A big number anniversary with the marking of twenty five years since Diana's untimely death.
It's sad as she missed so many things she would have loved to been a part of with her sons.
They would like to have had her still around too.
You miss something when you lose a parent. You can't call them and ask advise. Or tell them of how you did something successfully so they can share that happy. Birthdays and holidays pass without gifts in either direction. Or you see something and want to share it because you know they'd love/laugh ... but you can't.
Twenty five years is a long enough time to sometimes be able to look back with a more critical eye at the past. And the world has had so many tragedies since then. 9/11. Boxing Day Tsunami. July 2005 bombings in London to name a few. Kids grow up. Go to uni. People get married, have children, get divorced. People die. Life relentlessly moves on whether or not we are ready to move on.
And yet, at what point can we stop reviving the emotions as if this event happened yesterday? Is it helpful? And, to whom is this helpful (if it is) to other than those who count the inches of print?
Notice that the prince sons are not going to doing anything together or supposedly publicly either. Not really a shocker there but maybe, just maybe, this could actually help tamp down the high emotional whiplash for after (of course) all the major players who knew her personally and the rest of us who didn't.
And then, there is that article: all about the wife with the top photo as a Diana look alike. Interesting timing for that release.
Or that the next interview dropped as well. Not a lot of response to that yet.
Definitely a pattern here. Just not sure where it is ultimately headed for but ... it is quite "a" push and right before the headlines of remembrances before the death of Diana (possible short term?). But long term? Hmmmmm.
Comments
Ayramrosi
@aryamrosi
It seems Oprah is involved with producing Nutmeg’s Spotify content. Harpo Exec Producer, Terry Wood who produced PH’s MHealth doc & the O interview is also the EP of MM’s Spotify podcast. Harpo VP, Catherine Cyr is also helping to produce her podcast. They both work for Oprah.
2h
Replying to
@aryamrosi
Terry Wood is Executive VP at Harpo Productions Inc & Catherine Cyr is VP at Harpo Productions Inc. Harpo Productions is Oprah’s production company. No wonder it’s not being properly fact checked!
----------
Interesting. I have always maintained that Oprah remains a firm supporter of the Duchess (and has a huge grudge against the BRF) but did not imagine just how far that support would go.
That gave me a sorely-needed laugh for the day.
A note to you, and all other Nutties who do us the favor of cutting and pasting good stuff so we can read it here, I THANK YOU.
I am so often thwarted from reading things because they are hidden behind paywalls, or I’ve already ready my free compliment per month, or whatever.
So keep finding us scads of good stuff on-line which gives us a laugh, and/or reveals the new depths to which the 6s sink.
Carry on!
Photo that says the 6s have landed.
So, thank you to everyone who pastes likes and provides copies of articles! I check out every one of them, as time allows.
Thank you to Nutty, abbyh and other moderators who have provided us with this delightful community of likeminded souls. Your time and dedication is very much appreciated.
Let's us track Jesus's podcast numbers and see if Methane can keep up. I've got little use for Spotify since it got into bed with the SixSh*ts of Montecito but I do have a little grudging respect for this tactic. It's such delightful shade, it's almost British in flavor. I exaggerate only slightly when I say this pairing on the same platform of two diametrically opposed rivals has the potential to be as combustible as if Adolf went head-to-head with Winston for audience share. BLG's Body Language Buddies (but it sounds like 'Baddies' in his accent) will handily crush the Suxxit Flying Monkey Squad.
"the Ghost of Anne Boleyn" "With Her Head Tucked Underneath Her Arm" Molly Twitch, Dickens Fair 2009
19,754 views Dec 15, 2009 Molly Twitch sings us a rollicking, rousing, and spooky 'istory lesson about "the ghost of Anne Boleyn", "with her head tucked underneath her arm" (the song has been published under both names), at Mad Sal's Dockside Alehouse, the Great Dickens Christmas Fair 2009.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eX-K_CHd0c
Re. Wedding numbers
Wow, a very respectable showing for Edward and Sophie's wedding. Sophie, an accomplished businesswoman with her own PR firm took flak at the time for 'copying' Diana's iconic short hair. They were very similar but there are really only so many short cuts a blonde woman can wear and NOT look similar to Diana's unless she's going to do something extreme like shave her head. I think the short hair suited Sophie better and wish she would cut it. I didn't remember Edward's wedding being broadcast on American television; I would have been working perhaps and missed it. I do remember many lovely pictures of the bridal couple and the carriage ride through Windsor. I was not the Royal scholar I am now, but I figured that perhaps American networks wouldn't feel that the relatively low-key nuptials of the Queen's lastborn hardly rated a huge splash out for TV coverage and the expense of shipping broadcast teams and equipment over. Compared with his brothers' weddings, it was a pretty simple affair, and I'd assumed that the couple themselves didn't want TV coverage of their ceremony. It would be different at home and in the Commonwealth countries.
Another slapdown of 6's self-importance, if his uncle, beneath even his York cousins in the succession garnered millions more in viewing numbers.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2022/09/03/mad-meg-ii-and-mariah-carey/
Thank you for the funny Times take on a week with the Deplorables. Here is another Times article from today:
Harry and Meghan keep bashing the monarchy because it’s good business, royals believe
On the eve of the couple’s arrival in the UK, royal insiders reveal their exasperation at yet more bombshell claims from the duchess
Royah Nikkhah
When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex sealed the deal with the Queen for liberation from royal life in January 2020, their statement pledged that “everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty”.
How distant that promise seems now, as the Balmoral breakfast table heaves with headlines featuring slings and arrows so frequently fired by the Sussexes at the monarch’s family and the institution she leads. But the Queen, 96, has been keeping calm and carrying on during her annual Scottish break. “She has had a busy summer with lots of visitors and has been out picnicking,” says a Palace source.
While the Queen continues to emphasise that the Sussexes remain “much-loved” family members, they are not expected to see her when they return to the UK this week. They will attend a youth summit in Manchester on Monday and the WellChild awards in London on Thursday, with a visit to Germany on Tuesday for an Invictus Games event.
Under the terms of the “Sandringham summit”, when the Queen, the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry negotiated the terms of the latter’s departure, they agreed to step back from royal duties, Harry relinquished his military appointments and the couple’s public funding stopped, giving them financial freedom to strike multimillion-pound deals on the other side of the Atlantic. Prince Charles continued privately to support the couple financially while they found their feet in the US, but they have lived independently for more than two years.
The Queen signed off the 2020 deal — less than two years after the couple married in Windsor — with what now sounds like wishful thinking: “It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.”
Whether the Sussexes are happy and at peace is hard to tell, but ever since there has been precious little calm for the monarch. In the 2½ years since they left for America, the couple have accused the royal family of racism, disregard for their mental health, miserliness and bad parenting, with the Queen and Charles passing down “genetic pain and suffering”, according to Harry.
New jibes landed last week in Meghan’s interview with the American magazine The Cut, when she suggested she and her husband were forced into exile because “by existing, we were upsetting the dynamic of the hierarchy”. She added that Harry had “lost” his father in the process. Sources close to Meghan later claimed her comments were misunderstood, and she was referring to her estrangement from her own father.
None of which is what the royal family had in mind when the Sussexes vowed to uphold the Queen’s values. A royal source says: “It is hard to see how what they’re doing would equate to the values of the Queen, who has never encouraged people to discuss deeply personal family relationships in public.” The monarch soldiers on, but as a source who knows her well says: “She doesn’t want to be on tenterhooks all the time, waiting to see what the next nuclear bomb will be — that will take its toll.”
Meghan also revealed she and Harry are working on a “historical documentary” to “share” their “love story” as part of their huge deal with Netflix, which could give the streaming giant unfettered access to the privacy-obsessed couple. “I can say anything,” the duchess reaffirmed to Allison Davis, who interviewed her for The Cut, adding: “I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking . . . I have a lot to say until I don’t. Do you like that?” This is a different take from her interview with Winfrey last year, when Meghan said she was “silenced” by the royal family. She also let slip last week that she rediscovered her “journal” in Frogmore Cottage in June. Meghan is not known to be writing a book, but her royal diaries could yet see the light of day.
A royal source, who was involved in the negotiations around the couple’s departure, says the current direction of travel is frustrating: “Everyone hoped they would go off to be financially independent, pursue their philanthropic endeavours and be happy — and that in going their own way, they might no longer feel the need to rail against the system as much as they still do. But then the star power of them requires an association with the royal family, and the fuel on those flames is the family discord.”
There is no appetite from the Queen to remove the titles conferred on the couple when they married. She has already forbidden them from using their HRH styling and the word “royal” in commercial ventures. As a well-placed source says of the family’s thinking: “You can never un-royal a royal. You can take the HRH away, you could take the ‘duke’ away, but Harry is still the son of the future king.”
Instead, the Palace’s strategy is not to comment on every outburst, but to hammer home the distinction between official working members of the royal family, who represent the Queen, and the Sussexes as “private citizens”. In turn, the Sussexes continue to remind the world of their royal status. In her recent interview, Meghan mused on being a royal role model: “It’s important to be thoughtful about it because even with the Oprah interview, I was conscious of the fact that there are little girls that I meet and they’re just like, ‘Oh my God, it’s a real-life princess.” As a source who knows the Sussexes says, they “need to remind everyone they’re royal” because it carries a “higher status”.
It is hard to imagine Netflix being as keen on documenting the love story of plain Mr and Mrs Windsor. Although it was common knowledge the couple were discussing broadcast projects while they were still working royals, some royal insiders were surprised by news that a programme is in the pipeline. “I don’t think anybody thought they’d do an access show because of how strongly they spoke about media intrusion in their lives — it seemed contrary to their desires,” says one.
That seems unlikely, given that Meghan’s new podcast, in which she reflects on her struggles, alongside celebrity guests including the tennis star Serena Williams and the singer Mariah Carey, still has ten episodes to run. Harry’s “intimate and heartfelt” memoir, whose mystery publication date is hanging over the royal family like a rain cloud, is expected soon.
Shortly after their wedding in 2018, the Sussexes were rapturously received in Australia, with Meghan announcing her first pregnancy there. In the aftermath of her interview last week, Natalie Barr, an Australian television presenter, described Meghan as a “total tosser” on air. The plummeting of royal stock down under will ring alarm bells for the monarchy. There are fears the Sussexes’ antics will fuel the growing republican movement in Australia, which is expected to reappraise its status as a realm when Charles becomes King.
Meghan also said that a South African cast member of The Lion King told her at the 2019 London premiere of a film version of the musical: “When you married into this family, we rejoiced in the streets the same we did when Mandela was freed from prison.” The anecdote “surprised” Nelson Mandela’s grandson, Zwelivelile Mandela, who said of his grandfather’s 27 years in jail campaigning against apartheid: “It can never be compared to the celebration of someone’s wedding [to a] white prince.”
It “baffled” the actor John Kani, who said: “I have never met Meghan Markle. This seems like something of a faux pas by her. I am the only South African member of the cast and I did not attend the premiere in London. It just may be a misremembering on her side.” The South African composer Lebo M, who briefly spoke to the couple at the premiere, said he did not recall mentioning Mandela.
Meghan’s comments sent eyebrows skywards in royal circles. “The whole thing is just staggering,” said a royal source. “Nelson Mandela? Who’s next, Gandhi? There are simply no words for the delusion and tragedy of it all.”
The Duke of Cambridge is now acclimatised to the Sussexes’ gripes, which no longer raise his hackles as much as they once did. “He’s not really spending much time thinking about it,” says a source close to Prince William, though friends concede he does not relish the prospect of Harry’s book. The Cambridges are now happily ensconced in Adelaide Cottage, their new Windsor home, a stone’s throw from Harry and Meghan, who will stay at Frogmore Cottage this week. The couples are not expected to meet.
But the royal households expect the strategy to continue. “There is a weariness in the institution where this is priced in,” says a well-placed source. “It knows it has to move forwards and there will be voices off stage left continuing to chastise the institution and the individuals in it. But the Queen has always been good at taking the long view, she will have taken the view that it will take a few more years of this before things settle. Set against a 1,000-year-old history of an institution that has seen its fair share of family discord, this a familiar pattern. The more they attack the institution, the more people deduce they’re attacking the Queen and the public are turned off by that.”
Prince Harry to hold Invictus Games press conference… but will not be answering questions
The Duke of Sussex will ‘deliver remarks’ but will leave the event in Dusseldorf without talking to journalists
I can’t imagine why he wouldn’t want to take the opportunity to take questions from the press 😉.
Thanks for the article from the Times. It reads like a very well-sourced and in-depth piece. I do agree with the conclusion ... the monarchy will endure but the duo will basically fade away. Calling oneself a start-up after two years is a bit of a joke, and their reputations have taken a plummet.
I wonder if the hapless one will thank his family when he gives his press speech, because the Royal Foundation stepped in last year and gave Invictus Games a very large donation. That the hapless one was able to give IG a few thousand this year (although, everything is always shrouded in mystery) is an indication that he got his advance from the publisher so he has handed in a complete manuscript that the publisher deems to be publishable and sellable (maybe needing some work, but book publishing standards are generally low).
Invictus Games organisers will be holding a press conference (a proper one where they talk to the press and answer questions).
The hapless one will deliver a short speech and then leave.
The IG organisers regard him as too controversial because of recent events and are thus limiting his contact with the media. It is their decision to not have him be part of the press conference.
Bit strange to have a patron who still seems dedicated to the games having to be hidden away!
Although I suppose it is prudent to arrive a couple of days early to get over jet lag before heading off to Manchester, especially as they were on a commercial flight.
It's interesting that the Times article talks about Charles meeting Lilibucks, but I don't think that was actually the case. So, it makes me wonder.... what other little lies did they try to slip in?
You’re welcome 🙂
This is the part of the Times article that troubles me the most:
The monarch soldiers on, but as a source who knows her well says: “She doesn’t want to be on tenterhooks all the time, waiting to see what the next nuclear bomb will be — that will take its toll.”
I think the stress of having to endure all the slings and arrows launched from California at the Royal Family, is taking a real toll on the Queen already. Would the fallout from stripping their titles really be worse than the wait-and-see approach they seem to be taking? The growing Republican sentiment in Australia seems to be fueled at least in part due to the Andrew scandal(s) and the Sussex drama. Maybe the Queen and Charles are just too old and out of touch to understand what is happening under their noses.
hey flew commercial - slumming it in economy??
Or maybe they just said they did?
BLG just retweeted a comment from one of his followers:
Having worked in the airline industry and ground and air crew, for a combined 15 years, there is no way they could have flown commercial without a member of public crossing paths with them and having the chance to take a photo if they wanted to.
Source: https://twitter.com/HempLifeSpain/status/1566198884673658880
Let's us track Jesus's podcast numbers and see if Methane can keep up. I've got little use for Spotify since it got into bed with the SixSh*ts of Montecito but I do have a little grudging respect for this tactic. It's such delightful shade, it's almost British in flavor. I exaggerate only slightly when I say this pairing on the same platform of two diametrically opposed rivals has the potential to be as combustible as if Adolf went head-to-head with Winston for audience share. BLG's Body Language Buddies (but it sounds like 'Baddies' in his accent) will handily crush the Suxxit Flying Monkey Squad.
It's HILARIOUS! Mr. Rosas may even turn out to be a bigger asset to Spotify than she has ever been. I've already followed his channel and will stream the first episode as soon as I'm free.
I think the short hair suited Sophie better and wish she would cut it.
I agree that it suited her wonderfully, but it is awfully reminiscent of Diana. That was an easy impression to have in 1999, but when I rewatched some of the wedding footage many years later, I was struck by the same thoughts. Maybe now that Sophie is older and more established (and short hair gets styled differently from the way it was in the late 90s), she could go return to that old style without unfair comparisons.
I cannot believe that any reputable organization would invite The Grifters to sing their hit tune "Money for Nothing and Your Grift for Free (and the Queen was mean to me!)".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRBPr5jbS5M
The original version, I believe, from 1934 of `With her head tucked underneath her arm' - good notes on this site. Stanley Holloway sings it it in a strong Lancashire accent My parents had this 78 rpm - as a child, I was forbidden to play it.
He uses a Yorkshire accent for `The Lion and Albert', hence the reference to `On Ilkley Moor Baht'at in the intro - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOdjHBIz528
- and back west, (more of a Manchester accent this time) for `Runcorn Ferry' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqmVWOaBD14.
Holloway (1890-1982) was really a Londoner, as when he played Alfred Doolittle in `My Fair Lady'
I am also sceptical about the story of the family get together with Charles. The logistics of getting the family of four, with security, to Charles, in between his Jubilee commitments for a visit and remain completely unseen must have been very challenging. Was there any time that weekend that Charles visited the Queen at Windsor?
Dr Grande compares Wallis Simpson and TBW.
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/03/do-not-pretend-celebrity-princess-meghan-markle-can-meaningfully-advance-the-cause-of-racial-justice
Thanks for the article. During the first post, I was mentally hearing this song when I read the first line in the last paragraph:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyihQtBes1I
Interesting little tidbit I just ran across on Twitter. Best bits cut and pasted:
1) Here’s a little nugget. just had lunch with someone whose daughter was secretary to the combined office Harry and William and Catherine. They used to take staff to pub lunch every month. At the first lunch with Meghan she pulled up secretary for calling Harry, Harry.
2). Catherine said it’s ok in this casual environment. That monthly pub lunch never happened again. The secretary in question left because of Meghan demands. Telling her to drop Catherine’s work. Said from day 1 she was imperious snd nasty. She adored Catherine.
.
.
.
You’re welcome. It’s a bit more detailed but Twitter and all that I kept it brief !! Sad story isn’t really. Such a shame as they could have all been such a force for good. - end cut and paste -
Link https://mobile.twitter.com/ShazzerMac3/status/1564643968620568578 8:55 AM · Aug 30, 2022
Are they allowed to do that? In a public space? What authority would private security have? None?
I also wondered about guns. Don't the police in the UK not carry guns (but RPOs do)?
It is going to be interesting because I think every time they had barriers put up, they had the local police at their beck and call (like the tour to New York, where there were no crowds anyway). Don't they just have a couple of overweight bodyguards? Maybe they will hire local to save on airplane tickets?
Yes, I was wondering about that.
Using Google Earth, I see Bridgewater Hall is on a corner of between what look like 2 public roads. The police can and do allow public roads to be closed for events such as street parties & local festivals, if arranged in advance. I doubt if private security has any jurisdiction over the public roads. It is also illegal for anyone other than the police and people in some specific roles (eg School crossing patrols...) to stop the flow of traffic.
The hall may be part of a conference complex which itself is likely to be on private land so the police may not have routine access. There'll probably be private security arrangements in place, if the police has deemed it unnecessary for them to be involved. Nor are they necessarily squads of `heavies' but they may be like the brutish-looking `bouncers' employed by dodgy pubs and night club, I suppose.
It'd be really funny if, when * arrives with `da boys', the police, preferably with large dogs, search the bodyguards for weapons. It'd be even funnier if they found them (or drugs, come to that)... My goodness, wouldn't there be a hoo-hah !
Now there's a thought! As private citizens, are the Harkles no longer immune from being searched for drugs? I don't know - but there are lots of drugs in Manchester, just as there are in any other big city...
You are right, Sandie, about our police not being routinely armed. In the event of an `incident' firearms officers, with special training, may be called in and individual officers may also be issued with them for their own protection when arresting dangerous persons.. Once, that was unthinkable.
Presumably there'll be traffic officers dealing with traffic but Manchester Constabulary has made it clear that there's no way they'll be providing security specifically for the Harkles.
I admit that I refuse to watch the Our Great National Parks series precisely because of who the narrator is. I find his voice annoying—he has a faint lisp that drives me crazy.
I'm not sure what Obama sounds like, I'm not that familiar with his voice. Annoying as it may be, his voice can't be as syrupy as *'s. As to whether the Emmy was deserved, that might be like his Nobel prize but at least that's more than *, an actress apparently, got.
Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle declined an 'open invitation' to stay with Prince Charles at his Scottish holiday house on the Balmoral estates.
. . .
The insiders told The Mirror that Charles had thought the Sussexes staying with him would be a 'good opportunity for everyone to take stock and relax.'
'But the invitation was declined, as it has been before,' the source said, adding that Charles hasn't 'wavered' on his attempts to have a relationship with his son 'despite the attacks which seem to be coming with increased vigour.'seems to be trying his utmost to
-------
This sounds spiteful. I feel sorry for Charles,q who is trying his utmost not to lose his son. Who knows, maybe H would like to go to Balmoral but there's no way TBW will let him. I can't imagine that's her scene anyway. Let's not forget the Queen. How many more opportunities will H have to see her before it's too late?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11179347/Harry-Meghan-declined-Prince-Charles-open-invitation-stay-Balmoral.html
On the one hand, Charles is undermining their victim narrative. On the other hand, Pinocchio can easily turn this round (an apology, an acknowledgement that she was so wronged, see how important I am ... the monarchy cannot survive without me).
-----
So, after being exposed as a liar yet again and being called out for whining, she is going to stand up and give a speech then 'mentor' some young people in a brief sit down (how to screw a country out of tens of millions and get away with it), then head off to Germany to hold his hand while he gives a speech, then back to London to use sick children to try and get some good PR. She can't be a 'vulnerable' narcissist because she seems to have no sense of shame at all.
For the second week, Germany's biggest tabloid has been calling out the duchess on her behaviour. This week they called her a liar (on the front page) and then in-depth listed all her lies (public ones) ... do I remember a figure of 19?
Control the media (they refuse to be questioned and only allow access to approved media so I wonder how many there will be aside from Scobie), keep the crowds at bay, have a wall of security (all of two fat guys?) around you at all times ... This approach is not sustainable, in my opinion, but is a path to the madness of isolation and delusion.
"Huge cheers when Misan mentioned the September 2020 edition of British Vogue at Edward Enninful’s event tonight, really incredible"
I reckon Enninful thinks Charles is a softie and he is firmly in his good books so he can safely prop up the monumental deluded ego of TBW. I am keeping en eye out for news that the duo were actually at the event.
The story about Charles inviting them to Balmoral is incorrect, and I believe planted by the Harkles.
1. Balmoral is The Queen's residence. Charles would not as a matter or protocol or good manners presume to invite someone to The Queen's home, especially when she is in residence as she is now. Any invitation by Charles would be to Highgrove in England or Castle Mey in Scotland.
2. The Queen would not at this stage contemplate meeting the Harkles for half an hour, let alone seeing them every morning at the Breakfast table and having them stalk her in her own home. The Queen is actively being protected by those around her, not only because that is their job, they genuinely love and care for her, and are upset at the physical damage the Harkles are causing Her Majesty.
3. The narrative paints Charles as a weak pushover, and the Harkles as the ones in control, because they are the ones shunning Charles.
4. The narrative also paints the Harkles as being desired and in demand, and still being part of the Royal fold. This story stands alongside the one where The Queen was going to bake M a birthday cake.
5. The Harkles will have a Netflix crew in tow. The last thing the Royals will allow is a Netflix crew filming them drive in through the gates of Balmoral.
We are being played, yet again.
Prince Charles inherited Birkhall from the Queen Mother. Less than 10 miles away.
However, he wouldn't put up the film crew. It would allow, however, a geographic proximity to the Queen which would probably put people's teeth on edge.
Still could be playing people though.
Charles has his own home on the Balmoral Estate. The Queen has the castle and another large home. The Cambridges have their own home. So, Charles is not inviting them to stay in the castle.
Imagine if they turned up with a Netflix crew to 'record their royal love story'! What could Charles do?
So, I do not agree that the invitation is not real. Charles is taking the high ground. But, the duo have no interest in reconciliation with the family or visiting in private on a remote royal estate. The hapless one maybe, but TBW wants to give speeches, get photographed, be surrounded by people like Scobie, Misam the photographer guy, Enninfield, and the Sussex Squad. She has probably recorded more of her podcasts and there are more 'attacks', so she is well down the path of no return perhaps. The hapless one is in the impossible position of choosing wife and children or birth family. It is a choice that no one should have to make.
Mrs. Dumb-Arse Barton is well known to be vile and vicious, and no one has forgotten that. Not to mention Mrs. Dumb-Arse Barton is as mad as a box of frogs. No one in the RF wants their holiday deliberately ruined by Mr. & Mrs. Dumb-Arse Barton.
...
Netflix said
"Our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope,” the couple said in a statement. “As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us.” They added that Netflix’s “unprecedented reach will help us share impactful content that unlocks action.” Their productions will be exclusive to Netflix, which has 193 million subscribers worldwide"
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/02/business/media/harry-meghan-netflix.html
...
Archewell said
Archewell Productions was created by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to produce programming that informs, elevates, and inspires. Through its creative partnership with Netflix — the world’s leading streaming entertainment service with more than 221 million members —Archewell Productions will utilize the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and duty to truth through a compassionate lens.
https://archewell.com/productions/
...
Doubts: I understand that Archewell productions is responsible for creating its content and Netflix approving the creative content. I didn't understand that Netflix will be in charge of filming and choosing the content, but approving and distributing Archewell productions content on their platform.
It helps no one to be a prisoner to their past. That's not to say we have to just sweep what's happened to us under the carpet. Far from it. But there does come a point where if you don't learn to move on, it starts to define you.
At some stage, you have to let the past go, or at least build on it to stop it festering and consuming you.
Talking about the [adult] children of the rich and famous he said:
They had a toxic, noxious combination of self-entitlement and over-inflated self-esteem that resulted in a bitterness and bewilderment that not everything always went their way.
Rather than sucking this up as life, they used this as evidence that they were the real victims. And the key thing I realised was that the sense of victimhood was a perfect way of absolving themselves of life's problems.
The last paragraph sums up what *'s life has become.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11178991/DR-MAX-PEMBERTON-real-reason-Meghan-plays-victim.html
Maybe they should do a Skillshare class on how to do this.
BBC is still enabling them.
For her speech, how many boxes will she tick (activist from an early age, charity, best mother ever, philanthropist, digs at the royals and British media, racism, silencing of her voice from a woman who never shut up, Hallmark gushing best love story ever ...) and how many lies will there be? She will probably wear black (tight fitting), have her hair scraped back, display 'meaningful' itty bitty jewellery, have a smile plastered on her face, put on a great show for the cameras ... which engagement ring will she wear? (Someone on social media proved that she now has two because she has been photographed wearing the original and a replica with small diamonds set in the band.)
I notice a reporter on some media site using the term 'Hapless Harry'. Will she be 'Manic Meghan' or 'Malevolent Meghan' or ... today?
A lot of bronzer, hair scraped back. They both look very happy.
And the new PM is a woman! I do hope there is coverage of her meeting the Queen at Balmoral.
The couple looked ecstatic to be back in Blighty and were driven by two bodyguards and followed by another Range Rover
Yeah, I bet * was ecstatic!!
The couple's decision to use at least two private security firms and dog teams to form a ring of steel around Bridgewater Hall. . .
A ring of steel? Are we talking about the president or prime minister of a country?😂
What a lot of codswallop! I couldn't read any further. The BRF must be shaking their heads in disbelief.
Sorry, I forgot, that's presumably what the 2 heavies are for.
That sort if thing is for people like Ceausescu. It says a lot about them and what might happen to them.
FWIW, I think we're moving towards something more Scandinavian in the next-but-one reign, rather like the way Icelandic presidents interact easily with their citizens but are still respected.
Harry stated previously that he would never return to the UK if he did not receive government supplied security.
Yet, here they are.
Presumably, that was a pre Jubilee threat implying that they would not return for the Jubilee without security. As if the family cared whether they showed up or not.
I've just read that in the DM. I shook my head in disbelief as well.
Bridgewater Hall is a purpose built Concert Hall home to the world class Halle Orchestra. I don't think any famous artistes, conductors,etc would have a ring of steel when they performed there.
For non Uk Nutties do a Google search for the Hall. you can see how important it is to Manchester.
Maybe the ring of steel is to prevent the plebs from booing. The Mancs can be very loud maybe they can be heard from a mile away.
I wonder how they are getting up to Manchester, the train from Euston only takes just over 2 hrs. I've done it many a time,in fact 2 weeks ago. As you might have guessed I live in North Manchester.
New Post People!
I'm a bit late to the party! Even if this is another Harkle fairytale, it actually makes them look quite bad. If they have an "open invitation" to come up whenever Prince Charles is there, then he looks magnanimous and eager to mend things . . . while they just look spiteful. I notice the article doesn't say why they would be refusing. Is their PR slipping?