Deadlines for responses have passed.
Will they show? Won't they show?
And, rumors of demands for money to cross hands to make appearances (new level of pay to play).
Such drama. You would think this was a soap opera where every episode ends with a crazy cliff hanger story plot to drive the next installment.
Sadly, I don't expect it to change any time soon either. No. For them, there appears to be way too much energy left in the will they, won't they to end it now even though everyone else is pretty much tired of it. Hardly something one can point to and claim that they are trying to reconcile with those who feel distressed about what was printed.
Just noticed something: remember that talk of trying to reach out and reconcile after the book, etc.? It seems to have drifted away, hasn't it? Hmm. Interesting. I wonder if that is recognized as a total lost cause or just delayed into the summer (or fall) campaign (could be harder to pull off now that they will no longer have Frog Cott as a base).
So put on your seatbelts as the next thirty days will be a crazy roller coaster ride - likely filled with lots of drama filled twists and turns.
Comments
I believe Harry has always been able to relinquish his title, as long as it's his decision. Until now, he's wriggled around the question when challenged, blind to the hypocrisy of his position, arguing that it wouldn't change anything. I wonder if he really has changed his mind and, if so, why? Jumping before he's pushed? Or is it fake news?
Edward VIII relinquished the throne and a couple of MPs have relinquished titles in order to sit in the House of Commons (14th Earl of Home and Viscount Stansgate for eg, better known as Alec Douglas-Home and Tony Benn/Anthony Wedgwood Benn.) Also, Margaret could have relinquished her place in the Succession to marry Peter Townsend.
It probably needs an Act of Parliament but that's no problem.
Until last year I never saw or believed in the moonbumps. 😳🫤I never believed or in the very least became suspicious in any of the photoshopping until recently. I didn’t study the photos, just the same poses that were presented by HG and that’s where my attention stopped. 😩
I remember all the analysis of the Christening photos on here and others. I think the problem is that narcissists will lie at every turn, so in the end everything is thought to be a lie, doctored in some way or completely fake. 🫣🥺
Getty Images 2014 https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/photos/queen-elizabeth-ii-and-duke-of-edinburgh-attend-royal-windsor-horse-show
Full story at https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12p8ssl/according_to_neil_sean_there_were_no/
That's interesting. So, he can relinquish his titles. It's not as if he has a stately home or estate to hand down to his children. In fact, the titles, at least the Duke of Sussex, the late Queen bestowed on him had not been used for a while because of the 'interesting' history of predecessors. Him and his children can be in the line of succession without titles. I wonder if it is her or him holding onto those titles. If it is her, he can relinquish them and there is nothing she can do about it.
I suspect that the heart-to-heart story came from the duo. I suspect that they are trying to sell the narrative of a 'special relationship' with the King, that excludes William and Catherine, just as they did with the late Queen. It is a PR tactic, because surely the penny has dropped that they will not get a share of his wealth, just as they did not get a penny from the late Queen. Maybe TBW refuses to believe it ... 'But you are his SON, his favourite son ...'.
They were ambushed for that photo. There was no other reason for Doria to have been there, all dressed up. The late Queen made sure that never happened again.
By the way, I would love it if the photo is a fake and a letter is unearthed from Phillip that exposes it as such!
This is all my speculation and joining of dots! I don't have 'evidence'.
Former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has decided to keep her messages with Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex secret, refusing an Official Information Request Act request to release them.
The Herald has appealed that decision to the Ombudsman.
The chair of New Zealand’s Republican Movement, Lewis Holden, said the messages need to be released, noting there is high public interest in knowing whether Harry and Meghan are using the influence and access afforded by Harry’s birth appropriately.
Harry and Meghan were reported to have considered relocating to New Zealand after stepping back as senior members of the Royal Family. In Harry’s memoir Spare, he confirmed the reports.
“What if we could spend at least part of each year somewhere far away ... beyond the reach of the press? The question was ... where? We talked about New Zealand,” Harry said in the book.
They opted to move to Canada and then California instead.
Nearly three years of correspondence from 2018 to 2022 was requested by the Herald. Messages between the office of the former Prime Minister and the office of the Duke and Duchess were released.
However, the Government acknowledges that there are “additional communications between then-Prime Minister Ardern and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex” themselves, which it has decided to keep from the public eye.
The Government said it was withholding the release of these messages “to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and frank expression of opinions” - a ground for withholding information under the Official Information Act.
...
https://archive.is/2023.04.16-192300/https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/jacinda-ardern-keeps-harry-and-meghan-messages-secret-for-now/7HERB63D7FF3ROWXN4QB6QLVV4/
I think the RF would meet without announcing it. Normal families talk and get together all the time, nothing unusual,no need of press release.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11981061/Kate-resents-not-having-final-moment-say-goodbye-Queen.html
i’m kinda bored with the Harkles PR and whenever i say that something big happens. or at least we get some photo dropped on a sugar instagram.
The `official' lunch dish is Coronation Tarragon Quiche, just Google the term & you'll find the recipe on just about every news site. It'll have to be made with dried tarragon in this house 'cos I'm not paying £11 for 3 plants (French tarragon - an annual) from a well-known plant lady.
There'll probably be a run on Emmental cheese...
re H$M & NZ-
I wonder if the Harkles were sounding Arden out about the possibility of settling there?
We once investigated the possibility of relocating to NZ but it was by no means certain we'd be admitted and in any case my mother was in a care home and we couldn't leave her with nobody keeping an eye on her.
The immigration rules for NZ are very tough. IIRC, age limit is low (35) unless one has special skills/vast wealth. They don't want to import British oldies who'll be a drain on their economy. I know one elderly lady(no surviving British relatives but some in NZ) who couldn't settle there even though her mother was a Kiwi.
They also make a virtue of hard work, real grafters.
We were there a few years ago and could see that there's a policy to develop a specific Kiwi identity, eg the Te Papa, the national museum in Wellington, celebrates both Kiwi and Scottish cultures -based on the first immigrant ship that sailed in from from Scotland, in about 1848. (I thought better than to mention that when Charles Darwin arrived, I think, I think, at Waitanga in the 1830s, he found Maoris playing cricket, having been taught the game by English missionaries.) Scottish nationalism hasn't helped NZ attitudes to the English, even among my husband's relatives.
It'd be asking for trouble to let those 2 in, even if they did qualify under the rules, especially given her willingness to stir the race pot. It's not as if she's 43% Maori, although she might think that could be a new identity for her to try. Bound to cause offence if she did.
It's heartening that Arden seems to be OK with W & C - I do hope the Herald presses on in its quest for transparency, even if it embarrasses Arden.
Catherine St Laurent (secretary, treasurer): left April 2021
Richard Genow (president, secretary): left December 3021
Andrew K. Meyer (treasurer): left December 2021
Archwell is left with:
James Holt (executive director)
TBW (director)
Hapless (director)
Each person is listed as working an average of one hour per week.
Does anyone know if these people who left have been replaced?
as for quiche i’m a bacon/lardon/pancetta gal so mine will be either in a small tart pan or made as a tart with puff pastry. i’m not a good crust maker.
The more time he spends with irritating Californians, the more he will know that Britain is genuinely home
TIM STANLEY
17 April 2023 • 6:00am
If I were Meghan, I wouldn’t go to the Coronation, either. Aside from being stuck talking to people you suspect don’t like you, there’s the nightmare of being upstaged. No matter how much money one spends on a hat, the King’s is always going to be fancier. So, I get why she’s staying in California, land of the freebie. The question is, why is Harry coming to the Coronation? He has accused his family of briefing against him; his brother of physical assault. And then there’s the memoir, Spare, which he might not have written but he’s certainly read, because he recorded the audiobook, so he knows that it portrays the monarchy as borderline abusive. It is, the book seems to imply, a Ruritanian zoo – the royals kept as pets, deprived of autonomy and put on display. If William is the heir, Harry was born to be the “backup, distraction, diversion and, if necessary, a spare part. Kidney, perhaps. Blood transfusion. Speck of bone marrow.” There’s a lot of bloodletting in these pages (hunting stags, killing Taliban), yet the Windsors suppress their emotions, even in front of those they love. No wonder the spare was set to explode. No wonder he ran off to America, where, he says, he was relieved to be among people who say how they truly feel. Well, a lot of us have made that journey, Harry, and a lot of us have come crawling back. At first, Californian honesty is refreshing. The barriers come down, you feel understood. But then their openness becomes oversharing, and you begin to realise they haven’t really got that much to say, they just enjoy talking. By the millionth time someone tells you their chakras are out of line or “we can learn a lot from the dolphins”, you want to scream. Harry must be missing Britain’s brooding silences, our civilising damp. You can tell that from Spare’s description of Frogmore Gardens in April: “The trees were bare, but the air was soft. The sky was grey, but the tulips were popping. The light was pale, but the indigo lake, threading through the gardens, glowed.”I sense a tension between the ghostwriter, who thinks the monarchy is mad, and Harry, whose memories he has to interpret are bittersweet enough to suggest that, deep down, he bloody loves it. Hence, he can’t let go. Ever.
Cont.
Elizabeth did not go both ways along Whitehall, just once, on the homeward journey - I was there, in a stand in Whitehall Gardens, close to the Banqueting House.
https://www.rct.uk/collection/2587039/the-coronation-procession-route-extended
It looks as if the original plan may have been as shown in the DM (to go from Trafalgar Square to the Abbey via Whitehall ) but an extra loop was put in , along the Embankment.
I think the number of people who will turn out to watch this time is badly underestimated - where will they fit in? Would they have enough `street liners' (police & forces keeping an eye on the crowd) to add the Embankment loop? Is this the limiting factor?
NB in'53, the troops lining the way faced the procession; nowadays, security demands that they turn their backs on the Royals and face the People.
I always understood that French tarragon is an annual but according to the RHS it's not, doesn't set seed. Is it a `short-lived ' perennial `best treated as an annual'?
I normally used dried when doing a court bouillon but I'll see if I can find plants.
Having been hacked a few days ago (£1000+ taken from my credit card). I'm wary of the internet all over again - I see it as the digital equivalent of walking through the back streets of Naples with the scooter boys/sharks circling (keep close to wall, in single file, wear your bag slung across your body and listen for the scooters coming up behind you). I'll get the cash back but it's left my nerves in shreds.
Even if the photo's genuine, it doesn't necessarily follow that there was a real baby there!
Do you remember it was reported that she never let anyone else touch him? No `Would you like to hold him?'
I'd love to know what PP said afterwards - he wouldn't have minced his words.
Meghan de stroy
Deface that raunched a thousand lips
The mirror crack’d
from side to side
As haz perused his
well worn bride
Shattered schemes
and cold wet dreams
A guilted cage in scamalot
the future for sir prancelot
“The curse is come upon me”
cried the spouse of madam Thot…
@OCGal
Thank you for your kind words.
My little bit in defence of King
and country.
I very much appreciate
your appreciation 😘
#wordsmatter
From the Daily Mirror:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/king-charles-makes-change-coronation-29734059
King Charles 'makes change to Coronation lunch speech after Prince Harry plans quick exit
'
`Prince Harry's delayed decision on whether to attend the Coronation next month could alter King Charles III's plans for his toast, as he was hoping to raise a glass to birthday bob (sic) Prince Archie'
Hard luck, Birthday Bob!
Regarding relinquishing titles.
Princess Patricia of Connaught,
granddaughter of Queen Victoria,
relinquished her title, and HRH,
on marriage.
Became Lady Ramsay.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/meghan-markle-harry-included-official-29735446?int_source=nba
Q Why does Mack the Knife come to mind? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mack_the_Knife)
A The shark's on the right-hand side but the one who really has the knife is sitting down.
The difference being
Princess Patricia happily gave
up her title, unlike the
scurrilous sloths.
The above all seems a bit wild. In short someone claims to be directly in touch with the King. He wants his son back, to deprogram and detox him, and he does not want to ever even see TBW again, and it is the duo who owe the family an apology but hapless is definitely not in the space for any of this.
And lots of tea here:
https://www.quora.com/profile/Crystal-Martin-121
In short, he spends a lot of time in SF taking drugs and bedding other women, and so on! But the claim is that they grabbed the titles for the children because the King was going to remove all their titles after the coronation.
A long and detailed article about the royal courts and what role the courtiers play. Fascinating.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HarkleSnarkle/comments/12luw26/comment/jgq2f6l/
They opted to move to Canada and then California instead.
So they moved to the most intellectually shallow place in America where people might actually be impressed by their titles? AND it is the place where they can monetize their grievances against the BRF because, let's face it, they have no talent or ability to do anything except complain? Got it.
But their bills are astronomical. Just the upkeeping on the house alone, housekeepers, nannies, gardeners, cooks, repairs is costing them a few hundred thousand a month. Then there's the mortgage which costs another few hundred thousand. She's spending millions on PR even after getting dropped for being $2million in debt to Sunshine Sachs. The awards she's bought haven't come cheap either. The Gracie award is picking up clout on podcast land. But she has no projects at play that are actually generating money. She may be scrambling around trying to make an Archetypes 2, but she's not gonna get enough big names to interview and her name on its own sends people running for the hills. Spotify has yet to pick up another season though she's buying those awards to pitch hard. She has no source of future income (other than child support) and she's hustling. This is to say nothing of her legal fees, her personal assistants, her publicists, her agents, and (underpaying) the assholes she's got mailing out Starbucks cards at Archewell. I'm sure Doria's services don't come cheap either. I mean, a bunch of nothing isn't going to do itself. I personally think Doria blackmails her daughter by threatening to tell the truth about who she is and how she didn't grow up like a black girl from Compton, but instead had a more privileged upbring that 80% of US citizens, regardless of their color. Doria also probably knows Meghan's shadiest and most sordid maneuvers to get where she is. Doria stays silent in the background, but she's got stories to tell. And one wrong move from Meg, and they WON'T be the stories singing Meg's praises. That's my theory anyway.
I also believe that I was right in December when I said Netflix is done with Meghan. The last thing left on their roster is The Heart of Invictus set to come out this summer, but I've heard it's being edited to focus on the athletes and occasionally Harry. I've even heard that they may trash a lot of last year's footage, wait until this year's Düsseldorf games, and film those, Harry's-Wife-Free. NF was reportedly unhappy with how the games suddenly focused on the ILBW, how she commandeered things, taking attention from the athletes and Harry, who's cause this is.
Remember that ridiculous kiss between her and Not-the-Heiry, and all her prancing around in couture (which she supposedly at least tried to bill to them) instead of wearing the standard issue festive polo and khakis/jeans, Well Netflix supposedly does and they supposedly don't like it. I always think of her sashaying around in Valentino while everyone else wore the Invictus clothing. It's such a stark comparison to how the other Royals function.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12lr3yq/is_it_money_trouble_preventing_madam_from/
Just a comment on teaching manners & living in California as your prior post mentioned regarding Harry and "going home:"
I was uprooted at age 11 to be taken away from my beloved relatives in Texas (my father wanted he thought might be a better life & 2nd medical degree in Calif.). Well, my brother and I thought later it was the worst decision my otherwise good & wise father ever made. We both eventiually came back to "home" but not before I wasted 35 yrs in Calif, but your article espouses what I feel.
The espoused "laid back" attitude and the "accepting" people in Calif. actually is nothing but 'Bullsh*t' as we say here in the Republic of Texas. It is fakery. It never felt like home, and our souls longed for returning to the heart of where our family members lived for generations. We wanted to be 'Home'. My brother and I have repeatedly mentioned over the years how we lost the good part of our lives by living in California and would have benefitted from living among our relatives (who now unfortunately, are all deceased.)
As for manners, while I was in California, I was critized for my the manners I taught my children!! I was told that my children should Not respond with "Yes ma'am" and "No Sir" and that adults should just be called by their first name rather that "Mr" or "Ms" so-in-so. I was astounded.
-----
I shan't be surprised if H's father is not HM the King but I think there re other candidates apart from Hewitt, that is, Mark Dyer or A.N.Other (deceased).
-----
I too think that excluding the hereditary peerage from the ceremony is a huge mistake, even if they have been deprived of their seats in the Lords and hence their legal/constitutional role. Their resentment against Charles may come back to bite him. IMO, the reform of the House of Lords wasn't thought out properly (Life Peers have proliferated beyond reason) and the dispossessed still have influence, I'm sure.
It's very nice for those of lesser rank to be invited but I don't think it's an appropriate way to express appreciation, that's what the ordinary Honours system is for - MBEs and the like. Last time, though, civil servants (ie public servants employed by the Crown) and I believe members of the armed Forces (ie military servants) had the chance to enter a ballot for 2 tickets on stands to watch the procession, like they did for the Olympics.
A ticket for a seat on an open stand (no roof) was £4. In my family's terms, that was about the cost of a week's full board per person at a basic seaside boarding house - big money to us. I am forever grateful to my dad that he could see the significance of my being there. I loved every minute and took it all in. Unforgettable.
We did get a souvenir programme thrown in for the price and ours was a soggy mess by the end of the day. Afterwards, I had the tickets for my scrap book and I still treasure them, smeared with kauri gum though they may be. Sadly Mum held on to the programme and threw it out when the moved without asking me...
-----------
The pupils of Winchester College and undergraduates of New College Oxford, the 2 establishments founded by William of Wykeham to whom `Manners makyth man' applies, are considerably older than Archie - starting at 13yrs for WinColl.
Thank you for the Lady of Shalott poem, another well crafted gem 😁. Thanks for providing us with some well needed mirth after the protracted will they/won't they (attend) saga.
What an awful position for the monarch to be in, unless H is hastened to somewhere for the criminally insane and never let out again. He'd probably escape trial on rounds of insanity.
ILBW also could end up doing a very stretch as `a guest of His Majesty' (British euphemism) - but not in a palace. HMP Holloway (women's gaol) was known as the `Castle on Pentonville Hill' but that was closed some time ago. Pity, but as they say `there are other places' of confinement.
My thinking is the ILBW, and/or backers who think we should have `regime change', spotted the `potential' he offered for profit/constitutional mayhem respectively. He was putty in her hands, she wound him up and pointed him at his family and country.
Looking back to how things were when Diana died, when it felt as if we might be on the edge of a revolution, did person or persons of ill-intent identify that situation as an Achilles Heel to be exploited?
It was appalling how the press and general public ignored the facts and how easily they turned: it wasn't the Royal Family's fault Diana died; it wasn't their responsibility to stage the funeral; nobody dared say anything against her. I could go on but you've heard it all before.
What better way to destabilise us than to re-create that situation?
I suppose having rumors of his paternity dog him since birth is one contributing factor to Mole's current mental state and the seemingly permanent chip on his shoulder he's had against his family, and the core reason why he has always felt like an outsider in his own family. For this, I do feel sorry for him, because no child has any control over the circumstances he or she is born into or the parents they are born to. Diana's been gone over 25 years and that bereaved little ginger trudging behind her coffin between his father, his brother and his grandfather is nearly 40 years old and this matter is still being debated.
I haven't got the results of a DNA test in my hand obviously but I am 100% certain that Harold is a Mountbatten. As a child he certainly looked different enough from William to set tongues wagging after Diana confessed to her affair with Maj. Hewitt. But I believe her when she insisted (as did he) that they did not meet until Harry was past two years old. Besides that, the preponderance of physical traits shared with the late Iron Duke and with Charles are simply too great to ignore. I saw a photo once of the Windsor men in semi-profile . . they were lined up looking at something off camera. Charles, William and Harry all have Philip's nose--the Mountbatten nose. It's unmistakable. Harold also shares with his grandfather the same jawline, teeth, smile, fair eyebrows and pale blue-gray eyes. As does Charles. William obviously favored Diana, being her Mini-Me when he was younger. The older he gets the more he favors his paternal grandfather and Uncle Edward . .but he's got the strapping Spencer large-boned frame, whereas Harry more than anyone else in the family takes after Philip in body type . .that lankiness and angularity are his.
Maj. Hewitt has brown eyes, a stockier body frame and much rounder features. His hair is dark auburn. Considering the proliferation of red-haired genes on the Spencer side--Johnny Spencer and all three of Diana's siblings, I find the fixation by the conspiracy theorists on the dark auburn haired Hewitt as the only possible contributor of Harold's ginger gene quizzical to say the least. In short, if Diana and Maj. Hewitt produced Harry, it's amazing how much this cuckoo boy resembles Prince Philip. And in certain poses, when Hazza is looking constipated or worried, with his brow all wrinkled up in angst, he looks exactly like Charles.
Diana had lots of affairs, by her own admission . . but not until both her children where safely delivered . .of Charles. Now, it would be the greatest tea of all time if Harold was a cuckoo but unfortunately for the RF he's their genetic cross to bear.
Certainly looks as if HM will need all the support he can get if H's true nature is revealed to be as truly horrible as it seems from the rumours.
What an awful position for the monarch to be in, unless H is hastened to somewhere for the criminally insane and never let out again. He'd probably escape trial on rounds of insanity.
When Harold was 14 and already a stroppy little sociopathic twat though we weren't to know, he got a summer holiday working on a dude ranch in Australia. How different might he an the world of King Charles look today if Harold had been kept Down Under and sent to school there, far, far away from the court, the London party scene and the pressures of pretending to be up to the demands of Eton, Sandhurst and Her Majesty's armed forces? Harry is decent at sport, though certainly not a team player . . if he'd had the benefit of a residential facility for children with severe emotional and behavioral issues, with opportunities for Outward Bound style rugged adventures and taught some way to excel in his own sphere, not that of his brother and father--they might have been able to fashion a man out of the sorry excuse for a human being we now have before us. H was left to all his own worst licentious impulses and they ran unchecked and we see where that's gotten him.
Is ILBW culpable for a lot of this? Sure. But she's equally demented and needs the same thing--Permanent custodial psychiatric care, well away from the rest of society. Or maybe Elon Musk can be persuaded to blast them both off to Mars in his rocket ship.
I've never thought that H was Hewitt's son.
But you strongly favor other candidate(s), yes?
For Harold to be fathered by someone NOT Hewitt (or Charles), wouldn’t Diana had to be having it away with all and sundry practically from the get-go? William and Harry are only 22 months apart. For that matter, why isn’t William’s paternity contested more (or ever?) He’s the spit of the Spencer side but looked nothing like his Royal side. That’d be the real scandal—if *William* wasn’t Charles’. William was born 11 months after his parents’ wedding, which means she was with child by the time she’d returned from her extended honeymoon. According to legend, she behaved in an extremely un-demure manner with sailors aboard Royal yacht Brittania, being left alone for hours on end by her new husband who had his head buried in Laurens ver der Post.
Diana was a flawed person and quite possibly had some nympho tendencies owing to her Borderline fear of abandonment—but I credit her with a few more smarts than to endanger her heir and spare by playing away so soon in her marriage. DNA testing was in its infancy when Harry was born, but a simple blood test could have proven that Charles wasn’t the father. Don’t we suppose that Diana’s erratic behavior and known associations with men not her husband would have prompted the family to satisfy themselves about the provenance of her sons? I’m curious who you allude to as “Mr. Deceased”—would that be Barry Manakee? Does the timeline even jive with Harry’s conception and birth?
Hazmat’s very visible resemblance to Prince Philip makes a tough case to answer for someone other than Charles being his father. To me the physical evidence doesn’t support any other paternity. Considering what Hazzard is putting HM through, I would heartily wish he had never been born to anyone but it is what it is.
Yes, who can forget the shock of JFK's death and his near apotheosis? The political circumstances were very different though.
The Dallas shooting was only 13 months after the Cuban Missile Crisis - we'd all felt sick with fear but he faced down Khrushchev, who was given to banging his shoe on the conference table and declaring he'd bury us all. It was still very fresh in our minds and while opinions were polarised on the matter of nuclear weapons, we had been united in our terror and subsequent relief. Nobody seemed to be turning on the government, at least not in the UK.
Diana died horribly but the UK was already divided about her. Many almost worshipped the ground she walked on. They hated both Charles and Camilla even though we'd heard only one side of the story - Diana's. Charles couldn't defend himself because the response would have been `Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?'
The public mood was really ugly. Charles was being blamed for being an absolute swine, Camilla was the scarlet woman and it was all the Queen's fault for staying with the children in Balmoral (even `forcing' them to go church that Sunday morning) and not rushing to London to appear in sackcloth and ashes to weep and howl alongside her people.
The older generation, including me, were appalled at this response - it was so, frankly, out of character for us. It really did look like the end of the monarchy - we were on a knife edge. To speak out against the hysteria risked condemnation from all and sundry. Blair, controversially, stepped into the breach - and somehow we got back onto an even keel.
I can imagine that those who wish us harm could easily see that to create a similar crisis could bring us to revolution. What better way to do it than to pick up where Diana left off?
We'd shown how easily we could be manipulated by the Press.
One Sinner on Saint Meghan Markle has observed that were it not for the internet, clear-sighted people who know rotters when they see them and who recognise malignant narcissists from bitter experience, would have been silenced and the blighters would have got away with it.
The struggle isn't over yet but there is a little light dawning.
(Ps This may be a double post - I had a break in the connection as I went to post it)
The RF are slow learners, or too tied to tradition. Hikari has good ideas about Todger, and what should have transpired about his education. Todger needed to be left on a deserted island, and learned to fend for himself, ala some Native American communities, other communities around the world who have wayward adolescent boys who need a head-turning experience to turn themselves around emotionally and mentally.
I am sure they won't disappoint and will pull some outrageous stunt, but, for now, I wonder how she is managing this PR deluge without Sunshine Sacs.
King is warned against 'watering down' his Coronation….
https://mol.im/a/11983035
The French reportage into Archewell spending has led to the exposure of the relationship between Archewell and a media company that has been harassing Samantha Markle.
Pretty low behaviour, again.
----------------
@Raspberry Ruffle
I agree entirely with your take on a watered down Coronation. It would only be a cheap imitation.
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/anti-monarchy-group-republic-will-stage-largest-protest-action-its-history-kings
https://twitter.com/7NewsSydney/status/1171751598453743616
Thank you so much for alerting us that Dame Edna wants to marry Thomas Markle. I absolutely adore Dame Edna, and am sure I would've missed this romantic news had you not pointed it out. May her every wish come true.
I am lucky enough to have seen Dame Edna peform a few times in person, and her throwing gladioli to the upper reaches of venues to her "Possums" in the cheap seats is astounding. Honestly I cannot believe how far and accurately she throws.
And I've also been lucky enough to see Dame Edna's alter-ego Barry Humphries perform in stage plays. A top notch performer.
Furthermore, I feel lucky to count myself both a Nutty, and one of Dame Edna's Possums.
Cheers, Nutties and Possums!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11990979/Prince-Gustav-Princess-Carina-expecting-surrogate-royal-fans-claim.html
https://archive.ph/2023.04.20-063318/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/04/19/prince-harrys-sentebale-charity-thanks-couples-social-media/
I do think their relationship with the SS is problematic, especially as they are very active in trying to censor online social media because it is so toxic. How do you square a cricle? They come across as self-interested facist hypocrites and that does not help the cause of 'cleaning up' social media.
The comments on the above thread are interesting. It is a discussion on her wanting to end the rift with the royal family so that her children can have a relationship with their grandfather.
First, she does not learn and knows the King is wealthy and she wants an inheritance, through her children.
Second she always devalues others ... the late Queen was a grandmother and now the King is a grandfather. Their other grandfather is also completely ignored.
She has no interest in the monarchy and gives her children no opportunity to be acquainted with the history and customs and traditions and way of life.
Splattypus
Little Ho-Cheap
collapsed in a heap
Pondering who to screw next
Left home alone
the splay-footed gnome
Will be penning
more poisonous text…
Cheers @Maneki 🥰
I’m hopeful madam’s non-invite
wasn’t lost in translation…
To misquote John Lennon
“All we are saying is give Charles a chance”
@OCGal
Badge Madge 😃
Darling Dame Edna referred to Madge as
“a human maggot held together by bacteria”
More appropriate for the
Larva(grub) of LA…
https://www.google.com/search?q=crown+office+disclosures&oq=crown+office+disclosures&aqs=chrome..69i57.9574j0j7&client=ms-android-lenovo-rev2&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
Hapless (along with William, Andrew, Beatrice, Edward, Anne ... no Eugenie) was appointed CoS while the King and Queen were in Germany. Interesting.
“'a human maggot held together by bacteria'
More appropriate for the
Larva(grub) of LA…"
I could not agree more.
MM has the audacity to have a Royal Coat of Arms, claiming the late lamented QEII helped her personally design it.
In an ideal world we Nutties would re-work MM's coat of arms to reflect the grimly unadulterated true inner and outer her.
Magatha, your vision of a maggot strung together with bacteria hits the right note for the Montecito Douchass' coat of arms, as it calls to mind many unpleasant things including MM's stringy Medusa-like "hair".
Due to her noxious proximity to the Pacific Ocean, and whisperings of "yacht girl" I would nautically add an unmistakeable iceberg with just an icy tip showing (naughtily frozen blue todger-like in aspect) above water, and gargantuan in size underwater to reflect the slowly-moving but enormously powerful and unyielding RF, and next to it a foundering ship slipping beneath the (Royal) Waves (Goodbye)(Good Riddance).
I would name this sinking ship not Titanic, but 'Montecito Mountebanks.'
Rather than rocket flares of distress shooting up from the tilted decks, $$$ signs and £££ signs would shoot up in an unmissable barrage.
I would add a bird flying and gobbling up all the $$$£££ which MM would flatteringly mistake as herself-as-Phoenix, but it would actually be a carrion bird vulture or buzzard to signify The End.
Well. Don't recall reading that in news print before (yeah, it was a wished for comment on a blog but not out speaking so publicly before). well, well, well - isn't that interesting at T minus 16.
Just over two weeks to let that glitter swirl around in the wind.
forgot it (sorry, need more caff)
The changes KC requested to the CoS was to ADD Anne and Edward. His message to Parliament said that in practice, only working members of the family would actually be called upon to act as such and diaries would be aligned accordingly. Just because they’re in the pool, doesn’t mean they’re ever called on.
If this person read the document in its entirety, they’d see that one of the conditions for the COS to act is that they not be out of the country when the Sovereign is so that already precludes Harry (even if he’s in the pool).
Thanks for the info re Nana Akua. As she is a person of colour (is this the correct terminology?), the Harkles won't be able to claim racism.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's invitation to King Charles's Coronation didn't arrive in the way Harry had hoped, and the Prince "didn't hear" about his invitation "directly" from his father, but "through somebody" else. When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex received an email about the historic event from Charles's office, it became apparant that the "sit-down" talk the Prince desperately sought to work through their issues following the release of his memoir Spare wasn't going to happen.
"They didn't hear from Charles. Harry wanted to hear from his father directly - it's always through somebody," a close friend has told PEOPLE Magazine.
...
In the run-up to the Coronation, and with a big question mark initally hanging over the attendance of both Harry and Meghan at the historic ceremony, the estranged father and son ultimately connected and had "positive conservations". (sp!)
A source says that although Harry and Charles did not converse in person, they did have "positive" talks leading up to Harry's decision to attend the festivities in London. (So, they had 'positive conservations' or 'they did not converse in person'? Can't be both!)
...
Speaking to PEOPLE Magazine, the close friend added: "This is about a son showing up for his father rather than the optics of the institution."
...
However, those closest to the couple know that the media backlash Meghan faced in the UK during Queen Elizabeth's funeral last year - and in the months since - have played a significant role in her decision not to attend.
A close friend said: "Meghan wants to be there to support her father-in-law, but at the same time, the scrutiny she receives outweighs the support.
"There's always going to be that other side challenging their reasoning and who wants to put themselves in that position?" (So, her reason for not attending is not about the kid's birthday and her being a mom? And why on earth would the King need or want her support?)
https://archive.is/2023.04.20-161128/https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1760707/prince-harry-coronation-invite-king-charles
The Queen’s son has rebutted Prince Harry’s claims that she played “the long game” and courted the King as part of a “campaign aimed at marriage . . . and the crown”.
Tom Parker Bowles insisted his mother Camilla had no “end game” in mind and married Charles purely for love.
Speaking on The News Agents podcast, he said: “I think change happens but I don’t care what anyone says — this wasn’t any sort of end game. She married the person she loved and this is what happened.”
The Queen’s son has rebutted Prince Harry’s claims that she played “the long game” and courted the King as part of a “campaign aimed at marriage . . . and the crown”.
Tom Parker Bowles insisted his mother Camilla had no “end game” in mind and married Charles purely for love.
Speaking on The News Agents podcast, he said: “I think change happens but I don’t care what anyone says — this wasn’t any sort of end game. She married the person she loved and this is what happened.”
From an interview with Tom Parker Bowles in The Times:
The Queen’s son has rebutted Prince Harry’s claims that she played “the long game” and courted the King as part of a “campaign aimed at marriage . . . and the crown”.
Tom Parker Bowles insisted his mother Camilla had no “end game” in mind and married Charles purely for love.
Speaking on The News Agents podcast, he said: “I think change happens but I don’t care what anyone says — this wasn’t any sort of end game. She married the person she loved and this is what happened.”
This part I believe from family/ in-laws experience. My father was due to inherit a house, but he had to talk to the man's lawyers. Because this man (brother in-law) did not get along with my father. And obviously wanted to keep his distance. Everything went OK. My dad could easily emotionally handle this BS, because this was the way it was for years. Hapless is having a more difficult time.
King Charles is smart to do it this way/ I can just imagine Hapless having to ping pong his/Megs Coronation attendance proposals back and forth with Grey Men and King's lawyers. Via emails, texts and phone calls. Hahahha. He deserves it!
https://twitter.com/sage1411/status/1649136024625324032
I seem to remember that actually Camilla was happy,or happy enough, to be Charles's partner, she was happy to be in the background, unlike somebody else we know, and was certainly not pushing for marriage.
....................
I've come across an article from last month in the Scottish Daily Express. Angela Levin, a journalist and royal biographer, claims H is frightened by *.
'Prince Harry nervy and 'frightened' around 'demanding' Meghan Markle, royal author claims'
Meghan Markle is so domineering in her relationship with Prince Harry that he is 'frightened of her', a royal author claims.
The Duke of Sussex, 38, is currently weighing up whether to attend his father's coronation in May and appears very nervous around the wife Meghan, 43, Angela Levin observes.
. . .
Speaking to GB News she claimed Meghan is thought of as "delightful" unless you said the wrong thing - at which point she can become "really scary".
She added: "I think he (Harry) is frightened of her because of the way he looks at her. He doesn't want to say something if she wants to speak.
....
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/celebrity-news/prince-harry-nervy-frightened-around-29479002
If true,then this shows the extent to which she is controlling. We knew she was controlling but this is frightening.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1761055/kate-middleton-photography-queen-elizabeth-ii-birthday
The late Queen, a few months before her death, with two of her grandchildren and eight of her great-grandchildren. Lovely!
----
@Maneki Neko
This may sound a bit 'weird', but Diana often reprimnded hapless quite firmly in public, on camera. I think the controlling behaviour of his wife is all part of reminding him of his mother.
----
Numerous tarot readers are picking up that hapless is deep in addiction and that the King is trying to save his son. I am not sure that I agree with this, but it is marked that they are all picking up on this energy. As for hapless, they are picking up that he is not to be trusted, and is still very much in sneaky betrayal mode, but he does miss the love of his family.
----
As for TBW, I don't think she knows the real true reason why she is missing the coronation and keeping the children from the grandfather that she says she wants them to have a relationship with. Perhaps it was a business decision ... she is always working on her brand and she will jump at any chance to prosper from that. Being in second row seats, hidden by a candle, no photos with the most senior royals, facing a hostile crowd, and not being in control of anything does not boost her brand. Also, she is so crass and out of place in the royal family and a grandiose narc is going to avoid such situations, of they cannot take centre stage and take control.
@Maneki Neko - re Nana Akua: her parents came from Ghana but she's a Geordie by birth! (for overseas Nutties, that's someone from Newcastle, so-called, it is said, because in 1745 the city stayed loyal to the Hanoverians because they didn't want to lose the lucrative coal trade
with London.) Good for her thoguh, she can say things we can't.
@GWAH - I think it's hilarious that there were several shots available but the one with * leaning in was chosen. A picture's worth a thousand words.
@Maneki Neko about* terrorising H - we had been speculating that she assaulted him, didn't we?
New Palace Confidential ... Catching up on all things royal of the week.
New video from The Vintage Read Show. I am enjoying her videos. They are based on the review of books, but she comes across as honest, decent and straightforward. Check out her channel ... she did a video where she strongly expressed the opinion that the royal family should have no public interaction with the duo at all, including not talking about them or mentioning them. In private, they can met as family at Balmoral or Sandringham.
The King is getting a lot of criticism for being weak, but I am not so sure. I think that, like the late Queen, he can be firm and even stubborn and will protect and preserve the institution, but with age he sees everything with a lot of compassion.
The duo got nothing of their endless demands for appearance at the coronation.
But I do agree that the them in a family photograph in the coronation souvenir booklet was very weird. But I have not seen the booklet and don't know where the photo is placed and how it compares with any photos, if any, of the King with other royals.
But I do agree that the them in a family photograph in the coronation souvenir booklet was very weird. But I have not seen the booklet and don't know where the photo is placed and how it compares with any photos, if any, of the King with other royals.
I have to feel for Charles. It seems no matter what decision he makes, he is called weak or dithering or a sell-out by some contingent or other. He has embraced philosophies now classified as 'woke' for decades, ever since he was a young man. It doesn't surprise me at all that he wants his Coronation to look different than his mother's. Like it was when his mother was crowned, these are times of austerity. With so many of his subjects having to choose between food or heat, he opted to scale back on the size of his coronation, and he's getting flack for it. But if he'd been determined to go all out in the most extravagant way possible, he'd have been excoriated for that, too. Having already gone through a sort of mini-Coronation when he was invested as Prince of Wales, perhaps he feels like he's had ample pomp and ermine already. As an American, I do not have strong feelings either way that he's making a big enough splash for his big day. It seems like there will plenty of spectacle on offer. Bearing in mind that both KM and Camilla are in their 70s, the reduced scale of the planned festivities may be designed with a view toward preserving their Majesties' energies.
I call that playing a blinder. Apart from that, this group portrait is to the best of my recollection, the very last image which Charles will have of the whole clan gathered together and at least pretending to be getting along--the last image of his two sons stood together in (apparent) solidarity. We know that even that early on, just a month or two after the Sussex freak show wedding that tensions were already high between the couples. But Charles isn't going to have another superficially cordial photo of his sons and their wives together. It would've looked vindictive to exclude Harry from the programme--Diana's second boy and for better or worse, a blood Prince--and vindictive and petty to exclude Harry's wife, even though her presence mars the photo that is included.
The Coronation is, I believe, the last time the King will publicly include his toerag traitor younger son in any Royal occasions, leaving him to his chosen life 'overseas'. Let us be realistic and admit that Charles will not live long enough to get a Jubilee. The next state occasion will be Charles's funeral and at that juncture, the new King will be in charge of the invitation list. Hazza will not be on it, is my guess. Nor for any service for the hated QC who converted his childhood bedroom into a shoe closet and for which he is still fuming.
Harry's toast after this, so including his photo in the programme is the very least HM could do. But having included ILBW prominently in the programme, she can't now scream that she was excluded from the programme because HM didn't want a biracial daughter-in-law pictured.
Truly, uneasy lies the head that wears a crown. Especially one that got so many Narcs in the family.
That aside, I agree that he has played a blinder. All these accusations of `weakness' ignore the simple fact that a monarch doesn't have the same freedom of action in such matters as we the ordinary people do.
We are in the position to tell our narcissistic relatives and acquaintances where to get off and ultimately where to go, in the foulest language we choose, and it won't affect the international standing of Britain. The King cannot do that.
We can chuck them out of or house, even call the police or an ambulance if they turn really nasty, but it would be difficult for the King to do that without someone revealing all to the Press.
The King might hope that H can be `saved' but it all depends on whether H wants to be saved.
It is understood that the correspondence was sent in the wake of the March 2021 Oprah Winfrey interview-
https://twitter.com/BaronessBruck/status/1649524751075880961
The DM's take on it is at
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12001035/Meghan-Markle-wrote-King-Charles-unconscious-bias-Royal-Family-Oprah-interview.html
BBC has run with it, still pro-Harkles, mealy-mouthed repetition of speculation that Charles is `trying to heal rifts'.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12uoxg1/meghans_end_goal_catherine/
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12uijes/markle_has_played_her_card_telegraph_says_she/
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12uk6et/my_thoughts_on_the_telegraph_article_my_thoughts/
I used to tell my students that education was to help them develop develop what Hemingway called `an inbuilt, shock -proof' crap detector' (my paraphrase').
To be more professionally academic, see Robin Barrow (1999) The higher nonsense: Some persistent errors in educational thinking, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31:2, 131-142, DOI: 10.1080/002202799183197
Here's the start of the abstract:
`The British prime minister Harold Macmillan once reported one of his tutors in the classical languages and humanities as saying: 'Nothing you will learn in the course of your studies will be of the slightest possible use to you in after life- save only this that if you work hard and diligently you should be able to detect when a man is talking rot, and that, in my view, is the main, if not the sole purpose of education' (Kenny, 1997: 20).
In quoting this statement, the philosopher Anthony Kenny, a recent Master of Balliol College, Oxford, adds that Russell Meiggs, another distinguished classicist, pre-eminently gave his students this ability: an ability to see through what he called the 'higher nonsense'. (Essentially comparable is Ernest Hemingway's notion of an internal 'crap-detector', subsequently taken over by Postman and Weingartner (1969) in their Teaching as a Subversive Activity; so this is by no means the exclusive concern of Oxford classicists!) I, too, believe this to be at the heart of education. Unfortunately, not only are educational systems in Canada and many other countries failing to nurture this ability; they are themselves rapidly becoming repositories of the 'higher nonsense'.'
Singalong 🎤
Apologies: Eliza Doolittle
Wouldn’t It Be Loverly
Cornetto-Eunuchorn
All she wants is a golden chair
Placed in front of the
Cambridge pair
Without Cam or the spare
Oh, couldn’t it be mememe
Lots of room for her big feet
Lots of media to rinse, repeat
Hard face, man hands, de-ceit
Oh, shouldn’t it be bugger me…
Slovenly, covenly, fug ugly…
Thank you for the link to the HG Tudor video. This is something we all knew on some level but I found the video incredibly sad and also horrific. I never understood how Harry could go pre marriage from happy, if not jolly on many occasions, to glum and sullen once married. He'd just got married, his wife was pregnant (allegedly) yet he never smiled. If one looks at photos of him with Chelsey, he's in stark contrast.
I have no experience of narcissists butt realise how horrific it is to be in their clutches, particularly when I read comments here and on HG Tudor's videos. Imagine what it must be like for Charles, William and Catherine to see H. It's no wonder Charles is trying to keep the door open, or maybe just ajar. Call me naive but this shouldn't be seen as a sign of weakness but the action of a loving father who wants to be able to pick up the pieces if his son can be saved.
Ship Shifters
I wrote a letter
to daddy in-law
Disputing the fact
I was ever a whore
I took the dollars
as a port paid bunny
No-one questioned
colour of skin, just money
After you embraced my
colourful past
I decided to attack your Queen
to the last
Nobody noticed melanin
‘til I declared ‘twas a sin…
Of course she wants to go to the coronation but she backed herself into a corner with all the manipulation, of husband and his family, and all the spiralling demands.
What I have realized that she is bitterly jealous of Catherine and William. She just cannot accept that her and her children are not equals to Catherine and her children, even though she believes her and her children are actually superior. How dare the King not give her equal treatment.
The media reports that the walkabout was the most difficult thing for Catherine to have ever done, and TBW claps back saying it was the most difficult thing for HER, because of how Catherine treated her.
And so on ... and this is now the third reason she is giving for not attending the coronation. I think what set this off may have been the photo taken by Catherine of the late Queen with done of her grandchildren and great-grandchildren. The only photo she has is the one of the late Queen and Phillip smiling at the 'doll', taken when they happened to cross paths in a corridor in the castle.
Is she going to go full nuclear and point a finger at a specific person? I can give her top candidates: Catherine, William, Camilla ... in that order. Just my opinion, but she is spiralling out of control. Her husband should make sure she takes her meds ... just saying!!
@OCGal
Montecito Mountebanks 👌
@Hikari
Thank you for sticking up
for Charles.
A good man, can’t win either
way.
Damned if he does, damned if
he doesn’t.
Impossible situation.
* Harry showed he got a text from William on Netflix after the O interview. They also leaked to Gayle King that they got a phone call but it “wasn’t productive”. The article now claims KC is the only senior royal they spoke to is a lie looking for sympathy.
* Talking about institutional neglect leaving her suicidal when Harry admitted in his book he had a therapist that he phoned after his fight with William. So why didn’t he get her the help he was using? Sounds like your husband was neglecting you sis.
* LlThe “racist royal” story is all over the place. Even on Oprah, Harry and Meghan couldn’t agree if it was one convo or multiple and if it happened before the wedding or when she was pregnant. Now Meg claims it was 1 remark to her. I’ve always been on the “the convo never happened” train. What Vicky is reporting is highly selective when Kc probably wrote her a version of “recollections may vary” which she’s spinning because she knows they won’t respond.
----
And this response is spot on:
She is spiralling, anon. All it took is one picture. A reminder she is forever ousted
https://skippyv20.tumblr.com/post/715279495483031552/the-article-is-full-of-contradictions-to-earlier
Unfortunately, the tabloids will probably keep the focus on sensationalism instead of 'dismantling' her by simply pointing out how she changes her story and contradicts herself, and her husband, and replays the same stuff (and tells the same stories), and the timing is all about trying to get attention and be at the centre of things.
Sadly, her husband might pay dearly for her antics, which by the way he fully supports, as her latest appalling attention-seeking antic is likely to sabotage any reconciliation with his beloved family (because I do believe that he does love his birth family).
`@Hikari
Thank you for sticking up
for Charles.
A good man, can’t win either
way.
Damned if he does, damned if
he doesn’t.
Impossible situation.'
Hear! Hear!
Interesting TED Talk guide to narcissism here:
https://www.learning-mind.com/famous-narcissists/
* seems to be in a league of her own as a super-narcissist , unlike the common-or-garden toxic one I have known, who at least left me alone as long as I ignored them. They were horrible enough, capable of making me doubt my own perception of what was going on. * however could beat them at their own game hands down. She ill go down in history alongside Lucretia Borgia and Isabella, She-Wolf of France.
Just 2 weeks to go.
If there *are* children there and she is in a rage, they may be in danger.
What a load of bilge.
Yes, not fit to be left alone with children or animals.
@Magatha Mistie, again with "Cornetto-Eunuchorn" you hit your lyrics set to "Wouldn’t It Be Loverly" out of the park.
Smashing. Subversive. Seditious*
*seditious only if Kweenly Qwean Rachel Meghan were ruler over all, as she still intends to be, with Spare as her Royal Fool and Festering Jester.
Your work strikes such a note with me. I think of (alphabetically) Irving Berlin, Chuck Berry, Leonard Cohen, Bob Dylan, Stephen Foster, Ira Gershwin, Woody Guthrie, Oscar Hammerstein, Joni Mitchell, Cole Porter and so many more. Oh, my partner just demanded laughingly but insistently that I add Neil Young to this not-comprehensive list.
These influential voices show genius in using words poetically to hold a mirror up to their contemporary society, and in regards to our own ongoing Royal Kerfuffle you nail it soundly and delightfully; thus you belong in my personal pantheon of great lyricists.
You have my thanks, admiration and respect.
Comments from Valentine Low and Richard Palmer at above thread ... they both are of the view that she is trying to torpedo any reconciliation between her husband and his family.
She is also backtracking ... put out repeated accusations of racism via the letters story, but now backtracking and saying it was unconscious bias, and doing her old trick of having media stories changed.
But it is interesting that she is still fuming about the bullying investigation. A narc easily develops a grudge and never lets it go. And she is still going on about being suicidal because she was treated so badly and no one helped her. The woman is crazy. Here is just one contradiction:
* Refuses help offered by the late Queen because her husband will tell her everything she needs to know. They offered help and she said no.
* But, blames the royal family for not getting her help when she was suicidal when she only told her husband and even though he had a therapist on speed dial, he never got her help. How could they offer her help when they did not know she was suicidal and when she was adamant that she did not need their advice or help?
Thank you, as always, for brightening Nutties’ days with your clever verse and singalongs. Today’s Cornetto-Eunuchorn to the tune of Wouldn’t It Be Loverly is brilliant.
@Wild Boar
Your comments and quotations above re education are spot on. The road to Totalitarianism is paved with indoctrination of the young by “educators” teaching their students what to think rather than how to think critically.
I've been keeping up the Nutties' opinions, however, & naturally have a few of my own. IMHO:
KCIII absolutely did the right thing in inviting them. It put them in a neat double bind, (albeit one that was too subtle for their dimwitted & rabid followers), & was the right thing to do as a father & as a 'defender of the faith, (or faiths). Christianity, in spite of the unavoidable lapses of its adherents, is all about charity & compassion. He did the gracious, & 'royal' thing.
Given the execrable behavior of the Todgers at the Queen's funeral, I believe the Palace laid down strict rules as to their behavior at the Coronation, & how they would be treated. My guess is, that ILBW was enraged that they likely would be thwarted at every turn if they didn't stay in their lane. She loves to stay outside the lines. Her father said at much years ago.
Poor Charles has been getting reamed on other blogs about the alleged letter. If true, I don't see what all the excitement is about. It was allegedly sent over 2 years ago, & although it was after the Oprah train wreck, the RF likely didn't realize yet how completely untrustworthy the Todgers were. Charles likely thought he was dealing privately in a well meaning way with a younger member of his family. I'm sure he writes many notes & letters to lots of people, family & otherwise. If he did write the letter, he must have had some expectation of privacy. Even ILBW waited 2 years before leaking news of the alleged letter. Now the RF family has no expectation at all of trustworthy or decent behavior from the duo, so they're keeping their distance. Charles is very skilled in careful & diplomatic communication. I think it is highly unlikely that he said anything at all self damaging. The color of whiter than white Archie's skin is boring to all of us. Chris Rock has publicly called bulls**t on ILBW's phony racism claim.
ILBW is just gaslighting in crazed desperation. The public is very tired of her. I'm still hoping to get clarification on the poor little maybe children, but my main hope is that the people of the UK can enjoy a splendid coronation. (The release of the photo of the Queen with her younger family members is very telling. There is no way that KCIII would allow his biracial grandchildren to be excluded from an official photo with his beloved mother if there weren't something a bit off about them. What is it?)
The press keeps fanning the flames of conflict to get the clicks & comments. That's why they keep printing ILBW's drivel, & overlooking her lies & contradictions.
I rather suspect you already know, the let me tell you what to think ideology has been part of the school curriculum for some decades. I attended uni in the early 2000s and we were still being taught to argue a theory and to critically think etc. It’s changed now, just about every 20 something year old is now fully indoctrinated into not to critically think anything, it’s all about feeling rather than facts and reality. 🫣😳
https://twitter.com/sage1411/status/1649876646734831616
the yachter's strategy seems to have backfired this time.
Extremists' vile plot to spook King's horses with rape alarms: Fears protesters planning to sabotage Charles' Coronation could cause 'serious injuries or even deaths', ex-Grenadier Guard warns - as eco-zealot groups set to join forces to cause chaos
Concerns have been raised the stunt could lead to serious injuries or even death
One said: ‘It’s not practical to frisk members of the crowd for rape alarms, but we will move swiftly if they try it.’
Separately from the briefing from security sources, the MoS has independently discovered that the hard-Right English Constitution Party has used Twitter to urge supporters to protest at the Coronation, and ‘bring rape alarms’.
At https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12003081/Extremists-vile-plot-spook-Kings-horses-rape-alarms-cause-injuries-deaths.html
“And yet I'm struck by the thought of how this has succeeded for her. It's about her. She's moved the lens. It's now about ‘her & a letter from The King’. People are talking about her & The King, cementing the association. She's made it about herself & a monarch”
Argghhh. Every time I think her downfall is nigh, somehow it’s turned around and she rises, Phoenix-like.
Re Archie 's birthday, now * will have 'definitely have support that weekend.' He'll be just 4, what support will she really need? Ridiculous! The celebration will be 'low key', in that case just shut up, there's no need to make it public. What does a 4 year old need?
Explanation:
* needs Harry to be at party so he can Juggle and provide entertainment (aka support)
We live in an age of sanctified stupidity. What is needed is dissolution of universities to correct things.
Interesting tea from Australian Woman's Day. And these comments:
*I believe Womans Day AU has real sources, they’ve been right a LOT about a lot of things. There are people in AU who have worked for the Palace and people TALK.
*IDK what is going on, but Meghan, just like some lovely person here said, is Meghan is leaking to the press about everything. She’s ratcheting up the drama.
*This piece explains why the Sussex Squad and her paid minions in the SS are saying that they hate the BRF, they want her to divorce Harry. I think she probably also posts in there with a burner but not the ones anyone thinks. I think Myra is a paid Meghan PR person. Meghan has hired several fans of hers to work for her, this is a known fact btw.
*This is, imho, some kind of message Meghan is sending Harry. She won’t divorce him but she’s threatening to, which she always uses against him. She leaves him a lot. Are the scales falling from his eyes, yet? IDK but him actually going to the UK without her is making her really upset. She’s trying to control him. She can’t with this.
*Also notice she leaked they’re having problems and that there’s screaming matches now.
*We also know she hates William and is blaming William for all the problems. And William is probably ok with that. Bc William is getting stronger and stronger and stronger. W wants to protect his wife and children from them, bc Harry & Meghan have literally attacked them, verbally. I would call it verbal assaults.
`Sanctified stupidity' - what a brilliant phrase. I think it starts much earlier than university - currently, we're having loo and pronoun problems in secondary schools.
BTW I could weep at the disregard these days for treating horses properly. It was bad enough when `mourners' chucked flowers at Diana's cortege - but one only has to see videos of how tourists behave at the entrance to Horse Guards in Whitehall. They seem to think it's Pets Corner and think nothing of taking hold at the reins, then wonder why they get yelled at by the Trooper. Doesn't occur to the idiots that it's like grabbing a steering wheel. Then they don't like it when the horse gets upset, or gives them a nip because it expected a titbit.
Perhaps that's just common stupidity thiugh.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12vjzzk/spilling_scalding_tea_found_on_tumblrcredit/
It starts with something on Canadian TV which was pulled pdq, about M screaming at H, that H & Doria don't get along, that D & M control H with drugs & that D was responsible for getting him into ayahuasca. More or less what we suspected.
There's also much about the children , perhaps to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Nor have I clicked on the weird photo published in Hello! I've never seen that expression and I'm getting Wallis vibes. Has she had cosmetic treatment as well as practising that face?
It was alianor d'aquitaine who stated sanctified stupidity, 🥴but she’s exactly right! 😁I did state it started in schools before universities, but now it’s in both. 🥺
Harry and Meghan would do well to educate themselves about bias, as they are so fond of recommending other’s to do. Or if they are deliberately miseducating the public for their own PR battles, cut it out.
And if they were subject to racist comments they need to be clear about that. No one deserves to be the subject of prejudice, whether its coming from an internet troll or the King.
https://medium.com/@PRisUniversal/what-harry-meghan-keep-getting-wrong-92ff78ef304d
Responding to the article, the Duchess of Sussex's spokesperson told HELLO!: "The Duchess of Sussex is going about her life in the present, not thinking about correspondence from two years ago related to conversations from four years ago.
"Any suggestion otherwise is false and frankly ridiculous. We encourage tabloid media and various royal correspondents to stop the exhausting circus that they alone are creating."
-----
Of course she is the one who briefed the Telegraph, and then got them to change the article 5 times. She always has to be the centre of attention. No one would ever have known about the letter/s she wrote to Charles if she hadn't given the Telegraph the information. This 'leak' did not come from Charles. It is a replay of her letter to her own father... no one would have known about it if she didn't tell Hello about it, through 5 supposed friends.
and the claim she was unhappy about KC's response -
He isn't on the planet to make her happy. No one is (either).
Bottom line: if she doesn't want to be happy, someone else cannot make her.
Just funny how this letter thing (described as warm) just now appears and not two years ago - especially as the optics back then were more about how alone they were/being cut off by the BRF. (as always, why now is a good question)
As well as the claim that in the letter, she acknowledges that the named person wanting to know the skin color did not do so to be racist - but yet did not make a clarifying statement to help calm the roiled waters about that at the time. At the time when it sure could have helped. Cui bono?
Virtual-Cucumber-973
7m
If the Telegraph’s article is true, and she is not coming to the coronation because she didn’t get a satisfactory response to her letter two years ago, then she would have declined straight away. It’s far more plausible that negotiations went up to the wire and she didn’t get what she wanted.
-----
My opinion: She boxed herself into a corner with all her demands. She kept demanding more and got nothing. However I think the rumour that she had decided in January already not to attend may be true, purely as a business decision centred on promoting her solo brand. She put the Palace, and her husband, through all the drama simply because control, domination, being the centre of attention, through a mix of victimhood and grandiosity, is her default mode. Husband decides to attend without her and suddenly she finds herself on the outside, missing out on global attention. The birthday party for Archie with all the LA and Hollywood A-listers was not panning out either. She flipped and started spinning.
I wonder of he is still fully in her corner, blaming the media and the Palace for this debacle, or if he is at least starting to see the games she plays.
-----
@WBBM
I have watched a number of videos of how tourists behave with the horse guards and I find it appalling. I think the Palace should put up a sign warning tourists to not get close to the horses or guards.
I saw an article recently about influencers posing for social media at Auschwitz. Modern society is breeding a generation of sociopaths. At Auschwitz, I think they should ban cameras and phones on the site. And silence would be a good idea too. Show some bloody reverence and respect! Tourists can buy postcards if they want a souvenir.
"Bottom line: if she doesn't want to be happy, someone else cannot make her."
Wisest observation of the year, and so apt for TBW.
I thought I had posted the whole article but messed up somehow. It is well worth a read. They have no idea what 'unconscious bias' means. It reminds me of her not knowing the difference between stereotypes and archetypes.
World Wide Privacy Tour….is going so very well! 😂
------------
OT - horse guards
The mention reminds me of once when I was at Windsor castle. There were guards (on foot) and there was a line on the ground in front of them. People kept behind it except for a young foreign girl who tried to get much closer to a guard and walked over the line. The guard took a few steps marching menacingly towards her, stamped his foot and barked some order, something like 'stand back from the guard'. The girl jumped out of her skin and walked back. You have to laugh at people's stupidity. What many tourists don't realise is that the guards are real soldiers and their assault rifles are also real.
@WBBM
I have watched a number of videos of how tourists behave with the horse guards and I find it appalling. I think the Palace should put up a sign warning tourists to not get close to the horses or guards.
A lot of tourists have never been in close proximity to horses, do not know enough about horses to realize what a bad idea that is, and how much damage an angry horse can do to a human.
Like the people in Yellowstone National Park that want to take selfies with the bison, or the people we have to content with in Florida that want to let their toddlers pet the gators lazing in the sun on the riverbanks.
That article in The Telegraph is on its 8th round of editing. She/they are spilling bile on every resentment and grudge they are carrying.
The information about the letters between her and Charles came from her, without a doubt. She/they gave the story to The Telegraph on the condition that comments would be disabled.
The Telegraph are making complete fools of themselves and letting themselves be led by the nose by someone spewing bile against the royal family, just before the Coronation. A narc reacts badly when they are told no.
If he thought he could attempt some kind of reconciliation with his family, it is being blown out the water. Surely he is not that stupid that he cannot work out that she is doing this?
Why is she in a rage? Because he is going to the Coronation and she is missing out? Or is there something else going on behind the scenes?
I gather it's not a good idea either to laugh at the evzones of the Greek presidential guard in Athens, despite their pompons and cute little kilts...
Harold Will Attend The Coronation, And Another Private Letter ‘Leak’
A lovely cartoon before the start of the article 😁
Coronation invitations, Archewell investigative report by French TV, Samantha's case and the letter.
-----
That is what the situation seems to be. Her craziness has become his normal.
I do wonder why he wants to be at the Coronation. Is it because he needs that connection to get deals? If so, then surely she would support such a 'business' appearance and
not go batsh1t crazy trying to sabotage it for him? Or is he at odds with her, and wants to be there because it is his father being crowned and the 'royal' in him is still strong?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/04/23/jennie-bond-diana-told-me-charles-wasnt-cut-out-to-be-king/ continued as`... but she was wrong.'
It's about Dumfries House, the mansion in the Scottish Borders that Charles took on. He restored the house, bought its priceless furniture in the nick of time (it was on its way to the London salerooms when he finally managed to buy it - reports were that the police had to turn the lorry/ies around on the M-way in the small hours) and is getting the land into shape for biodiversity and sustainable agriculture.
He has already setup courses for craftsmen there, so old skills can be preserved to repair all our old pre-20thC buildings for instance (I got the impression that craftsfolk in `The Repair Shop' had trained there; and the grounds are likewise being used for education.
Best of all, it'll be open for free.
It also looked at the support he has given the farming community, especially during the foot-and-mouth horrors of 2021. I can't do justice to what HM has achieved - do watch it yourselves, if you can. I was very moved by it. He cares greatly for all his subjects.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/04/23/duchess-of-sussex-royal-race-row/?li_source=LI&li_medium=liftigniter-rhr
the article in the Telegraph is now in the 9th round of editing.
That thread over at Reddit is very interesting. Some poster suggested that the surgery addicted harlot will drop Camilla's name during the Coronation as being the one who was "racist" to try to ruin the event. But, people don't care anymore.
It's interesting to see how she is unraveling.
Here is the article you expressed an interest in reading:
Diana told me Charles wasn’t cut out to be King – but she was wrong
Having been a royal correspondent for 35 years, I know King Charles better than most
By Jennie Bond
“The truth is that Charles would be much happier living in Tuscany, painting the landscape or studying architecture.”
So said Diana, the late Princess of Wales, shortly after her divorce from her husband of 15 years. We were sitting in her drawing room at Kensington Palace talking about the future now that their “fairy-tale” marriage, which had become a living nightmare for both of them, had been officially extinguished.
“I still believe that he’s just not cut out to be King,” she continued. “He has enough problems being Prince of Wales!”
Diana believed that Charles needed time out to reassess his life.
“He’s stuck in a rut,” she told me. “Just take a look at his programme... he’s doing exactly the sort of things he was doing 10 years ago.”
But that was where Diana was wrong. It was precisely by banging on about often unfashionable causes – sometimes in the face of open mockery – that Charles eventually proved that he was a man ahead of his time. From his sometimes uncomfortable rut, he confronted issues most of us hadn’t even considered.
“Over 40 years ago,” Charles said in 2018, “I remember making a speech about the problems of plastic and other waste. But at that stage nobody was really interested and I was considered old-fashioned, out of touch and ‘anti-science’ for warning of such things.”
Our King is a man shot through with paradox and contradiction. A progressive mind with an old man’s soul; a Royal surrounded by servants who says his role is to serve; someone who believes profoundly in promoting harmony and yet whose family life has been punctured by conflict; a man whose values are rooted in tradition but who accepts the need for change.
I’ve been reporting on the Prince, now King, for 35 years. I’ve observed him from afar and close up, in good times and bad. I have been part of a band of reporters and photographers who have required Charles to perform for the cameras in every corner of the world.
We asked him to wear a Rastafarian hat in Jamaica, an Amerindian headdress in British Guyana, and to dance the samba in Brazil. Usually, he obliged, even though the results were sometimes enough to make anyone squirm.
He has an unsophisticated, down-to-earth sense of humour, which stands him in good stead in the frequent chaos of a royal tour. On Fraser Island, off the coast of Brisbane, he chastised the travelling press pack for keeping him awake with “that goddamn awful racket”. (We had been enjoying a spot of karaoke in the hotel bar that night, followed by a rowdy Jacuzzi under the stars.)
After a visit to Sea Lion Island, off the Falklands, he laughed long and loud with us about the elephant seals, which had enthusiastically farted and belched their way through a photo call.
“What a problem they had with flatulence!” he chortled.
I have found our King both personable and pleasant to be around. He was tickled by the fact that I liked to wear white stilettos, even when they were quite obviously ridiculous. As I stumbled, in great discomfort, across a stubbly cornfield in New Zealand, he leant out of a Land Rover and said: “Oh, Miss Bond! Wrong shoes again, I see!” And he was equally amused to see my stilettos turn a dirty brown as we tramped across a seed-potato field near St Petersburg.
Twice he invited me to Highgrove for tea and a chat. His private secretary at the time, Richard Aylard, said the Prince was mystified by the way he was portrayed by the media. He felt he was badly misrepresented. These meetings, I presumed, were part of a campaign to improve that image.
“I always think,” said Prince Charles, “that a brief stroll around the gardens helps people to relax. So often they seem a little overwhelmed to find themselves here, but once they’ve had a walk and got the general feel of the place, they’re far more at home.”
And so we talked about organic vegetables, and the merits of white custard marrows, which my husband and I had recently grown in our London garden. The Prince had never heard of them, so I suggested he grew some for himself.
“Would you like to see some photos of how the house used to be?” he asked, warming to this domestic theme.
“I’d love to,” I replied.
He reached for a photo album and set it on the ottoman. I moved across and sat on the floor as he thumbed through the pictures showing all the changes he’d made at Highgrove over the years. He seemed just like anyone else who’d struggled over making improvements to somewhere they loved.
All in all, it was a thoroughly pleasant afternoon and, as I left, the Prince said: “You must come back one day and see the gardens in better weather.”
A year later, in the summer of 1996, I was indeed invited back, but now Charles seemed a truly tortured soul. After all that had happened in his divorce battle with Diana, his antipathy towards the press appeared to have increased, and his mood was unsettled.
Once again, he offered no opportunity to discuss his private life, but he talked of his growing concern about genetic engineering. It was a topic few were discussing at that time, but he was in the forefront of the debate and he was angry about food production methods.
At one point, he was wanted on the phone. It was brought out to him in the garden by one of his staff, and he took the call where he was. He spoke quietly, in curt phrases.
Later that evening, I discovered that the call had been to confirm a financial settlement with Diana in the divorce proceedings.
Largely because of his fatally flawed marriage to Diana, Charles has been labelled as cold, unfeeling and – by his own confession – unfaithful. But, in truth, he is an extremely sensitive man who has proved himself to be unconditionally and faithfully in love with the woman he should have married in the first place: Camilla. It was his love for her that gave him the courage to stand up to the Palace and his parents and declare that she was “non-negotiable”. It was Charles’s alpha-male moment... and he won the battle. Camilla is now his Queen and they are blissfully happy.
Diana herself recognised the strength of the love between her husband and Camilla.
In one of our private conversations, she told me that Camilla always had been and would be the love of Charles’s life, and that their relationship was stronger than any marriage he might have made. She told me that she accepted that Camilla had been discreet and loyal... and that perhaps she deserved “some form of recognition”.
Whatever Diana would make of the fact that Camilla is now our Queen, it is undeniable that Charles is a much happier man and will be a better King with the woman he always calls his “darling wife” at his side.
And, 20 years ago, he expanded on that theme when he told an audience: “I have come to realise that my entire life has been so far motivated by a desire to heal – to heal the dismembered landscape and the poisoned soul; the cruelly shattered townscape, where harmony has been replaced by cacophony; to heal the divisions between intuitive and rational thought, between mind and body, and soul, so that the temple of our humanity can once again be lit by a sacred flame.”
Today, the King would probably recognise that he is more like his late father, Prince Philip, than he might ever have believed possible. For many years, the two men had a difficult relationship: Philip thought Charles needed toughening up; Charles felt bullied. In later life, Prince Philip acknowledged that there was one great difference between them.
“He’s a romantic,” he told Gyles Brandreth, “and I’m a pragmatist – that means we do see things differently. And because I don’t see things as a romantic would, I’m unfeeling.”
King Charles has made it clear that the monarchy can and must change with the times. He wants a core group of working members of the Royal family, with the rest being as self-sufficient as possible, with some of their houses being reshuffled or repurposed. The optics of a super-rich Royal family during a critical cost of living crisis are important... and tricky.
The Coronation will reflect the man himself: a mix of old and new. Many of the sacred rituals of the ceremony will remain, but will be witnessed by a much smaller and more inclusive congregation. Some of the robes will seem quaint and quite odd, but, for the most part, the King will forsake the bizarre breeches of his forebears and wear modern military uniform. And the procession in the Abbey will be a true blend of many a modern family, with both the King and the Queen’s grandchildren taking part.
In the end, Diana was probably right. Charles might well have been happier sitting in the Italian countryside, painting and communing with nature. But that was not his lot or luck. He was born to what he once described as his “ghastly” destiny: privileged, certainly, but deprived of freedom of choice.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12wsbxi/invitations_to_the_coronation_what_went_down/
it's well worth reading the long comments (especially the one from AuntCassie). All very thoughtful.
Ten rows back is not far enough. Will he realise what he's jettisoned to be with a cheap actress and that if he was trapped before while in the BRF, he's even more so now in the viper's nest? Perhaps the penny will drop but unfortunately, that's doubtful.
There's a sound precedent for that -the Duke of Wellington..
I think she is not like normal people ... she thrives on creating misery and stress for others. We might mistake the endless changes to the explosive Telegraph article as unravelling of her (which 'normally' is true), but there is a peculiar type of arrogance to her behaviour. It is typical of narcs ... they ask for the impossible, keep changing instructions, alternate between finding fault and love bombing, and generally increase stress and workload at least tenfold ... oh, and always blame others for mistakes. What she will never acknowledge is that she alone has created a mess because she does not know what the heck she is doing. Because she sees no fault in herself and always claims victimhood, she thrives while those around her collapse.
Anyway, she never misses a chance to take centre stage!
Imaging being him and living in a house that is a shrine to her. Does he realize it is not normal?
And what is that room? Any guesses? A dressing room?
For all her millions, she goes for cheap painted built-in cupboards with faux crystal glass handles. Ok for those of us who can only afford that and neat and tidy and practical is more than good enough, but this is a woman who spends hundreds on a dress she will wear once!
She is married to a man who grew up in homes with superb custom-made furniture, original oil paintings (and heaps of family photographs on every surface) ... is he so stoned all the time that he does not notice the difference?
Imagine Charles, with his impeccable taste, visiting them. The horror ... and then he would wonder what the heck they did with all that money they took from the UK, him ...!
* is seen with ultra straight sleek hair, perhaps a shade lighter than usual, a sort of Rachel (appropriate) long haircut. Very smooth face too.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12006323/Meghan-Markle-emerges-friends-insist-moved-race-row.html
It was a welcome antidote to BBC Tv news this lunchtime - they ran with dire forecasts about future of monarchy, based on a survey of younger people. Had to replay the worst bit of the OW interview - enough to make one weep.
Is that Princess Beatrice giving Piers Morgan a hug? The woman standing next to Piers is his wife - Celia Walden.
Thanks for sharing that very nice article about KC.
Today, the King would probably recognise that he is more like his late father, Prince Philip, than he might ever have believed possible. For many years, the two men had a difficult relationship: Philip thought Charles needed toughening up; Charles felt bullied. In later life, Prince Philip acknowledged that there was one great difference between them.
“He’s a romantic,” he told Gyles Brandreth, “and I’m a pragmatist – that means we do see things differently. And because I don’t see things as a romantic would, I’m unfeeling.”
It seems that in later life, Charles and his infamously irascible father came to better understand one another, and perhaps forgive each other for perceived past failures in their father-son relationship. It seems indisputable that PP, brash, extrovert, the epitome of old-school Alpha masculinity, was an exacting, sometimes cruel bully to his sensitive son--but maybe the hellish experience of Gordonstoun was precisely what Charles needed after all, even if taking his medicine was not pleasant at the time. I have a feeling the bullying he experienced might have been quite as relentless, though perhaps not as physical, had he gone to Eton, on account of his position, and that wasn't going to change no matter where he was sent to school.
I was not a fan of Charles during the Diana years, but as time has gone on, I feel myself with affinity for him and his paradoxical character. If I had to type him on the Myers-Briggs scale, I rate him as INFP, which incidentally is my own set of letters. Like him, I'm the eldest of four children, with a large gap between me and the youngest. He and I both have fall birthdays. I'm Libra; he's Scorpio. We are very similar in temperament, and like Charles, I too was very often criticized, ridiculed even, for always faffing about with my head in a book or in the clouds instead of being more practically concerned with my future. In my youth, I felt picked on, misunderstood. In my middle age, I see that my parents were right that a literature degree was not practical and I wonder how much more solvent I might now be had I opted to study accounting or something similar, despite feeling no aptitude for numbers or business.
It's a mistake to assume that a sensitive personality is also 'weak'. We actually have to be a lot *tougher* internally than somebody to whom a boisterous external locus comes more naturally. Charles is labeled as weak and dithering, not least by his own parents, because he wears his heart on his sleeve--he shares his feelings, all of them. As an unhappy child, sending tear-stained letters home, those feelings were negative ones and he was not demonstrating enough of the stiff upper to suit his elders. But would a weak person have stuck it out at Hell-stoun for the duration? Served in all branches of HMTQ's service? Turned himself from a pudgy, shy kid into "Action Man"? He skis, flies planes . . has been known to scale rock climbing walls in dress shoes. He doesn't back down from a challenge. Under the sensitivity, there's a bedrock core of stubbornness that is probably genetic--the same immoveable object quality that stood his mother in good stead all her reign. Charles took the ridicule for many of his more esoteric positions that proved to be ahead of his time and never wavered. To me he resembles very much his maternal grandfather, George VI, who was also dismissed by many as being too temperamentally weak to function as King. With the support of his Queen by his side, Bertie showed his critics what he could do, and I think Charles will prove the same.
If he would rather be painting watercolors in Tuscany full-time than being the King, I don't regard that as a character flaw, just an understandable human desire. His mother would have preferred to be a Navy housewife and breed horses for a living and she didn't get her wish, either. The test of character is being confronted with a job we'd rather not be doing but doing it to our utmost anyway.
It looks like Beatrice to me rather than Eugenie, judging by the hair. Her hair is darker and shorter but then again it could be somebody else entirely.
Another photo ... definitely Beatrice.
Meghan Markle sparks surgery speculation with new look: ‘She wants to be Kate Middleton
Is Meghan a copy-Kate?
Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle has made her first appearance since announcing she won’t be attending King Charles’ coronation — and some are saying her gorgeous new look is suspiciously similar to sister-in-law Princess Kate Middleton.
Markle debuted a sleek straightened hairstyle as she appeared via video link at her photographer friend Misan Harriman’s TED Talk over the weekend, sparking speculation among social media watchdogs.
“PLASTIC SURGERY ALERT? Sad Meghan Markle wants to be Kate Middleton so bad,” one fired-up Twitter user railed, questioning whether the ex-actress had altered more than just her locks.
Another claimed Markle, 41, had changed the color of her eyes in order to look like her 41-year-old sister-in-law, saying: “Omg. Meghan Markle, who is jealous and obsessed with the Princess of Wales, is wearing hazel contact lenses to look like Kate.”
She looks like she’s trying to look like Kate … that won’t happen,” another tartly tweeted.
Meanwhile, Markle’s many supporters came out en masse to trash talks of any cosmetic work.
“Meghan didn’t have plastic surgery,” one defender declared. “It’s all about lighting, angles, and contouring. And hair straightening is something many black women do. It has nothing to do with ‘erasing all traces of origin.’ Also, white people need to shut up about black women’s hair.”
“You’re accusing Meghan of having plastic surgery when your whole online persona is AI generated. Girl Bye! Meghan doesn’t need plastic surgery! She is sun kissed, getting love and and moisturized! That is GLOW!” another cheered.
Others, meanwhile, claimed that marvelous Markle may not have wanted to resemble a royal but rather a Hollywood star: “Is she going for Jennifer Lopez, Kim Kardashian or Jennifer Aniston here?” one asked beneath screenshots of Markle’s TED Talk cameo.
Markle has been largely out of the limelight in recent months, prompting some to speculate that she may have had some cosmetic procedures.
“I think Meghan’s public absence has been explained. And it was nothing to do with the children,” one posited.
Others weighed in on the work they believed the Duchess has had done.
“Facelift, filler dissolved in lips, buccal fat removal, more filler in cheeks, Botox, more subtle veneers, chin implant is my guess,” one watchdog speculated.
“She had under her eyes filled and a eye lift,” another chimed in.
Reps for Markle declined to comment about the new accusations, but insiders close to the Archewell camp told The Post she denied the surgery claims.
Multiple sources who’ve worked with Markle said she put on a lot of weight with both pregnancies and has finally lost the weight she gained with daughter, Lili, which accounts for her newly fit-and-fab style.
One told The Post she has not changed her face as she “loves” her nose and even contours it and uses bronzer to highlight it. Of course, she did change her hair color — and Botox and some lip fillers are likely, one source added.
While Markle’s new look has certainly sparked chatter, it’s far from the only topic that has the Duchess in the limelight.
The star sent the social media mill into overdrive after announcing earlier this month that she won’t be attending Charles’ coronation on May 6.
One royal watcher claimed Middleton had “blocked” Markle from the historic event, with another claiming the princess “resents” her estranged sister-in-law because she caused her to miss final moments with Queen Elizabeth last year.
Meanwhile, another royal biographer alleged that Markle wanted to skip the coronation because she can portray herself as a “martyr.”
Over the weekend, the Duchess’ reps rubbished reports she chose to snub the event over letters she and King Charles exchanged about her concerns of racism within the royal family.
I've just seen this article, it was definitely Beatrice, as I thought, giving Piers Morgan a hug.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12007287/Princess-Eugenie-shows-baby-bump-joins-Beatrice-pub.html
Shall try again tomorrow.
-----
The Telegraph waxing lyrical about her new 'power' look:
https://archive.ph/2023.04.24-201202/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/beauty/hair/meghan-montecito-hair-makeover-meaning-gwyneth-paltrow/
-----
Her sources have denied that she has had plastic surgery, but admit that she has finally lost the baby weight and has had some Botox and fillers. She also seems to have new teeth. To me, her eyes look a different colour so I think she is wearing colour contact lenses.
@Hikari
You’re welcome 🙂
_______
Thought I’d share a few comments on the Telegraph article re Meghan’s new look:
Straight hair is cultural appropriation
Surely if she is black (only in her mind of course) then straightening and lightening hair is cultural appropriation. Goose, Gander
So why isn’t a ‘black’ woman wearing straight, light brown hair ‘cultural appropriation’?
Looking more and more like Wallis Windsor every day.
Whoever did that to her face doesn't like her, she looks manic and predatory.
She's spending thousands and thousands of dollars to look like a white American teenage girl. It's not healthy; it's not normal.
As for Mrs. Todger, whenever she disappears for a lengthy period of time, it always means she's having work done. The NYPost reported on her changed appearance. Doesn't matter what she does to her face, she is a nasty, vile piece of work, and her interior is a blackhole of ugliness.
@Hikari: I, too, am INFP. You are so insightful, and I look forward to your posts. You could be a psychoanalyst, or therapist if that was to your liking. Your ability to be quite discerning about behavior is remarkable. You remember things, and put those things together to form a truth that the rest of us miss, i.e., the non-existent children, the no year review, among others. You also have a gift for writing.
I agree totally that * adopting straight hair is cultural appropriation - not a problem until we got screamed at for cornrows.
* also sees to have lighter hair/wig, with added `burgundy' tint, a rather strange unnatural purplish red, which doesn't harmonise with the rest of her colouration. She needs Colour Me Beautiful!
(O/T It wasn't until I consulted CMB, 30-odd years ago, that I realised why I looked awful in yellow; the thinking then was that yellow went went with dark hair. : Yes, but not if one has a pink-and whiteface! (30 years more of carrot-eating and now living somewhere sunny/being outdoors more mean I have a bit of a tan - but my hair's gone patchy white and grey -ghastly - so I am now `baby blonde' - out of a bottle.)
* would do well to get a copy of `CMB' - they're still available on Amazon. I see there's a newly-published Color Me Beautiful - A Coloring Book Celebrating Black Woman: Unique and Beautiful Illustrations to Uplift, Inspire and Release Stress for Adults.
It turns out not be anything that would help * look better (as if she'd take advice!) it's literally a colouring-in book, suitable for H perhaps?
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12y6yt1/harkles_lakers_game_staged_damage_control/
“This quote from The Great Gatsby seems apt in describing Meghan and Harry:
‘They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.’”
I imagine if she could, M would take credit for inspiring F. Scott Fitzgerald.
The meaning behind Meghan’s Montecito makeover
The Duchess of Sussex's newly straightened and lightened hairstyle is a polished power move
By Annabel Jones, Beauty Editor at Large 24 April 2023 • 8:00pm
https://archive.ph/fqqOp#selection-2525.4-2565.27
Re. Mugsy’s new look
What struck me immediately about it is that it doesn’t look like she’s copying Catherine so much as attempting to get into a time machine circa 2005. The hair is nearly identical to how she wore it in her early starlet days with Trevor. Does this mean it’s her own hair now, albeit straightened and dyed to an inch of its life, or is it finally a decent wig? Comment I read directed to those critical of this makeover: “Just shut up about black women’s hair.” Okay, so this look, like any she’s had in the past is just embracing her hair identity as a powerful and self accepting black woman. So black women can buy themselves some white hair and pretend it’s theirs and it’s STFU time; if a person of the Caucasian persuasion wants to rock some cornrows because they think they look cool, they’ve callously appropriated Black culture. Even though black women have abandoned cornrows in favor of spending thousands of dollars and thousands of hours in the salon so they can look like Jennifer Aniston. Check. Just another day in Hypocrite Land.
Thanks to forcing herself into Harry’s orbit and making herself a global figure, Markle’s childhood photos live on the Internet forever. We KNOW what Rachel’s natural hair looks like, as well as what her birth-issued face looked like before she started using men, starting with Dad, to pay for alterations. Rachel was one of the homeliest children to ever walk the earth and that fact remains no matter what she does. When the curated mask slips, the result is horrific, and it’s just a glimpse into her warped and shriveled soul.
The more the Duckarse of Montesh*tshow issues denials, and flings around terms like “frankly ridiculous”, the more the opposite is true. Of course she’s had more work done, just like she leaked the letter to Charles. You can wind your watch by it. Is this makeover just a pathetic attempt to steal Coronation thunder? Or is she planning something even more overt, like a broadcast of some kind on May 6?
HGT: She Will Never Come Back To The UK (Meghan Markle)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57EKaC4OD80
Actually, HGT has produced more videos in the last 24hrs than I can keep up with!
Ha! 'Cultural appropriation' - that's exactly what I wrote in a post a few years ago. She can bleat on about being black, she still looks caucasian as she put on her CV.
............
I bet she was fuuming that Beatrice, and possibly Eugenie (we don't have a photo), gave Piers Morgan, *'s enemy, a hug. Beatrice was larking about and Peirs Morgan was laughing. Hopefully this will be the end of the friendship, if there is one, with the York sisters.
Good posts about Charles, and particularly this point: 'It's a mistake to assume that a sensitive personality is also 'weak'.' I personally don't think Charles s weak, or as weak as some people seem to think. I think the current situation with H and * must be heartbreaking for him. Of course, he wants his sons to be happy, especially after what happened with Diana. At least he doesn't have to worry about William but seeing what a wreck H is now, under the thumb and faraway from him must be a source of constant worry. I believe he loves H but might have realised he needs to use tough love, which may go against the grain for him but is necessary.
Charles has also unfairly been compared to the Queen, who had an extremely long successful track record where her reign is concerned. Charles is only at the beginning of what will necessarily be a considerably shorter reign.
By the way, George VI was his father, not grandfather, but you are right that he resembles him very much.
I'm not going to read what is probably just drivel but the photos are worth a look. What on earth is * wearing at a basketball game? Kate does smart casual so we'll but * has to wear 6 inch stilettos. As for the couple looking so in lurve, it's vomit inducing.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12010109/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-laugh-smile-awkwardly-theyre-spotted-LA-basketball-game.html
Hair Of The Dog
First up meh
with her long borrowed hair
Flattened face and demonic stare
Swiftly followed by the awkward pair
haz attempting to kisscam his mare
Eleven more days of this to endure
fake photos, false laughs
the usual ordure
What next to expect
from the bride stripped bare
Hell hath no fury
like an uninvited cur…
@OCGal @Rebecca
@WildBoar
Thank you, affirmation makes
the pen strike stronger 😉
@Hikari
Thank you.
God Save the King
Gosh, she loves the spotlight and he was pretty happy about it as well. She gets all giggly when the camera turns on them at the basketball game and he is equally thrilled. And she must have been using hectic filters in that Zoom call to make her eyes look brown/hazel and her hair lighter.
I hope his family realize they are both destructively evil and hapless not only does not want to be saved, but can't be.
She wants to be at the centre of attention all the time so her antics, with him as her co-conspirator, to dominate the coronation is well on track. I wonder what other antics she has up her sleeve. (Revive racism stories, tick, threaten Charles by revealing the existence of letters, tick, get media talking about non-existent phone calls between Charles and hapless, tick, bag a couple more awards, tick, push herself onto a TED platform, tick, get Telegraph to be a PR machine for the magnificent duchess, like Hello, tick, get minions to attack William and Catherine with false stories*, tick ...)
And I am wondering why he is going to the coronation ... is it to act as 'the enemy within'? All the talk about Charles and 'his darling boy' are fuelled by them, to attack William and Catherine. What is their goal ... the throne?
Maybe they are heading for a major fall. It is what tends to happen when two stupid, smug, arrogant, self-focused people think they can get away with anything and everything.
By the way, they don't seem to have friends. In the past few public outings they are accompanied by staff.
* Bouzy, or whatever his name is, tweeted that the photo Catherine took of the late Queen and her grandchildren and great-grandchildren is photoshopped. The SS lapped it up. Rumours of trouble in the marriage of Catherine and William are also doing the rounds again. And, of course, royal biographers are playing along by talking about William's 'violent temper' (despite the enormous restraint he has shown with his brother and the witch).
NotToday7812
14m
I agree this is an act (that Harry might not know about yet). Notice how she’s not looking at him in any of these photos. Even in the photo where they are cuddling, she’s looking to see if they are being noticed. I think this is classic love bombing to make sure his family doesn’t win him back in a couple of weeks. Also, she definitely spent the last six months losing weight and having tweaks on her face done. It’s not a coincidence she’s been out twice now. My guess is she spent all that time getting “camera ready” for the coronation just to have her people advise her that she’s still super unpopular and it wouldn’t be advisable to attend.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/12yd2pt/yesterday_at_the_lakers_game_with_the_archewell/
I think the invite, via email,
was made plain.
Cheap seats, no interaction
with the King.
Meghan, by protocol, invited,
not heeded. Uninvited!!
don’t tell me she doesn’t read social media. harry no where to be seen in a week and people were speculating he was in london in rehab. so she had to produce harry. disappointed they were up late dont they have some wreaths to lay in the LA cemetery for Anzac day?
we need a bingo card for her. we have had pap pics, cosplaying jennifer lopez, a leak of a letter, what else do we need. i really think we are setting up for something the day of the coronation (unless she shows up in London at a window somewhere) and i’m not creative enough to think of it other than divorce. pic of archie’s bday isn’t gonna be enough.
A Very Public Devaluation (Meghan Markle)
https://youtu.be/mwQgDthL-Xw
Courtside explains exactly where William and Catherine were sitting, by the side of a tennis court at Wimbledon or at a basketball game.
Corporation box as you correctly state means it was a paid for seat by a company(for the Despicable Duo).
Pope gifts two fragments from the cross Jesus Christ was crucified on to King Charles so they can lead the new monarch's coronation procession
The King's coronation procession will be led by a cross that includes religious relics gifted to the monarch by the Pope.
Two shards of the True Cross – which is said to have been used in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ – were given to Charles by Pope Francis to mark his enthronement.
The small fragments have been incorporated into the Cross of Wales, which will be seen by millions as it is carried into Westminster Abbey on May 6.
The King's coronation procession will be led by a cross that includes religious relics gifted to the monarch by the Pope.
Two shards of the True Cross – which is said to have been used in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ – were given to Charles by Pope Francis to mark his enthronement.
The small fragments have been incorporated into the Cross of Wales, which will be seen by millions as it is carried into Westminster Abbey on May 6.
The Cross of Wales, which is a gift from the King to the Church in Wales to celebrate its centenary, will be blessed by the Archbishop of Wales, Andrew John, in a service at Holy Trinity Church, Llandudno, North Wales, today before it heads to London.
Upon its return, the cross will be shared between the Anglican and Catholic churches in Wales.
Crafted from recycled silver bullion, provided by the Royal Mint in Llantrisant, South Wales, it also includes a shaft of Welsh windfall timber and Welsh slate.
Words from the last sermon of St David are inscribed on the back of the cross in Welsh, which read: 'Byddwch lawen. Cadwch y ffydd. Gwnewch y Pethau Bychain', translated as: 'Be joyful. Keep the faith. Do the little things.'
The silver elements bear a full hallmark, including the Royal Mark – a leopard's head, which was applied by the King himself in November last year when visiting The Goldsmiths' Centre in London.
'Its design speaks to our Christian faith, our heritage, our resources and our commitment to sustainability.
'We are delighted too that its first use will be to guide Their Majesties into Westminster Abbey at the coronation service.'
The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Cardiff and Bishop of Menevia, Mark O'Toole, said: 'With a sense of deep joy we embrace this cross, kindly given by King Charles, and containing a relic of the True Cross, generously gifted by the Holy See.
'It is not only a sign of the deep Christian roots of our nation but will, I am sure, encourage us all to model our lives on the love given by our Saviour, Jesus Christ.
'We look forward to honouring it, not only in the various celebrations that are planned, but also in the dignified setting in which it will find a permanent home.'
Designer and maker Michael Lloyd said: 'The commission has allowed me to delve into the previous 1,000 years of faith and history. Now, with more than 267 thousand hammer blows, the cross has emerged from the inanimate sheets of silver, and I am delighted it will be used as part of the Coronation Service on 6th May.'
Dr Frances Parton, deputy curator of The Goldsmiths' Company – who managed the commission, said: 'Using the ancient craft of chasing silver, Michael Lloyd has created a beautiful object which combines a powerful message with a practical purpose.
'We are thrilled that the Cross will both feature in the Coronation and see regular use within the Church in Wales.'
The public service held in Llantrisant began at 9am at the start of the Church's governing body meeting.
Archbishop Andrew said: 'We are honoured that His Majesty has chosen to mark our centenary with a cross that is both beautiful and symbolic.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11988247/Pope-gifts-two-fragments-cross-Jesus-crucified-King-Charles-coronation-procession.html
Also, IMO, Mr. Todger is mightily afraid of Mrs. Todger. If he missteps, does one thing wrong, the tiniest thing, he will be abused, screamed at, etc. when they are in private. He tried to kiss her? He will die a thousand deaths for that as soon as they get in the door. A partner of a narcissist get never do anything right.