May 21st, Oprah and Prince Harry's Docu-series "The Me You Can't See" is set to premiere on Apple TV Plus. Let's discuss...
Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce. And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before? which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away". That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice. But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance. Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei
Comments
All the BRF has to do is let JH open his mouth and talk. He has nothing new or interesting to say, just continues to moan about the horrid BRF upbringing and mental issues he has. ( a result of such a priveldged education opportunity and resources that he squandered)
JH has nothing else to offer, and everyone knows anyone out there associating with him on podcasts/ interviews/ appearances, that it’s for the ratings and money they are making off of him. every time JH exploits the BRF for a buck his true colors show.
and when JH talks enough he puts his foot into it or mis-speakss. ‘genetic’ instead of ‘generational ‘; while living in the US and afforded its first admendment, he says it’s ‘Bonkers’ hahahaa. JH makes himself the fool when he speaks. the more he speaks, the more he becomes the laughing stock... kinda sad. and the US media loves to build people up , just so they can rip them back down. his time will come, the BRF just needs to wait and not comment.
@JHanoi
That seems to be the problem.
Take his Dukedom away,
he will use Prince Henry of Wales,
and madam Princess...
The world is slowly turning.
Sean Hannity Fox News
mocking them, will get bigger.
Sit back and watch the rats
jump ship!!
Yes, three long years. Who would have thought they'd last so long? (not me). We might see a tasteful ;-) b&w,natch, photo of #6 & spouse,with their backs to us? Or maybe they'll humbly spend the day feeding the poor with photographer in tow.
If this were the First World War, it would be February 1918 already (I'm using the war as a nearly comparable timespan, not implying anything else.)
Is this the Beginning of the End, or the End of the Beginning, do you think? At the moment the TV networks must be doing quite well out of them. Let's hope they keep up their repetitions so the majority of the US public gets as heartily sick of them as we are.
Argh, @Maneki
We’ll see the usual retrieval
of old photos, maybe one of
Archie astride Harry, backs
turned to the world, as they hand
out twice bitten, oh why, sarnies?
I've been following the comments religiously and noticed how quickly things are turning around. It feels like things are happening at a faster pace than ever before.
It appears MM is pushing and pushing at a frentic pace now, with article after article about this or that. Yet not saying much at all. It makes me nervous as if something horrible is about to happen.
I almost can't keep up with the pace, lol. When H made his comment about the American Constitution, I was so confused. What could a English guy know of our Constitution? Specifically the First Amendment. I suppose since that Amendment is #1 and is written in the 1700's, there's no woke words so it's out of his range of thought. It's by far the simplest wording, but a very important one.
Even a child could comprehend what it means, that's how simply it was written. We American's are entitled to certain rights regarding our Freedom's. Yes, H, we have all these freedom's in which to express ourselves, including you who doesn't have a clue.
Then there's P&G, what in gods name are they doing with this company? They sell cleaning products, how on earth does that align with their purpose of compassion and woke mission?
As nervous as I feel watching this all unfolds is, I find hope finally with Sean Hannity finally blasting H. Telling him can leave the United States if he finds it not within his understanding. So much for woke!
I actually spent the hour reading the podcast with Dax Shepard, the most boring garbage I think I've ever read. If it was a book I would have trashed it immediately (and I never throw books away). Dax and his cohort Monica were there making money and H was there trying to be a expert, telling us all to be responsible with what we say. Huh? He the most irresponsible with his words, telling us to be careful? Has the world flipped upside down?
He again was allowed to throw a dig at his father and to add insult to injury throwing the Queen of the Commonwealth under the bus just weeks after burying her own husband. I think it's time the Queen becomes proactive in stopping her grandson, in what way I don't know, but the sooner the better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6pDMhcatSY&t=95s
Palace prepares to BATTLE Harry & Meg. What the Earl's Daughter just told me
Very interesting/fun watch.
The message I want to see on front pages tomorrow:
“Dear Harry,
Happy Anniversary. Three years ago today, you pledged a new oath to the troubled warlike non-self-sustaining kingdom of Meghan Dishsoap Markle. Oddly, your newest employer, P&G, was one of the first companies to sponsor television soap opera dramas like East Enders, and now here we are.
But, lo, We digress.
As One’s gift to you today, your third wedding anniversary, On has consulted one’s experts, and it appears to be that leather is the appropriate gift material. With this in mind, One is sending you a used horsewhip originally owned by your Aunt Anne. Remember her? Use it anyway you see it: self flagellation included.
One also seeks to “apply the strap” in further tokens of my feelings for you, and thus as of this moment as One’s pen touches paper here in England, you are no longer Duke and Duchess of Sussex, or anything Dumbarton, Fernbottom-Tickler, etc etc., nor Mountbatten-Windsor. All titles, honors, courtesies are stripped. You are hereby and forthwith to be known far and wide as Harry and Rachel F*ckwit, by special order of Oneself.
Additionally, all monies have been stopped and prior deposits from the Prince of Wales have been retroactively scooped back, as they say. The lease on your Montecito house has been revoked, and you have ten days before Piers Morgan moves in.
You are, needless to say, no longer a Counsellor of state. No tears: we nipped off your uncle Andrew, too. Both of you have been temporarily replaced by two of my favorite umbrellas from the 1960s, until One can swear in Mr Daniel Craig and Miss Adele.
Also, One should mention, you are no longer a prince, because Mr James Hewitt admits on tape with Mr Burrell that Poor Diana told him you were his. We used some of your DNA captured after your attempt to throttle Mrs Angela Kelly, and this parentage is confirmed. We thought you would like to know before Father’s Day, as it will be such a relief to find you are indeed just a normal bloke. Now you can take care of your true father, who had a heart attack a few years ago just like the father of Rachel. Enjoy your time together; it is never too late to pay a parent’s hospital bills. Naturally, you are still free to attend the unveiling of your late mother’s statue, but will be required to do so standing in a large locked lucite box we will roll to the perimeter of the festivities. I am told only a few small shrubs will impede your view.
Again, happy anniversary. I am sure One’s dear late husband, rock, and partner in all things, Philip, is laughing down from Heaven today upon you both, as this entire gift and this letter were set into motion by his own hand the week before his death. He asked that I add as a loving sign-off, my last as your former grandmother,
“Bon adventure, *itches, the documentary about Archie and the people you bought him from and the way the new baby is being shipped in from Chile will air tonight on ITV, Sky, and HBO. It is called Bumped Out, and features an extensive opening montage of Rachel’s feet. Ta now, tea awaits.”
Yours nevermore,
Elizabeth II, Queen of Worldwide Snares and Lashes
.
"Is this the Beginning of the End, or the End of the Beginning, do you think? At the moment the TV networks must be doing quite well out of them. Let's hope they keep up their repetitions so the majority of the US public gets as heartily sick of them as we are."
Millions of us are heartily sick of most media talking heads and have been.
Also, we do not have our first amendment rights here in the US anymore. Anyone who thinks this is clearly not paying attention.
Why not a glass of something stronger?
One uses “tea “ as One’s delightful obscure euphemism for One’s scrumptious drop of gin with Dubonnet. 👑🎩😌
Now, now, it’s just that the rights are held only by our betters: Oprah and Harry, Megs and Chrissy, Gates and Gayle. Their strident voices can guide us plebes, as we learn to labor in dutiful silence. I only wish I could hear Harry and Megs on a city sound system all day long. 🤩
Appreciate the humor.
I think the entire Nutty team here could form a stalwart phalanx around the royals and sort things out for the dear Queen with clear eyes, true purpose, and a stiff broom.
@Girl with a Hat,
😉
A professor once mentioned that dictators and bullies fear close-to-the-bone parody as much as they fear their enemy’s sword.
Wouldn't removing their titles cause them to loudly publicly complain to Gayle King, Oprah, and anyone else that will give them platform, that the RF is once again abusing them?
Most of us here will just roll our eyes and say "whatever" because we know he's throwing a tantrum because Big Daddy cut his allowance. Since the majority of Americans are self-made, we don't care about his cash flow problems buying plastic surgery and yak-hair wigs for the wife.
I still think while things were in the works for a while but i also see some of the complaining out of Monetcito as being a reaction to not getting their way. would love to know the inside scoop and just how much they have been cut off from everything.
He is now 44.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9591017/Meghan-Markles-childhood-sweetheart-praises-courageous-Duchess.html#comments
Unabashedly and campily gay, he claims to have highly placed sources for royal family info, including the daughter of an earl.
He claims that contrary to stony silence going on at BP, there is a lot of sturm und drang going on behind the scenes. He says (paraphrased) "Let's just say they are listening to what everyone is clamoring about regarding removing the titles. There are loopholes everywhere."
He goes on to discuss the P & G debacle, among other topics. Very interesting, and I find the guy absolutely fascinating, even if he turns out to be wrong.
Haven't checked out his channel yet, evidently his usual gig is this kind of soft-voiced play-acting designed to calm people's moods, there's a word for it which escapes me.
Anyway, about a half-hour watch.
Was scrolling through LSA and found this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6pDMhcatSY&t=95s
Palace prepares to BATTLE Harry & Meg. What the Earl's Daughter just told me
Very interesting/fun watch.
I looked for 20 seconds with no audio. This is some gay dude dressed like a female royal, who is now providing commentary on H/M and the BRF! (lol) After just one month he is getting 95 thousand views with a high of 270 thousand views. EVERYONE is jumping into the H/M commentary game. EVERYONE! can jump in to become a Royal Commentator.
You are golden if you can gain traction on your youtube channel, and this dude has. Undoubtedly he has monetized, so is getting some youtube/Google cash in the mail. In a good month he can make more money than Camilla Tominey who has been at it for just short of 20 years. Who is an excellent writer.
Yahoo News UK
'Royal pain in the a**': Backlash intensifies after Prince Harry calls US First Amendment 'bonkers'
Rebecca Taylor
·Royal Correspondent
5 hours ago
Prince Harry is facing a growing backlash in the US over his comments that the First Amendment is "bonkers".
Commentators in the US have called Harry a "pain in the a**" and asked the UK to "take him back" after he made the remark about the amendment which protects freedom of speech.
In a podcast with Dax Shepard Harry, 36, said: "I've got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.
"I don't want to start going down the First Amendment route because that's a huge subject and one which I don't understand because I've only been here a short time.
"But, you can find a loophole in anything.
"You can capitalise or exploit what's not said rather than uphold what is said."
’
The First Amendment, which opens the US's Bill of Rights, enshrines freedom of speech, religion, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly.
Sean Hannity, who anchors the third biggest evening news show in the US, launched into a tirade at the end of his programme on Monday night after hearing Harry's comments, calling him a "right royal pain in the a**".
He said: "Harry, we really don't need you coming from England to give us lectures on the First Amendment.
"And if you can't understand the importance of free expression and the importance of constitutional principles that allow for a free exchange of ideas and opinions that make America the greatest country on Earth, then maybe it's time for you to move to a place more compatible with your restrictive ideas.
"This is what public figures in America go through."
He added: "Understand this is the same First Amendment that allowed you and your wife to trash your own family in the Oprah Winfrey interview. You and Meghan were allowed to accuse your family of racism.
"We don't really need lectures about customs or sacred freedoms, and by the way you're free to go home, make amends at the Palace with the people that you and your wife hurt deeply."
Hannity is a conservative political commentator who was reportedly close to Donald Trump during his presidency, speaking to him on the phone several times a week.
Amber Athey, Washington editor of The Spectator US, told Good Morning Britain: "The UK is one of the top 10 exporters to the US – as an American, in the words of former president Donald Trump, you all are not sending your best.
"I would beg you, please take Prince Harry back."
To which I'd reply, `Not Pygmalion likely!'
Lady C CONDEMNS Harry 4 1st Amendment/Palace plan 2 remove titles/Gov't anti-woke/Euro royals anti.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhmgfRcbX7k
It is possible. I did not share with the group that my beloved FIL had a fall in the house, struck his head, and ended up in the ICU (intensive care unit) for three weeks before slipping into a coma. The hospital honored his last wishes and put him in an ambulance and brought him home so that he could pass peacefully there surrounded by friends and family and his wife.
About three weeks previous to the household accident, he had asked his immediate family to come visit and apparently had spoken with my son and others about contributing financially to the private nurses that allowed MIL to remain in her home (she is bed bound). He somehow knew death was approaching and his final act was to ensure that his beloved wife of over 70 years would be cared for in their home but didn't want it to be a financial burden for any one family member. Husband has been there for four weeks; he will be home for a couple of days as other family members (grandchildren) stay with her, then he will stay there until she, too, passes. While we hope and pray that will be a long time in the future, she has sustained such a blow by her beloved companion passing suddenly that we are worried that she will not be far behind him.
That was a long, drawn-out way to say that PP's final messages were probably of love for his children and grandchildren as well as admonishing them to take care of his beloved wife, their mother and grandmother. When one is dying, the unimportant things fall away. I would file Harry and Yak Hair in the very bottom of the unimportant trash bin, nestled in amongst used tissues and toenail clippings.
"Joshua Silverstein, I was 13," she said at the time. "It was at a summer camp, and I kissed him."
And where's that charity bookshop?
Naturally, you are still free to attend the unveiling of your late mother’s statue, but will be required to do so standing in a large locked lucite box we will roll to the perimeter of the festivities. I am told only a few small shrubs will impede your view.
@xxxx
EVERYONE! can jump in to become a Royal Commentator.
Yes, it’s become a sort of cottage industry, hasn’t it?
yes, I posted the story and link about her ex-bf at age 13 being 44 even though they met when they were the same age above.
I enjoyed the Faux Aristo's performance - beautifully observed mannerisms. I wonder who he is and whereabouts he stands in society?
And where's that charity bookshop?
_____
I know, I'd like to read just about every one of his choices :)
Did a semi-deep dive on River, couldn't find out much except a link to his channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHI8xE-za9g7lUu3JefJQ9Q/featured
@Lt Uhura,
yes, I posted the story and link about her ex-bf at age 13 being 44 even though they met when they were the same age above.
_____
Sorry for duplicate post then GWAH. Trying to work around surfing never really works out too well!
But yes, interesting. I've read so many innuendos about M's age, and now it appears it's out of her own mouth.
Does it say that HE was also 13 at the time? Or was he an older camper or junior camp counselor at the time?
I have no issue thinking she may well be older than stated, but I am not sure I understand what he stated his age was at the time.
He was quite public when the noise started about her being unkind to people who worked for her. He was all about how he didn't think she could/would do anything like that. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9425619/Meghan-Markles-childhood-sweetheart-believe-allegations-bullied-members-royal-staff.html
We know she was to have graduated from HS in 1999 (if the internet is correct).
His resume is that he, too, graduated in 1999. https://www.linkedin.com/in/joshuasilverstein/
and https://heightzone.com/joshua-silverstein-wikipedia-meghan-markle-ex-boyfriend-age-and-net-worth/
So that all jives.
Except where it doesn't. his dob https://biographydaily.com/2021/04/04/who-is-joshua-silverstein/ he would be 20ish when graduating from HS according to one of the links above?
What I also find interesting is that he doesn't talk about his association with her until the last 12 or so months. Up until then, it is all about his work.
It all comes off as frantically grabbing at toothpick sized slivers of anything they can to shore up their shaky platform.
Never mind - Did a quick check to catch up — in New York magazine’s the Cut, in 2016, he stated they were the same age, 13. Wow.
So will anything come of this if she, for example, used false birth date info in a marriage license?
I am so sorry to hear about the loss of your father-in-law and so touched to see your family rallying to fulfill his final wishes and concerns about your mother-in-law. I know he is smiling down on you! And you are so right- when you are looking at the end of your days, you are only concerned with the important things you need to say- and M&H would not be part of that.
So.....it is possible he was hired by SS and given a fake background (all American shy camp sweethearts) story to pop up and use to make the Markle seem like a normal teen girl instead of the seething plotting bossy teen we see in family videos, yes?
Perhaps the SS interns forget to square the age issues:
*He is older because he is a hired actor , or
*He is the same age because she is a liar with faked documents used for her faked persona
*He was at 18 at the time, because that’s MM—go for the counselor w some minor camp power
......@Lt, @GWaH
Never mind - Did a quick check to catch up — in New York magazine’s the Cut, in 2016, he stated they were the same age, 13. Wow.
So will anything come of this if she, for example, used false birth date info in a marriage license?
______
Good question ... I'm cynical enough to think nothing could come of it, M seems to be made of Teflon as far as her lies seem to go, but maybe enough you-tubers/bloggers/commentators will pick up on it. Here's hoping, anyway :)
@Lt: Is the word you're looking for, for soft calming noises, ASMR?
_____
Yes! That's it, thanks!
I hadn't heard of the movement before just recently. Doesn't sound like my kind of "thing," but if it helps some people, more power to them :)
as for marriage license - if she wasnt careful they could bounce it for an annulment.
Would the prospect of losing the titles, even if they are given the chance to save face, be enough to trigger an apoplectic fit in the wife? (I'd have little sympathy for her, in view of the reports of the effects of her behaviour on Prince Philip.)
Or is this the calm before battle?
I've given this some thought, and I've decided that Smeg mightn't care that much about losing the 'Duchess'. As has been discussed here frequently, Americans do not understand, nor do we care as such, about ranks of nobility, and your average Yank has no idea that a Duchess outranks a Marchioness or whatever. To us, raised on Disney films, and tales of real-life royalty such as Princess Grace of Monaco, a Princess rates only below a Queen in our eyes . . the understudy for the Top Job if one is married to the firstborn Prince, as Catherine is. For us, the addition of "Duchess" (which frankly sounds like a middle-aged and overdressed matron with jowls . . it just connotes 'fat' somehow by the sound) just complicates matters. We don't know our 'Serene Highnesses' from our 'Her Royal Highnesses'. To us, all Princesses are Royal and equivalent in standing.
This is what Mrs. Thing #6 is banking upon, I can guarantee it. Strip off the 'Duchess of Sussex' . . and she is still Princess Henry of Wales, or in the common (if totally wrong) parlance, 'Princess Meghan of Wales'. As long as her husband wears the title of 'Prince', she will always be able to milk herself as a Princess of Wales here Stateside. She will brand herself 'The Duchess of Sussex' for as long as she can get away with, but even in the unlikely event that it's removed, she's always got Princess Meghan to fall upon. Without HRH or indeed, residence in Britain, 'Princess' is pretty meaningless. American women can and do routinely christen their daughters and miniature poodles and maybe even their cars "Princess". If Her Majesty has no proprietary ownership of the word Royal, that goes equally for Princess. Megatron and Hazard are a Prince and Princess without a kingdom except in their own delusional minds, but I don't think they could be prevented from calling themselves that. Or . . it could be said that they have achieved such notoriety and name recognition for their first names alone that they have passed into an elite club: Marilyn. Evita. Madonna. Bono. Prince (the Artist Formerly Known As). Gaga. Adele. OPRAH. No last names or titles needed. They could still graft and grift here as 'Harry and Meghan', sad to say. In sum, they have honed in on their target market well because they have plonked themselves down in the place most likely to not even notice the titles have gone, if they do. Three years after their marriage, even if they'd never caused this terrible rift in the Royal family nor ever left the UK, they would still be much more identifiable here as "Harry and Meghan" rather than as 'HRHs Duke and Duchess of Sussex'. That's an unwieldy mouthful which Americans have never embraced, to be honest. Diana is, after all this time, Diana. And Charles is instantly recognizable as just 'Charles'. 'The Prince of Wales' is a complete afterthought here.
I think *Harry* (he of the 'Just Call Me Harry' schtick would squawk if people were really forced to call him Just Harry on account of Granny stripping every other title. Right now he can be magnanimous and pretend that he's 'just like one of us' and go by JH without ceremony. That is a boon in his gift to extend, see. Look at all the grand titles he's eschewing, such a down to earth bloke!!! But how loud do we suppose the whining will get if Granny takes those away just like she did his Captain General Royal Marines?
Wouldn't removing their titles cause them to loudly publicly complain to Gayle King, Oprah, and anyone else that will give them platform, that the RF is once again abusing them?
I'm sure, probably. Not because M cares that much about not being called 'Duchess'. (She'd much rather have an excuse to market herself as 'Meghan, Princess of Wales'--Haz would care much more, in my opinion--but taking the titles away would represent for them, yes, yet another instance of abusive unfairness and racism, no doubt, on the part of Harry's family. Granny took a lot of wind out of their sails when they shot down 'Sussex Royal', and the whole Sussex title/merching scheme had to be scrapped. They are desperate to retain *access* and its attendant $$$$, not the titles in and of themselves. For H this will be an identity crisis, since he was HRH Prince from the time he was conceived. He's shat all over his heritage, but I find it hard to believe that he's really so keen to divest himself of being known as HRH Prince Harry of Wales, Queen's favorite grandson. Being The Duke is another notch in the cap and mark of equivalency with his brother the future monarch, so I think he will resist its removal. Anything to whine about on video in order to generate more pity-party victim narrative.
I think it's a moot point because Granny does not have the stomach to do it, and I think Charles will retain the status quo viz. the titles for his troublesome younger born and YB's grifting bunt. The main thing from Charles's view is that these two not be subsidized by the Crown any more in any form, or be given privileges afforded to working royals. This way he can keep his stripped down monarchy promise. As long as H and wife aren't abusing the coffers or getting prance on the balcony, titles are free. Leaving them makes the RF look magnanimous. Stripping them off makes them look petty. H and M excel at 'petty' so we haven't heard the last of this, I'm sure.
@JHanoi,
I’m of a different opinion. I don't think the BRF should necessarily remove their titles, and isn't JH a ‘blood’ Prince regardless if the Duchies are dropped?
All the BRF has to do is let JH open his mouth and talk. He has nothing new or interesting to say, just continues to moan about the horrid BRF upbringing and mental issues he has. ( a result of such a privileged education opportunity and resources that he squandered)
For a variety of reasons I have outlined above, I agree. I would certainly chortle if HM did remove those titles, but I have stopped expecting this. HM does not have the stomach for it and it would engender a petty fight that would drag the RF down to the sewer level where the Harkles are so happy to wallow. The Duke and Duchess of Windsor retained their titles and styles in exile, despite a far greater injury to the Crown, it could be argued. They are merely face-saving decoration without the access to the Royal circles and funds and privileges which the Harkles were obviously counting on keeping.
When William ascends, s#$% might change. Something for us to look forward to. :p
In the interview, he mentions he doesn't know how to save his kid(s) from all such future trauma he lived through?
Well that would do it, wouldn't it? No forced lessons about the Domesday book, War of Roses, who were the wives of Henry VIII, Queen Victoria and her children's marriages changing the then known world and how to do the wave.
Marriage fraud? That is an interesting legal twist. Oh my. And that would extend to lots of other legal documents - from passports, birth certs, applications for citizenship and a bank account to think up a few.
Lovely picture of Katherine by the way. I coveted the necklace.
Blogger Snarkyatherbest said...
AnT - or the interns assigned to her are fed up with her crap and let the slip they were both 13 and hes now 43 get by to show her true age (although i could see her angling for a camp counselor if she could get something from him)
as for marriage license - if she wasnt careful they could bounce it for an annulment.
I've wondered frequently about her *real* age just because of her facial skin. Granted, that bronzer is going to settle into every little crack and crevice and accentuate them.
So, she's frantically trying to look younger than Harry?
I know we've been here before but -
I'm sure there's more than enough evidence to show that their intention with the marriage was not to make a true marriage relationship. It other words, it was what the law calls a sham marriage.
A fraudulent marriage is where one partner sets out to defraud the other - fibs are often told about ages at marriage.
Documents show my own grandfather knocked a couple of years off his age when he married Grandma, his second wife 17 years his junior. In a sense, he defrauded her as he died earlier than might have been expected, leaving her with 3 small daughters and another child on the way. Nobody knew this until I dug into official BMD records and census returns before and after his marriage.
In the 6s' case, they set out to defraud a nation and its authorities, like false marriages conducted in hope of residence & employment rights.
As One’s gift to you today, your third wedding anniversary, On has consulted one’s experts, and it appears to be that leather is the appropriate gift material. With this in mind, One is sending you a used horsewhip originally owned by your Aunt Anne. Remember her? Use it anyway you see it: self flagellation included.
One also seeks to “apply the strap” in further tokens of my feelings for you, and thus as of this moment as One’s pen touches paper here in England, you are no longer Duke and Duchess of Sussex, or anything Dumbarton, Fernbottom-Tickler, etc etc., nor Mountbatten-Windsor. All titles, honors, courtesies are stripped. You are hereby and forthwith to be known far and wide as Harry and Rachel F*ckwit, by special order of Oneself.
All the lattes and the keys to the pastry cabinet for the above. I laughed myself silly.
Granted, I've been sailing past Harkle mentions when possible, but I haven't seen a peep mentioned about their anniversary tomorrow. ? It must be getting harder and harder for them to pretend that they are still a 'young couple of expectant parents in love'. My theory, previously stated, is that this was a transactional/blackmail arrangement from the off. Like many a marriage undertaken for ulterior motives (immigration status/money/profile, etc.) they are married on paper and for show/promotion. Do they reside together in Montecito? who knows? Does M have 'special friends'? Does he? I rule nothing out--except that they are happily ensconced in domestic bliss in their $11 million dollar mansion in Monetecito, breathlessly awaiting the arrival of their second completely normal biological baby. Let's see if they even remember to trumpet their own blissful happiness tomorrow, shall we?
@Hikari: Your theory is intriguing; however, #6 is a dumb as a box of rocks, always screws up the message because he can't remember all the lines he's suppose to say, so at some point I think he'd slip, and give something away. Or maybe not. #6 might be so focused on keeping hidden his perverted life, that it's the only thing he won't mess up when delivering his lines.
Let's hope he screws up the message.
We never know what's going on with people. Some relationships just don't up add up, Kim and Kanye; Pryanka and Joe; and then there's the secretly extremely perverted Bill Gates hiding behind his philanthropy.
It is possible. I did not share with the group that my beloved FIL had a fall in the house, struck his head, and ended up in the ICU (intensive care unit) for three weeks before slipping into a coma
I don't know your/FILs circumstances. Falls are fatal to the elderly. The hang on for a year or two but it kills their morale. So you know what happens. Besides all else you can think of doing, put in grab bars in the bathroom. My father's shower (only a very nice tiled shower stall, no bath) (he preferred this to baths) had two grab bars installed so that he could stabilize with both hands. They were six feet apart. He liked long hot showers. I also had three more installed at--
-- One By the front door entrance so he could reliably heave himself up this large step. This ability to stabilize and heave up was invaluable.
-- In both bathrooms right by the toilet so he could help lift himself up
So a total of five grab bars in his house where lived to a good old age. He was never in a "care home" which I am proud of. I lived close by enough to closely monitor him. My siblings cared very much, they visited, but lived in other states. He lived in his last house 30 years. Every weekday he hopped onto a so called short bus, to go the local senior care facility (owned and run by our religion) for 6 hours to mingle and eat lunch.
Grab bars!
Grab bars!
Grab bars!
Best part is he only thanked me once for all the grab bars. It was my duty and love to have them installed.
Wouldn't removing their titles cause them to loudly publicly complain to Gayle King, Oprah, and anyone else that will give them platform, that the RF is once again abusing them?
-----------------
It would but did you read my post this morning at 10.59 am? I said that
"If, in fact, the Palace told the 6s to relinquish their titles (and H's place of succession) but will let the 6s present it as their idea, it would be a masterstroke: this would allow the 6s to look gracious (well, a bit more) and would stop them whingeing that they were cruelly treated by the Palace, totally abandoned etc."
If it appears #6 & spouse renounced their titles voluntarily - in reality jumping before being pushed - then they can hardly complain without sounding stupid. They might say they were leaned on but would anybody care?
Vitamin D supplementation reduces falls in the elderly by 60%. This is not due to stronger bones, but due to some effect that scientists haven't found yet.
Secondly, make the elderly do some basic weight training exercises to improve their ankle strength.
Thirdly, make the elderly do some balance and falling exercises. It sounds crazy but it really works.
Finally, there are some types of "air bags" that the elderly can wear to cushion them in case of falls.
This is an example although it's a bike helmet. It is available commercially and it is quite effective. In France, they have these air bags for hip fractures. I am working at the moment so cannot do more extensive research for a better link so this all I can give you.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3821181/Would-wear-INFLATABLE-bike-helmet-Airbag-six-times-better-absorbing-impacts-foam.html
Another commenter said: Better yet, give them the title of Earl of Dumbarton's Parents. :D
DAN WOOTTON: Insiders fear Harry's renewed criticism of Charles has put reunion with 'horrified' William to honour their mother Diana at risk
Harry's recent pronouncements during the interview with US star Dax Shepard appear to break an agreement made by the brothers to no longer speak publicly about the loss of their mother.
When both brothers contributed to a high profile ITV documentary about Princess Diana on the 20th anniversary of her death in 2017, William believed they had pledged not to talk about their mother again.
Speaking on behalf of his brother, he said in the documentary: 'We won't be doing this again – we won't speak as openly or publicly about her again, because we feel hopefully this film will provide the other side from close family friends you might not have heard before, from those who knew her best and from those who want to protect her memory, and want to remind people of the person that she was.'
These two websites have his age at 44, born 29 November 1977
https://celebpie.com/joshua-silverstein-wikipedia/
https://www.tvguidetime.com/celebs/joshua-silverstein-height-weight-net-worth-age-birthday-wikipedia-who-nationality-biography-85561.html
However:
This states he is 39:
https://heightzone.com/joshua-silverstein-wikipedia-meghan-markle-ex-boyfriend-age-and-net-worth/
The Express has an article about Lorraine Kelly quizzing 'Meghan Markle’s first boyfriend Joshua Silverstein, 39'
So is it 1977 or 1981?
@Fifi LaRue,
Lol! Thank you, One simply couldn’t resist a missive to the lovely young couple. I hear tomorrow they will celebrate by smashing plates for luck and engaging in the Screaming Dance.
So.....it occurs to me they cant really celebrate their anniversary tomorrow since Megsy was videotaped and shown to the world stating g they were married three days earlier, I suppose May 16.
But..... They could not throw black and white confetti on the 16th because Archbishop Wobblyethics denied it happened!
....and they cannot blow up black balloons tomorrow as Megsy smirked and said they were married earlier. So they are stuck now, limited to the arrival of the Chilean Baby Diana, and Harry’s massive “Weeping fury” speech at the statue of Diana (who shall be depicted holding a little stone Harrods bag, perhaps).
M is probably fuming over this self-foiled missed opportunity and will instead release articles about how Trevor’s abuse left her not trusting and fearful and mentally damaged until she met the Toronto hockey team a week later, and then Corey, and then 31 older middle eastern oil billionaires and then finally, as she stood in a grocery store aisle while picking up more oil for a SoHo party, Harry.
Oh we will see a still unseen pic from a wedding. maybe she will have she and harry reenact the garden vows but we only see them from the back. And we will see a pointy mitre suggesting wobblyethics (I love that name) was in fact there, when in fact during the reenactment, marcus plays the dear bishop. lots of photoshopping and of course in black and white.
Am i the only one wondering about this? I'm in the US so maybe those in England feel differently?
If they actually removed the titles, he would not lose Prince unless he voluntarily relinquished it as he is a blood prince as mentioned earlier. I don't think they can force him to give it up. And she, of course, could be Princess Henry/Harry which she would just switch it to Princess M. But i don't think she wants to be called Princess (or she'd be doing it already).
Here are all solutions for falls in the elderly:
Vitamin D supplementation reduces falls in the elderly by 60%. This is not due to stronger bones, but due to some effect that scientists haven't found yet.
Vitamn D has been so neglected prior to Covid-19. It is so good for so many things that it must help with balance-stability in the elderly.
Will elderly put on helmets and hip bags? They might be too proud. But these are very simple items that can years of happiness.
Just me thinking out loud (or in print). The Diana statue. What is the point of it? Why was it commissioned and being erected? Is this just a sentimental thing for W & H? How did the idea come up? Did they just have leftover money from some charity account? I guess i just don't see the point of it.
My guess this has been in the planning for years. Too many grey men and the British public are involved to stop this now or even two years ago. This Diana statue has a huge constituency. This is a modest statue in a modest location so nothing wrong with this. I know, modest is the opposite of the D&D of Montecito. So let these two grasping fools zoom it in from their backyard grass which takes thousands to irrigate each month. No wonder they cry poor.
it isn't a helmet unless the person falls. It's like a collar that you wear around your neck and it inflates into a helmet if it detects sudden motion, like an air bag. It's great for bikers who don't want to ruin their hair with a helmet and it is very effective. The cost for such a device is 400 Euros but it can save so much more in health care both for an individual and the state sponsored health care systems.
Our society has accepted that getting old means getting frail, but there are so many things one can do to improve our health as we get older. Simple weight lifting exercises, balance exercises, etc can really improve your quality of life for many years.
Diana Statue - does make sense to do. She was well loved by a lot and they are already talking about a statue for prince phililp
Whole nother issue - someone on tumblr was saying the house was listed again? hmmmmmm
Again, thanks
"Just me thinking out loud (or in print). The Diana statue. What is the point of it? Why was it commissioned and being erected? Is this just a sentimental thing for W & H? How did the idea come up? Did they just have leftover money from some charity account? I guess i just don't see the point of it."
In some ways, I don't really see the point of it either. But the expensive ankle-breaker/head cracker water memorial in Hyde Park was pretty disastrous.
It's been reported the Queen supports W&H's desire to do this. But it's Will and Harry's deal, not a RF effort. And I wouldn't expect any of the RF to attend other than W&H and whoever comes from their immediate families. I'd think the fund-raisers would come too.
It's not being paid for with leftover money. Donations from the public were sought. Diana's sister Sarah chaired the committee. The idea of the statue was announced early in 2017, the year of the 20th anniversary of her death. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38785218.amp
That's the year we had back to back Diana specials all summer. ("The summer of Diana") The statue was supposed to be finished a few years ago. But the artist was sent back to the drawing board a few times. (And some of Diana's friends reportedly thought it would be a challenge to capture her in stone--& I agree.)
All I could think of was: apparently recollections have varied.
Hollywood is a young person's game and old person is not as considered or thought of as the key target markets. Shaving off years is not unheard of I suspect in the same way inches are sometimes added to listed height.
Just had to run to the grocery store for something and in the check-out line magazine rack, there was a stack of big thick oversized glossy magazines in a special black clamp rack, with the duo beaming on the dark black cover with her hands gripping his grey-suited arm and hand above her bare knees (she in a nondescript black dress and messy bun) ...and these words above them:
Special Los Angeles TImes Edition
HARRY & MEGHAN (in giant yellow type)
THEIR AMERICAN LIFE
A royal aura.
A special love.
Their own path.
I asked the checkout clerk if they’d sold any. She (African American, about 40, we’ve chatted for a few years now about gossip mags and jewelry) replied —“who’s crazy enough to pay $15 for that? They’re both bad to their families. She threw away the royal crown! Who does that? For what? they’re both crazy.”
🙁🙁🙁🙁
Oh no —- one of the Queen’s new puppies, Fergus, died over the weekend somehow! He was only 5 months old. Aghhh.
“The Queen is said to be devastated” — article in the Sun just now.
Hasn’t this poor woman gone through enough? And god, the poor sweet puppy. What could have happened? Heartbreaking. 😢
One commenter: The other four say they should lose their heads.
I tell you, each day springs one or two new articles which are pointing out them as the problem right and left.
RE Markle's age - there are so many whispers about her lying that it's hard not to assume she did at some point. And I'm a firm believer of 'where there is smoke there is fire'.
But around the time Samantha's book came out folks on Twitter were asking her about the age rumors and Sam stated emphatically that Meghan was born in 1981. She lived with Thomas and Doria at the time and would certainly know when her sister arrived. Also Ninaki Priddy who went through school with MM was also born in 1981.
Poor poor Markle is going to turn 40 soon! I bet that will not be a happy birthday for the vain one!
_____
But the Joshua person (and M herself in a Larry King interview) says he was 13, which would have made M about 8 or 9 for the "first kiss."
Procter & Gamble/Archewell ~ Why The Royal Warrant Must Be Removed
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2021/05/18/procter-gamble-archewell-why-the-royal-warrant-must-be-removed/
@JennS,
The 2916 online article from New York magazine’s The Cut has extensive quotes from the guy, stating clearly he and she were both 13 or 14 at the time, he says “the same age” and also that is wasn’t his first kiss so he doesn’t remember it, just that she approached him.
I will supply the link shortly, can’t do it on my iPad.
@Hikari,
She lied. There were P&G dish soap ads from 1989 and 1990 that featured men washing dishes and discussing the soap. So, minimum of three years before “11 year old Meghan wrote a letter”.
The Ivory ads never used that kind of tagline or banter in the 80s or 90s. Not even in the 1950s. They focused on the gentleness of the soap to the skin, Or gentle for younger looking, while cleaning well.
I will provide links to some ads 1980s to 1993. Including the 1989 ad of men washing dishes.
A company like P&G doesn’t flip around useless fluff tag lines (Women across America) or switch thrusts from month to month. They didn’t become huge saying useless things. Their goal is to impact the consumer to purchase by driving with a consistent useful message of function.
Meghan, to my mind, is a fully invented creature built by someone or some group since a young age on fabrication and lies. Why was she the one filmed for Nickelodeon? Why did she, a nothing, speak before the UN? Why has no journalist checked the simple facts to prove her claims wrong, by the vaunted fact checkers of Snopes etc?
Why did PR firms shove an untalented, unpleasant woman up a ladder? Why did Markus find her so valuable?
She is an invented creature, financed on a mission.
I will post the links as soon as I am back to my laptop.
Regarding M being born in 1981: you are assuming Sam isn’t in on whatever this Meghan scam is.
Perfect really: the loud distracting disabled half-sister no one sees, telling the world stories that make Megs more and more talked about. The anger!
So, when Sam says something in Megs’ favor, my goodness, we swallow it whole. It must be true, since Sam dislikes her!
Good cop, bad cop games. Distracting us along the way.
Why the f*ck would you be watching cable tv in your private school classroom??
Yes, ages are elastic in Hollywood and I personally don’t care what someone’s age is in real life either.
I don’t care if she is 50, and Harry 30 if they were just a happy couple in love.
For Megs in this instance, however, her age matters in relation to establishing the truth about her main claim to fame (the childhood letter, and fabrication around the LA political climate, and her letter to a Hilary who wasn’t yet First Lady). It can also possibly affect the legality of her marriage certificate. It might be why she didn’t get her SAG card (choosing not to supply DOB).
I look at now it as part of the ever-shifting, puzzle of the development of the character known as Meghan Markle.
Yes, I am sorry that comment for for you after reading your excellent multiple posts on the subject.
I started a quick note to Hikari and erased it to address more fully later in a different post, but I accidentally left her name. Apologies to you both for any confusion!
https://youtu.be/fR5hYsFmbwI
Here is the longest surviving snippet I can find on YouTube regarding the dish soap project in Meg’s sixth grade class. I would testify in court that a couple of years ago, a significantly longer segment was available in which host Linda Ellerbe sat with Megan and a couple of other little girls and ask them all questions. I also distinctly remember comment comment From the social studies teacher describing how writing letters to companies was a classroom assignment for all pupils as part of a unit on how media advertising influences societal attitudes. The footage of the class which nickelodeon shot was obviously a recreation of them watching TV commercials for this purpose. Meg May have chosen PNG Ivory clear soap as her let her writing project, but what is glossed over in the segments that survive is that the entire class was assigned to pick a commercial for their project. The idea to become a dish soap activist did not strike our little Megsie like a bolt from the blue off her own bat As she sat at home, egged on by her wise father.
Even what she reports some of the boys saying about women belong in the kitchen and how that hurt her feelings is nonsensical unless it’s taken in the context of them joking around after having been instructed by their teacher to listen to advertising with the intent of looking for gender bias. This was 1992; Working mothers were commonplace, and it’s pretty darn unlikely from my point of you that 11-year-old boys would be expressing chauvinistic attitudes like that without any prompting whatsoever. In the context of a larger assignment where the whole class has been asked to consider whether they thought it was true that women belong in the kitchen based on product advertising, it is Understandable. In this Nick interview, while M is the featured pupil, based on her letter having been successful, along with a screenshot of the hand writing of which she is so proud, the whole class was interviewed for this piece not just her. Nor at this juncture is there any mention of her writing to famous feminist figures for their atta girls. That embroidery came later, when she was eyeballing this childhood incident as the centerpiece of her resume to become a humanitarian speaker and princess candidate.
Impossible to say from this short clip what the dynamics with her classmates truly were, but she comes across as sullen and full of herself even then. I’m sure this interview and all the juvenile yeah it’s a double edge sword for Markle, because on the one hand this is her early claim to fame… Her first media appearance, Held up by the adults as a special advanced child. But it’s also very obvious just how many hundreds of thousands, probably edging into the millions of dollars she has spent to do what she could to obliterate her natural looks. If she’d never learned how to climb onto dim men with money, She would’ve remained a Chubby nappy headed little troll. I doubt anybody back then ever pegged her for a show business career, even as a briefcase girl.
Megs told something other than the truth in her quest for fame. You'll notice that the following P&G ads are not showing the "little helpless lady" Megs seems to have created for her story about writing a letter to "change" the "sexist" P&G. But no one checked.
EVIDENCE:
(1)
A 1989 P&G tv ad for Dawn dish detergent, featuring a cast of several MEN, two years before Megs' "letter" about Ivory dish liquid:
1989 Dawn Dishsoap - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvrU2EaHPBs
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-E6frRu7uko
-----------------------
(2)
Another P&G Dawn dish soap commercial (1992), again starring a man washing dishes - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeMeCh_ku48
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KeMeCh_ku48
-----------------------
(3)
P&G IVORY ADS FROM THE 80s/90s; Subject is function of the product, as always: soft skin, doesn't roughen your hands while cleaning; younger-looking hands:
Ivory dish liquid commercial (1982) - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UryttbOCUF0
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UryttbOCUF0
(4)
Ivory Dish Soap Commercial 1991 - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSio1gDK31k
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zSio1gDK31k
(5)
Ivory Soap Bar commercial, 1991 (Are these the downtrodden 1950s ladies Megs created in her mind? Nope. Same brand.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6X1cdVoqWw
------------------------
(6)
TWO MEN COMMENT ON WHY THEY WILL BE USING THE NEW 1991 IVORY DISH LIQUID FORMULA IN THIS 1991 Newspaper article: I don't think they heard of Rachel Markle's school paper.
NEW IVORY DISHWASHING LIQUID IS CLEARLY BETTER - Deseret News
https://www.deseret.com/1991/11/5/18950039/new-ivory-dishwashing-liquid-is-clearly-better
Finally --
1950''s Ivory Liquid Tv ad: results, softer skin, gentler on hands:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH2hN-glO5g
AND
1993 Ivory - YouTube. -- you will notice the same skin results theme as ever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSio1gDK31k
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeL45p3DRS8
Meghan Markle’s First Kiss Joshua Silverstein Speaks Out
https://www.thecut.com/2018/03/meghan-markle-first-kiss-joshua-silverstein.html
Content: [THEY WERE THE SAME AGE, per JOSHUA]:
Although it was frankly rude of him to make us all wait for so long, Joshua Silverstein, the man Meghan Markle identified as her first kiss, finally broke his silence about the soon-to-be royal on Wednesday in an exclusive interview with (what else) the Daily Mail.
Markle dished about her first kiss in a 2013 interview with Larry King, long before she even met Prince Harry — you know, back when she starred on Suits, ran a lifestyle blog, and lived in the majestic oasis of Toronto, Canada. King asked Markle and co-star Patrick J. Adams if they remembered their first kisses, and she told him that hers was with Joshua Silverstein in her hometown of Los Angeles.
“I was 13. It was at like a summer camp, and I kissed him,” Markle says in the video below (around the 22:34 mark). She also said she had no idea what Silverstein was up to now.
As it does, the Daily Mail tracked down Silverstein, a comedian, actor, and rapper who stars on the celebrity rap battle TV show “Drop the Mic.” Silverstein, 36, is now a married father-of-two, and rightfully only had nice things to say about his time with Markle:
“We were together every day, we spoke on the phone a lot, we held hands and shared kisses. Meghan and I are the same age so, I know I was about 13 or 14. I obviously don’t remember ‘the kiss’ — but I do know that I was the first guy she kissed. She was a nice, kind, sweet girl.”
Silverstein explained that he and Markle attended the same theater summer camp at their local Agape Spiritual Church in 1993, which is where their relationship blossomed. They starred in a play together — Silverstein told the Daily Mail that Markle stole the show — but their relationship fizzled out when camp was over. Still, Silverstein said he was “excited” for her upcoming wedding.
“To be a person to grow up in LA, no ties with the royal family, or anything across the pond, to marry into it, that’s exciting. I’m happy for her. She’s very smart, got a good head on her shoulders, can handle herself, so she’s going to have a fun ride. I’m very happy to hear that it seems like all her dreams are coming true. It’s nice to know that someone from my past is doing so well.’
Excellent research, finding that link, and I think your comment about the whole dish soap episode is spot on.
This in particular -- because all the 80s and 90s tv ad YouTube links I posted above show strong women and men doing dishes -- is perfect and lucid and true. You wrote:
This was 1992; Working mothers were commonplace, and it’s pretty darn unlikely from my point of you that 11-year-old boys would be expressing chauvinistic attitudes like that without any prompting whatsoever. In the context of a larger assignment where the whole class has been asked to consider whether they thought it was true that women belong in the kitchen based on product advertising, it is Understandable. In this Nick interview, while M is the featured pupil, based on her letter having been successful, along with a screenshot of the hand writing of which she is so proud, the whole class was interviewed for this piece not just her. Nor at this juncture is there any mention of her writing to famous feminist figures for their atta girls. That embroidery came later,...
With a birthday falling in August, M Would have been one of the youngest in her grade. If this project was done in the sixth grade, her last year at little red school house before starting at immaculate heart in seventh grade, she would have been 11 years old for the entirety of her sixth grade year. I think this unit in social studies would’ve taken some time to complete, especially if the kids had to wait for answers from the companies they had written to. This would’ve been all conducted via snail mail so there would’ve been a lengthy wait for the replies. This seems like rather in advanced assignment, so if it was done early in the second semester, the Nick piece was probably shot in the latter part of the school year. By the time it was edited and actually aired on the network, it was probably in the fall of that year, by which time she would have been 12 And they referred to her by the age she was at the time of airing, Not the age she was when she wrote the letter. At most, she was probably 12 for a month or two by the time the segment actually played on TV. This would seem to lend credence to her official birth year being 1981, not four years earlier. By the end of the sixth grade nearly all of M’s classmates would’ve already been 12. She may have been sensitive about being the youngest in her class and told the TV people that she was nearly 12, and that’s what they put in. She’s fudged the truth way worse since then. Far more egregious is The abiding impression that has been allowed to stand that she was the only Student who wrote a letter of this type, and that to do so was entirely her own original idea. Not true on either account. There may have been other students who got positive replies to their letters, But we will never know about it.
Nickelodeon has a lot to answer for. Without this inflated brick in her arsenal of “humanitarian activism from an early age” would she have gotten as much mileage as she has? Debatable. And now she’s invoking her history with P and G again for personal gain. It makes me ill.
Great info finds, and I just watched the more extensive Nick link you provided.
Another fascinating case of her keeping a copy of a letter, lol, and working to make it public.
Nickelodeon has a lot to answer for. Without this inflated brick in her arsenal of “humanitarian activism from an early age” would she have gotten as much mileage as she has? Debatable.
And -- why her, why was she chosen, how did Nickelodeon hear about this story, and find her and focus on her? Was this her dad's tv connections? So, would that mean her greatest claim to fame, in addition to being a class project, was due to the father she threw aside?
Prince Harry Demands Meghan Markle Be
Officially Part Of His Mother Princess Diana's
60th Birthday Tribute Or He Won't Show
“Harry is demanding the Meghan be part of the official ceremony. She will not be able to attend in person because of the couple's second child, but Harry is pushing to have comments prepared by Meghan included in the event or a video message featuring his wife released to the media the same day the brothers unveil the statue,” sources tell Radar.
https://radaronline.com/p/prince-harry-meghan-markle-princess-diana-60-birthday-tribute/
Queen is left 'devastated' after five-week old Dorgi puppy 'gifted by Prince Andrew to keep his mother company while Philip was in hospital' dies
Get two more Corgis but have your top Grey Man find them this time. Ha - I'll bet Queen has already been flooded by UK Corgi donating breeders. That want their doggies to be Queen and Royal adjacent.
And tell your Greys to install grab bars all over, if you have not done so already.
The man started weight lifting when he was 87 and started running at 90 and found that the improvements to his health were tremendous. He also found that all the ladies his age found him irresistible
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/apr/02/i-am-a-90-year-old-bodybuilder
He said: 'At 85 I had a crisis. I looked at myself in the mirror, and saw an old man. I was overweight, my posture was terrible and there was skin hanging off me. I looked like a wreck'
He's the one who inspired me to get more involved in my fitness and to try to improve certain things that most people give up on as they age, like posture, fitness, etc
The fluidity of years with child Markle....
If we assume Tv show lighting director Daddy arranged this magical Nickelodeon focus on his sullen spoiled kid, then it was probably easy to draft in a couple of tv-ready hopeful LA classmates or neighbor kids to take part in the child Markle tv clambake.
I am always struck by how “over it” the girls sitting beside her look. They thought they were going to get better roles.
Haha! The child Markle TV clambake!
This is incredibly naïve of me, but it hadn’t occurred to me until now to what degree Thomas might have influenced nickelodeon’s choice of featuring his little starlet front and center like that, laborious penmanship and all. It can’t be a complete coincidence that and otherwise charmless and unphotogenic little swot was given the starring role in the class production when she just happened to have a father in the TV business. It’s seeming kind of likely that nickelodeon who is owned by the same media conglomerate That produced “married with children”.
For that matter, what proof do we have that this collection of children was even Markle's real class? they could’ve been all child actors straight from central casting who turned out for a half day of shooting in exchange for a United States savings bond toward their college educations and an ice cream party. The way the two little girls flanking Markle are sitting, it doesn’t seem like either one of them is too keen to be that close to her. as far as the disparity of the year, 1992, 1993…I’m going with the filming happening prior to summer vacation of the sixth grade year. granted it’s LA and warm for most of the year, but Markel and some of the other students are wearing shorts, so I figured this was probably shot at the end of the school year, but didnt air until six months or so later when it had flipped over to 1993, not that they reassembled the class all those months later. Maybe it was in the can and they just didn’t use it right away. There might have been legal clearances to get that took time.
When MarKle was married to Trevor, she Was extremely persistent In hounding him to get her acting roles. I’m thinking she honed thar skill early & pestered her father to do the same, even though he was on the technical side and had no control over casting. Thomas moved heaven and earth to get his princess whatever she wanted, so maybe he pulled some strings here. She’s always made it a point to insert her father into this story As the inspiration and cheerleader for the whole thing, not the elusive Doria who would have been more personally affected by chauvinist advertising. Maybe there’s a reason for this, As we know Maggie doesn’t do gratitude. Is it invoking Thomas in the story supposed to be a not so subtle reminder for him to keep his mouth shut over the truth behind this dish soap saga?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9591017/Meghan-Markles-childhood-sweetheart-praises-courageous-Duchess.html
Another puppet?
I'll post it.
• Joshua Silverstein met Meghan Markle at summer camp when they were 13
• The pair had a summer romance which fizzled shortly after
• Their mothers attended the same church and he was kept updated on her life
• Appeared on Lorraine today and praised Meghan for handling criticism 'well'
• Branded Meghan 'courageous' for speaking out about 'history of racism' in royal family
By CHLOE MORGAN FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 10:39, 18 May 2021 | UPDATED: 14:07, 18 May 2021
Meghan Markle's childhood sweetheart has been slammed after he claimed the Royal Family has been 'racist for centuries.'
Joshua Silverstein, a Los Angeles-based actor, who was the royal's first kiss, aged 13, and dated her throughout that summer, appeared on ITV's Lorraine today and praised the 'courageous' Duchess for speaking out during the bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview - despite knowing it would 'create tension.'
Silverstein, now a married father of two, appeared via video link and told the Scottish presenter: 'Meghan did Oprah and was very honest and transparent with her experiences in the royal family.
'There's a history of racism within the royal family that goes way back to the transatlantic slave trade. The fact Meghan is able to get on TV and bravely talk about that is awesome.'
He continued: 'Whenever people of colour speak out against oppression and racism, genuinely there's a huge backlash so the fact she got up and spoke about that even knowing it could create a lot of tension between her and her family, I thought that was really courageous on her part.'
However, those who tuned in were left outraged by the claim, with one writing: 'Why have you just allowed somebody on your show to say that The British Royal Family are institutionally racist without asking him to back that up with facts?'
Another commented: 'Why are we being told how racist the UK is by some unknown person. Lorraine just agrees. No balance.'
A third added: 'Meghan's ex-boyfriend Joshua spouts as much rubbish as she does. The Royal family is not racist!' while a fourth raged: 'I can't believe that interview with Megan's 1st boyfriend.
'What was Lorraine playing at? She allowed him 2 accuse the royals as being racist of Megan telling truths in her intv with OW. she didn't correct him once. She's gone right down in my opinion of her.'
A further added: 'So an ex of Meghan claims she can trust him but he is giving an interview about him & her as kids OH & took an opportunity to slate our Royal Family for racism...turned you off Lorraine remembered why I had given up listening to your show.'
Joshua went on to explain how he doesn't believe change can take place unless people are 'willing to have a conversation.'
'You look at any history of politics, things only start to look different when opposing sides are both brought to the table and they have a conversation,' he said. 'That's the way it's always worked.'
'I think the more and more people become honest about their role and privilege and all the darkness in the past, then we can move forward.
The unfortunate role of humanity is that we want to pretend thing are great and wear our rose-coloured glasses but that's just denial. The more people can speak comfortably and confidentially about pain and trauma. then healing can begin.'
Speaking of what Meghan was like at high school, he said: 'Meghan was always a strong, confident young person. It was always clear when we was together that she had a very clear idea of where she wanted her path to take her.'
Lorraine went on to ask what it was that Joshua saw in Meghan that made him want to make her his girlfriend.
'I think as she told it, she approached me, so I think that in itself was very attractive that a young person would have the confidence and walk up to me and tell me that she thought that I was attractive or anything like that,' he said.
At that time we was together it's what kids did. She told her friends she liked me, I told my friends I liked her. Our friends met and they kind of arranged it and then we became girlfriend and boyfriend.'
Lorraine went on to explain on the pair have stayed in touch, and questioned whether it was strange when Joshua found out his ex was going to marry into royalty.
'My only thought when I found out that she was going to be marrying Harry was that I hope she's happy,' said Joshua. 'That's all that matters. Love is love.
'No matter what the relationship looks like or what the background is, as long as that love is authentic, honest and real then I'm happy for her.'
Joshua went on to say how he got on well with Meghan's mother Doria Ragland and stayed in contact with her too, throughout the years.
'Meghan and I dated when we were kids, broke up before high school and we stayed friends throughout high school,' he said.
'I would see her every now and then at the church we were going to but I mostly stayed in contact with her mum.
Her mum would let me what she was up to. 'Megs is doing this, Megs is in Canada, Megs is modelling, Megs is acting.'
I knew she was definitely staying busy and staying on her trajectory on success.'
Joshua added: 'I hope that whatever Meg is doing in this moment she knows she can tr
ust me. I definitely have nothing but respect for her and what it looks like she's doing'
'I love that her and Harry are working on this documentary with Oprah about mental health.
'I think mental health is one of the biggest crises in our world right now so it's great they're drawing a lot of attention to that'
'I even heard she might run for office in the states here so depending on who she surrounds herself with, that could be great.
'I support her as long as she's keeping her focus on change, awareness and making the world a better place - that's awesome.
Lorraine went on to ask Joshua what his wife makes of his very famous ex-girlfriend.
'Cynthia was very thrilled at the beginning of this whole thing,' he said. My wife has been really obsessed and very much into the royal family history and the fact I know someone that is part of that narrative makes her very excited.'
Joshua says Meghan and Harry make an 'amazing couple.'
'They're about to have two children which is super awesome for her. It's a big deal to raise kids in this current climate. She has a lot of access and a lot of responsibility to the country now. She's a figure head.
'A lot of people are looking up to her now for guidance as a role model. Young black girls are looking up to her now in a way that I'm sure Meghan is taking very seriously.
'The fact she's a mother and this pop culture figure, she's got a lot on her hands
Also, how does he know anything, besides what she wrote herself (I'm including FF in that), about the BRF? How does he know what MM did (and did not do) when she was a part of the BRF? Did he witness any racism on the part of the BRF first hand, or is he just regurgitating what she wrote?? When was the last time he spoke to her in person or spent any amount of time with her?
I'm not going to touch on his views of racism in the BRF (and all of GB), as they are self-evident. What does he expect that his comment will do other than divide people even more? Is that what he and his old girlfriend from his young teen years really want, because it surely looks like it.
I do wonder if he is still in love with her? What adult comments publicly on his middle school girlfriend? I wonder what his wife thinks of this?
Channel 5 is about to release a new drama about Anne Boleyn with the strapline, wtte, `What you didn’t know about her’ - such as she was black. I kid you not.
Henry VIII looks suspicious like #6, to judge from the trailer. I hope that at least they emphasise that it was H that had her head chopped off, 485 years ago today (give or take 11 days – I’ll let Aquitaine explain that qualification).
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/actress-jodie-turner-smith-slams-24130964
The Boleyn actress has been drinking the Kool-Aid by the gallon.
And -- why her, why was she chosen, how did Nickelodeon hear about this story, and find her and focus on her? Was this her dad's tv connections? So, would that mean her greatest claim to fame, in addition to being a class project, was due to the father she threw aside?
@AnT: From my experience in the news business, it’s my guess that Thomas had a hand in getting the ear of a Nickelodeon producer perhaps through the public telations team at Married With Children or the Fox network, or perhaps through a well-connected parent at Meghan’s school, where many people in the entertainment business send their daughters.
I read that it was Thomas who saw the dish detergent commercial and suggested it to Meghan as her class project. I wouldn’t be surprised if either Thomas or another adult had a role in helping Meghan write the letter to P&G. Parents have helped their kids with schoolwork for as long as schools have existed.
As a budding young narcissist (Remember the video of her at the birthday party after she took the birthday girl’s crown for herself and proceeded to order the other children around at the girl’s birthday party?) Meghan got a big taste of notoriety and narcissistic fuel via the Nickelodeon coverage.
I’m sure that once Meghan realized how useful Thomas was, she exploited him, possibly through guilt that many divorced parents experience, to use him to all the way through high school, then to finance an out-of-state private university (After all, there are absolutely no decent colleges and universities in California. Yes, I’m being sarcastic.), to her bit parts on soap operas, as a topic she lovingly discussed on The Tig, and all the way up to just before she married Harry, when she dumped him for the paparazzi photos that coincidently were taken by one of her go-to pap photo agencies. I believe she had that photographer or agency contact Thomas to talk him into the photos so Meghan would have a reason to leave him out of the wedding.
She managed to have Harry meet Doria multiple times during their quickie trans-Atlantic courtship, but just couldn’t find time to fit Thomas in for a meeting with Harry. If instead of living in a very modest Mexican apartment Thomas was a hip, older retired wealthy successful dad living on the beach in Malibu, Meghan would made damn well made sure Harry met Thomas, who, as Meghan called it, “Brand Meghan.” Doria was “Brand Meghan” but Thomas wasn’t. Neither were her retired diplomat corps uncle, her half siblings and Doria’s family. She created a carefully-cultivated facade for Harry, which he swallowed hook, line, and sinker.
And to think it all started with a note she dashed off to complain about a dish soap commercial.
From November 2020, six months ago;
“In a report published by the Daily Mail, bookmakers say they are likely to part ways than to rejoin the royal family full-time as a couple.
Bookmakers are placing odds of 3/1 for Harry and Meghan to get divorced by 2025, and only offering an outside chance that the Sussexes will be reigned in and rejoin the family, with prices going long at 14/1.”
I am hoping on their third anniversary, the bookmakers will update the odds of a Sussex split.
So #6's wife wants to get in on the action of Diana's sculpture unveiling by Zooming into the celebration? If I were PW, I'd hold off on the unveiling and schedule it for her 65th birthday. Do not allow #6's wife anywhere near Diana's statue. She's already stolen Diana's clothing style, perfume, head tilt, etc.
As for Harry, he's sullied his mother's name by acting like a deranged, overly-pampered schoolboy. Please don't sully her memory further by having her idiot son be a part of the unveiling. He'll say something stupid, trust me. He's said that he doesn't remember her anyway, and only plays the Diana card when he and #6's wife need more publicity.
Of course, #6's wife has been studying Diana's every move for decades.
I was the tallest person in the fifth grade, towering over even the boys. When we came back from summer break and entered the 6th grade, everybody had shot up so much over the summer that I was now the shortest person in the class.
Every child grows at their own pace.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2021/05/18/duke-duchess-sussex-liquidate-one-sole-remaining-uk-companies/
Also at
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/duke-duchess-sussex-liquidate-one-185611833.html
Sussex Royal loses its lustre as Duke and Duchess call in the liquidators
Victoria Ward
11 hours ago
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have formally liquidated one of their sole-remaining British companies, marking the final nail in the coffin for Sussex Royal.
Documents filed with Companies House revealed that MWX Trading confirmed on May 5 that it was winding up and a liquidator was appointed on May 14.
The couple established the company in August 2019, naming their lawyer, Gerrard Tyrrell, as its secretary and Natalie Campbell, who worked for their charitable foundation Sussex Royal, as director.
They registered it at Companies House and used the business to apply for trademarks.
Ms Campbell and Mr Tyrrell were later replaced by James Holt, the couple’s former head of communications who was recently appointed executive director of their Archewell Foundation and is relocating to the US.
The Duke and Duchess are also in the process of liquidating the company formerly known as Sussex Royal, The Telegraph understands.
When the couple announced they were stepping back from their roles as working members of the Royal family they were told they could no longer use the name, and so changed it last July to MWX Foundation.
Despite reports suggesting that MWX stood for Markle Windsor or Mountbatten Windsor, using the X from Sussex, sources claimed the name was just created from random letters and had no special significance.
Sussex Royal was announced with much fanfare in July 2019, shortly after it was confirmed that the Sussexes were breaking away from the Royal Foundation, the charitable vehicle they had shared with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Company accounts revealed last year that it had £99,000 in the bank and would cost £16,000 to wind down. They also showed that the charity was owed £200,000 from an unidentified source.
Accounts for the MWX Foundation, of which the Duke remains sole director, reveal that the £200,000 has now been repaid.
The moves to formally wind up both companies come as the Sussexes continue to sign lucrative deals with business partners in the US via their new US-based Archewell Foundation, most recently announcing a partnership with consumer goods giant Proctor & Gamble.
Is it telling us more than it being in effect a name change?
The BRF should do something like that. They think they have already, but as I said before, the world isn't full of royal nerds who understand BP's nuanced approach. Just as we need dry, factual, written rebuttals to Sussex falsehoods, we need a more explicit statement, repeated at regular intervals, that the Royal Family completely disassociate themselves. That would underline that the Sussexes are seedy, loose cannons. To be avoided by all respectable people, as Victorians would say.
Viewed as an embarrassment, they would eventually(!) end up in a depressing half-life like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor but even worse, as the Windsors' wealth was in the bank, not just on exaggerated press releases. No work was required to maintain their spectacular standard of living, whereas the Sussexes need to keep scrabbling in the gutter, relying on completely unreliable, immature sugars to sustain them. And our rage.
We know the Sussexes feed on our rage, whereas to be pitied and/or ignored is death to them. That's one of the worst aspects. We know they feed on our anger and use it as a weapon against us, yet we can't stop feeling and expressing that anger. It's beginning to feel like a form of self-harm to me. We all - BP included - suffer from them in a peculiarly direct, physical way. They're like a bacterial infection that needs a new kind of antibiotic.
I agree that removing the titles is not the answer, as we would end up with prince and princess which cannot be removed. The succession is the silver bullet and, as other Nutties have noted, they really have no answer to give. H can't repeat often enough that he wants to break the cycle. He had to get out. So take them up on that. Publicly. Again using a dry, logical, inexorable, official tone. Putting it on public record.
I'm fearful of using the term 'black and white'. Such is the world we now live in. But that is the key to this. We need BP to put things in black and white and keep putting things in black and white. One voice. One source. Disciplined, controlled messaging. As a contrast to the Sussex media maelstrom. No faffing about between royal households. No subtle intimations. No tiresome backtracking from 'senior members of the royal household' or 'royal aides' within 24 hours. Raising our hopes only to dash them, again and again. People are exhausted and if nothing changes, they will abandon all royals, not just the two who deserve to be abandoned.
You are so right about the harm this does to us - I'm sure both my mental and physical health have suffered since Mrs6 came on the scene, a combination of anxiety about the future of our Constitution and lack of exercise from too much computer time.
I ask myself if I'm being obsessive but the answer is that I have to keep fighting to the end, like my totem animal.
HARRY, GO HOME! U.S. journalist begs U.K. to 'take Prince Harry back'
https://torontosun.com/news/world/harry-go-home-u-s-journalist-begs-u-k-to-take-prince-harry-back
Problem is, we don't want him back...
He's just another actor looking for publicity. Won't be surprised if he was hired by SS to keep her in the news. He has nothing interesting to say.
@JHanoi
That seems to be the problem.
Take his Dukedom away,
he will use Prince Henry of Wales,
and madam Princess...
@ Magatha Mistie and JHanoi:
Meghan would likely relish being Princess Henry of Wales even more than bring a duchess even though from what I understand, being a duchess is higher on the food chain than being a princess.
I am wondering, and perhaps some of our UK nutties can chime in on this, even if Harry is a blood prince, can he still renounce being a blood prince and become a commoner with absolutely no titles at all?
If being a royal is such a tremendous burden for Harry, the royal family should call him out on it and say, “Well if being a prince is so terrible then renounce EVERYTHING, including your title from birth and become a commoner.”
Of course it is highly unlikely Harry would do that because having a title is the only reason anyone pays attention to him or his skanky wife.
Meghan would never allow Harry to do that, but I would love to see what sort of mental gymnastics the Sussexes would go through to justify keeping their titles after all of the bombs they’ve thrown at the institution, family and country that is the source of all their wealth, fame, status, and influence.
Without any titles, they’d be a pair of talentless nobodies that they truly are.
Can anyone answer if Harry can renounce his title from birth?
It should also be pointed out to them that as woke people, they should not be using gender-specific royal titles. As I recall, they said after Archie was born, they wanted to raise him in a gender neutral environment.
This is their big chance to put up or shut up.
He's just another actor looking for publicity. Won't be surprised if he was hired by SS to keep her in the news. He has nothing interesting to say.
@Natalier:
You are probably right about Sunshine Sachs being the reason this guy got any ink, which says to me that if you have to go back to summer camp at 13 to dredge up someone to say something nice about you, then it seems a bit desperate.
Harry and Meghan must be paying buckets of money to SS to put a positive spin on two talentless, pretentious, entitled, whining grifters.
Does anyone have a guess as to the amount Harry and Meghan are spending with a company like Sunshine Sachs? A company like that isn’t cheap. I am guessing a minimum of six figures a month.
Next story from SS: The custodian at Meghan’s private school who will say she kept her desk and school locker clean.
We've had peers renouncing their inherited titles in order to keep their seats as MPs in the Commons - eg 2nd Lord Stansgate - previously Anthony Wedgewood-Benn, later Tony Benn (didn't go the whole hog and to `Tone' Benn ( far too common?) but I see his son is now 3rd Viscount.
@WBBM: Thank you for this info. I wonder if Harry might then also be eligible to renounce all his titles. It will truly put him into a corner if it’s possible for him to break free from the burden of those horrid royal titles and be a generic human being.
/jk
I propose their gender neutral titles should be the Douches of Sussex.
It means something like `in the general run of things ' - in this context `like Joe Bloggs/John Doe, not royal'.
Of course, if he's not a `genetic human' he must be another species - I dunno tho'...
---------
Good for Bea!
--------
re the statue - invite him three days early, let him unveil it on his own - no reporters, no audience, no publicity. Just them.
Have the real deal, with maximum fuss, three days later when he's gone home - just like their two weddings.
👏👏👏👏 for the gender neutral titles!
Well, one could explain it like this:
if the King sleeps around, we merely have to deal with the odd Fitzroy as farmed out with little houses and 1000 a year by Charles II.
(Crowd murmurs, giggles, nods touching their noses)
If the Queen or future Queen sleeps around, we get a Randy Andy and a Hapless in the line of succession.
(Crowd screams in horror, throws themselves into the dirt, weeping)
The more people that can see how self-absorbed and obscenely pushy Mrs Bonkers is, the better.
Apologies, I'm slow on the uptake today.
Please follow this advice if possible:
Have uncle Gary contact Thomas Markle, and fly him over to Ibiza in June. Give Thomas a nice suite in Uncle’s villa, and a personal health coach. doctors, Mediterranean diet, sun, pool, and stylist.
Add a new wardrobe by end of July.
Photograph Thomas and Uncle Gary enjoying themselves with a celeb here and there. A trip to Monaco too. And a Greek Island. Add Liz Hurley and similar for whatever fee they charge for a set up photo. A fun car, a great dinner overlooking the sea. Thomas wears cool classic well cut loose white linen shirts and trousers, plus a white hat that looks familiar to us all. The hat becomes his signature.
Tout Gary and Thomas as the fun new Odd Couple, men about town, enjoying life. Make him a guest on Top Gear Season 30, or 31.
Sit back, and watch MM melt down as her now tan, slimmed, happy groomed father gets the spotlight.
That seems to be the problem.
Take his Dukedom away,
he will use Prince Henry of Wales,
and madam Princess...
Revoke the Sussex Dukedom, then M is known as Princess Henry. Americans would be confused and would not know what this means due the male Henry name. Thus, my bet will be that M will defy and call herself Princess Meghan. She will drop the Henry part. They live in the USA so out of reach of the BRF unless they want to engage lawyers in the USA. To demand that M stop using the name "Princess Meghan". My guess will be that US courts will throw up their hands, they will say that M can call herself whatever she likes.
Megs would not dare try this on UK soil. The DM and others would have a field day. She would become a laughing stock.
________________________
Would Meghan Markle become Princess Henry if Queen strips her Duchess of Sussex title?
MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have faced calls to be stripped off their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles following their step away from the Firm. But would Meghan really become "Princess Henry" if her Duchess title was removed?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1437282/meghan-markle-princess-henry-duchess-of-sussex-title-queen-prince-harry-evg
"If Prince Harry were to renounce his peerage his wife would cease to be the Duchess of Sussex and would instead become HRH Princess Henry of Wales and subsequently HRH The Princess Henry."
Meghan only has her Duchess title through her marriage to Prince Harry, Mr MacMarthanne made clear.
(long answer here by a UK academic)
'Royal experts say that Buckingham Palace's decision to announce Princess Beatrice's pregnancy on the same day as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's third wedding anniversary suggests that they are now 'irrelevant'.
Royal expert Duncan Larcombe tells OK! "It's a bizarre decision by the palace to have a clash as the royal diary is meticulously planned out and births, deaths and marriages have a lot of consideration and planning with the announcements. Palace officials will take into consideration the news and what is being talked about.
"This is no mistake. The fact that they decided to announced Princess Beatrice's baby news on the same day as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's anniversary seems to say something. I'm not saying it's the palace waging a war but it seems to show that the couple are certainly irrelevant to them in terms of diary clashes."' ...
https://www.ok.co.uk/royal/royal-news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-beatrice-24140015
Yet another royal expert commenting but it would be nice to think this is deliberate.
Harry and Meghan mark their third wedding anniversary by announcing plans to build a community relief centre in India that can be used as a vaccination hub to provide ‘healing and strength’ to locals
'Archewell Foundation and World Central Kitchen will establish our latest community relief center in Mumbai, India, which is also home to Myna Mahila, an Indian organization focused on women’s health and employment opportunities that The Duchess of Sussex has long supported'.
------
Archewell foundation, of course. As for the Indian organisation that the spouse 'has long supported', I've never heard of it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9596159/Harry-Meghan-mark-wedding-anniversary-plans-build-community-relief-centre-India.html
You’ve heard of it — World Central Kitchen is the same chef Jose Andrès and his org that replaced the roof of a Texas women’s shelter, in February of this year, and Meghan and Harry horned in on it per their press releases on Feb 21, 2021.
They did similar with WCK via their foundation on the island of Dominica.
The WCK org tends to help with relief centers for areas worldwide hit by hurricanes etc.
Piggybacking. They never stated the amount of $ given for the Texas shelter roof, either.
The time limit on this in England is three years from the date of the treasonous act. But, for acts committed outside the U.K. against the crown, there is no time limit.
I don’t care how many titles they sport, as their own behavior pattern and penchant for alienation will harm them publicly even if the backers remain eager.
What is important is to remove Harry and his offspring cannot climb to the throne.
There's something very strange about her compulsion to mimic others and blatantly pass off other people's work as her own. Frequently she has used quotes that are very quickly discovered to be nearly verbatim those of someone else. Someone mentioned yesterday on Twitter that she took credit for one of Corey's recipes, right in front of him!
$6's misbegotten wife blatantly and famously posted and preened Corey's roast chicken recipe as her own. Supposedly she charmed $6 into___ and an engagement with this simple dish. For those unfamiliar, he had a roast chicken empire in Toronto. With Covid I don't know the present status of his outlets but he had 6 or 7. Simple dish but must be roasted right to get juicy breast meat and that crispy skin which can be addictive. This must be where Chef Corey excelled.
Summary is that $6-TW edition will shamelessly steal anything and everything she can. Starting with super lavish Royal wedding and Royal titles. And everything on down that is not nailed down. She has also manages to steal stuff that is nailed down. Dorito taught her well.
To the BRF -- You snooze, you lose.
"There is no need for a community relief center, the existing framework needs heLP. Mumbai real estate is expensive and will eat into a major chunk of the budget. Instead of grand standing like this, they could’ve just helped with oxygen and vaccines supply.. not forcing govts and corporates, they could’ve actually chipped in with their own [expletive] money. That’s the main need of the hour. As usual they [expletive] miss the point and make these grand standing announcements."
-----
I've read elsewhere that the so-called "$3 million" they raised from their "Archie's Birthday" campaign was mostly corporate grants.
How awesome, spectacular, karmic and just plain wonderful is Bea announcing her pregnancy on H&M's anniversary?! NO coincidence. I'm sure it greatly angered Markle. Harry's had kind of a tough week and this announcement shows to me...that they just aren't very important 'to the palace diary' as someone above said.
I'm certain Fergie is just laughing with glee over it. No matter what weird spin stories have been put out about Fergie and Markle, I just know in my bones that Fergie does not like her whatsoever.
Good for Bea and Edo, and congratulations to them. Very exciting. Hopefully gives the whole family a bit of a lift and some joy. God knows, they'll probably never see Markle's daughter.
https://archive.ph/Zb7Cp
@Swampwoman
Oh my dear, what a hard time for your family, and how nobly you are handling the ongoing pain. IIRC, your husband has had a terrible series of family losses, hasn't he? My best thoughts to you and many hugs.
@AnT, the leather anniversary was hilarious! Thank you for the laugh!
Yes, it is such happy news.
Sadly the sugars have lost their collective tiny minds over the timing (and over the reporting that the 6s are irrelevant to the Royal Diary). They are being particularly despicable with wishing harm to the baby and vague threats. For so much censorship of SM those freaks sure get away with a lot.
It would have been nice for Beatrice to wait until Charles and Camilla got back, but.... the possibility for Karmic vengeance could not wait!
Tha should read "a nice little column from the Telegraph"
apologies
Ooh! From your lips to Gods ears, as they say!
Good points both of you!
The Independent
A Very Royal Baby: Royal experts reveal the real story behind Harry and Meghan’s nannies
Kate Ng
8 hours ago
Royal biographers have revealed the true story behind a report that claimed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex cycled through three nannies in the first six weeks of their son Archie’s life.
The report by The Sun in June 2019 raised questions about Harry and Meghan’s staff turnover, amid other reports of staff leaving the couple’s employment.
But in a new documentary on Channel 4 titled A Very Royal Baby, royal experts have clarified that the turnover was simply due to the couple wanting to find the right fit for their son.
The documentary explores what happens when a royal baby is brought into the world, the traditions that have been kept and those that have been changed over the years, in anticipation for Harry and Meghan’s second child.
The royal family usually employ live-in nannies from the prestigious Norland College in Bath, but Harry and Meghan ditched the tradition as they did not want their staff to live with them.
Omid Scobie, royal correspondent and co-author of Finding Freedom, said the couple “didn’t want a Mary Poppins-type character around their child”, adding that it was possibly “a dig at the Norland nannies style”.
But although the couple decided the elite service wasn’t right for them, they still found it difficult to settle on an alternative.
“After Archie’s arrival, Harry and Meghan hired a night nanny to establish a sleeping pattern - but there was an incident on one of the very first nights that put the couple off from having a night nurse,” he explained.
The incident, according to Finding Freedom, involved the nanny “being unprofessional and irresponsible” on her second night working with the Sussexes.
A second night nanny was hired to replace the first, but the couple had by then decided the arrangement did not work for them and she was let go.
The third nanny, who was hired as a daytime nanny to provide extra help, stayed with the Sussexes “for quite some time” until they moved to California, said Mr Scobie.
“She helped them out on very much a 9 to 5 basis, it was a great working relationship actually despite reports,” he added.
It is not known if the couple currently employ a nanny in California, but it has been reported that Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, plays a big role in supporting the couple as they bring up Archie.
The Sussexes are expecting their second child, a daughter, this year. The due date is not known, but it is believed Meghan is in her third trimester.
The Independent has contacted the Sussex’s spokesperson for comment.
A Very Royal Baby will air on Channel 4 on Wednesday night at 9pm.
Did they then hire an imaginary night nanny to look after an imaginary child?
As stated, it's on Channel 4, 9pm, and sounds as if it might have a reasonable historical dimension (wet nurse & warming pans, perhaps) Being Channel 4, I'd expect a snide tone now & then.
Perhaps they'll introduce it with a reference to Bea's Happy Announcement.
-------
No anniversary congrats from BP to the other couple? Another dog that didn't bark in the night!
Absolute silence from the royals regarding the 3rd wedding anniversary!
I’ve never heard of that expression ....funny though. ;o)
Sorry, I didn't specify what it was I'd never heard of. It was 'Myna Mahila, an Indian organization focused on women’s health and employment opportunities that The Duchess of Sussex has long supported'.
Thank you for that. ;o) I did Google it, it mentioned Sherlock Holmes...but it’s explanation wasn’t particularly clear.