great.
I think 25 The Cloisters is within the grounds of Windsor castle, there is an entrance in Thames Street and in the bend there is the entrance to The Cloisters.
BREAKING NEWS: Californians are shaken awake by magnitude 4 earthquake and aftershocks which hit LA before dawn
Lots of worry that that is a foreshock for a much bigger quake. I do hope that they have enough sense to be prepared for that eventuality. (sigh) I suppose that that whole preparing for an eventuality that WILL strike, timeline unknown, is for the little people.
If SoCal has a devastating quake, what are the odds that the RF will take them back? Personally, if the BRF have to get them out, I'd send them to Canada, but that seems like a mean thing to do to a nice country that already has the Trudeaus.
@Magatha Mistie - this all goes back to Diana doesn't it? Harry was treated with kid gloves after her death and given free passes for everything. They made him still more impetuous than he would have been already. He kept acting unilaterally, from the beginning with Meghan, when he should have kept the Queen informed first. So that the BRF were always left coping with the aftermath rather than guiding his future.
You can bet William was the polar opposite as he was older when his mother died AND saw the ruin caused when your heart rules your head. William learned from his mother's mistakes while Harry just goes on repeating them.
Harry's overtaken Diana on the royal crisis scale now, but that's only because her life was cut short. I still think she had an increasingly tawdry future ahead of her had she lived. Her divorce settlement wouldn't have lasted forever and worthy, responsible men found her too complicated to take on. So she was left with men like Dodi. Harry's writing the chapter she never got to write.
This is very astute. I have often thought the same thing--Harry is playing out the Royal Family's nightmare scenario with Diana, post-divorce, had she not died in Paris. Just like with her son, the wheels came off for Diana shockingly quickly after the divorce. She was dead within a year, having dismissed her Royal Protection. The BRF made a lot of concessions to Diana in the divorce. They were navigating an unprecedented situation, since no previous Prince or Princess of Wales had divorced. Diana's settlement was not astronomical, even though Charles had to cash out most of his own portfolio and borrow from Mummy to meet it. But she also got to keep the very nice KP apartment that had been the London family home, on the grounds that the boys would be staying with her there some of the time and they needed a secure location, plus the stability of a familiar place, and the family tried to keep her protected with RPOs.
It was a manifestation of her mental illness that she grew increasingly paranoid to the point where she was convinced that William was spying on her and recording her through his watch. This paranoia was planted and watered by Martin Bashir . . now I read that in addition to faked-up reports of MI5 surveillance, he also presented her with a fake 'invoice' of a termination supposedly of the boys' nanny, whom Diana had always suspected of having designs on Charles. If these are true, then I have no words for how a mentally ill woman was shamelessly exploited to manipulate her into that Panorama interview. That, and the myriad other self-destructive acts that followed it have to be forgiven in some degree by the fact that Diana was not in full control of her faculties. Seeing what has happened to Britney Spears really reminds me of how Diana was. Britney is a diagnosed bipolar disorder, as is Lindsay Lohan, and a person with this mental illness is highly susceptible to negative influences and choices . . also eating disorders, chemical dependency, uncontrolled spending and an otherwise chaotic lifestyle where they do a lot of damage to themselves and exacerbate their brain imbalances. When rigorously managed and kept to a healthy schedule by people looking out for their best interest, they can be charming, dynamic, exciting and giving people. But when the mania spirals out of control, they are not capable of self-management.
Harry is now older than his Mum was when she died. Diana turned 36 a mere two months before her death. So far, Harry has done nothing but blot his copybook in the chapter of his life outside of the Royal family that he's writing, or rather, largely having written for him. It remains to be seen whether he will die young like his mother or whether he will drift sadly and pointlessly through the remainder of a decently long life, just being an uncomfortable embarrassment and failure for decades after his self-exile like Great-great-Uncle David. Whether the rest of his life be long or short, for whatever remains of it 'Pathetic & useless loser' is Harry's legacy to the world.
Sadly agree. I didn't realize Harry's degree of dysfunction when he was under the protection of the royal family; it is now sadly apparent. Maybe this exposure is a good thing, though, in that it reveals what and who Harry really is to the people of the UK.
Something Harry Markle said a short while ago implied the author had read history. I recall also that the aim of H-M was to create a piece of 1st hand, contemporary, evidence for the future, which would tally.
--------------------
25 The Cloisters seems to be within Windsor Castle -
https://www.stgeorgeshouse.org/society-leadership-fellows/general-information/
--------------------
I agree with you, Opus, about the way Brentnall was prevented from chairing the meeting by MM. I'm very critical of those in the chair who either love the sound of their own own voices and drone on, wasting everyone's time, or who are tardy in preventing others from doing the same. I like to think I conduct meetings effectively, without allowing either to happen.
So, watching the QCT video, I imagined myself in Brentnall's place, looking for a chance to take back control. I could not find an empty fraction of a second in which to intervene diplomatically.
Markle just did not stop - it was as if she had a continuous supply of air entering her lungs, obviating the need to draw breathe.
How does she do it? I assume she is anatomically like the rest of us, rather than being like those molluscs which have inhalant and exhalant siphons to achieve a continuous flow of fresh water over their gills.
As for what she says, I doubt if she ever drafts it out and asks herself `Is this paragraph really necessary? Were someone critical, (like me!) to attack the draft with the red pan, she'd ignore the amendments. She just opens her mouth and logorrhea spews out.
Part of the problem, I suspect, is that she cannot stand anybody else being the centre of attention.
With a stable mind, it could have all have been so different.
If the Patrons of the QCT seek to upend the meeting (Harry the sixth in line to the throne doing nothing to restrain his wife) then in my humble opinion it would have been as wrong indeed impossible of Brentnall to call out Markle as it would have been for Bob Iger to tell Harry at the Lion Kong premiere to get lost. Calling out Markle would surely also have been construed as racist, no one ever told me, I was given no guidance, mental health issues, the weather in England is so awful, stuff. The rudeness or as it is now fashionable to describe rudeness, Inappropriate behaviour, of Markle is of course consistent with her other instances of poor behaviour.
For a woman who spent most of her first 35 years denying her black heritage . . who denied her black mother to her school friends as 'the maid', pretended to be 'Italian', commenced with plastic surgery in her teens to obliterate any evidence of her 'African' features, marketed herself as exclusively 'Caucasian' in her industry . . she certainly has effectively weaponized her 'Blackness' all of a sudden. She's only been 'Black' for about the last 5 years or so. But that is a very powerful weapon. Not just 'Black' but also a woman, a 'vulnerable new mother' and a 'Black vulnerable new mother being harassed by racist bullies'. Also, a Royal by marriage, which means that all the Britons she met while 'the Duchess' have been indoctrinated into the culture of deference to Royalty, regardless of the actual worth of the person they are curtsying to.
This culture of deference is a large part of the reason why Markle was never called out on her shenanigans or faced consequences. Her Royal status is why Justice Warby basically gave her a freebie and delicately referred to her constant lies as 'hyperbolic assertion'--because it is not Done to call a Royal a bald-faced liar. Duels would have been fought for less in earlier times. The other barrel she's got trained on the world is the 'Race' card--the deference of titles was more powerful while she was in England, but now that she's over in the States, she's putting all her ammo into racism, and mental health as an adjunct. The subtext is that she'd have been given all the support and mental health intervention she needed if she wasn't 'Black.'
Although I'd read the Harry Markle post, I eschewed the video. I read your post and decided to be brave and endure it. I couldn't believe how rude Megalo was. She had to have the attention on her herself and couldn't shut up. If you look at Harry's face, he didn't look particularly pleased with her. These days, I can't bear to look at Megalo's face or listen to her voice. She's so fake.
it is not Done to call a Royal a bald-faced liar.
-------
Perhaps not but she's only a Royal by marriage, as you said. Remember what Palace staff used to call her: Dino - duchess in name only.
Euphemisms for `lies and lying', acceptable in Court and Parliament::
`Hyperbolic assertion'
`less than candid'
`economical with the actualité'
I daresay Nutties can tink of more.
The video is really jaw dropping to me. I've always been aware of the physical message and the implied message sent as something to decode thanks to a family member for what am I supposed to do/not do with what they just told me. Never took it farther. This takes it so much farther.
As for Diana no doubt she had mental illness issues but I think there was probably reality to being spied on by Charles for possible leverage against her or to keep her in line. They don’t call it court intrigue for nothing. I still wonder if the BRF would have waited to get her introduced to the public or let them have a few years of privacy (at least til she had her first baby) of if Charles could have been more discrete about the Camilla thing how it would all flow out. We will never know but Harry sure seems to be going down the same path. We know Megs likes to compare herself to Diana but I imagine Haz actually does about himself. And of course her soho court intrigue probably isn’t helping.
Bottom line he doesn’t look happy or joyful, they don’t look happy together and where the f is archie? Oh to be a fly on the wall in Montecito. Would love to know who and what she is aiming for next. I firmly believe if she can’t get more money out of the BRF it will be Harry and 50% of community property and earnings since the flight to California and child support for at least one kid all happening in the next year.
MEGHAN MARKLE faces further criticism from Piers Morgan in the coming days, as he gives his first TV interview since quitting GMB.
The outspoken journalist will chat to US TV host Tucker Carlson on Monday for his video podcast on Fox Nation. The interview with last for one hour and will air at 4pm ET on Monday, 8pm GMT. Mr Morgan is expected to discuss his recent career change, having quit Good Morning Britain (GMB) last month over his criticism of Meghan Markle.
Modified limited hangout, from Watergate.
@Hikari said
it is not Done to call a Royal a bald-faced liar.
-------
Perhaps not but she's only a Royal by marriage, as you said. Remember what Palace staff used to call her: Dino - duchess in name only.
Yes . . but I'm sure they only called her DINO out of her earshot, and they wouldn't have written it down. To her face, I'm sure it was all 'Ma'am' and curtsies, even as the crockery and hot liquid was being hurled in their direction.
Everyone knows that Markle was only ever a faux tin-pot 'Duchess' by virtue of marrying the family's resident retard (I know that term is offensive to the 'developmentally delayed' and I mean no disrespect to anyone else but Harry when I use it. It just fits so perfectly and is alliterative. Harry's not just 'delayed'--that suggests that with time, he could ostensibly 'catch up'. Dude's not delayed; he's permanently stunted.) . . but good manners and training would have made folks polite to her face and following the norms of protocol for interacting with Royalty, even if she didn't. Such deference to her title allowed her to get away with the most egregiously arrogant acts like clearing out whole sections of Wimbledon on her order, and taking over meetings where she'd only been invited as a courtesy. That Wimbledon thing still burns my bacon because all those rows of empty seats should have been filled by all the 'regular' folk who had purchased tickets for that match, a year in an advance, probably, and who had been looking forward to it as the highlight of her year. Barred from attending an event to which they had paid large sums of money all on the whims of a 'Duchess' who was high out of her mind and didn't even pay attention to what was going on.
Her title, plus the fact that she was seated beside a legitimate blood Royal who was not intervening to correct her created the atmosphere that allowed Murky to shanghai this meeting with her verbal word salad diarrhea and waste the time of a roomful of people who were actually rather important themselves in the context of the charity and actual real-world W.O.R.K. Making a pernicious Narcissist like Markle a Duchess was the very worst thing that could have happened because until that occurred, her grandiose delusions of being a Princess that was better than everyone was all in her head. Marrying Harry made it a reality . . at least that's how people were compelled to act when interacting with her, and why the highly accomplished chairwoman of this meeting felt constrained against blurting out 'Will you put a sock in it, you daft bint and STFU!' Had she done so, she'd have been promptly sued. As it was, she had to take comfort in the privacy of her own thoughts, no doubt shared by everyone else in the room, but just too well-bred to say what they were thinking.
"Creditable story", overheard at a meeting
Her Majesty said it best . . "Recollections may vary".
How about:
'a creatively original narrative of events'
'Surgically precise recall of detail'
'admirably imaginative application of details'
No one is calling M to ask how she is (they haven't and are continuing to not ask).
So no one has tried to placate her/them since the interview. For all the talk of healing the breech, one wonders how to classify the information release that although the other side did make contact (as requested) but that it was not as promising as hoped (not in good faith? but can that continue to fit the narrative?).
Perhaps a little response was that the message sent was about how this is supposed to be private and within the family, not shared with outsiders. But again, no real contact and it sounds like nothing scheduled.
In FF, there are several times where JH had feelings about how the family let him down or didn't show the support he/they wanted. The CW ceremony was one example.
But in these two examples, they are looking at this as: things just happen to me (something brought out in the video) instead of I did some things and this is the new reality because of my decisions and then other people's in response.
So the BRF isn't budging. They are still going about with their lives as if none of that is happening. Or that they need to drop everything and pick up the phone. I think we will likely see this escalate/ratchet up from JHAMS side as they continue to try to get a response and/or need more money.
As they should. If I were such a pushover that I would immediately spit out cash every time the children made a purchase that they were unable to pay for, I'd be harking up cash left and right. My job, as an adult, was to prepare them for life as an adult. That didn't mean paying whenever they got into a financial hole because all that would do is teach them that they didn't have to be responsible because somebody else would take care of them.
Will we ever understand this? It's as if he got on one of those moving walkways to hell and he hasn't figured out how to get off. Yet not once has he tried to help anyone who wants to help him. It baffles me.
It's more than the outcome of ordinary jealousy of his brother or petulance or a series of tantrums where he has dragged the country along in his wake. It's something more sinister. I have never liked or been happy with Harry, but there's something deeply unsettling in this situation.
The only ordinary explanation I can think of is that he chose this person and now he demands that everyone likes her and listens to her because he chose her, even though she's systematically persecuting his family and his country and destroying every vestige of his past life. Is his ego that huge, that he refuses to recognise the extent of the damage, just because Harry must for once call the shots? Is that stronger than his love for his father, brother and grandparents?
Harry loves children and was always great with them yet for several years he's shown no closeness with his little nephews and niece. No care for them. It's as if he's been reprogrammed. It can't be just a sexual hold over him. That doesn't seem enough to explain this level of control at this great a cost.
Yes you can quote Wallis Simpson all you want, for whom an empire was relinquished, but the Duke of Windsor was clearly willingly in thrall to his duchess every day of his life to the end. Harry looks like he doesn't even want to be in the same room with his.
The outspoken journalist will chat to US TV host Tucker Carlson on Monday for his video podcast on Fox Nation. The interview with last for one hour and will air at 4pm ET on Monday, 8pm GMT. Mr Morgan is expected to discuss his recent career change, having quit Good Morning Britain (GMB) last month over his criticism of Meghan Markle.
I read this Piers Morgan stream is free and the password is either tucker or TUCKER
https://nation.foxnews.com/?cmpid=org=NAT::ag=MediaStorm::mc=CPC::src=bing::cmp=brandcore&utm_source=CPC&utm_medium=bing&utm_campaign=brandcore&gclsrc=ds
Yes . . but I'm sure they only called her DINO out of her earshot, and they wouldn't have written it down.
---------------
Obviously, they wouldn't have called her Dino to her face. That was their nickname for her. Shows what their thought of her and how she must have treated them.
There are also a number of photos of Diana being caught reading--magazines yes, but books too. Diana Cartland novels are not Laurens van der Post, for sure, but she devoured those avidly. Not something someone allegedly hobbled by dyslexia would do . .?
Did Diana get seduced by the London scene into eschewing all things country life? She certainly enjoyed the pool at Althorp and her pony, by the looks. Dressed like a country tomboy, too, not a frou-frou princess. (I am very glad the 1980s style of white tights on grown up girls is passe.) What impressed me when we first met Lady Diana as Charles' fiancee is how down-to-earth her life seemed, for an aristocrat who was going to be a Royal bride. Living in a flat with three girls, driving a tiny car, wearing sensible sweater sets and working in a nursery school. So . . the flat had been purchased for her by Earl Spencer in a top neighborhood, and she could afford nights out and the Sloane Ranger lifestyle. But she wasn't a typical Sloane Ranger, bunking with mates, working part-time menial jobs and cleaning her sister's flat for pay. Diana seemed far happier doing 'normal' things than she ever was with the trappings of Royalty. There is no hint in those pictures of an emotionally shattered and insecure child of divorce secretly binging and purging herself. Her eyes do often look sad in those pictures but equally or more often the Diana we see is smiling, laughing, confident, showing off for the camera.
She was a consummate actress if she kept her pain so well hidden that it was not visible to anybody outside the family until she decided to make 'Royal victim' her story line.
Charles was absolutely the wrong spouse for her but that also flowed his way. Diana could not adjust to Royal life, but how much of that was 'couldn't' vs. 'wouldn't'? Her intrinsic thirst for constant attention and drama surrounding her, even if it was negative, is so much like Markle's. Diana could be canny and calculated at times but I don't think her bids for attention were malignantly designed to harm, as Markle's are. Diana thought that if she could just get 'enough' love and affirmation, she'd be transcendently happy. The problem is--what would have been 'enough' to satisfy her? Charles was not the man to give it to her, but could anyone have managed to? Would Diana have been content with a more obscure, 'normal' life and non-Royal husband who was attentive to her alone--or would she have sucked him dry as well?
Diana's version of events assumes that all the fault is Charles' and the Firm's, and they deserve all the blame and she none. Just like another professional victim we know.
It all happened ridiculously fast. Engagement and marriage. Despite Diana's proximity to the BRF at Sandringham they barely knew each other. If Charles had made Diana wait as William made Kate wait, there wouldn't have been a marriage. Diana couldn't have kept up the pretence. As far as making the next heir was concerned, Prince Charles had no biological clock ticking and Diana could have afforded to wait much longer than Kate. The reasons it was rushed were pretty feeble, with the wisdom of hindsight. Just look what Diana has put the country through. It's still going on, nearly a quarter of a century after her death.
I should add, if I'm thought to be unkind towards Diana, that I burst into tears on hearing of Diana's death. She was infuriating but somehow got to you. I don't think later generations will ever understand. I don't myself.
I've had a month to digest 'the interview' even though it didn't feel like a interview. It felt more like an attack of Harry's family, the British public, and to the Queen's Reign.
MM and the minefield of mental disorder's really come down to one thing for me. She is an abuser, especially of her husband and his family. She cuts off her nose to spite her face.
I've seen this trait in men but never from a woman and it fascinates me. It superficially looks like a peaches and cream life that she lives, but she's actually tortured mentally. She comes off so sweet (most of the time) but behind those evil eyes she's diabolical in all the things she's been doing non-stop since she was 1st spotted at the Invictus Games back in 2016.
Those who post here have certainly dissected her and I believe the mask she's been wearing has finally fallen away and in many respects it reminds of The Picture of Dorian Gray, inhuman and you must immediately look away or you will die from fright.
She hasn't done herself any favors doing that interview, it actually makes her true self look horrible. Does she know it's backfired on her yet? I mean she said in the interview she doesn't read about herself so I'm assuming she hasn't. But on the off chance she has seen what's been written is she herself horrified? She is doing so much negative and she can't help herself, as if she can't control what she's done. I believe it's going to destroy her, her family, and all those who associate with her. If she's lucky she'll go back to her ordinary original life with the money she initially started with from her own earnings.
Hunting, shooting, fishing are. Horses are old school, but not necessary for country living.
All manner of country living people engage in hunting, shooting and fishing. It's not restricted to the aristocratic class.
The royal family are primarily country folk. And afew of them are crazy about horses or horsey activities. The Queen has been horse crazy since she was a little girl. Margaret learnt to ride, but wasn't horse crazy and preferred the city.
Camilla is a country woman. Ditto Tiggy. That's why they slot in so easily with the royals.
Also, Diana wasn't scared or petrified of horses. She just didn't care for them to the degree the royals are assumed to love them.
As for her first affair, it wasn't Hewitt though he became the most famous of lovers. Her first affair was thought to be her bodyguard, Barry Mannakee.
He was transferred elsewhere after their relationship started to leak out. He later died in a motorcycle accident - random accident. If Harry hadn't popped out with red hair,the paternity rumours would point straight at Barry because that relationship is so close to his birth.
Diana told us in her ghost-written Morton autobiography that Charles broke the news of Barry's death in the limo to a premiere at the Cannes Film Festival 1987.
Looking at how radiant she was, you'd never know she'd just received the shocking news or that she was heartbroken.
https://princessdianabookboutique.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/image191.jpg
Tricks aside, that marriage was doomed regardless of Camilla or anybody else. They were completely different people in every way.
I think the best description of Diana and Charles's disaster of a relationship comes from James Whitaker's obituary for Diana.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/princess-dianas-life-and-death-obituary-1282386
Looking at their individual interests laid out so starkly, you can see that no professional matchmaker would put these two together.
I think Meghan is scary as she is indeed all artifice but her delivery falls short of her ambitions there as with everything else. Dorian Grey, when his portrait first started changing, with lines of cruelty around the mouth, put a large screen in front of it to hide it from others. After reading your post I'm now seeing Meghan doing the same but accidentally knocking the screen over from time to time due to her ineptitude, so people get horrifying glimpses of her real self. It's much more frightening to know something is lurking just out of sight than to see it plainly. Unsettling, as I said in my earlier post. She's unsettling.
There are a couple of photos of her I actually find too disturbing to look at. Her eyes are dead, bottomless pools. Yet other times she can look lovely. She would have been ideally suited to those old British hammer horror films in fact, where bad acting didn't matter. All you needed was to look soft, melting and vulnerable, then scarifying in your next scene after Count Dracula had paid a flying visit.
I just don't get what's going on with Harry. What is going on in his head? Not just here but since this started. He looks like he doesn't even like her. His head looks as if it's going to explode from the pressure inside.
Will we ever understand this? It's as if he got on one of those moving walkways to hell and he hasn't figured out how to get off. Yet not once has he tried to help anyone who wants to help him. It baffles me.
It's more than the outcome of ordinary jealousy of his brother or petulance or a series of tantrums where he has dragged the country along in his wake. It's something more sinister. I have never liked or been happy with Harry, but there's something deeply unsettling in this situation.
This is the million-pound question right here. Markle is a relentlessly exploitative and grifting opportunist/megalomanic who, once one reads up a bit on 'clinical narcissism' is actually easy to figure out. Transparently basic in her motives, once one is wearing the right pair of merde colored Markle-vision goggles. Once that piece falls into place, Markle is reliably predictable as an exemplar of her species, the sociopathic narcissist with a taste for the high life, a pathological need for control and dominance that is matched only by her aversion to real work, and an endless thirst for adoration and money in equal measure. What makes her unique for her breed is the rarified level of victims she found to exploit. The strata she married into gives her a literal global platform for all her Narcissistic behaviors to play out. She'd be acting the same, just on a much smaller scale of influence if she'd met and married somebody from the a royal family with the profile Harry's got.
He's the real cipher here and always has been. Of course, we have learned the true, ugly, extremely limited Harry through all of this, and it is not an appealing picture at all. The image of Harry we've been sold since he was a lad at secondary school has been a masterful bunch of high gloss. I still like to think that Harry would have had the potential to be a better person and meaningfully contributing member of the Royal family with a different choice of spouse, but maybe not. Harry may be altogether too broken to fix and was so BM (Before Markle). Like the apex predator she is, she sniffed out his damage and exploited it. The beginning of their story follows the script Harry'd been following for many years, whether he was in a publicly confirmed romantic relationship or not: Boy sees girl in club. Girl looks up for a good time. Girl proves she's up for a good time. Hazza Hits That. Hazza Hits That for a While, Long Distance whilst Hitting as Many Other Thats as he can on his party Prince circuit. Hazza seemed way more into Sarah Anne Macklin, an absolutely stunning model a LOT younger than Markle during the same period he was ostensibly 'seeing' MM. Hazza gets Bored and moves on. A year passes . . .a year filled with other birds in other ports, 'round the globe. So far, so Hazza.
However, in his sussexofficial statement, Harry revealed that he thinks the public is brain washed by media articles. I think he also said it in the statement announcing lawsuit against ANL.
And in one of her zoom interviews, Meghan revealed similar thoughts.
It's safe to say that they both process any public comments via that lens and so it's not their fault. It's the dastardly media and others brainwashing the public rather than them being at fault.
Something went down in Toronto that day that propelled Hazza to put a ring on it that fast. Once again seeming like the soul of happiness in the gardens and a jangly, unhappy awkward nervy mess at the interview which happened directly after the pictures. Talk about turning on a dime!
Could Harry be a split personality? A Jekyll and Hyde? Could he have disassociative episodes where his shadow self, his Hyde, makes contracts that Good Harry (Jekyll) can't extricate himself from when he comes to? Maybe it was Harry Hyde who impetuously decided to say 'F*ck U Granny and Family!' and marry his American hook-up in Botswana. After that trip, Harry Jekyll took over the train with no memory of that event, or convincing himself that it was just for play, not real. Whoops! Here come the gang to Toronto to reassure him that, yep, he's actually *really* married, and whoops! His bride is pregnant, too. What's he gonna do about it? Either they go global with Markle being his girlfriend and he puts a ring on it FAST, because she's out of a job in Canada and, oh, yeah, carrying his baby . . (a convenient baby to exert pressure, followed by one of her equally convenient pregnancy losses because she has to look svelte for the engagement and wedding photos) . . either he agrees to marry her or else they are going to tell the Queen about the African marriage and about all the other stuff he gets up to at Soho House parties.
Blackmail.
In descending order of awfulness, my theories are:
1. Harry's ego really is that huge because he himself is a sociopath without a normal conscience and it doesn't bother him to hurt people, including his nearest and dearest. More than one girlfriend has intimated that he's 'not nice'. I think that was a tactful British way to say that he has a violent temper and expresses it physically. We know for a fact that he abuses his polo ponies. Anyone who abuses animals is equally capable of abusing any person they deem weaker than themselves. People like this can be very charming and fun and the life of any party--so long as they are getting their way in all things. Thwart them a tiny bit and the monster emerges. We've got an awful lot of dark stories coming out about Harry going back to his childhood, even before Diana died . .getting much worse in his teens and 20s. We can't blame Meg for those, so he was profoundly damaged and miswired before she got on scene. His toxic jealousy of William's birth position and the attendant privileges seem to have been eating him alive even before Meg's arrival, but she found the perfect pressure point to exploit. The irony is that William probably envied Harry *his* position growing up--all the privileges of Royal rank with nothing like the burdens he's going to have as King. If Harry had been able to see the blessings of his own position and been content with a smaller house, fewer staff, having to walk behind William at ceremonial events & less elaborate ceremonial uniforms, by God, what a nice life he could have had. He would have been given the leeway to fashion a role for himself that had many more freedoms than William enjoyed. The family tried! They let him have the bride of his choosing--Markle would have been flat out denied as a suitable choice for William, racism or no racism. The Queen offered them a role in the Commonwealth . . where they could raise their baby in the relative privacy of Africa and still come home for Christmas and 'fun' things. Nobody who's had a even a glimpse through the media of what Harry has given up to squat in California and shill smartphone apps can even believe our eyes.
2. Harry had decided at the age of 33 that he was never going to find 'the One' like William had. He may be gay, bisexual, asexual or just not capable of feeling that kind of love for a woman, and knows it. However, to get all the perks in his family, he needed to be a married man. Only way to the Duke title, a bigger house, more swag. More money. A seat at the grown-up's table. Nobody was taking him seriously as a bachelor party prince. He had no intention of giving up partying but he couldn't advance in the Firm without a wife. Children . . ? Children were complicated. Maybe he can't father kids and that is an item that is known to his closest family members. His surgical procedure on his testes is a matter of record. If Harry is sterile, I think the family would know. Perhaps he and William have been tested, because their fertility is a matter of state. If this is the case, imagine Harry's family's surprise when Hazza's wife announces I'm Pregnant! and displays such burgeoning bumps so soon after the wedding. What might have been possible, for two people in their 30s (Late 30s in the maternal case) with fertility issues is not *likely* to have occurred just 6-8 weeks after the wedding, which is Markle's claim. She would have had to conceive sometime in July.
So at an age when he'd started to despair of getting married and was no doubt under increasing pressure to grow up and get on with it, along comes Markle . . a woman who is auditioning British husbands with cash. Being in love with her is not a prerequisite. She's got a proposition for him--a surefire way to get everything he wants plus unlimited holidays in Hollywood, where she promises to introduce him 'round to all her movie star friends. Because she's a big acting star in America, innit! If he pretends to be in love with her and they convince Granny to let them get married, they will be rock stars and get everything William's got, and more. They are the 'exciting young royals' after all . . and Meg knows how to get the really top gear. He plays his part for show, and when they aren't in front of a camera, she says he can absolutely do whatever he likes. She doesn't care. As long as he hits his marks and they rake in the cash, he can continue to live pretty much as he has been, only, under the radar, innit . . for a few years, a couple of sprogs, and then the divorce. Meanwhile, the 'marriage' gets everyone off his back & he gets to be a Duke and have lots of sun hols. 'Marriage' is just a construct, innit, it needn't cramp his style. Only, in public they have to pretend to be in love, but how hard could that be? Just photo ops, and he's well used to those.
Only, acting this part has become a full-time job and it's really cramping his style and he never meant for things to go this far. Meg told him they'd live in California during the sucky English winters, but not that he'd be giving up the polo circuit, Balmoral shooting and all his mates forever and ever. Or that Dad and Granddad wouldn't ever take his calls.
#3 would be a worst-case scenario for Harry, but it's the most sympathetic read on the current state of affairs. It makes him her victim rather than an equally complicit monster toward his own family for entirely selfish purposes.
This is why I wonder about a Jekyll/Hyde/multiple personality for Harry. Maybe the trauma of losing his mum made him split into two people, which is why the message of Harry is so mixed up and contradictory.
Markle does not get this pass--she's got one personality and it is evil.
In retrospect, I have been forced to conclude that "Harry loves kids/is great with kids/can't wait to be a Dad!" is the corresponding leg to his 'Hero Soldier Harry, Champion of Veterans and His Mother's Son" image that was meticulously constructed by ELF and others. Being Diana's son is the centerpiece of Harry's entire image and his self-image, too, probably. It was *Diana* who loved children, was great with kids and who couldn't wait to be a mother. As Markle well knows, it's incredibly easy to find staged photo opportunities with cute children to burnish one's image as nurturing, loving, a real family type . .if one has the PR machine to make it happen.
I don't doubt that Harry enjoyed kicking the soccer ball around with some brown kids in Africa, but it was the 'soccer' aspect rather than the 'kids' aspect that was the draw. He was getting attention for Sentebale and those pictures were part of the job. He could leave the kids behind at the close of the photo shoot and go back to his bachelor lifestyle in his luxury accommodation. There was a well-publicized photo series that seemed entirely extemporaneous of Haz mugging with a toddler girl eating his popcorn at the stands at some sporting event he was at. He interacted with another girl baby briefly during a visit to a YMCA in London when Meg was 'pregnant'. That seemed spontaneous as well, but it might have easily been suggested to Haz that he look for an opporunity to get a cute picture of himself with a baby since his fatherhood was impending. He didn't actually hold the baby or anything; just made a few goofy faces at her. Goofy, we know Haz can do.
In short, Harry's reputation for being so loving toward and good with children rests on a handful of photo ops with kids who are complete strangers to him. He was an uncle of two before Markle ever blew into his life as the 'mother of his future kids'. I've never seen a candid photo of Uncle Harry with any of William's children--there was the family portrait to mark Charles's 70th, when Boss Baby totally stole the show. Other than that, there is no visible sign of Uncle Harry's relationship to his niece and nephews. There is the standing story that William banned Harry from being around the children or coming over at all due to him consistently turning up drunk or high. This was also pre-Markle.
So let us say I am agnostic that Harry actually likes kids or wants anything to do with them. It's super curious, isn't it that pictures of him with his own son are so very scarce?
Yes you can quote Wallis Simpson all you want, for whom an empire was relinquished, but the Duke of Windsor was clearly willingly in thrall to his duchess every day of his life to the end. Harry looks like he doesn't even want to be in the same room with his.
Can't argue there. Stockholm Syndrome? Split personality? A matching case of NPD to his wife's? Who the hell knows?
I blame those novels for her disastrous romantic life. Not just with Charles, but all her lovers.
Almost every woman goes through an unrealistic romantic phase. Adding Barbara Cartland to it is like lighting a match to gasoline.
We all eventually get over it, but before Diana got over it, she was married to a real life Prince complete with disney style princess scaffolding thus ensuring she never got over it.
If you've ever read a mills and boon or Harlequin, you'll understand the genre of Barbara Cartland.
Except that Cartland sets her novels in Regency England. Where the hero is always a Prince (or important titled aristocrat) who rescues the kind hearted damsel in distress. He magically knows her and what she needs. No discussions needed. He is always charging in and removing her obstacles in life. Is obsessively attentive and will drop everything to be at the heroine's side no matter what it costs him. Marries her and makes her a princess (or some equally impressive title) and everyone lives happily ever after.
My 14yr old self adored it. As did all my 14yr old female friends and indeed classmates. We traded Mills and boon/ harlequins/ Cartlands like they were crack and we were all addicted.
My grandfather wrly observed that these types of books were the reason women had bad relationships because reading them as an unworldly girl imprints the worst kind of unrealistic expectations of romantic relationships. Prince Charming would have to be a unicorn to measure up.
When you examine how she behaved in all her other affairs, you realise that she never outgrew the Cartland imprint.
The bizarre thing is i think Diana was Charles's physical type. This is Anne Wallace, the woman he proposed to twice before Diana. Notice the superficial resemblance.
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/1957789.jpg?r=1562923879666
If they had some common interests, and Diana had matured from the Cartland imprint, i don't think Camilla would have been an issue.
Disclaimer: age gap at the time of their wedding!! Major obstacle. That would have always worked against them i think, but in a hypothetical scenerio where age isn't a factor, a mature Diana might have been able to see off Camilla.
My second thought would be, MM reads everything about herself...on the downlow away from JH, and she has brainwashed JH into not reading anything written about them. How else could JH not know or realize their interview was full of outright lies?
And because they both Lie so easily....even on easily fact checkable issues... i think are both reading everything written. MM is constantly adjusting her plan, so she knows whats being written.
She also conveniently responds too quickly to positive press on the Cambridges. Tries to one up them, if they give to a charity from their charity, the Harkles make a lame donation, like 10 handknit baby hats, the next day.
Even the 10k cookbook donation, the head of the charity that recieved it said he kept getting calls asking if he knew they donated the money because he took 3 or 4 weeks to announce it. If doesnt specify who kept calling, but i think it was her team looking for the publicity.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9411569/British-charity-kept-Meghan-Markles-10-000-donation-secret-fears-damage-reputation.html
".I still don't believe what they were saying and in particular I still don't believe what Meghan Markle said...17 different claims by the pair of them have now been proven to be either completely untrue or massively exaggerated, or unprovable...."
And, recounting what happened after he spoke on his program:
"...a huge furor erupted through the day....I was an outrage, I wasn't allowed to have an opinion that I didn't believe what she was saying, even though it was clear to me in real time as I was watching the interview that there were a number of things which just couldn't be true..."
.
Shes reading everything and probably has alerts set up on her phone!
I blame those novels for her disastrous romantic life. Not just with Charles, but all her lovers.
Almost every woman goes through an unrealistic romantic phase. Adding Barbara Cartland to it is like lighting a match to gasoline.
We all eventually get over it, but before Diana got over it, she was married to a real life Prince complete with disney style princess scaffolding thus ensuring she never got over it.
Overromanticizing any aspect of life is a sure-fire key to unhappiness, and young girls sure are primed by our culture to have vastly unrealistic expectations about romantic love, marriage, sex, motherhood, the works. Novels used to be the prime delivery format for this; they have been supplanted by movies and other people's glowing (fictitious) Instagram lives. There's been a record number of 'influencers' and 'celebrities' committing suicide during this pandemic year, notice? Maintaining the facade of perfect wife/super hot sex kitten/post-partum goddess/Martha Stewart/homeschooling mom has gotten too much to sustain.
Diana's romantic preoccupations were very developmentally typical for a girl of her age. In her case, though, those romantic fantasies weren't just on pulpy paper--she actually *knew* the most eligible Prince in the kingdom. And the purveyor of these fairy tales wasn't just a distant figment on the author page but her own step-grandmother. On some level, Diana had to know she was reading *fiction* but fiction seems a lot more reliable when one's own family member is writing it. Maybe Diana fancied that her step-grandmother was actually writing a frilly version of her own family history? Diana's actual level of mental acuity seems open to dispute.
By the age Diana was affianced, married in that fairy tale ceremony seen by the world and expecting a baby, I was still a college sophomore reading Tess of the d'Urbervilles in my monastic cell in the dorm, never having dated anyone. Mentally and emotionally, Diana was practically a baby, with no practical experience at all of life or men and entering the Royal bubble just swaddled her further. Then she got Charles, a most difficult personality to deal with. Who married her for duty, not love. He was very clear about that from the start. He told her about Camilla, and that he didn't love Diana and didn't ever see himself loving her. This marriage was for England; his heart belonged to another. This was his version of being honorable.
Charles is a very sexual person underneath the repression, and I have heard the same said about the Queen. I had to adjust my wig a bit after I read that but it makes complete sense. The way the Queen looks at Philip now is the exact same way she looked at him in their engagement photo, and that gaze has never changed. The Queen can look quite stern in pictures with everyone else but when she's looking at her consort, she's always smiling, with her face and with her eyes, too. A woman does not look like that for 75 years at a man who doesn't light her fuse. Philibet lit it up in the day.
Camilla 'gets' Charles. Charles needs a Mummy. Camilla gives him what he needs. She doesn't showboat. She loves what he loves, or pretends to. They are compatible. Camilla is also a slightly older woman, which plays into the Mummy thing. Harry really isn't that far off the old man, after all.
Diana needed a Daddy figure. A Daddy who was going to adore her and spend all his time spoiling her and making her his Princess. Both needed the other to be the parent figure and needed from the other that exact thing which the other was not able to give. They were doomed. Diana was so young but also very immature for her age besides, which made the age gap an emotional chasm. They were chronologically and emotionally from two completely different generations. It's a miracle they lasted for 10 years before things went completely t!ts-up . . but out of that union, we got William and I don't think anyone would un-wish his existence. I used to include Harry as the other good thing to come out of htat marriage, but unfortunately I can't any more.
If you've ever read a mills and boon or Harlequin, you'll understand the genre of Barbara Cartland.
I've had a gander at a few Carland-esque novels. And the prose of the Duchesss of Sussex. I've got the gist. :-)
I know who Tucker Carlson is and I would suggest the closest America has to (in his prime) Paxo. Expect retaliation from Markle, but does Carlson have the national reach and influence of Paxo? 'Minister did you sack Derek Lewis' repeated sixteen times.
I recall what Harry Markle in possibly her first blog entry said about the Toronto Invictus Games; that (if memory serves) Marcus Anderson on one side and Doria Ragland on the other they appeared to be threatening a visibly shaken Harry who when Markle first showed thereat was shocked by her arrival. Was Harry such an easy mark?
You ladies have been reading romantic fiction since the days of Mrs Radcliffe with her fates worse than death. My first and only nineteen year old wife consumed four Mills and Boon a week (then the maximum number of books borrowable from the public library). How can even someone as attractive and virile as myself compete with that?
Regardless of his intentions in that direction, he wasn't allowed to divorce her. A divorce for the heir and the monarch requires parliamentary permission.
It's not as simple as personal feeling and the retention of a lawyer to get on with proceedings.
Back in the day, we used to joke about Charles being the only man in UK who couldn't get a divorce.
Later, when i read the Morton book, i realised that was one of his attractions for Diana. Somewhere in those pages she says she married the only man who wouldn't divorce her (paraphrasing).
Taken out of context, her words imply a romantic attachment exclusively, but when you understand his constitutional position as far as divorce then they take on a different meaning especially given the security she needed after her horrible family upbringing.
When it became clear that their marriage was at an end, there were alot of meetings and public discussions about the constitutional implications of a divorce not least from the CoE - the irony of that particular body given their beginning!!!
The solution was a separation, but not a divorce. John Major, Prime Minister at the time, duly made the announcement of the separation in parliament with emphasise that there were no plans for a divorce.
IMO, the war of the Wales became vicious simply because they were stuck together. Or so they thought. No consequences for poor behaviour, but equally appalling to keep them attached when they clearly hated each other.
However, Diana took it a step too far with her panorama interview forcing the very outcome she'd feared from the outset. No wonder she was shocked when the divorce was ordered.
However, divorce seemed to release all the pent up frustration because by the time she died, cordial relations were developing between them.
Charles, Camilla and marriage.
This one also demonstrates Diana's naivety due to her age. Camilla was not a secret in those circles. Anna Wallace, the aforementioned twice fiancee, broke it off because of Camilla's ongoing presence. Anna's second engagement went as far as passing the Balmoral test before it was broken off.
Diana herself admits to knowing about Camilla, but like the satisfaction she admits to feeling about taking Charles from Sarah her sister and marrying him where her sister failed, she thought marriage to Charles would see off Camilla.
I sometimes wonder why she didn't get tips from Kanga who she'd befriended. Kanga managed to hold off Camilla being the no 1 mistress for a good decade and if not for her deteriorating health and eventual death, might have kept her in a holding pattern forever.
On a different note, the mistress arrangement was normal and reciprocal between spouses in that set except for the periods when heir and spare were being produced. Diana was the outlier in wanting her husband to herself even if she didn't extend the same courtesy to other women and their husbands.
Then again, she might have become increasingly bitter when her efforts outside the marriage were not producing her own Camilla and meanwhile she had to endure Charles with his. You wonder if she would have accepted the arrangement if she had succeeded afterall The Hewitt affair lasted 5yrs which seemed to satisfy her for it's duration.
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1379159233627820032
Piers calls Meghan a 'delusional Duchess on the make' and says he was RIGHT not to believe her because '17 of her and Harry's Oprah claims are untrue or exaggerated': Defends right to free speech and calls for end to 'ridiculous' cancel culture.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9438431/Piers-Morgan-says-right-not-believe-Meghan-Harry-interview-Tucker-Carlson.html
Re the many mistresses of King Charles III
It’s quite an irony that the Monarch who is the supreme head of God church in England Has historically been so right about marital fidelity for himself/herself. I exclude the current queen from the trend among her set for bed hopping. I know the list charitable insist that Andrew is not Phillip’s But Lord Portchester ‘s. My mind just really can’t go there with Elizabeth. I believe she has been faithful to her consort Even when things were at their worst, and he certainly was not always faithful to her. I just think that she hasn’t looked at another man since she was 13.
In 1994 Alan Bennett wrote the screenplay of his movie, Which he Madness of King George. Until viewing this movie, I knew very little about this King’s personal life—Only he’s increasingly unreasonable decrees against his Colonies. For an American school child, this George is Satan incarnate, and evil power we had to cast off. Alan Bennett achieved the near impossible, and created a Touching the human and sympathetic portrait of this “monster”. A sad life really for all that he was King of such an empire. No end of trouble with a lot of his sons, and of course there was the matter of the colonies which could not be mentioned, and the periodic insanity brought on by his medical condition. But I remember two outstanding things about King George From this movie: His love of the land of England which got him christened “Pharma George“ And his Fidelity to his Queen who bore him 15 children. He appears to have been mocked in court circles for not taking mistresses in defiance of the custom of his class and station: it was even suggested that’s being sexually pent up, since ones wife was not deemed sufficient outlet for sexual energy, What is a direct contributory factor to his insanity.
It is my belief that Someone who is anointed in church to be a leader, a spiritual leader of his or her people, should be him or herself and example of character and of godly living to the people he or she leads. We are all full of human frailty and we are not perfect, but it is incompatible to call oneself the head of a church while also feeling entitled to have sexual affairs. Maybe Chas has given up playing away from home at his age. Charles has cut quite a swath through the ladies, and is it pretty sure of that that had he not been born air to the throne, but I’d rather been born the son of a traveling salesman and cleaner, just plain Jug Ears Charlie, It’s not very likely that he would’ve been able to lay more than a bathroom rug.
but out of that union, we got William and I don't think anyone would un-wish his existence.
It's almost beyond belief that William came out of such a disastrous union. I guess it is a combination of extra time and care for his 'royal' upbringing and awareness of his duty by the Queen and Queen Mother, who had regular 1:1 time with him. Not forgetting Prince Philip.
Later, and most importantly, Catherine and her family wrapped William in love, companionship and stability. I also give credit to William's own innate qualities, which took time to emerge but all I care about is that he has them now. If it wasn't for William and his family I'd be saying let's put an end to this when the Queen dies. Our monarchy has run its course. After more than a thousand years.
@Hikari: Re: Diana and her obsessive reading of Barbara Cartland novels.
I blame those novels for her disastrous romantic life. Not just with Charles, but all her lovers.
Almost every woman goes through an unrealistic romantic phase. Adding Barbara Cartland to it is like lighting a match to gasoline.
We all eventually get over it, but before Diana got over it, she was married to a real life Prince complete with disney style princess scaffolding thus ensuring she never got over it.
If you've ever read a mills and boon or Harlequin, you'll understand the genre of Barbara Cartland.
Except that Cartland sets her novels in Regency England. Where the hero is always a Prince (or important titled aristocrat) who rescues the kind hearted damsel in distress. He magically knows her and what she needs. No discussions needed. He is always charging in and removing her obstacles in life. Is obsessively attentive and will drop everything to be at the heroine's side no matter what it costs him. Marries her and makes her a princess (or some equally impressive title) and everyone lives happily ever after.
My 14yr old self adored it. As did all my 14yr old female friends and indeed classmates. We traded Mills and boon/ harlequins/ Cartlands like they were crack and we were all addicted.
Ain't that the truth! I nearly snorted my cold drink out of my nose when I read that she read those as an adult. I must not have any romance in my soul because I read those @ about age 13 or 14 and tossed them for much more believable science fiction. If she really thought that men (or indeed, women) coming home tired from a day at work would welcome drama and histrionics and having to deal with somebody else's hurt feelings, she needed to grow the hell up. But that was the problem, she couldn't.
George lll Didn’t do pharmaceuticals, but he was Very fond of farming. Farmer George!
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I think Diana was a bit mentally unstable, and obviously bulimia is a mental disease, but I don't think she was truly mental like Spears. I think she had an insecure, possessive and somewhat spiteful nature, and a jealous one as well; certainly being so young and naive when she married Charles didn't help.
But I think she pursued him, as Catherine did William, and probably thought she could wean Charles off Camilla, who must surely have looked rather old and plain to her. Even as a young woman ( I am a year or so younger than Diana was, and waited up all night to watch the wedding!) I could never understand how Diana's pride would have allowed her to let it be known she was so upset. I understood why she'd be upset, but I'd have died a million deaths before I allowed anyone to know they'd hurt me so much, let alone broadcast it to the entire world. I thought the Panorama interview was spiteful beyond belief, given her position in the UK, and the age of her sons, as well.
Waity Katy was undoubtedly a direct consequence of the disastrous Wales marriage, and I agree that Diana wouldn't have been able to keep up the charade, but I think she'd have gotten just as obsessive in the aftermath; look how she behaved with Oliver Hoare and Dr. Khan.
We're living in such tough times now. I used that term 'precariat' recently. Well it's happened to me too (as for some other Nutties) and I have two degrees, over three decades of experience and I've kept my skills up-to-date. During the Queen's earlier reign there were such things as jobs for life and secure pension schemes. A general expectation that your life would keep improving, as would your children's futures. That has all ended. So to see a family with unearned wealth and privilege, generation after generation, is harder for many to accept now.
The majority of British people still support the monarchy but how long can that continue during this time of accelerating social change? If we eventually get a more capable government, for a decent amount of time to build public trust, the danger to the monarchy will increase further.
The Windsors really need to learn to sing for their supper. Fortunately William and Catherine seem to be on board with that. After Charles it will feel like the end of the Hanoverians (just look at their faces) and the beginning of a new dynasty. I really want us to be more like Scandinavian countries and less like Ruritania.
If Diana had reading difficulties, her attachment to the books of her youth, which were familiar and not written at a high-level would have been comforting. How many hours had Charles been married before he try to get his new bride interested in Laurens van der Post on Brittania? Poor lamb… What a blunder. That had to be the first clue this marriage was doomed. But even I, who have read “merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence” And was reading adult books in the seventh grade would have found Lauren’s van der Post Uninvolving—on my honeymoon. They were just a spectacular mismatch from the get go.
The truth dawned on me for myself though, reading the beginning of 'Agnes Grey'. She's a quiet, shy young girl who her family wants to protect for life, even though they are in increasing financial difficulty. However, she wants to test herself. Try to be useful. Earn some money. It's a real struggle for her. Softness is against her, rather than hardness. But she perseveres and makes her own happiness.
Again, when you read about Anne's life ('The Brontës by Juliet Barker) she was treated the same way. Charlotte in particular wanted to keep her in a nice, pretty box. She was just Anne. Whereas all the time Anne was streets ahead of Charlotte and Emily in terms of maturity and plain common-sense.
Charlotte yearned after a married man and perpetually put off pursuing more worthwhile options and Emily just lived her fantasy life on the moors. She pined away when she tried to earn a living. Anne, on the other hand, could see Byronic men and Byronic copycats for what they were. A bloody nuisance. She wrote 'The Tenant of Wildfell Hall' to warn us but we all get sidetracked by 'Jane Eyre' and 'Wuthering Heights' first. And the damage is done. Anne is my antidote now. Administered almost too late, but better late than never.
I think as Andrew (and Eugenie) so strongly take after the Queen Mother's Bowes Lyon familial features it's hard to notice the Mountbatten in them.
Specifically the teeth.
Googling various Mountbattens shows a family genetic inheritance of big teeth.
Andrew, Eugenie, Beatrice, William have the same big horsey teeth.
The most startling of this family inheritance is Alexander Knatchbull, Uncle Dickie Mountbatten's great granddaughter, who has the same teeth and mouth as William and Beatrice.
It's not something people pick up on, but it's there.
And to me that proves The Queen's fidelity as far as Andrew and Porchester.
I should add to my last post that I don't see Meghan as nearly vanquishing a thousand-year monarchy. Prince Andrew is still to play out. He's dutifully being nearly invisible now but he's a living reminder of the bad side of monarchy. The unjustifiable side. Plus the failure to rein him in for decades.
I still think Andrew is more about money, illicit or otherwise, than about sex. My main question (that will never be answered) is whether he was consulting Epstein on his own behalf, or maybe quietly finding some new places to hide funds for the family. People forget about Epstein's reputation as a "money manager". Then there was the whole alleged blackmail and spying thing.
Part of me believes Meg got name "the tig" from William and Harry's nanny, Tiggy. Said it was namesake of wine for freebies ..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLUv4S1Z-Gs
I think perhaps we all mistook ‘Harry acts like a child’ to mean ‘Harry likes children.’
With hindsight, I believe he is childish rather than child-loving.
Re: Porchester and Andrew
Not too long ago, Lady C discussed the Queen and her children and stated that Andrew was indeed Phillip's, but Edward was fathered by Elizabeth's good friend Patrick Plunket. Patrick and his brother had been orphaned when their parents died in a plane crash and being close to the Royal Family, had been looked after by them.
Does this sound familiar to anyone, or am I misremembering?
I'll do a Piers on that one. He wouldn't risk her going to pieces in public or barfing in the car.
Hmm. I will have to look that up. Lady C. has a particular knack for stating the most provocative gossip like she’s got a direct telephone line to the Lord God Almighty. I look forward to reading her...what I have gleaned is incredibly b*tchy take on the Queen Mother. But I would have to accept that Queen Victoria had carnal knowledge of a horse to prime myself to believe that Elizabeth cuckholded Philip and for the last 56 years has subverted the succession of Great Britain with a cuckoo baby. Of all the Queen’s children, Edward looks the most like her, Which isn’t helpful as to his paternity, but he did have blond hair like Philip until his 20s. The queen had blonde curls as a child, but those had darkened by the time she was four or five.
I think Elizabeth is constitutionally incapable of infidelity—By that I mean her own internal character, not the constitution of GB. I’d sooner believe that she’d roller skate down Pall Mall naked. Her husband and her kids may play musical beds but not ER. Lady C. is entertaining and she might be right about much, but not this.
More than that, a crowd banged on Tucker's door when his wife was home alone with young kids. I believe police were called.
Brilliant! You win the Latte of the Day and a donut!
Too right—Harry is a child; the debut of Moonbump took him as much by surprise as anyone. Something tells me he wasn’t involved in that little project…And wasn’t expecting a little stranger so soon. He gave no indications during the engagement interview that having kids immediately was the plan. Surely, if he was pining to become a dad that badly, he would have enthusiastically said the sooner the better, since time was not on their side. Especially hers. And a guy thrilled at the prospect of becoming a dad even if it was a bit sooner than expected should have been happy in Australia instead of screaming the house down demanding to know if she was really pregnant… And going on later to make snide jokes well on public engagement of “Is it mine?”
She’s got him doing it again. Fortunately for all of us, Covid restrictions in California might not ease up enough in time to present her with a bunch of opportunities for papping herself bump clutching before she “delivers” Dariana AvoToast Frances Sparkle in the bathtub at Mudslide Mansion.
https://fb.watch/4HG3hBzqXA/
Diana did originally ride, but she had an accident & broke her collar bone while riding, which understandably put her off it! l think Hewitt was engaged to teach the children riding, not her per se
Thank you for sharing the link to 'some of Meg's most notable acting jobs' - although I'd say 'notable' might be a moot point.
Here are some more. Do watch, there is Meg on her wedding day after a few saucy pix and a news excerpt but more pix at 1:00, particularly 1:10. The last one I couldn't remember seeing before.
https://www.insideedition.com/why-meghan-markles-sultry-videos-her-time-actress-may-be-played-court-44095
This is a still of a princess asleep (complete with crown):
https://images.app.goo.gl/g17QP89zhomrH4LJ8
Also, the film 'Random Encounters' 2013 where MM declares 'I'm too old for old-fashioned romance'. Very briefs excerpts prefaced with a title, e.g. 'A right royal pain', 'Sometimes finding Prince Charming'... 'is no fairy tale'. Little did she know.
I aged about thirteen read some Georgette Heyer (that does not count) but for A 'level Eng Lit had the considerable misfortune of reading Austen's Persuasion. I hated it and so a decade ago I acquired the Norton edition to see if I could do it better justice. I am afraid my A level opinion of the work remained unchanged. On that, my only experience of Austen, I say she cannot write men. As I read it I also watched - chapter by chapter - the 1994 (?) Channel 4 dramatization and I thought particularly where Cpt Wentworth lifts Anne Eliot into the buggy that it improved on the original.
One day I entered my local to find that an Eng Lit teacher (male) I knew in their with his A level class of boys who I suppose had just sat the exam. On the subject of Austen I told them that I loathed Austen and why. The boys were genuinely shocked at my heresy towards the blessed Jane they having been brainwashed into the cult. No self-respecting boy should study Eng Lit until Austen is removed (as well as from the Ten Pound note). I have to add that I really enjoy Bridget Jones and partly because Zellweger gets that lower middle-class home-counties accent just right. How does she do it?
Prince Harry 'wants apology' from the Royal Family over treatment of Meghan Markle
According to reports, Prince Harry is demanding an apology from his family after the way his wife Meghan Markle has been treated, and it's said that Harry is in no mood to 'back down'.
...
One of the main bones of contention is over an alleged racist comment made by one member of the Royal Family regarding the skin colour of Harry and Meghan's baby, Archie before he was born.
...
The source claimed: “The problem with Harry is that he’s hooked on being right and regardless of saying he wants to move on from this.
"He won’t back down until he gets some form of apology from his family."
°°°°°°°°°°
If he does want an apology, this should have been kept private. The never ending saga...
If he wanted an apology he should have brought it up 4 years ago when the statement occurred, as he said, when they were dating. What is he, 5 years old?
But beyond that it looks like another PR ploy. They want the family to have to keep responding to their antics, they want the person (I suppose Anne) to expose themselves and create a media target for their never ending ‘feud mode’ as if they are sparing pop stars.
Whomever is advising them are idiots.
Thankfully I don't miss it now though. Such a waste of time! I'd love just once to go back in time to my younger life, with my head where it is now, and just walk up to whoever I had a crush on and say whatever I liked (although of course I wouldn't want him now!). Having that freedom when you're older is so exhilarating. Much better than being young.
Markled.
The more he behaves like this the weaker he gets, to Americans also. He need only act like this a bit longer for the BRF tactic of remaining above the fray to start pleasing people like me. At the moment I'm still worried about things like the Commonwealth and our international reputation. I guess the BRF know him best. Harry himself is the weapon they're relying on to pull through this.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1419368/meghan-markle-prince-harry-winery-santa-barbara-neighbour-royal-family-news-ont
Had to smile at this. Montecito neighbours' suggestions only apparently (do they talk to other people?) but why not? They'll get to everything eventually.
The thing is though, it's actual work that has to be done, on time, or lose everything. When their employees run away as they undoubtedly will, Harry and Meghan will have more than a teaspoonful of authenticity to deal with.
The alternative would be just to give their imprimatur to someone else's product - their usual MO after all - but why would anyone else want them on their bottles? I've yet to see wine marketing itself with angst, dissension and bitterness. Let alone yak hair, unlaundered clothes and old shoes. Unless your taste runs that way.
Now if Meghan and Harry were talking to neighbors I’m sure Hot Rob would have heard about this.
I went to a wine tasting for investors a couple of years ago, it’s what people buy when they are so rich they need more investment vehicles for their portfolio. I’m sure she loves to associate herself in this wealth club. The kinds of people sitting with me at that table were beyond Meghan’s status. We are talking property families, a Russian billionaire, and one of the EU’s premier hedge fund managers.
There are a lot of desperate funds out there, and capital groups looking to raise money, so it’s from that POV I think Meg has been invited to these sort of events and is taking it as actual interest *in her*. No, they just want her money- or rather The Queen’s. Now this has me wondering how many freebies Meghan is getting in the US off the back of the Queen connection.
Girls are fickle as above you demonstrate. That is the difference between men and women. If I could I would have all my ex-gfs in a rotational harem and probably add a few more. I can say and I think without fear of being wrong that no woman ever had a crush on me and I suspect most men if they are being honest would say the same. This is because women all want the same man which thus leaves out nine-tenths of all men and thus women end up like Donna Elvira in Don Giovanni gently or not so by a Leporello being tutored in his masters 'score sheet'. Women have a tendency to settle.
Your proposal to go up to your crush and tell him what you think only reminds me of that scene in Tootsie where Dustin Hoffman does exactly what Jessica Lange said she wished men would do and of course when he does it she slaps his face. We hear a lot about the need for consent but your proposal would have had men running for the hills and I am only glad that I am here to have prevented you from doing something so foolish.
Now if I were that Captain Wentworth I would have gone for one of the Musgrave girls but demonstrating that one is a butter-fingers is hardly going to impress hot-totty.
The apology that Harry wants seems to centre mainly on the skin colour of Archie, so this is something recent.
This is not something you make public, you discuss it in private. It seems they're entitled to privacy but the BRF is not.
Are you meaning the comment on Archie’s skin being recent or Harry’s request?
Perhaps Harry feels empowered by his new Woke friends in taking this public stance, on behalf of his family. Again, why invoke the entire BRF in this spat?
Piers is right in that they only trade in their Royal gossip.
Well, of COURSE we are. We want to pick the best partner possible when raising the next generation. A fertile woman marrying a man in his 70s *cough*David Foster*cough* is not about picking a partner, it's about picking his pocket. In that case, the child is just an ATM for when he dumps her or dies.
As regards Barbara Cartland novels, my mother was a voracious reader of bodice-rippers. It started in the early ‘60s when we lived in London. She became hooked on Georgette Heyer and as did my nine year old self later on. After she had devoured all of those, she moved onto BC as well as other authors. She would always have a rotation of at least 3 books, reading them all at the same time. She would never buy a book unless she read the ending first. The issue is they are all the same. Shampoo, rinse and repeat. You knew exactly what the plot would be and how it would end. At least Heyer’s books were more interesting. BC put me right off of them. Never read another bodice-ripper.
The article is in the Star and the Mirror has nearly the same one re. the colour of Archie's skin.
BThey [Royal experts] claim he has demanded "an apology" from the Royal Family over what he perceives as the mistreatment of his wife Meghan.'
...
'One of the main bones of contention is over an alleged racist comment made by one member of the Royal Family regarding the skin colour of Harry and Meghan's baby, Archie before he was born.'
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/prince-harry-wants-apology-royal-23859290
Also https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-harry-wants-royal-family-23859477
My point is that if Harry feels very aggrieved (whether about this or some other 'perceived' mistreatment at some other time) and wants an apology, there is absolutely no need to say so publicly, that sort of behaviour is just not 'royal'. This shows just how low he's sunk since he's been with her.
UK actress/comedian Meggie Foster (whose TikTok takes on Megs and Harry etc made her famous during lockdown)
just put out a new hilarious short video of Megs as "The Little Mermaid". Brilliant, one of her best ever.
Watch it here, if you need a laugh:
Meggie Foster on Twitter: "Meggie Markle is The Little Mermaid
https://mobile.twitter.com/meggiefoster/status/1379343500911775746
Incl the throne room setting, her house, the tabs, perfect.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96RHnihyXlk
This bothers me. Netflix is buying Invictus Games participation in this.
In addition to executive producing “Heart of Invictus,” Prince Harry will also appear on camera in the docuseries.
The Invictus Games Foundation will serve as an executive producer. The project will provide “significant funding to the organization,” according to Netflix, supporting the group’s work ahead of the Games at The Hague.
Or how they are defining privacy at that moment which is subject to change with them and what is going on in their lives.
I think the apology is more than just skin color though. I think it is for his feelings of they have failed him and not shown support for his choice or his family when he was looking for support (such as at the CW ceremony and some other times in FF).
How much of it is that he thinks that because they failed to show support as he was wanting it to be (sad but we don't always get what we want or how we want it) or how much is "You want/need this" coming from other vectors is an IDK.
Or even that he made his requests to them about what and how he was hoping for support. People don't read minds. And they have heavily scheduled lives already. Think of how JHAMS wanted to meet to plan out the beginnings of Megxit and told that it could not happen for like 2 weeks or so.
Capitulation on the apology in public (not unlike being forced to publish an apology in large font, etc.) I suspect would be viewed strategically as reopening the gates to all the other demands such as not just the money taps opening but opening wider (a greenback salve).
According to reports, Prince Harry is demanding an apology from his family after the way his wife Meghan Markle has been treated, and it's said that Harry is in no mood to 'back down'.
...
One of the main bones of contention is over an alleged racist comment made by one member of the Royal Family regarding the skin colour of Harry and Meghan's baby, Archie before he was born.
...
The source claimed: “The problem with Harry is that he’s hooked on being right and regardless of saying he wants to move on from this.
"He won’t back down until he gets some form of apology from his family."
The Firm owes these two raging narcissists no apology. Piers did a great job laying out the case why that interview was a load of bunk. He did their work for them. The longer this drags out, the more pathetic these two look. You know what they say, give a fool enough rope and let them hang themselves. Diana was right about Harry being dim.
I truly think that silence is the best revenge here. Don't respond to their toy throwing, tea kettle throwing tantrums because that's exactly what they want...to continue the fight in public. Don't strip them of the titles either? Why give them more to moan about. Starve these 2 selfish ego maniacs of the attention they so desperately need to stay relevant. One of their many lies was putting their moan fest to rest with the interview.
"No answer" came the stern reply.
Lady C on Kate, William & The Queen's influence; Harry's title & PR aims; why she wrote THE book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts_rFCRZEA0
Invictus was never Harry's organization nor idea.
Harry is there to raise money and be a spokesperson. He has very little to do with the organization.
I'm guessing this is the role he is mimicking stateside with BetterUp and others.
Using Invictus as their Netflix cash-in serves it's purpose, but now he can't be claiming to be charitable unless he is donating his producing fee. Also, goes to show they don't have any ideas.
Megs wants an apology, so she keeps nagging at Harry for an apology. Curious if she was upset at the time or did she have a new found memory of repressed racism by the BRF and just now "woke" to it.
I think the ignore campaign is working although more subtly to us than to the general public. Do still think shes up to something with the Cambridge anniversary, Boss Baby Louis' birthday, and queen's actual birthday.
Exactly, "No answer" came the stern reply. They're trying, and have tried for some time, to poke the bear in order to get a reaction so no reaction is the sensible solution.
What is the point of this exactly?
I think that due to Harry’s soiled reputation outside of the US, especially in the UK and Canada, which have both been crapped on by the Sussexes, the ratings won’t be that great.
This is an easy, quick offering the Sussexes can give to Netflix, but Netflix will need content beyond this.
Perhaps the Sussexes plan to just do more shows like this, which feature themselves masquerading as humanitarians parading around emoting and essentially giving the same spiel about this person or that person who has encountered some sort of hurdle in life, and their inspiring story that the Sussexes have conveniently inserted themselves into as a way to use these people to make millions for themselves while perhaps a little bit going to an organization. But in the end, the Sussexes will benefit far more because the people and organizations they feature. As with most celebrity events of this type, as with a study from the University of Sussex, in most cases, the celebrity receives most of the public relations benefits while the be featured heart string-pulling story of the person or organization is quickly forgotten.
These are basically glorified photo ops for the Sussexes to bolster their facade while filling their pockets on the backs of other peoples’ misfortunes and the hard work often done by people working for little or no money or recognition. I doubt Harry and Meghan will be writing checks to any person or group they feature.
And frankly, the world is full of people and stories for them to exploit. How much of an audience will there be for people willing to watch these two?
It’s not as if they’re Mother Teresa.
It is taking the trite one-off celebrity visit to a soup kitchen to unimagined heights of hypocrasy.
I'm sorry to hear your circumstances aren't the best at the moment. And to think Megalo had the gall to whinge that she was just surviving! I hope things get better for you. Take care.
O wait, I'm a financially responsible adult, with strong work ethic, and firm reputation to stand on. Even if I loose my job and have to accept the severance package at the end of the month. My supervisor, his manager, HR manager, the Director of the company and half dozen people are vouching for me at every job I apply for. I have had 3 interviews so far, and another this week. I got my sh*t together even on the verge of collapse. Its called adulting.
These two need a serious lesson in responsibility and accountability. Hope the BRF continues to ignore and cut them off financially. The Queen and Charles aren't going to live forever and clean up their messes. Some lessons are better learned the HARD way.
On another subject altogether, I love Boss Baby! I do hope he turns out well. The omens are good for a change, looking at his immediate family.
"When life throws challenges at people with a skin like us, we smile and compose ourselves, and become a better version of ourselves as we take pictures, that's BRAVERY. There is no Oprah or Gayle for us."
https://jeangasho.com/2021/04/01/why-meghan-owes-britain-an-apology-for-mocking-royal-wedding-they-paid-for-as-a-spectacle/
(My very best wishes and prayers for all in these challenging times. Hold on and bear down.)
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/12595643/invictus-games-bash-netflix-meghan-harry/
Sorry if this topic has already been raised and discussed.
About Netflix and Invictus documentary, I am a bit confused. Didn't Harry and Meghan cancel their association with it because it was now Amazon Prime property and they were signed up with a rival. Or was it just the fundraiser that was contentious?
With those two (who change stories hourly), who knows?
On Harry's demand for an apology, it's making him look pathetic and silly now ('Now?' you all ask. 'What do you mean 'Now?'".) He's like a little boy throwing snowballs at a castle. And that's not a figure of speech for his family.
The more he behaves like this the weaker he gets, to Americans also. He need only act like this a bit longer for the BRF tactic of remaining above the fray to start pleasing people like me. At the moment I'm still worried about things like the Commonwealth and our international reputation. I guess the BRF know him best. Harry himself is the weapon they're relying on to pull through this.
I spent a lot of time ruminating about Harry yesterday. Just when I start to talk myself 'round to feeling sorry for him, he sinks to even lower levels of being a pathetic tosser.
What does he hope to achieve by 'not backing down' until his family 'apologizes'? Can't monetize 'Sorry'. Even if the BRF took out a full-page ad in the Sunday Times, that doesn't benefit the couple anything tangible. They both have a vindictive pathological obsession with getting apologies for slights and having the last word that astounds. Not enough for Anne or whoever to privately apologize--they demand 'evidence' of the fact that they were 'Right' to be highly public to 'Prove' that they were victims.
The image of a red-faced brat hurling snowballs at a castle is so apt to depict Harry's ineffectuality in the face of a monolith with his puny ammunition. This seems to be pretty convincing proof that there's no more money coming out of the Bank of Pa and Gran. The family agreed to a one-year allowance and the year's up. Nothing left to do but pitch tantrums.
Are the family prepared to have one of their own living on Skid Row? They have done their best to cushion Hazza's hard and swift fall from his pampered perch into hustling for a living in a foreign country. No matter how bad it gets for Harry, the family has got to leave him on the bed he's made. It could get bad. Meg will ditch his ginger arse as soon as she runs through what remains of his money, leaving Harry to face all the debts alone. Maybe the only way he's going to return home is if he's deported.
Ay yi yi.
Charles could glean a lot of sympathy points if he made sure it got out how much he misses his grandson, and how he comforts the Queen, who gets really choked up over the prospect of never seeing Harry and his child again in her lifetime.
I believe that Archie is never invoked because he is not real. Hence, the BRF does not need to apologize over remarks made about a fetus who was a figment of Meghan's imagination. There was not a single comment made from the family about the 'Beach Archie' video. If they knew that these two highly unstable people had a child with them, I do not think it likely that they would cut off communication completely with Harry, and there would be significant interventions in the child's interest. There was no response from the BRF about the 'miscarriage' or the Valentine's Day special announcement. They have sadly given Harry up to his crazy. That's my take, anyways.
Meg is literally throwing anything and everything at the wall now. Now they are going to make wine on top of everything else they are doing? It's nothing but empty talk. All those two are capable of doing is swigging wine out of a bottle.
How have we missed this point all this time?? (seems like it's been months since that greenscreenstraganza took place.)
@SirStinxAlot, I hope I didn't set you off. I'm sorry if I did.
ConstantGardener, I didn't read it as SirStinxAlot was angry at you; instead, angry at the Meghan and Harry Carnival and Snake Oil show who don't have a clue about the problems real people face (and they don't care) but want to extort money from them to support their high (in every way) style of living.
@Hikari: Oh Hikari, That is the best solution YET!!! Why should anyone apologize for extremely common within-a-family conversational musings about a [prospective] baby that DOESN'T EXIST??!
The ostensible reason given for Megxit was that Harry and Meghan were very unhappy that they were constrained from making money from their Royal image and felt that that they'd thrive so much better if they were released into the wild to make bank for themselves. Meg was always going to try to cash in however she could. The 'merching' and billing Charles for clothing she got for free or else had to return as samples was tacky enough. The Disney pimp-fest instead of honoring military victims of terrorism would have been a huge scandal all on its own, if the Harkles hadn't already created so much worse drama in the preceeding year of their marriage. "Archie" was ostensibly 21/2 months old during that debacle. Yet the horrid couple of tossers still got a South African tour, where they stuck two fingers up to all of the United Kingdom by showing off 'their baby' to Bishop Tutu.
Right after they returned to Blighty, they were basically packed off for their 'break to think about their future' from which they never returned, not really. I still don't grasp the point of dragging them back for the Commonwealth service after the Sandringham talks had been so unproductive. I think everything came to a head over 'Archie'. It's a feature of Meg's illness (and Harry's too, apparently) that they will grimly double-triple-quadruple down on an issue when they are in the wrong, determined to somehow validate it enough times if they insist that their version of reality is . . reality. A normal person would know it was in her best interest to either tell the truth about him or to stop waving the point of her greatest vulnerability in front of the world. It's like she's daring the BRF to out her over Archie. They didn't respond, so she tries to bait them harder by announcing a 'miscarriage' and then Boom! A sister for Archie, due in just a couple of months! Who knew? Not us! We watched her do how many Zoom calls in skimpy clothing and backyard chats with Gloria Steinem, etc. all while post-miscarriage/pregnant and there weren't any clues. Until one day she decided to 'be revenge-pregnant' and that afternoon, bam, she's under a tree with a 6 month bump. That came out of absolutely nowhere, didn't it?
It must be so infuriating to her that those racist bullies aren't calling to congratulate her on her newest addition. How many times is she going to put us all through this? Will it be octuplets next time, or what? She just spent an hour telling the world that she was so suicidal when she was pregnant the last time that she had to be watched constantly lest she hurt herself and the baby. She wears me out. Any rational sane person cannot follow what passes for her mind. Harry's just as bad.
Mm believes that she knows all about wine from taking just one sip of the Tig, which is impossible because somms take years of training to learn all about wines.
More nonsense from her Tig blog:
"Several years ago I had a sip of wine called Tignanello (pronounced “teen-ya-nello“). But let’s be real – in the states most people said “tig-na-nello“…or just plain old “Tig.” The Italiano of it all gets a little tricky, so the bartender kept it simple; it was a glass of “Tig.“ So there I am, with very minimal wine knowledge and I take a sip of this wine. It wasn’t just red or white – suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine. It was an ah-ha moment at its finest. For me, it became a “Tig” moment – a moment of getting it."
***************************
You don't learn about the body, legs and structure of wine after just one sip. That's ludicrous, but of course, MM is an expert on everything. Also, in the wine world, a $50/bottle of wine (The Tig) is just not that special. When you get up to $1500/bottle, then you have something to talk about.
How much does Tignanello wine cost?
Sort by:
Store Information Price and Size
Hop, Cask & Barrel Washington, DC - 202-795-9494 United States $ 47.99
Calvert Woodley Washington, DC - 202-966-4400 United States Shipping info for Calvert Woodley $ 47.99
*******************************
One of my cousins is a wine importer and wholesaler of wines from around the world. It took him about 20 years to learn everything that he could about wine.
I wonder what the Harkles will call this wine? Mudslide Manor Muscat? The Tig But Not Really? Archie's Juice? Montecito Malbec?
I feel for you in these uncertain times, I was made redundant back in November, been temping as absolutely no progress on a permenant job despite great experience in my field and impeccable references. I've just accepted a permenant role at much less money than I was earning, but needs must, it's an income, perhaps will lead to better things, perhaps not, time wil tell. Fingers crossed for you x
https://twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1379335013464936450?s=20
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9442487/Piers-Morgan-says-hes-messages-Royal-Family.html