The Sussex camp has been quiet since Princess Diana's Statue Unveiling but I don't think we can expect that to continue. Is there anything left to keep them in the limelight? Let's discuss...
Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event? Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th? Oscar's - March 10th? In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US. The IRS just never goes away. Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on). There's always another one. Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California. That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales. Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere. But. The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.
Comments
It's the Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series Or Special category.
Well, the plot thickens, doesn't it? My understanding is that one must campaign not just for a nomination, but also for a win. Can Oprah wage a successful campaign for a fourth (?) Emmy for the Harkle interview and wash her hands of her interviewees at the same time?
Ah, if it wins, Harry's wife will consider it her first step toward an EGOT.
as President of The Football Association, William had to say something. I don't think he could have stayed silent.
I agree that he was between a rock and a hard place. I still think his team could have helped him come up with something less hotheaded, but I guess they'll just have to learn from this.
If true, who do you think the one member of the BRF was that met with JH on 'business matters'?
And what were the 'business matters'? And when was the discussion... prior to the unveiling?
PW? - he seems too irritated/fed up with JH to even speak to him.
PC - was out of town as was HM?
Would an older but technically lower ranking royal end up with the job? PA... PE?
What were the business matters that didnt go over well with JH..... PP's will and the executors (perhaps PE or PA) and lawyers were there to let JH know if he was getting anything?
Was it less than expected?
JH certainly seemed (chemically) happy go lucky and goofy at the unveiling... did he have the unpleasant meeting before or after the unveiling?
Inquiring minds...ME! Want to know !
I was just wondering if anyone would like to hazard a guess as to which member of the Royal Family (per Blind Gossip) had the uncomfortable business meeting with Harry and palace officials when he was in London for the statue unveiling?
My guess was actually Prince William. Sometimes I think he was angry at Prince Charles for skedaddling off to Scotland and leaving his eldest son to do the dirty work vis a vis Harry yet again; and sometimes I think he was glad his father wasn't around so that someone could handle Harry with an iron fist.
If not William, then Prince Edward. Had Harry been able to see the Queen, the Harkles would have trumpeted that from the rooftops, even if they couldn't also say what had transpired during the meeting.
William could have mentioned all the bad behaviour, not just the racist ones.
I thought the Queen was in Scotland the entire time he was as in London, with the exception of those pics of her racing to see him at Frogmore right after he arrived.
Interesting that Meghan’s PR has already put out that they’ve made Oprah a ‘winner’ (of what? A nom?). You have to wonder what Harry thinks of this.
Another fine example of the 'participation trophy' world we live in here in the U.S., and how one can 'buy' anything and how actual standards have deteriorated to a new low.
...
William's words
"I am sickened by vcthe racist abuse aimed at England players after last night’s match.
It is totally unacceptable that players have to endure this abhorrent behaviour.
It must stop now and all those involved should be held accountable. W"
...
As for Oprah's Emmy I'm loving reading the comments here.👏👏
Of course they would (in theory) require a fitness assessment but I'm just spitballing.
You have to be both out of your house and in an area experiencing rioting and then you kinda have to participate to end up with a bad situation.
Much like when they were breaking windows in NYC, if you just stay home while the crazies are out it will die down. That's my guess anyway.
https://metro.co.uk/2021/05/27/harry-wont-be-punished-and-could-get-share-of-prince-philips-30000000-will-14663903/
And now the interview they did to smear Harry's family is nominated for an Emmy. They will likely receive invitations to the show and Harry's wife will finally get the red carpet moment of her dreams. Oprah will have to give them a second chance or else lose face. Fashion houses will have to play nice again. Other chat show hosts will have a legitimate reason to have the Harkles on as guests. (Who wants to bet that only Harry's wife will show up, though?) It's the best thing that could have happened to them and it has come completely out of left field.
I'm not sure how an interview that went so soft on its subjects and let them get away with blatant inconsistencies merited an Emmy nomination. Was it simply a lean year? Or is there a new backer who has decided to smile on the Harkles? And if so, why?
@PortCityLass I think you're from my hometown
If the words Cape Fear are familiar let me know.
Hobie
Well, if it does happen, then O would be the one taking it home.
Her dad won an emmy: 1975 for work on a PBS station in Chicago.
So I was rereading the IMDB page for 6w. It barely mentions her father (more about his ancestry than his name). Her mother gets her own page.
Odd notes about the IMDB page:
There is a large amount about the wedding to 6 in the trivia section. Odd because this is about acting and movies. Also all about royals who married royalty.
And, there is some parts about how she was the first (as a BRF) to vote which is not supposed to happen like that in the UK but outside the UK is unclarified.
Jessica is still listed as the BFF.
I look upon it as a well-planned attack; an insurrection if you will. It will be *very* easy to shut off electricity to the cities and the suburbs if they need to escalate. The question for me has been is is this a typical commie color revolution where the Zuma boys want a big slice of the power and corruption, or is this going to be a full-out new world order operation to completely destroy South Africa? Hell, it could have Chinese funding for all I know. They do want Africa. Having the infrastructure wiped out will give them the opportunity to ride in on white tanks to *restore order* and completely rebuild the infrastructure at a considerable price that will lead to further impoverishment.
I think it is going to be bad because they're systematically destroying warehouses, a water treatment plant, food warehouses, South African corporations and their assets. They even looted a blood bank. *None* of that is necessary for a color revolution. No food is coming anytime soon. Farms and suburbs *will* be looted. I don't think hired security is going to want to re-enact Custer's battlefield or the Alamo. As the people get hungrier, the violence and looting *will* escalate. There is footage of police joining in the looting. They've already done damage to the infrastructure that will take *years* to repair. Those plants aren't going to rebuild themselves, and I don't see a lot of MENSA members out there in the rioting population or the government.
How loyal will the armed forces be? It is an interesting question. If the armed forces are loyal to the government, this can still *maybe* be shut down but huge damage has already been done. If not, well, it won't be the first military-assisted coup where the military leaders were paid off.
I think it is going to be very bad, myself.
I think both Ramaphosa and Zuma are bad news.
South Africa, as dysfunctional as it is, is still more functional than a lot of African nations. If South Africa crashes, it is going to have far-reaching consequences.
https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Witt/status/1414885049095401480
https://riotarchive.com/
https://twitter.com/pine_tree_riots/status/1414955543228293121
A gf of mine dated a guy from CA who was a producer and writer of well known sitcoms. He was also on the writer branch committee for the Academy. His son, also a writer, wouldn't say much but gf told me it's very political in the way the nominees are chosen for each category. She told me Rabbit Hole, a movie we both liked, had been nominated before the nominations were aired.
Great movie, too.
M n H have been bought and paid for imo, and their employers have taken on the throne of the British Monarchy. I love HM and the UK. I have family in Wales and Scotland. But unfortunately, unless something changes, I fear Charles and William have a tough course ahead of them. The global media is not their friend. However, it will be interesting when and if H realizes his employers are not his friends but sharks who smell blood in the water, namely his family's. Imo, he already looks as if he is about to crack up.
How much longer can he play the game?
Also, it would appear we have some sugars here masquerading as monarchists, or maybe I made the wrong assumption initially. Admittedly, I haven't been paying attention too closely to each post.
It put me in mind of Henry I and the White Ship disaster in 1120 - a possible repeat of history but not one that was expected - Henry was said to be devastated.
And yes, to all who have mentioned it, surely the nomination is a put-up job, or paid-for deal, as there was nothing special about the broadcast, just the sensationalism and the amount of lies therein.
(direct link to pic in question)
https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/images/pa-60681636-1625148476.jpg
I doubt the Communists are involved.
When the Whites gave up control of South Africa, Mandela and his cronies set up laws that were going to make them rich. I don't think Mandela benefited much from it, but there were laws that stipulated how many Blacks were required to be on the board of every company. So, a group of very influential Blacks became very wealthy just because it was required for someone of their group to be part of a company in which they had never contributed or would contribute apart from taking a paycheque.
Zumba is part of that group. He went too far however, and when he was President, he did far too many corrupt things so there was some blowback. He was indicted and convicted of corruption, and now his supporters are destroying the country rather than have him sent off to prison.
If true, this PC not giving PE the Edinburgh Dukedom is a bad decidision imo. The Wessexs have been stepping up to the plate as far as supporting the BRF and HM. maybe there is a litt subtle PR out there to get positive support for them and the BRF, but it makes PC look extremely childish, spiteful, petty, and insecure. His reputation is already extremely low due to past Di mistakes and quirkiness in genera.
It’s petty and will look petty. it wont win him any supporters ( except from the Cali crowd cause they will no longer be the public/ presses target). whats he going to do when the 50 year less is up and they are in their 70’s…. kick them out of their home?
Thats said, if it’s trully PC’s intention to do cut out the Wessex’s to make hiimself and Cam look better and get more press then HM most know that or get the feeling it coud happen.
HM makes sure family in the UK have a roof over their head, she feels loyalty to her family…perhaps unline PC… and thats the problem with his own immediate family.
So if its seriously being condisered, HM can step in now and resurrect another Dukedom title thats kicking around HM has the power and should use it.
Also should HM do nothing and PC doesnt issue a dukedom, he wont be there long PW can always rectify the situation later. its my feeling
PW will need help. yes times are changing the working royals can be cut down through retirement rather than pink slipping them
jHanoi - you are right - if true PC wont win any support for that. He has to think of his own legacy on the thrown even if its only a 10 year reign pettiness is not the way to mark it.
@Enbrethiliel: Re the Emmy nomination: If there's a flurry of interviews around this nomination (surely not a win) might that not be an ***opportunity to again bring up what a pack of lies the questions and answers were.
____
This right here! I would think Spare and TBW would try to keep a lid on things so that the questioning about their lies and OW's failure to ask countering questions remain squashed. It's such a DUH...
But we know in their state of minds, anything is possible with that duo. It is also highly possible-IMO-this right here could be OW's way of getting back at them for being so sniveling...the interview made all three of them look bad and OW is well aware of it. Her star is fading and it is not beneath her to separate herself from her subjects when she is done feeding on them. It could be her way of throwing them under the bus. I'm sure she also knows she will never get that interview with PC or any of the other Royals, most certainly not HM. It's always about her. IF she wins, it will only benefit HER in the long run. The duo will continue to spiral down, and she'll come out smelling like the rose.
But who knows, she could also be playing it from another angle as well. Throw Spare and TBW under the bus as an attempt to win favor with the BRF. I believe she's smart enough to know HM &co are much, much more powerful than she will ever be.
Just theories on my part.
My bet is the Emmy nomination was part of the deal with the “Interview”. O bought it.
Do you mean that the Harkles wouldn't have done it unless Oprah guaranteed the interview would get a nomination? Which, of course, she'd have to pay for herself, on top of all the usual production fees? If so, she must be regretting it, because . . .
@Teasmeade
If there's a flurry of interviews around this nomination (surely not a win) might that not be an opportunity to again bring up what a pack of lies the questions and answers were.
I agree that it's a silver lining. But I also don't know if people other than royal watchers really care. The Harkles, for all their stunts to grab attention, are ultimately boring. Their interview was tiresome even when it aired the first time and we didn't know what to expect. A rebuttal picking it apart and exposing all the inconsistencies wouldn't be compelling TV. I can't imagine a producer wanting to do it unless he or she had a real bone to pick with either Oprah or the Harkles. It's just not worth it.
What is compelling, however, is the narrative that Prince William is racist. And that really baffles me. My sense is that the majority of people already believe that the Harkles are mercenary, disloyal and talking out of both sides of their mouths. But they somehow also believe that Prince William did not like his sister-in-law for being biracial and possibly disapproved of his unborn nephew looking less than 100% white. How they can hold both opinions, I don't know. I guess it's a credit to the narc that they do. He, his family and his team were already looking at years of fallout after the interview first aired; the nomination is just more fuel to the fire. I hope it burns out quickly, but I don't know at this point.
I agree that it be look really bad if Prince Charles doesn't give the dukedom to Prince Edward. Never mind his staunch belief in a "slimmed-down monarchy." Even subjects who like the abstract idea of it might be too rocked after the death of the longest-reigning monarch ever to welcome another big change from the way things were.
The Wessexes have been hardworking, loyal and wholesome senior royals for a long time now, following the Queen's idea of a royal family. And we all get the sense that if Edward has to remain Earl of Wessex forever, he won't hold a grudge against his brother and will continue to do his work happily. I think one of the best things the future King Charles III (or whatever his regnal name shall be) could do is to show a strong link to traditions established by the beloved monarch before him.
(I'm anticipating an outpouring of grief for the Queen that will remind us of Diana's funeral. Not the hysteria, of course, but definitely more openly expressed emotion than the British normally show. It may give Charles some deja-vu.)
I think PC is definitely being strategic (or so he thinks). I doubt he has his head in the sand about the optics of the RF during these changing times. I would hope he has great advisors and PR people in his crew.
He's waited a damn long time and I'm sure he and Camilla have thier eyes on the prize-not in a bad way just they are probably ready and as I read today in DM, they more than likely want the title for Prince Louis. This does seem to follow the Swedish model of downsizing.
It is understandable how Edward would be very hurt by this if true. If so, he'll have to take one for the team. I'd be pissed but s%!+ happens in business, and family or not, the Firm always comes first. One would hope Edward gets a great compensation for giving up the title...
Priyanka Chopra knows she has to take a stand or she will be cancelled. I'd bet my next retirement check she and TBW are on the outs. Priyanka Chopra probably dislikes her immensely but will canoodle in public for the optics. Hollywoowoo is their "Firm" and those types are sycophants extraordinaires
the interview made all three of them look bad and OW is well aware of it. Her star is fading and it is not beneath her to separate herself from her subjects when she is done feeding on them. It could be her way of throwing them under the bus.
I agree that it was a poor move for all three of them, which is why the nomination throws me for a bit of a loop. I can understand Oprah setting it up for herself from the beginning, when she anticipated the interview getting positive reviews and coverage. An Emmy for it would just be the final emerald in her tiara (if I may say so).
But after the interview unleashed a dumpster fire, I can't see why she went through with it. Surely there was time to nix the deal between then and now -- which the Emmy people might even have welcomed, because they could have been free to cut another deal with someone else. As things stand, Oprah will just just get more attention for the same things that embarrassed her four months ago.
@snarkyatherbest
This is the only piece of Oprah work this past year that anyone has talked about. she didnt get the win for michael jackson interview years ago so this is her big chance to be "back"
If this is the best she can do these days, then there's no way she's "back." But I see your point. It's better for her in the long run to look prestigious and relevant -- and an Emmy can still do that for her, never mind the actual quality of her work. If this is the only card she has to play, by Jove, she's going to play it and hope she has pulled enough strings in the background so that nobody will notice how bad it really is.
I think he was between the wood and the bark and had to make a statement about the fb players or he would look like he was the one who made the alleged comment about Fauxchie. Silence would not work in that case. He was strong in his statement and though it may look like he was jumping on a bandwagon so to speak, he needs to continue to be strong in his approach or his sniveling brother and TBW will continue to try to grab the reins.
I can totally understand why he needed to snatch the reins away from them and hold on tight. The one thing he and Catherine will always have in their pockets is they will be King and Queen Consort. William is Charles heir, and George is his heir. A show of strength is what is needed to keep that ship afloat.
In the big pic, Spare and TBW can hold Will's beer lol...
I am just now catching up.
I'm out for the day. Will check in later. Good day Nutties :)
It had long been accepted that it is the Queen’s wish her youngest son have his late father’s title and this was agreed upon in 1999 when Ed declined another Dukedom upon his marriage. Since the monarchy has already become slimmed down due to Andrew’s disgrace and H’s defection, Edward and his wife have assumed a much higher profile than they otherwise would have had. He deserves the title and should have it. It’s what the Queen wishes. Could she make a special letter patent to gift that title while she lives? She would have to make a gift of her own title to Sophie. But why couldn’t she?
Do we think the claim that Charles is going to withhold the Duke of Edinburgh title from his brother has truth to it or is it more negative PR from the Sussex camp?
I don't think it comes from the Harkle camp. If they want to make him look bad, there will be some reference to themselves in it. It would kill the wife in particular to make Prince Edward and Sophie look sympathetic. She wouldn't share the spotlight with them.
This is also something we've been hearing for a while -- almost as long as we've known that it was the Queen's wish for Prince Edward to be the Duke of Edinburgh after Prince Philip's death. I'm more inclined to suspect that it comes from the same source as the idea of the "slimmed-down monarchy" that has been associated with Prince Charles for years. It fits that template. He reflect his actual wishes, in which case he may be testing the waters -- in the hope that his future subjects think it's a good idea as well. If so, then I hope he has figured out that both to go against the Queen's clearly-stated wish once he has the power and to treat one of the hardest-working members of his family in such a shabby way would only mean blowback for him.
...
RE: Emmy
COMPETITION ENTRY FAQ. (I found these interesting)
1) Can I submit my program into both the domestic and the international competition?
No. If your program is eligible in both competitions, you will have to choose which one you would like to submit your program to. Choose wisely!
2) My series was only made public online – e.g. YouTube, streaming service, etc. Is it still eligible to compete with programs that were broadcast on television?
Yes, as long as it was commissioned/produced by a professional media company, and made available within the eligibility dates, it’s eligible – no matter the viewing platform.
3) When is the deadline?
February 17, 2021 at 12 noon E.S.T.
4) Does the Academy pre-select the programs in the competition?
No. All eligible submissions are entered into the competition and then judged by television professionals around the world.
5) Do I need to submit my program through a third-party organization?
No, all programs must be submitted directly to the Academy.
https://www.iemmys.tv/entries-judging/faq/
...
a) The doens't Academy pre-select the programs in the competition. All eligible submissions are entered
b) When is the deadline?
February 17, 2021 at 12 noon E.S.T.*. b)Harry and Meghan's interview aired on March 7th. How could you have been nominated for the 2021 Emmy?
...
(Harry Shame on you)
Interesting find!
I wonder if anyone will ask Oprah how she could have been nominated this year when the interview aired after the deadline.
Or better yet, ask the Emmy people themselves. Let them share some of the Markle-ing!
In other words, when did Harry and Meghan record this? And now on what date was Lilibet born? Since we can question the date of the interview
...
Enbrethiliel...If I'm right...
LOL... Doesn't that add a bit more spice to this story! Nominate yourself before that interview even hits the air waves & no one knows how successful/unsuccessful it will be. Anyone know if there is a way to negate the nomination? I would be happy to sign something like that. But I sent an email Emmy asking this, and I've also signed the online petition against this nomination. After all, this is *my truth!*
"FEE AND PAYMENT
How much is the submission fee?
The fee is $400 per submission. Should the Academy grant you an extension (at your request) to submit your program/performer after the deadline, a $50 late fee per submission will be automatically"
...
Oprah may have requested an extension of the delivery period. But she had to apply by the date of February 17th. Therefore, the Harry and Meghan interview was already set before it went on air.
Oh my god! Woah I just thought it was pockets of uprisings, kinda like Portland Oregon (made to look more widespread than it was). I guess not.
I totally agree SA is one of the more advanced countries, if not the most advanced, in that region and destabilizing it will be a complete shit show.
I don’t want to take us further off topic so I’ll leave it there, but thank you for educating me, I didn’t realize.
Karla – very interesting point about the submission deadline. The Oprah interview may not have aired until March 7th but it was likely “in the can” prior to mid-February. The rules go on to say “and made available within the eligibility dates,” – do the eligibility dates extend beyond the submission dates?
provinces (presently) involved in the looting/protests contains @ half of the SA population.
They're screwed. There is no money. There is no food. There is no fuel. Their infrastructure is toast. If supplies *were* trucked in, they'd be set upon and looted PDQ and, if some miracle occurred and there was a distribution depot, ditto. Agriculture, ditto. The cane mills are shut down. The cane fields have been burned. The cane trucks have been hijacked. There is no employment or employers. Where will the money come to replace all this? More international aid that will mostly go to the warlords? Power is down at one of the reservoir pumping stations and staff is afraid to venture out to try to fill the generator with diesel. So, no water for Ndwedwe. In Durban, the water treatment plant was destroyed and municipal water trucks burned. What *looter* does that? Schools are being burned.
Will the (directed) looting and destruction spread? Who knows. Probably, unless looters are shot dead PDQ. The Indians have no illusions; their houses have been firebombed, their businesses looted, and they are putting up a good defense. It looks as though there is a partnership for self-protection between Indians, Muslims, whites, and coloreds. It is fight or die time IMO.The local government has ordered them to cease and desist with the protecting of their businesses and homes, much like the northern cities that had huge BLM and antifa outbreaks.
I expect that government officials loyal to Zuma are directing the looting. I found it interesting that Zuma was much more open to inviting the Chinese in. I wonder if personal assurances of infrastructure replacement have been made, and who guaranteed it?
I watched Bookworm's video from today. Her video this morning indicates that she is afraid of revealing too much information. Bless her heart, she seems to think that the protests have been hijacked by criminals. (Or *says* that she thinks. She should really not say what I think, which is that criminals *are* the various governmental factions.) Rubble as far as the eye can see is an interesting observation.
DAMN, she had a printed post on the video that ambulances in KwaZulu-Natal are coming under attack as well (I suppose she was fearful of saying it). She said how absolutely dependent they are in her small town on supply trucks for fuel, food, and pharmaceuticals. Their supermarket is running out of supplies. They don't know how long the situation will persist. They cannot leave. They cannot get resupplied. Her opinion is that a lot of things that have been destroyed will not be rebuilt. She asks for prayers. The income from her YouTube channel is how she is supporting herself, her daughter, and her grandson. I admit that I shed some tears listening to her. If you can go watch her video and give her a like or a kind comment, she would surely appreciate it.
----------
Which means they were substantially done with filming some time before that.
They announced their second pregnancy Feb 14th.
PP went back into the hospital Feb 16th.
Titles were stripped Feb 19th.
Based on 1) the difference between the size of her bump at the pregnancy announcement and the smaller size during Oprah interview and then the much, much larger size during the chicken coop part of the interview and 2) the filming needed to be more or less completed some time before Feb 17th in order to meet that deadline, I'm gonna guess filming was maybe the 2nd week of January. Maybe even earlier.
So the original interview had nothing to do with stripping of titles, since title stripping was two days AFTER the Emmy application deadline.
They always out themselves. Always shoot themselves in the foot.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9787841/Gwyneth-Paltrow-Brad-Falchuk-near-completion-eco-friendly-Montecito-mansion.html
I wonder how long it will take for TBW to befriend GP? Maybe she can get a few tips on starting her own 'wellness'/lifestyle brand...
"This blog should not be giving mileage to Negs PR and media attempts to discredit the BRF, William or Charles unless there is actual proof of wrong doing."
July 14, 2021 at 8:32 PM
____________
Exactly, totally agree.👏
I just finished the Prince Philip bio by Gyles Brandreth.
Clearly put that the title was to be passed on to Edward (both he and HM).
I don’t think PC will have any problems slimming down some of the working royals once he moves up because most are at or beyond retirement age. HM’s cousins, Kents, Glouscesters, Oglivy, Alexandria, are very loyal to HM and may want or be ready to retire…. if they can afford it. If they do ‘retire’ will PC still allow them grace and favor homes or a roof over their heads? i think most live in homes provided by HM, and some still need an income to pay the bills. thats 13 pople or 15 if you include the prince/princess of kent.
That just leaves PC /Cam, Camridges, Prinicess Royal ( also nearing retirement age, but she loves the BFR work), and the Wessexes. 7 peopple as the Kids are too young for now. if PC drops everyone but the Cambridges to finally ‘get all the glory’ i dont see it ending will for his reign/legacy. especially if he starts evicting people. he’ll have lots of poor relations running around trying to hoover up $$ to pay their bills. Some of these people havent had upbringings to prepare them for non-royal life.
and what of HM’s & PP’s servants that have been provided roofs/ grace n favor homes. is he going to evict them too to save a shilling? that wont go over well with the publci either. he needs to be careful how he handles these changes. his own cornwall estate tenants complain periodically about his rules/regulations dont they?
"do the eligibility dates extend beyond the submission dates?"...
Deadline: 02.17.2021
Eligibility: In order to be eligible for a statuette in 2021, episodes must have aired between June 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021. (It does not mean to have been recorded on this date, but shown on TV that period)
...
I am not able to obtain information on the date of this nomination
and if it was made complete)
That award seems to be just for Oprah and her team.
...
My thoughts...
Beginning in 2020, the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences renamed the category to reflect that it recognizes "personality-driven programs in which the host drives the show's narrative; includes documentaries, travelogues, segmented/magazine program and interview formats." So Oprah must have known very well what would be said in that interview. And the What! What! (hers) was theater. We know that she altered some journalistic headlines to give "truthfulness" to the lies told. So Harry and Meghan gave the interview already knowing about the Emmy nomination.
...
Doubt: Now, many wonder why The Me You can't see what Harry produced together with Oprah was not nominated for Emmy. If won Harry could also receive the award. And it was broadcast in late May within the eligibility deadline.
Does anyone know the reason?
Meghan Markle teams up with Elton John's husband David Furnish to produce animated Netflix series about a '12-year-old girl who finds inspiration in influential women' in latest project for Sussexes' lucrative streaming deal
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9789229/Meghan-Markle-executive-produce-new-animated-series-Netflix.html
Is this a thinly disguised embellished autobiography? I thought anyway she was on maternity leave.
Agree with @Puds post at 8:32PM.
Well said!
*************************************************
OT
Re: SA - For those who are interested.
I have friends in Durban.
They sent me a link to a photographer who has been documenting the troubles. ☹
You do not need to be signed into Facebook to view.
https://www.facebook.com/KierranAllenPhotography
Meghan Markle teams up with Elton John's husband David Furnish to produce animated Netflix series about a '12-year-old girl who finds inspiration in influential women' in latest project for Sussexes' lucrative streaming deal.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9789229/Meghan-Markle-executive-produce-new-animated-series-Netflix.html
Do we think the claim that Charles is going to withhold the Duke of Edinburgh title from his brother has truth to it or is it more negative PR from the Sussex camp? Anything to further damage Charles or William’s reputations would fit the scorched earth PR ploys to a tee
____
Great point! I'm not on here enough to remember that this is said on the blog: that Spare and TBW's PR puts out nonsense. I appreciated this comment.
@Maneki said,
I wonder how long it will take for TBW to befriend GP? Maybe she can get a few tips on starting her own 'wellness'/lifestyle brand...
____
I'll bet she's been trying to land Gwynnie as her new BFF for quite awhile now. Goopy is smart enough to stay away from that mess...I would hope.
___
For the record, I support the RF. I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm a Loyalist but I like them and respect their positions, their traditions, and that they are a foundational part of British culture. My observations come from someone who is outside of that Realm so I may come across as a bit critical but I don't mean to sound that way. I can just be a bit more objective as a non British person.
I will be really sad when HM passes as I was with PP and Diana's passing. I hope the BRF are around for a long, long time.
Also,
Mods, with all due respect would you consider not allowing continuous discussions on the politics of South Africa? It distracts from the flow of the subject matter and can possibly derail the thread. It's really not relevant to the theme here. Much like other politics and Covid.
Thank you so much.
What Kind Of Numpties Are Buying The Sussex Spiel?
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2021/07/13/what-kind-of-numpties-are-buying-the-sussex-spiel/
She reckons that Charles thought MM was the `best thing for the RF since sliced bread’, that he loved her as a daughter but all the Diana-play has brought back the trauma of the Diana years. For him, history is repeating itself.
In her view, he has been treated most unjustly yet again and, from what she has heard, is as near to a nervous breakdown as he can be without actually breaking down.
Design Doctor posted the link on 13th:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1F5NiWiQ9c
It's well-worth watching.
i think he has some health problems, maybe heart trouble? His hand are always swollen/puffy.
pics in the DM at the latest charity function show it and its been going on years…. congestive heart failure? what else causes some thing like that?
------------------------------------------
All I can say is, if this article is reflective of Charles' true feelings and motives--and if the Queen cannot revise tradition and award Philip's title herself right now--then HM must survive PC so that King William can do right by his uncle.
Like Charles, I am the oldest of four siblings, with a large gap between myself and the youngest. One does not have to be Heir to a crown to experience much harsher parental expectations while watching the youngest be blatantly favored. My word of advice to Chaz would be: suck it up buttercup. 73 years old and we still haven’t gotten over Daddys sending us to Gordonstoun.
If the DoE title is now too politically sensitive to award after 74 years, why not mention that instead of saying it’s because we don’t want James Wessex to get up himself and start putting on Royal airs? If that’s the case, then Edward will receive no Ducal title whatsoever, which is a pretty crappy state of affairs after a long-standing public agreement. If Charles denies his mother’s wishes, he will essentially make a liar out of the Queen. Would he really go so far to get back at his father and brother? Would the grieving man walking behind his father’s coffin do this?
Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure? Heh. Probably not that one.
/I'm partial to John Wick.
ROFL, I feel your pain. I didn't care much about the youngest one being favored; he was my favorite, too! (Did I say that out loud?) Besides, we were a rambunctious bunch so the youngest ones *had* to be protected to survive.
"i think he has some health problems, maybe heart trouble? His hand are always swollen/puffy.
pics in the DM at the latest charity function show it and its been going on years…. congestive heart failure? what else causes some thing like that?"
We've discussed this before, I think. There are lots of things that can cause that. I've read it's from psoriatic arthritis. Picture in this link https://www.merckmanuals.com/home/bone,-joint,-and-muscle-disorders/joint-disorders/psoriatic-arthritis
Philip's fingers were swollen for years too. So it may be genetic.
I'm not a doctor but personally I doubt it's congestive heart failure as active as Charles is. He could have heart issues (although his reddish face coild easily be from something like rosacea) but for congestive failure to show up that way it's my understanding the person would be pretty impaired. And Charles does manage lots and lots of walking. Not what one often sees with a heart patient with noticeable edema. So I'm not convinced it's cardiac.
Incidentally, I came across this video that contains some gems which may be relevant to various aspects of the current situation, although I know philosopher Alain de Botton isn’t everyone’s cup of tea:
`Why you will marry the wrong person’ at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MBEinOdI2I
At about 2.01 he mentions `vast industries’ dedicated to selling `hope’ . He quotes Theodor Adorno (yes, he of the Frankfurt School whence came Critical Theory & Cultural Marxism) who said that the most dangerous man in America was Walt Disney because he was the prime agent of hope, therefore of rage and then bitterness...
He's got a point!
Who cares, Wirral, United Kingdom-
`I cant wait to definitely absolutely not watch it. But it has reminded me I need to put the bins out.'
Bubba McEnemy, Scranton, United States-
`It is the epitome of privilege that you get a massive deal with Netflix to provide content, it doesn't matter what content, when you have no experience providing content.'
To which I’d add Meg(h)an is Welsh for `Margaret’, which in turn means `Pearl’...
I'm also the oldest child and the oldest grandchild -- and my youngest sibling was also the youngest grandchild. There are sixteen years between us. We were each favored in different ways as children. And maybe even as adults. I relate both to @Hikari's advice to suck it up where he is concerned and to @SwampWoman's not minding because the youngest ones do merit some protection from the oldest ones. (It's the ones in the middle who tend to get lost in the shuffle!)
If the Daily Beast article is true, then Prince Charles needs to get over himself. He's going to be the King, for crying out loud. Does he really want this pettiness and jealousy to overshadow his reign?
Someone has said that Charles may want the Edinburgh dukedom for Prince Louis. But isn't Prince Louis going to become Duke of York anyway?
Meghan Markle teams up with Elton John's husband David Furnish to produce animated Netflix series about a '12-year-old girl who finds inspiration in influential women' in latest project for Sussexes' lucrative streaming deal
I agree with @Maneki that it will practically be her autobiography. At the very least, it will be quite self-referential.
This also gives us some insight into her mind. Trauma can freeze us mentally at the age we were when it happened. Did something happen to freeze her at 12?
If Harry also did freeze mentally the year his mother died, then we have a pair of 12 year olds wrecking havoc out of Montecito!
To which I’d add Meg(h)an is Welsh for `Margaret’, which in turn means `Pearl’...
Good grief, it is all about her!
Will she voice the girl, too? Using the technology Mariah Carey did when she made herself sound younger for her child version in Glitter?
Or will she voice the girl's mother? If so, will there be a father? Will the parents be of different races so that Pearl can mirror her creator yet another way? So many questions . . .
This is in part what made me personally think it was a Harkle PR move when I first read about it. Why would any of William's children need a title that was publicly known to be earmarked for Edward? Why would William want to accept it for his child knowing the optics would reflect badly on him? To me, it seems as though someone's trying to put (at least some of) the blame on William for this news.
Admittedly it could all be true and Charles really is petty enough to throw William under the bus and make it seem like he'd be willing to take his Uncle's title for one of his children, but I think we all know of a couple of people who already have form for throwing people under buses, obsess over title/status and regularly release dubious PR stories. Unless we hear anything concrete from official channels, I think I'm going to lean towards it being yet more Harkle PR trying to stir up trouble.
Perhaps, one day.
The second son of the monarch sometimes does become DoY (eg Bertie, Geo V's 2nd son, later Geo VI) but Louis can't have the title while the the present holder (Andrew) is still alive. Nor can PA being stripped of the title any time soon.
This is in part what made me personally think it was a Harkle PR move when I first read about it. Why would any of William's children need a title that was publicly known to be earmarked for Edward? Why would William want to accept it for his child knowing the optics would reflect badly on him?
This makes sense. Thanks.
I had said that the Harkles usually have some reference back to them when they put out stories about other royals, but when they take aim at the Cambridges, they make sure to scuttle out of blast radius. And Harry's wife must still be salty about her children not getting titles -- so what better way to project her avarice than to say that Princes Charles and William are being possessive over the title of Duke of Edinburgh. While Charles has betrayed William's trust before, I don't think he is cowardly as well as petty. He might withhold the dukedom from Prince Edward, but he wouldn't make his son take the blame for him. (I hope!!!)
https://www.healthgrades.com/right-care/bones-joints-and-muscles/hand-swelling
perhaps its just athrititis, still seems weird - a possible medical concern to me
Dukedom of Edinburgh - maybe it’s another TBW PR scheming press drop, arguments seem very reasonable.
but the Palace did say they would correct inaccurate claims in the future. i dont know if this qualifies for that or if the claim has to come from an identified person instead or an ‘anonymous friend or high ranking palace official’.
maybe the Palace doesnt think the story is worth commenting on because that just draws more attention to it. (thats aways been their strategy in the past ).
Edward can thank his stars he made an excellent marriage and got it right the first time, unlike his sibs. Being secure in the love of his parents no doubt has helped him develop his by all accounts sunny and even-keeled temperament. The defection of his nephew and his nephew’s tart has been good for the Wessexes if only because it has brought them public recognition as workhorses for the Firm which may have been more obscured if they were still relegated to having to defer to the Rock Stars of Montecito.
In fairness to Charles, we have to take this report with a grain of salt until time proves whether there is any merit to it. Seeing as William’s name has also been dragged into it via the invoking of Louis—making the Cambridge camp the ultimate beneficiaries of William’s uncle is thus screwed over—I think I know which way I lean.
That's interesting - perhaps it's being left until the painful memories of what went on around the passing of the previous duke have at least dulled a little.
The late Queen Mother was nearer 102 than 101 when she died so perhaps extra time is being allowed before the elevation of the Earl of Wessex.
Edward had some rather critical press when he was much younger but he and Sophie are proving their worth now.
I don't think #6W can have noticed that she's up against 4 strong and inspirational women - HM, Princess Royal, a Duchess and a Countess.
At about 2.01 he mentions `vast industries’ dedicated to selling `hope’ . He quotes Theodor Adorno (yes, he of the Frankfurt School whence came Critical Theory & Cultural Marxism) who said that the most dangerous man in America was Walt Disney because he was the prime agent of hope, therefore of rage and then bitterness...
He's got a point!
____
I agree. And those tv shows that are like romance novels set to film; Hallmark Channel, Lifetime etc. I'm just about finished with a NF series that is similar. The settings are gorg and the cinematography, but ugh same plots, same actors just change the names of the characters and the town. Stepford people, giving viewers false hope that Mayberry is real life; although, I detest **gratuitous sex and **gratuitous violence, I am a big believer of***we are what we feed on...
I've been single a very long time, meaning not married. The BS I've seen, experienced and heard is pathetic. SM, hook up apps, cell phones have created a very difficult dating experience to maneuver than I knew back in the day. It would be nice to have a balance of modernity with some values of the past. Not going to happen. Pandora's box has been fully opened.
Women's Studies calls the knight in shining armor mindset the "myth of romantic love". So true. I don't consider myself bitter, just very realistic when it comes to what real love truly is and sometimes it's NOT easy.
____
TBW/Pearl. Janis Joplin is rolling in her grave...
Good luck to the wench if she thinks anyone but her sugars will bother to even watch that disaster waiting to happen. Probably as a favor to Oprah as was Tyler Perry lending them his house (but then threw them out over abuse of his loyal long time staff, by guess who? TBW again).
Thanks to the Nutty who posted that link. I didn't catch who it was.
SNUBBING & HOUNDING William & Kate/Duke of Kent ACE/EMMY 4 Oprah & Harkle TrioCON/Meghan SCHEMES
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhABJnlJWxo
`Why you will marry the wrong person’ at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MBEinOdI2I
____
Thanks for the link. He is absolutely spot on and brilliant! All of the over priced marriage counselors just fell over lol...
Bravo!
@Snarky -
That's interesting - perhaps it's being left until the painful memories of what went on around the passing of the previous duke have at least dulled a little.
Maybe *he* (and his family) is/are the one(s) not yet ready.
Daniela Elser: Harry and Meghan's money pressures over Netflix and Spotify deals
15 Jul, 2021 03:52 AM
news.com.au
By: Daniela Elser
OPINION:
PART I
If the Emmy Awards were handed out based on "most headlines generated", then this year, Oprah Winfrey would be a shoo-in.
The nominations for this year's awards have been released with Winfrey up for another prime-time gong (she already has two) for her history-making TV interview with Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex earlier this year.
For Harry and Meghan, it's the first time since they landed in the US last year that their names have been linked with awards season gold. (Whoever knew that going so wildly rogue on the palace would be met with critical enthusiasm in California?)
The question is though, just how much of a Midas touch do they have? Hundreds of millions of dollars – and their US futures – are at stake.
In just over a month's time, we will hit the one-year anniversary of the Sussexes' Netflix deal being announced. In the 10-and-a-half months since news of the "megawatt" deal was broken by The New York Times, there does not seem to have been much movement on this front, publicly at least.
While initially the Times had reported the Sussexes would be making "documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming," what sounded like it would be a flood of earnest content has not even amounted to a trickle.
In March it was announced that the couple had hired Oscar-nominated producer Ben Browning to head up Archewell's video content production arm and the following month it was revealed that their first project would be a docuseries about the sporting tournament for wounded veterans, the Invictus Games, that Harry founded.
On Thursday, it was announced that Meghan will produce an animated series with the working title Pearl, which follows a 12-year-old girl who is inspired by influential women in history. No air date was revealed, nor would Dora the Explorer officially comment on the potential rival.
While on one hand TV and feature-length projects take years to get to the screen, on the other, what has Netflix really gotten so far for their estimated $133 million investment in the Duke and Duchess? Sure, their signing was a huge publicity coup but so far all the streaming giant has gotten for their nine-figure financial commitment is essentially the world's most expensive press release.
Harry and Meghan have a lot to prove, and fast, because they are fighting against the clock here.
(cont)
Harry and Meghan need to prove worth to Hollywood
When they landed in Los Angeles in March last year their value as a highly bankable, rare commodity was peaking. Their brand was on the ascendant. They'd told the sovereign where she could stick her crown, something Americans have had a penchant for since the War of Independence, and were eager to make a name for themselves in the commercial world.
But, their arrival in the US collided with the advent of the coronavirus pandemic, snuffing out a lot of the momentum around their arrival in the States. They might have been ready and open for business but the nation was not.
Fast forward to this year and with the US reopening and life returning to normal and something of the novelty value of a real-life Duke and Duchess in Tinseltown's midst is no longer quite what it once might have been.
If Harry and Meghan don't want to be written off as a marketing gimmick, and if they want, in the years to come, to keep pulling in those nice big cheques full of delicious zeros, then they are going to prove they are worth the investment.
So far, they haven't exactly set Hollywood on fire.
In April, Variety's chief media analyst Andrew Wallenstein said their Invictus series "does not remotely sound like what their tabloid-driven audience wants", labelling it "an exercise in their image rehabilitation, funded by Netflix".
He said: "The value Harry and Meghan will probably most bring comes to making themselves available for interviews to publicise the content that bears their imprimatur."
Should Netflix, which has for years been throwing money around with glee abandon, suddenly have to tighten their belts, "Rest assured this deal will be on the list of what gets second-guessed," Wallenstein wrote.
At danger of interest in pair waning
The problem with this paradigm is that their entire money-making ability is pegged to their ability to generate good PR. Should interest in them wane, or public fatigue for the never-out-of-the-news duo set in, then their value could plummet.
While Harry and Megan's financial future might outwardly seem rosy thanks to their Netflix deal (and their estimated $36 million Spotify deal) look closer and things aren't quite so shiny. The Times has reported that, according to industry insiders, it is likely that their Netflix deal would be structured such that they receive a retainer of somewhere between $2 million and $3.9 million annually, and would then earn more as they release shows.
Given their costs for security and their home in Montecito have been estimated at around $6.2 million, they would need their productions to be smash hits.
Emmy nominations, like the shiny one Oprah has just earned, will go a long way to giving their fledgling TV careers a much-needed credibility boost.
If this time next year it is their names, as producers, we are seeing on the nominee list, it will go a very long way to establishing that they genuinely deserve a seat at the big table – and all the lovely money that comes with it – because of their talent, rather than just because of who his Gan Gan is.
END
Nice one, Daniela! Lots of reality here.
WBBM Thank you.❤️
An opinionated piece that I agree with everything. Well said. But as for the correct information when citing Oprah's Emmy nomination... "Emmy *nominations*, like the shiny one Oprah has just earned, will go a long way to giving their fledgling TV careers a much-needed credibility boost". Honestly, I think we're going through a terrible journalistic and informational meltdown. The Emmy is not like the Oscar that selects award candidates. Applications are reviewed once a year by the Academy's Board of Governors, which has the final say on who joins the elite group. Members used to enjoy voting rights for life but since 2016, "voting status" has been limited to 10 years, and is renewable, to avoid having voters who are no longer active in the business. As explained on the Emmy website...a) Does the Academy pre-select the programs in the competition? No. All eligible submissions are entered into the competition and then judged by television professionals around the world.
Nota:Oprah was not nominated for an Emmy. Oprah signed up.
...
Pearl is a fictional character from the animated television series Steven Universe, created by Rebecca Sugar. She is a "Gem", a fictional alien being that exists as a magical gemstone projecting a holographic body.
She is portrayed as a loving, gentle and delicate motherly figure for Steven, the protagonist of the series, and can be a fierce fighter. However, she also tends to be overprotective, has low self-esteem, and is deeply overwhelmed with grief caused by the loss of Steven's mother Rose Quartz, whom she loved.
She is frequently praised for being a positive depiction of a queer character, though her strong obsession with Rose has been described as "unhealthy".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_(Steven_Universe)
I daresay MM would say it's only a working title - her animation will be called Peggy.
Someone has said that Charles may want the Edinburgh dukedom for Prince Louis. But isn't Prince Louis going to become Duke of York anyway?
The UK Government abolished male primogeniture for the Crown before George's birth. They didn't pass reforms for other titles. They ought to. Beatrice would then be able to inherit her father's title and Lady Louise Edward's title.
The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the original meaning of her own name
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9791469/Meghan-Markle-named-new-Netflix-herself.html
X- Meghan: "The truth is out there"
https://youtu.be/Qz2wnSVeITg
(Excerpt, but you may want to read it all:) A Hollywood producer was arrested Thursday for allegedly running “an extensive and far-reaching” prostitution ring — which he hid for years using his moviemaking company, federal prosecutors said.
Dillon Jordan — who backed the 2018 Maggie Gyllenhaal drama “The Kindergarten Teacher” — is accused of pimping women to Johns across the US for at least seven years, between 2010 and 2017, according to an indictment filed in the Southern District of New York.
Jordan, 49, allegedly used his movie production company and a supposed California-based event-planning firm to hide the proceeds from the sex-sales, according to the court papers unsealed Thursday.
The pervy producer is said to have partnered up with a UK-based madam, “by sharing and referring customers and prostitutes” with her, the indictment states.
“As alleged, for years, Dillon Jordan operated an extensive and far-reaching prostitution business, using a purported event planning company and a movie production company to conceal the proceeds he made from exploiting women,” Manhattan US Attorney Audrey Strauss said in a statement.>
A UK-based madam? An international prostitution ring? Now where have I heard something like that before...
https://nypost.com/2021/07/15/movie-producer-dillon-jordan-accused-of-running-prostitution-ring/
https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2021/07/15/diabetes-high-risk-condition-death/2781626314320/
Btw, the chap with the horse (a continental/Scandinavian breed? I haven't looked it up up yet) looks as if he & his equine colleague work extracting timber, rather than clear-felling, hence the safety gear . Using horses is reckoned to cause less damage in the woods than using tractors.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/oh-poo-charles-puts-foot-155643538.html
Evening Standard
Oh poo – Charles puts his foot in it at Great Yorkshire Show
Tom Wilkinson
Thu, 15 July 2021, 7:19 pm·3-min read
The Prince of Wales was told it was good luck after he trod in a cow pat at the Great Yorkshire Show.
Charles and Camilla spent hours touring major agricultural show at Harrogate North Yorkshire in sweltering conditions.
It was the largest public gathering – with some 20,000 visitors – the couple have walked among since the pandemic started.
Charles appeared engrossed in the show ring, inspecting prize-winning cattle and, later, sheep.
And it was during a chat with South Devon cattle judge Anne Tully that he trod in a fresh cow pat.
Mrs Tully, from Brixham, Devon said afterwards: “I told him that was luck, that’s what we always say.”
The prince then came face to face with champion 1,550kg Hereford bull Moralee One Rebel Kicks, owned by Tom and Di Harrison from Stocksfield, Northumberland.
Mr Harrison said afterwards: “I could have talked to him for an hour.
“He is very knowledgeable and I would have liked to have bought him a pint.”
Charles looked happy to stop and chat to visitors during his three-hour tour of the huge site.
He spoke to Hannah Richardson, from Ripon, who brought her eight-month-old baby Phoebe to the show.
Afterwards, Mrs Richardson said: “I can’t believe she has met the prince – this is the first big event she has been to because of lockdown.”
And Charles was given a warm welcome by horse trader and father-of-six Red Lee Smith, who spotted the prince and gave him a booming hello as he walked by.
The gypsy from Dublin is currently staying in Doncaster, South Yorkshire, and told Charles he was visiting the show with his family.
After asking: “Can I get a photo with Mr Charles?” Mr Smith told the prince: “You’re looking well.”
Charles replied: “Not too bad yourself.”
As they parted Mr Smith wished him “God bless”.
Afterwards, Mr Smith said: “He’s all right. I’ve met him before. I’ve met Harry a few times too.”
The prince stopped for selfies with some groups and chatted to fruit seller Ollie Fuller, who gave him a punnet of strawberries from Thirsk, North Yorkshire.
The event did not happen last year and Mr Fuller said: “It was great to see him, it’s great to be back.”
The prince talked to farmers throughout the visit and was pleased to launch a new guide to help them go green, which aims to demystify some of the jargon which surrounds environmental agriculture methods.
The guide, which was Charles’s idea, came from the Prince’s Countryside Fund, supported by McDonalds.
In a speech, Charles said: “It is unhelpful that many terms used to describe environmental processes are somewhat obscure and off-putting.”
He added: “Once we all understood what we need to do, of course the next step is to go on and do it.”
He hoped the A-Zero guide would help farmers achieve that.
The Duchess of Cornwall toured the show site separately from her husband for most of the afternoon and held a hedgehog, calling it a “happy hog”.
She also met children, held a spider and some baby owls.
Camilla met Deb Howe, who was balancing a chicken on her head, from Eggucation – an organisation which teaches schoolchildren about ethical chick-hatching projects.
Well done, Yorkshire!
@WildBoar
Love the cow pat splat!
We always say it’s lucky to step on
a pat, same when a bird drops
it’s offerings!
Well done to Charles, positive reviews
from Yorkshiremen, a fine endorsement.
I'm glad that report met your approval!
------
Everyone, re the Harkles and publicity -
For some reason, I looked up Stanley Green, the `Protein Man’ - older London Nutties may remember him patrolling Oxford St (and occasionally elsewhere) with sandwich boards and an overhead sign, once called a `high flyer’.
He too wanted people to be kinder and less aggressive but thought reducing protein intake was the answer.
He was once described as `the most famous non-famous man in London’ – he didn’t need Sunshine Sachs for his publicity. It was pure DIY.
I already think of the #6s as the `most famous non-famous’ people around at the moment and love the idea of them being reduced to parading around in sandwich boards when the cash runs out.
Can you imagine it? I offer this copyright free to any cartoonist who might wish to use it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Green, plus many other photos are available on line.
The only `lucky' thing about it was that it hadn't ever happened before - after more than 2 decades of living within sight of the sea. Not bad going.
Claymation
Her latest pearl of wisdom
is a cartoon, anime
Featuring, I presume, me me me me
Her team looks all white,
it would seem
Not what you’d call
an all inclusive team
Meghan to Pearl, no relevance
But Rache in German
means revenge, vengeance
I actually like Charles,
I think he’s a good man.
I don’t believe what’s been written.
God Save the Queen
@Magatha
Yes, all about meee!
See Duchess Moaning Markle:
Since being nominated for My Emmy Trophy I’ve been reflecting on My greatest acting roles:
Which is My most inspiring?
1. Loving wife 💕
2. Maternal being 🍼👶🏼
3. Truth-telling on Oprah 🗣
4. Global Humanitarian & Feminist 🌍👧🏽
I agree with you, I too think Charles is a good man (too good, sometimes).
Re the horse logging, it is a niche thing here as well, usually on privately held land. Back when we had a mule, we used her for plowing the garden and moving felled trees (for firewood). Sadly, we sold her to finance the birth of youngest daughter. I used to tell daughter that I'm still deciding whether she was worth it! As the kids were growing up, we had lots of horses, no more mules.
Here's a good video about horse logging in the USA--I enjoy his videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ln1Ytep8yc
I* always intended to *one day* get more mules and, when we retired, we'd ride them on some epic trail rides. Funny how we never thought about getting older and having knees that would say things like "Yeah, NO, soooo not doin' THAT!" It also seems unfair to get animals that would probably outlive us at this point and be sold off to strangers that may abuse them. Nope.
*Husband, not so much. He would prefer something fossil-fuel powered.
I daresay MM would say it's only a working title - her animation will be called Peggy.
She could also go from the Welsh Megan to the French Marguerite, which means Daisy. (Oh, is that where Doria got the nickname "Flower"?)
Maybe the positive accolades she got from it, she's been trying to reproduce ever since? but never quite able to reach that emotional "high" again.
In keeping with that, a driving need to be validated for being important(?) (in certain circles) is part of why this happens? Since she has not been able to reproduce that level (until reaching the BRF and apparently by that time even that was not enough), the soap dish keeps coming up is part of the selling CV to the world as well as reinforcing the idea to her of this is what started her trajectory of importance here, so she will continue to be that force/change maker level of importance and you can be part of it.
I suspect most of us can realize that we won't be sashaying in high red carpet events and have come to terms of where we fit in the hierarchy of the world. Drive can be a good thing. OTOH, it can also be bad if you are unrealistic about the possibilities of not being the star/recognized brand name and that settling for anything less is not an option. And, very few people are ever able to stay permanently at the tiptop. Most actors have some bad (really bad) reviews in their CV. And as she is alleged to have said: No is not an option.
I suspect most of us can realize that we won't be sashaying in high red carpet events and have come to terms of where we fit in the hierarchy of the world. Drive can be a good thing. OTOH, it can also be bad if you are unrealistic about the possibilities of not being the star/recognized brand name and that settling for anything less is not an option. And, very few people are ever able to stay permanently at the tiptop. Most actors have some bad (really bad) reviews in their CV. And as she is alleged to have said: No is not an option.
Probably most of us wouldn't even want to be sashaying in red carpet events. Having to look amazing everyday, never going anywhere without makeup, being on a perpetual diet, and undergoing multiple surgeries to stave off the ravages of time yet leaving the person looking like an alien? Nope, that is not is something that I've never wanted for myself. Seems weird to me.
I've had a little work done. Not much in the big picture but I can see how it becomes alluring.
You have something you don't like about yourself. It bothers (or eats at you). If only this were not so, then life would be every so much better.
So you do this. Get it changed. Now there is a new something you hate about yourself which you didn't notice before or was not prominent because the other thing was "the focus". But this time, there is this world of possibilities - all fixable with money. It can become a never ending renovation project.
But, if you can look at yourself realistically - knowing that you will not get back to some magically better physical/possible think of as the best time of your life, you can walk away from the idea of needing to do more because you know that the emptiness inside you won't be fixed with surgery, filled by buying the latest supposed "must have" objects and do the work on finding out who you really are - good, not good and neutral.
Thank you for the article on PC and Camilla in Yorkshire at the show. Delightful. It is good for PC to be out and about amongst the people discussing what he loves—the environment. The article really warms my heart. As another Nutty said, PC is a good man. He has had a rough spring and summer— good for him to spend *three hours* mingling with farmers who I am sure were happy to speak with him.
Claymation=Brilliant!
You are so clever!
I did enjoy that video, Swamp Woman, what a magnificent pair of horses. I've only seen a little demonstration in the show ring by one man working with an Ardennes horse.
Mules are rare here but one dedicated rider caused a stir in equestrian circles by training her mule for dressage, from a very unpromising start - since when hasn't looked looked back:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19GpU3_v3Gk Wallace meets Monty
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLs9k8PdJO0 BBC Interview
Another longer video, with sadly a synthetic voice, decided it was an equality and diversity issue, so he was allowed to compete!
My dear, now late, neighbour was a veterinary surgeon who had served in Burma with horse- & mule- drawn artillery. In retreat from the Japanese, they had to cross the Irrawaddy river but the horses refused and had to be left behind - the mules didn't hesitate though and the troops, mules & guns all got across and on their way to safety.
My neighbour had a very low opinion of horses ever after!
As we drove away from the Grand Canyon, we saw a Ranger on mule back - both rider and mule were as beautifully turned out as if competing in the snootiest of shows, but then, even donkeys scrub-up well.
Didn't the narrator say, in those TV programmes about the Duchy, that he was a countryman at heart? Such a pity that he couldn't have had a different life, say managing his family estates in the country instead of being in line for the burden of kingship. He certainly seemed in his element at the show.
God Save the Queen, bless the Prince of Wales - and help all the rest of us!
What you propose, PC retiring is not a bad idea. But I cannot imagine after waiting and being in preparation for the throne his entire life, giving up his legacy.
Another Nutty up thread mentioned that PC seemed enthralled with 6w in the beginning. I don’t think we can hold that against PC though, I am sure she was at her eyelash-batting, love-bombing, most charming narc self to him. What man does not enjoy the flattery and attention of his soon-to-be daughter-in-law.
it seems to me 6w had reached the top social standing with her marriage into the BRF. She could have had a very privileged life with relatively few work commitments to keep the job. But that did not suit her. Because she had to merch and monetize everything to bring in cash? That seems very short-sighted to me.
It'll depend on many other things besides the sh*t the Harkles have given him as to whether he feels able to cope. If the Devil flies off with his daughter-in-law, the outlook might be brighter. We don't know how much he is prepared to depend on Wm, if at all.
He would always have the option of throwing in the towel and letting William take over as Regent. He could then head off to somewhere remote like Berneray (as he has done in the past, see https://www.scotsman.com/news/berneray-crofter-who-hosted-prince-secret-visit-dies-78-2465509).
Or rent a farmhouse, off the main tourist track, in Iceland.
I admit, I can't really see him throwing in the towel.
On Topic: I don't see Prince Charles running away from being King Charles.
I've always wondered to myself whether *jealous* Prince Charles wasn't another Diana invention when he was probably exasperated by her constant need to be the center of attention instead of letting the cause he/they were trying to bring attention to be the focus.
I 100% agree with abbyh about HM.
This is just trivia, but is the link with the Marcus and Prianka pic, a few years old. The article also says Marcus introduced Negs to Harry on a trip to Europe which is a new one to me, but that's all it says. Wondering if some of the suspects all turned up for the opening of Barcelona Soho House, seems Negs and her Panama style hat, Marcus and Misho were there.
https://expressdigest.com/markus-anderson-the-man-who-introduced-meghan-and-harry/
Very very interesting in my book. Megs thought Markus was very important because 3 of the images are from her own Instagram. She wanted these images out there because they helped her climb socially. The above article must date from 2016 when her Instagram was still live. She deleted it in 2017 I think.
https://expressdigest.com/markus-anderson-the-man-who-introduced-meghan-and-harry/
Harry and Meghan want Lilibet to be christened at Windsor in front of the Queen - with Duke making 'intentions clear' during visit for the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue
By RICHARD EDEN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 22:01, 16 July 2021 | UPDATED: 22:10, 16 July 2021
They've accused the Queen of handing down 'genetic pain and suffering' and charged unnamed relations with racism, but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are apparently eager to cling on to the perks of life in the Royal Family.
I hear that Prince Harry and Meghan want a royal christening for their baby, Lilibet, held in the presence of the Queen.
The California-based couple's intentions are said to have been made clear during Harry's visit to this country for the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue earlier this month.
'Harry told several people that they want to have Lili christened at Windsor, just like her brother,' a royal source tells me. 'They are happy to wait until circumstances allow.'
It would be Meghan's first visit to Britain since the couple quit royal duties last year.
Interestingly, six weeks after Lili's birth, she has not yet been given the eighth place in the line of succession that she is due, according to the official royal website.
It's understood that the list will not be updated until after the christening. Lili would bump the Queen's second son, Prince Andrew, into ninth place.
Lili will join the list as long as she is not baptised a Roman Catholic, as they are specifically excluded from succession to the throne.
Although Meghan attended a Catholic high school, she was baptised and confirmed into the Church of England in a private ceremony at the Chapel Royal conducted by Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby.
+Lili's brother, Archie, was christened by the Archbishop amid unprecendented secrecy at St George's Chapel, Windsor, in 2019.
Although details of royal babies' godparents have always been made public in the past, Harry and Meghan refused to confirm any names.
It's not clear how enthusiastic the Royal Family will be. Her parents have already caused one major royal row after their spokesmen claimed to U.S. media that they'd asked the Queen's permission to use her pet name, Lilibet. Palace sources subsequently told the BBC that no such permission had been sought.
As my old dad would have said: `Well, that beats cock-fighting!’
No comments as yet.
"I will not be ignored........"
You will recognize my daughter with her name, period. These two have no concept of reality from Richard Eden's latest tea spill.
Example of terrain where a mule might be a better choice of mount: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFuh7gollxk
Or they could just ride a bovine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTZ7jWFKFb0
I saw the article just before I came here. So this mean they now have a real baby? I can't understand why they want to have the sprog christened at Windsor in the presence of the Queen. Wasn't the Queen racist, according to them? After laying into the BRF on a TV show shown worldwide they now want to meet the Queen. Have they no shame?
Apparently,'They are happy to wait until circumstances allow.' Let's just hope they never allow - the Queen's diary is done up to a year in advance, she'll be at Balmoral soon and normally stays there until October. Then she'll be too busy with engagements 🙏🏻
or do they really want to be able to say they were shut out by the mean BRF who have yet again shown how they deliberately do not allow them the full measure and rights (especially since they have taken away parts already) of what it means to be a member of the family?
They want the Queen to be there and are willing to wait? I'm thinking cold day in Punxsutawney.
"Interestingly, six weeks after Lili's birth, she has not yet been given the eighth place in the line of succession that she is due, according to the official royal website"
Puds...raised this theory about the importance of Lilibeth's baptism and the line of succession. A point that Harry and Meghan, if the article is true, are giving a lot of importance: the baptism of Lilibeth
...
Act of Settlement of 1701
That whosoever shall hereafter come to the possession of this Crown, shall join in communion with the Church of England, as by law established;
...
The Act of Settlement
The Act of Settlement of 1701 was designed to secure the Protestant succession to the throne, and to strengthen the guarantees for ensuring a parliamentary system of government.
...
*Only, my theories...*
Yes, Lilibeth's baptism seems to be an important piece. to secure his place in the line of succession to the throne. Having the queen as a witness (to validate this in parliament) as she is the head of the Church of England. Since H&M are two pathological liars. After all, if HM says no, I "think" the Archbishop can do it without her permission.
I found that article and pics very interesting, too. 6w really looks like the social climber she is in those pics. The message seems to be that she is part of the “in crowd” and “jet setters” who frequent Soho House. What better way to do that than hang out with Marcus and Misha? Isn’t this around the same time she was building her fauxhumanantarian profile with the pics with the children in Africa and the UN speech? Creating a persona to lure in a Prince?
So funny that the Harkles now want a "Spectacle" of a Royal Christening for the baby they named Lilibet.
The probably want JH's genetic pain giving granny, HM , to foot the bill for their excursion and spectacle. Its so toxic there its understandable and the titles, pomp and circumstance, mean nothing to them, its perfectly understandable!
Or is it just another game TBW is playing so they can claim more abuse and victimhood at the RF expense?.....the toxic family refused to guve Lilibet a Christening because of whatever
JH is really spitting in his familys face. I hope theres a way to remove disloyal to the countfy and crown people and their spawn from the line of succession.
I believe I’m talking about the right child.
I've always wondered to myself whether *jealous* Prince Charles wasn't another Diana invention when he was probably exasperated by her constant need to be the center of attention instead of letting the cause he/they were trying to bring attention to be the focus.
That's a long-lived smear, then! And if it really is made up, it's very sad that Prince Charles couldn't shake it. Camilla was able to brazen out being called "the Rottweiler" by Diana and "that wicked woman" by the Queen, and her present popularity is still a source of cognitive dissonance to everyone who remembers the War of the Waleses. But the sense that Charles is naturally insecure and resentful has stuck with him for decades. Other royals have had major image makeovers; why is one for him so elusive?
?
So funny that the Harkles now want a "Spectacle" of a Royal Christening for the baby they named Lilibet.
The probably want JH's genetic pain giving granny, HM , to foot the bill for their excursion and spectacle. Its so toxic there its understandable and the titles, pomp and circumstance, mean nothing to them, its perfectly understandable!
Or is it just another game TBW is playing so they can claim more abuse and victimhood at the RF expense?.....the toxic family refused to guve Lilibet a Christening because of whatever
JH is really spitting in his familys face. I hope theres a way to remove disloyal to the countfy and crown people and their spawn from the line of succession.
...
Meghan Markle Is Reportedly Baptized in a Secret Ceremony. (March 7, 2018)
https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-reportedly-baptized-leading-up-to-royal-wedding
...
Kensington Pxalace confirmed it back in November.
...
JHanoi...Well said👏
...
I believe that when it comes to the baptism of members of the royal family, the Queen's validation is needed. I don't believe she will trust a baptism performed by an archbishop without reliable witnesses. I'm also researching if the baptism certificate, in the case of the royal family, needs the queen's signature or specific paper with the royal family's coat of arms. But I'll research what you said and when I find something I'll tell you
was not present for the christening of Archibald and Louis.
https://pagesix.com/2021/07/16/meghan-markle-pitched-netflix-in-2018-despite-harrys-claims/
Below is the full item from Page Six. It sounds like more lies were coming from the Sussexes during the Oprah interview and it becomes more obvious that Meghan was busy plotting her exit with Harry in tow in 2019. Elton John and David Furnish are very useful to her. Because of Meghan’s longtime fascination with the concept of royalty, the British Royal Family in particular, and specifically Diana, Elton John’s association with Diana, William, and Harry make him and his husband David obviously useful objects for Meghan to cultivate, which she did very early on as he sang at the second wedding reception. Remember that narcissists regard all people as either useful or not useful objects. John and Furnish provide status, connections, and lots of narcissistic fuel.
PART ONE
Page Six
Meghan Markle pitched Netflix pre-Megxit, despite Harry’s claims
By Sara Nathan
July 16, 2021 | 7:43pm
Meghan Markle started working on her Netflix project with David Furnish long before she quit England, back in 2018 — Page Six is told.
We’re told that Markle and Furnish were in active discussions with Netflix while Markle was still a senior working member of the royal family, and still living behind Palace walls.
In March, Markle’s husband Prince Harry insisted they had never thought of teaming up with streamers such as Netflix and Spotify until they sensationally quit the UK for the US in early 2020 — and were cut off financially by his family.
During the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Harry said the big-money deals they made once they moved to California were “never part of the plan”, adding, “That was suggested by somebody else by the point of where my family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us.”
Harry said they were able to start a new life thanks to the millions left to him by his late mother, Princess Diana.
“I’ve got what my mum left me, and without that, we would not have been able to do this,” he said.
But during the pandemic, a friend suggested: “‘What about streamers?'” Harry continued, while Markle added: “We genuinely hadn’t thought about it before.”
“We hadn’t thought about it,” Harry continued. “So, there were all sorts of different options. And look, from my perspective, all I needed was enough money to be able to pay for security to keep my family safe.'”
We’re told that the Netflix series was originally just one of a number of one-off advocacy projects that Markle started work on while a working member of the royal family, which included her charity cookbook to raise funds for the victims of the London Grenfell fire and the issue of British Vogue that she edited.
Furnish himself admitted they had worked together on the project for some time, writing on Instagram this week: “I am delighted that we are finally able to announce this exciting animated series … The team collaborating on the series are first class, and @netflix are the perfect partner.”
In a statement, Markle, who is currently on maternity leave following the birth of her baby daughter Lilibet, said: “I’m thrilled that Archewell Productions, partnered with the powerhouse platform of Netflix, and these incredible producers, will together bring you this new animated series … David Furnish and I have been eager to bring this special series to light, and I am delighted we are able to announce it today.”
“Pearl” is the working title for the series, which doesn’t yet have a release date, and will follow a young girl who finds inspiration from influential women from history while on a “heroic adventure.”
PART TWO
Harry had also openly been talking about his Apple + mental health show “The Me You Can’t See” with producing partner Winfrey in early 2019 before leaving the royal family.
Page Six also reported the couple was in 2019 talks with Quibi, the now-defunct streaming platform led by LA supremos Meg Whitman and Jeffrey Katzenberg, about a commercial partnership.
Markle and Harry are extremely close with Furnish and his husband, Elton John. John was friends with Princess Diana — famously updating “Candle in the Wind” in her memory — and has remained protective of Harry and his brother Prince William.
John performed at Harry and Meghan’s wedding reception in May 2018 — singing a number of songs including “Tiny Dancer” and “Circle of Life” — and was a guest on their Spotify holiday special in 2020.
When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex came under fire for taking a private jet to visit Furnish and Elton at their home in Nice in the South of France in August 2019 alongside their then-baby son Archie, John fiercely defended them.
“After a hectic year continuing their hard work and dedication to charity, David and I wanted the young family to have a private holiday inside the safety and tranquility of our home. To maintain a high level of much-needed protection, we provided them with a private jet flight. To support Prince Harry’s commitment to the environment, we ensured their flight was carbon-neutral, by making the appropriate contribution to Carbon Footprint.”
He then called for an end to “these relentless and untrue assassinations on their character that are spuriously crafted on an almost daily basis.”
A rep for the Sussexes was unavailable for comment.
Great rationale for them to distract from the real issues with the christening request. Don’t do it, Your Majesty!
.........
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4916724/Markus-Anderson-man-introduced-Meghan-Harry.html
The handsome best friend Meghan takes EVERYWHERE! How Canadian Markus Anderson became Markle's unofficial chaperone - after he ignited the royal love affair by playing matchmaker
Markus Anderson is a frequent fixture on Meghan Markle's Instagram feed
The good-looking 36-year-old sat next to Markle, 36, at the Invictus Games
Dubbed the 'King of Soho House', Anderson is said to have introduced the pair
With enviable connections, Anderson is seen as a 'safe' companion for Markle as she prepares to step into the spotlight
PUBLISHED: 05:24 EDT, 25 September 2017
"MM was baptized in the Jewish faith to marry Trevor. She later baptized herself into the Church of England to marry Harry."
While there is plenty of documentation that both M and Kate were confirmed into the CoE in official ceremonies (not do-it-yourself ones) just prior to their marriages, I don't believe M converted to Judaism before marrying Trevor. (Don't think Jews are ever "baptized.")
Kate had been baptized in an Anglican ceremony as a baby but she had never been confirmed into the church as the Middletons weren't regular church-goers. There was no evidence M had ever been baptized as a Christian so unlike Kate, she had to do both the baptism and confirmation. (Baptism is a once and done thing--doesn't "expire") Thomas Markle is/was Episcopalian but Doria's religion is/was unclear. She choose Hollywood's Paramahansa Yogananda Self-Realization Fellowship Temple and a ceremony performed by Brother Bhaktananda for the wedding to Thomas. Kind of unlikely she'd suddenly demand a Christian baptism of her daughter a year or two later.
At the time H&M's engagement was announced and there were questions about M's religion, Trevor's brother went on the record saying their wedding ceremony had "elements" of Judaism but wasn't a Jewish ceremony. (They did have a chair dance at t hee wedding reception but that doesn't mean anything about the religious purity of the ceremony itself.) Since Trevor remarried I can't find those old articles quoting the brother but I'll keep looking. But with all else we've heard about that wedding (drugs and alcohol, pot favors, Jamaica, on the beach) somehow I doubt the religious element was given any priority, just the flashy trappings like the hora.
------
@XXXXXX wrote:
"As far as I know, if #2 gets Christened in a mainstream Protestant church, then this baby has fulfilled the requirement to be in the line of succession. This could even be done in the US."
I agree. There are plenty of people technically in the LoS not baptised into the CoE. (European royals, for example.) As long as they are Protestant, all is good. The DM article suggesting CoE baptism is a requirement is a red herring IMO. Only question is who planted it and why.
...
How to Convert to Judaism.
The process varies from movement to movement, but certain rituals are common to all of them.
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-conversion-process/
...
Regarding Your comments about Meghan hanging with Markus and attempting to refashion her facade from SoHo House barfly to humanitarian to snag Harry, check this no-punches-pulled Page Six column by none other than the very well-connected Cindy Adams from January 2020 commenting on Megxit. Pay specific attention to the info about Meghan being known in European elite circles as a woman who was trolling for a rich husband. My guess is that Adams’ source is Lady CC.
******
New York Post
Page Six
Meghan Markle knew exactly what she signed up for
By Cindy Adams
January 14, 2020
With British blats leaking all over America’s happenings, only fair for me to expel bodily fluid on theirs.
Selfish Meghan knew precisely exactly — bet your assets on it — what she was doing. For openers, why’d she want that twit Harry? Why?? Because playing house — or castle — with him was a better role than anything on TV.
An actress, she loves the spotlight. Attention. Importance. She knew a good script when she smelled it. And she knew what parts she needed to flex to get it.
How dare this nothing nobody do that to the queen, who’s 93. Forget even that HM Elizabeth’s a symbol. A monarch. A sovereign. Queen of the realm. She’s first of all a mother, a grandmother, a great-grandmother, a Majesty. This is how you treat a mother? The greatest most precious human being ever in my life was my mother. This is how you treat a mother?
And the way to treat that alleged nitwit husband’s brother? Father? Whole family?
This is how you’re going to teach your baby respect for a parent? How to respect family? Just like how selfish-you respected your own father and stepsister?
And that royal stupidness grandson Harry not revering his grandma? Conspiring to diss her? What’ll he do Mother’s Day? Send Her Majesty that Nazi swastika shirt he once pranced in?
Formerly married, divorced, showbiz, biracial, foreign, American, been around, strong-minded, tough, smart, allegedly maybe could be possibly selfish and headstrong Markle never thought playing the palace would be different?
This is only hearsay, but in London a Brit socialite who knew her way around money, Europe, royalty told me — and my companion, so I wasn’t alone hearing this — that Meghan was known in the old days. “She was around the famous playgrounds Europeans visit . . . and known to be shopping for a rich husband.”
How about Fergie, that other temp duchess who divorced Prince handy dandy randy Andy? She took a handout from Jeffrey Epstein, she made a few quid hyping Weight Watchers, she got photographed sucking a guy’s toes. And when this newest duchesslite no longer needs hairy Harry??? The crapshoot is how long she stays.
She’s already interviewed p.r. folk in the states. Tired of kissing babies, visiting hospitals, laying wreaths and being stymied, she’s already tapped showbiz possibilities in the Colonies. She’ll be back in the business big-time while her husband, who’s never earned a farthing, diapers the kid.
Remember a predecessor of generations gone by? Duchess of Windsor? Who married the almost king? Also had been married and divorced. Also foreign.
Also American. She was not happy afterward. She was tough. I met her. I interviewed her. She was constantly looking to negotiate some sort of financial betterment.
Hey, sic transit, Meghan.
Regarding Your comments about Meghan hanging with Markus and attempting to refashion her facade from SoHo House barfly to humanitarian to snag Harry, check this no-punches-pulled Page Six column by none other than the very well-connected Cindy Adams from January 2020 commenting on Megxit. Pay specific attention to the info about Meghan being known in European elite circles as a woman who was trolling for a rich husband. My guess is that Adams’ source is Lady CC.
******
New York Post
Page Six
Meghan Markle knew exactly what she signed up for
By Cindy Adams
January 14, 2020
With British blats leaking all over America’s happenings, only fair for me to expel bodily fluid on theirs.
Selfish Meghan knew precisely exactly — bet your assets on it — what she was doing. For openers, why’d she want that twit Harry? Why?? Because playing house — or castle — with him was a better role than anything on TV.
An actress, she loves the spotlight. Attention. Importance. She knew a good script when she smelled it. And she knew what parts she needed to flex to get it.
How dare this nothing nobody do that to the queen, who’s 93. Forget even that HM Elizabeth’s a symbol. A monarch. A sovereign. Queen of the realm. She’s first of all a mother, a grandmother, a great-grandmother, a Majesty. This is how you treat a mother? The greatest most precious human being ever in my life was my mother. This is how you treat a mother?
And the way to treat that alleged nitwit husband’s brother? Father? Whole family?
This is how you’re going to teach your baby respect for a parent? How to respect family? Just like how selfish-you respected your own father and stepsister?
And that royal stupidness grandson Harry not revering his grandma? Conspiring to diss her? What’ll he do Mother’s Day? Send Her Majesty that Nazi swastika shirt he once pranced in?
Formerly married, divorced, showbiz, biracial, foreign, American, been around, strong-minded, tough, smart, allegedly maybe could be possibly selfish and headstrong Markle never thought playing the palace would be different?
This is only hearsay, but in London a Brit socialite who knew her way around money, Europe, royalty told me — and my companion, so I wasn’t alone hearing this — that Meghan was known in the old days. “She was around the famous playgrounds Europeans visit . . . and known to be shopping for a rich husband.”
How about Fergie, that other temp duchess who divorced Prince handy dandy randy Andy? She took a handout from Jeffrey Epstein, she made a few quid hyping Weight Watchers, she got photographed sucking a guy’s toes. And when this newest duchesslite no longer needs hairy Harry??? The crapshoot is how long she stays.
She’s already interviewed p.r. folk in the states. Tired of kissing babies, visiting hospitals, laying wreaths and being stymied, she’s already tapped showbiz possibilities in the Colonies. She’ll be back in the business big-time while her husband, who’s never earned a farthing, diapers the kid.
Remember a predecessor of generations gone by? Duchess of Windsor? Who married the almost king? Also had been married and divorced. Also foreign.
Also American. She was not happy afterward. She was tough. I met her. I interviewed her. She was constantly looking to negotiate some sort of financial betterment.
Hey, sic transit, Meghan.
...
Many liberal rabbis will perform a conversion for the sake of an upcoming marriage, reasoning that exposure to Judaism in the context of an intimate relationship is likely to inspire such a convert to eventually accept Judaism for its own sake. Even the process of conversion is a matter of contention among the movements. Whereas traditional rabbis expect the candidate to undergo all rabbinically prescribed rituals, liberal rabbis may use rituals more selectively
...
The term “Protestant” (what I know) comes from the formal protest document – Protestatio – which the Lutherans presented at an assembly in 1529, expressing their opposition to the religious policy adopted by the Catholic Church. Protestantism has been defined as “the Christian current . . . who broke with the Catholic Church.
...
Anglicanism: Henry VIII
Protestantism: Martin Luther.
In Anglicanism the king is the head of the Church. Not in Protestantism. In Anglicanism there is the Eucharist and in Protestantism not. Outside England, the Anglican Church is generally referred to as the Episcopal Church, particularly in the United States and Latin American countries. The term Anglican originates from the Anglican ecclesia, which means English Church or Church of the English People.I raised this question because I read it (it's even on Wikipedia, although I prefer other sources too) The episcopal church was organized after the American Revolution, when it became separate from the Church of England, whose clergy are required to swear allegiance to the British monarch as Supreme Governor.
Re: European royals in UK line of succession (LoS)
Being in the LoS for the UK throne relates to one's ancestors. An example is Denmark's royal family.
https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/european-royals-in-the-british-line-of-succession-denmarks-royal-family-147815/
I'm aware of the religious history of the CoE and the UK monarchy but that doesn't determine the LoS except to bar Catholics which rules out some otherwise qualified European royals. (And previously those who married Catholics were ruled out but that was changed recently.)
I am pretty sure the Danish royals weren't baptized in the CoE. They are Lutheran. While they are far down in the UK LoS, they are there The Norwegian royal family is too. https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/european-royals-in-the-british-line-of-succession-norways-royal-family-145939/
They fall a bit higher in the line than the Danes. They are also part of the Lutheran Church.
I could be wrong but I sincerely doubt Lili has to be baptised into the CoE to be in the LoS. The principle would be the same for Lili at #8 as for King Harald V of Norway at #80-something.
------
Re: M's wedding to Trevor @Karla wrote:
".... I agree that MM's religious ceremony was strange and in Jamaica. But if there was a divorce as she claimed she also needs a legal marriage. If yes, where? Or the ceremony in Jamaica was symbolic for a specific group...."
I think it was essentially a civil ceremony. Those are perfectly legal. A marriage ceremony doesn't have to be religious to be legal, at least not most places. And people are perfectly free to create whatever kinds of ceremonies they want "for show." (And we know M is good at that!)
Here's how to get married in Jamaica.
https://jm.usembassy.gov/u-s-citizen-services/child-family-matters/marriages/
,:
The Archbishop of Canterbury is `first among equals' with regard to the bishops of the other churches which are part of the worldwide Anglican Communion -
At the micro-level, there are 3 other churches in the British Isles which are in communion with the CofE: the Episcopal Church of Scotland; the Church in Wales; and the Church of Ireland, which functions in All Ireland - ie in both NI & the Republic. All have deep historical connections with the CofE.
Throughout the world, there are Anglican churches and dioceses, founded by Anglican missionaries, especially in Commonwealth and former Commonwealth countries, and some which have never been in the commonwealth, eg the USA - hence Michael Curry at the wedding. This site might help:
https://anglicancommunion.org/
The largest diocese is the Diocese in Europe, covering all the other Anglican churches in the European continent, plus Turkey, parts of the Middle East and North Africa.
https://europe.anglican.org/
There is a multiplicity of other protestant denominations, here and across Europe & the rest of the world but all but one don't count.
There have been decades devoted to pursuing Christian unity - so far the Anglican Church is in full communion with only the Lutheran Churches.
Anglicans and Methodists are moving closer together in hope of reconciliation but there's still a way to go.
-----
It strikes me that the Harkles are just playing games. Their bluff might be called if they were told that if they are so concerned with the spiritual welfare of Little Lily, it would be perfectly acceptable for her to be baptised at the delightfully-named All Saints By the Sea in Montecito.
Here are the contact details:
All Saints-by-the-Sea Episcopal Church
83 Eucalyptus Lane
Santa Barbara CA 93108
Phone: (805)969-4771
Fax: (805)565-1281
Email: info@asbts.org
https://allsaintsbythesea.org/
- Subject, of course, to the ceremony being witnessed by 2 trusted representatives of HM, one her Chaplains perhaps, plus another loyal courtier...
It's so very convenient, less than 2 miles away from Riven Rock Road, as the crow flies, and in these uncertain days, better not delay. Otherwise, years from hence, she might die unbaptised.
Thank you for the 2017 link. The comments are very interesting, and that was nearly 4 years ago. People knew what she was then. Worth a read.
There's an Anglican communion/mass held once a month in Hallgrimskirkja, Reykjavik,, with presumably the priest mentioned here.
https://europe.anglican.org/main/latest-news/post/517-st-thorlak--our-newest-patron-saint
Same person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjarni_Bjarnason_(author)
I thought he'd served as priest in an English church in Herefordshire but it was in Lincoln.
That's an ancient connection - when we visited Lincoln Cathedral, I saw something about an Icelander who came there in 1160:
https://aclerkofoxford.blogspot.com/2019/01/an-icelander-in-lincoln.html
He went to become Iceland's first saint, Thorlak. A nice touch to call the English congregation after him.
Because of moderation, our comments crossed.
I don't have anything to oppose your history of protestantism in general or your history of the Anglican Church specifically. But I don't think any of that's the point.
The monarch of the UK has to be "in communion" with the CoE. IMO, that does not say every person in the LoS has to be baptised into the CoE or they can't be in the LoS. Plus, we know there are people in the LoS who haven't been baptised into the CoE. The European royals I listed, for example.
I am not familiar with what certain rabbis will and won't do re: weddings. But we have essentially NO reliable evidence M "converted" to Judaism. (Whatever conversion means-- all I know for sure is it doesn't mean baptism.) The only "evidence" supporting a possible conversion I can see:
1. Trevor is Jewish. But that doesn't mean M converted. Lots of people marry Jews and don't convert. We also have no way to know how important religion was to Trevor at the time.
2. There are internet rumors saying M converted. But there are also internet rumors saying she converted to Catholicism because of her private school-- that's quite unlikely too IMO. Lots on non-Catholics send their children to Catholic schools. There are also internet rumors saying she's into Scientology.
3. T&M had a chair dance at their reception. Big whoop. The reception activities have nothing to do with what happened at the wedding and that Includes doing a dance that historically wasn't even a Jewish dance. (It was Romanian but was adopted by Israel in the early 1900's.) That dance nothing to do with who conducted the wedding, how it was conducted, or whether it was religious. T&M and their guests also played that stupid and degrading to women "wheelbarrow game" more suited to teenagers. That doesn't prove anything about the wedding either.
You asked how M could have gotten a divorce from T if she didn't have a legal marriage. (I assume that's why you brought up legality of marriage again in another comment.)
I'm not saying her marriage wasn't legal. I am saying we do not know if it was a religious ceremony. And if it was religious, we don't know if it was from one faith or many faiths. We have no idea except Trevor's brother said it wasn't Jewish. But as long as it was legal, M could have gotten a divorce. It didn't have to be religious. That's not required and for some people, it's totally unnecessary.
I am one who sees it as catholic, albeit reformed. I wouldn't thank you for calling me a protestant!
The Catholic wing emphasises Eucharistic worship (the Mass) as opposed to making the sermon the main part of the service and is overall more sacramental. Only Baptism and Communion are recognised as essential in the Book of Common Prayer but we regard confirmation, ordination, marriage, penance, ordination & the anointing of the sick as sacramental. Someone from the opposite wing would accept only baptism and eucharist - but's OK.
The other wing is called Evangelical, ie like Welby. There are many in the middle too, so we are regarded to as a `broad' church - on the whole we tolerate each other fairly well, choosing our place of worship by its `churchmanship'. The parish in which I live is too Evangelical for me (worships songs...) so my allegiance is to the next parish which is more Catholic( 2 of the 3 actual churches describe themselves as Modern Catholic, the 3rd places more emphasis on ritual-with-incense).
I find it impossible to generalise about the other protestant churches, be they Brethren, Baptists, Calvinists, Spiritualists, Presbyterian, or any other you care to mention. There's so much variation in doctrine and practise.
The monarch is Supreme Governor- not the Head. That's Christ.
I'm not surprised that Americans are sometimes perplexed by us!
...
And * if* she married Trevor without converting under the law of Judaism he would be excluded from the religion.
...
I was on Lilibet's theory of baptism, that's all.
The Act of Settlement of 1701
"That whosoever shall hereafter come to the possession of this Crown, shall join in communion with the *Church of England*, as by law established".
....
A majority of Protestants are members of a handful of Protestant denominational families: Adventists, Anabaptists, Anglicans/Episcopalians, Baptists, Calvinist/Reformed,Lutherans, Methodists, and Pentecostals.Nondenominational, Charismatic, Evangelical, Independent, and other churches are on the rise, and constitute a significant part of Protestantism.
The Episcopal Church in the USA is in full communion with the Church of England, but recognizes the Archbishop of Canterbury as a spiritual leader. In England, the Queen is the head of the Church. In USA no. Anglican clergy refused to swear allegiance to the British monarch as was required.
Well, so baptize
an heir to the English Crown who is in the line of succession to the throne and who does not recognize the queen as such seems strange and confusing to me.
"The Episcopal Church, established shortly after the American Revolution, has its roots in the Anglican Church. The Anglican Church, known as the Church of England, had a strong following in colonial America. But when the colonies won their independence, the majority of the United States’ Anglican clergy refused to swear allegiance to the British monarch as was required. As a result, The Episcopal Church was formed".
https://www.episcopalchurch.org/who-we-are/anglican-communion/
...
Good Night
Episcopalians do reference the Archbishop of Canterbury in the prayers. And it was the head American guy, Michael somebody, who was at the 6 wedding.
She could offer to do the baptism just down the road. If it were to be during a regular Sunday service, there'd be a ready-made congregation to welcome the babe into the `family'.
Who else thinks they probably have never darkened its doors?
I wondered what sort of reception the Incumbent would get - would she be shown the door pdq?
"...And * if* she married Trevor without converting under the law of Judaism he would be excluded from the religion."
Well, I'm not sure that's entirely true today in the US outside of the very orthodox branches of Judaism.
But even if it is true, that by marrying M Trevor gave up being part of an even a Reform religious community, that was his call. I am willing to blame M for lots of things, but Trevor was 35 years old when he married M-- almost middle-aged! And he'd been living with her in an initimate relationship for years before that. (Not sure that arrangement would have been acceptable to those holding orthodox religious views either.)
If Trevor did marry M in a non-Jewish ceremony (as I suspect he did because I personally doubt she converted) I don't think it's fair to blame M for that. If that happened, perhaps the religion of his birth was just not a top priority for him at the time.
I'm not sure what it is about M that suggests grown men aren't responsible for their decisions. ..I just don't see her as that powerful. But there certainly is a tendency to let the men off the hook.
Good to find another Cindy Adams fan. I remember that column well. As you said, she is very well connected and knows where the bodies are buried. The longer this fiasco goes on, the more I miss the late, great Joan Rivers. Joan and Cindy were close friends. What I wouldn't give to have heard a little chat between those two on the subject of MM.
I once knew a chap who converted to Orthodox Judaism - he found it it rather painful process, even though he had it done in hospital. He gave me to understand that that, historically, converts were suspect - in Spain, for example, they were too likely to be agents of the Inquisition `sailing under false flags'. This chap wanted me to convert with him but I recognised that I'd be incapable of running a Kosher household .
@Swampwoman - thank you for 2 more very enjoyable videos.
Very impressed with the sure-footedness - presumably that comes form the donkey side of the family? I've hacked over pebble-bed heathland and often felt very vulnerable when there were spinning pebbles under hoof. Such willing animals too - small wonder the Royal Artillery ones didn't hesitate at the Irrawaddy.
My father (once an RAF wireless operator) had a tale about riding on a gun limber when he was on the North West Frontier, between India and Afghanistan. The mules set a cracking pace on rough ground - both he and his radio set were thrown off - the limber wheel just missed him but didn't do the radio much good!
I forewent the helicopter ride at the GC when on a geology field trip (I'd have been sick) but sadly there wasn't time to do the mule descent.
TBW went through the motions to do what was needed as far as CoE so she could marry Spare. Again, zero discipline.
Also, conservative, orthodox Anabaptists (Amish,*some Mennonite groups, etc.) do not consider themselves Protestants. They are considered the third arm of the reformation. Protestant, Catholic, and Anabaptist. Menno Simons did not adhere to Protestant nor Catholic dogma but opposed both.
I wasn't implying Doria is Jewish. My train of thought is off sometimes. It runs in a stream. When I write, I forget to stop the stream. Old age, OCD...lol.
I meant to make the point the reformed synagogues are not orthodox so, the indication of who is Jewish or not is more liberal. This is why, my opinion, TBW was allowed to play Jewish at her wedding; so she could appease Trevor and/or his family (which more than likely happened in the mirroring stage and she had to follow through with it).
Its possible a celebrant at a ceremony is reformed Jewish and can be ok with the hijinks seen at TBW/Trevor's ceremony.
That reminds me. I'm having a birthday bash this year and I want the Queen to attend it.
Wait. What's that? I have to invite her? And she has an option to decline? What do mean I can't have everything I want?
I do find the wording of the article interesting. In the past, it would have read "Harry and his wife are planning a Windsor Christening for Lilibet. The Queen is hoping to clear her schedule that she may attend." Then we'd learn later that plans were changed for some reason and that the Queen was crushed that she couldn't spend that time with her favorite grandson, favorite granddaughter-in-law, and two favorite great-grandchildren. But the Harkles can't do that any longer, can they?
I'll bet the huffy, entitled tone of the article is a great reflection of the tone of their demands when they send them to the PR people who have to make sure the wife has three tabloid stories on her per day.
They want! No magic words.
That has always bothered me about them. I always felt they conveyed a rather imperious tone to a lot of what they wanted. I think I really started noticing it with Megxit with the demand letter.
"However, I can imagine Negs putting on a Jewish style ceremony in Jamaica with all the fun bits, smashing glass, being carried aloft in chairs was probably enough for her to claim to some she was Jewish. Trevor had been with her for a few years and probably just gave in to her fantasy's for sanity's sake. I kind of doubt the Minister who conducted the service was Jewish but who knows."
Yes, that seems more likely. Appears that Meghan Markle's first marriage was a civil ceremony, perhaps in Los Angeles on August 16, 2011. This information can be found in Meghan's divorce application. The Jamaica event was probably a wedding celebration party.
....
Jenny Singer is Jewish. So I *opted* to think of MM conversion. But we just opine and nothing more.
...
Well. Well, well, well. For one brief, shining moment, we thought there might be a Jewish Princess of England. We thought Prince Harry’s girlfriend (now fiancé) Meghan Markle could satisfy thousands of years of Jewish longing. We dared to hope that a dark-haired beauty with a social justice streak and the legal first name ‘Rachel’ who tossed around the word ‘Sephardic’ might be one of ours. Forget Jerusalem — next year in Buckingham, we said.
https://forward.com/schmooze/388553/how-meghan-markles-jewish-ex-husband-became-the-guy-who-lost-future-royal/
LOLOL "Next year in Buckingham" --- priceless.
AWFUL RACE CARD/Meghan & Pearl Egotism/Wiki CONS/Fergie WRONG on Diana/Harry EXCLUDED/Jamaican Gov't
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7HInz23fjo
@ Karla
LOLOL "Next year in Buckingham" --- priceless.
____
LOL indeed! :D
https://forward.com/schmooze/388553/how-meghan-markles-jewish-ex-husband-became-the-guy-who-lost-future-royal/
___
Ha! I'm sure the relief of dodging that bullet more than compensates for the connection.
Thanks for the link.
Just to conclude the saga.❤️
...
The credibility of DE is questionable, but my confidence in this article is due to the spokesperson for Westminster Abbey.
...
"A spokesman for Westminster Abbey said: “The Abbey follows the General Synod Ruling of 2002. Since then it has been possible for divorced people to be married in the Church of England. The spokesman also confirmed that Meghan’s Jewish background would not prevent her from having an “interfaith” marriage there.
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/820641/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-wedding-queen
...
DM published this information as well.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4516848/Prince-Harry-wed-Meghan-Markle-Westminster-Abbey.html
...
Hugs❤️
https://m.jpost.com/omg/is-meghan-markle-jewish-515324/amp#aoh=16265389934154&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s
".....An article in the British tabloid Daily Express claims that Markle’s father is Jewish; Vanity Fair, Elle UK, Tablet and many others have cited the story."
"The story also says that a spokesman for Westminster Abbey, the historic London church where British royals marry, confirmed Markle’s Jewish background."
“The spokesman also confirmed that Meghan’s Jewish background would not prevent her from having an ‘interfaith’ marriage there,” Camilla Tominey writes in the May 14 article."
Unfortunately, for those who would love to see a Jew marry into British royalty, the claim is utterly false."
"Duncan Jeffery, Westminster Abbey’s head of communications, told JTA on Wednesday that the church never said that Markle was Jewish. It only confirmed that Markle could be married at the church despite a previous divorce, thanks to a rule that was instituted in 2002."
“[Markle’s Jewishness] is merely conjecture on the part of other people,” Jeffery said.
"A source with knowledge of the situation also confirmed that Markle is not Jewish."
Just in...