The Sussexes are simply beyond evil.
Lillibet is the Queen's personal nickname; I highly doubt she would want it used for any child, let alone a Sussex child. Using it is a gross invasion of privacy.
Diana wouldn't have been best pleased with what Harry's done with himself, either.
After tearing apart the Royals in public for two years, the Sussexes are trying to stay connected with them via these names, and appropriate their glamour and style.
How tacky.
Also, shout out to Doria and Charles. You're the only parents the Sussexes talk to any more, but no one thought to name a child after you.
Comments
It is usual for members of the royal family to indicate that the Queen was asked and gave her approval. There is a respectful request and a gracious assent. Not for the Sussexes. Just a cold, hard 'told'.
Also, not that the Queen was told the baby would be called Lilibet. Just named 'after her'. Which would lead any normal person to expect 'Elizabeth'. Just as one of Charlotte's names is Elizabeth (also the middle name of her own mother).
So we have a second Sussex 'birth' just as controversial as the first. No warm glow, being informed of a new baby on the day it is born, a peek at the baby with the proud, happy parents hours later and then we settle back into our lives and leave the new parents in peace. None of that. Just rage, bitterness and exhaustion. Frustrated rage deliberately provoked. What a way to welcome a baby.
The Queen's first cousin, Margaret Rhodes, was, I believe the last apart from Philip so to do.
For anybody else, it was gross over-familiarity, otherwise what we call `a bloody cheek'.
That is why it is such an insult, the deluded b*tch putting herself on a par with Blood Royals.
At the time, people made fun of the name. And yes, it remains both awkward and indicative of a certain social background. But we could always tell that, deep down, Pacquiao was a good-hearted family man who just wanted to give his new baby the most regal name he could think of.
Today, however, we're getting a similar deep glimpse into Harry and his wife. And this time, it's an ugly sight.
For anybody else, it was gross over-familiarity, otherwise what we call `a bloody cheek'.
That is why it is such an insult, the deluded b*tch putting herself on a par with Blood Royals.
I keep getting reminded of Wallis Simpson presuming the right and the familiarity to address the Queen Mother as "Cookie." I wonder if Meghan will someday buy little Lili a corgi and name it Cookie, too.
Anyone else notice that the first time around after the (eventual?) birth announcement the name "reveal" of Archie Harrison was quite a while (I can't remember how long) afterwards for 'privacy', whereas this time the name is announced with the birth announcement? Short of posing on the hospital steps for photos the couple seem to be wanting to mimic a royal birth while with the first they seemed to want to be as different as possible?
Easterly, Chicago, Illinois
Well, they couldn’t really use one of Meghan’s nicknames, could they? One Skeazy Golddigger in the family is already one too many.
Doggone! 'Next time she’s in season' π€£. I would have said 'next time the b!tch is in season'. Those two are absolutely repulsive.
'this naming is a thumb your nose at the family.'
It's more than that, @Snarky. The name has been sullied. How can the Queen or anyone else in the BRF now recall the nickname and not feel absolutely disgusted?
'She will however be entitled to be become a Princess - a 'HRH' - following death of The Queen and succession of Prince Charles'
In theory, yes but I think after the latest evil offence, Charles might, reluctantly or not, feel he needs to reconsider. I fervently hope he does.
A prediction - she'll expect Welby to agree to baptise the child while he's in the US. If he agrees to use that first name, with or without demur, he's an even bigger fool than I thought
I'd add that poor Prince Charles has never been a naturally charismatic person. If he, as King, makes a wrong move on a sensitive issue, he won't be readily forgiven by his subjects. I hope he's not thinking that because he got away with flat-out adultery once, with the British people eventually accepting Camilla, he can get away with giving titles to Harry's wife weaponized offspring.
There were eight years between Diana's funeral (at which Charles genuinely thought he'd be assassinated walking behind the coffin) and Charles and Camilla's wedding. That may seem like a long time, but I personally find it quick. Mark Bolland was a wizard. Will someone of similar skill be able to turn things around in an equally short time for a King Charles III who wants all his grandchildren to have titles? Even if we assume there is one, I have to wonder if Charles really wants the first eight years of what will surely be a short reign to be so tarnished.
Should he reconsider giving them titles, sugars will howl and more accusations of racism will fly. But he will definitely have the plausible deniability of having said for years that he wants the monarchy slimmed down. And where best to cut the fat than in his own family?
Can the Queen, as the Head of the Church of England, forbid Welby to do that? She'd have to do it quietly and to trust in his discretion, of course. But would it be within her powers?
My own predictions are leaning toward a neo-pagan naming ceremony in their own garden. Both parents barefoot under their "tree of life." And surrounded by merchable crystals, candles and incense.
I've heard of vicars objecting to names parents want to bestow - such as `Pagan'! I'd hope that any Anglican priest would refuse to use the sensitive name but be prepared to baptise in another name.
I'm sure you're right about what she's more likely to go for - pyramids, crystals, and yogis- than a Christian sacrament.
Whatever she does, if she graciously informs us about it, will be telling I think.
Meanwhile, folks, I started digging into Scientology. First, they have a naming ceremony for children which, ironically, they refer to as `christening' - I ask you!
Well one thing led to another and I arrived here:
https://tonyortega.org/2020/09/21/scientology-black-ops-episode-6-dirty-tricks-are-a-sacrament-in-this-church/
- and I found this:
`They have followed me, filmed me, bugged me, tried to get me sacked, tried and failed to injunct my stories, published an attack website on me, attack videos, and, appallingly, tried to convince me to commit suicide. One of their favorite ploys, as it turns out. One of them leaned in when he knew we weren’t filming, leaned in and whispered into my ear, we know you grew up in an orphanage, we know they gave you drugs, what’s wrong with you, why don’t you kill yourself? This is what he whispered into my ear. Now, they prepped someone, had the discussion, this is how we can try and unsettle Seymour. And I’ve got to say and I hate to admit it, it did get to me a little bit. Just the awfulness of thinking that you can plan to try and throw someone off by throwing up childhood trauma at them and suggesting they commit suicide. That’s what Scientology is. '
Think about it. Is this `Church' backing the Wife?
https://scientologymoneyproject.com/2015/02/16/what-the-church-of-scientology-doesnt-want-the-public-to-know-part-1/
and so on.
This is off topic and my first thought was, I know no one cares, not even a lil bit (UGH, won't happen again, sorry) but Penguin Random House and Waterstone's have resolved their dispute, so worthy literature such as "The Bitch" (hope I spelled that title correctly) may now be placed for sale.
Apparently this was signed Friday but the press release came out today. My Twitter is acting up but this was in a publishing industry newsletter that just arrived.
I get miserable just hearing and reading about them, imagine being around Maggot and Mole on a regular basis?! π₯ΊSuch a mentality and emotional unhealthy couple they are. π
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-and-harrys-decision-to-call-baby-lilibet-slammed-online/news-story/65a804b8bbcc10d44d15fcba83a37537
Rachel is demented and her husband is an imbecile.
"What I don’t understand is why the media, particularly the American media haven’t picked up on the negativity the pair exude?"
US media is tightly controlled by just a few people who are left of woke. They are anti Monarchy among other things all woke bleat about constantly.
π₯Ί
What I see as a huge fault in US media is the frequent tendency to bothsidesism, rather than presenting the facts or one viewpoint. which gives us things like "The Earth is round. On the other hand, many believe that it's flat, blah blah blah . . ." so that people believe that there are TWO credible sides, and often there just are not. And we've had decade of this.
Here’s why:
To make you think they had a baby
To make you think they care about their children and bonding
To have an excuse for why they have produced nothing for Netflix, just one podcast for Spotify, BetterUp is a blank, and no top Marvel movie roles (Eternals for example) have popped up clamoring for Megsy to be the star
To have an excuse to bother Pa Charles for more money (“we took leave from our non jobs. For your granddaughter. Pay us!”)
To have time for Megs to get more plastic surgery
To se reply film their new reality show for Oprah and Kris Kardashian
To undergo Scientology training — or have Harry undergo it (perhaps Sci is paying for the mansion, a la Tom Cruise’s houses)
To lay about partaking of old habits as they are currently out of money for PR and photos
To wait to hire an 7-month-old for photos which will be easier for Megs to handle
To recast the role of “Archie” or tragically bid adieu to him
To hide out from McPhee and Foster who know what’s up and are pressing to see Baby just to be deliciously evil to thr liars
To spend more time plotting with the vacationing Archbishop of Canterbury who is in the US
....
Quote from article you shared:
"Harry and Meghan left the House of Windsor for the House of Whinger. Their milieu brims with champagne socialists who have revived the Ancien RΓ©gime for a new age where “let them eat brioche” is dΓ©mode but let them eat tosh is de fabulous. All hail Harry, California princeling."
Bingo.
@CookieShark asked about why they keep saying they are on parental leave.
Here’s why:
______
Everything you said.
My problem is ... everything these two do is coated with slime, and now, with this latest assault on The Queen, I feel as if I'm swimming in it.
Gotta take a break, I'm afraid.
Did anyone catch the Piers 60minutes?
I just saw a terribly disgusting news segment about a pedophile whose apartment was filled with Darren Dolls. They arrested him, but I dont know how that will play out in court.
And we thought the 6s were the worst.
I think the Cambridges use of the name "Lili" is a good tactic. Its what the 6s said they would call her, and it refuses to use HMs nickname.
My word, those two are so evil. How can anyone be so cruel? At this point, PC needs to act. TQ is afraid of looking petty, but PC can simply announce that only Williams kids will have the HRH. It will be well received, and he will look strong. Honestly, what has he got to lose?
Big news stories are not 'broken' by big media. They are suppressed.
Regardless, I do believe that all of this positive coverage is just her paid for publicity. Nobody cares.
Apparently H plans to have 'several months' parental leave. He's been embroiled in one thing after another since joining BetterUp. Will they stand for it? He had an actual job description (I've worked with people with similar roles in my old corporate life) so they must be employing someone else to do the actual work, presentations etc.
American Nutties - I've always understood holiday entitlements to be really tough in the US - two weeks a year on average, and often none at all if you're a new employee. I expect leave for other reasons is also far tougher than in Europe or the UK. American colleagues of mine have been staggered by the difference, coming from the other direction, just as they were by our 'free' visits to our doctors.
Apparently H plans to have 'several months' parental leave. He's been embroiled in one thing after another since joining BetterUp. Will they stand for it? He had an actual job description (I've worked with people with similar roles in my old corporate life) so they must be employing someone else to do the actual work, presentations etc.
______
Here in the U.S., no one takes months of leave, to which you rightly, if indirectly, alluded.
The correct announcement should have been:
"After taking a few weeks off to settle our family, M and I will be hard at work solving the world's problems." (er, doing the diversity inclusivity compassion healing thing.)
Actually, while Murdoch owns lots of media groups and publications internationally, particularly in Australia, UK, etc.,he owns relatively little in the US.
He is not at all the largest owner of US media. He has the Wall Street Journal, NY Post, Fox......a few things like realtor.com.
Blogger Ava C said..
Apparently H plans to have 'several months' parental leave. He's been embroiled in one thing after another since joining BetterUp. Will they stand for it? He had an actual job description (I've worked with people with similar roles in my old corporate life) so they must be employing someone else to do the actual work, presentations etc.
______
It all depends on whether Butter Cup decides he is a good investment. Problem is, startups like these are populated by idiot youngsters who think they've got a good gig. More often than not, these kinds of "businesses" go down in flames.
Actually, while Murdoch owns lots of media groups and publications internationally, particularly in Australia, UK, etc.,he owns relatively little in the US.
He is not at all the largest owner of US media. He has the Wall Street Journal, NY Post, Fox......a few things like realtor.com.
______
Here in the U.S., the inmates are running the asylum.
"Big news stories are not 'broken' by big media. They are suppressed."
You said it, Swampwoman!
My word, those two are so evil. How can anyone be so cruel? At this point, PC needs to act. TQ is afraid of looking petty, but PC can simply announce that only Williams kids will have the HRH. It will be well received, and he will look strong. Honestly, what has he got to lose?
@KCM1212: From what I understand as a Yankee, PC has the choice to leave the Sussex children with NO titles at all.
He can easily use the reason that as king, he does not want Harry and Meghan’s children to bear the horrible burden of royal titles and the genetic pain that Harry has said has been inflicted upon him as a royal.
Charles can simply in the most magnanimous and touchy-feely caring manner, spew back a word salad to Harry that essentially tells that every organization has rules to be followed or they will cease function in an orderly manner and eventually no longer exist.
But because Charles has deep empathy for how Harry feels about the issue of genetic pain, the best thing to do is eliminate it for Master Archie and Miss Lili to allow them to grow up without royal titles of any sort.
I’m sure that Harry would be especially appreciative of the warm and tender decision made by his loving father who would never want to hurt his snowflake son, daughter-in-law, and most of all his grandchildren via Harry and Meghan.
Meghan will no doubt appreciate Charles’ gesture and be relieved that her son and daughter will not suffer the way she and Harry have suffered as royals.
But because rules are largely due to the restrictions that his father and grandparents had to bear as royals.
Many individual states have their own policies which provide more generous leave. For example, here in NY, you can get up to 12 weeks of PAID leave (it works out to about 2/3 of your average salary with a cap in place) to care for a newborn or a parent child or spouse with a serious illness. All companies must provide it regardless of number of employees. The employer is required to maintain insurance to fund it. But here's the thing...the employer is allowed to deduct money from employees paychecks to partially fund the policy they are required to carry.
Poor child, who ever she is, she is innocent and will have hell rained down on her everyday of her little life.
But then, Lady C prevailed and let's hope it is this new child that some day outs her parents as the lunatics they are.
I hope I'm still alive to see it.
@Magatha,
101 Damnations indeed...
On July 20, Jeff Bezos and his younger brother will fly in a Blue Origin capsule into ”space” — actually going about 60 miles away from earth on an 11 minute ride. It will take place 15 days after his official end date at Amazon.
Oh, that he would have one military-trained celeb guest with him! One whose shedding ginger-haired head will be easily filled with visions of extra fame and more money. A guy who thinks it will be just like Star Wars, Ooh!
I mean, first royal in space, Harry, you really need to crawl in on top of that 59-foot rocket. Do it to honor your new daughter doll! What can happen? And your wife and The Bezos grifting girlfriend can hold hands supportively for the camera while both gaze at Captain Bezos’ booster-powered wallet. Let the games begin!
-
I don't feel scientology is puppeteer in mess but certainly their tactics. The brainwashing and blackmail,etc. M found his "therapist " and way H speaks and praises M as savior is robotic and chilling .
EMDR therapy has been praised as effective therapy but also shown to make one more susceptible to false memories. What if one went through this therapy with therapist whose sole purpose was exactly that? Not an excuse for H but you must admit in certain talks he appears victim of Stockholm syndrome, very least in need of some deprogramming.
His televised therapy session was so inappropriate. Who in right mind would agree to that? Let alone therapist ever thinking it was great idea.
Still can't get over baby name. One child namesake of cat, the other Queen of England. Lilibet is not even real name. People in US are probably wha? Then you hear it was pet name of HM (ha, just realized 2 pets) and it turns disturbing. Never mind the hypocrisy of weeks ago declaring HM head of racist institution. Have they registered domain name yet? Let that get out as it is disgusting.
Not sure why everyone is saying this will endear child to titles. I don't see HM or any of the RF feeling this flattering tribute.
I'm afraid that Rupert Murdoch controls a LOT of media in the US as well as everywhere else. So, hardly left or woke at all. Like most things, it's controlled by money.
His sons now control Fox and it is only controlled opposition and his sons are most certainly woke.
It is my opinion that various companies joined together to give the Harkles large amounts of money, with no work expected.
It is my further speculation that this was done to launder son seriously dirty cash, and create a secret war chest of money.
My other thought is that is why the Harkles sign deals, yet remain clearly cash poor, yet live in a mansion and exhibit wild emotions ranging from smug pampered entitlement to angry panic. Their stupidity and arrogance caught them in a bind.
I think she told Harry not to worry, they’d be swimming in it, just do it. But alas, she can’t outsmart cartels and cabals even with her magical boobs and salad, and now they watch the cash float by in the laundry machine and can’t grab it, so they are lashing out and trying to suck up all at once. Russian rental babies notwithstanding.
The cash is getting laundered, but the Harkles are more of a joke than ever and being scorned in LA too in that no real jobs will arrive. My friend tells me things are actually rather bad in Hollywood at the moment, many productions scuppered, contracts much smaller, as China takes over the back end and production plans. Many are pretty worried. Name actors are hustling for the tv advertising gigs they would have avoided three years ago, A no-talent like Megs is out of luck.
So the world sees them as millionaires but they haven’t got it, and they are too dumb to even look like they fake doing their fake jobs. And now they take a lengthy pampered “leave of absence” and look even more ridiculous in an America trying to get back on its feet after a devastating year, where such leaves are rare and frowned upon, and where you have to have a job in the first place.
Scientology is seen as insane, an evil cult and passΓ© in the US thanks to tv documentaries, books and news stories. Sci is losing money rapidly, which is why Cruise has to keep working on his thrillers. Other American actor Sci’s like Elisabeth Moss and Catherine Bell keep working but remain more down low. So even if they hook up to that fizzling cult, the Harkles are in a bind. What can they star in?
The hoops were falling out of the Harkle PR ball gown, even before their evil selection of a baby name.
With a few bits of open reporting about babies, house, fights, money, and......kablooey.
Looking at the papers this morning I was struck by how happy the Duke and Duchess looked standing there with the new baby in its swaddling clothes - and then I realised that photo was not of Lili but of real doll Archie. I wondered what the newspaper was trying to tell us.
This is as inappropriate as when she allegedly asked for a hug at the end of her disciplinary hearing in college.
She can't read the room at all.
I don't know if this is so much being incapable of reading a room as using tactics that had worked for her in the past (on her dad, for example, and maybe teachers).
So the world sees them as millionaires but they haven’t got it, and they are too dumb to even look like they fake doing their fake jobs. And now they take a lengthy pampered “leave of absence” and look even more ridiculous in an America trying to get back on its feet after a devastating year, where such leaves are rare and frowned upon, and where you have to have a job in the first place
This I do agree with.
I also note that Americans started covertly boycotting the "woke" Hollywood piffle which seemed to coincide with increasing Chinese ownership of studios/distribution. Sports, too, as thugball athletes were encouraged to disrespect the American flag, the American people, and crawl in apology to their Chinese overlords.
Amazon bought the MGM studio for BILLIONS because of their old movie library (and because Bezos also wants to be a media powerhouse). Is there a market for real escapist movies that aren't preaching socialist/communist values constantly? Definitely. Can Bezos avoid doing the woke thing that has ruined so many companies? I don't know.
Good observation regarding the use of the old doll photos.
The press had to run some imagery, since digital clicks and SM are built on imagery. There is nothing but old pictures of “Archie” to use. So the press is saying, okay, we will play it this way, to point out the return of “mystery baby” nonsense.
Make me editor for a day, and I would be substituting broadly with images of comic book heroes Archie and Betty. And a few cosy photoshopped images of racist sitcom character Archie Bunker and the real Lilibet playing the piano together and singing, grabbed from the All in the Family tv show opener, which Megs, child of Hollywood, and advocate, certainly knew about. Coupled with big photos of 13 year old Megs grinning at the camera, identified only as Rachel and always shown split shot with sister Samantha. Add naked Harry in Vegas, or pouting red faced Harry from the tennis stands. Let’s laugh! Let’s join the Harkles and laugh at people! Especially them!
Megsy loves her creepy games; lets laugh with her and at her, as she cowers behind the sofa after shooting her little poison darts with her ludicrous nasty Orc of a prince.
@Cookie Shark, her asking her victims for a hug after the disciplinary hearing was her re-asserting her power over her victims. It's how they get one more hurtful, damaging kick in. It takes away any power or healing the victims may have gotten, puts them back in their lower place, and erases her crime against them as if everything is okay. It's another revenge tactic, you could say.
You may well be right. I avoid such people. If they try to push me, I shove back much harder.
Actually, Amazon, which Bezos will no longer be leading in a few weeks, can now also suppress or destroy the old MGM film library, saying everything in it was racist, misogynistic, not diverse enough, with harmful story lines that cause PTSD, etc.
Hang on to your DVD’s and digital captures. Dr Seuss was just the test.
Excellent idea re the Cabbage Patch doll images or velo egg! Lol.
And using close ups of My Little Pony for Megs? And a shot of poor the poor naked guy from the kids’ “Operation” game for H.
@Ant, you make a very good point about Amazon controlling the MGM film library. Scary times. I don't trust anything to do with Amazon or Bezos. Nothing good can come of it.
@SwampWoman,
Actually, Amazon, which Bezos will no longer be leading in a few weeks, can now also suppress or destroy the old MGM film library, saying everything in it was racist, misogynistic, not diverse enough, with harmful story lines that cause PTSD, etc.
Hang on to your DVD’s and digital captures. Dr Seuss was just the test.
Indeed, those Nazis never did give up their bookburning (now to include movie burning). I think there would be an incredible rage against them if that happened, but they do silence authors.
Exactly. The game was just on rain delay for the past 60 or 70 years.
This is as inappropriate as when she allegedly asked for a hug at the end of her disciplinary hearing in college.
She can't read the room at all.
@CookieShark: I have read an account of Meghan being the subject of a disciplinary action through her college sorority Kappa Kappa Gamma that was provided by a woman who was a member of a KKG chapter at a university other than Northwestern, where Meghan attended.
She said the disciplinary committee was comprised of KKG chapters at other schools and that all the girls in Meghan’s chapter went silent and were not forthcoming with information about Meghan’s alleged hazing of two girls who had pledged her chapter.
The woman said the injuries to the two pledges were serious enough that they required medical attention and the case was settled when the medical bills for these two pledges were paid, but there was no mention of any hugging at the end of the hearing.
I am assuming this was about the reports that Meghan glued the eyelids shut of pledges.
As I recall, the woman said that after this incident, Meghan had her records at Northwestern sealed.
Is this the incident that you are referring to in your comment?
If you look on Quora, you can find at least one first-hand report by one of her sorority sisters of Meghan targeting two younger members of her chapter for bullying that reached a level where they would not attend sorority events if they knew Meghan would be there and at least one of the girls she targeted considered dropping out of the sorority.
If Meghan had glued my daughter’s eye shut in a hazing incident, she would have not walked away from it with just the medical bills being paid, (likely by Thomas) and a slap on the wrist from a disciplinary committee.
I can only imagine what sort of hellhole Harry and het children are stuck in out of the sight of the public, the cameras, and NDAs.
However, there are "some" "royal experts" who are claiming this could be the road to peace.
I was thinking in what universe do you think after all the misinformation will the firm be so willing to toss off the make us look bad history merely because there is another great grandchild?
But now she can claim they did this because they were trying to make amends but the family took offense at this. Willfully not mentioning that they did not ask about Lilibet but kept it general or implied Elizabeth.
They are a gift which keeps on giving.
The Mirror quotes a Telegraph report that says the Harkles plan a “private christening” for their new doll, and that once again the names of the godparents will remain their little secret.
Aw, come on, you two, we know you picked Jughead and Veronica, because Affleck and JLo haven’t returned your calls.
.
The other new story out (that sugars are actually swallowing) is that the name Lilibet is actually also tribute to forgotten Doria......because she called Megs “Flower” as a nickname, and “Lilibet” contains the letters “Lili” which is similar to the actual word “Lily” which is indeed a flower.
Personally, “Flower” makes me think of the little skunk named Flower in the old Disney “Bambi” cartoon. You know, the friend of the rabbit called Thumper, who burst out laughing In the story when Bambi called the skunk a pretty Flower.
In 2016 every major American newspaper endorsed Hillary Clinton, except for the NY Post and one other. The count was something like 65 to 2.
The US media has a hard tilt to woke. This helps Megs' racism claims and the M/H woke crusade.
Here I am in America and the UK Daily Mail is my best source for fair and balanced news. I look at their site every day for my political news.
I've a feeling that only Prince Philip and blood members of HM's family were allowed the privilege of addressing her as `Lilibet', probably only those who knew her in childhood.
The Queen's first cousin, Margaret Rhodes, was, I believe the last apart from Philip so to do.
For anybody else, it was gross over-familiarity, otherwise what we call `a bloody cheek'.
That is why it is such an insult, the deluded b*tch putting herself on a par with Blood Royals.
WBBM.
On the tag end of the last thread I posted this comment. Right underneath me you wrote: "I spit on them."
I second that sentiment a million times. And worse. But apropos of what you wrote above . . .
As Happy Days pointed out upthread, Human gestation is 40 weeks, Counting back from the date of the woman’s last menstrual cycle. It’s been colloquially shortened to nine months because anything after 36 weeks is considered full-term. HD did the actual math, But If we generalize and count one month as 4 weeks, what other blessed event occurred exactly 10 months a girl from June 4? Or put another way, what does significant day occurs two months From yesterday?
Ding ding ding! Why, Rachel Meghan’s natal anniversary of course. She wouldn’t have been meticulous enough to do the actual calculation, but just counted back 10 months from her own birthday. Ta da!
Wait, it gets better. What esteemed personage In the house of Windsor shares August 4 is a birthday with RM?
That’s right—The Queen Mother. So, Rachel is essentially equating herself with the QM if she expects us to think she conceived Harry’s Little Princess on QM’s birthday. “Look – – I can make Queens too. I am a queen (in my own mind).” Far-fetched? I don’t think so. This woman has no job and nothing but time on her hands to plot and plan. No doubt by choosing June 4 she can say that it’s a sign: her baby princess born on June 4; America’s birthday on July 4 and her own birthday, and incidentally QM’s too on August 4. Rachel just loves to concoct patterns that point to her cosmic specialness.
Anyway, I keep reading (as @HappyDays wrote here) "after this incident, Meghan had her records at Northwestern sealed." What does that mean? What educational/disciplinary records wouldn't automatically be sealed by FERPA or institutional policy anyway? For M and every other student? I've seen some claims on Quora that are simply 100% wrong about what is normally public info for university students. And since the info can't be accessed for M, the argument is that she must be hiding something when that may not be true at all.
At one point I thought I would do a second degree in journalism. The first lecture, at a solid university known for its department of journalism, the professor stood before a hall of 250 of us and explained in clerical tones that journalism was more important than medicine or science.
Someone in a front row apparently snorted. To which the professor replied, “You think I am wrong? A good journalist can perform brain surgery on an entire nation with a pen. A doctor is a mere drudge, helping damaged people to survive, in exchange for money.”
He drones on this way, and about 20 of us in my section of seats exchanged looks. Together we went to the office and dropped the courses.
Today, I look back and realize we were actually given a clue back then.
.
@Wild Boar Battle-maid,
@Hikari
@Puds
Meant to address this tidbit to you. Add this to your list.
Princess Diana visited Northwestern University, Megs’ future school, on June 4 in 1996.
It is all so obvious, isn’t it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9660887/First-look-Meghan-Markles-childrens-book-Bench.html
https://scientologymoneyproject.com/2015/02/16/what-the-church-of-scientology-doesnt-want-the-public-to-know-part-1/
https://tonyortega.org/2020/09/21/scientology-black-ops-episode-6-dirty-tricks-are-a-sacrament-in-this-church/
It seems to me that she is a perfect fit for them; the highest level in CofS - the `Thetans’ - consider themselves as a Master Race while the rest of us are untermensch. They believe in power, money and World Domination - to the extent, it is alleged, of preparing to commit genocide.- Nazism with Extra-terrestrials, if you like.
That kind of thinking would lead her to believe that the normal rules don’t apply to her and that not only she could be our Queen but that she should be. Her ego and megalomania seem, to me, too monstrous for the seeds to have been sown just by her old Dad but the CofS would fit the bill for as those responsible for whispering in her ear.
Perhaps she’s been a S-ologist all along, following instructions to nab a rich man and siphon off his wealth, and that of his family, for the organisation using a false flag to enter the RF-- and if she could win over/take down a democratic nation as well, so much the better.
Did she blow her own cover with the engram-free birthplan?
Please follow the links and say how it strikes you.
I pray that the Security Services have her in their sights.
God Save the Queen.
Well-spotted! Can you suss out the significance of 11:40 AM PST? Unlike Archie's debut, perfectly attuned to the precise moment of sunrise over London, this was late. Did the late L. Ron Hubbard predict some sort of astrological event at 11:40AM PST on 6/4/21 of which we non-Thetans were unaware?
I hadn't commented on your Scientology theory yet but it makes total sense.
Smeg would be drawn to Scientology because it's where all the glittering slebs worship themselves in their spa church. Scientology is the "Church" of the profoundly narcissistic. Meg would love to be rubbing elbows with the likes of John Travolta, Kirstie Alley, Elisabeth Moss and whoever is still a 'member'. Oh, and of course, Crown Prince Tom. Mugs would dump Harry so fast his carrot top would fly off if Tom expressed an interest in making Murk Katie Holmes's successor as his Princess. Murk would not be troubled by any theological concerns. In my layman's opinion, Meg is going to Hell but just not soon enough to suit most of us.
We have theorized that Mugs and Harry are both so dim and developmentally stunted, immature reactive and disorganized/high that the only way they have made it thus far is with the help of shadow backers. Scientology might have had a vested interest in infiltrating the Royal family. There's no way that all of these huge celebrity 'favors'--deluxe housing, free, 'jobs' for profile, TV appearances, private jets, etc.--aren't coming solely through the combined wattage of Harry's title and their winning personalities.
"I hope they throw the book at her so hard that her wig and her lying head fly clean off."
Ha, decapitation by "the book." Poetic justice for a narc who does not play by "the book" and thinks that neither the rules nor the norms of polite society pertain to her behavior!
The more I think about it, the more I think your Scientology theory about Megs has endless merits.
I was just texting with a woman from LA I know through an arts connection, who grew up In Bev Hills, the daughter of a director/producer. Connected, still connected through her siblings and friends. So I asked about Sci and MM, her opinion. She says at the time Megs was an LA teen, Sci was actively in the streets and malls and markets in LA, recruiting school kids. Disgruntled kids, or bored pampered kids who wanted stuff, would have been a top choice target. Obviously Megs‘ later years trying to climb into Hollywood would put her into that like it path again. It is absolutely plausible— she couldn’t give them money or talent, but she could use her salad making to bring them a royal, and on to Toronto and the Mulroneys and Soho House she went with her yoga mat and Tig bottles. There were Sci rumors about Ron Burkle’s late son too. Who knows.
Scientology-assigned work in one of their creepy ships or desert locations, a requirement for the less special, would also explain the long weird absences of Doria, and the way she keeps popping up with various degrees and professions.
Plus, Sci don’t believe in medications for physical or mental health Issues (remember the huge blow-up between postpartum Brooke Shields and Tom Cruise?) — so Doria and Meghan taking Harry off his medicine and subjecting him to starvation “healing” etc might tick another box in our suspicions.
WBBM, I think your theory has legs.
The money laundering theory is both fascinating and frustrating. It means they will not be running out of money any time soon. I wonder if soon Harry will have ties to figures so shady they'd make Prince Andrew's contacts look like seven-year-old choir boys.
@WBBM
The Scientologist theory is also interesting as an explanation of why they always seem to have money. Perhaps they're not as liquid as they'd like, but they certainly have support.
Is it possible, though, to keep secret what a dedicated Scientologist one is? Were Harry's wife neck-deep in Tom Cruise's church, it would have presumably come to the attention of the BRF while she and Harry were still dating. I would be much more concerned about ties to the church of Scientology than about any glaring defects of character or inherent trashiness -- and I believe an organization as old and large as "The Firm" would, too.
I know pretty much nothing about Sci except what I've read by Tony Ortega or heard on the shows Leah Rimini hosted.
However, I stopped, and tried to think like Megs, Oprah and Doria (ouch my head)... and found this:
ANGEL NUMBER 1140
Number 1140 is made up of the energies of number 1 (appearing twice, doubling its influences) and the vibrations of number 4 and number 0. Number 1 encourages self-leadership and assertiveness, initiative, taking positive action, new beginnings and taking a fresh approach. Number 1 also relates to motivation, striving forward and progress, and reminds us that we create our own realities with our thoughts, beliefs and actions. Two number 1's appearing together relate to the Master Number 11. The karmic Master Teacher number 11 relates to the principles of spiritual awakening and enlightenment, illumination, high energy, creative idealism, inspiration and intuition, self-expression and sensitivity, and mysticism. Master Number 11 tells us that to connect with our higher-selves is to know and live our Divine life purpose and soul mission.
Number 4 relates to practicality and application, hard work and responsibility, traditional values, honesty and integrity, diligence and determination to successfully achieve goals. Number 4 also relates to our drive, passion and purpose in life. Number 0 magnifies and amplifies the energies and attributes of the numbers it appears with, and resonates with the Universal and ‘God force’ Energies. Number 0 stands for potential and/or choice, and is a message to do with developing one’s spiritual aspects and is considered to represent the beginning of a spiritual journey and highlights the uncertainties that may entail. It suggests that you listen to your intuition and higher-self as this is where you will find all of your answers.
Angel Number 1140 encourages you to put your efforts and focus towards your long-term goals and aspirations. Your thoughts, feelings, emotions, actions and overall outlook are being boosting by your angels so that you can continue to manifest all that you want and need in your life. Building strong foundations from well-laid plans ensures future progress, stability and success, and your angels encourage you to work with your passion and drive.
Angel Number 1140 encourages progressive change, growth and development, and asks you to share your knowledge and wisdom with others. Begin worthwhile projects now that will bring long-term benefits and future success. If you take action with caution and wisdom you will be successful in business, money matters and life in general. What you put your efforts towards will reap long-term rewards.
Angel Number 1140 may suggest that your desired outcome and/or result will occur in the very near future. Have faith, trust and patience, and do not try to force things to happen. Allow the angels and Universal Energies to work things out for your highest good.
Angel Number 1140 is a sign from your angels that they are there to assist you with manifesting your true desires. You have worked hard and you deserve them.
http://sacredscribesangelnumbers.blogspot.com/2012/08/angel-number-1140.html
HM squashed the impending empire when she ended SussexRoyal. Remember all those domains they registered? They have been in complete shambles since. No plan B.
Return of Torontopaper reminded me of clip I viewed long ago. Maybe all of this was born in Canada. I was thinking more along lines of Soros but it doesn't really matter between soros, oprah, gates,etc. They are all of the same ilk.
"This had potential" is phrase that comes to mind. What is interesting to me is what went down behind the scenes that seemingly ended their support after ending of SR. Archewell is surely not brainchild of any mastermind seeking global domination.
Lillibet is rogue counterstrike to banning of SR. Petty , painful and immature. Lone H&M . Obvious sign true Power behind scenes has walked away. Oprah still around to make money and of course still embedded with PTB but imo master plan involving All is no more.
Frank Giustra. So quick to distance himself from story. Is who I now believe originally wrote it. Once his name came into play he was out. Too much at stake. He more than likely was in it for money its his cronies that would in turn capitalize on success of SR ,in turn M , pivot political.
Not my intent to get political. Disregard messenger , this message seems highly plausible. He refers to them as "Hewitts" further diminishing his credibility to many but what he says of FG is why I share. I can totally believe this scenario. https://youtu.be/_6mT1hPnG2Q
More on Giustra. https://heavy.com/news/2020/01/frank-giustra/amp/
Certainly ties things together. Meg thinking she's destined POTUS. Whispers of Russian oligarchs. Foster involvement, subsequent distancing.
Everything went awry after Vancouver, more aptly, after the banning of SussexRoyal.
This mess now and since is them on their own. Behind the scenes HM slayed The Beast, not directly implying H&M either. H&M cannot sustain themselves and will eventually implode. As awful as all this is , the alternative could have been irrevocably devastating. HM is hero , 95 year old dragon slayer. In retrospect you can kinda see how all the infuriating shenanigans of Harkles fell low priority, not withstanding fake babies.
Who knows, but 2014 seem relevant to the story.
I seem to recall that 2014 was the year that Soho House Toronto was launched and she got in tight with the Mulroney-Nonoo set. Jessica was actually pregnant at the time so their Bestie FFs act didn't start in earnest until a year or so later. This means, when Meg blew into our consciousness with her 'bestie' in tow, the women had been acquainted for 2-3 years and 'friends' a shorter time than that. And of course, that Best Friends Forever tie seems to be over. 5 years = 'Lifetime' in Meg-World. That's why I'm amazed that she was still consorting with her college friends as recently as two years ago. Her Wimbledon babysitters looked very ordinary to me . . soccer moms with unstylish clothes and extra weight--does Meg keep them around to highlight that she's the 'beautiful' one, even post-partum?
But what if when Megs read the book she
says transformed her she thought the money in Scientology would help get Megs closer to her desires. I don't know, but I wouldn't rule it out at all. But it can only all be speculation so far but it does seem something occurred around 2014 that changed Megs and brought out her demons to the surface. Maybe the new books on Megs will dig deeper and see how she could have got involved in a cult.
Meg has never stuck with anything in her life, so if she is involved in Scientology, she'll abandon it as soon as she decides it's not working for her any more. She's got a pattern of converting to different religions when expedient/she's going to get something out of it--a berth in the best private girl's Catholic school in L.A. or a wealthy husband with churchgoing mothers/grandmothers. The content in the teachings has zero interest for her, it's all white noise. If she's 'practicing' Scientology now, the sole objective is to hang out with celebrities and elevate her own status.
See my reply to WBBM about Sci right above your comment, at 7:59 PM. My thoughts about why I think WBBM may be right.
I think the book you are referring to was The Secret, by Rhonda Byrne, the very book touted by none other than Oprah:
US TV host Oprah Winfrey is a proponent of the book. On The Larry King Show she said that the message of The Secret is the message she's been trying to share with the world on her show for the past 21 years. Author Rhonda Byrne was later invited to her show along with people who swear by The Secret. The key message of The Secret is that everyone has the ability to create their own reality. In other words, “thoughts can become things”.
People around the world have been talking about a movie so powerful that it can change the course of your life. This movie, The Secret, was created by Australian Rhonda Byrne, and she says that if you follow its philosophy, you can create the life you want—whether that means getting out of debt, finding a more fulfilling job or even falling in love.
Rhonda says she stumbled on what she calls The Secret at the end of 2004. At the time, everything in Rhonda's life had fallen apart—physically, emotionally and financially—and she was in "total despair." Then her father died suddenly, and she was worried about her grief-stricken mother. "I wept and wept and wept, and I didn't want my daughter to see me sobbing," Rhonda says.
That's when Rhonda's daughter gave her a copy of The Science of Getting Rich, a book written in 1910 by Wallace D. Wattles. "Something inside of me had me turn the pages one by one, and I can still remember my tears hitting the pages as I was reading it," Rhonda says. "It gave me a glimpse of The Secret. It was like a flame inside of my heart. And with every day since, it's just become a raging fire of wanting to share all of this with the world.
Read more: https://www.oprah.com/spirit/_75/all#ixzz6x7kb9ZtE
HOWEVER....in March 2007 right after the book came out, SALON SAID:
Oprah's ugly secret
By continuing to hawk "The Secret," a mishmash of offensive self-help cliches, Oprah Winfrey is squandering her goodwill and influence, and preaching to the world that mammon is queen.
...
I don't know how many of these make there way across the Atlantic but still-
Think of gems like `The Queen's Knickers', `Room on the Broom' and Quentin Blake's work for Michael Rosen. Or the classics of EH Shepherd's - Pooh illustrations and Wind in the Willows.
And she's even stolen George's dancing classes.
The Bench is down to $13.16 on Amazon US.
Conversely, Hold Still is up to $94.99
"About the Author
Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, is a mother, wife, feminist, and activist. Through the nonproο¬t work of the Archewell Foundation, she and her husband are committed to activating compassion in communities across the world. She currently resides in her home state of California with her family, two dogs, and a growing ο¬ock of rescue chickens."
@Puds,
@Hikari
WELL, WELL, WELL:
From the Sun UK, March 20, 2021
OPRAH Winfrey has been blasted by critics of Scientology after an advert for the controversial church aired during her interview with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
The ad promoting Scientology’s own TV channel ran during the US broadcast of the interview on Sunday evening on CBS, which saw Meghan and Harry accuse the Royal Family of racism and poor treatment.
The interview is believed to have attracted 17.1 million viewers in the US, while advertisers are thought to have paid $325,000 for a 30 seconds of ad time during the program.
Detractors of the church say it smacks of “tremendous hypocrisy” given widespread claims of abuses within the religion and allegations of anti-black racism against late Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard.
“CBS and Oprah’s production company have a responsibility to not help promote a cult like Scientology to millions of people," Scientology critic Jeffrey Augustine told The Sun.
“They should not be taking the Church’s money, it’s pretty disgusting and extraordinarily hypocritical.
And, the link:
https://www.the-sun.com/news/2544389/oprah-winfrey-scientology-ad-harry-meghan-interview/
REST OF THE ARTICLE ABOUT THE SCIENTOLOGY ADS
running during the Harry and Meghan Oprah Show:
“If Oprah is so shocked by the Royal Family's alleged racism, why does she turn a blind eye to L. Ron Hubbard’s alleged racism?
“Oprah has for decades not made a statement about Scientology.
“She hasn't broadcast about about the claims of human rights abuses, forced abortions, child labour. It’s inexcusable and a tremendous hypocrisy.
“In the 1990s and 2000s former Scientologists contacted her show and she did not have them on as guests to talk about their awful claims.
“She is friends with John Travolta and has also done two blockbuster interviews with Tom Cruise, both well-known celebrity Scientologist."
The religion's founder L. Ron Hubbard was a defender of South Africa’s racist apartheid regime and said in 1960 that black people in that country were not civilized enough to vote.
He told a Scientology congress at the time: “Right now you tell me, well, the government of South Africa does not permit the black man a vote. He doesn’t even know what a vote is.
“Blacks kill off the blacks. And all you’ve got to do is pull a stable government off the top of them and they promptly start killing each other off.”
Science fiction writer Hubbard, who died in 1986 aged 74, also described the brutal South African government of the time as “nice guys”.
Hubbard’s church - which is currently run by Scientology chairman of the board David Miscavige – has long faced accusations of abuse of members and former members.
The harrowing stories of those who have escaped have been told in hit documentaries and TV shows such as Scientology and Me, Going Clear and actress Leah Remini’s Scientology and the Aftermath.
Those who leave the religion claim they are often declared “suppressive persons” and “disconnected” from family members and friends who remain within the church.
There have also been claims that members of the church’s Sea Org religious order have been forced to have abortions or subjected to forced labour.
Scientology has always strongly denied any accusations of abuse, forced labour or forced abortions. It also claims it does not have a policy of disconnected family members.
The Scientology Network is run from a five-acre complex on LA’s famous Sunset Blvd, which is known as Scientology Media Productions.
The TV channel was launched in March 2018 and is available on satellite TV and streaming services such as Apple TV.
CBS reportedly paid Oprah Winfrey’s Harpo Productions up to $9million as a licensing fee for the two-hour interview with Meghan and Harry.
Karen de la Carriere, a former Scientologist previously married to the president of the Church of Scientology International Heber Jentzsch, said:
“Scientology will relentlessly poke itself into anything which is headline news, just to hijack or piggyback the publicity of it.
Strangely, I found an angel too when reflecting on 6th April: all to do with astronomy & the change in the calendar in 1752. It's a stretch but bear with me:
The Financial Year used to start on 25th March, aka Lady Day or Feast of the Annunciation, when Gabriel announced the pregnancy to Mary. In 1752, the calendar jumped from 25th March to 6th April. Was this child born for the Blessed Virgin Meghan on this day to signify her Divine Nature?
@Puds,
My jaw has dropped too. I searched a connection on a whim and bam, this pops up.
Didn't O interview Leah Rehimini?(sorry butchered that)
She would not if scientologist
https://www.culteducation.com/group/1284-scientology/24963-oprah-scientologys-mission-impossible.html
I am not beyond believing O or even Meg could have joined at some point but I would need more. I can't right now see how it would have benefited O and M seems too rogue.
If Oprah wanted her Sci connections to remain under wraps for audience purposes, just as she keeps under things under tight wrap, but wants to make more hot money to give to Sci, sure, she would interview Leah for the ad sales. Sci desperately needs modern money. The
glory days are over and they are clawing cash in, any which way. If you go to Clearwater, FL, you may see the many thin, gray-faced Sci people milling around in the streets there.
Money, people, money. Oprah is no saint. MONEY.
Why the HELL didn't she just name the baby Lili (or Lily) Diana? Lilibet is very awkward and embarassing. What an utterly weird choice? I was very suprised. LOL.. just when you think you have Megsy pegged. Also, this is the time should could be experiencing some mild good will from the public, after her infant daughter was born. However, everyone is so thrown off by the name that the good will has morphed into confusion and awkward embarassment about the name.
How does she always get it so dang wrong? It's really a wonder!!!
Let's pretend MM signs up and gets seriously locked into Sci for the money since, oh, 2015. That's not very long. She lasted on Suits for the cash, she can probably last awhile longer a Sci as long as long as her outbursts are creatively channeled or kept hidden behind closed doors (as we have seen). Hence the whole big privacy thing, and desire to silence the press.
Maybe she is told she can run for the White House with Tom Cruise on Sci bucks, etc etc.
Megs bailed on the royals when the money turned out to be small, she found out she wasn't going to be Queen tomorrow, and say she noticed they were monitoring her communications. She completed her Prince Removal task and got back out to LA. But she is locked in, because they have dirt on her, and narcissists hate looking bad and having their secrets get out. And unlike the RF, Sci plays dirty.
The only gap in this is that I think I read the Russians hate Sci, like the Germans, so not sure how that ties up with the houses. Unless they don't know.
Personally, “Flower” makes me think of the little skunk named Flower in the old Disney “Bambi” cartoon. You know, the friend of the rabbit called Thumper, who burst out laughing In the story when Bambi called the skunk a pretty Flower.
I assumed this was where her nickname came from because in real life and in "Bambi," skunks are black with big white stripes.
Not a peep about the new royal baby on Procter & Gamble twitter or site.
Missed opp, considering they make a slew of baby products. But I'm told P&G tries hard to look hip, but is actually run like an old man's army trying to climb a sand dune backwards. So if the baby wasn't built into their schedule, no peep.
aw, I always thought Flower was kind of cute. Though, of course, it was a boy animal. But yes, another Disney reference to sell.
The Royals should be vary wary of accepting the Markles back into the fold. Why after all the abuse are they suddenly so keen to be back in the royal family. Pressure from some other party?
My guess is they're running out of money.
“ How do I copyright a name, title, slogan, or logo?
Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks. Contact the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, TrademarkAssistanceCenter@uspto.gov or see Circular 33, for further information. However, copyright protection may be available for logo artwork that contains sufficient authorship. In some circumstances, an artistic logo may also be protected as a trademark.” Another answer says specifically that you cannot copyright a domain name. HOWEVER, you can appky for trademarks for domain names, names of products, and much more. The article refers to the trademark office.
https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html#title
The Wall Street Journal had an article today announcing the birth of a girl to Harry and his wife. Sigh. I was shocked. The WSJ typically doesn’t cover low level “stars”. Sigh.
AnT - let her join scientology. She markles everything else. We can then finally put that "alleged" cult to bed Hmmm, what else can we have her markle.! I think it was your post about hollywood and everyone scrambling. Yes it seems like that is the case and some things may not go back to normal. The streaming services are consolidating and netflix will have to pump more cash into projects. They want to get returns and whatever the harkle are cooking up will not be enough to drive eyeballs to netflix (short of hiddent cameras and unscripted viewing of the home life!)
Im thinking they are going quiet as they shop to see if they can get takers on pics or if they want us to speculate on that is what they are doing. if they dont have a child or cant secure photo rights on a stand it, this may be harder to negotiate. The mrs is cheap if shes spending her own money and is likely not to sign up a 2-3 year deal with some family. I am thinking we get a baby hand holding harry's finger on Fathers Day or on Trooping the Colours and little lili diana will be taking her first steps when the statue unveiling is.
Members [of the Church of Scientology] also feel that God is somewhat of an afterthought, seeking to focus more on themselves and their own perceptions and life experiences for personal guidance and belief. Outsiders may be considered “fair game” or adversaries to the belief and are to be readily treated as an enemy.
Now who does that remind you of?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9659603/Meghan-Markle-gives-birth-Lili-25-years-Princess-Diana-visited-college-June-1996.html
and all of this with up to 20 weeks of parental leave. That says to me Harry lost his job at ButterUp$ since he has barely done anything for them.
OMG and Thomas Markle shade - from daily mail "I am very pleased with the announcement of the safe and healthy delivery of my new granddaughter, and I wish her and her mother all my love and best wishes." her and her mother - not my daughter but her mother. ha!
Of course, I realize that the very wealthy or powerful members of Scientology always get a break on what they are allowed to do.
I've been reading Tony Ortega's work on Scientology since he was at the Village Voice. I'm glad that others here have found his Underground Bunker site.
********************************
I've not written anything about the new baby's name yet because I was so gobsmacked that I needed a day to digest this new, horribly evil news. The absolute gall of these two (new word warning!) kidults is appalling.
HMTQ needs to act now.
“... What educational/disciplinary records wouldn't automatically be sealed by FERPA or institutional policy anyway? For M and every other student? I've seen some claims on Quora that are simply 100% wrong about what is normally public info for university students. And since the info can't be accessed for M, the argument is that she must be hiding something when that may not be true at all.” Can’t find post I’m quoting.)
I agree and I remain skeptical about that incident. If it happened, I can’t believe Northwestern didn’t expel her if she glued anyone’s eyelashes closed. Even in the 60s, my college sorority was real clear about hazing and there would have been severe consequences. Never mind what the university would have done.
I remember specifically that all of President Obama’s university and law school records were sealed. I think most candidates do that now. But I am now also wondering what that means as disciplinary records and academic records have always been unavailable to the public. It may mean that they are physically moved to a special area so that employees or others don’t have routine access.
Lillibet is rogue counterstrike to banning of SR. Petty , painful and immature. Lone H&M . Obvious sign true Power behind scenes has walked away. Oprah still around to make money and of course still embedded with PTB but imo master plan involving All is no more . . .
Certainly ties things together. Meg thinking she's destined POTUS. Whispers of Russian oligarchs. Foster involvement, subsequent distancing.
Everything went awry after Vancouver, more aptly, after the banning of SussexRoyal.
This mess now and since is them on their own. Behind the scenes HM slayed The Beast, not directly implying H&M either. H&M cannot sustain themselves and will eventually implode. As awful as all this is , the alternative could have been irrevocably devastating. HM is hero , 95 year old dragon slayer. In retrospect you can kinda see how all the infuriating shenanigans of Harkles fell low priority, not withstanding fake babies.
Christine said,
Why the HELL didn't she just name the baby Lili (or Lily) Diana? Lilibet is very awkward and embarassing. What an utterly weird choice? I was very suprised. LOL.. just when you think you have Megsy pegged. Also, this is the time should could be experiencing some mild good will from the public, after her infant daughter was born. However, everyone is so thrown off by the name that the good will has morphed into confusion and awkward embarassment about the name.
How does she always get it so dang wrong? It's really a wonder!!!
Yesterday after I read the announcement, I confess, I had some bad moments, my own little River meltdown. (Do look up his latest video if you haven't seen it yet. Incandescent/verklempt in inimitable drag style. But he (presuming that is is preferred pronoun was genuinely enraged and sad to the point of tears on behalf of the Queen. It was touching to see.)
I have had a night to sleep on this ridiculous petty stunt and I've got some perspective. We all imagine the Royals are crying into their tea in London over this unimaginable liberty, on the heels of their bereavement. The Harkles' actions are vindictive in the extreme. But Her Majesty and all the Windsors can afford to be sanguine about this and laugh at the pathetic posturing of the pontificating ponces even, if they know FOR POSITIVE that Harry and Meghan have not had a child for the last two years and they don't have a new one now. I think Archie has been a Construct for Cash/Title Grab and the sudden, swift appearance of Baby Princess Lilibet Diana is the same. This is like a little girl naming her dolly baby after her dog or something . . .Nothing the Harkles do is real. If she can prove that she's got a real legitimate birth certificate issued by the State of California for a real, liveborn breathing human female infant . . .Let's see it, Rachel. Show us. We've seen all the legitimately notarized and witnessed birth certificates for dozens of other Royal babies. Not the one you claimed to birth 2 years ago. What sort of Photoshop/Internet DIY project are you going to display in the pages of Kneepads as 'Lili's' bona fide birth certificate? We await it with bated breath.
The paucity of detail provided over 'this birth' after months of her telling us all about the home birth she was going to have, etc. (some outlets merely reported that the child was born in 'a hospital in Santa Barbara') is pretty telling. Where's Meg's fanciful imagination this time? No leaping up out of the home birthing pool to greet the sunrise with a perfect Warrior pose? How'd the silent birth go? What, she wasn't up making vegan waffles with Gan-Gan's Christmas present within 15 minutes of "giving birth"? How uncharacteristic of her.
That protection is ending now. Harry is definitely 'Out'. Lockdowns are over. American tabloids have no deference to royals and no super-injunction. Scrutiny is coming. Santa Barbara feels to me like a big small town. If a global celebrity gave birth at a hospital there, it will be known. If a global celebrity definitely did NOT give birth there on Friday last or at any time in the last six months, that will be known as well. The Fosters know the truth. I think it's just a matter of time before their run of secrecy and cons is exposed.
The Crown always wins.
I gave it more thought and am inclined to believe M may in fact have joined but only recently. Lots of articles out there saying Tom Cruise wooing MM to join. She may for movie role. The silent birth story was random too, or not?
One caveat is the mental health stuff . That was in works long ago with O. The commercial could have been compromise of sorts. Has O ran their commercials during other programming? Not quite yet sold on her being member.
Harry's Better Up would be violation as well but crickets. Will be a sign if that "job" falls away.
The random leak of embassy making death notification is odd but not if H had already excommunicated family. But would scientology have allowed H to attend funeral?
Finally, they don't have any money. Scientology is expensive. But could be how they got lured in. H can turn a profit, considered investment. Seems clear after Vancouver they had no plan. O put them up due to impending interview, previous favors. But I feel now wants to cut loose as they are train wreck. Scientology swoops in for the save?
Just a friendly note that a word you use very often, "wander," means to move around aimlessly. The word that you mean to use is "wonder", not "wander."
"I WONDER if the Harkles..."
"I WANDER through the grocery store, looking for new items..."
You are right in what you say. Ultimately the BRF tactic of taking the high road will work. There are signs it is working. But such small signs. Taking too long. Are we supposed to go on bearing Sussex insults and contempt indefinitely?
If the BRF aren't careful, they will forfeit their own popular support. Not a negligible risk given the rise of a younger generation with little time or respect for the monarchy. The rest of us could just fall by the wayside. Give up. Exhausted.
I must say it really helps to hear your own immediate reaction Hikari, and from other Nutties. I was taken aback by how upset I was when I learned the baby's name. It reminded me of when my dearly loved grandmother dropped dead without warning when I was 18. The last time I saw her she gave me a simple sapphire and silver ring. Months after her death I saw a visiting friend of my brother's had appropriated it and was wearing it at our dinner table. I was inconsolable. Nothing else has reminded me of that experience, nearly 40 years ago. Until now. This sounds wildly overstated, but it was my honest reaction to the name. I don't fully understand it.
I certainly understand computer glitches. I get them all of the time, too. Because it had been going on for so long, that I wasn't sure if you knew the difference because you could be a non-English as a first language speaker. We get people from all over the world here.
I have a hard time spelling Barbara, as in Santa Barbara. It usually comes out as Babrabrabra. LOL!
************************************
Moving on, Scientology opened a new center to serve Santa Barbara in February 2020.
https://www.scientology.org/scientology-today/church-openings/grand-opening-ventura.html
"It is strange how our minds work and how unpredictable the triggers can be (God I hate that word 'trigger' now, but it used to be a perfectly good, useful word). You think something is long past and then suddenly it rears back up, just the same as it ever was."
Great point! What The Harkles have done with their mental health stunts is doing great harm to suffering people. It is so dangerous to try to be mental health experts with absolutely no background. Lady C read several messages to her that said they are reliving past trauma because of the Harkles. I wonder when the first suicide directly influenced by the Harkles will happen.
I first got a glimmer of the news here, when Maneki posted the news. Thinking this HAD to be some sort of joke, I looked for myself. Shore 'nuff. The Farkles surprised the hell out of me with 'Archie Harrison' and to say I was shocked at the name choice for a girl would be an understatement. So many 'woke' choices they could have gone with. So many other variations on Elizabeth, even. Her envy of Catherine is pathological, since both of Farkle's 'children' are named variations of names which were already bestowed in the Cambridge family.
You are right in saying that Harry, the spare of the heir, remains uncomfortably close to the throne in theory. So long as even one of William's children live, the Ginger Head Case will never, ever get a whiff of the throne. The time has definitely come for William to ensure that he travels separately from the children. I'm sure some sort of Regency would be set up for George, if need be . .and Uncle Harry is the last person who would be considered. He has thrown gasoline on his birthright and set it on fire and he can p!$$ all he wants but there is no putting out these flames.
The situation with Harry is pretty unprecedented in modern times. Younger brothers of a King or future King have oft plotted to advance their interests--ultimately, the Crown--leading military coups or more underhanded ways of dispatching the rightful heir. Harry's is the latter . . he is attempting a coup by disinformation/whining. I can guarantee that William's burdens of Kingship will have never crossed Haz's puny ginger mind--what it actually means to assume the mantle of sovereignty. All Harry sees is the boodle--the wealth (which is only William's to oversee, not 'to have'), the flash house and whatever other tangible perks there are. The intangible responsibilities elude Haz entirely. He couldn't even manage his own significantly less demanding ones.
Haz was too dim and damaged to be allowed out on his own recognizance, with a blank chequebook from Dad, but that's what happened and this is the trouble he's gotten himself into. Haz is one seriously f*cked up puppy. She is too, but she's only still a topic of conversation because she married him. He's the reason the RF has been to all appearances so lenient. They must live in terror of him offing himself.
If we are this exhausted, imagine how they feel at the Palace . . it's a right mess. Even Edward VIII didn't cause this much kerfluffle when he left the family. The amount of heartache Haz has caused the family is out of all proportion to the actual importance of his role within it.
Didn't one of you predict Meghan would name the baby Lilibet?! I swear someone did.
----------
I did a while back, thinking Lilibet or a variation thereof. I was half joking and was utterly shocked when I read the news, so much so that I forgot an ingredient when cooking dinner, then nearly forgot the veg!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re Scientology, knowing absolutely nothing about it I did some research. Their website says this about drugs:
* Scientologists do not take street drugs or mind-altering psychotropic drugs.
They consider drugs cause extremely damaging effects on a person—physically, mentally and spiritually.
This doesn't seem to square with our knowledge of the duo who allegedly are fond of some weed and white powder.
Re life, this is the philosophy of the 'church':
[They view life] As a game. A game in which everyone can win and no one need lose.
In which case, the Harkles are always winners -or so they think. Maybe this is why they carry on with their disastrous decisions.
Scientology can't be ruled out but it would require to study the subject and it's rules etc. The thing is, nothing can be ruled out where those two are concerned.
I have wondered myself why Oprah/Apple would open themselves up to litigation in that fashion. Do they have sufficient weasel words on their channel to protect themselves in court? (For entertainment purposes only, always contact a licensed physician and not the frauds we use on our channel, etc.) Is the program profitable enough to pay off the claimants and their attorneys? I wouldn't have thought so, but...
I couldn't agree with you more. If he'd been sent to Gordonstoun it could have made all the difference. Tragic that Prince Charles should have gone somewhere like Eton instead of Gordonstoun and vice versa for his second son. We've mentioned this before on here, but H is very reminiscent of Clarence, the troublesome younger brother of Edward IV and older brother of Richard III. Whenever I read about Clarence's treacherous activities and behaviour - both petty and serious - I exclaim in my head "Are you going to let him get away with that? AGAIN?" H is no different.
Scientology is NOT a possibility with the Harkles, Oprah, or possible backers.
I'm from Los Angeles, where many a cult has thrived, but the Scientologists have VERY distinct characteristics, and the foremost one is adherence to Scientology as the only master. They ONLY socialize with other Scientologists, and have much more effective PR and lawyers than we've seen from Montecito.
Not a chance in the world, hippie Doria or her wretched daughter became converts to that particular organization. BUT the techniques Scientology uses for mind control are familiar from many, many cults ... like NXIVM, Moonies, etc.
I agree that the Harkles have powerful helpers beyond Oprah, with an agenda, but not Scientology.
Of course to little children, the first kind of freedom - to learn about the natural world, to build resilience, health and a sense of adventure - is the one they would want. That they should have, and would have had but for their loathsome parents.
On another subject, yet again the Sussexes are treating the masses with disdain, withholding a photo of the baby. So petty and vindictive. Indiscriminate too, as they are obviously upsetting their followers more than their critics. As far as a photo is concerned. I'm still busy recovering from the name.
Scientology is NOT a possibility with the Harkles, Oprah, or possible backers.
I really agree. The number one thing that Scientology wants from its members --because it is a cult -- is money, big money. I can't imagine Flower (aka Harry's wife) being willing to give that kind of money to anyone other than herself or her standing by while PH gave it either.
Yes, supremely ironic that Gordonstoun would have been a natural fit for Harry. Charles vowed that sons of his would be Eton men, as had been his own wish. Philip misread his own son, to the detriment of that boy, and Charles did the same a generation later. Gordonstoun is a better preparation for a military life, with its emphasis on fitness and an action-oriented curriculum. Eton is more academic and more elite, better for a future King. But even if Charles had seen the wisdom of sending H to his hated alma mater, the expectation had been set in Harry's mind that he would naturally get to do everything William was doing, whether or not it was suitable for him. That's why a school outside of the UK might have been best--one with no connections to the Royal family. In the UK Haz was bound to be in William's shadow, no matter where he went to school but it was a zillion times worse at Eton and that is, according to legend, where the rift began in earnest between the brothers. Because H expected that William would smooth his way in all things and he'd be allowed to join the older boys among William's set by dint of being his brother. Completely daft. At no school are the grades mixed like that . . and it was never Will's responsibility to be his kid brother's social secretary. It seems that Haz got into the habit from an early age of blaming William for not 'standing up' for him whenever things didn't go Harry's way.
The poisonous culmination of this lifelong tendency is now what we have before us.
Ava,
It seems that Haz got into the habit from an early age of blaming William for not 'standing up' for him whenever things didn't go Harry's way.
______
@ Hikari, I can't get away from the impression that H was always a kind of zero. Blank expressions as a child, completely impulsive actions as a teen and young adult.
Not sure where I'm going with this train of thought, but this .... person .... needs to be culled from the RF in any way possible, I'm thinking.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9661817/Queen-offers-olive-branch-Prince-Harry-invitation-lunch-source-says.html
The Queen is the bigger person and very forgiving and gracious. H, if he comes back next month, will be back in a private capacity so his grandmother can see him if she wants to. Although this gesture, if true, gives a positive image I'm not sure how it'll be viewed. If the Queen wants to see him, then this doesn't need to be made public, it's a family affair. Just my opinion.
Queen has offered olive branch to Prince Harry following the birth of his daughter Lilibet with an invitation to lunch when he returns to UK to unveil Princess Diana statue next month, source says
By EDEN CONFIDENTIAL BY RICHARD EDEN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 22:00, 7 June 2021 | UPDATED: 22:33, 7 June 2021
She has been accused of handing down ‘genetic pain and suffering’ and her family tarnished by racism claims, but the Queen clearly does not hold a grudge against Prince Harry.
I hear the monarch has invited her grandson to join her for lunch at Windsor Castle when he flies over from California for the unveiling of the Princess Diana statue next month.
‘It’s a typically magnanimous gesture by Her Majesty,’ a courtier tells me. ‘The lunch will be a chance for them to talk things through.’
The invitation is said to have been made before the birth of the Duke and Duchess’s daughter last Friday. Harry and Meghan announced that they had called her Lilibet after the Queen’s family nickname.
Meghan is expected to stay behind at the couple’s £11 million mansion in Montecito, California, with baby Lilibet and their two-year-old son, Archie.
It would be the first time that Harry has had a tete-a-tete with his grandmother since he and Meghan announced that they were quitting Britain more than a year ago.
After the rancour of the Sandringham summit and tense ‘Megxit’ negotiations, she hosted an informal Sunday lunch for Harry in March 2020 — a month before he and Meghan formally stepped down as working members of the Royal Family. They ate in the Queen’s dining room in her Windsor Castle apartment. When Harry attended the funeral of his grandfather, Prince Philip, he spoke to the Queen only outdoors with other members of the Royal Family.
They will certainly have much to discuss. In his and Meghan’s now infamous interview with Oprah Winfrey, they made a string of distressing claims about the Royal Family and accused an unnamed royal of racism. In a string of public appearances since, Harry has blamed his family for his mental anguish and said just the thought of flying back to London was enough to fill him with dread.
The Queen, by contrast, has made clear that Harry and Meghan will be ‘much-loved family members’. A Buckingham Palace spokesman declines to comment.
More or less hearsay?
I don’t know what BBC was expecting with this.
"Most likely allegedly she already has someone in mind to replace Harry, as allegedly there were rumors when his wife when staying at San Ysidro Ranch a number of times without her husband, she is having affair allegedly, if true or not?"
It didn't even occur to me that "San Ysidro Ranch" was an actual place. It is! I thought it was probably a misspelling!
https://www.sanysidroranch.com/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=business-listing
"The Ranch has a historical guest list: Groucho Marx, Winston Churchill, Sinclair Lewis, and John Houston, who finished writing the screenplay for The African Queen while in residence. Lawrence Olivier and Vivian Leigh exchanged midnight wedding vows on the grounds, and Camelot began here with John and Jackie Kennedy honeymooning in the cottage that now bears their name."
"Tucked away in the leafy foothills of Santa Barbara, San Ysidro Ranch offers a unique blend of privacy, peace, and tranquility in an idyllic setting. Thirty-eight vine-covered cottages surrounded by incredibly landscaped gardens with flowers always in bloom under a canopy of stately sycamores and gnarled oaks make this exclusive property destination unplugged from the rest of the world..."
This is exactly the kind of place where I can see MM thinking her "privacy" would be respected. And if she's already been meeting someone there, I think it's highly unlikely she just gave birth to a baby. But that's just me.
Great find re the Scientology link to Oprah! I think this tells us something important about her - Oprah, that the almighty dollar comes first in her life. Considering O's strong stand against racism I'm shocked that she would still deal with Scientologists as in Travolta and Cruise and would take money from them to run their ad during the interview.
What does this actually tell us about Oprah? This info is upsetting considering all Oprah has said about white privilege and her recent stand making her appear to be anti-white. I guess it's ok for Orca to tiptoe around the Scientology crowd but the royal family and a 1000-year-old monarchy are targets for destruction? smh
This link is an interesting aspect to the Harkle narrative but I agree w/ Miz Malaprop that Scientologists are not directly involved w/ the Harkles.
I believe this due to their stand on psychology and drugs. They are very anti-psychology and are against any psychiatric medications. They view the practice of psychology as a pseudoscience.
Oprah probably tiptoes around the Hollywood Scientologists but I don't think they would get involved with the Sussexes at all due to their "work" in mental health as well as their rumored involvement in illicit drugs.
There was an interesting story that went around involving Kelsey Grammer, Kirstie Alley and the tv show Fraiser...As a long-running and successful spin-off of Cheers, Kelsey made a point of inviting all the regular stars of cheers to appear in Fraiser at least once. Every single one of the main cast of Cheers showed up in Fraiser with the exception of Kirstie. She claimed that as a Scientologist she would not appear in a show that featured a storyline centered on psychology.
There have also been infamous public arguments over the years with Scientology folks calling out others for seeking psychological help. Tom Cruise rudely called out Brooke Shields a number of years ago for taking medication for postnatal depression.
And lastly, there was a lot of speculation over how the death of John Travolta's son could have possibly been prevented if it wasn't for the family's beliefs in Scientology. The boy allegedly suffered from seizures associated with autism which caused him to fall and hit his head. Apparently Scientologists do not believe in autism and therefore Travolta's son did not take anti-seizure medication.
The Oprah link sounds like it's worth looking into as it might show something interesting about her but I doubt Scientology would be interested in the Harkles. I have other reasons for thinking this but no time to explain...the psych reason is a biggie. Hope this helps.
I haven't been following very closely but there was already a rumor of MM staying at that ranch which is in the area of the mudslide mansion. Maybe there is some truth in what the dm commenter is reporting?
Also the Longo twitter story about Harry and rent-a-cops at the "Owenshire property"...that's the name of Rob Lowe's previous home that stands right next door to the Harkle's estate. Rob sold it years ago to the current owner who has it up for sale. It's still well known as having been owned by HotRob and borders the Harkle property.
I agree. Harry had no place at Eton. He probably shouldn't have gone to university at all. He doesn't have the brains for university. I think he should have gone right into the military.
He has been so coddled all of his life, but I think one of the worst things that Charles did was to allow Harry and William to have a nightclub/bar in the palace. What on earth was he thinking?
And, no, an older brother should not have to be the babysitter for his brother at university. They should have been separated to give each of them an individual experience at university.
From Sam's twitter:
Sammy Markle - CIO @ Point To Shade
@TheMarkleSammy
Replying to
@salty_duchess
UK citizen should start a petition to demand proof of delivery
10:20 AM · Jun 7, 2021·Twitter for Android
If they are having a private christening and godparents presumably are Oprah and Gayle....oops, meant TBD, inorder for the child to be in succession does it have to be baptized in the Church of England? Do LD and MA have to go thru a "confirmation" in the CofE?
Are there CofE's near to the Multi Million Dollar Monteceito so the kids can attend services?
Also the Longo twitter story about Harry and rent-a-cops at the "Owenshire property"...that's the name of Rob Lowe's previous home that stands right next door to the Harkle's estate. Rob sold it years ago to the current owner who has it up for sale. It's still well known as having been owned by HotRob and borders the Harkle property.
I had Googled "Owenshire Property Management" the first time that was posted here and couldn't find any good hits. Thanks for the details about "Owenshire" being the property name.
Although the U.S. inherited English common law once upon a time, we don't have any tradition or common law about traditional paths for common use that cross private property lines. I may not be describing this very well, but articles about, e.g., Madonna being taken to court -- during her marriage to Guy Richie -- by her neighbors for having put up fencing on her estate that stopped locals from using long-time footpaths doesn't exist legally in the U.S. Any private property owner can restrict members of the public from their property if they wish to do so. (Admittedly this is more complicated for ranchers and people owning land bordering a body of water, etc.)
But the point I'm getting to is I can easily see Harry "going out for a walk" after a fight with Flower and crossing property lines and-or sitting down somewhere, not realizing it's private property, and attracting the attention of a rent-a-cop.
For example, in my county, we have a lot of public parks, and some are good-sized, but not all publicly held land is clearly marked as such. But the kicker is that there's no basis in law for non-owners to take legal action against a property owner who, intentionally or otherwise, denies or restricts access to a widely used, long-time footpath on private property. I've read about these kinds of disputes in the DM; they're interesting from an American point of view. And it's always interesting when it comes up in a BBC television show!
I had trouble finding the Longo Twitter story, but my first thought in hearing it was that it was a faux pas a newly arrived Briton could easily make, even in a wealthy neighborhood with large estates.
Are there CofE's near to the Multi Million Dollar Monteceito so the kids can attend services?
As the U.S. Episcopalian Church has full communion with the CofE, I can't imagine they'll have any difficulty finding a local one to attend. Not that I think Flower would make that a priority for her family! But where they attend church locally would make for an interesting news story. It comes up a lot in Washington politics.
Re: Public access on private property in California.
Every beach in California is open to the public up to the mean high tide level. There were several lawsuits a couple years ago relating to public accessibility through private property. Barbara Streisand, if I recall, did not want plebs on her property walking down to the beach.
Sorry for any confusion - I meant to address the Longo portion of my post to AnT - I believe she was the one who brought the original info here.
I too googled the term "Owenshire Property Management" when first learning about this bit of tea and thought it was a maintenance company like the type that manage condo/townhouse communities. The twitter account was referring to the rent-a-cops in the area. The story is not really very meaty other than to suggest the Harkles are having arguments. I just thought it was interesting that Rob Lowe was pulled into the picture once again albeit very tangentially! I'm sure his ears would prick up if he heard the story. π€ͺ
@Puds
Do you know where the Foster's house is? I didn't realize they purchased in the neighborhood.
I'm not sure though if they are still involved with the Harkles. AnT and I had discussed a while ago the silence between the couples and speculated they had fallen out. she told us about some tea she heard...apparently Foster did not like that they never saw Archie nor any signs of a child and he decided to dump them as friends.
I guess you never know though. Perhaps they are silent because they are housing them?
My guess for another living location has always been Oprah's massive estate. She has a number of guest houses.π€·♀️
You're absolutely right about pathways and the law. I had to block off one path on a property, as people were using it as a shortcut to get to the main street in the city. If I hadn't done that, the city could have said it is an established right of way and could have taken it from me as a city street or pathway.
@Maneki
She’s on permanent heat!!
@LL
Yes, Indeed...
@JennS
Good to see you back X
1) Well, they couldn’t have really given this child any of Meghan’s nicknames, could they? Skeezy Golddigger Mountbatten-Windsor doesn’t have much of a ring to it.
2) Just what sort of push present will Harry be giving to the surrogate?
When last we left our prodding tv hostess and the saga of the guest house, Oprah had Stedman locked in there due to worries about him having Covid. But....her dog? What I am thinking about Oprah and her brain and ego now contains too many words I can’t type here.
But I like your idea of Oprah using the dogs to keep the Harkles out, or to create a media fog —— “don’t look in the guest house, there is a rabid dog in there!” As the sound of Harry singing Single Ladies warbles out a vent.
Per HELLO, as of March 21, 2021, the Fosters still had not purchased in Montecito.
Instead, they showed off their luxe LA apartment.
Sunshine Sucks dollars hard at work again...In fact it sounds like Smeg wrote the copy herself.
Read it and puke.
This is all part of the strategy to legitimize her tale of giving birth. The more the world argues over this baby name, the more it gets solidified in the public mind that the baby must therefore exist.
*. Harry told the Queen he wanted to name his future daughter after her before he ever even met Meghan, but well, he didn’t actually ask her or inform her before his new daughter Lilibet was named.
*. Sources think the Queen is honored and just so delighted with the new baby, and wants to invite Harry to a private tea when he is in the UK for the Diana statue unveiling.....
The Sussex PR team is peddling furiously to absolve Megs.
Odds-on Favourite
The naming of this child, Just wrong,
plain mean
Disrespectful to, our beloved Queen
What’s the betting now they’ll both
be real keen
In releasing multi pix
not of Darren, but Darlene
πππ Darlene! π€£
Katie Perry and Orlando Bloom bought an estate in Montecito. They have a new baby and have been slightly linked to the Harkles - supposedly Harry has struck up a little friendship w/ Orlando. But I can't imagine anyone wanting to part-time house these freeloaders - other than Orca since she has a ton of land and multiple buildings. Would eye of the tiger Katy Perry wish to befriend the Megalo? I'm not sure I could picture that. The Harkles may run into the same problem they had w/ the fosters when their children want a playdate and they discover the Harkle spawn are made of rubber.
@AnT did you see my post about Scientology's dislike of psychology? What do you think?
@Magatha
Thanks!
Who is that in your avatar? Is it PP?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9661903/Is-baby-Lilibets-honour-shameless-attempt-boost-Sussex-brand.html
Excerpts with my comments:
[...]it is with some trepidation that I venture any criticism – after all, in certain quarters anything other than fawning praise for this pair is tantamount to blasphemy.
Was ever a couple this indulged and protected? Right from the beginning. Exempt from scrutiny and accountability. Speak your mind and we'll set our lawyers on you or, in the case of Piers Morgan, go to your boss and get you constructively dismissed from your job.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m delighted at the new arrival. But one can be simultaneously happy for them and Archie, who now has a little sister, and utterly flabbergasted by the absolute cheek of it. Lilibet Diana? Seriously? Quite apart from the strange juxtaposition of the two names – which in itself is an entire psychodrama – isn’t this Lilibet the same person who according to Prince Harry was a lousy mother to Prince Charles, and who passed on her lousy parenting skills to him so he in turn was a lousy father to Harry?
Harry and Meghan’s supporters have rushed to point out that the couple reportedly asked the Queen for permission to use Lilibet, and she approved. But she couldn’t exactly have said no, could she?
Sloppy reporting. Nowhere have I seen a claim that the Queen gave her approval for the name Lilibet. Only that she had been told the baby would be named after her. Who the hell would expect Lilibet from that?
The same kind of sloppy reporting that took the announcement that the Sussexes had paid all necessary costs from the Frogmore renovation to mean they had paid ALL that was due from them. The fact that it was never confirmed how much they actually paid spoke volumes.
Come on DM. You're dealing with sharks here. You need to be fully prepared, armed and ruthless.
Harry didn't go to university - he went to RMA Sandhurst (Royal Military Academy) where office cadets do 2 yrs training before `passing out' ie getting their commission as 2nd Lieutenants. Formerly, had he been bright enough, he could have done a degree in, say, Engineering at RMCS Shrivenham (now the Defence Academy, with a different emphasis) otherwise gone on to a civilian university, still being in the Army.
Pub at Highgrove? Probably seen as the lesser of 2 evils - if H is to be believed, he may have become an alcoholic before he was old enough to enter a pub.
Having struggled, and usually failed, to keep sixth-formers out of the pub when on field trips, I'd say it was preferable to the boys making an exhibition of themselves in the local pub.
@WildBoar
The Tench illustrations are lifeless,
matches her words.
So many beautiful children’s books
for her to plagiarise...
Janet & Allan Ahlberg,
Shirley Hughes etc.
Joyous, warm and full of life,
exact opposite of madam mooch.
@JennS
Yes, Prince Philip X
Also reminds me of Master Mistie
as a nipper.
The Cof E is just that - English.
The Anglican Church in the US is ECUSA - the Episcopal Church of America. It's a member of the Anglican Communion, Presiding Bishop - Michael Curry. Despite what one may think of his bible-thumping style, he was the correct person for the wedding.
https://www.episcopalcafe.com/until-evacuated-itself-montecito-episcopal-church-served-as-shelter-in-ca-mudslides/
I doubt if the H$Ms have ever darkened its doors, assuming it's still standing.
@Jocelyn - to clarify - Eton is a very expensive public school, in the British sense ie independent of the State/local council or whatever. It takes boys 13-18; also known as `Slough Comprehensive' to the locals. Brains desirable but not required - unlike Winchester College where intelligence and academic aptitude are essential.
Eton's' `sister' establishment is Kings College, Cambridge, for which brains are required.
Harry had no place at Eton. He probably shouldn't have gone to university at all. He doesn't have the brains for university. I think he should have gone right into the military.
----------------
Eton was not the right fit for H but he never went to university and after a gap year, he went to the military.
'After school, Harry took a gap year, during which he spent time in Australia working on a cattle station ... He also travelled to Lesotho.
Harry entered the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst on 8 May 2005.' (Wikipedia)
Apologies again, you posted about H not going to university and I did too without seeing your post.
@AnT
Darren and Darlene sitting on The Bench..
"Cumberland Island [...] offered both isolation and romance. Fewer than thirty-five people lived on Cumberland for just part of the year and it was accessible only by ferry, private boat, or helicopter. 'If Mr. Kennedy wanted privacy, this was a good place to find it'. [...]
"No landlines existed on the island, only a radiophone for emergencies, and there was only one place to stay, the Greyfield Inn. [...] John rented the entire space for the weekend of September 21, even buying out the reservations of those who had already booked rooms. He also booked a few private homes nearby for guests who could not be accommodated at Greyfield.
"Carolyn and RoseMarie [Exec Assistant] handled the logistics in the months leading up to the event. So as not to trigger any suspicions, they sent everything needed for the wedding—wine, plates, glasses, silverware, tents—in a series of small shipments, making them appear as routine supplies for the inn. RoseMarie had travel agents create fake itineraries showing John and Carolyn traveling to Ireland that weekend. No one on the island, including the caterers and hotel staff, was allowed to leave that weekend, and they were required to sign confidentiality agreements. In case an industrious photographer managed to make it to the island, they hired a small security force to guard the entry to the ceremony."
I guess I don't resent JFK Jr's secrecy as he simply was so famous and one of the handsomest men in history. He was genuinely mobbed wherever he went and deserved a break on his wedding day. As did his bride. My goodness. Compare to that M and her couple of acolytes in that sea of empty seats at Wimbledon. The two members of the public who crossed them had no idea she was there. Or her drumming up of press interest for the NY baby shower. The half-empty press pen by the hotel. In JFK Jr's city. So pathetic.
I remember how surprised everyone was at how JFK jr successfully pulled off the secrecy of his wedding. I think this was largely done for Carolyn who was having serious problems dealing with the attention she received from being JFK jr's girlfriend. I recall the couple releasing to the press only one photo from the wedding and thinking "good for them"!
These two whack job fake parents have been attending therapy on television, and Harry’s big gripe is never having the opportunity to be his own person....but wait! stop the PRESS! he has to identify his first daughter directly with the family who are abusive and trapped? Has this man child learned anything at all in therapy?
Now I’m reading Meghan is saying lilibet was all Harry’s idea? What? You are a couple? You’re both responsible for this, right? Do neither care? Is the child not a doll?
They are so confusing. What did she think would happen in the press? That the entire world would fawn over the name and think...’how cute! And sweet!’ Are her advisors there? Are they all to close to the madness to realize everything happening is just one terrible idea after another?
There is also another letter re M's baptism into the CoE and the BBC saying it 'had links to slavery'. I wonder if M knew that before she was baptised??
Interestingly, this letter starts with "Amazing insight into the lives of Harry and Meghan." There is also another letter advocating the benefits of walking "People who are out walking and biking feel more connected to their community." Is this how H was spotted cycling and M carrying Archie?? Maybe this Montecito Journal is worth a read (or not?).
https://www.montecitojournal.net/2021/03/25/letters-to-the-editor-85/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxOOptS3tf8
The longer this story goes on the more convinced I am that Markle has completely mind-f**ked Harry.
And I'm back to my original theory from the beginning of this nightmare regarding the RF's reaction to this situation - they are tiptoeing around the Harkles because they are afraid Harry will harm himself.
Anyone who has the time to watch this - please let me know what you think.
It's funny you should mention the Montecito Journal as I was reading through several columns in it just tonight. I have used it for research in the past but tonight I was sleuthing for mentions of the Harkles around town.
A British writer now living in Montecito who used to be a royal reporter writes a column for the paper and is a neighbor of the Harkles. I really don't think they have been seen around other than what we already know of - which is really odd even considering the pandemic. It does appear however that the residents of Montecito and the British columnist believe they live there in that house. I took some notes but am off to bed now. Will have to find time to share them when I can.
"I agree. Harry had no place at Eton. He probably shouldn't have gone to university at all. He doesn't have the brains for university. I think he should have gone right into the military."
As an American, the differences between the educational system in the US and the UK confuse me a bit. But as @Maneki Neko and @WBBM point out, Harry never went to a "university." Eton "College" is not a university. It is an independent boarding school for boys up to 18, more like high school in the US.
Will (and Kate) attended the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. While both were awarded the Scottish master's of arts degree, that is not equivalent to an American or an English master's degree. Rather, it is equivalent to a bachelor's degree in England or the US. https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/subjects/study-options/ug/degree-routes/honours/. That difference I believe may have led people to erroneously assume Will already had a "university degree" (possibly from from Eton) when he entered St. Andrews.
I agree it's unfortunate Harry was sent to Eton. But I'm not sure that was all Charles's decision. Diana's father and brother attended Eton and from what I've read, she was pretty determined that both her sons should too.
I've never accepted the idea both William and H have, that Diana would have loved to be involved in their families now. I think she would have been great in an exciting, unstable kind of way with the children, but she would have been a nightmare for their wives. I would pay good money to watch a contest between M and Diana. A gladiatorial clash of manipulative narcissists. Who could do the most damage and for how long? Where do they register on the malignometer?
There is also another letter re M's baptism into the CoE and the BBC saying it 'had links to slavery'.
It'd be hard to find any organisation that existed before 1833 that didn't have slavery links - if you look hard enough. Also, anyone dealing with the US up to 1865 can also be accused of having `links'.
As for the BBC, they've swallowed wokery hook, line and sinker and ram it down our throats as if we are individually responsible for the sins of the past. Just like the National Trust. They project a representation of England that few would recognise unless they were Londoners.
I've even had someone in Scotland say to me `You live in England? Of course, it's full of blacks!' She went on to criticise the numbers of English coming to her area (Morayshire), little realising that I was English. She was fooled by my red hair (at that time!) and the Shetland silver earrings. I didn't bother to put her right.
Yes, I can imagine tension between Diana and Catherine too, especially as age crept up on Diana.
@WBBM
Thanks. I was worried you'd be annoyed. I was bleary-eyed this morning (still am!) and should have checked before posting.
The BBC is the epitome of woke. As for the National Trust, they have become political and woke and have made controversial decisions in the past few years.
Meghan Markle's first book fails to top the bestseller list: The Bench doesn't make the top 200 on Amazon UK - while Kate Middleton's Hold Still photography book reached number two on the day it was released
More spitting feathers in a part of SoCal.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9663375/Meghan-Markles-Bench-fails-make-bestseller-list.html
--------
Re Lilibet- I'm wondering if they did it deliberately, knowing that those who really know the ins-and-outs would be livid but their ignorant supporters won't see what the fuss is about?
It's given them something else to scream `Unfair!' about and boy. are they using it!
Had they called her `Elizabeth' we'd probably have just shrugged.
Hard to imagine Diana at 60 isn't it? I think she would have a dwindling fortune now despite the reported £17M divorce settlement, as she lived very well and I really don't see any reasonable, wealthy man signing up to be her partner. And she wouldn't have stayed with any of the alternatives. What man in his right mind would choose to live in emotional chaos, all shifting moods and alliances and betrayals and ghosting? Except of course her younger son has chosen the same. Unfathomable. It must be because H was too young to appreciate how awful it all was, while William knows all too well. Thank God (yet again) for Catherine.
When I'm really struggling to keep track of M and what she's doing to our world and our values, I think What Would Kate Do? She'd have eaten healthy food all day, exercised, stayed focused, limited screen time for adults as well as children and had some quality family time every day she could. I'm not nearly as calm and disciplined, but I like to think of her being so. A bit of steady ground in the middle of an earthquake.
Oh my goodness LOL! π
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9663375/Meghan-Markles-Bench-fails-make-bestseller-list.html
Made my day, seeing that M's book hasn't had an impact while Catherine's book is still soaring high and those screenshots on DM of a succession of one-star reviews. I see one person wrote that her 3-year-old grandson 'was not at all engaged' reading M's book. When he's a little older he could get together with Archie, who can share his duck rabbit experience.
@WBBM
Oh dear, I hope I don't come across like that!
--------
No, no, no! Absolutely not, Wild Boar. It's me, I'm always worried I might have upset somebody. I posted something last week, I think, and you'd already posted something similar - I should have checked the overnight posts but there were too many and it was too late by the time I read yours.
I always enjoy your posts :-)
Re The Bench, I only read the headline and couldn't be bothered to read the article. Looking at it now to look for something, I saw this:
Critics also panned the book, with The Telegraph's Claire Allfree calling it 'semi-literate' and writing: 'One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it. But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.'
Meanwhile The Times' Alex Connell described it as a 'self-help manual for needy parents', adding: 'The story [is] so lacking in action and jeopardy you half wonder if the writing job was delegated to a piece of furniture...'
The DT critic said it appeared to show 'Harry's role in this marriage is to sit on his bench holding the baby while Meghan gets on and conquers the world'.
Ouch!
Meanwhile, Kate's book is for charity : 'Proceeds from the book will be split between mental health charity Mind and the National Portrait Gallery.' (The Sun).
It was sold out last night on several websites.
How academically rigorous is RMA Sandhurst? I don't know about the militaries in other countries but, even years ago when I was in the military, promotion was quite competitive and university degrees were heavily encouraged. Technical certifications for various technical fields, ditto.
I've never accepted the idea both William and H have, that Diana would have loved to be involved in their families now. I think she would have been great in an exciting, unstable kind of way with the children, but she would have been a nightmare for their wives.
I share the same thoughts as you and @WBBM. I imagine that Diana would have been very jealous of Catherine.
But Prince William seems very clear-eyed where his mother is concerned. Remember the interview in which he said that she would be an "absolute nightmare" as a grandmother, arriving at inconvenient times and creating a huge mess with the children before finally leaving?
As for Diana at 60 . . . I think she'd be kind of like her sister-in-law Fergie -- but in her case, supported by William (and Harry?) rather than her ex-husband. Perhaps she'd do a few endorsements to earn more money . . . and then afterward, threaten to do more, for less prestigious brands, to manipulate her sons into raising her allowance.
As for Harry, I can see her being equally threatened by Chelsea and Cressida. But her younger son's wife is
One thing's for sure, though: If Diana were still alive, all the leaks we've been fervently wishing for would have spilled out by now!
As a Nutty who lurks more than she posts (I also don’t have time to read all the comments, even though I have email notification of them). π So from my own perspective, I’d much rather see duplication of posts rather than none, especially factual ones. π plus each Nutty adds their own little Nutty tit-bit. π
I wanted to add, technically Mole didn’t have a gap year because he didn’t attend Uni....he just had an extended break between school and starting Sandhurst. π
You've just made me think that Diana would have been even more jealous of Carole Middleton than she would have been of Catherine!