Skip to main content

The Podcast Release - Who is listening?

 So ... the first real podcast has been released!

Finally something concrete that people can listen to.  

What does it say?  I don't know.  

I wonder when it was taped though.  Just how current does Serena talk about her life, her plans and so on?  Can you tell this from the content or is it just vague enough not to?  I just wonder if it were taped and finally cobbled (excuse me, edited) into something useable from some time ago or was it done last month.  Does it sound like a logical conversation flow?

Is it even relatable to the current general public?  How well will it be received by said general public?  I know that you want certain demographics that are the target group(s) but would they, just by themselves, be enough to sweep this up high?  I was thinking you need them plus more (but I can and have been wrong).

People are always looking for filler so I guess we can expect it to be mentioned in most or all the articles for the upcoming charity appearances.  So, that's free advertising I suppose to help make people aware of it.

Is there something new we can all learn?  That would increase it to a broader market appeal.  Or is it all something we could get from a newspaper, magazine or biography?  

Now there can be numbers to throw up on the wall - to slice/dice/compare to other releases and get an idea for ROI (return on investment).  

And ... that will be "interesting" to watch.  

How will the response be portrayed when released?  Who will do this?  What if they don't release numbers?  Would that even be mentioned as to why no release?  Or worse, no one asks what they are to the responsible sources.

Finally - any ideas on if or what the next one might be?

Comments

Sandie said…

@Enbrethiliel

I'll try and keep it short and not too confusing re. tensions between South Africans and Zimbabweans ... during the very long reign of Mugabe, many millions of Zimbabweans fled to South Africa. They were given 'special permits', which are now going to be revoked. (In addition, many risked the crocodiles in the Limpopo River and entered and stayed in South Africa illegally.) This is not the first time that the South African government has told them to go home and fix their country (special permits are being revoked/not being renewed). As always, there is outrage and the South African government usually backs down, but maybe not this time. The South African government even spent many millions building a super duper fence on the border to stop the illegal crossings, which was a total waste of money. That basically is the story, one with which Americans may be familiar (Mexico; wall)!

I doubt that the duchess is that well informed nor has the capacity to understand the problem. I think she wandered into this minefield unknowingly. But maybe she is vindictive enough to be that clever.

Unfortunately most Westerners think Africa is a place of desperate poverty, backward black people, and game reserves, so the tabloids are just repeating her nonsense without question without calling her out on her ignorance and racist stereotyping.

* Mud cloths are from a completely different part of Africa, would not be used as she describes, and most people from South Africa would not know what a mud cloth is. Traditional cloth in Southern Africa is definitely not made in the same way as mud cloth (it is made in the same way as fabric is made in the West), so it cannot be mud cloth. The nanny would have used a light blanket or a large piece of cloth, which does not have to be traditional to do the job, but 'traditional' cloth is made and sold in the right size so it is the easiest to use.
* The 'housing unit' comment is being repeated by many tabloids without question. They were accommodated in a luxurious mansion in a very exclusive suburb ... the sort of residences most Westerners would never be able to afford to own, and the duchess certainly could not before she fleeced the royal family and British people. In South Africa, their accommodation would be described as a 5-star (international rating) suite. That was an insult to the British High Commission that should not be ignored.
* Carrying a child on the back, secured with a cloth, is a practice found in very many parts of the world. Westerners buy an item so that they can do the very same thing (baby/child carrier, or whatever it is called). The duchess herself was seen on a pap walk in Canada with a doll (sorry, baby) in a carrier attached to her front.

Serena revealed that her child fell out of a high chair and broke her wrist the day before she played and won a Grand Slam match (final). But everyone is screeching about the fire (did not happen) and the most popular podcast ever (not true). What a joke!
Este said…
@NeutralObserver...hey thanks for the correction there. I'm glad to hear they were reruns cuz otherwise, it just did not compute. Still, you know they used bots to bump the figures because they were outed by Barkjack doing just that and also using those bots to shut down legit dissent on Twitter and elsewhere. thanks, again!
Este said…
This opinion was from the Saint herself from SaintMeghanMarkle reddit thread:

I don’t think he forgot his polo gear. I don’t think he’s been in Montecito since his rushed, unannounced, unexpected, aimless trip to Africa.

There was no reason for him to go to Africa and I think he went there to get away from Meghan. I think he then came back from Africa and stayed in a hotel. He’s in touch with Nacho so Nacho knows what’s going down and invited him to the polo match. Another unexpected, unannounced event for Harry to be involved with.

So Harry took what luggage he had from Africa and booked the private jet for Aspen. Since he didn’t go back to Montecito, he had the bodyguards get his polo stuff for him.

There’s just so much weird stuff going on with him and the controlling claw nowhere to be seen so I believe this is their first separation. Maybe it’s just a cooling off of some kind, but it seems to me there’s serious trouble in paradise. I think it’s the beginning of the end.

It will be interesting to see their interactions during the UK trip!
Este said…
Plus this from the Saint herself from prior thread 1 day before. Gotta say, the picture of Harry with hands behind his back is odd, tho we can't discount the possibility that this is all intentional disinfo coming from their camp. But, I don't think their camp is well organized and certainly not well thought out enough, to warrant that concern. Who knows so I share:

What would you do if you had something happening in plain sight that you didn’t really want people to recognize as happening until you could figure things out? Would you release a long awaited podcast that shoots to “Number One” in order to divert folks from the other bigger story?

Sure you would.

But the story is the podcast, right? Fire in the nursery. Serena deciding to retire.

Wait, isn’t there something missing from this podcast story? Isn’t there a story in which the podcast is but one element: the story we’ve lost track of, the story of the Duke & Duchess of Sussex.

Sure. And what’s the element missing?

Harry.

So just as Spotify is gearing up to release Meghan’s long awaited podcast, quite out of the blue, Harry just decides to take some time off to go to about as far away as you can get from Santa Barbara. He goes to Africa.

Prince Harry Travels to Mozambique and Rwanda in His Role as President of African Parks

The Duke of Sussex joined an American delegation traveling to the region.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a40956974/prince-harry-mozambique-rwanda-africa-trip-august-2022/

In a rather hastily announced visit that did not involve Harry traveling w/ an American delegation, Harry wandered into Mozambique & Rwanda w/ no apparent purpose or plan. He looked disheveled (cord pants & safari shirt) but then Harry always looks disheveled. He gave no speeches, he announced no programs, meetings or events. But he was photographed, & in every photograph, he’s shown w/ his face to the camera, his arms resolutely behind his back, hands shielded, ring finger unseen.

r/SaintMeghanMarkle - I think we’ve all lost the plot here
Sandie said…
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-9.4991454/post-85076543

She has kicked a hornet's nest!

The post above reads: "The South Africans are seriously upset with her. #voetsekmeghan is trending on my Twitter. Voetsek is an impolite word used to chase away mangy dogs. Not a bridge left intact...you go Megsy. Dig that hole!"

The copied tweet reads: "#VoetsakMeghan and never set your dirty feet in South Africa again u racist".

----
Nothing new to us here, but it is a story that is not going away ...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11148709/Prince-Harry-slammed-phone-William-heated-call-Meghan-Markle-bullying-claims.html
Karla said…
For the Podcast listeners, it is listed in the topic episodes that I have already posted here. Joe Rogan leads in the United States. Meghan 11, and falling.
Maneki Neko said…
The DM says "Prince Harry 'slammed the phone down' on William during heated call about allegations Meghan Markle 'bullied' staff".
. . .
The explosive claims are contained in a documentary by the most popular TV news outlet in France.

BFM TV displays emails - disclosed as part of the Duchess of Sussex's privacy claim against the Mail on Sunday - in an investigative documentary series called 'Red Line: William and Harry, the enemy brothers'.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11148709/Prince-Harry-slammed-phone-William-heated-call-Meghan-Markle-bullying-claims.html

I tried to watch a brief excerpt on YouTube https://youtu.be/K9HwHkdLgyU. There was nothing we don't know but it wasn't the full version. What horrified me were the comments (they can be translated into English), saying leave them alone, what have got against * etc. I can't believe people can be so stupid and naive.
You can also watch the whole thing on https://tinyurl.com/3fdyr74e. It's in French but @Girl with a Hat and others might be interested. You need to subscribe.
~ ~ ~ ~
I had a look at Paris Match, a French weekly news/celebrity/royals magazine. There was a piece on the podcast and the fire: 'someone smelled smoke and went in, then the fire went out'. Just like that, the fire went out... A miracle, innit?
snarkyatherbest said…
is rogan only on reruns? big news last night was Meta/facebook founder admitted to Rogan that
FBI asked for biden laptop censorship ahead of 2020 general election. it’s gonna knock her off the top or will cost a lot more to get more bot listeners

hikari. i agree she is probably on a big narc high i also think harry was only let out of house on conditions. you can play with your friends but they need to bow to the queen or i drop a few about them on my NUMBER 1 PODCAST. TAKE THAT KATE

also will be curious. with everyone on vacation ahead of school start in england will anyone know they are in the UK Are there discounted PR rates for seasonally slow periods for dropped articles) smart of the queen. stay at balmoral. we know the duchass will never go there.
snarkyatherbest said…
is rogan only on reruns? big news last night was Meta/facebook founder admitted to Rogan that
FBI asked for biden laptop censorship ahead of 2020 general election. it’s gonna knock her off the top or will cost a lot more to get more bot listeners

hikari. i agree she is probably on a big narc high i also think harry was only let out of house on conditions. you can play with your friends but they need to bow to the queen or i drop a few about them on my NUMBER 1 PODCAST. TAKE THAT KATE

also will be curious. with everyone on vacation ahead of school start in england will anyone know they are in the UK Are there discounted PR rates for seasonally slow periods for dropped articles) smart of the queen. stay at balmoral. we know the duchass will never go there.
snarkyatherbest said…
oh and we are going to get the big blitz of the 25th anniversary of Diana’s death. hang in folks it’s gonna be a bumpy ride
snarkyatherbest said…
so the whole harry eco warrior waiting for his bag to be fetched while his private jet idles. do we think she called the paps on him to make him look bad. i’m beginning to see yes.

heard he will be on cbs sunday morning program this wee. won’t watch it but would be curious if she shows up or if it is only about him. and if it’s only about him and diana will she pull some narc bullshit on him if he doesn’t follow her direction. if we see that happen you know she is pissed.
snarkyatherbest said…
finally. do you think the large listener totals are because the european and british royals and staff were all listening, making it a drinking game😉

ok enough with me. i am totally avoiding a ton of work and personal things that need attention.
Este said…
While Meghan is surely savoring the sweet appearance of victory over Joe Rogan, he had to content himself with a new podcast with Jeff Zuckerberg on the Hunter Biden story getting killed before the last really big election. So, basically, no news there, who cares, right? Meanwhile, Meghan is so winning in the ratings, no bots about that! Yeah, I'm sure she'll be choking out that old white man in the ratings for quite some time to come.

Oh yeah, it's on!
Michael from That 70s Show
Enbrethiliel said…
@Sandie

Thank you for providing the extra context. I wonder how * is going to spin being called racist by the British and the South Africans.
Hikari said…
Neutral,

@Hikari, LOL, you're right, everyone deserves compassion. Charles is the introspective, sensitive type. His strengths are cultural, not political. I just think the RF shouldn't have raised the 6's profile so much, so early, with the massive wedding. They should have told Harry, yeah, get married to your middle aged divorcee, but do it in a registry office like your father, the future king, & stepmother did, & you can have a nice party afterward for all your old friends and family. He or she who controls the purse always holds the upper hand. Or, they could have told 6 to pay for his own wedding, as a lot of couples do. LOL. As if that would ever happen! If the 6s did threaten to play the racism card to get their way, the RF in effect, gave in to a couple of terrorists.

Don't get me wrong--though I admire some of Charles's personal qualities that I feel get overlooked because everyone loves to harp on his failures--I do think the Markle Debacle was mishandled from the start. I'm not exonerating him from his share of the blame but I do think it needs to be parceled out a bit. Charles's ouster of Lord Geidt as his mother's private secretary (joining forces with the similarly-aggrieved Andrew in what must be their first-ever display of fraternal solidarity) did him no credit, and in fact may have led to the conflagration we are seeing now. Lord G. might have been able to keep it tamped down to a low roar. Had he been there in his Lord Walsingham capacity to his ER, perhaps HM would have listened to his counsel and demurred Harry having such an ostentatious wedding. I admire the Queen for a lot of things, but her ability to stand up to her children and deal with family messes is not one of them. HM cannot be bothered, does not want to be bothered with interpersonal dramas within her family and therefore ostriches as long as possible when confronted with problems. By the time she is forced to deal with them head-on (aka Sandringham Summit), things are completely out of control and it's too late.

Hikari said…
We now know that the Firm had been deeply worried about Harry and cleaning up his messes since he was a pubescent. Spinning the gloss as they did to such a high shine and misleading the public as to H's true (lack of any sort of) character isn't to their credit, but the Firm is nothing if not a top-level PR outfit. That's its whole job and reason for existence. I'm sure the feeling was that if only Harry could find his way with the right occupation and the right woman by his side that he'd straighten up and fly right after the youthful oats-sowing period. For all the PR embarrassment H caused with his choice of Nazi regalia for a fancy dress costume or naked pool party hijinks in Vegas . . those exploits are in the realm of normal high-spiritedness for a young man who hangs around louche companions and drinks too much. I'm sure many many young guys have worn tasteless Halloween costumes and had nude pool parties with willing babes . . only since they weren't Princes of the realm, only their immediate circle knew about it. What H is doing to his family now makes those bachelor exploits look almost wholesome in comparison.

The Firm and ER was really between a rock and a hard place with * and her Prince, who's always been legendarily aggrieved about coming second to his brother. As this was Harry's first wedding, I'm sure he saw no reason why he shouldn't have had the kind of fuss William received. Never mind the constitutional reasons why not. And if * had been denied her Princess fantasy nuptials (the ones she claimed to Orca that she never wanted) . . the Racism card loomed over the Palace's heads like the sword of Damocles. Well, she swung that f*cker down as hard as she could on international television later to O, so everything the RF did to try and appease/accommodate her was in vain.

Hikari said…
If Elizabeth had been willing to court the inevitable charge of racism at the beginning and been absolutely firm that a huge spectacle wedding on TV to *this* bride was impossible for Harry--not due to her color or her nationality but because she already had two previous husbands still living (that could be the official reason--the unsavory sexual past would have to factor in as well, and I'm sure the security services were well aware if M had a sideline as a floating prostitute, had made sex films on the Dark web or similar . . remember that HM disallowed Andy from marrying a lovely girl who'd made a saucy film in the 1980s), and absolutely held that line, I think * would have flounced away and attached herself to another celeb guy with money, maybe a footballer. Oh, there would have been a grand stink raised first, but since M was only in this for money and fame, a modest registry office wedding and family lunch wouldn't have done the trick.
The rumors that the RF tried to pay Rachel a vast sum of money--100,000 pounds or similar--to go away and leave H alone persist. No smoke without fire, I say--except when it comes to alleged housing unit space heaters.

Things were different for Margaret, Charles and Andrew back in their day . . .they all were too close to the Crown for allowances to be made. Number 6 (5 as he was at the time of his engagement) was allowed to have more leeway due to William's heirs looking secure, and the RF will have years to rue giving him that latitude. On the face of it, I can understand why the Queen did not want to be seen to be interfering too heavy-handedly in the love life of a grandson. She didn't object to Autumn Kelly for Peter, though the bride had to convert from Catholicism so that her husband would not lose his (distant) place in the succession. That was massively let go for Harry's affianced who had no practicing religion--or had three or four, depending on one's point of view--none of them the Church of England. They made the show of confirming her into that faith for all the meaning that had. Autumn Kelly was at least a citizen of the Commonwealth. * didn't even stay long enough in England (72 days as a 'working Royal') to get the ball of citizenship rolling. The Queen could at least have insisted that Markle obtain a fast-tracked citizenship before the wedding could happen as a measure of her commitment to her prospective husband's country.

Hah, is all we can say 'bout DAT.
Hikari said…

“To further clarify: the Harkles brought the heater with them (why during African heat?). It was brand new (with manufacturers oil coating on elements, rust prevention, smokes at first use, unavoidable and not flammable). It smoked at first use, immediately unplugged. The child was strapped to the nanny's back with a traditional African wrap - a Kanga (not a Kente cloth which is a floor mat). Sooo disrespectful, ignorant and rude to her alleged black "sisters

@Marnie

Thanks for posting this . . 'TWUNT' is one I will be borrowing.

So I've given some thought to this whole 'mud cloth/smoking heater' debacle. To use one of the Twunt's favorite phrases, it just doesn't make sense.

Twunt has never talked sense in her life but she loves to use that phrase--probably appropriating something often directed at Child * for her constant storytelling/'subjective truth' (lies, to us plebs)

The couple touched down in high summer in South Africa. Twunt carried a child off the plane herself that was all bundled up in woolens--wool sweater and a wool pom pom hat pulled down over his head. Twunt was cosplaying Diana deplaning with infant Harry in a very similar looking outfit. Diana was taking H to Balmoral for Christmas. Scotland--in December.

1. Why would it be necessary to bring a heater with them on the air plane? Did Twunt think they don't have any appliances in Africa or that a baby was going to freeze in the middle of summer? If the child got cold, you know, blankets. Or heat provided by their hosts. Did she 'hope' to actually start a fire? Imagine--'Death of Archie whilst on South African tour!' That'd be a convenient way to 'rid' herself of the encumbrance of the continuing Archie narrative. Or, just to get attention with the smoking. So why was it never mentioned at the time?

2. Master Archie was 4 months old at this time . . wouldn't they have brought his own nanny with them from England? Why are they suddenly using the services of an indigenous nanny? Or if it was a Western person who was part of their entourage, why is she all of a sudden using a native cloth sling to carry him in?

I do not believe any of this happened, full stop. Other than they stayed at the High Commissioner's residence and Twunt thought it was a dump. Perhaps it's been made known to her that someone affiliated with that tour is gonna blow the lid off her 'Archie' lies--to wit, who the baby is/was . .where she got him, who was caring for him, where he was staying, etc. .. .and this attempt to discredit her hosts as providing them unsafe accommodation is her retaliation, trying to get in front of it?

Everything Twit and Twunt do is for REVENGE. Tom Bower has aptly named his book.
Blonde Gator said…
@ este....re bot farms (BarJack info)

Ran across this recently...it's a photo of what a bot farm looks like, and how it functions. Until seeing this photo, I had no idea how a bot farm works. But this photo is rather enlightening, and I now understand the how/why of * hiring bots to "promote" her "work". VERY interesting!

https://media.patriots.win/post/3RHC1nEU.jpeg
OKay said…
@snarky Arguably, Harry makes himself look bad. If he made primarily smart moves, there would be nothing to expose.
DesignDoctor said…
Billboards for Podcast—almost as big as her ego.images
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/wxrwuv/billboards_for_archetypes_theyre_almost_as_big_as/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&utm_term=link
snarkyatherbest said…
do you think i’m making up derogatory elements to her FIRE IN THE HOUSE story that she is kissing off people enough that Harry will be unwelcome there? so he can’t even hide there if/when they separate. she would do that.
SwampWoman said…
snarkyatherbest said...
do you think i’m making up derogatory elements to her FIRE IN THE HOUSE story that she is kissing off people enough that Harry will be unwelcome there? so he can’t even hide there if/when they separate. she would do that.


Nope. I think that she is trying to destroy 6's ability to return to his 'happy place' (Africa) as well as to his family. Did that fool even know what she was doing?
DesignDoctor said…
@snarky

Yes. She absolutely would ruin H's welcome in a place he loves.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
I do not believe any of this happened, full stop. Other than they stayed at the High Commissioner's residence and Twunt thought it was a dump. Perhaps it's been made known to her that someone affiliated with that tour is gonna blow the lid off her 'Archie' lies--to wit, who the baby is/was . .where she got him, who was caring for him, where he was staying, etc. .. .and this attempt to discredit her hosts as providing them unsafe accommodation is her retaliation, trying to get in front of it?

The breathy "I can't believe we've never talked about this" line was a dead giveaway that the whole thing was a fabrication. For me, the only question is whether she made it up right there, on the spot, because Serena's story about her baby's broken wrist was stealing too much of the spotlight -- or whether it was a premeditated drop. In either case, however, she clearly didn't think it through. Someone tell her that it "doesn't make any sense"!
DesignDoctor said…
@BlondeGator
Very enlightening. Thanks for the photo. I had no idea.
SwampWoman said…
And, if I may, I feel the need to segue back to her horrible Serena podcast for a moment. This was a spoiled podcast that could have been so much more with a black woman with ambition and talent who became wildly successful. She did it all without defacing her black heritage with plastic surgery to make her look white. Shouldn't Ms. Ambitious Social Climber have taken a clue from that? Call me crazy, but just maybe your success depends on your knowledge, what you can do with it and who you are not in terms of family but in moral fiber, not on your appearance or whether you qualify for some diversity checklist.

While your family can definitely help you on your way by providing the best education money can buy, 6's case proves that money and advantages can neither buy happiness nor productivity in a person that is sadly lacking in intellect and moral fiber.

/Now, out to dig some 3' postholes through sticky clay.
abbyh said…
I was reading the article about PW so angry, Jason Knauf email, phones slammed and then her comment about sad and that she was the target for being bullied and understood the pain and so on.

Other than the recent they made me go out on another event just after I thought my baby was almost killed - when has she talked about being bullied?

Blonde Gator said…
@abby Other than the recent they made me go out on another event just after I thought my baby was almost killed - when has she talked about being bullied?

Likely another of her apocryphal tales....when she was pregnant with Archie(??) and had to go to an event (in the dark blue shimmery dress with ginormous moon bump).....after she had her suicidal ideations and "no one would help me, not even HR"....so they made her go to that event and took away her phone and her keys, yada yada (LOL, my recollection may vary in the minute details). So they bullied her in her mind. Or something like that, second verse, almost same as the first!!!!
Hikari said…
@Embre

The breathy "I can't believe we've never talked about this" line was a dead giveaway that the whole thing was a fabrication. For me, the only question is whether she made it up right there, on the spot, because Serena's story about her baby's broken wrist was stealing too much of the spotlight -- or whether it was a premeditated drop. In either case, however, she clearly didn't think it through. Someone tell her that it "doesn't make any sense"!

We all remember how rapturously the press followed Twit and Twunt on that South Africa tour. No strand of Twunt's hair could blow in the breeze than it was reported on by a dozen media outlets. If Archie had had a narrow escape from death, wouldn't Twunt have been made sure to get that out there? Even if it was just a new heater that smoked a little, it seems like her stress over the potential catastrophe would have been trotted out for Tom Bradby during her quivering lip interview as an example of why she definitely was not OK.

So there may have been a heater of some sort that malfunctioned and Twunt filed that away in her churning and diseased brain. It didn't even have to be in any room anyone with her was staying in. Probably no idea how it might come in handy in the future . . depending on her fuel needs at some future date, perhaps she intended to someday tell the story of how she, the hard-working and compassionate humanitarian Duchess was nearly electrocuted in her shoddy 'housing unit' but still got out there and plastered on a smile in Royal service. But then the need arose to make this near-disaster all about the tot.

Hikari said…
As to how long she'd been planning to make Fauxchie the star of this concocted drama, it's hard to say. Doubtful she'd have come up with that completely improv on the fly while talking to Serena. If her intent had been only to compete with Serena in the hurt baby sweepstakes, I think she'd have woven a tale of something that happened more recently--why, just a hour before sitting down to the podcast, she'd been in the ER with Arch because he'd been riding his little dirtbike in the driveway and fallen and he needed X-rays for a possible concussion . .maybe. Yes, Archie isn't yet 31/2 but Harry has taught him how to ride a bike this summer--no training wheels!--and he's so advanced, he's going to be taking the test for his learner's permit once he starts kindergarten. He'll be skipping over 18 months of preschool and starting kindergarten in January, you know?

Her wheels have been spinning for some time over this South Africa experience, I have a feeling. This tour that happened 3 years ago is on her mind for some reason. It was the last big hurrah for her as a "Royal" . . but it was still very odd to bring up to Serena in this context, even though she framed it around 'Archie in peril'. She's trying to get back at somebody in officialdom there, or discredit them in some way out of rage that Harry would rather spend time in South Africa than with her. The very overt mention of the 'ratchety' (my word) 'housing unit' with its faulty appliances . . well, she wants to make it sound that the South African government put her, Harry and an infant in some kind of slum housing. Deeply deeply offensive to the host nation, the Governor-general, his wife, the entire staff at the High Commission and every single person who had any hand in organizing that tour. Did she *know* she'd be kicking off a diplomatic incident with this packet of lies? America is the only market she's interested in, so I'd say she neither knew nor cared. The whole story has the feeling of some sort of vendetta against her hosts in South Africa . . and indirectly the Queen for 'sending' her there.

So I have to ask . .why? Why *now*? Something bad may have gone down or is about to in regards to 'Archie'. Hence--notice he is at the forefront of this anecdote, like she's daring us to question that she'd make up a story about her baby almost burning alive. If she draws attention to this 3-year-old 'incident' it's like she's reminding us that her baby must be real.
Hikari said…
. . .apologies if this posts twice . . .

As to how long she'd been planning to make Fauxchie the star of this concocted drama, it's hard to say. Doubtful she'd have come up with that completely improv on the fly while talking to Serena. If her intent had been only to compete with Serena in the hurt baby sweepstakes, I think she'd have woven a tale of something that happened more recently--why, just a hour before sitting down to the podcast, she'd been in the ER with Arch because he'd been riding his little dirtbike in the driveway and fallen and he needed X-rays for a possible concussion . .maybe. Yes, Archie isn't yet 31/2 but Harry has taught him how to ride a bike this summer--no training wheels!--and he's so advanced, he's going to be taking the test for his learner's permit once he starts kindergarten. He'll be skipping over 18 months of preschool and starting kindergarten in January, you know?

Her wheels have been spinning for some time over this South Africa experience, I have a feeling. This tour that happened 3 years ago is on her mind for some reason. It was the last big hurrah for her as a "Royal" . . but it was still very odd to bring up to Serena in this context, even though she framed it around 'Archie in peril'. She's trying to get back at somebody in officialdom there, or discredit them in some way out of rage that Harry would rather spend time in South Africa than with her. The very overt mention of the 'ratchety' (my word) 'housing unit' with its faulty appliances . . well, she wants to make it sound that the South African government put her, Harry and an infant in some kind of slum housing. Deeply deeply offensive to the host nation, the Governor-general, his wife, the entire staff at the High Commission and every single person who had any hand in organizing that tour. Did she *know* she'd be kicking off a diplomatic incident with this packet of lies? America is the only market she's interested in, so I'd say she neither knew nor cared. The whole story has the feeling of some sort of vendetta against her hosts in South Africa . . and indirectly the Queen for 'sending' her there.

So I have to ask . .why? Why *now*? Something bad may have gone down or is about to in regards to 'Archie'. Hence--notice he is at the forefront of this anecdote, like she's daring us to question that she'd make up a story about her baby almost burning alive. If she draws attention to this 3-year-old 'incident' it's like she's reminding us that her baby must be real.
Sandie said…
FRIDAY, AUGUST 26, 2022
Blind Item #2

The alliterate one's lapdog reporter is trying to worm his way back into her good graces by writing piece after piece praising her to the moon. It is such an obvious suck up job, but she loves it and she sent him an email that just said thanks and he won't stop showing everyone.
----

And this ... (scroll down for the tweets)

https://www.capetownetc.com/featured/voetsekmeghan-is-trending-on-twitter-heres-why/

Auntie: a term of respect and not an indication that you are related to the person

RDP housing: small houses built for the poor as a part of social welfare in the country
Ian's Girl said…
Is S Africa in the southern hemisphere? So perhaps not the heat of summer there at the time of their visit?

Has is it been confirmed that the Dumbartons brought the heater, or is that rumor? I cannot imagine traveling with a space heater, although I suppose a bint raised in Los Angeles might feel the cold more quickly than an idiot raised in Britain, and is likely always looking for a reason to complain, and put people out.

KnitWit said…
OMG, checking with the Nutties to see if the podcast is worth a listen. I didn't think it would be.

A tall tale of M leaving the blessed invisible almost royal baby not born if the body if born at all with an African nanny in the guest hut which was set on fire! True or false this is embarrassing to her African hosts. She infers the hosts put her baby in danger when I suspect they had maximum security and world class accommodation
Maneki Neko said…
New Harry Markle up analysing the podcast (with transcript)
The Equator is well north of the Republic of S.Africa ie it's in S hemisphere but I'm not sure of the temperature when they were there - ?they were just emerging into Spring, I'd think that it'd still be fairly balmy in Cape Town.

Or did she expect they'd have to sleep around a fire of wood and dung, with a fence of thorn to keep the wild animals out? Didn't it occur to her, that if they were to be accommodated like that, there wouldn't be any sockets to take a plug?

According to BLG, the Residence had had a thatched roof and no smoke detectors prior to the fire of 2002 but not since then, yet the info went into her conflated account.



NeutralObserver said…
@Hikari, Magatha & other fans of Prince Charles, never, ever in a million years would Charles have ever treated anyone, or any country in the boorish, ill-informed & condescending way the wife has treated South Africa. Whatever you say about him, he seems to have exquisite manners. I'm waiting for the RRs who proclaimed William & Catherine's trip to the Caribbean a PR disaster to weigh in on this latest debacle from *. Along with her oblivious treatment of her more celebrated & accomplished guest, * has managed to offend an entire country. Unbelievable. Please, somebody, make her go away.
Hikari said…
Neutral,

Crawfie Creawford said in her memoir that Charles always had impeccable manners even as a tiny boy and was a great favorite amongst the household staff for not only his deportment but also that he was a sweet child who learned staff members’ names and would greet them personally. As a lonely kid who spent most of his time with adults, he was always eager to please and grew comfortable early interacting with adults. Peers were harder. I can empathize with Charles because I am also the oldest of four with a large gap between me and the youngest.

The Prince of Wales is widely hailed as a genial man who actively listens while on engagement and is quite jovial in company. I have a Brit friend who says a mate of his has met both Charles and Andrew and while Chas seemed like a warm and polite person the atmosphere with Andrew was very different. Charles is personally acquainted with a great many Black people all over the world which is more than can be said for Twunt. It was Chas I believe who arranged the musical guests at the Corpse Bride Wedding…I don’t know about the choir but the young man on the cello playing the recessional music was there by Charles’ invitation— That was my favorite part of the day. Charles is himself a cellist.

The information. Charles was the one who made the racist comment about Archie’s skin tone would wound him deeply as would Twunt’s latest tirade about her treatment on the SA tour. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that Charles has been on the phone to the high commission in Cape Town making apologies. Twunt herself is in capable of embarrassment so I think the aim is to embarrass the royal family as well as the host nation.
snarkyatherbest said…
Sandie scoobie do needs stuff for his new book and she needs to have an outlet for her”voice” or truth or whatever especially if she can’t rewrite harry’s book
H G Tudor has been shut down or so it would appear. If it is * how does she manage to do this. I’m not big on the “backers” theories but how else does she get this done.
Maisie said…
Apologies in advance if this has been mentioned.
Dr. Todd Grande’s YouTube channel has a very succinct 15 minute summary in his segment ‘Privileged Victim Archetype? Meghan Markle “Archetypes” Analysis’.
Highly recommended. He surgically slices and dices her psychology.
River is also in top form as he discusses her podcast as well.
Ralph L said…
HG Tudor's youtube channel has been deleted. I wasted a lot of time there.
BLG on #VoetsekMeghan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QszFCiXwLU

V- is the only word of Afrikaans that I know! I learnt it from my S African students in the late 1960s - they made it clear that no lady should ever utter it but I'd say it now of her.

According to one of the comments below the video that it's used to tell dogs to clear off - using it of a woman implies that she's a bitch.

Have we talked about this BLG video? I don't recall it:

`This post about Meghan's DIVORCE plans was DELETED!'

at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLdbBLmgAGQ
Bolt report on the podcast:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-_BPyVWVOs

How I wish British broadcasters would be this honest - don't they realise that eventually those who censor free speech here will end up with egg on their faces and seen as cowering lickspittles?
...and another good 'un from Oz - the Kenny Report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSsvzakyrQ0

One of the comments:
`Dr Todd Grande came up with a brand new archetype on account of her, "Privileged Victim Archetype", which is Braa-vo! '
Sandie said…
https://archive.ph/2022.08.26-174406/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/08/26/meghan-markle-podcast-trauma-limits/

Completely believes everything she has said, even though her claims gave been proved to be lies
@ Ralph L,

Yes, all of HG Tudor’s listings have vanished from my viewed history and it’s no longer showing on my subscribed list. I wonder what happened? 🥴
Sandie said…
@WBBM
It is extremely rude to say voetsek to a person (and the person would rightly be very offended), and yes, it is a term used to chase away a dog (or perhaps a baboon or monkey, depending on which creature is making a nuisance of itself).

As for the temperature on that day ... to a Brit, it would have been warm (Spring). Brits head out for the beach and parks at that temperature! The room might have not warmed up yet in the morning, but I doubt it would have been cold enough for a heater. There was no fire. It was probably a new heater that made a funny smell when you switched it on for the first time.

She is a despicable woman who has no care for who she harms, what damage she does, when she makes up these stories. She clearly shows that she is completely unsuitable in a diplomatic role and should never have represented the monarchy.

Unfortunately, she taps into people being stupid and benefits from her lies spreading and becoming the truth.

I do wish the monarchy and the British government would step in and put an end to this silly story.
Sandie said…
@Hikari
Very astute analysis ... why tell this story now? It is difficult to try and work out because she makes no sense. But by the time of that tour, she was in full-on victim mode and manipulation of husband. Interesting that even though she wore 'old' or cheap clothes and left her expensive jewellery in the UK, it was the most expensive royal tour. How does that woman manage to spend so much money, and why on earth did the hapless one (who is supposedly not a big spender) just go along with it or think that they were compatible?

It was not the South Africans who provided the accommodation, transport, security or anything else for that visit. It was the British people, through the British High Commissioner in South Africa. That she has insulted and done harm to a country in her attack on the monarchy and the British and/or her compulsion to always create drama and be a victim, is something she would neither be mindful of or care about.
Sandie said…
https://narcsite.com/2022/08/27/a-message-from-hg-tudor-re-youtube/

The explanation of why the HG Tudor YouTube channel on Revenge was taken down. He read the entire book so there was a copyright complaint, which seemed to have been resolved with the publishers, but YouTube took down the channel anyway.
NeutralObserver said…
*'s (& that of her followers & enablers) archetype is immediately obvious, Cinderella's stepsisters. That archetype is abusive, envious, covetous & dishonest. It has not one thing to do with race, ethnicity, or even gender. It occurs throughout humanity. * even has the big ugly feet!
I personally don’t go much on that Washington Post offering. I quote, The United States may be more psychologically open and socially progressive than the fading empire, but the more the pair talk about what they suffered in England…. Oh really?! The British Empire officially ended in 1947, so it’s hardly fading. 🥹🙄 Don’t get me started on the progressive stuff. 🙄😖

From my side of the pond America has made it far worse for the Brits. the American media has whipped up and sucked up to the despicable pair and have given them the platform they crave, and then thrown it back at the Brits and the Royal family over and over again . 😳😞

The Washington Post piece isn’t shedding any light on the lies the pair have told. As for it stating the pair need to leave the royal trauma behind etc (most of the piece) reads like they have and are still buying into the nonsense uttered by both Maggot and Mole, despite suggesting the pair need a new story to spin to be successful. 😔
NeutralObserver said…
@Hikari, Yes, one can't imagine Charles doing something intentionally unkind, however misguided some of his decisions seem. I think I get irritated with him because I see society as a whole making terrible decisions with the intention of being 'kind' or 'fair.' The difference between Charles' & his father's personalities is an example of what real diversity is, diversity of character & thought. Philip said being bullied at Gordonstoun was the making of him, Charles reacted very differently. People are very different, even in the same family.
Hikari said…
Apparently HG Tudor has run afoul of the copyright gods for posting read aloud chapters of Tom Bowers’ book in their entirety. Excerpts for review purposes would have been acceptable but not the whole thing. The fact that his entire channel is gone suspicious however, because until the last month or so, his channel consisted of original material. It was all highly TWUNT critical however, So I wouldn’t be surprised that she had a hand in shutting it down. I think he’ll probably be back in a re-branded form, at least I hope so. A person who classifies himself as an Ultra Narcissist isn’t just going to let this go. I hope he’s got copies saved of all of his podcasts.
Ralph L said…
Typical WaPoo writer assumes all her lies about the past are true.
NeutralObserver said…
@Sandie, I agree that the Washington Post writer seems to have swallowed *'s dubious stories whole, but at least one ultra liberal Bezos owned paper is tiring of her constant whining a bit.

Yes, * was likely aiming at the British in the SA story, as they supplied her security, accommodation, etc., but she managed to tar SA, & a whole continent in the process. The whole silly story reminds me of her making young SA mothers sit on the floor & gifting them with Archie's hand me downs. Didn't she understand that not every country is like the USA, where some decadent loon will apparently buy her husband's underwear from a stripper? My guess is that in some countries such behavior would draw complaints to the British Embassy. She is a menace to diplomacy.
HG Tudor still has an online presence - it's just the videos that've gone - see https://narcsite.com/about/ f'rinstance.

Like Raspberry Ruffle, I feel pretty sour about the Washington Post article - they still seem to have swallowed her garbage, hook, line and sinker, then regurgitated it uncritically, as somebody quoted recently, `even as a dog returns to its vomit'. Thank the Lord that people in S Africa can see through her and understand what the British have had to put up with. I daresay there are Aussies who feel the same, thanks to the sterling work of some of their news channels.

I have now reached the stage where I think that if anyone deserves to end their lives in poverty and ignominy (ideally v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y), it's the Harkles. Ideally, they'd take their enablers with them too.
Sandie said…
The online conversation from South Africa is interesting as it shows that South Africans were polite and friendly. Now, the gloves are coming off and they are revealing that they were offended that she made women sit in the floor, gave them second-hand clothes, flew in something like 20 (or was it 10) bullet-proof Range Rovers, left her expensive jewellery at home ...

I think other royals understand that people being polite and friendly and not screaming like offended snowflakes about everything does not mean they love you. On the other hand, the Queen is legendary for putting on a smile and hosting delegations from other countries for State banquets. It is called diplomacy (and keeping your ego in check). For all her boasting about how smart and educated she is, the duchess is really bad at diplomacy.

Unfortunately, the world sees Africa as a place filled with poor and backward people and so thus, although the story is providing entertainment, I doubt that anyone will try to smooth over what is a major diplomatic incident, and I doubt that it will affect her support in America. I would like to be wrong about this.

I think the royals knew before the marriage that she was unsuitable, although the Queen had probably only met her twice at the most before the wedding. It is a tragedy that they could not stop this malignant narcissist at an early stage.
Sandie said…
There is another anonymous rumour being shared about separation, looming divorce and a new man for her. I don't believe it. It is not just about the possibilities of her finding a wealthy man to marry her, but the possibility of a man who would do anything for her no matter what harm it did to him, as her present husband does. It is easy to find a rich man, but not easy to find one so easily controlled, manipulated and self-destructive, who also offers a global platform. She loves the royal link ... a major royal funeral (the Queen) and a coronation are looming in the near future. She is not going to give up the chance to shove her way into those global events. I also think she still believes there will be a major inheritance from the Queen. I believe there won't and there will be a major narc meltdown when she has to face that reality.

But, psychics still see separation and divorce, and I remember one saw her remarry and live quietly with new husband in London, after handing over custody of the children to the hapless one. At present, that does not look feasible.
NeutralObserver said…
@Sandie, I agree with you on the divorce, she will never give up her titles, (her main meal ticket), which I believe she would lose if she remarries. Plus, any protection of her reputation which the RF currently gives her, would likely disappear. I may be wrong, but I believe all the info on Diana's affairs appeared post divorce. One can only imagine that the RF has kept hidden about the wife. I could be wrong, I believe she's referred to herself as 'Meghan,' without the word 'duchess' recently. Perhaps she feels she's reached the Beyonce, Madonna stratum of fame.
OCGal said…
@NeutralObserver, you perspicaciously wrote:
"*'s (& that of her followers & enablers) archetype is immediately obvious, Cinderella's stepsisters. That archetype is abusive, envious, covetous & dishonest. It has not one thing to do with race, ethnicity, or even gender. It occurs throughout humanity. * even has the big ugly feet!"

I think you really nailed the situation, in that the douchass and her minions are effectively today's version of Cinderella's evil ugly selfish hate-filled stepsisters, and I genuinely got a thrill with the Cinderella slipper connotation:

"* even has the big ugly feet!"

Your post and the spectacular Cinderella stepsister big ugly foot connection is going to cheer me ALL DAY LONG.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Sandie,

I have a hard time believing that any man would want her after the reputation she has made for herself. The man would have to be a first rate masochist.
Blue Dragon said…
When they scarpered didn't palace sources gripe that the duo had had the wedding they wanted and the tours that they wanted. So she got what she wanted and hasn't stopped moaning about it since.

Someone posted a link to the billboards earlier in the thread. When I looked at the pictures I thought it looked like a Calvin Klein scent advert. Does she think she's Christy Turlington?
Enbrethiliel said…
@Hikari
It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that Charles has been on the phone to the high commission in Cape Town making apologies.

If this is the case, then I hope the blinders have finally fallen off his eyes.
Enbrethiliel said…
From the Reddit thread quoted by @Este:

There was no reason for him to go to Africa and I think he went there to get away from Meghan. I think he then came back from Africa and stayed in a hotel. He’s in touch with Nacho so Nacho knows what’s going down and invited him to the polo match. Another unexpected, unannounced event for Harry to be involved with.

Another blogger I know who experienced abuse from a narc has been saying since Prince Philip's funeral that anyone who still cares for Harry has to take advantage of any and every separation from his wife. There isn't even a need for an intervention, in which family members and friends make a detailed case for a permanent separation. Simply show the abuse victim what he has been missing. And in Harry's case, that is the warmth and support of sane people who love him and want what's best for him.

I can understand why they might not have had the emotional bandwidth to do that for him during the funeral. It was supposed to be all about Prince Philip, but Harry still tried to make it about himself when he got all the other men to wear suits so that he wouldn't stick out. And he had just done the Oprah interview. So many raw feelings. Harry might not really have registered a difference between the contempt of * and the then-coldness of his family.

But this trip to Africa with Nacho is has some real potential. Even The Body Language Guy admits that Harry is showing some real joy and is happy for him. Surely he will be able to register the difference between how he feels around Nacho and how he feels around *. Heck, Nacho doesn't even have to be there, because Harry would feel lighter and happier away from *, no matter whom else he's with. But a close friend who wills the good for him will only heighten the contrast. And so one can keep hoping.
abbyh said…
Reading the comments on the SA twitter article.

One of the comments was something about how she is working on insulting the world - country by country.

Not going to get invited back to speak at the UN after this one.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Marnie

Thanks for sharing Alyssa Rosenberg's analysis. The idea of the "trauma plot" is especially interesting. By casting herself as a victim of trauma, * makes sure that the story will always swing back to her -- and specifically to her past experiences. She will never really offer anything new. It will always be about her seventy-two days of glory.

That's why she told a story about Archie from when she was still a working royal rather than a story about him today. She might twist the formula in the future, by telling a story about him from the Jubilee, when he and Lili allegedly met the Queen and all their cousins. But it will always go back to the BRF who "traumatized" her.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Abbyh
One of the comments was something about how she is working on insulting the world - country by country.

Not going to get invited back to speak at the UN after this one.


I think we're uncovering more of her malicious motivations. It must have enraged her little narc ego that it was Harry who got to be a keynote speaker at Mandela Day. After all, of the two of them, isn't she the better public speaker (arguably true) and the one who got a standing ovation for her last speech at the UN (HAHAHAHAHA)? All the international incidents that she is sparking are not just to get back at him for being the one whom people prefer, but also to get back at the nations of the world for preferring him.

Nacho Figueras is from Argentina. Maybe it is next on her hitlist.
NeutralObserver said…
@OCGal, Thank you so much for the compliment! I think this blog has given us all a lot of entertainment, (& information)!
Enbrethiliel said…
@NeutralObserver
My guess is that in some countries such behavior would draw complaints to the British Embassy.

Perhaps her behavior did just that and we just didn't hear of it!

Remember that she so offended the King of Morocco that Prince Andrew had to fly over to apologize. There must have been an entire staff following after her with mops, buckets and pooper scoopers since even before that.
Sandie said…
He seemed to make that trip to Africa to chase a Congressional delegation around and to try and latch onto their trip to burnish his credentials.

The polo match was not unexpected at all. The duo certainly did not do any advance publicity for it (TBW too busy becoming the Queen of Spotify, dissing the UK and royal family, and alienating another country), but the polo match is an annual event to raise funds for Sentabala.

As I shared in lists above, Nachos posted on social media to praise TBW and explain why she was much too busy working hard and being a mother to attend the polo match. (I know, cringe worthy!) Nachos doubled down and made another post in support of her ... something along the lines of what a good person she is and how her intentions are good.

The hapless one himself made a speech about his mother and said that the most important thing to him was his family and children (odd as children are family). If he was referring to his blood relatives, who is left who is not estranged? His family is TBW, two children and a mother-in-law, so perhaps he was referring to Doria.

As for the airport story ... he could have headed straight from LA airport (at least two and maybe three inter-continental flights later) to the private airport in Santa Barbara, planning to have a shower/wash and change of clothes on the private plane. To save time, he arranged to have his polo gear delivered, but taking care of anyone else's needs is the last thing the duchess is capable of, especially while riding high on the podcast she engineered, so there was a long and unnecessary wait on the runway.

The prince was very happy at the polo, probably because they won, but I reckon he was looking forward to getting home to a triumphant and happy wife. Then the backlash started and Nachos started tweeting ...
Girl with a Hat said…
https://twitter.com/CelticTribesman/status/1562973379325440001

The reasons Hazbeens memoir has been set back is because he’s been told legal action will be taken over any lies.

The Palace has had enough.
SwampWoman said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Enbrethiliel said…
Speak of the devil . . .

Trevor Coult reports that H.G. Tudor has a new YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCge1h5fEmC4sU1fN6TgevIA
Sandie said…
The rumour was that Prince Andrew was sent to Australia to apologize for her behaviour on tour, not Morocco. That rumour never made sense to me.

However, I do believe that at least some, if not a lot, of her bad behaviour while on tour has been kept secret by the British government and the host country. A couple of mysteries for me (I am sure there are more):

* On the last day of the Southern African tour, the hapless one looked like hell and was visibly holding his back and wincing. What happened? She was grinning like an idiot and leading him around as if he was a senile senior. The royal family have never hidden injuries, so why did the entourage on tour (and the media) say nothing and pretend it was not happening?

* DM insist that the duo moved 'elsewhere' (rumoured to be a 5-star hotel) after the fire that never happened. Why was there such secrecy about where they were staying, and how could them and their entourage have moved suddenly without anyone noticing, and how did they accommodate the additional security required at a hotel without anyone noticing, and how did they justify the huge additional and unnecessary expense?
Yep, I agree that she's probably hanging in like grim death until at least the next reign. I wouldn't be surprised if she'd read the Caroline of Brunswick playbook and is determined to be included in the next coronation -

https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Queen-Caroline/

https://ornc.org/stories/caroline-of-brunswick-the-uncrowned-queen/

and

https://www.factinate.com/people/facts-caroline-of-brunswick/ (a slightly different account of what is popularly believed to have happened)

The monarchy survived even this so there's hope for the 21stC
SwampWoman said…
Wild Boar Battle-maid said:Like Raspberry Ruffle, I feel pretty sour about the Washington Post article - they still seem to have swallowed her garbage, hook, line and sinker, then regurgitated it uncritically, as somebody quoted recently, `even as a dog returns to its vomit'. Thank the Lord that people in S Africa can see through her and understand what the British have had to put up with. I daresay there are Aussies who feel the same, thanks to the sterling work of some of their news channels.


Don't worry about the WaPo being any kind of a viewpoint on American thought. Think of it more as a Washington D.C. propaganda outlet. While they are happy to report anything negative about the UK, even they are telling * publicly that ain't nobody believing her sh*t.

Sorry about deleting my previous post. I was mortified to come back inside from wading through the mud to feed livestock before more rain arrives (grrrr!) only to find that I had not quoted WBBM properly and the entire post lacked context.

xxxxx said…
Enbrethiliel said...
Trevor Coult reports that H.G. Tudor has a new YouTube channel


H.G. Tudor explains >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gVB18-iaCY
What happened Viacom/CBS claimed some copyright violation by HG
HG took down those videos
Viacom/CBS notified YouTube that we are satisfied, so void our compliant.

Incompetent YouTube deleted HG's channel anyway. Twitter is run in the same chaotic way.
xxxxx said…
Enbrethiliel said...
Trevor Coult reports that H.G. Tudor has a new YouTube channel


H.G. Tudor explains >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gVB18-iaCY
What happened Viacom/CBS claimed some copyright violation by HG
HG took down those videos
Viacom/CBS notified YouTube that we are satisfied, so void our compliant.

Incompetent YouTube deleted HG's channel anyway. Twitter is run in the same chaotic way.
SwampWoman said…
Sandie said: The hapless one himself made a speech about his mother and said that the most important thing to him was his family and children (odd as children are family). If he was referring to his blood relatives, who is left who is not estranged? His family is TBW, two children and a mother-in-law, so perhaps he was referring to Doria.


Now that you point it out, his verbiage hits me like a club to the head. When a person refers to their "family" they usually use it in reference to their spouse or partner and children. While I might casually refer to 'family' as including spouse, children, and grandchildren, my children would probably refer to people residing in their household such as their spouses and their adult children along with minor children and/or stepchildren.

I expect that 6 wants to make it clear that he is a VIP heir to the throne and he KNOWS people even though he doesn't seem to want to see them or visit them. Maybe it is reflected glory syndrome (which I just made up).

DISCLAIMER: Because I live in an area of the country where family is embraced, 'family' definitions tend to be a bit more fluid. Rather than strictly nuclear family, in-laws, former in-laws, children of a former in-law after he/she remarried as well as their spouse and any of their children, friends from childhood, their children and spouses, etc. might be classified as family. One of my grandchildren calls his older half sister's mother "aunt". It comes down to if we like you, you're family. If you're family and we don't like you, you aren't family.
Ralph L said…
all the info on Diana's affairs appeared post divorce

She confirmed the Hewitt affair in the Panorama interview which triggered the Queen to get them to divorce. The Squidgy tapes were published in Aug 92, months before the separation. I can't remember what she told Morton for his book.

From Wiki, quoting the nasty old man who recorded Squidgy: "I was trying to save her face in a way." However, having thought on it "for a day, at least", Reenan decided that he "would not get to see Diana." So he "rang the Sun instead." [that certainly saved her face, I guess they paid him]

I think the Will Carling and Hoare calls came out later.
Hikari said…
https://youtu.be/xgP_B4cTUbE

Samantha Markle interviewed by Dan Wooten about Twunt’s latest effort in self-promotion.
Hikari said…
@Sandie

* On the last day of the Southern African tour, the hapless one looked like hell and was visibly holding his back and wincing. What happened? She was grinning like an idiot and leading him around as if he was a senile senior. The royal family have never hidden injuries, so why did the entourage on tour (and the media) say nothing and pretend it was not happening?

Harry looked like warmed-over hell for most of the tour, as did she . . her first favorable impression in the black and white print dress and simple hair didn't last long. Remember the olive drab horror and winter scarf she schlepped to the mosque in?? I believe Hapless referenced this in the Bradby interview. According to him (remember, truth is subjective and recollections may vary) Harry threw his back out after lying on the ground and contemplating nature. I think he claimed he was trying to take photographs of trees or some tosh like that. More likely he passed out dead drunk on the floor of their 5-star hotel but in an odd position.

A few years ago, I threw my back out after falling asleep on a lumpy sofa at my mom's, combined with possibly straining it while lifting a suitcase that was too heavy. I didn't feel the full effects until a few days later but I suffered from about 6 months of excruciating nerve pain that made it nearly impossible to stand or walk without agonizing pain. After a dozen visits to a chiropractor I was at least able to stand upright again. At the worst point I had to crawl from room to room in my house and sit on the lip of the tub to wash myself. Putting on pants was an ordeal that lasted 5-10 minutes, as was using the bathroom. So from Harry's grimaces and gingerly body movements I knew that he'd injured his back. Perhaps the 'nature photography' was code for some deviant sex position that caused a back injury. Maybe his wife beats him with belts and floggers and other objects. I am in all earnest when I say that. Their relationship, as must be obvious to all by now has a sadomasochistic foundation. I truly believe that H gets off on brutal sexual acts. In the past he beat prostitutes so badly they got sent to hospital. In this relationship, * is the Dom and H is the Sub. Methinks the Dom punished her Sub severely the night before he was seen hobbling off the stage and having to be supported on his wife's arm. She'd absolutely get off on the fact that he was hurt and in pain, and that's why she grinned like a maniac.

If it were due to a sex injury, I can see why the press corps kept schtum. They were told they could not say anything at all.
Girl with a Hat said…
Ashli, from Danja Zone has passed away from cancer.

I know a lot of people here didn't like her, but I always found her fun and refreshing.

RIP
Sandie said…
"At 8 a.m. EST on Tuesday Aug. 23, digital billboards lit up in Times Square and across Los Angeles, Toronto and Sydney. The displays featured a stunning black-and-white image of Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex".

Did Spotify pay for this or did the hapless Prince?
Este said…
From Secondhandcoke on reddit about an hour ago:

So here is what I heard:

One reason he has delayed publication is because their currency after the Jubilee and Meghan's podcast is too low to successfully launch the book.

BUT I've been informed that the biggest reason for the delay is that the marriage is seriously on the rocks. Like so on the rocks that divorce could be announced any week now. Harry is pushing the date back because he allegedly is hesitant to drop a huge traitorous tome right as his marriage ends and he has to go to his family for help during and after divorce. He will also need the support of the family to keep the children.

That's the latest tea I've heard on the book front.
Sandie said…
@SwampWoman
Reflected glory syndrome! That's why they keep harassing the Queen. Brilliant term that you invented there!
Este said…
I am listening to Lady C's most current podcast and she has a high up source in the industry that says Meghan's podcast got only 10K hits over the period of 10 hours. Lady C says her own youtube videos get more than 10K visitors per hour than that so that should tell you how dire the performance was. She says Spotify created the illusion of success in showing her briefly as No 2 but that that was on a "select list." When you look at the top 200 podcasts for that day, Megsybaby to quote Lady C was nowhere on that list.

I think this video dropped an hour ago and it's got 30K already. Oh dear, oh dear!.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFsH1K0vXLw
Girl with a Hat said…
From a comment over at DM:

One time, I was making cheese toast, and some of the cheese dropped onto the bottom of the toaster oven. The kitchen rapidly filled with smoke. Thinking on my feet, I turned off the toaster oven, called the media, the fire department, my mom, and Oprah. I couldn't believe that the cheese had just tried to kill my whole family. I truly believe that the cheese did so at the behest of Donald Trump and the Queen. Also Kate Middleton's mom. Lifetime has approached me for the rights to my story, but I don't one movie is sufficient to describe my harrowing ordeal. I just hope my stunning bravery has impressed people less special than myself


I especially like the part about Kate Middleton's mom.
Girl with a Hat said…
That ‘silly’ love is gone. She is now busy banging fiercely in a LA hotel…according to recent leakage

https://twitter.com/Knesix/status/1471933496755118081
Girl with a Hat said…
Sunshine Sachs has been putting on the hush hush . They are saying she in LA doing PODCAST . Spotify contact have said that didn’t happen and that basically had to force her to record it all at the Spotify LA Office and due to the separation she refuse to do it with Harry .

https://twitter.com/suzannah_wade/status/1563561085474549762
HappyDays said…
How will they renew their vows if they are separated and on the brink of divorce? Hmmmmm.
abbyh said…
Sad to hear that Ashli has passed on.

I didn't follow her but sad to hear of the loss of life.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Girl with a Hat

Thanks for letting us know about Ashli. Even though we all don't know each other in real life, we still manage to touch each other's lives and it's sad to hear when someone passes on.
Enbrethiliel said…
@SwampWoman

I agree with @Sandie that "reflected glory syndrome" is brilliant!

She has tried to do this in the US, too, by latching on to other big names. But no one there gave her a tenth of the reflected glory that the BRF did. And we're just going to keep hearing more and more "revelations" that she (cue breathy voice) "can't believe she never talked about before" about the fleeting time in her life when she had senior royal status.
Magatha Mistie said…

Panties Inferno

The sisterhood
of the fiery pants
Archewell known liar
inContinent rants
Megtini invisibily shaken
not heard
Hell bent on having
the last heated word
Burning her braai on #Spotalie
#VoetsekMeghan #Mortify…

Magatha Mistie said…

@Sandie
8am EST would be 10pm
in Sydney.
Doubt many would have
noticed it on a cold, wet
Tuesday night 😉

Enbrethiliel said…
@Este quoting Secondhandcoke:

Harry is pushing the date back because he allegedly is hesitant to drop a huge traitorous tome right as his marriage ends and he has to go to his family for help during and after divorce. He will also need the support of the family to keep the children.

Well, at least he's not entirely off his rocker.

If he goes to them now, I believe that they would help him. He would get a clean divorce, plus custody of any children (which we're still assuming exist). It would be conditional help, hinging on his tell-all never getting published. So they'd probably buy out the publisher, too. If he goes this route, though, there will be no turning back. He will have his family's protection, but it may take him decades to earn back their trust. I do think this is the best way forward for him, but it is the path of a true penitent. I might even compare it to entering a monastery.
Sandie said…
The following is a real eye-opener. Seems impossible, but I think her pathology is much worse than we have speculated.

"Just making my way through the 2020 Robert Lacey book Battle of Brothers and came across the first chapter introducing our abominable Saint. The chapter is somewhat dated in light of Tom Bower’s Revenge exposé, however it did touch on The Immaculate Heart School’s fondness of using ancient Greek words such as ‘arche’.

Extract from book “…Immaculate Heart had a fondness for ancient Greek words with a religious connotation - ‘kairos’, for example, meaning ‘the time when God acts’, was the title given to school spiritual sessions, in which Meghan participated as a group leader. Another was ‘arche’, the term Aristotle had coined to express the ‘origin’ or ‘first cause’ of all things (as in the term ‘archetype’)…”."

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/wzpfuj/what_is_in_a_name_battle_of_brothers_insight_i
Maneki Neko said…
I had a look at the beginning of the transcript of the podcast in the Harry Markle blog. Something struck me in the way * introduces H when he walks in. She talks to him like you would to a 5 year old who's suddenly walked into a room where you where having a chat with a friend. I'm surprised she didn't add 'would you like some milk/juice and biscuits?' or'have you finished playing with your Lego?'

[HARRY WALKS INTO THE INTERVIEW]

MEGHAN: Hi! You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.
Magatha Mistie said…

@WildBoar
Thank you, I enjoyed
Catherine of Brunswick,
mention of Villiers?
Wolfenbuttal, Mz Mistie
did exchange there.

God Save the Queen


Sandie said…
https://mobile.twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1563786789428596736

Angela Levin
@angelalevin1
A source has said that there had been ‘a change in the past few weeks’ in the Queen’s mobility, which meant that she was ‘resting’ a lot more.
-----

I suspect that the Queen has known for some time just how limited the time is that she has left in this life. I am sure we can all speculate as to what is wrong. My Mum was diagnosed with heart failure shortly after my Dad died suddenly. She lived another 6 years, but her mobility became increasingly restricted. The Queen's progression is much faster than with my Mom (from difficulty in walking too far, which was not far at all, to a wheelchair, to bedridden immobility). But, others may have experienced something else that fits her symptoms (which might just be normal aging ... I have never known anyone to live that long so I have no experience).

What can we expect from the dastardly duo? There will be a lot of stories about Zoom calls and secret visits and how special everything is about them and their closeness to the Queen. Anything more vile like her not being taken care of and not being of sound mind is not beyond them at all.

Unless they extend their stay in the UK and head for Balmoral after their triumphant mini-tour, with the duchess front and centre, they are not going to see the Queen. If they go to Balmoral, they will have to face the entire family. Imagine the duchess at Balmoral! Her grandiose demands are the last thing the Queen and her family need. If he goes without her, she will constantly be texting him to maintain control.
I suppose if she is so warped that she believes her version of events as the absolute truth, and is not consciously lying all the time, my earlier judgement may be a tad harsh - perhaps a case of her being mad rather than bad.

In this case, can she be held responsible for what she says and does? Is she supported because people can't believe that anyone would make up such whoppers? How deliberate are her lies? Is she incapable of not lying?

Has she got moral agency? Is there a consistent logic underpinning what she says and does, even if it is at odds with the logical framework which we use?

I realised that my ex's thinking was based on what we would regard as false assumptions (eg that he physically owned me) but what he said and did was completely consistent within this framework. He had no conscience and never felt remorse, only self-pity. I even spent time in Southampton University Library, trying to find some answers. The only cases discussed though were of sadistic psychopaths; the term `personality disorder' wasn't used. The view expressed in the literature then was that people, with such ideas and behaviour hard-wired into their brains, cannot be considered mentally ill because they cannot be cured, nor can they be held truly responsible for their deeds. A tricky philosophical situation.

I'd love to know what today's shrinks would make of *. Would they deem her as lacking moral agency and legal competence, incapable of knowing right from wrong and therefore unfit to stand trial if suspected of criminal activity?
Magatha Mistie said…

Meg of Ahoy!

The face that haunched
a $housand yachts
Has turned her tricks
to farming bots
Her only talent
that I can see
Is as a failed RFugee…

What do you make of this? From Daily Telegraph late yesterday:

Princes William and Harry agree to draw line under public events to mark Princess Diana's death
Hannah Furness
Sat, 27 August 2022 at 8:59 pm

Pt 1:
Prince Harry and Prince William during the unveiling of a statue they commissioned of their mother Princess Diana, on what would have been her 60th birthday - Dominic Lipinski /AP/PA
The Duke of Cambridge and Duke of Sussex will mark the 25th anniversary of the death of their mother privately and separately, having agreed to draw a line under their public commemorations.
The brothers will each remember Diana, Princess of Wales, with their own wives and children, none of whom were able to meet her.
At the 20th anniversary of her death, they undertook major public commemorations in her name including creating a memorial garden at Kensington Palace, taking part in a documentary, loaning belongings to an official exhibition, and meeting wellwishers at the gates of their home.
They also commissioned a statue of her, which was unveiled last summer in a joint photocall despite their by-then strained personal relationship.
The Telegraph understands both Dukes have made it clear that the 20th anniversary would be the last milestone anniversary they would mark in public for the foreseeable future.
Having shared their memories of their mother and paid tribute to her legacy in person and on television, they will now continue to grieve privately on the anniversary each year.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and their three children will have returned from their summer visit to the Queen at Balmoral, and be setting up their new lives at Adelaide Cottage in Windsor ready to start the new school year a week later.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and their children Archie and Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor will be at their house in Montecito, California.
The couple will fly to the UK on the week beginning September 5, when they stay at Frogmore Cottage just a short walk from the Cambridges but are not expected to spend time with them.
PT 2:
Prince Harry this week expressed his intention to spend August 31 privately, saying in a speech at a charity dinner: “I want it to be a day filled with memories of her incredible work and love for the way she did it.
“I want it to be a day to share the spirit of my mum with my family, with my children, who I wish could have met her. Every day, I hope to do her proud.”

A source said the day was still a painful one for the late Princess’s sons.

Friends of each brother separately emphasised that they would still mark it in their own ways, talking about “granny” with their young children.
Wellwishers are still expected to gather at Kensington Palace to lay flowers in Diana’s memory.
Young, digital-savvy admirers will also acknowledge the anniversary online, with a new generation of Diana fans sharing videos to millions of views on platforms including TikTok.
Prince William and Prince Harry were just 15 and 12 when their mother was killed in a car crash in a Paris underpass in the early hours of August 31, 1997.
In 2017, at the 20th anniversary of the tragedy, they chose to speak extensively about her in an effort to focus public attention on her charity work rather than the circumstances of her death.
At the time, it was seen as the brothers setting out their definitive wishes about how she would be remembered.
A spokesman said then: "They wanted to feel that their mother's legacy will be celebrated in a positive way.
"The Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry very much want to show their gratitude to the public for their continued celebration of their mother's memory.”
Since then, both brothers have spoken of the Princess in the context of charity speeches and interviews.
On the 23rd anniversary, before Covid lockdown, Harry planted her favourite flowers forget-me-notes at a pre-school in Los Angeles during one of his first “engagements” of post-royal life.
A spokesman for Kensington Palace and spokeswoman for the Sussexes separately confirmed that this year's anniversary on Wednesday would be spent privately.
Magatha Mistie said…

R’udderless

Archetype
Archehype
Whatever she says
an amalgam of tripe…


NeutralObserver said…
This is a long post, so please scroll past if it's too boring.

Like many, I've been mystified by the 6's ability to spin gold into straw. When they made their ballyhooed escape from the RF, I expected them to be much more successful than they have been. They do have a major disadvantage, neither has a world beating once in a life time talent like three people who have leveraged fame into huge fortunes, Michael Jordan, Roger Federer & Serena Williams. I was afraid Serena's interview with TW wouldn't be interesting because big sports stars are so experienced in not saying anything that might alienate potential sponsors. A really skilled interviewer, who was actually interested in Serena & tennis, might have gotten some juicy tidbits from her, but that wasn't *.

Rules for being a beloved celebrity mega star:

1. Have an incomparable talent, like Michael, Roger, Serena (& Mariah).

2. Work very, very hard at staying at the top, (like our three sports stars).

3. Be loyal to your family. Michael adored his parents & took care of them. The Williams family's ability to stay close through thick & thin, despite divorces, etc. is one of the most impressive things about them. Roger has joked he had to make the quarters or semis of every tournament he was in just to break even, because he often traveled with his wife, 4 kids, parents & attendant help. Roger's playing days have been shortened because of a knee injury he got while bathing one of his two sets of twins. He's kept any whining he may do to himself.

4. Never dis anybody or anything out loud. As Michael famously put it,' Even Republicans buy sneakers.' Michael, Serena & Roger are all famously fierce competitors, but they managed to keep the feuds they may have had with others under control.

5. Avoid politics as much as possible. Michael's beloved father was murdered by white thugs who wanted the red Lexus Michael had bought for him, but no cries of racist victimization came from him. Covid lockdowns & injury have kept Roger from traveling internationally as much as he once did, but he's usually very tactful about his hosts. His mom is from SA, so his comments about the country have always been glowing. Not sure, but he may have investments there. Serena plays the sexism card, but not the racism card. Sexism is a big issue for women tennis players, because there are a lot complaints from the men that women shouldn't get equal prize money because their matches are shorter, & their audiences are smaller, so the sexism thing isn't just about Serena. The Williams sisters helped bring about equal prize money for women.

6. Pay for your own generosity , & don't crow about it afterwards. Sometimes there are ulterior motives behind a sports star's largess, as when Michael & Roger used to bring young up & comers to practice with them to figure out how to compete against them, but they made a lot of friends that way.

These stars could still blow through all the money they've made, or could be upended by some scandal that no one could come back from, but that's a danger every wealthy celeb faces. The 6s are outstanding in having squandered their very real advantages in such a spectacular way, in such a short time. Even the no talent Kardashians have bested them. That's what makes their story so compelling.

One more comment on the podcast. Why does * look like a middle-aged orange-faced pleasingly plump hausfrau in photos taken by the regular press, as in her Invictus & Jubilee photos, but looks like a 20-something ingenue in photos she releases herself? A mystery.
Este said…
@NeutralObserver. I really appreciate your posts, which at much depth of the discussions here. Thanks for sharing! These are great rules too. This observation really struck home for me too, The 6s are outstanding in having squandered their very real advantages in such a spectacular way, in such a short time. Even the no talent Kardashians have bested them. That's what makes their story so compelling.
SwampWoman said…
NeutralObserver observed: One more comment on the podcast. Why does * look like a middle-aged orange-faced pleasingly plump hausfrau in photos taken by the regular press, as in her Invictus & Jubilee photos, but looks like a 20-something ingenue in photos she releases herself? A mystery.

It must be much more difficult, judging from the horrific plastic surgery on display in California/Hollywood, to age in a place where your primary talent is your look.
SwampWoman said…
I am so sorry to hear that Ashli passed on. Thank you for letting us know.
Fifi LaRue said…
@ Hikari: Re: the Dom/Sub relationship between the Harkles. Nutty brought that up some time ago in the blog. Twit can't leave, and he can't stay in the marriage.
NeutralObserver said…
@Este, Thanks for the compliment. I enjoy your worldly & informative posts as well!

@WBBM, Thanks for drawing our attention to Caroline of Brunswick.
She was a real hoot, as was her royal spouse, George IV. The pair of them make the current royal family look like paragons of wisdom & virtue!
snarkyatherbest said…
family would have to tread lightly in the case of divorce. if they give financial support there could be a push on her side to get assets/cash out of them as implicit/actual support over the years personally they should have a third part involved and i would call her bluff and site harry’s mental illness publicly as why she should have sole custody and him with only supervised visitations. oh if those are rent a kids that would certainly call her bluff.
Sandie said…
https://youtu.be/OIiLWvAnCHA

The Body Language Guy looks at another connection from her past.

She was clearly not suitable to be a working royal or to do diplomatic international tours. It was not just about inexperience ... the character that shows through is the problem.

Did the royal family do any due diligence in checking on her past and what blowback that could have?

As for her, when she latched onto the Prince, she suddenly had the attention and money she always craved. But, her character and ways were set by then so the mess was inevitable.

The more I find out, the more certain I am that she engineered the meeting with him and set out to capture him. Now she can't let him go because hustling would now be so much more difficult for her. He can't let her go because she has been so successful in burning bridges behind them (and convincing him it was and is all his idea).

By the way she is still getting significant unquestioning support in America. I still don't think that support will translate into the unquestioning adoration and immense wealth she wants, and it will not stop the exposure of her, every time she appears and every time someone digs some more into her past.

They are still putting out the PR that they will be visiting the Queen. I see the Cambridges have left Balmoral and the rest will follow as school and work starts again. I would not put it past them to make a move when they think the coast is clear. Will she bring along a heater to start a fire? Will he get into a fist fight with the Queen's courtiers?
Sandie said…
@NeutralObserver
I can think of no rational explanation for the change in her weight. Make up, lighting, angles and filters can do a lot but she appears after a relatively long time and you can see she has lost a lot of weight, but then shortly afterwards photos show that she is still carrying a lot of extra weight.
NeutralObserver said…
@Swamp Woman, I think she uses digital manipulation and/or filters to make her photos look the way she wishes she looked. It's been possible for quite a while, & digital capabilities have gotten only better over time. I remember reading several years ago that Kate Winslet got mad at Vogue for making her look a lot thinner than she actually was. She preferred a more authentic photo of herself. Don't think * has that issue.
Observant One said…
@ Neutral Observer

I fully agree with your observation that the 6’s have squandered every extraordinary opportunity they have been handed. Her need to control everything and everyone, refusal to take advice and inability to read the room have led them to the bottom of a pit they will likely never climb out of. Yet astonishingly, she continues to believe that “people don’t know the real me,” and if they knew her, they would love her.

She has clearly ignored all of the professional and experienced advice offered by palace staff, along with the never ending list of paid publicists. She is a living, breathing example of the old adage that “the definition of insanity is repeating the same mistake, but expecting a different outcome.” The insufferable whining about how difficult their life is and her observations about the expectations of the RF are not popular messages for the public, who are concerned with job security, exorbitant prices for utilities, petrol and food.

I am definitely ready for them to be handed some serious consequences (stripped of their Duchy titles, H removed from succession and canceled contracts) for their lies and accusations, and I don’t believe I’m alone. The public’s disgust is nearly palpable, based on the thousands of negative comments on social media. Personally, I am close to major burnout with their predictable saga. It isn’t healthy to witness daily news of their opulent lifestyle that is seemingly supported by lies and twisted, manipulative behavior.

Maybe I am just in a funky mood, but I was really disgusted by the narcissism on display at the Uvalde tribute in Texas, their creepy behavior at the UN and the disrespect shown to Nelson Mandela with Harry’s unrelated speech that was poorly delivered in anger. We all know that nothing has improved since those two events. It’s starting to feel like we have spent four years watching a terrible movie, written and acted by a couple of spoiled pre-teens. Ugh.
Maneki Neko said…
I know there are divorce rumours swirling around and we don't know whether there is any truth in them but I detect a shift in *'s attitude. It's only a feeling and perhaps I 'm wrong but I think * is now showing contempt towards H. To me, her 'Hi! You wanna come say hi?' in the podcast reads as if she was talking to a small child. She has reduced him to nothing and possibly as a result now hates him/can't stand him. He's not someone she can look up to like when she was on a hunt for an Englishman.


SwampWoman said…
eutralObserver said...
@Swamp Woman, I think she uses digital manipulation and/or filters to make her photos look the way she wishes she looked. It's been possible for quite a while, & digital capabilities have gotten only better over time. I remember reading several years ago that Kate Winslet got mad at Vogue for making her look a lot thinner than she actually was. She preferred a more authentic photo of herself. Don't think * has that issue.


Thanks for the explanation. Jamie Lee Curtis has done the same sort of thing, posing for articles illustrating the illusion versus the reality.

It seems silly to me to post idealized pictures of herself when her actual pictures are on display. If she's advertising for another partner, she'll have to take her clothes off eventually. Maybe I'm too firmly grounded in reality and don't believe magical transformation happens just because I wish really hard for it. While I would *like* to have my 17-year-old body back, I would have to spend so much time in exercise and money for plastic surgery that I wouldn't have time to do anything else. Guess I'm just too lazy (and cheap, mustn't forget that quality!) to want to revisit the past and would rather enjoy the now.

SwampWoman said…
Sandie said: By the way she is still getting significant unquestioning support in America. I still don't think that support will translate into the unquestioning adoration and immense wealth she wants, and it will not stop the exposure of her, every time she appears and every time someone digs some more into her past.

I think her 'support' enjoys the same public relations firm that she does. In other words, the support is illusory.
DeerAngels said…
Upon hearing SA inferno in Archers room my first thought was,"wonder who all talked to Tom Bower".
NeutralObserver said…
@Swamp Woman,@Sandie, I think she's trying project herself as one of the super models of her youth, like Kate Moss or Christy Turlington. Looks like she's given herself cheekbones she's never had. Her press photos while she was in Europe for Invictus & the Jubilee seemed to all show the same person. It's the stuff she puts out herself that's weird. She might also be a yo-yo dieter, although that's pretty hard at her age.

@Observant One, It does sort of feel as though we're heading for climax of sorts, although we keep thinking one is coming. The 6s seem to be the apotheosis of the notion that one can re-imagine reality. Back in the day, people used alcohol, drugs, stimulants, etc.. Now we have surgery, technology, the Metaverse, etc.. It may be fascinating & disturbing to those of us on this blog, because we've never had that need.I doubt many of us would be interested in Google Glasses, etc.. Perhaps * is just a disturbed person who needs to lie & fabricate to create a reality that she can accept. Lots of people who aren't very stable can function at a pretty high level. * is just one who sends out constant loony press releases, but she's not alone in her quest for transformation. There seem to be a lot of people who want to deny hum drum reality these days.

I am sorry to hear about Ashli, although I'm afraid I never watched one of her videos. Was she one of women whom *'s horrible squad persecuted? If so, they're doubly horrible.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Neutral Observer,

Ashli claimed that she was being targeted by the sugars, and that they had burned her house down. It seems a ridiculous claim to make, but she and her family then moved into another house, which seemed to also be targeted. She lost her beloved pet dog in the first fire.

She was very open and I am afraid that she may have given too much info out about herself.

She was a very lovely woman, and she will be missed. She was upbeat and loving to the end, and her faith never wavered.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Neutral Observer,

Ashli claimed that she was being targeted by the sugars, and that they had burned her house down. It seems a ridiculous claim to make, but she and her family then moved into another house, which seemed to also be targeted. She lost her beloved pet dog in the first fire.

She was very open and I am afraid that she may have given too much info out about herself.

She was a very lovely woman, and she will be missed. She was upbeat and loving to the end, and her faith never wavered.
Karla said…
Twitter
"Why is this new Production Company doing *another* promotional film/clip for Harry"

https://twitter.com/JenCarsonTaylor/status/1563975933236748294?s=20&t=ZJqBhrRzSG1noQQ5geGPdg
Observant One said…

@ Cat’s Slave - Your comment about the SA fire story triggering questions about who all might have spoken to Tom Bower is quite thought provoking. If the “fire” had actually been serious, we can be certain that * or #6 would have brought it up during their Whinefest with Tom Bradby at the end of that trip. The use of the term ‘housing unit’ is an American expression for government subsidized apartments for families with low incomes.

@ Swamp Woman - I agree that American support for the couple is limited to a few sugars and thousands of bots purchased by their PR team. It seems as though the majority of Americans either ignore them, dislike them or laugh at them.
snarkyatherbest said…
a few interesting things:

the wall street journal had a round about of past books about Wallis Simpson including the Andrew Morton books and one focused on the Windsors when he was in the Bahamas. i’m thinking i need one for vacation reading

as for visiting the queen. sounds like she will be at balmoral for sometime (rumor has it the new PM will be named from there). she doesn’t sound like she is doing well. i doubt they would head up to see her. too far away and i am sure the courtiers and family will keep them away if the queen is doing poorly

did anyone see the HMS Prince of wales had a mishap coming out of Portsmouth oh dear. poor charles. take heed don’t stumble out of the gate

Membership of One Young World/attendance at Manchester:

`Delegates who participate in the annual Summit tend to be aged between 18 and 30 years old. 30 is not a hard limit, however, and we absolutely do still welcome Delegates that are older'. (from OYW website)

When does one stop being `young'? Herself has now clocked up 42 years (at least...)

What has she ever led that has helped advance the purposes of OYW -verifiable leadership, that is, not just her own opinion?
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11155343/Harry-Meghan-visit-Queen-Balmoral-not-anticipated-couples-rare-trip-UK.html

So typical ... their story is that they can't visit the Queen at Balmoral because the government and British people won't pay millions for their security! No mention of his father (the next monarch) or his brother (future monarch), both of which he was much closer to and spent far more time with, before TBW orchestrated an estrangement. Why does the media not question this ruthlessly self-serving behaviour?
VetusSacculi said…
Karla said...
Twitter
"Why is this new Production Company doing *another* promotional film/clip for Harry"


Enty has a blind that they are taking a production crew to their UK charity dates. No doubt to use camera angles to give the impression of much bigger crowds than there really are and to whip up standing ovations for them.
NeutralObserver said…
This is a pretty funny tweet. The comments are hilarious. It's a counterweight to the NYTimes story which reported *'s 'Archie almost died in fire' & earlier racism claims as completely true. Oh well, the NYTimes has been accused of being 'stenographers' before.

https://twitter.com/MeghanSans/status/1563897737795477510

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/23/style/meghan-markle-podcast-serena-williams.html
Girl with a Hat said…
article and photo shoot of the twat

https://www.thecut.com/article/meghan-markle-profile-interview.html

she looks quite different and the clothes actually fit! I wonder if she stole the shoes.
Sandie said…
https://www.thecut.com/article/meghan-markle-profile-interview.html

A major PR piece, with photographs. The journalist simply repeats her lies without question, even when the lies have been exposed.
Girl with a Hat said…
https://twitter.com/boxmontessori/status/1563888964695724035

who is the most hated person in the world?

Putin comes in at only 9% LOL
Girl with a Hat said…
in that article in thecut.com, the twat actually says that she is all for forgiveness, and that she is trying to work on it (supposedly towards the BRF?)

her take on her relationship with her father in that article is also very interesting.

and supposedly Archie and Lilibucks exist and were seen calling the twat "mommy"?

read and learn how an evil mind works!
Hikari said…

Thank you, Thank you to who posted the direct to this Twitter. Ima gonna have to get an account now. This is a new account that bills itself as the 'parody press office of the Duchess of Sussex." Comedy Gold! Here are the two tweets I was able to access.


https://twitter.com/MeghanSans


BREAKING: In anticipation of the Sussexes visit to Manchester, authorities have called in all blow heaters within a 20 mile radius of the city. A task force has been set up to ensure that any heater found emitting smoke will be immediately destroyed.


BREAKING: the Duchess Of Sussex was last night the victim of a mouth scalding incident when a domestic worker served her an overly hot camomile tea. Paramedics attended & she is expected to make a full recovery. The worker has been dismissed & immigration authorities informed.
snarkyatherbest said…
sandie. saw twitter is afire with “the cut”. creepy photo looking like diana in the black turtleneck released around the time of the anniversary of diana’s death.

i am thinking a separation is happening. she is branding herself alone. no harry in the pics no harry in the podcasts (except say hi and go play with your toys). she’s working on post divorce brand. even tease about going back on instagram. she has some money from someone/somewhere.

girl in the hat. ha she appears to have found a new stylist

marnie. i think you are right she will land with someone who has an ego and wants a profile.
Hikari said…
I'm a new Twitter subscriber and MeghanSansFrontieres is my second follow after the Columbus Zoo.


Meghan will donate August proceeds of her book The Bench to the charity
Smoke Alarms for South Africa (SASA). “The emotional scars of my heater trauma remain but it’s a small relief to use my pain to help others”, she said today. SASA will shortly receive the gift of $7.53”

After Archie’s recent suspected heat rash and Lili’s knee scrape, the Sussexes are disappointed not to have received supportive messages from the royals. A spokesman today remarked; “One wonders if the Queen’s white great grandchildren receive this level of neglect”.

For goodness sake people. Have you ever actually been in a housing unit? Have you any idea what it’s like to have to stay in such places? I mean they don’t even have bidets or a gift wrapping room. And the chocolate left on my pillow wasn’t even organic!
Sandie said…
@Hikari

The tweets from that account are hilarious!

Royal reporters and others are pushing back against the lies ...
----
Richard Palmer:

https://mobile.twitter.com/royalreporter/status/1564226696819122178

I’m afraid Meghan is a fantasist if she believes this would be a daily occurrence in the UK, where the
@IpsoNews
code has strict rules about treatment of children in education.
-----
Dan Wootton:

https://mobile.twitter.com/royalreporter/status/1564226696819122178

The lies in this interview are extraordinary.
Meghan claims there would be a royal press pen with 40 photographers each time she took Archie to school.
Rubbish!
William and Kate drop their kids off to school most days sight unseen.
-----

My theory: to her, the ultimate is to be papped every time you leave your house, and to be on magazine covers and be featured in every tabloid. The reality is that this does not happen because she is not that important. Her children are actually far better protected in the UK than where they are now. She lies because she believes her own delusions.
Enbrethiliel said…
@VetusSacculi
Enty has a blind that they are taking a production crew to their UK charity dates. No doubt to use camera angles to give the impression of much bigger crowds than there really are and to whip up standing ovations for them.

Would they have to fly the actors for those crowds in? My impression is that the Dollars are so despised in the UK that they wouldn't be able to pay people to cheer for them.

And even if they managed that, there would be others, like Trevor Coult's source who said they had no children or nannies with them at the airport, who would be happy to spill the beans. There might even be incriminating photos this time.
Enbrethiliel said…
@NeutralObserver

I join Hikari in thanking you for sharing this parody account with us. Impeccable comedy!
Sandie said…
Katie (Holmes) and Suri are frequently papped in New York, yet the kid has and does go to school every day and does not get papped doing so. My theory is that most of the time these celebrities get papped when they make the call. TBW wants, and loves, to be papped. She is playing a game and the stupid besotted husband believes her.
Girl with a Hat said…
extract from that article:

That didn’t sit right with Meghan, given her strained relationship with the British tabloids (“Harry’s girl is [almost] straight outta Compton” is how the Daily Mail introduced her to the British public), and especially since she would soon have a child of her own to protect. “Why would I give the very people that are calling my children the N-word a photo of my child before I can share it with the people that love my child?” she asks, still ruffled. “You tell me how that makes sense and then I’ll play that game.”
Sandie said…
This claim from the article is bizarre ... she is not considered black in South Africa, and the connection to Mandela is the craziest thing I have ever heard. And no, South Africans did not rejoice in the streets.

"She recalls a moment from the 2019 London premiere of the live-action version of The Lion King. “I just had Archie. It was such a cruel chapter. I was scared to go out.” A cast member from South Africa pulled her aside. “He looked at me, and he’s just like light. He said, ‘I just need you to know: When you married into this family, we rejoiced in the streets the same we did when Mandela was freed from prison.’ ” Of course, she knows she’s no Mandela, but perhaps even telling me this story is a mode of defense, because if you are a symbol for all that is good and charitable, how can anybody find you objectionable, how can anybody hate you?"
Maneki Neko said…
Another whingefest...

Meghan Markle takes ANOTHER swipe at the royals: Duchess insists she was 'happy' to leave UK because 'just by existing' she and Harry were 'upsetting the hierarchy' and moans others were given roles they wanted - as she reveals she could rejoin Instagram (DM)
Ah yes, the Tom Brady interview when she said it wasn't enough to survive.
snarkyatherbest said…
the Meghansans account hilarious!!!

she likened her marrying harry to mandela being freed. love it. she is on such a narc high she is sounding ridiculous. maybe harry is smart to let her PR on her own.
Maneki Neko said…
And let's not forget her face on the cover of a magazine just before the 25th anniversary of Diana's death. What a coincidence! Is she jealous?
TheGrangle said…
This new photo is the best I’ve seen yet. It captures the essence of * perfectly....Utterly vile to the core and as mad as a box of frogs.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Sandie: Instead of "stupid and besotted" IMO Hairy is stupid and a prisoner. He doesn't know he can leave.
Fifi LaRue said…
I just saw a headline on social media: "They call my children the N-word" re: quote by Twat.

Twat is a lunatic in the worst way possible. It reminds me of a Chinese Medicine dx for extreme mental disorders: Phlegm Misting the Mind. In Twat's case, it's more than a mist of phlegm, more like a rotting, putrid swamp covering her mind.
Este said…
Meghan shows up in The Cut the only role she knows how to play, effectively or not: Professional Victim. Yeah, this is Meghan trying to capitalize on September and get her thrive on two years too late. Okay, sport: game on. Work those roasted crocodile rock Soho made buns and show Netflix and Spotify the money. To quote Madonna, We're waiting!
Rebecca said…
@Fifi
I agree. Harry is too stupid to know what is really going on. He will not leave her. She will eventually leave him.
Girl with a Hat said…
bottom licker Lainey Lui on the article:

What’s tricky about covering the Sussexes, and Meghan in particular, is that the British tabloids and the racists on social media have made it complicated for objective and qualified journalists to provide fair criticism. But, as I’ve often said, the Sussexes are celebrities and like all celebrities, Harry and Meghan can occasionally invite some side-eye. Pointing that out is tricky though, because you risk being lumped in with all the assholes and the haters in the British media and on Twitter. You don’t want to give them any more fuel for their distortions. Allison herself acknowledges this in her piece:

“The result of trying always to do and say the right thing is the impression that [Meghan is] constantly policing herself, and in a meta-twist, I find myself worrying that the words I write about her will be misinterpreted and dissected — rudely, maliciously — too.”

It’s that awareness that makes Allison the perfect person at the perfect time to write about Meghan, who is promoting her podcast, Archetypes, that launched last week on Spotify and went straight to #1. Allison is fair but she is not fawning. She writes with empathy for both Meghan and Harry over what they’ve endured and how terribly they’ve been treated, without compromising her duty to her job, which is to provide unbiased insight to the reader on what Meghan is like through her own experience in spending time with her. And without compromising her own voice as a writer – observant and thoughtful, but also irreverent and hilarious.
Hikari said…

@Sandie

"She recalls a moment from the 2019 London premiere of the live-action version of The Lion King. “I just had Archie. It was such a cruel chapter. I was scared to go out.” A cast member from South Africa pulled her aside. “He looked at me, and he’s just like light. He said, ‘I just need you to know: When you married into this family, we rejoiced in the streets the same we did when Mandela was freed from prison.’ ” Of course, she knows she’s no Mandela, but perhaps even telling me this story is a mode of defense, because if you are a symbol for all that is good and charitable, how can anybody find you objectionable, how can anybody hate you?"

I've almost just vomited into my computer keyboard.

The salient feature here is that She recalled. That is code for * is about to launch into a whopper.

The Twunt literally compared herself as an equal in the fight against racism with Nelson Mandela. All because she spread like butter for a pasty white English prince and took his family to the cleaners for cash and notoriety. How deeply repulsive this thing and its fantasy universe it lives in are. She doesn't even qualify as a human being to me. English forces me to use a pronoun so I'd just as soon call the thing Harry stood up in church before God and sundry and married an 'It'. What else does one call a malignant troll such as this?

Well . . isn't it odd, then, that after relating how the South African people were jubilant in the streets because Harry of England had become the third husband of a twice-divorced (one annulment but I call that semantics only) ex-showgirl with some melanin in the family tree she would then insult the entire country by insinuating that she was housed in a derelict shack with faulty appliances and no smoke detectors? The SA tour was only a couple months after this supposedly glowing practically worshipful comment was made.

The Son of God was born in a stable with cow manure and spent His first hours/days of life in a feed box. Never once did He ever complain that He did not enter the world in a luxury birthing suite at the Portland hospital or Marriott Four Seasons 5-star resort.

Harry's wife is a vile disgusting liar.

Bible scholars may know that 'Satan', which is commonly translated as 'Devil' in common usage actually means 'Accuser'. So therefore anybody can be a satan, small S. We reserve the capital S for the team captain as it were.

Accuse, oppose, sow discord . . Satan is also called the "Father of Lies". Well, he had a daughter and she's called RMM.
Este said…
I see Meghan is playing the only role she knows how to play for The Cut: professional victim. Okay. Is there a market for this? Spotify and Netflix are on the line. It's do or die for the duo. Can Meghan harvest big bucks on Word Salad and Victimhood? It's time to deliver or divorce because Meghan isn't one to stick with a man whose not advancing her money and status in life. That's for sure.
Hikari said…
More from MeghanSans on Twitter:


BREAKING: statement from The Duchess of Sussex:“I wish to address the hurtful accusation that my hit podcast insulted South Africans. To be clear, I do not blame them for my child’s near death experience but the royal family who forced me to visit such an uncivilised country”.

Meghan Markle meteoric rise from a private school childhood with a dad in movies to playing a supporting role on a C-list TV drama could never have been achieved without ambition and a rich dad.
NeutralObserver said…
To UK Nutties & all Nutties outside of the USA. No, * does not register much in the USA. No one knew who she was before she married, & not many people know or care who she is now. My millennial children had no idea she had even had a second child, & think I'm nuts to even be interested. Certain news outlets, like the NYTimes or the Washington Post will print their Pravda-like stories about the 6s now & then, but they have an agenda. Other than that, it's just the trashy entertainment/celeb outlets like ET & People Magazine, which has no journalistic credibility. Other formerly respected media like Vanity Fair, Newsweek, Time etc. can't even afford fact checkers anymore. It was fact checkers at Vanity Fair who found the holes in *'s interview claims which Tom Bower reported. Vanity Fair doesn't do that much fact checking these days, & they too adhere to the old boring 'progressive' agenda.

Unlike Serena Williams, who has been a celebrity since her teens for her enormous success in what until then had pretty much been a white/country club sport, no one had heard of * pre-wedding. I became intrigued because her bizarre pregnancy seemed to upend the rules of biology, & she seemed to be involving a respected institution, the BRF, in some sort of deception.

Now, I just enjoy the chatter as a distraction from the real news, which can be depressing. @Enbrethiliel, hilariously mentioned 'normies' in one of her posts. Before this car crash, I was a 'normie' with respect to the BRF. I thought that mean, jug-eared Charles had cheated on his lovely young wife while she dutifully took care of her children & performed her duties as a royal, because all I knew came from headlines on magazines at my supermarket checkout. Now of course, I know all sorts of useless, but amusing stuff about the 6s. I don't know how she can claim our comments are racist. I have written much worse things about both of the Clintons, whom I voted for multiple times. You don't need to like someone to approve of the job they're doing. The 6s are not likable or good at their jobs.
snarkyatherbest said…
Poor duchass. taylor swift drops timing of new album, us embassy in baghdad is being evacuated as we speak (helicopters on three roof with haunting echoes of vietnam?) who’s gonna read her and her interview in what was suppose to be a slow news week ahead of Labor day in the US. i have only seen clips but some of the clips were odd. was the author making fun of her with some of the over the top stuff and glowing? just curious for those who read it if this could be the case.
Hikari said…
@The Grangle

My God . . does she think she actually looks beautiful in this new photo?

She looks like the vengeful harpy she is . . it's really scary. That is her Bunny Boiler/Terrorize a 3-Year-Old face. You can't hide crazy, you really can't. Her eyes look deranged.

The constant media frenzy over her every move and word-salad utterance is only feeding her delusions of grandeur. She really seems to think that she's some kind of Woke Femme Messianic Coming. The black turtleneck reminds me of Steve Jobs.

I'm not sure I've ever encountered anyone, save perhaps Donald Trump, with a more overinflated sense of self than this one's got. 100 years ago or even more recently than that, she would have been committed to a mental asylum for 'hysteria'. That's where the loons who believed they were Napoleon used to go.

Is the media colluding in propping her up in her delusions or . . .could it be an elaborate trolling by this point? Whenever this twunt lands a major magazine cover, it seems that care is chosen by the editorial staff to make sure it is possibly the *most* unflattering image of her captured that day.

When Twunt wants to project an air of 'I'm really serious now', she scrapes her hair back into this severe ponytail. She did the same at the U.N. where the shadows in the photos made her appear bloated and maniacal. Of course she was giving the camera the side-eye. In one semi-side view she reminded me of Elizabeth Taylor during one of her rehab periods due to her face being so round in this, I hesitate to call it a 'hairstyle'.

Before any of this kicked off and RMM was just the ingenue from a TV show that Harry was seeing, she could, with the right styling, take attractive photos. The way her true reptile self is becoming revealed is happening at a precipitous rate. If she's this frightening to look at in a professionally air-brushed photograph, imagine what Haz wakes up to at home.


https://www.thecut.com/article/2022-september-cut-cover-editors-letter.html
NeutralObserver said…
I want to, once again, thank abbyh for her hard work in keeping this a fun & civilized space!
Try this parody interview for a laugh!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8uZPwmwajg
What kind of existence is it if all you’re filled with is anger, hatred and jealousy?! She is eaten up with it and it utterly consumes her. This is the toxic make-up of Maggot but also Mole too. Imagine being around those kind of personalities for any length of time! 😳😔😖

I saw a comment in the DM where they said the U was missing from the title! Ouch! 😳Another said ‘she’s like a wasp at a picnic’! 😂
snarkyatherbest said…
Curious. in none of the posted pics does she show her engagement ring. did she sell it? if they separated she certainly wouldn’t be giving it back to harry. she is definitely trying to define herself as just herself.
Maneki Neko said…
Not sure about their much vaunted privacy: "Meghan Markle offers a rare insight into her and Harry's charmed life in California"

Meghan regaled during the interview how some residents are hesitant in the couple's presence, and surprised when they even show up at birthday parties.

She said: 'I was in a bouncy castle, and I saw this 1-year-old inside. I was like, "Where’s your mom?" And this mom on the outside goes, "Oh, hi! I’m here. I wasn’t sure if I should come in.’ "

The 41-year-old reveals she told her: "Do you need your child? Of course you can come in."


Of course, a mere mortal would be totally intimidated in the august presence of her serene highness Sparkles that she wouldn't dare go and get her own child 🙄. She really believes her own hype.
Brown-eyed said…
HG Tudor read REVENGE out loud. He also did that with his regular podcasts. I often wondered how he could do that. One night he was talking about the Harkles and I realized i had read what he was saying earlier that day in a British tabloid. He was curating his content. I did like to listen.
Mel said…
Hikari....great find on that account.

After Harry’s hit “great vibe” podcast appearance, the Duchess has listed appropriate compliments he may offer future guests. Examples include “cool grills, man”, “feelin those funky braids” and “those sneakers are da sh*t”. Harry’s own contributions of “nice tits” was rejected.
@maneki Neko

May we have a link to th at cover photo, please? Ta.
@The Grangle:

A link for this pic too, please.
Humor Me said…
why does Harry need to release the book after that article? Geesh - talk about a Kraken from * herself!
DesignDoctor said…
@TheGrangle
Perfectly stated. What a malevolent facial expression.
OCGal said…
@Girl with a Hat and @Sandie,

I guess I should thank you for alerting us to the projectile-vomit inducing magazine article https://www.thecut.com/article/meghan-markle-profile-interview.html

But I just can’t. Each time I think I cannot react any more angrily and disgustedly to the douchass and her self-serving shenanigans, she tops herself. I actually feel agitated after reading THE CUT’s oleaginous fawning liefest.

For those who want to have THE CUT’s online article entitled “Meghan of Montecito” on their very own coffee table, note “If you prefer to read in print, you can also find this article in the August 29, 2022, issue of New York Magazine.” I hate that 666’s lies will be floating in hard copy around the USA.

How much did this effort cost, all told? Astronomical, I bet. Who paid for this? Hazbeen? The secret fund that I am still 100% convinced daddy Charles is funneling to them? A new patsy who is enjoying her (“alleged” wink wink) yachting skills? Who?

The douchass must’ve been in hog heaven being the center of attention for this fashion shoot. Just take a gander at how many production professionals it took to bring it to fruition:

Photographs by Campbell Addy
Styling by Jessica Willis
Hair by Hos Hounkpatin
Hair color by Kadi Lee
Makeup by Edwin Sandoval
Set design by Din Morris
Produced by Dana Brockman at viewfinders
Tailoring by Susie Kourinian

The writer ended on an interesting note: “…I make my way out the door, wondering if somehow I’d missed everything she was trying to say.”

Dear =somebody= in Heaven, can’t you make this stop?
Girl with a Hat said…
Trevor Coult reports that Harry has a new gf, who is blonde:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-pbpjBjP5w
Harry just thinks his brother is trapped - look in the mirror dude.
Maneki Neko said…
Keen to respect her family's privacy, * reveals a few more gems.

The independent toddler devoured a quesadilla in the back seat of the car on the drive back home while asking to wind down the window himself for some fresh air.
. . .
As well as teaching their eldest to have good manners, Meghan told The Cut she and Harry are educating him about homelessness - and even enlisted him to put kits together for the homeless which contained granola bars
. . .
Elsewhere in the interview Meghan addressed the couple's strained relationship with the Royal Family and said 'forgiveness is really important'.
Her father might beg to differ.
Sandie said…
“A source close to the Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle has confirmed to The Citizen that there was indeed a fire in her son Archie’s nursery while she and Prince Harry were on a royal tour in South Africa.”

This is from a South African media source. So, this is another lie from her because there is no 'source' close to her that was on that tour.
Sandie said…
I have no idea what The Cut is, so I found the following very enlightening:

"The Cut" is not a magazine. It is a section of New York Magazine. Meghan didn't get the front cover of anything.
Sandie said…
And I came across this:
-----
Social media promotion for a New York magazine's exclusive interview with Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was deleted and reposted – so that her royal title could be added in.
-----
In the article she says everyone sees her as a princess, confirming to me that the PR around calling her a princess comes from her.
Sandie said…
@FifiLaRue said ...
IMO Hairy is stupid and a prisoner. He doesn't know he can leave.

Very astute. All he has to do is walk away.
Sandie said…
https://twitter.com/user/status/1564229572165603333


Russell Myers has often been called a sugar for generally being supportive of and sympathetic towards the Duchess. In the series of tweets he highlights all the BS in the article, and does not hold back from expressing his astonishment at how much she lies or fantasizes.
If only they did `just exist...'

No speeches, no strutting, no photos.

Wouldn't it be luvverly?

Luvverly, luvverly...

Eliza Doolittle, through and through. A squashed cabbage leaf is all she is, for all she imagines she's a Fair Lady. (Over to you, Magatha!)
Sandie said…
From Scobie, some damage control from the Duchess:

'There seems to be confusion in some headlines about this quote in The Cut interview. I understand that Prince Harry is actually referring to Meghan's loss of her own father, and Meghan is saying she doesn't want Harry to lose his.'
---

Nope, that is clearly not what she said. I reckon the husband had a knee-jerk reaction and so she is doing damage control. It will be interesting to see what other damage control she is forced to do, and if the journalist will keep quiet or leak like a sieve to someone.

She did not lose her father. She threw him away brutally and cruelly.

For those who read the article, did you notice that in her usual bitchy way she disses Catherine and Anne (I presumed the latter was Anne), and claps back at everything that has appeared about her in the British tabloids.

She also claims that estrangement is his family's fault and she is the one reaching out with the olive branch of forgiveness. Remember 'release the kraken' to finish her off? She is doing it to herself. The woman is crazy.
Fifi LaRue said…
I just saw the cover of "Cut" magazine with Twat's scary countenance on the cover.

Noted, the Frankenstein knobs on either side of her neck.

Here's a fun thing to do: With a piece of paper cover up the right side of Twat's face, the right side facing the viewer. Then cover up the left side facing the viewer. The left side, facing us, is the face she shows to the public. The right side, facing us, is her interior. Mad as a box of frogs.
HappyDays said…
Sandie said:
Dan Wootton:

https://mobile.twitter.com/royalreporter/status/1564226696819122178

The lies in this interview are extraordinary.
Meghan claims there would be a royal press pen with 40 photographers each time she took Archie to school.
Rubbish!
William and Kate drop their kids off to school most days sight unseen.
-----
@Sandie:
When would Meghan have been papped by 40 photographers in a royal press pen in the UK when taking Archie to school? They left the UK before Archie was even a year old. He has never been to school in the UK.
Girl with a Hat said…
https://twitter.com/lux_solis/status/1564307883621339137/photo/1

the twat wasn't on the cover of the NY magazine. this is the actual cover.
Ralph L said…
I guess MM really does like emeralds.
Maneki Neko said…
@Raspberry Ruffle

I saw a comment in the DM where they said the U was missing from the title! Ouch! 😳
...............
I saw it too! It's good to know people take the pee out of her 😆.
Maneki Neko said…
@Wild Boar

May we have a link to th at cover photo, please? Ta.

I don't remember mentioning a cover photo, it must have been somebody else but is this the one you meant?

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/08/29/17/61832573-11157379-The_Duchess_of_Sussex_has_given_a_bombshell_interview_to_The_Cut-a-103_1661790249281.jpg
.........
There's a flurry of articles on *, I wonder if it's to eclipse the anniversary of Diana or if it's to deflect from the podcast lack of success.

Maneki Neko said…
Meghan Markle told an interviewer to transcribe the 'guttural sounds' she was making during her sit down chat for a magazine article that was published today.
. . .
[Features writer Allison P] Davis felt that the California-based royal did not answer one of her questions at one point and instead 'suggested how I might transcribe the noises she's making'.

Meghan then turns to her, referring to herself in the third person, and suggests the interviewer, writes: 'She's making these guttural sounds, and I can't quite articulate what it is she's feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she's just moaning.’

This is not the first time the Duchess has used the word 'guttural' to describe how she is feeling.
. . .

The magazine said if 'we are taking her at her word' then both her and the Duke were 'growling' but she probably meant 'visceral'.

While if you are using the term 'guttural sounds', the Collins Dictionary and the Spectator, notes you are talking about a 'harsh sound produced at the back of a person's throat'.


We've head that before. For someone who is supposedly so 'whip smart' and went to a prestigious university, she is singularly stupid and uneducated if she doesn't know the meaning of guttural. And she's really up her own @r$e (3rd paragraph).
OCGal said…

QUESTION:

@Raspberry Ruffle: you wrote

"I saw a comment in the DM where they said the U was missing from the title!" And

@Maneki Neko, you agreed about it.

Forgive me if I'm thick as a brick here, but I don't understand. What does the missing U signify? Where in the title should the missing U go? What am I missing here?

Thank you in advance for advising.
DeerAngels said…
HG Tudor released a new you tube about an hour ago. So nice his site is back.
Karla said…
t think it was Meghan who wrote this sugary piece.
...
Richard Éden

"It should be pointed out that the magazine to which #Meghan granted her jaw-dropping interview, The Cut, has been responsible for spreading scurrilous rumours about Prince William in the past. "
...
I don't understand, Harry is everywhere: Podcast, article from the digital magazine "The Cut" when we were told that in mid-August he was in Africa and on his way back he went to Colorado where he performed, on the 28th, at an ISPS Handa event. BUT The interviewer described the prince as ‘exasperated’ when talking about ‘fixing pipes’ in their Montecito mansion. (?)
...
MM said
" I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking. I can talk about my whole experience and make a choice not to”
.,.
wait...what? Not silenced? But in Oprah's interview she claimed she was silenced.
...
SA again - quoting Nelson Mandela
...
OCGal said…
Look at this!

Smashing comparison (courtesy Remoulade Sauce on Twitter) of iconic cover photo of Diana close-up in black turtleneck, and Diana 2.0 aka douchass Methane trying to channel Diana by identical close up in black turtleneck.

https://twitter.com/Remisagoodboy/status/1564224455840243713

Are there no depths to which Methane won't sink?
Ziggy said…
Psycho playing Diana dress-up again.
https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/376965431283842845/
@OCGal,

You didn’t miss anything…..🤗

The title of the magazine is called CUT. Either I did a typo or the original DM commenter did (deliberately to be polite?), I can’t find the comment in the DM now to check. So….add a missing N (not a U). You get a very bad swear word. 😳🥴 I hope that helps. 🤗
I tried to read it, or at least most of it. I have never before read such a pile of shite. This is my take and has been since the beginning.

It is a business arrangement.

1. Her part is the fame, the need to live in luxury, the ability to be seen, heard and adored by all and sundry. To pontificate about every ridiculous thought in her head, to hang with celebrities, royalty and to be seen and envied.
2. His part is for her to provide a cover for him to do and live as he wishes, to poke at his brother and his father, to have children without the strings of a real relationship.
Only:
She is better at it than he is. To him it was a good idea at the time but the reality is not what he imagined. She is much smarter and manipulative than he had counted on and now he is trapped. He is out maneuvered by her over-the-top pathological crazy.

This piece is a show, a pretentious pretend and because she has no idea how real couples behave she is laying it on so thick it is a parody of a real relationship. Who calls their other half 'my love' or talks about two trees representing their relationship to someone they have just met (or even known forever!!). Its like a comedy of a harlequin romance chick flick. A pantomime of pretentious shite.

On a certain level it is so bad it could be seen as funny but it is actually sad for the royal family who must think they have stepped into hell. She has them and Harry by the proverbial balls.
I tried to read it, or at least most of it. I have never before read such a pile of shite. This is my take and has been since the beginning.

It is a business arrangement.

1. Her part is the fame, the need to live in luxury, the ability to be seen, heard and adored by all and sundry. To pontificate about every ridiculous thought in her head, to hang with celebrities, royalty and to be seen and envied.
2. His part is for her to provide a cover for him to do and live as he wishes, to poke at his brother and his father, to have children without the strings of a real relationship.
Only:
She is better at it than he is. To him it was a good idea at the time but the reality is not what he imagined. She is much smarter and manipulative than he had counted on and now he is trapped. He is out maneuvered by her over-the-top pathological crazy.

This piece is a show, a pretentious pretend and because she has no idea how real couples behave she is laying it on so thick it is a parody of a real relationship. Who calls their other half 'my love' or talks about two trees representing their relationship to someone they have just met (or even known forever!!). Its like a comedy of a harlequin romance chick flick. A pantomime of pretentious shite.

On a certain level it is so bad it could be seen as funny but it is actually sad for the royal family who must think they have stepped into hell. She has them and Harry by the proverbial balls.
OCGal said…
@Raspberry Ruffle, thank you for clarifying by saying "The title of the magazine is called CUT. Either I did a typo or the original DM commenter did (deliberately to be polite?), I can’t find the comment in the DM now to check. So….add a missing N (not a U). You get a very bad swear word. 😳🥴 I hope that helps." - end quote -

Yes that helps! It's naughty but in this case it fits.

I guess i am slow on the uptake today: struggling to add a U to THE CUT to make something meaningful, I had concluded it probably was CUUT pronounced like a drawn out "cute" and to be said in a contemptuous voice. I had just yesterday learned the naughty hashtag #VoetsekMeghan and I imagined that CUUT was a similar take down of Methane.

But CUUT spelled instead with a N rather than a second U works even better.

Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

 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.  

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...