Good morning! It's a work day here and I haven't been able to delve deeply into the Sussex interview with Oprah last night, but here are a few quick thoughts:
- If we're allowed to have Halloween celebrations this year, lots of couples are going to go dressed as Harry and Meghan.
Beaten-down redhead in a wrinkled grey suit, crying pregnant (?) woman with heavily-applied eyeliner and a black dress - it's an easy costume that anyone can manage.
- Talking about how a baby will look as a balance between its parents is a pretty common thing. Speculating on the baby's skin color when you have one biracial parent is also not an unusual thing. (I'm sure there was also some discussion about whether or not the baby would be a redhead.)
Anyway, the ladies at Lipstick Alley spent a lot of time trying to figure out how "Black" the baby would be.
Apparently so did Prince Philip. It's easy to imagine him saying something stupid about it. He's 99 years old.
- It makes no sense to anyone that the baby's skin color should determine his security status. What should determine his security status - and that of his parents - is "Do you live in the UK? Or have you left the UK by choice?"
No one should expect to be protected indefinitely wherever they choose to live in the world.
At any rate, do Lady Louise and Viscount Severn have security? They're not at all Black, but they are minor children who are minor Royals, as is "Archie".
- Charles really got thrown under the bus here, apparently for cutting off his 37-year-old son from an ongoing allowance and expecting him or his wife to work for a living.
There's already a lot of sentiment for skipping over Charles when it comes to the line of succession. Will this add to this sentiment?
- The palace response will have to be a doozy.
No more "Prince" Harry, no more Duchess of Sussex, and Archie (if he exists) can just be an ordinary boy.
Comments
I doubt that Megs-O interview has hurt the Royals reputation and popularity in the UK. Naturally the RF cares most about how they are perceived at home.
*
True!
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are an embarrassment. They are morons who violated Robert Greene's #1 rule in his 48 Laws of Power. Never outshine the master.
I'm a nobody pleb living in a less than sophisticated system and even I know that rule.
They are Morons (big M intended).
Yes, AnT & Yankee Doodle - Mr P.a.l.i.n.d.r.o.me
Is there anything to link him with anyone else?
Better not to spell out the name as it stands - beware of crawler bots.
Amazing how she was able to change the narrative from being a legitimate bully to a victim. The other thing that gets to me is she blatantly lied to cover the origin of the earrings - that shows consciousness of guilt, at least in my mind
"The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
"The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."
The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved
a few observations:
totally unsatisfying (miss madam was geared for a fight and they arent engaging at least publicly as yet)
they are referred to by first name, not by titles
sadden to learn says no one told us directly
recollections may vary - narc you are a liar but we use british english in these parts ;-)
so again we await any satisfaction always a bridermaid
However, going by the experiences of people who have been unfortunate enough to have narcissists in their lives, you have to avoid engaging with them. Meghan is basically Medusa. Just leave her and her writhing snakes alone on a remote hillside.
Worst thing about pharmaceutical commercials is it nothing we can walk into a store and purchase. It all must be prescribed. So why even advertise to us? Hmm
@sirstinx if your 13 year old daughter is willing to relocate ,if needed, is half the battle solved:)
I wish you luck
I too think Soros is the one behind Meghan. I'm sure I read that she was trying to get her talons into his youngest son. George clearly put his foot down, but saw that she could be put to use elsewhere.
https://youtu.be/2l6JUNFAJ9o
So, the as@wipe Meghan and her benefits scrounger of a husband took that and turned it into something racist.
1) recognizes them as Harry and Meghan. No titles.
2) expresses that this is a family matter
3) discredits their account (I was worried about this, that Harry or Meghan would have audio or video, the fact the family is sure they don’t means the conversation never happened)
4) presented as the BRF caring for their petulant out of line teenage children.
End.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9343383/Queen-breaks-silence-Harry-Meghan.html
All of this only works here though. Far too nuanced to repair the damage on the other side of the Atlantic. I was furious to read, in the Los Angeles Times today, comparisons with the Saudi Royal Family in the way Meghan was treated. Only if you believe her!
That is exactly what needs to happen. This is treason and a threat to the national security of the UK and I'd be surprised if the RF security and MI6 didn't have enough intelligence on the real situation to support such a statement.
Done with such gravitas,it would scare the crap out of Harry and Maggot would no doubt be on the first flight to somewhere remote in South America ( If she has her passport of course!!)
Harry needs to be taken on a long holiday for a spot of gentle de programming perhaps...
I just stopped addressing her. She would speak to me directly, and I would completely ignore her. I pretended to be lost in thought. After a while, she started criticising my ex-husband and drove him crazy instead of me.
I later learned this was called gray rock, although my reaction was more extreme because I didn't engage with her at all. It worked though.
part 1
Harry and Meghan interview ditches subtlety in embrace of tabloid television
new
Quentin Letts
Monday March 08 2021, 5.28am GMT, The Times
One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.
As a work of televised theatre, the Oprah Winfrey’s interview was soft-focus: the setting bucolic, Queen Oprah in delicate mauve, shots of the royal couple’s pets and — privacy alert — of toddler Archie. There were meaningful, emotive nods as they said “yeah” to each other in the Californian manner.
But the content was unsubtle. This was Semtex in swaddling bands. Cyanide en gelee. The biggest act of strategic self-harm since the scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow. It may have been presented as schmaltz but this two-hour gloopathon was politically ruinous.
“Life is about telling stories, right?” said la Markle, all high-resolution lip gloss. “Telling stories through a truthful lens.” Her eyes sparkled behind lashes as long as ravens’ wings.
Stories were duly delivered, a steaming dump of indiscretions: whinges about money and titles and bodyguards and the rotten tabloid press (which must be quite different from tabloid television). That Kate Cambridge? A B*I*T*C*H! “But I have forgiven her,” purred Meghan with her truthful lens.
Further atrocities: she had had to teach herself the words to God Save the Queen; no one had advised her how to keep her legs crossed; people had been beastly about her on the internet. We had our first blinked-back tear at 1.54am. Either that, or some unfortunate midge had made it past the ravens’ wings and had jabbed her in the eyeball.
Then came the intended killer blow: someone in royal circles had speculated about what skin tone the Sussexes’ baby was going to have. “That conversation I am never going to share,” said Prince Harry, after he and his wife had disgorged its existence to a worldwide audience.
Every so often we broke away for the CBS adverts, many aimed at hypochondriacs or handsome people who were smiling through bouts of raging diarrhoea. Useful context.
Harry had not appeared in the first half, when we were assured Meghan was not a gold-digger. “I never looked up my husband online,” she claimed, when Oprah asked if she had done her “research”. Harry now took his place alongside his duchess and we found he has started saying “like” and he has the beginnings of an American accent. He disclosed that his father stopped taking his telephone calls for a while. Maybe Charles simply didn’t recognise him with that valley girl uplift.
And yet Harry was less clunkingly dim than one possibly expected. He has certainly drunk deeply of the west-coast Kool-Aid. At one point he made it sound as if he himself had breastfed Archie.
The programme was entitled Meghan & Harry. Most of us used to put them the other way round. Her Grace wore a dark dress with white splodges. Blasted seagulls. She, in turn, proceeded to deposit industrial quantities of guano on a royal family that had, we heard, welcomed her warmly to their midst. Things only started to go wrong after the row about the bridesmaids’ dresses. Or was it after the couple’s official trip to the Pacific (translation: the rest of “the Firm” were envious of its success)? We heard both.
Further inconsistencies followed. One minute Meghan disclaimed grandeur, the next she was concerned about her “status”. One moment she was unfussed about honorifics, the next she was furious Archie was not going to be a prince. She was astonished when her police protection was withdrawn (bodyguards are a must-have accessory in Hollywood). The next she was writing to the Queen to say she didn’t care less about protection. Oprah let these self-contradictions go through to the wicketkeeper.
It ended with Meghan comparing herself — sorry about this — to the Little Mermaid and Harry saying “time heals all things, hopefully”. Someone possibly said the same to the Earl of Uxbridge at the Battle of Waterloo, even as much of one of his legs was disappearing over the brow of the hill attached to a cannon ball.
Very much a high road statement as we'd expect from the Queen. I think it's great. Hard to sound credible, to keep arguing and spreading bs to someone who takes the high road.
I believe the racial appearance discussion happened as a one off type thing between Harry and definitely Charles possibly Camilla as well. (That is if you believe Harry that it wasn't the Queen or Philip, who is frankly the number 1 suspect) The fact that Charles stepped out to go to a black Church today, spoke volumes to me.
One of my favorite sayings is "Least said soonest mended". The problem is that everyone and their dog wants to know the identity of the royal with the racial comments. Even though around 95% of Meghan's statements can be proven as lies, that one comment has everyone all in a tizzy. I wonder what, if anything, the RF can do about it?
@designdoctor - you are correct. What MM was NOT saying is telling - if she was suidicial, why wasn't her OB team alerted. All this talk of "how it would look" is hooey (IMHO).
The Queen has spoken, as noted above (see DM lead article).She acknowledges that there are two sides to issues, and that what was said was sad, and that it will be an internal investigation.
IMHO, nothing will happen. As much as this poster would like to see the Queen remove titles, honors, and remove Harry and children from the line of succession, it is not going to happen. Why - because MM played the race card. And it stinks to high heaven. Given all the reading of the papers availble to me across the pond in fly-over country, the British people are behind the RF and HMTQ, while here in the state, reaction is mixed. Perhaps the court of public opinion will give the verdict when Harry comes over in July for his mother's statue unveiling. MM/ PH alluded to things taken away - I believe they are prepared IF things are rescinded and will point to racism, again. What they are not prepared for is public reation in the negative.That is more important to them than what the family thinks.
As Rhett Butler said to Scarlett O’Hara towards the end, “Do you know you are throwing away happiness with both hands? If I was dead, and Miss Melly, and you had your stupid Ashley, you would be miserable. You don’t understand how unhappy you would be, and you would never understand your unhappiness. The only thing you really understand in this world is money. Just money.”
Ah, yes, the Miz Scarlett template of literary narcissism. At least, that is pretty much the only layer mined in the film, as gorgeous as that is to look at, and how innovative for its time. When I read the book (after seeing the film), I encountered a much more interesting and multi-faceted Scarlett O'Hara. Yes, she can be selfish, calculating, self-absorbed and careless of others' feelings. She fixates on an unavailable man, and then, when her privileged lifestyle is upended, fixates on earning it back through graft if needs be. She is callous and unfeeling toward three husbands and her one child by each. But somewhere along the way she grows up and develops into a person. Her hardships force her to develop humanity, and she is a far gutsier and more resourceful person than this professional whinger. Meg hasn't had any hardships she couldn't skate out of. Her parents created a baby narcissist and fed that monster until it was full-grown.
I am disappointed, though not surprised, that so many of my fellow Americans are falling for their line of BS . . but unless you have followed this saga as closely as we have here over the last three years, their tale of woe might seem plausible. If all you knew of Hazbean and Mess was a few People covers and you'd heard that she'd won a lawsuit against a big bully newspaper, or read that she'd suffered a miscarriage and then came straight to this gabfest with Big O. I have been boycotting Oprah for 20 years, but now it's to the point where I seriously wish some massive disaster to befall her. Her acting is as bad as Meghan's . . .circa 1986, and The Color Purple, I was a supporter of hers. Now I see she is every bit as much of a narcissistic fraud as Megalo, but she's got the work ethic and the connections to have built up her empire. Little Megsie the Downtrodden will always be a hanger-on of coattails.
oh yes, now I see it
Thank you, those subtleties escaped me initially.
But also is the no titles to reinforce that this is a private family matter, or a hint to titles lost.
Of course now Meghan has told us that "Mom" is the title that really means something to her and basically rubbished the rest as she remained "Meghan" throughout (sigh of rapture) the Palace can take her at her word, just call her Meghan and drive her into a frenzy of narcissistic rage.
____________
Jimmy Kimmel lays into 'inbreeding' Royals and mocks up an 'old lady' blowing a dart in to Meghan's neck after her Archie skin-colour claim - as late night hosts skewer Palace over Oprah interview
Chat show hosts from Colbert to Corden queued up to give their take on claims
Kimmel and Colbert both seized on Meghan and Harry's racism allegation
Kimmel joked: 'Charles has the ears of a basset hound and they're worried about the skin - and by the way they should hope that the kid looks more like Meghan'
He also included edited clip showing an 'old lady' firing a dart into Meghan's neck at the crucial moment, when Oprah asks who made skin color comment
Colbert jibed: 'It's never good when the British ruling class thinks someone is too dark. They steal their land and make them play cricket'
Corden avoided controversy, instead making a gag about Meghan's revelation that she and Harry were actually married before the public wedding he attended
By ROSS IBBETSON FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 05:36 EST, 9 March 2021 | UPDATED: 12:25 EST, 9 March 2021
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9341653/Kimmel-lashes-inbreeding-Royals-Colbert-asks-medieval-selective-breeding-racist.html
Harry, being as dumb as he is, probably forgot that Meghan who presents and identifies as white, was even black. It probably didn’t occur to Harry his child could be of a darker skin tone. I think that is what truly shocked Harry. When he relayed it asking Meghan if it was possible (see: dumb) she was like ‘who’s the racist’.
^^that seems far more likely. It was an issue of Harry’s and to save himself he threw his family under the bus to his viper.
https://mobile.twitter.com/danwootton/status/1369341246272139269
To me, this tweet from Dan Wootton is illustrative of media coverage:
* We want the drama (see that narc/the BRF get their comeuppance, depending on your viewpoint)
* We do not understand the issues at all
The bullying accusations have to be investigated as there is an HR policy (Dignity at Work I think it is called) and the policy and system failed staff who were bullied, many and repeatedly. The Palace has to be more careful than a private corporation as it is publically funded and it has the peculiar position of 'principals' having their position because of birth and marriage.
The racism accusation supposedly was an issue between two family members and had nothing to do with staff or any of the principals while on duty representing the Crown. It is a private matter.
By the way, I interpret the wording of the announcement as it didn't happen and the Sussexes are making it up/a remark was taken out of context and completely turned around.
There is no doubt that the suffering of the Sussexes is real, but why they are and were suffering and how they blame everyone else is another matter. Harry is obviously miserable and has been for a long time. I have no doubt that the melt downs from Meghan really happened (rage and tears). Contrary to the inward looking selfishness of the Harkles, Harry's family are capable of feeling compassion when they see suffering, no matter who it is or why they are suffering.
Unfortunately, I think this statement is going to be completely misunderstood.
What do you think the reaction from the narc is going to be? Triumphant vindication (and a misleading statement of victory as she did with the court case) or rage that they are taking the high road and not playing her vindictive games?
Harry's desperation is real because his grandparents are aging and his father will swiftly be King. Then Harry will truly be f'd. After that is his brother and interest will go onto his brother's children, then they are done for. He's got to scrap up funds somehow, some way. I just find it hard to believe that after this, what Meghan's going back to narrating specials and doing podcasts?! I think this interview will have a negative blow back. The only thing people will want to hear from them now is dirt on the Royals. I don't think they can transition out of this.
`Hang on, we 've only been told one side'
Witchell did his best but they wheeled out Hillary Clinton, the ghastly Diane Abbott and the black female lawyer for the people involved in the Windrush case.
It was grossly one-sided - sadly, what could expect of them.
They made much of a generational divide revealed by a survey, apparently lots of youngsters questioning the need for the Monarchy. They've clearly never thought about how much a republic might cost nor who would be fighting to be in charge.
Bloody Wokery,
Perdition to Faithless Princes!
God Save the Queen!
Anyone who believes that Charles or Camilla were like "Oh my stars, if that child has curly hair and brown skin it will defile our lineage. The child can't possibly be titled!!" is honestly nuts.
What I have found on the LSA site is the complete opposite. Posters from the USA and UK are sharing personal experiences and it seems it is common and completely acceptable to speculate and chat about features of unborn mixed race children. Everyne does it. It is not seen as racist at all. Please note that LSA is a site for mostly black women.
‘You’re all dumb, bye.’
They gathered far more information on public commentary and operatives than they would have with a quick response.
She has him trapped in her storybook collection of ‘stories she only likes’ and he cant escape. If someone writes a screenplay on the reality of how this relationship works, I’d be the first to buy a ticket. I think it would be disgusting, sad, and insanely accurate of what a lot of domestic abuse survivors go through. We need it.
"What do you think the reaction from the narc is going to be? Triumphant vindication (and a misleading statement of victory as she did with the court case) or rage that they are taking the high road and not playing her vindictive games?"
I think she will demand an apology.
I liked the Queen's statement. Not exactly what I would have done but I'm not British and certainly am not the Queen. What matters is not what people in the US think IMO. Nothing can satisfy rabid woke Americans. And some will believe anything if it fits an agenda. Downtown Chicago at night when it's about 2°F.-- "This is MAGA country." Right. Three white frat guys in flowered shirts hanging out at midnight near a BLM protest looking to set someone on fire. Uh huh.
A day after the White House pauses national topics to defend a Z-lister and low IQ hubs.
Nothing in the world is more important! By tomorrow, we will know where to send donations to help the Harkles.
.....If this isn’t all crystal clear yet?
I cannot cheer the palace statement.
Hope others like it and feel it does the job.
Lol! 😂
I think there will be more after they calm the waters.
Before they were 'much loved members of my family'.
Now they're reduced to 'much loved family members'.
You know, just like all of my other grandchildren. Nothing special. Ta ta, hidey ho, then.
I love how they went on end on for 4 hours with Oprah and then the family responds so concisely. Privately being the key word.
"I just find it hard to believe that after this, what Meghan's going back to narrating specials and doing podcasts?! I think this interview will have a negative blow back."
What I think about this is who in the world would want to work with them? If you just think a moment you would realize that they are constantly in the center of a maelstrom identifying everyone else as the problem, for everything. Most reasonable adults, and particularly adults with money on the line, know instinctively that life just does not work that way. Oprah got 99.9% of the sellable goods. Maybe 100%. There is little left for anyone else. And most smart people know there is NO SUBSTANCE and NO TALENT component of the two professional victims. They could turn on anyone in a heartbeat and they will. For most sane people they are radioactive.
I may be completely off base here. Megs could be just another garden variety sociopath, apparently, like an alarmingly high numbers of people in finance, tech,& other areas.
Heading out now. Be bac k later!!
@jessica - oh i like that and knowing that pair if they were paid, the would do it. Only simon gets to play meghan, wig and all.
@Flore - i am guessing she is too busy being gleeful about the Piers Morgan firing news. Megalo doesnt understand subtly but she will flip out since we know she reads the blogs and everyone is jumping on the lack of titles in the statement.
After a few more days, we will just have to deal with the slime balls on The View and other assorted professional victims.
Definitely! Archie will join Harry in the FOG (Fear, Obligation, and Guilt) that the Narc subjects them to. Along with gaslighting.
Honestly, I think at the very least, Harry struggle with depression and quite possibly Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). It is very common that a BPD and a Narc will marry. It's a match made in Hell!
@anyaamasova - you bet'cha!! March Madness is just up the road from me - what oa wonderful, welcome diversion.
The comments from his guy are hilarious, and I kind of agree with him ... best line:
"Actually, I think this statement is one of the most wonderfully subtle fuck yous of all time."
Re: Harry saying he was "cut off" from family funding first quarter 2020, and all he had to fall back on was his mother's inheritance.
Ya' know when I was "cut off" from my family funding, Hazza? When I was 21, as soon as I graduated from college. You know, when I began to become an ADULT and had to provide for myself.
And I sure didn't have a multi-million pound inheritance from Mummy to use as a financial cushion.
You work for The Firm, they help allay costs. You step away from The Firm, you don't need their resources....
Hear, hear!
I'd bet that is likely the case for many of the constant posters here!
https://blindgossip.com/only-one-way-back-for-fredo/#more-102086
"Those who are saying the RF needs to only worry about what the UK thinks of them and not the US ... don't forget we are stuck with the vile pair now and they have elevated themselves tremendously via that interview."
I am one of the people who said something like that so I'll explain.
As an American, I wish the Sussexes weren't here. And yes, they are vile and a problem. But to a great extent, the fact that we let them be a problem is our doing, not the Queen's. As such, she can't undo it. But she can lose support in her own country and in the Commonwealth.
I'll try to stay away from overt politics.... In the US we have hardly any real journalism these days, much of the US press is actively working to suppress free speech, we excell in cancel culture for transgressions that may be decades old while looking the other way at ongoing horrendous behaviors, the term diversity decidedly does not apply to thought, and we buy stuff from the Kardashians for pete sakes!
H&M are like mosquitos. Bothersome and irritating for sure. Dangerous even given diseases that may be spread. But while it's satisfying to splat a mosquito that's buzzing around, we really ought to be trying to drain the swamp that supports them.
Who is she really? She has plenty about herself online but there's no independent piece as far as I can see. Is there anything balanced about her?
What does `Solicitor of England' mean? Does that mean she's a solicitor in England?
I can't stand finger-wagging, it tells me she wants to beat him on the head.
It is to stimulate demand. The pharmaceutical sales people haven't been able to visit the doctor offices to apprise them about the benefits of Same Pill Version 30 (with slight changes so that it can again be under patent). If patients are asking for it by name, $$$$ for pharmaceutical company instead of company manufacturing low-priced generic.
Personally, I've found the side effects that are voiced at the end of the commercials...disturbing. "Side effects may include headache, muscle aches, rash, slight fever, deafness, loss of vision, or sudden death." "Wait, WHAT? Did they just slip sudden death in there hoping that nobody would notice?" "So, you're not at all worried about deafness or loss of vision?" "WHAT?"
Anyone looking for a sport to watch for distraction, there's also curling on right now(The Brier-Canada's national mens tournament) via ESPN3(streaming) for those in the US. There are matches at 1030a, 330p, and 830pm each day this week. It's what I watched instead of the Moprah fest. There was even a HotRob commercial. Win win!
I've been out all day and am just catching up. I did see the news and we don't watch the BBC news any more. I can't say I'm surprised. Yes, the 'ghastly Diane Abbott'. She probably couldn't care less but has to pipe up. She can be safely ignored, as can Mrs Clinton et al.
Honestly, wtf lol, does she assume herself to be a Hadid sister? Who would want to dress like Meghan???
Will the crater-sized hole between Prince Harry, Prince Charles and Prince William ever be repaired?
By
Camilla Tominey,
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
9 March 2021 • 6:00am
To outward appearances, the Markle Sparkle was fully in evidence as the Duchess smilingly worked the room, her hand touchingly entwined with Harry’s.
With her midnight blue ball gown shimmering in the glare of the flash bulbs, the five-month pregnant royal appeared in sparkling form as she joined her husband for the premiere of Cirque du Soleil in Jan 2019.
Yet following an extraordinary TV interview with Oprah Winfrey that has left the Royal family reeling, we now know that the “suicidal” former actress only went ahead with the engagement at the Royal Albert Hall because she did not think she should be left alone.
The claim, along with the suggestion that an as-yet unnamed Windsor questioned how dark Archie’s skin might be when he was born, form the main charge of the bomb dropped on the monarchy during the couple’s two-hour tell all.
As the Sussexes on Monday night walked away from the smouldering wreckage of the programme’s UK airing, viewers were rightly left wondering whether the crater-sized hole in their relationship with the royals can ever be repaired.
If allegations of racism within The Firm – along with its failure to deal with the Duchess's mental health problems – were not damaging enough, the incendiary interview also lay painfully bare the fractured nature of Prince Harry’s family ties.
In allowing his wife to throw a grenade under the Duchess of Cambridge and detailing how his father stopped taking his calls, Harry lit the fuse on a slow burn stick of dynamite that arguably promises to cause the greatest devastation of all in the long run.
For while criticism of the “institution” will have to be addressed by what Princess Diana described as the palace’s “men in grey suits”, Charles and William will find it much harder to brush off the debris of dysfunctionality at the heart of Harry’s claims.
By describing both his father and his brother as “trapped” – and refusing to rule them out of the running as the relative who made the “racist” remark – Harry is casting aspersions not only on their character but the very establishment into which all three were born. Little wonder, then, that royal watchers are now questioning whether he should keep his title and place as sixth in the line of succession.
A source close to the heir to the throne on Monday night suggested Charles will be left “absolutely devastated” by his younger son’s suggestion that he had let him in down in the run up to Megxit in January last year.
“There will not be any anger, just deep upset and sadness,” they said. “He absolutely adores Harry and won’t want to feel ostracised from Archie. He’ll be feeling very despondent at the idea that they won’t be coming back any time soon.”
Only four years ago it was Harry, 36, not William, 38, who was the closer of the two royal brothers to Charles, 72.
The future king was very upset when William refused to acknowledge his role in their upbringing during the commemorations to mark the 20th anniversary of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, in 2017. Instead it was left to Harry to concede: “He was there for us, he was the one out of two left and he tried to do his best and to make sure we were protected and looked after.”
Amid reports that Charles had felt “edged out” by Kate’s parents Michael and Carole Middleton when it came to spending time with his grandchildren, relations between father and eldest son hit rock bottom when a previously unseen photograph of Prince George inadvertently appeared in a video broadcast featuring his grandfather.
According to insiders, William “hit the roof” and for a period, Charles became much closer to Harry.
Of course the majority of minorities here are Democrat, (that is slowly changing as the Democrats are increasingly elitist and the Trump-type Republican faction is increasingly the party of the working class) but Democrats in the media (but I repeat myself) are always proclaiming every accusation as truth, be it ever so outrageous, of anyone in any of the protected victim classes. ( women, minority, and whatever the word is now for people who prefer their own sex up to and including people who marry horses, have physical relationships with roller coasters, and claim to be 57 genders)
So long as they're Democrat, anyway. And if these claims are proven to be false later on, and usually self inflicted on top of it, why then, these precious darlings are merely living their truth, and your cis, misogynist and certainly racist white a$$ has no business having any opinion about it whatsoever.
This surely can't be unheard of in the UK, as I seem to recall something recently about a hospital deciding we must no longer refer to something that was once understood to be the exclusive purview of women ( breast feeding, or something along those lines) in such a way as to not injure the feelings of men who have chosen to live as women.
It's a brave new world poppets, and while I welcome some of it, a great deal of it is complete insanity.
Although Charles was said to be “a big fan” of Meghan – agreeing to walk her down the aisle in her own father’s absence – the mounting acrimony between the Sussexes and the Cambridges in the wake of the 2018 royal wedding placed him in the invidious position of having to play peacemaker to his warring sons. As William and Charles joined forces in a bid to insulate the monarchy from the growing crisis, Harry and Meghan soon began to feel marginalised.
With talk of "transition" already high on the agenda, Charles was increasingly involving William in his decision-making – much to the chagrin of Harry who felt pushed out by their "away days" to Duchy of Cornwall estates. He also resented William for what he perceived as “positioning himself as an exemplar” – not least when Diana had insisted they be brought up as “equals”.
The New Year 2020 release of a photograph showing the Queen and her three heirs – Charles, William and George, only served to compound the Sussexes’ sense of sequestration.
By then Harry and Meghan had already decided they wanted to step down as senior royals – but their mistrust of Charles’s operation was laid bare when Harry felt compelled to telephone the Queen about their growing unhappiness after being repeatedly rebuffed by his father’s private secretary, Clive Alderton.
His father had asked him to commit his plans for a "quasi" royal role to paper, but Harry refused, fearing they would be leaked by Clarence House. (One former royal aide described “the endemic paranoia that everyone is secretly briefing against each other” behind palace gates).
Harry then claimed the Queen’s private secretary, Sir Edward Young, cancelled a scheduled meeting with her at Sandringham, prompting him to “take matters into his own hands” by issuing their Instragam statement announcing they were stepping back as “senior” royals.
According to one former royal aide: “Private family matters used to be completely sacrosanct but in recent years the lines have become blurred.
"Private secretaries have been over-stepping the mark when it comes to trying to manage the Royals’ relationships with each other.”
As with all families, money also played a destructive role – as evidenced by Harry’s dismay at the plug being pulled on his family’s taxpayer-funded security.
As one well-placed source put it: “Like any parent, Charles did get fed up with the constant calls from Harry for more money.
“He ploughed a lot into the wedding and the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage (the couple's Windsor home) and did his utmost to make them feel financially supported but when they said they were upping sticks, they asked for even more.
“If he was less inclined to take calls, it might be because he didn't want to be treated like a cash dispenser. I think a lot of parents will be able to identify with that.”
Yet while insiders describe Charles – if not William – as “willing to forgive”, the worst fear of those closest to the royals is that “the trust has gone”.
Referencing the fact that the Queen’s Christmas present to Archie of a waffle maker had featured in Harry’s interview with James Corden, the source added: “They’ll be wary and afraid of making contact now, because they are no longer able to guarantee that any passing comment won’t end up being taken out of context or appearing in the media.
“There is nothing the royals value more than discretion.”
They thought that sunlight would be the best disinfectant. But in airing their dirty linen in public, Harry and Meghan have left a stain on the monarchy that could prove impossible to wash clean.
The poster says, 'How can Meghan have the emails she sent asking for help when she told the judge she couldn’t share emails or texts because they all get auto deleted after 30 days.'
Has she claimed she has emails?
PS: What are rules for posting things seen elsewhere here?
HM must be beginning to wonder if the Monarchy could withstand two more princes mysteriously lost in the Tower.
My fondness for Camilla continues to grow.
Who needs to see an oculist - her or me? Someone has serious issues with her eyes if she thinks he looks at all `black' or even `brown'.
Or is her memory that's at fault and she's forgotten that all the `Archies' she's shown us are as pale and pink as any Northern European, just like her bare feet?
Will she now apply bronzer to the child? We're watching you, Megsie Baby.
"The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."
My comment: The BRF grey-rocked the Sussexes in simple, elegant language. I see why it took a day for it to be issued. They gave no openings for the Sussexes. They expressed sympathy, upheld the sanctity of familial ties, and gracefully admitted to nothing.
- While some recollections vary = There is another side that is in direct contrast to what the pathological liars are saying...
- they are taken very seriously = Contrary to what they say, we're not racist or race-baiters and will stamp it out given such a situation...
- and will be addressed by the family privately = we're acting in good faith and not dismissing what the Sussexes say because we're not petty. So we will check into it and if we see they were right, we'll rectify the matter in a quiet, respectful manner upholding the sanctity of family. That is of course in direct contrast to Rache who plans on playing Jerry Springer with every family member she can.
Please keep an eye out for The London Times coverage. I will be posting more from The Telegraph and from an American site called Politco. I'm vetting the stories I pick.
The queen's response clearly shows that she too, wants to keep some things private in her life, including the alleged skin color comment by a family member.
Will M violate the TQ's privacy by hurling the family member name in public when the Queen has clearly let them know she wants to handle this privately???
Privacy for Meghan, but not for anyone else!
What Meghan misunderstood about the monarchy
The Duchess’s complaint that she received no positive guidance about her role in The Firm rang especially hollow
By
Sally Bedell Smith
9 March 2021 • 2:16pm
Of the many shocking statements made by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in their full-scale assault on the monarchy during their two-hour interview with Oprah Winfrey, the most peculiar was surely Meghan’s claim to know nothing about the British monarchy when she first met Harry. She was so incurious that she didn’t bother to read a volume of history or biography. She said she didn’t even do an internet search to learn the basics. Her knowledge of the Royal Family, she said, was based only on what Harry “was sharing with me.” Astonishingly, as a graduate of well-regarded Northwestern University, she said her sense of Royal life was based on “fairytales.”
What she described as naivete seemed more like a wilful refusal to accept that life in The Firm – the name first used by Harry’s great-grandfather, King George VI – would involve long days of plaque unveiling and tree planting as well as exciting passion projects made possible by her unique position. If she had read some history, she would have recognised that overseas Royal tours such as the one she and Harry took to Australia are indeed “exhausting.” She would have known that she wasn’t the only member of the Royal Family to undertake such duties while pregnant. In 1948, for example, Queen Elizabeth II, then still a princess, took her first official visit with her husband to Paris. It was a gruelling four days, and Philip and Elizabeth generated massive goodwill. Unknown to the French or British officials, she was four months pregnant with Prince Charles and suffering from nausea behind closed doors.
Meghan complained bitterly about her treatment by the press, which did ricochet between adulation and harsh criticism. Perhaps if she had sat down for tea with her husband’s stepmother, the Duchess of Cornwall, she could have learnt about years of being savaged by the media. Camilla, like everyone else in the Royal Family, survived the pummelling by staying quiet, pressing ahead and doing her job. But Meghan was already bursting to share her point of view, even months before the wedding, with no less than Oprah Winfrey.
Coming from Hollywood, where actresses are joined at the hip with their publicists, Meghan expressed surprise that Palace press officials felt duty bound to listen to her first telephone conversation with Oprah. She then went behind their backs anyway, met her future interlocutor, invited her to the wedding, and arranged a privileged seat for her. Such was the downside of being “silenced.”
Meghan’s complaint that she received no positive guidance about her role, only “certain things you couldn’t do” rang especially hollow. She lamented that there was “no class on how to speak” or “cross your legs.” It rather beggared belief that a trained actress would complain about having to learn the British national anthem, and the “30 hymns” she was expected to know. Did it really not occur to her until she was five minutes away from her first meeting with the Queen that she should know how to curtsey?
The fact was, the Queen assigned Meghan one of her most experienced advisers to guide her through her first year – the very antithesis of the insidious “grey men” who supposedly thwarted her every move. I have known Samantha Cohen for a dozen years and have watched her navigate high pressure situations on overseas Royal tours. She is a total professional, smart, loyal and knowledgeable as well as congenial. She was thoroughly dedicated to showing Meghan the ropes. Not only did Meghan fail to express gratitude, it has been credibly reported that she treated Cohen poorly, by one account subjecting her to exceptional stress.
Another conspicuous omission from Meghan’s confessional was the Queen’s most meaningful gift to her: a global platform on which she could do important work by making her patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities, and naming Harry the president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and Meghan the vice-president. Meghan said that while traveling to Commonwealth countries with Harry, she first realised that people of colour made up three-quarters of the population in the 54 Commonwealth countries. Despite the Queen’s well-considered appointments, Meghan faulted The Firm for failing to see that as a biracial woman, she could have provided “added benefit” to the Commonwealth.
At one point Meghan mentioned that “a lot has been lost already” in her life even as she proudly shared her rescue hens and a luxurious California life with Harry that is “greater than any fairytale you ever read.” The dignified and beautiful Commonwealth Day Broadcast that preceded the unprecedented unburdening to Winfrey served as a stark reminder of what Meghan and Harry could have achieved had they genuinely applied themselves.
The Queen is killing them with kindness, their response may be a further indication of their real motives and it will be interesting to see, having pleaded poverty, whether one or two podcasts, when they can find the time will be just fine with Netflix and Spotify. Regardless, I'm sure that financially they will be 'Thriving'with or without the support of Prince Charles.
Hillary Clinton makes me shudder.......
Is anyone going to care?! Isn't she just slightly less likely than Philip to be come out with things best left unsaid? I don't mean racial things, but she is pretty blunt, from all I've read.
Now to implement #2,
release the press to sink the Haz's leaky battleship. Lol!
Your Queen is a little badass ;) she has my utmost respect!
At that point, Morgan got up and, while walking off the set, said, "Okay, I'm done with this, sorry, no, sorry... see you later, sorry, can't do this."
Mr. Morgan, I salute you for doing what all of us toiling away for arsehats wish we had the guts (and the portfolio) to do. Piers will be OK. GMB was only one of his jobs. He's still a judge on Britain's Got Talent, isn't he, and probably other panel shows, too. And he's still a big personality on the Tweetie (as Craig Ferguson, mi amour, calls it.) He's got plenty of money, and his wife, Celia Walden, still has her nice little earner.
There was a time, not terribly long ago that I thought Piers was a bombastic blowhard . . the epitome of the oily public schoolboy that confused snark with wit, and who could be downright mean. I first met him through America's Got Talent, which I stuck with longer than I really wanted to if only to see Piers' legendary tiffs with fellow judge Howie Mandel, his opposite number in every way imaginable. I think the pranking was largely for ratings though because sometimes they did agree. Anyhoo . . when Piers was introduced into the Harry-Meghan saga as the guy who had drinks with Meg on the night she met Harry (so the legend goes, not that I believe an ounce of that shite anymore--I do believe that she met Piers for drinks, yes--to use him, like she does everyone else)--but at the time, I didn't disbelieve Meg's version of events because we didn't know her then--Piers' subsequent fits of pique escalating into vitriol against her always smacked of the rage of a jilted man to me . . notwithstanding that he was married. Had he met Meghan under the impression that it was a date? Did they actually do more than just have a drink together? Was he toying with the possibility of an affair with her? Did it go beyond possibility to actuality and we only heard about a platonic meeting? Or . . was he just that p*ssed to have been charmed by this actress only to find out her true colors?
I am not saying he had an affair or even wanted to, but his level of anger and one-upmanship toward her since has been kind of extreme for a guy who had an Instagram friend who met him once or twice and went on to marry a member of the Royal family. Though his Twitter war against Meghan has been entertaining, taking the high road and saying nothing but 'Good luck' would have preserved his job at the least and been better for his blood pressure. But he's a tabloid journalist . . taking the high road does not keep his crumpets buttered. If I didn't know Meg the way I feel I do now, his comments would likely come off as heartless and cruel . . .but anyone who has heard that thing speak at length and has sampled her latest vengeful Medea look has GOT to feel in their water that she is a toxic plastic poser . . it just seeps out of her. How can anyone be fooled?
Now with his greater allotment of free time, what is Piers going to do with it? Writing anything related to Meg would be risky, seeing as she's so suit-happy. I'm sure there's a way he could get around any litigation, even if he has to present it as a fictional roman-a-clef about a married journalist who gets taken for a ride (perhaps literally) by an aging yacht girl. Piers should call up Trevor Engleson for a chat. Maybe with Piers's contacts in the British media, they can collaborate and finally get that TV show about a pushy American marrying a dimbulb Prince off the ground.
There's a Southern saying that fits this situation: "Never get in a p***ing contest with a skunk"
A poster on Tiaras and Houseplants remarked that she felt sick after the interview and fallout as if there was an aura of malevolence radiating from it. Think a lot of us may feel that way.
I especially like the bit about how discussions will be addressed privately. Great Queen move to silence this on the LA playground.
From the Telegraph:
They may claim to respect her, but this is a devastating insult to the Queen
By Allison Pearson
Part 1
Towards the end of her more shocking-than-you-could possibly-imagine, even-in-your worst-royal-family-trashing-nightmare, interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, mused, “Life is about storytelling, right? About the stories we tell ourselves, about the stories we buy into.
“To be able to have storytelling through a truthful lens that hopefully is uplifting is going to be great.” After two hours of this jaw-dislocating CBS special, the story the Sussexes have told themselves about their own behaviour, the authorised version of Megxit which they were happy to share with a sympathetic inquisitor and millions of viewers, is perfectly clear. The only truthful lens is their own. Anyone who comes up with facts which contradict their feelings is either frightened of the tabloids, trapped (Prince Charles and Prince William) or racist, and quite possibly all three.
With that familiar expression of dewy-eyed sincerity on her blooming pregnancy face, Meghan turned to her husband when Oprah asked about the way they had left – sorry, stood back from – the Royal family. “My grandmother and I have a really good relationship,” enthused an oblivious Harry. (Not any more, sonny.) “She’s my Colonel in Chief and always will be … I’m comfortable knowing we did everything we could to make it work.”
“And we did everything with as much respect as possible to protect them,” added Meghan.
Sorry? If this was respect, what on earth would disrespect look like? My heart goes out to the poor courtiers who had to brief the Queen about the excruciating revelations from her grandson and his wife over the Cornflakes. So many to choose from!
It says something that the gobsmacking admission that the Archbishop of Canterbury “married” Meghan Markle and Prince Harry “in our backyard” three days before that £32 million wedding in St George’s Chapel would struggle to make the cut in the Top 10 Most Scandalous Takeaways from the Oprah interview.
Between the commercial breaks, the Duchess reloaded, taking aim at those she believes did her wrong. While conceding that everyone made her welcome at first, she was clearly furious at “The Firm” which had protected other members of the Royal family, but not Meghan, and was still “perpetuating falsehoods about us”. As an example, she disclosed that it was Kate, her sister-in-law, who had made Meghan cry before her wedding, not the other way round, as was widely reported.
“I don’t say that to be disparaging [of course not!]. I don’t think it’s fair to go into the details [which I sort of just did] because Kate apologised and I’ve forgiven her.” Ouch. That forgiveness may not be mutual.
Not to be outdone in the diss-the relatives stakes, Harry told us that his father stopped taking his calls when the Sussexes moved to Canada. The Prince of Wales asked his son to put his plans in writing. I mean, who does he think he is – the future King?
The family “literally cut me off financially,” said Harry and Oprah gasped. She was horrified, although not because a 36-year-old man was complaining that daddy stopped footing the bill when he quit – sorry, stood back from – the job he was paid to do.
Luckily, Harry had the money his mother left him, although he had to sign deals with Netflix and Spotify to keep the wolf (and the paparazzi) from the door. Diana, whose ghost hovered over this interview, both as inspiration and cautionary tale, bequeathed her younger son £10 million – a fortune to the millions who have lost their job during the pandemic, but chickenfeed if you want to live like a prince in LA with a designer henhouse and your wife favours Aquazzurra heels for an interview in a garden. That was all ‘My grandmother and I have a really good relationship,’ enthused an oblivious Harry. (Not any more, sonny)
Meghan and Harry Will Never Be This Interesting Again
And that’s a problem for the former royals who are bankrolling their escape with new media ventures.
Jack Shafer is Politico’s senior media writer.
It’s possible to hold two contrasting views about why Meghan and Harry sat for their interview with Oprah Winfrey on CBS Sunday night without appearing illogical. The couple had a list of legitimate grievances against their family and the hectoring British tabloid press, not to mention the bigoted treatment by some toward Meghan, and they wanted to air those complaints to their best advantage. But having recently signed a “megawatt” production deal with Netflix and a separate one with Spotify last year, they also needed to launch their new media brand in a way that would flatter and publicize them and shame their critics, even if it did expose their vulnerabilities.
Saying the couple’s image needed maintenance would be an understatement. A December YouGov poll found that almost 70 percent of respondents declared themselves “not very interested” or “not interested at all” in Meghan and Harry. Men and women answered the question about their interest in similar percentages, so it wasn’t a matter of one sex expressing apathy. And it wasn’t just the United States turning its back on them. A recent United Kingdom YouGov poll showed a long-running and steep decline of Meghan and Harry’s measured favorability. The other Windsors have not suffered such a dramatic drop, excepting, of course, Andrew, who occupies the sub-sub-basement of favorability.
So what better place to repair the pair’s likability than a CBS special hosted by Winfrey and broadcast after the highly rated 60 Minutes? All the pieces fit together to create event-scale ratings—the media buildup to the show, the showstopper quality of Winfrey’s questions, and some ultra-buzzy reveals, including news about Meghan’s suicidal ideation, Charles not returning Harry’s calls, and family questions about their baby’s skin tone. About 17.1 million tuned in, which is more than the average NFL game viewership in the peak 2019 season. Public relations professionals everywhere must be studying how Harry, just a normal bloke who happened to be born into a notable family, and Meghan, who achieved B-list celebrity by breaking into Hollywood (no easy feat), made themselves into international luminaries with so few extraordinary assets.
Haters of monarchies would have you regard “royal” families as marrow-sucking parasites on the public treasury. And they would be right. The Windsors being the exemplars of such parasitism, believe ancestry and divine endorsement gives them an automatic right to an opulent life and deference from commoners. We should probably give Meghan and Harry an attagirl and an attaboy for turning their backs on “The Firm,” the widely used nickname for the “royal” family, and striking out to earn their own keep through production deals. The taxpayers who funded Meghan and Harry’s lifestyle were victims. The media consumers who will partake of their films and podcast will be paying accomplices in the first season of The Liberation of Meghan and Harry.
Part 2
Quite shocking enough, but Harry and Meghan (Ginge and Whinge to their outraged critics on social media) had barely got started. Remember the grudging reluctance with which they showed their newborn to the public?
Well, it emerged that Meghan was none too happy because baby Archie had been denied the title of Prince.
It took some mental gymnastics for the “I’m so authentic, me” duchess to explain why a grand title for her son was so desirable. She managed it by claiming, absurdly, that, if he wasn’t made a prince, Archie would not have security or be “safe”. Furthermore, the first member of colour in the Royal family would not be titled “in the way that other grandchildren would be”.
Oprah who, like most Americans, gets her knowledge of the monarchy from The Crown did not push back on this assertion. A British researcher would have told her instantly that neither Princess Anne nor Prince Edward’s children are princes or princesses. A decision to retain those higher titles for the offspring of the heir to the throne seems reasonable if you want to streamline the monarchy and is hardly without precedent. But Harry and Meghan (Ginge and Whinge to their outraged critics on social media) had barely got started. Remember the grudging reluctance with which they showed their newborn to the public?
Well, it emerged that Meghan was none too happy because baby Archie had been denied the title of Prince.
It took some mental gymnastics for the “I’m so authentic, me” duchess to explain why a grand title for her son was so desirable. She managed it by claiming, absurdly, that, if he wasn’t made a prince, Archie would not have security or be “safe”. Furthermore, the first member of colour in the Royal family would not be titled “in the way that other grandchildren would be”.
Oprah who, like most Americans, gets her knowledge of the monarchy from The Crown did not push back on this assertion. A British researcher would have told her instantly that neither Princess Anne nor Prince Edward’s children are princes or princesses. A decision to retain those higher titles for the offspring of the heir to the throne seems reasonable if you want to streamline the monarchy and is hardly without precedent. But Meghan and Harry can spot a personal slight from outer space.
The Duchess expertly steered her interviewer towards the desired conclusion. “Is it because of Archie’s race?” gasped Oprah. A look of infinite sorrow clouding that lovely face, Meghan conceded that, indeed, there had been “concerns and conversations” with a senior Royal about what colour the baby might be when he or she was born. “They were concerned if he was too brown?” demanded Oprah.
“If that’s the assumption you’re making, it feels like a pretty safe one,” said the Duchess pointedly. Later,
when Harry joined his wife, he suddenly discovered a sense of discretion, saying he would never disclose who had said such a horrible thing. Let’s put it this way, the field of suspects is not large.
What a weird, reeling ride of an interview it was. Oprah seldom queried the often blurrily evasive answers Meghan gave. She should not have let her get away with a passing reference to “losing my father”. Thomas Markle didn’t die. A foolish man, but not a bad one, he was “cancelled” by his previously devoted daughter for a misdemeanour with the media and has never met his grandson. The former actress’s track record – “Meghan moves on,” as one childhood pal put it – merited a lot more scrutiny, particularly in the light of allegations that Meghan bullied two young female staff members, causing them to resign. (A pity the allegations were not made public before the
interview was conducted.) The most shocking moment came when the Duchess confessed to having had suicidal thoughts and not wanting to go on in the face of relentless media scrutiny. She and Harry gave a convincing account of the crazy, constricted cage that is being royal, and their decision to bend the bars and fly away seems totally understandable, admirable even.
But the media face through which the two will now encounter the world is not radically new for them. Instead of “the Firm” pulling the puppet strings on their bodies, they’ll do their own yanking as they switch from being human products of a company that markets their lives to the world to human products that they control. It’s just the same unscripted material moved to a new location. The biggest difference is how they’ve disintermediated the Windsors from profit participation and assumed complete image creation for themselves.
Having unbridled themselves from family and tradition, and having moved their act to an international stage, Meghan and Harry have not obliterated their publicity and autonomy problems. In order to stay commercially relevant, they’ll have to produce great content for Netflix and Spotify before their novelty wears off. That’s no easy feat. They’ll be competing against the most brilliant filmmakers and podcasters in the world now, and conjuring content from nothing ain’t nothing. Not even Steven Spielberg can deliver what the public wants every time, and he’s the greatest mass entertainer of our times. Also, neither Meghan nor Harry have much experience in producing media. If not for their relationship with the “royals,” they couldn’t have gotten a meeting with a Netflix flunky, let alone a deal.
The couple’s most durable assets are the ones they created by leaving the Buckingham Palace cocoon for La La Land. This season, for example, the couple portray the aggrieved and sympathetic “royals” in exile, self-styled underdogs who want to show the world they can be media moguls. But like Bob Dylan, David Bowie, Madonna and others have shown, an entertainer mustn’t operate too long under one persona. The audience says it wants more of what the entertainer produced, but they really crave something fresh and new. Stirring the publicity pot by picking fights with the Windsors and suing the British tabloids won’t sustain their novelty forever.
In the absence of creating astonishingly good media, Meghan and Harry might need to re-create many aspects of the British environment they’ve just fled to keep audiences interested. For starters, they’ll need a steady supply of villains to battle, additional causes to champion, unique heroes to partner with, and fresh personal revelations to uncork. It’s an unceasing, demanding spiral.
We’ve gotta wish Meghan and Harry good luck for making a courageous, one-way flight out of the Windsor family. But has anybody warned them that they’ve merely left one cruel plot for one that is even more merciless? The Meghan and Harry biopic will be a very filmable story, but one doubts that they’ll have the vision to capture it.
Part 3
But why give this deeply destructive interview now when Prince Philip, within three months of his century, is in hospital and the Queen waits at Windsor for her “liegeman of life and limb”, who has been by her side for 73 years? It looks vengeful, self-absorbed and attention-seeking.
Meghan talked perceptively about the “misalignment” between the perception of royalty and the reality. That same sense of discomfort was evident here. Sitting in a beautiful garden, the couple talked of compassion and healing in soothing, therapised language, but the spring air was acrid with the smoke of bridges being burnt.
Even Harry’s gleeful shout of joy as he revealed the news that they are expecting a girl, a baby sister for Archie, could not sweeten the prevailing sourness. Princess Diana, Harry insisted, had been with him and Meghan all the way during their great escape. It made him appreciate how hard it had been for her to do it alone.
Surely, he must know his mother would have been heartbroken to see her boys thus estranged. Harry’s hope that he and William will both be there for the unveiling of Diana’s statue in July, on what would have been her 60th birthday, suggests he hasn’t grasped that the wounds he inflicted on his brother and his brother’s wife could take years to heal, and may never.
Some sign of doubt would have been welcome. When Oprah asked the Duchess if she had any regrets,
Meghan answered, “My regret is believing them when they said I would be protected.” That’s not a regret, honey, it’s a rebuke.
I’m sure that this profoundly polarising interview will be a big hit with Americans and with the younger generation which sees “speaking my truth” as fabulous personal empowerment. Last night, older British viewers may have found their toes curling. And their lips.
Above all, many of us will have felt the insult to the Queen. However loudly Harry and Meghan may have proclaimed their affection for the monarch there is no question that their interview was a devastating act of lèse-majesté. The couple unleashed demons which could destabilise her beloved Commonwealth and threaten the future of the monarchy itself. Harry once reportedly said: What Meghan wants Meghan gets. But is this really what she wanted?
////////
The article cuts them down to size.
With regard to the palace statement, I think it said enough and had enough nuance, which may be lost in translation - we shall see what the next few days will bring...
"Well for the love of God, Charles sounds just as bad as Harry. Feelings hurt because there was a picture of George he hadn't seen, really? Jealous of the Middletons? Have I read that correctly? Rather than being thrilled for his son having the extra the support of warm, loving loyal in-laws who appear to be better bred than his own flesh and blood, he instead has a hissy fit about a picture of George?!"
I think you are reading it wrong. What happened was there was a picture of George in the background on a bookcase when Charles did a broadcast from his home or office and William hit the roof. Not Charles. I remember when there were stories about the incident.
I do have some sympathy re: Charles & the Middletons. I'm not saying Charles was right but I understand and think this happens in alot of families. ("A daughter is a daughter all of her life. A son is a son until he takes a wife.") With Charles too, there was the past efforts of Diana to undermine him as a parent (like when Will had that injury) although she later admitted he was a good dad.
When George was little, there were tons of pictures of him with Carole. There were pictures of the Cambridges' with the entire Middleton clan in Mystique each year for Carole's birthday. And articles about their "farm" with fun kid stuff. Never did we see Charles even holding George until that picture was seen in that broadcast. As I recall it was taken when George was very young, an infant, and Charles was holding him with Will beside him wearing a blue sweater.
At one point, there were articles in the press about Charles being shut out. Pretty sure Charlotte had been born by then. Will went on the record and said Charles needed to work less if he wanted to see the kids. (This was during Will's "workshy" period. But even if it hadn't been, as HM has gotten older, Charles has needed to work more, not less.)
Thanks for sharing. It was great to read!
@Animal Lover
Thanks for sharing. Camilla is getting more and more sarcastic! And the politico article was so factual and straight forward!
I am sorry but I do not believe it racism to ponder how a mixed race baby will look like. It is a natural curiosity! Also too our government should never have gotten involved period. Amazing how Megs word is taken as gospel . Cannot wait for her demise
https://www.tmz.com/2021/03/09/boycott-royal-family-black-lives-matter-co-founder-racism-meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-oprah-skin-color-prince/
@Swampwoman good points! and 2 words "oily stools" 😒
Reproducing your dossier on Mugs from the first page, it's so excellent. It's a head-scratcher all right.
(1)
Who, really is Rachel Meghan, this mysterious untalented broke nothing from LA with access to surgery, with one hidden marrIage, who did a two week South American internship before disappearing to Spain for awhile, who can’t even correctly name the discipline of her own college got in tight with Canadian political biggies, has a photo partying at an event with Obama, is defended by Hillary, avoided by Andrew? Whose mother, whereabouts unknown for year, who suddenly got a big house in “Windsor Hills” LA after the relative who owned it suddenly died by falling over a dog leash onto a sidewalk, though his autopsy report (was online two years ago) allegedly showed three blunt force trauma injuries to three different sides of his head? Whose father had mysterious lottery winnings to launch Megs?
(2)
Why were politicians and political celebs pushing for her hard, and ringing around her and Harry at the wedding and beyond, and why does Eugenie’s husband work for Clooney? Why was she pals with Amal, the “human rights lawyer” with bloody, close political family connections in arms, underground terror-spouting groups and media ?
(3)
Why did she carefully exclude Eugenie and Fergie from her smears? How does she know Andrew, what does he know about her, have they done a deal to keep it sweet? (& Her Sara Bronfmam NXSvim connections btw?)
(4)
She clearly went into royal life planning to malign it (Scobie book) for just a minute to establish her credibility, then grabbed money and fled to LA where they live a life far, far beyond the scope of Harry’s Diana inheritance. How?
(5)
Huge cash payout from NWO banks and funds right off in Florida, & ridiculous large Netflix contract for nothing later. Why?
(6)
Oprah asks nothing about their pre Archie trademarks and post Archie trademarks and SR trademarks and Delaware businesses. Why?
(7)
Soho House and its officers and connections and journalists pop up in a tangled ball — why? Markus Anderson just disappeared?
(8)
Evinces the calm assumption she can get away with anything, even brutal abusiveness, missing foundation funds... why?
(9)
Only one talking point for these two, resembling anti-monarchy propaganda now. Why?
(10)
Dimwit Harry invited to barefoot billionaires global secret symposium—the yacht and jet scandal era — why?
(10)
I have mentioned before that three scientist friends of mine in Germany were invited to a private dinner with an extremely old EU-born billionaire whose name you know who seem to have fingers in everything in global politics and NWO. He openly told them of his life, his beliefs,mhis/their plans, laughing and going on and on. They sat increasingly horror and when he offered them a staggering sum in millions to support their (Unrelated) work and be his friend, they turned him down and were scared and upset for months. Hillary etc backer.
You can invade countries with tanks, financial ruin, disease, crop blight. But to take take a monarchy by killing the belief and trust of the loyal, you can’t really do a Tsar family basement shooting today. But you can send in a missile in the form of an utterly criminal actress whose only loyalty is to money, with a press and other paid celeb agents poised to support her and give her a clear pathway to create destruction.
Megs isn’t worried about money the way her dumb husband is. I think she has a money spout. From who. Why?
That is my mere speculation, enhanced after what we heard and saw last night.
The persistent rumor that before Mugsy came on the scene, another younger and prettier mixed race brunette actress was approached by mysterious persons who tried to recruit her to start a relationship with Harry of England and promised huge money if she did so. She got spooked and declined. It's like something out of a LeCarre novel, except with Mugsy as the lead spy, it's more like Get Smart.
I'm still reeling from the news that Piers has walked off his own program after being piled on by the obviously delusional. Is the end of the world nigh? It sure feels like it.
You're welcome :)
I don't disagree mistakes were made in the past by the RF re: H&M. Certainly that's obvious with benefit of hindsight. But some things were iffy at the time even with how little the public actually knew in real time. So I agree with you there for sure.
But I really don't think the US government is being led away from focusing on H&M as "dangerous criminals" by the Queen's response to the Oprah show.
It's hard to talk about this issue without running afoul of Nutty's request we not start political discussions because those can devolve into fights. But in my view, there are plenty of people and movements that are bigger threats to the US than H&M. And they are being ignored (at least it looks that way) or even openly supported. So I just don't see H&M as primary existential threats. They are bandwagon-jumpers, not band leaders IMO.
But I guess we'll see. You may be right and I may be totally wrong. But I don't think, BTW, that the matter is closed so far as the RF goes. Today's statement was just to calm the troubled waters for now. It's not the end of the matter from that side of the pond.
And yes, absolutely, daughters are generally the ones who remain close to their families, I guess Charles can't see that. (Ironically, Diana doesn't seem to have, but her position was different, and her sisters further away, maybe, with careers of their own?)
I came across harshly; I am actually very fond of Charles, but it seems like he is also quite the Princess! And William is said to be a grudge holder, which doesn't bode well for Nutmeg and her puppet, does it?
I sympathize as no matter what happened Meg was ALWAYS going to lay out the race card. This is what was going to happen so I can see RF not wanting to create this at onset but in hindsight..
"IMHO, nothing will happen. As much as this poster would like to see the Queen remove titles, honors, and remove Harry and children from the line of succession, it is not going to happen. Why - because MM played the race card. And it stinks to high heaven. Given all the reading of the papers availble to me across the pond in fly-over country, the British people are behind the RF and HMTQ, while here in the state, reaction is mixed. Perhaps the court of public opinion will give the verdict when Harry comes over in July for his mother's statue unveiling. MM/ PH alluded to things taken away - I believe they are prepared IF things are rescinded and will point to racism, again. What they are not prepared for is public reation in the negative.That is more important to them than what the family thinks."
I copied this from my earlier in the day post.
IMHO - IF the Queen goes nuclear and removes PH from the line of succession, removes the dukedom, removed the HRH, MM will be justified in saying - see, I told you so. HMTQ has played this perfectly - MM wants this played out in front of an audience so she reemains the pertpetual victim. HMTQ is not giving her that satisfaction, and is treating it as it is - a family problem. The invstigation into the bullying is called for, as the Palace is an employer in the UK. Everything else that was said had to do within the family - their place in the family, family members who said this and that. HMTQ will no stoop that low and as much as we want to see the boom lowered and the Kraken released, it is not going to happen.
It wil be far more damning to see how the Public treats Harry when he returns in July. Will he return for the Tropping of the Color - that will be interesting to watch IF Harry returns for the event. HMTQ would be justified in bumping him off the balcony and onto the sidewalk IMHO, but that is her call and hers alone. I have the popcorn at ready. :)
He cited an example of one publication asking whether Prince Harry was going to marry into “gangster royalty”.
Did the commentator back this up ie what publication it was, just never heard of that before, so curious..
I am so embarrassed as an American right now, I couldn’t come back to the blog. After a year of being a dedicated lurker, and occasional poster, I know, y’all know, sensible Americans do not buy what Markle’s selling beyond the bandwagon crowd.
Still, the firing of Piers Morgan, old Hillary Clinton claiming crulety, even our President joining the mob (while hiding behind miles of barbed wire and an expensive National Guard “presence”). Our nation once unified behind the principles of “innocent until proven guilty” and freedom of speech. The American reaction to this, led by a fact-free media, is shameful.
So apologies to all the British people and citizens of Commonwealth for exporting Markle. As punishment, I guess we’ll host your hapless Prince … or is it hostage? In any case, very sorry.
It was the `of England' bit that puzzled me. Had it been `in' or `from' I'd have got it. It made her sound as if she were the Attorney General, not a common or garden solicitor dealing with conveyancing, neighbours who chuck dead rats into your garden, boundary disputes, Wills & probate and divorces.
In short, all the embuggerances of every day life - we await the bill from our chap who has just given us back-up in extricating ourselves from a dodgy contract with a dodgy pv panel firm!
I can see that she thinks herself a bit special - `intersectionality feminism for for refugees' (paraphrase- I ask you! )ie If you believe in one aspect of social justice, , you have to go with the whole shebang, including believing every word Megsie utters.
The Harkles have trashed our Monarchy who have done nothing other than facilitate them. That is surely quite unacceptable. An attack on the Monarchy is an attack on the country and its people. If the Queen cannot do better than this then either she or all the Windsors should go. The country is not run for the benefit of those who at the slightest opportunity will play the race card. I frankly am sick of it.
See: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-gangster-17055768
Fellow Nutties,
I am so embarrassed as an American right now, I couldn’t come back to the blog. After a year of being a dedicated lurker, and occasional poster, I know, y’all know, sensible Americans do not buy what Markle’s selling beyond the bandwagon crowd.
Still, the firing of Piers Morgan, old Hillary Clinton claiming crulety, even our President joining the mob (while hiding behind miles of barbed wire and an expensive National Guard “presence”). Our nation once unified behind the principles of “innocent until proven guilty” and freedom of speech. The American reaction to this, led by a fact-free media, is shameful.
So apologies to all the British people and citizens of Commonwealth for exporting Markle. As punishment, I guess we’ll host your hapless Prince … or is it hostage? In any case, very sorry.
Miz Malaprop, they had to know that she was a snake when they let her in.
1) how sad to learn how challenging it was for you.
2) there are two sides to your recollections.
3) investigations into racism will be looked into
4) you are loved family members.
IMHO intrepretation :
1) you never said anything to anyone; You suffered in silence. Why didn't you seek help from her OB??
2) you have your side to the story, we have the other side (which many have been aired and refuted MM)
3) racism - there is much to be considered in this allegation. Context is everything. We all know that Prince Michael of Kent (please - correct me if I am wrong) wore the blackamoor broach to the extened family lunch. In What context did this one statement regarding Archie take place?
4) a statement from Grandmother - at this time you are still loved and a member of my family.
I am fully behind the Queen on this. Any further public statement from MM/ PH will take this in the direction that they want it to go and reflect on them, not the royal family.
How does that even make sense?
And it may well not have made sense... forgive my grammar and all of those "that"s!
What I meant was: if she couldn't be left alone for fear she'd kill herself, why didn't HE stay home instead of HER going out?! It is laughable, and further proof of their lies. And Harry's stupidity.
"...................
@Ant
I agree.
And the more I think about it, the more I believe the Harkles will embrace her statement as a victory."
----
JennS, that is exactly my worry, The British understatement works at home, but Megs is a ruthless poser and will definitely peddle this to partners like Netflix and Oprah as a victory, and that fib may become the US press line going forward. I understand WHY the palace wrote it that way, I do. But this is a world watching who think M&H are getting away with murder, or properly beating the Queen and family to a pulp. More direct language was needed, and I wish American Jason could have been allowed to handle it.
I am reading comments praising the wording as showing class, grace, remaining above the fray.
In normal circumstances, I would agree, absolutely. But we passed Normal Circumstances 1000 miles ago.
The idea that this lean, "family" statement will somehow stop the Harkles from further abusing the BRF and the institution absolutely baffles me. Has Meghan ever been stopped? They are protecting the lace while the castle burns.
The time to wake up to the beast they are dealing with was yesterday, and they didn't.
Whatever is supposedly happening behind the scenes, I hope it is a muscular solution, and up to the threat.
My thinking is they are letting her destroy Harry without killing him. They are letting her take advantage of him 100%. They are both too toxic to go too far. Eventually, I assume, if their plans work Harry will have enormous platforms to talk about mental abuse from. People will listen to him, as we’ve watched it play out in real time. She will make accusations, but it will be easy to point as the one person with all the problems is actually Meghan.
First, the need to let the bully investigation and fall out run its course.
Second, they need to remove the money making titles. They were upset about Archie and the Firm, so it’s in their best interest to cut the tie that causes them so much anguish. Fresh start!
Third, simultaneously and calculatedly release Meghan’s past.
Meghan has proven to be hard to deal with by pretty much everyone in her life. Netflix and Spotify are going to dredge up more issues. Just wait. This show won’t be over for a while, but it will go up in flames.
Because it just doesn't fit the narrative they're pushing of the sensitive, give-up-all-to-protect-her Prince to "cradle" her for a few minutes and then insist she suck it up and get going.
He is supposed to be slaying the myriad of dragons set loose on her, not make her get dressed up and go parade around for them.
I think Harry is the proven racist. He has his history of racist rhetoric and is of extremely Low IQ. Posters on random sites and forums which have nothing to do with the news or Monarchy are commenting about how shocked they are at how dumb he is since the interview came out.
I said above I think he personally was shocked to find out Meg could have a darker toned baby. We’ve never seen Harry with a Black girlfriend- Meghan is extremely light skinned, as many Black women have pointed out in LSA. The only way for Meghan and Harry to get past his racism and issues were to blame everyone else, and rewrite the narrative for the current times. Meghan has taught him this valuable media skill.
This is the only thing that makes sense to me. They are covering for Harry’s inherent racism.
How many of you are secretly hoping Piers takes a week and handles the job that needed to be handled 3 years ago! It is perfect. Whatever motive he had behind sudden departure he went out on Megs so now he must avenge!
Problem in that is how are you ever going to prove something was not thinking of suicide, you can't! Only option is to discredit the source! But how many fall with her? Where does loyalty lie? But no harm in a one hour Meghan Markle expose' to get the feet wet. Sure to be ratings blockbuster
#piersmorganavenge!
Excerpts from the DM
What Her Majesty said:
'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.'
What royal experts say she means:
Former Press Secretary to Her Majesty Charles Anson said her message was 'edged with sadness'.
He told Sky News: 'I think these developments are difficult to deal with and and she wants to do it in a fair way but in the family circle rather than by public diplomacy.'
He added: 'I think the main point there has always been that the Queen has said whatever decision Prince Harry and Meghan take... Her Majesty and the Family wish them well.'
Royal author Phil Dampier said: 'I'm sure the Queen is desperate to heal the wounds and deal with this in private.'
What Her Majesty said:
'The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.'
What royal experts say she means:
Royal author Phil Dampier said: 'The phrase ''recollections vary'' is telling.
'The Queen is really saying that Harry and Meghan might be giving their version of events or their interpretation of a conversation a couple of years ago, without going so for as to say they are lying, which they might not be.
'Clearly she has spoken to the person who allegedly made the remark about Archie and they have given her their version of events.'
He added: 'Above all she wants to keep the identity of the senior royal who made the alleged remark about Archie's skin colour a secret.
'She knows that if it comes out that person will never be allowed to forget it, rightly or wrongly.'
Royal biography Tom Bower went a step further than Mr Dampier, saying: '''While recollections may vary...'' is an exquisite phrase to accuse the Sussexes of Disney style fantasy.
'They need to name names and give dates and circumstances to justify their accusations.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9343965/What-Queen-said-meant-Royal-experts-decode-Majestys-statement-full.html
Australians in new push to break royal links after Meghan and Harry interview
Only an ‘Australian should be eligible to be our head of state’ says former PM Malcolm Turnbull
And . .in one fell swoop, Harry and Meghan undo what Harry's mother did in 1983 on her first Commonwealth tour just by being herself. Newly elected PM Bob Hawke was a republican and none too pleased to have to host the toffs from England so soon after his election. Sentiment among the people was much the same as now--and then new-mum Diana touched down and won the nation over to the Crown all over again.
Great job, Harry! You claim that Diana is with you in spirit and proud of how you're living your life now . . but you told us not so long ago that you barely remember her at all. Ah, yes, until your wife helped you recover your memories.
They are disgraceful.
Survey reveals the damaging impact Meghan and Harry's interview has had on opinions of the Royal Family
Poll showed most people who watched interview disbelieved Meghan's claims of racism from family member
Most felt the couple prioritised media attention over their duty - though there was a split between age groups
-----------
Not sure if the results are the same as the other poll. Figures in the article (pie charts etc.)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9344121/Poll-reveals-majority-Britons-want-Harry-Meghan-stripped-titles.html
Reading between the lines, I think she called them out as disingenuous crybabies who are, bluntly, liars. "Recollections may vary" is a stinging rebuke in her world.
This well heeled version of the Grey Rock technique is guaranteed to drive the two Narcs, the alpha and the beta, mad. If they can provoke any sort of frothing reaction, they win. TQ didn't give them any. Though it may be time to stop with the 'much loved members of my family" bit. HAMS are anything but loveable at this point.
Unless what HM really means is that they can fark right off, bring the Sapphire Bombay! . .in which case Her Maj should carry on.
Not quite sure what Prince Michael of Kent did that was so wrong, I always wear my Robinson's Golly badges (though not to a formal lunch). You ladies as soon as I let you in want to start cooking and cleaning - not that I ever asked or gave permission and so I have photographs of more than one former girlfriend in my kitchen wearing my Robinson's golly apron and quite happily too.
In Act 3 of Rosenkavalier a little black boy comes on the stage and in Flute, Papageno is scared off by Monastotos and merely because the latter is black. Is this still acceptable or has Mozart been cancelled? Koanga (with its all black chorus) is thus unperformable, yet having the ladies of the Covent Garden chorus tiptoeing round the stage as geishas is quite acceptable. Forgive me for being confused because not only are Koanga and Butterfly contemporary with each other but in both and other than for three white characters all others and the chorus (female in Butterfly, male in Koanga) are ethnically challenged.
Willliams and Meghan reportedly first met in 2010 at party celebrating the Super Bowl and the tennis star attended the couple's wedding 2018.
"Meghan Markle, my selfless friend, lives her life -- and leads by example -- with empathy and compassion. She teaches me every day what it means to be truly noble. Her words illustrate the pain and cruelty she's experienced," tweeted Serena.
My second bet is that they began doing this even before the wedding, looking ahead to the day that they might need evidence of their innocence and The Harkle's behavior/guilt.
"It is legal to record someone without their permission if it is in the public interest to do so. For example, if you are recording to gather evidence of criminal or corrupt behaviour, the crime you document is more serious than the civil offence you are potentially committing by recording."
UK Surveillance Law
Wow, Some Common Sense
Suits actor takes swipe at Meghan Markle: Duchess’ former co-star Wendell Pierce slams her and Prince Harry for giving bombshell interview during deadly pandemicWendell Pierce, 57, criticised the Sussexes for giving interview during pandemicMeghan Markle’s former Suits co-star played her character’s father for four yearsHe told LBC the interview was ‘insignificant’ compared to rising Covid death tolls
By GREGORY KIRBY FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021 | UPDATED: 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021
Meghan Markle’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’.
Wendell Pierce, who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise.
The 57-year-old told radio station LBC: ‘Today 3,000 people are going to die in America from Covid.
‘A couple of hundred people are going to die, even this hour, in the UK.’
Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’.
The actor, who said he had not spoken to the duchess since 2019, added: ‘It was quite insensitive and offensive that we are all complicit in this sort of palace… gossip in the midst of so much death. I think it is insignificant.’
Asked who he included in this criticism, he said ‘everyone’ including Oprah, US network CBS, ITV, Prince Harry and Meghan, and the Palace.
Pierce, who also starred in award-winning gangland drama The Wire, added that the monarchy should not get involved ‘in this sort of conversation’ and instead ‘focus on the throes of death that we’re in’.
The actor, from New Orleans, revealed he and Meghan had not talked much about race as they filmed Suits, despite the topic featuring in their roles.
He said: ‘We didn’t have long discussions about it, besides what was in the script and what was happening in our personal lives.’
Full story with photos found here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9344137/Meghan-Markles-former-star-Wendell-Pierce-slams-Harry-interview-pandemic.html
Animal lover, that Sally Bedell Smith article from The Telegraph is splendid! Thank you for sharing!
I swear, if I was a part of the RF, even if it weren't me,I would just fall on my sword and admit that"it was I, Snidely Whi....err, I KC, who asked the skin color question, here is what I meant, and sorry, move on now.". It's getting bigger by the minute (which measured in Meghan-minutes are actually seconds). And anything that MM can hang an apology-demand on needs to be cut off right now.
I swear, if I ever meet some of these "feminist" politicians that stick their oars in without being asked, (you know who I mean), I hope they turn tail and run. I cant be held responsible for acting on my evil desires to smack somebody in the chops (disclaimer: joking!! and yes I know there is NOTHING funny in such tasteless remarks...I'll meet you in HR). But I WILL make some pointed Lolita Express remarks, you can be sure.
I wonder if that picture of George is the one where he is hugging Charles. I would have leaked that one as well. It makes PC look great and is cute as all get out.
I'll be in the corner ...catching up. I swear without you guys reminding of the important things in life, this sh*tshow would drive me round the bend. I sometimes wonder if I just made all this up. Its insanity, is what it is.
And actually, I was trying not to swear. Much.
Please disregard my lapses.
Yes, lots of US celebrity types are lining up to show support. But, the Harkles need more than support. THey want speaker engagements, WHite House invitations, offers for acting/voice overs, award show seats, high-profile charity partnerships and most important, donations - lots and lots of donations. Let's wait and see if any of those throwing support behind the Harkles today, actually offer them something valuable tomorrow.
Much appreciation for copying The Times articles. I apologize if that seemed like instructions, it was just a request.
This is breaking down over racial lines in the US. Many commentators are not really looking at facts, or trying to verify what Harry and Meghan told Oprah. They just want to rant.
They set off a real shot storm in the US and the world and they are loving it. I wonder how long they were planning this interview?
Personally I like the Queen's statement. it short and to the point , which makes it difficult to misinterpret.
She is the Little Mermaid who "lost her voice" after falling in love with a prince.
Dont we wish!
And the irate villagers got torches and pitchforks and burned the psuedo-Tuscan manor and its cheap tchotkes to the ground while driving the mouthy mermaid and her wimpy prince to a new life in the witness protection program where they are forbidden to ever engage with the media again!
Or wear couture
It's amazing the world is giving this woman so much attention and credit. She reminds me a bit of Michael Avenatti , the lawyer who represented Stormy Daniels who was lionized by many in the mainstream American media, but later was found out to a fraud.
@jessica, Harry's racism doesn't count, you see, because he brought the first black princess in to the icky old white RF!
That’s the point. If Meghan is aiming to become Leader of Woke BLM, or at least get a few well paid speaking gigs, they needed to drop a bomb to make any question of Harry’s racism pale in comparison. Now the narrative is ‘he didn’t know he was trapped with a bunch of racists brainwashing him.’ Now she’s allowed to be married into a white old money institution and her pet trust fund racist husband is now a fully woke feminist supporting his Black wife. If only he knew before! It took his fairytale love for Meghan, the new star of BLM to open his eyes, and condemn his families evil ways!!
Oprah is into that narrative BIG time. Otherwise, she would have pressed him more.
This whole interview was an exercise in cleaning up their ‘too controversial image to continue working with Disney’. Everyone was racist towards them, and their unborn child! And who cares if Meghan upset people, she was SUICIDAL.
It’s masterful PR enhancing their image as Mr. and Mrs. Woke of Montecito.
It wasn’t about the Royal family whatsoever. They were just collateral damage that they could use to get maximum press coverage and steer the controversial aspect away from Harry and Meghan, and onto the evil dated BRF.
I felt the same way about Piers! Something of the pearl-clutcher in his complaints.
But boy, was he right.
Maybe Piers will be The One to write the tell-all that brings down the House of Harkle
I feel like sending him a case of Scotch.
'A billionaire interviewing two millionaires about oppression. Got it.'
@Joyceln'Bellini - Ariel - she wants another try at a Disney contract
@luxem - its is curious the Obamas are crickets. But if you believe the other conspiracy theories he's actually the one in the oval office running the country so maybe they are too busy ;-)
Markle - the palace has spoken its your move.
"Meghan told me about her problems – this is a storm that could have been avoided
As the debate sparked by the Sussexes now rages over who is in the right and who is in the wrong, could there have been another way forward?
BRYONY GORDON"
Gordon is a friend of the Sussexes.
I am still baffled by this narrative.
There was nothing stopping them from contacting a mental health professional. They seemed to do fine in going their own way in choosing a hospital and birthing team, and, as many have pointed out, anyone on that birthing team could have recommended a mental health professional. Why did Meghan even talk to anyone on the staff about mental health issues? It is just so inappropriate.
Was she 'laying down evidence' for a future storyline?
I think the Palace must investigate this. Who did she speak to and what was said?
Nothing makes sense about this story for me, but it seems that this is the narrative that Meghan is pushing.
How did this modern, independent strong "feisty" whipsmart woman not get called out on reducing herself to a children's cartoon, and a white one at that?
Modern feminists, ya gotta love 'em. (No offense intended to normal ones here!)
That comment from the NYT piece popped for me, too. Loved it.
@maneki neko's sharing Allison Pearsons article from The Telegraph.
Thanks Maneki. That one gave me new hope.
And @Animal Lover, the article from Politco was excellent.
I particularly liked:
"In the absence of creating astonishingly good media, Meghan and Harry might need to re-create many aspects of the British environment they’ve just fled to keep audiences interested. For starters, they’ll need a steady supply of villains to battle, additional causes to champion, unique heroes to partner with, and fresh personal revelations to uncork. It’s an unceasing, demanding spiral."
If the Harkles had to escape the brutal racism (sarcasm) of Great Britain, how the HELL will they survive in the States?
We can't even agree what racism is.
Which is working in their favor right now. They are like evil fae. The operate best in the In-Between.
Yes, the Telegraph article was heartening, wasn't it? I like the sarcasm. I think people are now seeing through the cr@p.
H.G. Tudor at narcsite.com has just posted a new commentary analyzing the Harkles’ Oprah interview.
It is an audio. No text, at least no text at this time.
I have not yet listened to it.
https://narcsite.com/2021/03/09/meghan-markle-a-less-than-royal-narcissist-part-18/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9344139/RICHARD-KAY-Did-Kates-friendship-Harry-cause-rift-Meghan.html
Good for Catherine!
To answer your question Sandie, I do think the Covid crisis has made people crazier. Hopefully, economies will bounce back vigorously after more vaccines are given and people will have jobs and money to spend and stop trying to destroy everything.
Thank you for continuing to share articles with us. The Valentin Low was particularly interesting as it reports "source" comments which are not as restrained as the Queens, and are actively correcting false claims.
I sure hope HM blistered the WH for daring to interfere. Especially in a British family matter. We'll see how long it takes for that State Dinner invitation takes.
That article by Byrony Gordon is infuriating.
I also believe that MM was setting her up for a future storyline about just how horribly mistreated she was by the BRF. That's MM's usual MO.
Byroy Gordon seems to be quite naïve about MM, and she has had quite a few mental issues herself. Although she has worked with Harry before, I think she was flattered that MM picked her to come to the house and to listen to all of her problems. MM is great at picking people who are easily manipulated.
Just because you have mental issues, it doesn't mean that you are qualified to help others with their mental issues. The same goes for the Harkles.
From Wikipedia:
"In June 2016, Gordon published her second book, Mad Girl, a memoir about her struggles with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), bulimia, alopecia and drug dependency.[12]
Gordon has been open about her mental health challenges, including OCD and depression. In April 2017 she began her Mad World podcasts[13] with an interview with Prince Harry. As of August 2018 Gordon is a sober, recovering alcoholic.[14]"
************************
I love the bit about after Covid sending W&K on New York tour to "Diana territory "
Too much to list (limited) fame haha
In another sign of the fractured relationship with William’s wife, she and Harry pointedly did not once refer to the Duchess of Cambridge as Catherine, the name the Royal Family use for Kate.
🔥🔥🔥
She said something very poignant on her YouTube today. Pdina said to look to Martin Luthur King, Jr, who said people should be judged by the content of their character, and that MM is greatly lacking in her character, and that's why so many people don't like her or Harry.
Pdina is spot on.
Thanks so much for last night's recommendation of usefulcharts on youtube. I fell asleep:)
I will def take a look as I'm needing more content to pass the Covid time. Things are opening up but I've only had my one shot and waiting on the second.
I simply cannot stomach anymore of H$M. They are energy vampires and I don't have what it takes to continue giving them so much of my time.
Tonight I'm going to watch Kenneth Harris' 1969 interview with Duke and Duchess of Windsor on youtube. I never thought I'd say I like Wallace! She certainly had taste and some level of class. Megs wishes she was Wallace...
Cheers!
I listened to most of his latest podcast. (HappyDays posted the link.)
He has improved his speaking style so that it is not so monotone it puts you to sleep within a minute!
I am not so sure that I accept his analysis that she is a mid-range narcissist who is completely unaware. I think she spends most of her time manipulating and plotting and rehearsing. She knows when she is lying and just brazenly believes she can get away with it. She just creates a story that suits her (like Archie not getting a title because of race) and goes with it because that is what she wants to be the truth. Ironically, there is no truth with her but just a truth that suits her.
Remember when she admitted that she lied about having a union card and laughed about being 'such a fraud'? She feels no shame or guilt about telling lies if it serves her, but she knows that she is lying.
Her manipulations also seem not to be spur of the moment but carefully thought through.
One thing that has emerged without a doubt is that she is a very destructive person, and there are a lot of people who are easily manipulated by her.
I agree with you 100%. Why this interview couldnt wait is something they should be held accountable for. Who is asking these questions?
@JennS
Thank you!
And a million thanks for all the articles!
@Opus
My heart agrees with you. HM should smack down hard and publicly.
My head says she was right to take it private.
Wouldnt a Dynasty catfight be fun?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IN-ut_5i_Bw
Anyway, the point is Meghan doesn’t have original ideas or thoughts. She holds onto her visions and guns it. She literally thinks she is in a Princess fairytale and escaped with her Prince from the dungeons of doom, and is now trying to sell her ‘story’ like she said, to the USA. Princess Meghan saves. She has an empathy problem, though, So let’s see how this pans out with her claimed mission to support others.
Her messaging did the thing they hoped for, which was mass acceptance of her circumstances and Harry’s circumstances, but it lacked any ounce of Compassion or Kindness. She doesn’t have the money to fund extravagant pay to play giving. What will she come up with next?
Another commenter said she copies what’s in the news. Any ideas of recent things she may want to try out?
"What right do Americans have to call for abolishing the monarchy in the UK? Has the world gone mad?"
None, of course. Its incredibly arrogant.
I am embarrassed to be an American today. Not only for MM, but also for the divisive world we have created for ourselves and our inability to simply Shut The F**k Up.