At last, the coronation.
How are you celebrating? food? drink? dress up? tiara?
Whilst we celebrate, take a look at a nice history of the all the earlier Kings and Queens. It ends while Her Majesty was still alive. And for all the UK citizens, please note that they do have a mistake or two but note the correction in the description. For the rest of us, sometimes it is nice to see the origins of something as we don't always have a good overall vision of this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evArztIZpYw
Probably not mentioned by the talking heads is the history of the Abbey. It began on what was then called Thorney Island (marsh area where the Thames and Tyburn met) as Benedictine monastery (960 something).
More likely they will be talking about how there will be females singing in the choir. And, that there is a distinct attempt to connect with all the different groups of people who make up the kingdom of today.
More likely they will be talking about how there will be females singing in the choir. And, that there is a distinct attempt to connect with all the different groups of people who make up the kingdom of today.
The new era has begun with lots of changes. May the new King live long and have peace in the land. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZGRxn9eCxU
Comments
Sorry, Harry and Meghan — the lies don’t fly in NYC
Two unwelcome imports arrived in New York this week. You may have heard about Harry and Meghan’s big night in the city.
Accounts of their time here differ.
According to the couple themselves they suffered the ordeal of a two-hour, “near-catastrophic” car-chase with paparazzi tailing them all the way.
According to other sources (including the NYPD and the driver of the taxi the couple changed into to look humbler) the truth was rather different.
The fact is we didn´t need the authorities to tell us that.
Every New Yorker knows that any kind of car-chase — let alone a two-hour one — is literally impossible in this city.
You can sit in traffic for two hours, sure. But actually racing through the city?
Sorry, but no. Every New Yorker can call that out as BS.
And now we have the footage to prove it.
Video of the exchange shows that the Sussexes were accompanied by the NYPD and that they moved at no speed at all.
In fact they were moving so slowly that their driver got out of the car at one point.
So why lie?
It is understandable if Harry fears the paparazzi, and car chases in particular.
But he doesn’t need to invent such things to get sympathy from people over the death of his mother.
But in Harry and Meghan land nothing can be done without drama, exaggeration and lies.
They are the most privacy-seeking publicity-seekers that even this city has seen.
Yet they chose the wrong place to do it in. One of the greatest things about New York and its inhabitants is that the city is so unimpressible. A prince and a duchess might arrive in the city expecting everyone to stop and gawp, but the city just wants to go about its business. I was passing a hotel in midtown the other week when a small group of people were hanging outside the doorway. “Who’re they waiting for?” I asked one onlooker. “Keanu Reeves, apparently” a guy said, shrugged and walked on too.
Naturally it is different in LA. There the town grinds to a stop when a full-wattage mega-star arrives at their favorite restaurant. Paparazzi surround the publicity-hungry celebs. And celebrity-themed buses tour fans around, showing the hedges and gates that surround the famous peoples´ houses.
So this was the wrong city for Meghan and Harry to set their big scene. Because most likely it was all staged for the next installment of their Netflix series. Meghan seems to be continuing her audition to be acclaimed as the most hard-done-by person on the planet. Whether it is not going to a coronation or not having enough houses, there is no sorrow that is like Meghan’s sorrow.
Harry, on the other hand, is a man on a campaign. And his campaign is against the press. As readers of his memoir will know, Harry has an almost obsessive hatred of the free press. A serial litigant, he is due to appear in court before the summer to testify in the latest in a string of cases he has brought against a newspaper. But at some point perhaps someone should tell the poor lad the truth.
Not least the fact that his mother was not simply a victim of the media. His mother courted the media. Diana was forever calling journalists, planting stories, alerting them to where she would be and when she might leave. She was a master at manipulating the media and public. It was a talent that Harry did not inherit.
Instead he just has this fuming resentment, blaming everything in his life — including the break-up with his previous girlfriend — on the media. So in his mind the media must pay.
Yet one of the problems of blaming all your problems on someone or something else is that you end up robbing yourself of agency. If there are things in Harry’s life that haven’t gone well he should look to his own behavior.
His fallout with his family is not the fault of the press. His wife’s fallout with her own family and her in-laws is not the fault of the media. It is the fault of the couple themselves, who constantly try to plant stories, make outrageous claims and claim attention, only then to turn around and pretend to be outraged that anyone is paying attention to them.
Well sorry, but the trick doesn’t work anymore. The Sussex show has run out of gas and stalled, somewhere on the Upper East Side.
You know who has not apparently spoken out is the driver of the SUV.
@abbyh: I believe the SUV driver was, in some capacity, probably being employed by the Smolletts or perhaps the organization that sold the award to Harry’s wife. There is a good chance the driver might be under an NDA of some sort, either directly by the Smolletts, or if employed by a limo company, under an NDA by that company, or by the award orgsnization. My guess is all of the Smollett’s expenses including travel to and from the event, ground transportation, lodging, and meals. They may have even paid for her dress, hair and makeup and similar goodies for Harry.
We are fortunate the taxi driver was a random person and that neither Harry or his wife had an NDA on them for him to sign as soon as they entered his taxi. We are also fortunate the driver gave multiple interviews. By now, he might have been told to stop talking.
I’m just wondering if the litigious duo will attempt to sue someone or some organization in an attempt to salvage something fro
this branding disaster and portray themselves as victims instead of ghouls feeding on the memory of Harry’s mother.
* He can spend 15 nights in the UK from the 6th of April 2020 to the 5th of April 2021.
* He can spend 45 nights in the UK from the 6th of April 2021 to the 5th of April 2022.
* He can spend 90 nights in the UK from the 6th of April 2022 to the 5th of April 2023.
* This test also requires him to work overseas for one hour per week doing something.
As for the future:
* For the year April 2025 to April 2026, 90 nights.
* From the 6th of April 2026 he is free to return to the UK full-time and not be taxed on his earnings from the 6th of April 2025 to the 5th of April 2026, either on income or capital gains from financial assets sold or transferred to him from trust etc.
* The UK tax system runs from the 6th of April to the 5th of April; the U.S tax system runs from the 1st of January to the 31st of December.
I can't find the actual article in the DM website, but Rishi Sunak said that "Cars in New York are not really my priority or my responsibility."
https://archive.ph/2023.05.19-074540/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/05/19/harry-meghan-sussex-marriage/
My question: Why does he have to attend a gym when they have a fully equipped gym at home? A personal trainer could come to him.
"Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's security team drove on the wrong side of the road, a witness has claimed.
The Duke of Sussex released a statement through a spokesperson on Wednesday, claiming he and his wife had been involved in a "near catastrophic" car chase following their appearance at a gala in New York.
The couple attend the Ms Foundation for Women's award ceremony in New York on Tuesday evening.
A photographer at the incident has said that Meghan and Harry's security team caused "chaos" as they attempted to evade paparazzi.
The witness said: "They were heading east on 57th Street and came to a stop at a red light at 8th Avenue.
"It’s two lanes of traffic in each direction and they pulled out onto the opposite side of the road into oncoming traffic. But they got stuck in the middle of the road.
"It caused absolute chaos."
Another photographer told ITV: "Their driver was making it a catastrophic experience."
It comes as Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's "near catastrophic" car chase claim was dismissed by their taxi driver on the evening.
Sukhcharn Singh picked up Meghan and Harry from the New York City Police Department’s 19th precinct, where they had gone to get away from paparazzi, on Tuesday evening.
Singh has called the couple's statement on the car chase "exaggerated" after speaking out on the incident.
He told NBC: "I think that’s all you know, exaggerated and stuff like that. So don’t read too much into that, you know.
"New York City is the safest place to be."
In a separate interview, Singh told the Washington Post: "I don’t think I would call it a chase."
"I never felt like I was in danger. It wasn’t like a car chase in a movie."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-s-security-team-caused-absolute-chaos-by-driving-on-wrong-side-of-road/ar-AA1bpfC5?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=4b542ab15b9e4e75bb62786b07181c3d&ei=29
Harry goes along with the madness but I will not believe he was the mastermind behind this stunt.
I agree entirely, if only because a car chase by paps would be too triggering. In fact, as @snarky said, 'are they ['mama and the grifter'] setting him up for a breakdown.' It's certainly not far fetched.
--------------
@Rebecca
You say people in NYC seem unfazed by famous people and this reminded me of a time when I went for an appointment at a London hospital. There seemed to be a few people standing there waiting outside but I didn't take much notice. When I came out, there was a small crowd waiting. I asked a road worker what was going on and Prince Charles, as he then was, was coming to visit a building across the road. I waited a few minutes and Charles arrived on foot (not sure where they parked) with a few people but no noticeable bodyguards (they must have been discreet). When he left, I 'followed' him as I was heading in the same direction. He then went into another building, chatting to the people who were with him. I carried on to the tube station to take the tube back to work. I was only a few metres away from him, there was no exclusion zone. The whole thing was very low key and would have been easy to miss and there was no need for all the over the top behaviour of the duo.
I will not believe he was the mastermind behind this stunt.
I agree completely with your statement, a car chase by paparazzi would be too triggering. In fact, as @snarky said, 'are they ['mama and the grifter']setting him up for a breakdown.' This is certainly not far fetched.
--------------------
@Rebecca
You said New York's seem unfazed by celebs/famous people. This reminds me of a time when I went for an appointment at a London hospital. I saw a few people standing there waiting outside but didn't take much notice. When I came out there more people outside waiting. I asked a road worker what was going on and he said Prince Charles, as he then was, was coming to visit a medical building across the road. I waited a little bit and then Charles arrived on foot (not sure where they parked) with some people and went into the building. When he came out, he walked towards another building, still talking to the people with him, presumably hospital staff. I 'followed' him as I was heading in the same direction to take the tube back to work. I was walking only a few metres from him, protection was very discreet - there were no visible bodyguards - and the whole thing was very low-key, in fact easy to miss. Charles was chatting in a very relaxed manner, the bystanders were very respectful and didn't approach him. This was a world away from the over the top antics of the duo.
Thanks for Rishi Sunak's comment. Here is the DM headline and a couple of paragraphs.
In a round of interviews overnight as he attends the G7 summit in Japan, the PM said he was 'not aware of a particular incident in question'.
Pressed if he has sympathy with a possible invasion of privacy or safety, Mr Sunak said: 'I think just as all of us do, we want to make sure that we go about our day-to-day lives in safety and security.
'My job as Prime Minister is to ensure everyone feels safe in our country. That's why we put 20,000 more police officers on the street. It's why we're giving them the powers to tackle things like knife crime.'
But told the incident under discussion happened in the US, Mr Sunak said: 'Cars in New York are not really my priority or my responsibility.
'What is my priority and responsibility is people's safety at home.'
He said it loud and clear. Did your hear that/read that over in Montecito? I hope those two are smarting for a long time.
[H] has also been known to stay at the uber-exclusive San Vincente Bungalows [in LA]-
“That seems to be his escape place”
https://twitter.com/BaronessBruck/status/1659546407236247552
@according2_taz
·
Harry stays at a local hotel in Montecito so regularly, that they have a room set aside for him & he also stays at the San Vicente Bungalows, alone, in LA.
“They’re like any married couple, five years in.”
I can assure you, that is NOT NORMAL
https://twitter.com/according2_taz/status/1659544527105933312
Yes, the article in the Telegraph is revelatory. The hotel room in Montecito on permanent hold for Harry so he can stay there when he likes; the fact he often stays up late gaming; his isolation from most everyone and everything that anchored him for most of his life….
That one photo of Harry, Meghan and Doria in the taxi in NYC said it all—Doria staring at her lap, Harry looking stressed while trying to film the paps, and Meghan with that demented smile on her face, clearly relishing the attention.
It would appear to be only a matter of time before the Sussexes’ house of cards comes crashing down.
this is the Telegraph article about Harold staying in hotels, in its entirety, without any paywalls.
I once heard that Malay soldiers refer to going to a brothel as `paying their income tax'.
Mr. Todger has gotten naked in public in the US, In Las Vegas, and afterwards he disappeared for awhile, family put him on time out. It's just a matter of time before Todger does something embarrassingly awful in public because there are no restraints to keep him in check.
Royal pals are ‘mocking’ Harry, Meghan over ‘hysterical’ NYC car chase story
https://nypost.com/2023/05/19/royal-pals-are-mocking-harry-meghan-over-hysterical-nyc-car-chase-story/
-----
Friends of the British royal family have mocked Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s account of a “near catastrophic” car chase in New York, after photographs, videos and other participants’ accounts gave a very different—and much less perilous—impression of the evening’s events, with one friend of Prince William quipping, “Recollections may vary.”
The friend added: “I thought they were leaving the royal family for a quieter life. If flashbulbs give Harry flashbacks, I don’t understand why he is going to award ceremonies.”
Asked if William, whose spokesperson has declined to comment on the incident, would at least take Harry’s side on the issue of invasive paparazzi, the friend said: “William and Catherine have put up with shit like this in the past. Everyone understands his anger at the photographers, but making hysterical statements doesn’t help matters, especially when, as the queen might have said, recollections may vary.”
A friend of King Charles, whose office has also said he won’t be making a formal comment, told The Daily Beast: “Charles will completely understand Harry being upset at being pursued by the paparazzi. He knows how scary it can be. But he has always tried to get Harry to understand that complaining about photographers or the media is pointless. It just makes it all worse.”
-----
The piece finishes off with this:
A London-based PR executive who has worked for the royals told The Daily Beast: “If I had to guess, I would say this is Harry going, ‘This is unacceptable, I’m going to say something,’ and no one having the balls to say, ‘Well, maybe not, sir, that would be really fucking stupid and it is going to totally overshadow everything your wife has been doing tonight, her big comeback.’ This is what happens when people do their own PR.”
https://archive.ph/2023.05.19-094602/https://www.thedailybeast.com/royal-friends-mock-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-as-nyc-chase-story-unravels
As i said - the gift that keeps on giving.
https://www.barrys.com/
https://www.losangelesblade.com/2017/08/23/joey-gonzalez-wants-make-world-sweat/
https://pagesix.com/2023/05/19/harry-meghans-nyc-car-chase-happened-because-they-were-too-cheap-to-pay-for-hotel-source/
The entitled couple allegedly demanded the Carlyle — the late Princess Diana’s favorite hotel — give them a discounted room for their New York City visit this week.
According to law enforcement sources, bosses at the Carlyle refused the hefty discount, so the embattled pair instead stayed at a friend’s house on the Upper East Side.
Look at this excrable painting of Haznoballs, Megaliar and heavenly Diana. I actually laughed so hard that I both hurt my throat and pulled a stomach muscle:
https://twitter.com/daikhood/status/1659456203271880704
And if you have time, drill down into the hilarious comments AND drill further to read the comments incredulous people have made to the commenters. Tons of fun.
There is so much wrong with the painting, but the first thing I noticed was that Hazbeen has way too much hair here.
Enjoy!
-----
Harry and Meghan’s “near-catastrophic car chase” happened because they were too cheap to pay for a hotel, sources have revealed.
The entitled couple allegedly demanded the Carlyle — the late Princess Diana’s favorite hotel — give them a discounted room for their New York City visit this week.
But when the paparazzi began following them Tuesday night from the Ziegfeld Theater — in what their spokesperson claimed was a “relentless pursuit, lasting over two hours” — the duo didn’t want to lead the photographers back to their friend’s home and reveal where they were staying.
A New York City law enforcement source told Page Six: “They should have just gotten a hotel for the safety of everyone. Instead, they were cheap and wanted a free place to stay.”
The couple attended the Women of Vision Awards, where Meghan accepted an award from Gloria Steinem, before their alleged “near-catastrophic car chase.”
According to the source, “Harry and Meghan’s people called the Carlyle ahead of the trip and asked for a discounted room, and the hotel said no.
“If they had just paid up and got a hotel in the first place, this supposed ‘dangerous’ paparazzi chase around town would never have happened. They would have been driven back to the Carlyle, been photographed going inside and that would have been the end of it.”
In the past, Harry and Meghan have been regulars at the Carlyle, where rooms go from around $1,240 and suites up to $6,000 a night. They checked into the iconic hotel during a visit to New York in 2021, and were seen dining at the hotel’s famed Bemelmans Bar.
.....
https://archive.ph/2023.05.19-180429/https://pagesix.com/2023/05/19/harry-meghans-nyc-car-chase-happened-because-they-were-too-cheap-to-pay-for-hotel-source/
"They should just market themselves as a sitcom. Misadventures, misunderstandings, misshapen clothes, mistaking furniture stain as bronzer, any and all kinds of mirth and mayhem."
From reddit/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/response_from_the_taxi_driver, use my tiny url to read the whole post:
https://tinyurl.com/ybymch2r
"I'm sure it was traumatic for a near-actor and a near-royal to be involved in something near-catastrophic."
Nailed it!
Backgrid USA reportedly said the prince's 'English rules of royal prerogative to demand that the citizenry hand over their property to the Crown were rejected by this country long ago'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12104465/American-firm-dismisses-demand-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-hand-pictures.html
The Sussexes are frazzled, fraught and lacking romance – like any couple with young kids
Five years after their wedding, the omens are bad as Harry and Meghan seem to be heading in different directions
By
Camilla Tominey,
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
19 May 2023 • 8:00am
However, questions have been raised over how such a campaign sits with the Duchess’s plans to build her “global enterprise”. Meghan signed with leading global talent agency WME in April, amid talk of more “content creation”, a Dior clothing deal and the revamp of her defunct lifestyle blog The Tig.
Given this potential conflict, it is little wonder, then, that the couple have cut quite separate figures lately – with Harry travelling alone to the Coronation on May 6, leaving Meghan in Montecito with their two children, Archie, who turned four that day, and Lilibet who turns two next month.
The last time the Sussexes were photographed together in public was at a basketball game in Los Angeles last month, when they missed the opportunity to smooch on the “kiss cam” that pans in on couples in the stands. Some took the normally tactile couple’s reluctance as a sign all may not be well between them after Meghan’s absence from Harry’s promotional book tour fuelled split rumours.
https://archive.vn/BWHa1
This poster actually has a good point:
"They should just market themselves as a sitcom. Misadventures, misunderstandings, misshapen clothes, mistaking furniture stain as bronzer, any and all kinds of mirth and mayhem."
Add in visits to the hair transplants doctors, and the plastic surgery Docs for Megs. I can see a Lucille Ball type screwball comedy series there
Well, paying one's taxes is morally good and entirely acceptable, as long as that is what one really means...
I cast no aspersions on Barry's Boot Camp.
...
"London mayor Boris Johnson hailed Charles and Camilla's 'great fortitude of spirit'"...
...
"A spokesman said: 'Their Royal Highnesses totally understand the difficulties which the police face and are always very grateful to the police for the job they do in often very challenging circumstances.'"
A very scary attack and a totally different reaction but then C&C have a very different attitude. H&*, take note.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1337088/ROYAL-CAR-ATTACK-Mob-attacking-Charles-Camillas-car-lucky-shot.html
Grand Prixels
Haphazard Wails
and Megga Maniacal
Back pedalling now
from paps on a bicycle
De-fender benders of truth
it’s near comical
Better she was placed
in pole position
Ready to embrace
any rear collision
Could’ve been avoided
if she’d sat in the front
Hand on the brake
90210 stunt…
Singalong 🎤
Apologies: Nat King Cole
Smile
Cartastrophic
Smirk though your face
is aching
Smirk we all know you’re faking
When there’s no crowds to espy
you’ll just lie
Smirk as you beg and borrow
Smirk and cause much sorrow
You’ll find the world
is now smirking at you…
The Hollywood types must be quietly cringing at Mrs. Todger's PR stating she had lunch with Goop, and Cameron Diaz, etc. They must think Mrs. Todger is completely unhinged.
Whatever comes out of the Todger's PR is a lie, a total lie, all of it. Both Todgers are lying liars.
insignificant.
I realize that there have been rumors that Todger has at times engaged the 'services' of professional ladies, but I don't know much about that. Like the yachting rumors & the rumors about Doria, incontrovertible proof has never been revealed in a reputable outlet, & I doubt it ever will be. We do know the Todgers are all about 'service,' though. LOL!
ILBW has been waiting for a 'gold dress' moment since Catherine appeared in one back in 2021. I'm just puzzled by how this Queen of Hertz moment & the paparazzi debacle will feature in her quest for lucrative commercial deals. Oh well, the Kardashians have made tons of money having their photos taken, I suppose the Todgers can as well. I can certainly see why the RF would want to keep their distance. It's like trying to separate the brand of an expensive champagne from Miller Lite. What to do, what to do?
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/13ms2kw/tumblr_the_funding_freebies_world_tour_continues/
TBW phoning around trying to get a freebie birthday cake for Archie. The bakery said not bloody likely! Merching is what she used to do and I suppose that she thought that with the royal title and connection, the merching gig would simply expand. Why pay when you can get something for free ... actually, I think that she thinks that her patronage is far more valuable than the value of the freebies she wants. When she does hand over money, it must be in the form of a 'gift' that is then used to burnish the image of a kind, generous philanthropist. I don't think either of them realize how cheap they come across with the asking for freebies and merching.
Meghan Markle, Prince Harry personally decided to parade past photographers before ‘chase’
https://pagesix.com/2023/05/19/harry-meghan-walked-by-paparazzi-despite-having-ex-obama-secret-service-agent-chris-sanchez-source/?_gl=1*626nur*_ga*MTUwMDYzNjExMC4xNjU0NTU2ODQ2*_ga_0DZ7LHF5PZ*MTY4NDU5MDkxMC4yNTEuMS4xNjg0NTkyMTUxLjAuMC4w&_ga=2.111258628.1883330727.1684590911-1500636110.1654556846
https://nypost.com/2023/05/20/meghan-markle-and-prince-harrys-brand-is-totally-off-base/
Did Gloria Steinem put them up for the night?
I can see Meghan’s good pal “Glo” putting them up in her apartment. Maybe they’ll start squatting and claim ownership.
Tom Brady is very famous here in the US, & is a good-looking guy, but the Todgers have their own notoriety. Hazmat & Megdusa telling people to rent cars? Crazier things happen in the USA all the time. Perhaps WME wants an ad with Brady & one or both of the Todgers.
WME has been increasing its involvement with all sorts of sports, which are a huge part of the USA advertising scene. Maybe they'll try to market the Todgers as a sporty couple.The only sport the Todgers are associated with personally is polo, but ILBW has been 'hiking' & she went to a Lakers game with Todger. It will be interesting to see what kind of magic WME can work.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-02-02/tom-brady-80-for-brady-wme-fifth-season-paramount-pictures-jane-fonda-lily-tomlin-rita-moreno-sally-field#:~:text=Brady%2C%20a%20WME%20client%2C%20appears,produced%20and%20financed%20the%20picture.
http://auralcrave.com/en/2023/04/30/lets-go-tom-brady-returns-in-the-2023-hertz-commercial/#:~:text=Luckily%20for%20him
The first thing I noticed as she entered my office were her feet. Long, misshapen feet put on full display in a pair of delicate gold sandals. I immediately understood that she had been a victim of torture and that the evil men who disfigured her had taken out their hatred for her on her extremities. Yet, she defied them by showing off the twisted wreckage as a badge of honour.
I was surprised she could still walk on those mangled appendages but she bravely toddled along, wearing a frozen smile to stifle the pain.
Her tormentors had no doubt starved her, evidenced by her twig legs as she hobbled along. And, despite her emaciated state, her belly was swollen, as it is in the most desperate famine victims. Berri berri, I think they call it.
And she had escaped from the grasp of her aggressors, wrapped in the cheap golden bedspread, the only fabric she could obviously find to protect her modesty and cover her wretchedness.
She slid into the chair opposite me and began to tell her story.
Given how large the house is in Montecito, why does he need a space to get away in some hotel somewhere else? I understand gaming (been there, done that, lived with people who did that too) but ... isn't there a room far enough away so as to not disturb the others or something at where the mortgage is being paid for? (our house was way smaller but we managed - shut doors and ... more).
Side note: pushing the need to get away at this point (young kids) is not likely to be well received as most people in a similar situation do not have the financial resources to pull that out for them. There are those who can and do that but ... not so many.
Stupid question for before:
Thinking more about the whole NYC ... situation. Where are the kids? I know that this event was not kid friendly (did I miss how this situation could have gone south and we were worried about what might be ... for our kids IF we had been in CA mention?) so when you look beyond that, when exactly do we (ever) see the kids? When? What occasions? But also, when do we not? Like Mother's Day? Pay attention to (therefore) Father's Day (because ... why would he look like a better parent that her... or something?). We hear/see about pictures "sometimes" on certain dates but there are birthdays and other emotionally charged dates. What about those?
Per this article:
Prince Harry Seemingly Tried to ‘Humiliate’ King Charles Before the Coronation With ‘Tampongate’ Reference, Commentator Says
Remember the “Tampongate” phone call between King Charles III and Queen Camilla? Well, Prince Harry brought it up before his father’s crowning on May 6. Immortalized via tape recording and depicted on The Crown, the Duke of Sussex referenced “Tampongate” in court documents made public in the lead-up to the coronation. According to a commentator, it may have been an effort to “humiliate” King Charles.
A 31-page witness statement from Harry was released as part of an April 2023 preliminary hearing in a phone-hacking lawsuit against News Group Newspapers, or NGN, the publisher of the British tabloid The Sun and the shuttered News of The World.
Going public shortly before the coronation, the 31-page statement saw Harry claim his brother, Prince William, received a large sum of money as part of a secret payout.
He also alleged the palace made a “secret agreement” with certain British tabloids, resulting in his being deterred from taking legal action.
As for why the palace would’ve made a “secret agreement,” Harry proposed it had been a preventative measure to avoid unfavorable stories being shared. His example: “Tampongate.”
However, Harry didn’t mention “Tampongate” by name. Instead, he said: “Details of an intimate telephone conversation that took place between my father and stepmother in 1989, while he was still married to my mother [Princess Diana].”
A recording of the phone conversation went public in 1993 following King Charles and Diana’s separation in late 1992.
In The Royal Report podcast’s May 3 episode, host Jack Royston called the “Tampongate” reference a possible humiliation attempt.
“Obviously, it’s quite striking that Harry has chosen to throw one of the most humiliating episodes in Charles’ life right into the middle of this case. When, to be honest, it was completely unnecessary to do so,” he said.
“The point that Harry’s trying to make here is really simple and straightforward,” he continued, adding that he “cannot see anybody contesting.”
“It was perfectly possible to make it with reference to evidence that is already part of the case,” Royston said. “It’s very straightforward that the palace would not want embarrassing information to come out in court. But the embarrassing information would be nothing whatsoever to do with ‘Tampongate.'”
“It would have been to do with the voicemail messages that had been hacked by journalists and private investigators. And we know what those were,” he added.
“You know, this is the kind of stuff that’s already there in the court documents, which shows that there would have been embarrassing revelations if a royal family member had been called to give evidence,” Royston continued.
“So, the fact that he chose to throw ‘Tampongate’ in there when it’s such an old example is either just a desire to humiliate Charles by dragging it all back to the surface again,” he said.
Another possible option the commentator considered is that Harry’s “Tampongate” reference was a “dig” at tabloids’ illegal wiretapping.
“Perhaps it’s a kind of dig along the lines that because that was a telephone call. Maybe Harry is trying to imply that it was a result of wiretapping by a tabloid newspaper. And that maybe Charles should have taken action over it,” Royston said. “But Harry doesn’t say that.”
The lawsuit continues as NGN argues the Duke of Sussex is too late in filing his claims. Meanwhile, Harry has ongoing lawsuits against other British tabloids. One of which is expected to go to trial in June 2023 with an appearance by Harry as a witness.
Dally Lame
A night at master bates motel
shocker
Norma by the window
off her rocker
Sheathed in a
golden shower curtain
Still not certain
one way or t’other
Is she his wife
or is she his mother…
https://twitter.com/Mystifeye/status/1659814924867063810
Thank you - that's perfect! Philip Marlowe sleuths again. Here's a repeat, in case anyone missed this gem:
The first thing I noticed as she entered my office were her feet. Long, misshapen feet put on full display in a pair of delicate gold sandals. I immediately understood that she had been a victim of torture and that the evil men who disfigured her had taken out their hatred for her on her extremities. Yet, she defied them by showing off the twisted wreckage as a badge of honour.
I was surprised she could still walk on those mangled appendages but she bravely toddled along, wearing a frozen smile to stifle the pain.
Her tormentors had no doubt starved her, evidenced by her twig legs as she hobbled along. And, despite her emaciated state, her belly was swollen, as it is in the most desperate famine victims. Berri berri, I think they call it.
And she had escaped from the grasp of her aggressors, wrapped in the cheap golden bedspread, the only fabric she could obviously find to protect her modesty and cover her wretchedness.
She slid into the chair opposite me and began to tell her story.
--------------
and @Magatha -
That's one of your very best.
Dally Lame
A night at master bates motel
shocker
Norma by the window
off her rocker
Sheathed in a
golden shower curtain
Still not certain
one way or t’other
Is she his wife
or is she his mother…
You both deserve the highest rewards for these literary endeavours - a crown of laurels for Magatha and a Golden Dagger award for crime fiction for GWAH. I shall print off both works and keep them for posterity.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/prince-harry-meghan-markle-2-hour-car-chase-ex-nypd-911
It begins, As an attorney and retired NYPD Inspector, I’ve been told some stories in my day. This one lands someplace between "Beowulf"and Monty Python.
As in `he's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy...'
WildBoar-latex offering
Couverthore
The shameless dame
lay spread on the bed
Brass ringed, goose feathered
hooves wrapped round bedhead
She left a French letter
ou deux, as a clue
Double en-chambre
duvet for two…
@GWAH
Love it, cover her wretchedness
hahaha
Slid👌perfect for the
scale shedding snake
Beriberi good 😉
BTW Did the American way of using a knife, then only a fork, really come about in a similar situation?
Thanks for sharing that article.
There seems to be so much in his lawsuits that is not relevant. Why are his lawyers going along with this? Are they aiming to manipulate a judge? Is it because they actually do not have evidence of him being hacked?
https://news.ohmymag.co.uk/entertainment/royal-family/king-charles-secret-son-will-take-a-fresh-approach-to-prove-his-lineage-next-year_art15796.html
thank you.
she is determined with the 2nd chakra to find balance and aim for the top and close the door to love.
She wishes to create a beginning of abundance for herself but she is still attached to her past, mask, but she wishes to leave with the card to leave. Except that his 3rd chakra is inverted vitality (putting things in place) to improve his life and attract happiness and personal success.
with the tarots: an action, a decision, we cut ourselves off from our past, we move forward in our personal projects, we want to create a favorable moment for ourselves, we try to get rid of something, we put a lot of willpower with the queen de baton, (as i write i don't think harry is here for his award show)
meghan wants to create a moment of mental liberation through her actions, to get out of a conflict or a marriage.
This week is going to be interesting
https://www.tumblr.com/mysteriouslytransparentwitch/717910836710113280/energy-meghan-markle-21th-may?source=share
And for him:
with the energy oracle: we have a beginning of the opening of the 3rd eye of harry, does he begin to see that his marriage is dead or does he begin to understand psychologically?
interesting the card of the contract is neither positive nor negative, the card is put in an angle of 45° degree, he sees the beginning of the end but with his 3rd eye. With the angel of love card, are there any thoughts on the topic of breaking free from that? his mind is very agitated at the moment, he is really disappointed with the royal family's non-response the community card is reversed and the love card too.
His mind is really agitated, many questions but few answers, much disappointment.
with the tarot cards: he is in a place where he reads a lot of newspaper articles, after the fall, he is in a form of solitude, there is something that is going to get complicated (his trial?)
loss of status, loss of power, he tries something to ask for something with the ace of batons but with the empress reversed = things become sterile.
he is mentally unstable but with the hangman card, impossible to get out of there (according to his point of view)
certain things come back with force, problems to face again?
https://www.tumblr.com/mysteriouslytransparentwitch/717912041217785856/energy-prince-harry-21-th-may?source=share
https://thecrownsofbritain.com/2023/05/13/royal-round-up-13th-may-coronation-special/comment-page-1/#comments
ArabellaL
@ArabellaRober19
Something the taxi driver said has really stuck with me. He said they got into his taxi and we followed by the black security SUVs that were using a CAMERA. Netflix anyone?
Was this entire thing set up for exciting Netflix scenes?
@Magatha
👏👏👏😂
@WBBM
Thank you for the Fox News opinion piece by Paul Mauro. It’s one of the very best I’ve read about the car chase that wasn’t. So many clever lines—I love this one:
“Look, perhaps if we were back in the Crusades or something, this tale could float, like a witch in a moat.”
https://twitter.com/ArabellaRober19/status/1660353157338103810
-----
Awhile from now, when it is all over, I think we may view the Royal Car Chase not as a silly bit of tabloid fluffery but as a turning point. You may feel differently; you may think there were other, bigger moments when you knew it had gone terribly wrong for Harry and Meghan. Oprah, or “recollections may vary”, or Netflix, or the tights catfight. The Fijian market freakout, the MBS diamond earrings, the suicidal thoughts at Cirque du Soleil, or the penis-heavy contents of Spare.
But never before have I actually thought: well, that’s it — it’s over; they’ve gone the full Imelda Marcos now. They’re literally crazed, on a one-way flight out of God knows where, stuffing diamonds into nappies as they flee the presidential palace, children howling, soldiers falling off collapsing walls, choppers, gunfire, pearls scattering, everyone watching agog as these glittering creatures, once on top of the world, now look washed up and hopeless, like bedraggled fallen despots.
And yet that’s what I thought at 3.30pm on Wednesday, when they released a statement saying they’d had a “near catastrophic” car chase in Manhattan, when, basically, they hadn’t.
The utter tastelessness of it.
Who does that?
It was mad.
I’m not going to go over the “chase” minute by minute. You can read the many live feeds, grids, diagrams, graphs, explainers, debates, interviews, post-match analyses etc elsewhere.
All you need to know is that on Tuesday, just after the couple left an awards ceremony with Meghan’s mother, at which Meghan was given an award for being a “woman of vision”, they claimed they were subjected to a “highly aggressive” car chase around the same few blocks for two whole hours.
-----
Why did it take so long? Mainly because the couple hysterically used three separate cars. They left the ceremony in a 4x4 with a police escort, circling for 75 minutes to give the paps the slip, before fleeing to a nearby police station when they didn’t. At the station they hid for 15 minutes in a garage until someone called a taxi. When the taxi got stuck behind a rubbish lorry, they went back to the same police station, where they got into a final vehicle, which took them on to where they were staying ... just two blocks away.
As I said: mad.
All these places were within walking distance; nothing could have been easier. But still, we’re meant to believe it’s the paps who were behaving like demented animals, driving on pavements, endangering pedestrians, causing “multiple near collisions” as they pursued them with “cars, scooters and bicycles”, bringing the duke “the closest I have ever felt” to understanding how his mother died.
Yet, as the New York police put it drily later: “There were no reported collisions, summonses, injuries or arrests.” The taxi driver who drove them for 15 minutes said the details had been “exaggerated”.
Nothing they said about their night now seems real. I don’t just mean the couple’s statement, clearly written by Meghan — I’d recognise those roiling Disney descriptions (“relentless pursuit”) anywhere. But the phoney/ridiculous award she was collecting; the fear, drama, danger: it was all fake.
I wasn’t going to write about the royals, but this is all just too appalling. It’s bad for us to have people constantly claiming things have happened when they haven’t: the drip-drip of conflicting information — sorry, “truth”.
The truth is, that taxi chase is Harry and Meghan. It is their mindset, their paranoia, their chaos, their attempt to label themselves as victims again. If you watch their Netflix series you can see how they egg each other on to the point they forget how to behave normally. During one short car journey Meghan tells Harry where each paparazzo is, effectively notifying him when to be scared, while he nervously whispers, “We’ll be with friends in less than ten minutes.” I blame him as much as her.
-----
They’re now in a lunatic downward spiral of fiction and fantasy. Ironically, you just think: “Are you OK?” Why, for example, did they feel threatened when they had a police escort the entire time? Should Harry’s obsession with photographers be the police’s problem? If Meghan is truly a “woman of vision”, why couldn’t she envision a simple, problem-free trip to the Upper East Side, where they were staying with a secret “friend”?
And why, the next day, when the story wasn’t going their way, did they think it would be a good idea to demand “copies of all photos, videos and/or films” taken by the photographers? The photo agency laughed in their faces. Don’t they know how pictures work? Harry should. An agency won’t hand over material simply because “third parties ... demand it be given to them, as perhaps kings can do”. They’re not in the palace any more.
When Meghan arrived on the scene, we all thought the same thing. Finally, an intelligent, worldly, sophisticated woman who was in love with Harry. And if she was the activist she said she was, so much the better. She could quietly show up the royal family for what it was: snobby, backwards, uncool, mediocre, unfair. And then, who knows what? She could have been a truly subversive figure and cratered it from the inside (my dream). But none of that has happened.
What’s happened is the royal family has, conversely, shown Meghan and Harry up for what they are: a pair of wayward hangers-on with unhealthy egos. The more the family trundles on, the more enraged the couple seem. For three weeks we had been waiting: how would Meghan punish Charles for daring to have the coronation? And here’s the answer. What must the royals think when they see the grotty pictures of the Sussexes in a grim taxi on their mercy flight out of Manila — sorry, midtown?
https://archive.is/2023.05.20-231751/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-biggest-threat-to-harry-and-meghan-isnt-paparazzi-on-bicycles-its-their-own-paranoia-0rqrwd2wr
Couverthore
...She left a French letter
ou deux, as a clue
Double en-chambre...
Brilliant, as always. You have such a way with words.
brilliant, as always.
Do you think this Twitter account is her? I found it via a Reddit post ...
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/13o7wjy/iso_archived_version_of_the_working_actress_megs/
And the poster says:
Has anyone been able to find an archived version of Meg's anonymous blog The Working Actress? Here's an article from the Daily Mail to give you a sense of the blog:
https://archive.ph/4p95E
The related twitter account is still out there. Childhood friend Ninaki Priddy is a follower. The account follows only 7 twitter accounts, one of which is Meg's actress friend Janina Gavankar (remember her?)
https://twitter.com/workingactress?lang=en
The Twitter account even includes a Link to Ina Gartner's video on Youtube that features THE ROAST CHICKEN RECIPE!! Yes, Sinners, this is THE roast chicken that Megs prepared for Harry. This is posted under "media" on the twitter account:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys7dyV97FXw
-----
The Working Actress blog seems to have been scrubbed from the Internet, but I did read it a while back and did not think it was her. The person who wrote it came across as British to me. But, I think maybe she could have serious issues and does strange stuff, including taking on a fake persona.
it could be hers since the twitter account only has tweets about the working actress blog and nothing else.
Thank you for posting the first part of the excellent Camilla Long commentary in The Times. I’d like to add the rest of it—it’s worth reading:
(Continued…)
Why did it take so long? Mainly because the couple hysterically used three separate cars. They left the ceremony in a 4x4 with a police escort, circling for 75 minutes to give the paps the slip, before fleeing to a nearby police station when they didn’t. At the station they hid for 15 minutes in a garage until someone called a taxi. When the taxi got stuck behind a rubbish lorry, they went back to the same police station, where they got into a final vehicle, which took them on to where they were staying ... just two blocks away.
As I said: mad.
All these places were within walking distance; nothing could have been easier. But still, we’re meant to believe it’s the paps who were behaving like demented animals, driving on pavements, endangering pedestrians, causing “multiple near collisions” as they pursued them with “cars, scooters and bicycles”, bringing the duke “the closest I have ever felt” to understanding how his mother died.
Yet, as the New York police put it drily later: “There were no reported collisions, summonses, injuries or arrests.” The taxi driver who drove them for 15 minutes said the details had been “exaggerated”.
Nothing they said about their night now seems real. I don’t just mean the couple’s statement, clearly written by Meghan — I’d recognise those roiling Disney descriptions (“relentless pursuit”) anywhere. But the phoney/ridiculous award she was collecting; the fear, drama, danger: it was all fake.
I wasn’t going to write about the royals, but this is all just too appalling. It’s bad for us to have people constantly claiming things have happened when they haven’t: the drip-drip of conflicting information — sorry, “truth”.
The truth is, that taxi chase is Harry and Meghan. It is their mindset, their paranoia, their chaos, their attempt to label themselves as victims again. If you watch their Netflix series you can see how they egg each other on to the point they forget how to behave normally. During one short car journey Meghan tells Harry where each paparazzo is, effectively notifying him when to be scared, while he nervously whispers, “We’ll be with friends in less than ten minutes.” I blame him as much as her.
They’re now in a lunatic downward spiral of fiction and fantasy. Ironically, you just think: “Are you OK?” Why, for example, did they feel threatened when they had a police escort the entire time? Should Harry’s obsession with photographers be the police’s problem? If Meghan is truly a “woman of vision”, why couldn’t she envision a simple, problem-free trip to the Upper East Side, where they were staying with a secret “friend”?
When Meghan arrived on the scene, we all thought the same thing. Finally, an intelligent, worldly, sophisticated woman who was in love with Harry. And if she was the activist she said she was, so much the better. She could quietly show up the royal family for what it was: snobby, backwards, uncool, mediocre, unfair. And then, who knows what? She could have been a truly subversive figure and cratered it from the inside (my dream). But none of that has happened.
What’s happened is the royal family has, conversely, shown Meghan and Harry up for what they are: a pair of wayward hangers-on with unhealthy egos. The more the family trundles on, the more enraged the couple seem. For three weeks we had been waiting: how would Meghan punish Charles for daring to have the coronation? And here’s the answer. What must the royals think when they see the grotty pictures of the Sussexes in a grim taxi on their mercy flight out of Manila — sorry, midtown?
https://pagesix.com/2023/05/21/gayle-king-calls-out-people-downplaying-harry-meghan-markle-car-chase/
Evans E. 🏳️🌈⚧ 👨🏿🏫 #KingCharles'Angel
@jomilleweb
EXPLOSIVE 🚨🚨
We now have video showing New York police officers scolding Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s security guy/driver for crossing the road and driving recklessly.
#HarryAndMeghanAreLyingGrifters
Thank you
@MeghansMole
with video (German subtitles)
My first post didn’t go through for some reason. I had thanked you for the Camilla Long piece, and said I thought it was excellent, then copy and pasted the rest of it. The best laid plans. Sorry!
I'm afraid I don't share your opinion of * when she came on the scene. Right from the off, I personally saw her as smirking and manipulative. In the engagement interview, she had the gall to state she wanted to modernise the monarchy. I'm not surprised if she saw the BRF as you describe it: "snobby, backwards, uncool, mediocre, unfair." It may look that way superficially when you're not British but shows a lack of understanding. In fact, I think these adjectives do apply to * herself.
When the royals see the pictures of H&* in a taxi they must breathe a sigh of relief they're several thousand miles/km away in SoCal and are grateful * stayed there for the Coronation.
@WildBoar
Brings to mind
“Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”
haz with his cork fork n knife…
@Maneki
Blankety Blank 😜
@Rebecca
I didn’t like her from the off
intelligent, worldly, sophisticated
hahaha
The ‘lady’ didst project too much,
methought
@GWAH
Gayle probably angling for
Carcrashian interviews
Sponsored by Hertze and
Golden Drape funerals
I posted the whole article but some got lost. It is well worth a read.
The Gayle King comments seem to indicate that the duo are doing what they always do: bonding in their victimhood, endless phone calls to friends to defend them ... and then there are the denials. Gaslighting! But more and more people are seeing through the BS and more and more people are questioning their insanity.
Their next appearance will be in Hollywood, for her to pick up another silly award. What she really wants is the Oscar!
* Will he be with her?
* How much security will they have, and will they convince the governor (whoever) to provide them with publicly funded security?
* How much clap back will be in her speech, if she gives a speech? Who will she attack in her passive aggressive way?
* Will she go all out with a designer dress or another last season off the rack garment?
* Will she have new itty bitty, meaningful jewellery?
https://youtu.be/cuc2e6zqHCM
It starts on minute 44. The guy says he knows some of the photographers that were involved in the ‘non existent’ chase, and basically he confirms a little of what H&M’s team said, that they agreed to the pictures outside the event, so that would prevent a follow from them, but was actually their ‘immature and amateur’ security who started everything, they apparently were mocking the paparazzi before the duo were out the event and they also were taking pictures of the papz, so the photographers started following them I think like a ‘revenge’ (because the guy says that it doesn’t make sense a ‘high speed chase’, because they already had pictures from inside the event, so the Papz pictures were already cheaper) but it was a ‘pacific follow, not a chase’.
They also concluded that was disgusting to invoke Diana and that they need to communicate things better.
-----
My comment: Why is their security behaving like reckless amateurs? Is this what happens to people who are too close for too long to the duo?
There were so many witnesses!
It seems the cops arrived on the scene because an SUV in their entourage was blocking traffic. There is video evidence of this.
Gayle King is working hard to get an interview with the duo. I think they may be desperate enough to do so in the belief that they can control the narrative.
Her treatment of Samantha Cohen says it all, really.
See also https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/13okpd5/did_say_antisemitic_things_to_samantha_cohen/
Poster speculates that this may be why the report was never issued - `it would've caused a shit storm'. Harry not concerned about it. I wonder how Trevor feels?
BTW Did the American way of using a knife, then only a fork, really come about in a similar situation?
I think events of the past week have proven that we may be reaching the denouement of this farcical tragedy, The Sussex Saga. I really believe that theirs is strictly a contract marriage, of a kind commonplace in Hollywood. These things generally have an expiry date of a few years. Certainly under ten, which is the magic number in a community property state like California. Tom Cruise infamously dumped his contract wife Nicole just a month or two shy of their tenth anniversary, after which she'd have been entitled to 50% of his vast fortune, and tragically, she'd just suffered a miscarriage prior. When love is absent but narcissism isn't, dissolving the contract is a no-brainer.
They've been hanging on until the Queen passed, at which point they assumed that they'd be able to manipulate Charles easily and worm their way back into being Royal on their terms. I think it's been a nasty shock to realize that they aren't suddenly having their way in all matters. Madam may have shoved off for a superannuated billionaire way before now, but Covid threw a monkey wrench in their triumphant launch of Sussex Court West. In a way, Covid helped them maintain a facade of relevance for longer. They could stage their little tableaux online and not have to be seen getting rejected in person. They could remain opaque about where they were living and how they spent their time and with whom, because nobody was getting out, industry events weren't happening. Once they started having to show up in person, they only proved what empty vacuous inarticulate dull-witted bags of zero charisma nothing they actually are. The wheels are completely off the train now, but 5 years is a longer run than we ever dreamed they've have. She's got to have just about run through all the money, if they have to go begging (well, demanding) free suites at the Carlyle. I really think the whole faked up 'life threatening' chase around the same two blocks of Manhattan for two hours was Madam's response to being denied a brag walk into the Carlyle (Diana's favorite Manhattan hotel) from her luxury SUV ala Angelina Jolie. She had to concoct something else to invoke Diana for attention and this was it. Had to distract from letting anyone tail them to where they were actually staying--couch-surfing at some PA's five-floor walk-up? Or even worse . .having to go to Brooklyn for a budget motel.
Madam's cards are all falling down.
In answer to your query (tongue in cheek) about the American style of cutlery usage, I have an entertaining anecdote from my college Spanish instructor, Snta. Forrester. She always mixed up her draconian grammar drills with interesting tidbits about Spanish culture that were a highlight of her classes.
According to her, and she was not prone to whimsy as such, the difference in the Continental vs. the Colonial table etiqutte evolved thusly:
In Europe, the preferred methods of doing someone in at a dinner party were either tampering with the food/drink with poison or stabbing someone under the table with a small dagger concealed in one's sleeve or elsewhere on the person. So, in order to show good faith, one keeps both hands out and visible on the table with knife and fork in hand, to show you are focused on your food and not any funny business.
In the New World, in the metropolitan areas like New York City (formerly New Amsterdam) or Philadelphia, the Continental ways would have been imported from Europe and stayed in fashion for quite a while. I'm sure when the forces of His Majesty King George III occupied those cities, they would have recognized the table manners as familiar.
Outside of the big cities, it was a different situation. If one had hewed a homestead cabin out of the woods with one's own hands, the nearest neighbors were going to be woodland predators like wolves, coyotes and bears. There were also the local indigenous tribes that viewed white settlers as squatters on their lands and could be hostile. So while the homesteader was eating his supper, he had to keep one eye on the door and one hand on his rifle. So Pa would use both hands momentarily to cut his meat but would lay the knife down and eat with one hand out of vigilance. Other family members copied him in solidarity . . maybe Ma was dining with a piece as well, and the American custom of laying one's knife down at intervals was born. We also flip the fork so the tines face up, since we aren't using the knife to push food onto the fork, it's easier to scoop with the curved edge. I confess that eating with the flat side of the fork seems to me a difficult way of transporting food to the mouth safely. Hence the British custom of 'mushy peas' which are definitely not a thing Stateside.
This is what I was told. Does it seem plausible?
- `modernising the monarchy':
Me: `WTF? It's long been known even by lowly folk like me, that the RF has long been aware of the need to keep up-to-date but it has to be done very carefully - the 1969 film was controversial and the later Royal Knockout (1987) did not go down very well in some quarters - ERII was not amused.
Nevertheless, there's been much modernisation - done sensitively and when the time is right.
- *'s attitude to UK's relationship with the EU.
Me:`WTF? Who's pulling her strings? What's it got to do with her?'
Windows in NYC often have bars to insure someone does not accidentally go through them from inside to outside.
Thanks for your piece on dining etiquette in Europe & US.
Thanks for the mention of mealtime assassination -one of my presumed ancestors in medieval Ireland is said to have held a banquet for his enemies - and he had the lot slaughtered when they were at table (I'm not sure if my kin were still counted as Normans, or whether they had become `more Irish than the Irish ' by then.) Keeping one's hands visible at all times reminds me of how children in bed in boarding school `dorms' had to keep their hands above the covers - but for a very different reason.
I like the `pioneer' explanation for American ways - what I heard though was that during the War of Independence, Redcoats would be billeted in ordinary homes. So nervous were they about being attacked by the householder that they allowed the family only to cut up their food before they removed the `weapons' away (or else they cut the food up for them).
On the subject of barred windows - and bears - we once stayed in a Transylvanian mountain hut we called it the Overlook Hotel- the 2 dormer windows were like eyes, very sinister. The windows were barred and the only door was padlocked at night so we were trapped - loo (Brick privy over large hole) was outside...
In the morning, the custodian swore that the door wasn't locked and, anyway, it kept the bears out.
Oh I see. Hadn't thought of that. Dangerous place Manhattan.
I agree with you that '5 years is a longer run than we ever dreamed they've have.' I gave them 2 years!
Thanks for the history of American style of cutlery usage.
@Wild Boar
As I posted up thread, * seriously annoyed me with her wish to modernise the monarchy during the engagement interview. Not even yet legally in the family, a complete outsider and a foreigner to boot, she showed unbelievable arrogance, ignorance and stupidity. This from a 'whip smart' woman with a degree in theatre and international relations.
Really more of a problem with toddlers and small kids who don't understand the potential problems but have the ability to pull themselves up or crawl up.
Your explanation about the knives and forks is also very plausible. It was most likely a combination of the two that contributed to the American style of eating, and was rather geographically dependent on where the diner lived. Your explanation would explain how our style of cutlery usage became common in the cities where the population was much greater. For a long time they were relatively few people living on the frontier. At the time of King George, my state of Ohio would’ve represented the western most border of this country.
A recent TV series I enjoyed very much is called TURN: Washington’s Spies, and concerns figures of the American Revolution engaged in espionage. The center of a famous spy ring, alias Samuel Culpeper was a farmer on Long Island. His work puts him at odds with his father, the local Tory magistrate, who billets the British commander at his home, which is the finest in the town. I’m sure the officers were placed with “Friendlies” but the enlisted men had a variety of less congenial situations in barns and etc. The show is the fictionalized version of some real life events and personages. Major John Simcoe was probably not the absolute psychopath he is portrayed as.
https://youtu.be/QKGqGWUNsCA
Summary of video posted on Reddit:
Selling pictures from inside the dining room, the no-eye-contact rule, no speaking to the Duo order to hotel staff, being rude to staff and trashing the rooms. The Duo were loud, fighting, drinking a lot and did not sleep in the same room.
I missed out the bit about `- and a bloody foreigner' going to `hit the ground running' like an enemy paratrooper. Come to think of it, that image was more appropriate than we realised.
As for how she got her degree, she has demonstrated the requisite skills many times over:
- she is a complete plagiarist - her university era was when Turnitin, the plagiarism checking program, was very new. Perhaps she was assessed mainly on course work so she lifted material lifted from the sources and she hardly ever had to submit to the `You may turn over your question papers and begin' torment.
- I doubt if she would have any hesitation in cosying up to to the blokes that set/marked the question papers. She'd make sure they'd done something reprehensible in secret , then blackmail them, either for advance access to the question papers or threaten to reveal all if they failed her, or both.
Speculation of course, but this is MM we're talking about.
There's also the question of how she was able to get away with such poor use of English. Not that she'd have responded to correction of course. Her efforts remind me of the first essays that 16yr olds produce when starting their A-level course. I suspect also that her vocabulary is significantly smaller than that of her online critics.
Can other Nutties who are in the know about NYC geography have a look at this and see how likely this scenario is, please?
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/13oty5v/i_think_ive_figured_out_why_the_harkles_ended_up/
If it's even remotely true, they've sunk even deeper into the abyss - but I doubt if they've reached the end of their downward path.
I, too, think the Todgers are out of money, or really close to the end of it. They did not stay with Gloria Steinem, or they would have arrived together. They probably stayed at a hotel/motel adjacent to whichever airport they flew into (Kennedy, LaGuardia, Newark), then got the car service with an SUV and a driver.
Someone mentioned they had the SUV driver filming while the Todgers hopped into a cab. They might be filming, but there's no Netflix deal, that ship sank. There are no more takers for another Todger film after their boring drivel that was televised. WME doesn't want their film. Maybe Mrs. Todger is going to try to shove it down some assistant's throat at WME, a pity for that person. No more books. However, Gayle, with her sympathetic murmurings, is circling the carnage looking for some fresh meat. I hope the Todgers give Gayle every detail about the near catastrophic car chase, and how much the Todgers have suffered. The Todgers are good for some horrified fascination with their unlimited victimizations.
As for Mr. Todger regularly renting hotel rooms when he's got a 16 bedroom mansion, that's what a person does when they've got habits/vices/lifestyle choices they don't want anyone to know about, and performing acts with people of dubious character who can't be brought into one's home.
@abbyh
Oh I see. Hadn't thought of that. Dangerous place Manhattan.
Indeed. You may recall back over 30 years ago when Eric Clapton's 4-year-old son accidentally fell out of the 53rd floor window in their apartment when a janitorial crew accidentally left a window open.
Apologies to the company for one more brief diversion about American history, but it’s ultimately relevant to why the UK and the United States enjoy our ‘Special Relationship’ and why the British Royals and shows like Downtown Abbey continue to captivate Americans. I think Downton Abbey was a bigger hit on this side of the Pond than it was at home. Americans continue to regard British customs and culture as the height of sophistication, even after all of this years since we “left home”. Maybe there is an ingrained longing for “mother country” after 2 and a half centuries. The UK continues to be the number one tourist destination for Americans— primarily because it’s one European destination we can get to without speaking another language, but I also think we are in a sense searching for home, our routes, when we go there. Myself, I hail from ancestors that didn’t touchdown on American soil until 1888, some century after our revolution here, from what is now northern Germany. But believe me, I’d rather be able to count myself among the Mayflower descendants. Those are the closest we get to aristocracy in this country. I am descended from a bunch of Teutonic potato farmers, me.
One of the primary features of being American is that it’s not supposed to matter where you come from, or who your parents were… In our philosophy we are all equals and we self determine our own success or failure. But in studying my countries history, I discovered, only recently that During our revolution, and even after separation from England had been achieved, at best only 1/3 of the American population labeled themselves wholeheartedly as patriots. Another third were vehemently opposed to war with England, and wanted to remain with the Crown. Those were the Tories, who knew which side theIt bread was buttered on. To separate from the mother country while so geographically isolated, With no infrastructure, industry, trade power or money independent of England seemed like suicide. It easily could’ve been. It was luck more than anything, or really a disinclination of king George to continue engagement that led to our eventual separation from the Crown. We were vastly out manned in resources. The other third of the country was at best neutral. So discovering that a full 2/3 of the citizenry were opposed to apathetic about this action was quite shocking. We definitely are not taught this as school children. In fact, a revolution was hanging by such a thread that if a few more events had gone Benedict Arnold’s way at West Point, we could very well be part of the Commonwealth. If Arnold had succeeded in his treachery, General Washington would’ve been executed on the spot and he was figure holding everything together.
The shared DNA of our two nations can never be forgotten, despite our political differences. That’s why even before all the former colonies had had a chance to ratify the new constitution, the first order of business for the new country was to establish diplomatic and trade relations with the Court of Saint James. I dare say it was quite sporting of George III to receive Mr. Adams amiably Rather than having him shot on sight.
Millions of Americans got up at 5 AM or didn’t go to bed at all on the West Coast in order to watch Charles’s coronation. We don’t get any opportunity for pomp over here anymore. A presidential inauguration can’t even compete with the Rose Bowl Parade for splendor. We chose this for a good reason, but that doesn’t prevent us from missing in some measure parts of what we gave up.
CH5 - The Fab Five: The King's Grandchildren (2023)
I am wondering what they said about the blow up dolls known as Lillibucks and Archibucks.
Thank you so much for your further post on American history. I had read that the history of American independence was by no means as cut-and-dried as it's usually presented but have hesitated to mention it. Poor ol' Geo III has a poor image in the US but it wasn't him that upset the future Americans - it was his Government. Somehow the idea that our sovereign reigns but doesn't rule isn't widely understood on the west side of the Atlantic. We'd had enough of being a republic in 1660 but in 1688 James II discovered that we don't tolerate Absolutist monarchs either.
Hence the Separation of Powers. Take note, Backgrid.
As for reports of * acting like Olivia Coleman's Queen Anne (`Did you look at me?!), it's a breath-taking example of projection. She probably assumes that the film of CRIII being greeted by well-wishers outside BP after Accession Council was faked, 'cos that's what she does.
OT but worth reading
Thank you for your interesting 'brief diversion into American history'. The Mayflower departed from Rotherhithe in east London and there is an ancient pub of the same name, originally called The Shippe, established in 1550. The ship was moored in that part of the river to avoid more expensive mooring charges up river. Some of the wood of the ship was used in parts of the pub, obviously some rebuilding or extension.
The pub is small and rather dark but well worth a visit, with great views of the river and good food.
https://tinyurl.com/9j9crmky
https://www.mayflowerpub.co.uk/history
Ruling from Justice Chamberlain today ... if it goes in his favour, government is forced to do a review of their decision that he would no longer be provided with government-funded security. If it does not go in his favour, tantrums will be thrown and he is going to be out of pocket.
He lost the case.
Scobie trying to make it sound like a win.
Actually, they probably do see this as a win. The court has basically said that he may not pay for police protection in the UK. They probably still think they will win full royal protection, at the expense of the taxpayer.
Prince Harry has lost a legal challenge over his bid to be allowed to make private payments for police protection.
His lawyers wanted a judicial review of the rejection of his offer to pay for protection in the UK, after his security arrangements changed when the prince stopped being a "working royal".
But a judge has ruled not to give the go ahead for such a hearing.
------
I hope this doesn't mean he'll demand the taxpayer pay for his protection, especially in light of the recent near catastrophic, nay, near fatal, car chase.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65609209
Tonight, she goes forth to accept another award, the first in her hometown? It is not the Oscar she has fantasized about since childhood, but I would be surprised if she does not make the most of it. Will she allow handbag to walk beside her holding her hand? Will they create another 'security scare'? Will she drag out her mother and friends?
This is interesting ... the name he used in the court case: H.R.H. The Prince Henry Charles Albert David. Just a matter of time and she grabs the princess title, but HRH is back on the table for them. What can the Palace do if she starts calling herself HRH Princess Meghan?
I see Todger has lost one of his lawsuits attempting to get Met protection in the UK. He has another one coming up concerning the way the initial decision was made. Can't keep up with the lawsuits.
Apparently, WME is stepping up the positive publicity for ILBW.
https://twitter.com/hrrysgreysuit/status/1660714867693633536?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet://twitter.com/hrrysgreysuit/status/1660714867693633536?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Some of it might be even be true!
Hikari, thank you for your riffs on American history. I enjoyed TURN as well. However, most of the millions of immigrants who have swelled our population since the early 1900s aren't even from English speaking countries, (unless you count the Irish, who have their own issues with the UK & who funded the IRA.) Many recent young immigrants have been taught that the UK & the USA are evil colonialists & imperialists, although that begs the question as to why they want to live in our countries in the first place. It's these young, misinformed, get all their history on the internet consumers that WME is targeting as the ILBW's audience/customers.
-----
The Gracie Awards winners list has 10 pages of winners, totalling about 182 individuals and groups. Harry’s wife is waaaaay down on page 5, right in the middle of the pack.
She will have to sit through a couple of hours watching other people receive their awards ahead of her, and the an hour or two afterwards. You know how quickly and easily she gets bored when she isn’t the one at the centre of attention. She will just be one of the herd. But the way she and her PR team have been spinning it, she is the main attraction and the top winner.
https://skippyv20.tumblr.com/post/718098081747517440/gracie-awards
Any extra protection duties that the police undertake is decided by the the police when they have assessed the need eg football matches, demos, big shopping centre - then the organisation that has created the need has to cough up.
Prince Harry loses latest legal challenge against Home Office after it refused to let him pay for Met Police to act as his personal security because its officers 'are not guns for hire'
Prince Harry lost his bid for a second legal challenge against the Home Office today over its refusal to let him pay for Metropolitan Police protection when in Britain.
The Duke of Sussex, 38, was seeking permission from the High Court to secure a judicial review over a decision that he should not be allowed to pay for his security.
The King's youngest son was stripped of guaranteed police security when he and his wife Meghan Markle stepped down as senior royals and moved to the US in 2020.
When told he no longer qualified for this protection, Harry offered to pay for it personally but was declined. It was that decision he decided to challenge in the courts, as he believed he should have been allowed to pay – in the same way football clubs pay for officers to maintain order at matches.
But in a ruling, Mr Justice Chamberlain refused the duke permission to bring the second challenge, rejecting on a number of grounds.
It came after Metropolitan Police chiefs told the court their officers are not 'guns for hire' for the rich and famous, claiming that allowing Harry to pay for the protection of officers, potentially armed ones, would set an 'unacceptable precedent'.
Earlier this month, Harry's legal team asked to bring a case over decisions taken by the Home Office and the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec), which falls under the remit of the department, in December 2021 and February 2022.
The estranged duke had wanted to maintain, when in Britain, the Royal and Specialist Protection command (RASP) armed squad who protected him when he was a working royal, before the acrimonious fall-out with his family.
But the Home Office, opposing Harry's claim, said Ravec considered it was 'not appropriate' for wealthy people to 'buy' protective security, which might include armed officers, when it had decided that 'the public interest does not warrant' someone receiving such protection on a publicly funded basis.
Lawyers for the Met, an interested party in the case, said Ravec had been 'reasonable' in finding 'it is wrong for a policing body to place officers in harm's way upon payment of a fee by a private individual'.
The duke's legal team argued Ravec's view – that allowing payment for protective security would be contrary to the public interest and undermine public confidence in the Met Police – could not be reconciled with rules which expressly permit charging for certain police services.
But in his ruling, Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'In my judgment, the short answer to this point is that Ravec did not say that it would be contrary to the public interest to allow wealthy individuals to pay for any police services.
'It can be taken to have understood that s. 25(1) (of the Police Act 1996), to which it referred, expressly envisages payment for some such services.
'Its reasoning was narrowly confined to the protective security services that fall within its remit.
'Those services are different in kind from the police services provided at, for example, sporting or entertainment events, because they involve the deployment of highly trained specialist officers, of whom there are a limited number, and who are required to put themselves in harm's way to protect their principals.
'Ravec's reasoning was that there are policy reasons why those services should not be made available for payment, even though others are.
'I can detect nothing that is arguably irrational in that reasoning.'
The court was told at an earlier hearing that Harry's latest legal challenge was related to a previous claim he brought against the Home Office, after he was told he would no longer be given the 'same degree' of protective security when visiting the UK.
A full hearing in that challenge, which also focuses on Ravec's decision-making and for which Harry was given the go-ahead last summer, is yet to be held.
Harry's lawyers told the court earlier this month that the Home Office delegated an 'issue of principle' to Ravec over 'whether an individual whose position had been determined by Ravec not to justify protective security should be permitted to receive protective security but to reimburse the public purse for the cost of that security provision'.
Ravec later concluded that 'individuals should not be permitted to privately fund protective security', the judge was told.
A barrister for the Home Secretary previously told London's Royal Courts of Justice that the duke's offer to pay for the expert Metropolitan Police protection had rightly been dismissed, as it would set an 'unacceptable' precedent.
Robert Palmer KC told the court, including three barristers representing Harry: 'Officers are expected to place themselves in harm's way to protect the principal [royal under protection] and in the public interest.
'It's different from ordinary policing, and can only be provided when the public interest requires it.
'It is inconsistent with those principles for a private individual to be able to pay for that security.'
Tuesday's ruling comes amid an ongoing High Court trial involving the duke, in which he is bringing a contested claim against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
Harry is also waiting for rulings over whether cases against publishers Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) and News Group Newspapers (NGN) can go ahead.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12114233/Prince-Harry-loses-bid-second-legal-challenge-against-Home-Office.html
"The Madness of King George" starring Nigel Hawthorne is one of my favorite movies. (The 'III' from Alan Bennett's original play had to be dropped from the marketing as the the fear was that the Americans would think they'd somehow missed installments I and II. I hope that was a joke, but probably not.) My late father also very much enjoyed the movie, which presents a sympathetic portrait of the last British sovereign of America. A real tour-de-force from the whole cast. George III has been demonized as Satan incarnate for two centuries' worth of schoolkids but the truth is a lot more complicated. They don't tell us, for instance, that the founder of our nation, Geo. Washington, when he was a young and green commander of a militia was more or less single-handedly responsible for starting the French and Indian Wars. Oops. Nor are we really taught how tenuous our revolution was and how fractious a time Gen. Washington had in his command . . Ignored by Congress as his men starved and marched without boots in winter; how his own generals conspired against him. One in particular, his protege, almost got him killed and nearly derailed the entire enterprise.
George Washington was the only President in our history who did not seek the office and truthfully did not want the office, but he saw it as his duty, as he was the best-equipped at the time to rally the new nation. Some might say our best and brightest was also our first and it's been all downhill from there. Washington had faults like any man but it does not appear ego was one of them. Humility is not generally found among those who seek the highest office in the land. Even though the President is the sole head of state and has no equivalent of a Prime Minister, he (maybe someday she) still has to defer to the Congress in order to get anything done and his/her powers are effectively limited (or hamstrung) by that body. Particularly when the opposition party is in power.
As our Mr. Twain observed: "CONgress is the opposite of PROgress". And also: "Suppose you are an idiot. Then suppose you are a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."
Good, bad or mediocre, we only have to tolerate a President for 8 years at the maximum. The monarch is installed for a much longer time than that but it seems your Parliamentary leadership turns over a lot more often than an average Presidential term over here. Liz Truss got what, 3 weeks? That's a record, all right.
Yes to your question.
@maddyforcenow
Some tea spilling..
Apparently Allegedly HA HA..UK parliament will put titles
(the neatest way) into abeyance
for anyone by choice living in foreign countries.
This means ... No omg .. pity or politics or anything else, trading on RF and is a fact in this.. watch this space
6:25 PM · May 22, 2023
https://twitter.com/maddyforcenow/status/1660773926836789250
btw gracie awards soon. so what will we get? i think she will show without her arm candy maybe mom instead? alone? you have to dig to see it on the website that she is one of the 10 pages of winners. will she try to get a pic with Marlo thomas? what will she wear and who will be the dress’ corp sponsor. Hertz Gold was kind of iconic but not in a good way.
Awards on steroids. Will she turn up or use 'security fears' to stay away?
@Sandie:
I think it's 50-50 that she shows up, but it will be without Harry.
In case she wants to take a second run at a chase, perhaps her team at WME can get Al Cowlings to drive an old white Ford Bronco and have a West Coast version of last week's NYC chase. But instead of the streets of Manhattan, this time it could take place on the 405 freeway, site of the famous 1994 low-speed chase in as Cowlings drove O.J. Simpson around while local police followed in a pursuit.
Unlike last week’s NYC chase, this low speed chase was by police, not paparazzi photogs, but I am sure WME can round up some photographers to make Harry’s wife feel suitably important and suitably stalked at the same time.
This time, perhaps she can have the vehicle take a short detour to the drive through at the In-N-Out Burger on Santa Monica Blvd., not far from the Beverly Hills location of tonight’s award ceremony if she is hungry for more than just attention.
Back in the day, women relied on multiple petticoats to preserve their modesty; bifurcated underwear wasn't thought of until the Directoire period in France. Even after that, the nether-garment in question was not necessarily joined at the crotch:
For a pair of Queen.Victoria's drawers as an example, see https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6014823
Thus they didn't have to hoist up their skirts to make themselves comfortable. In the open. standing on an appropriate surface, they could just widen their stance and let go, whether they were ladies strolling in the park or women working in the fields. Also, every so often, 18thC French miniature porcelain travelling `bidets' come up at auctions, thought to have been used as potties in long church sermons from which it was impossible to excuse oneself (the maid had to carry it both before and after use).
Might * be claiming a `power pose' when it was an accomplishment she practised in former employment? For her, such bidet should be decorated with roses, variety `Golden Showers.
If ILBW set him up, it was beyond cruel & cynical. There have been rumors of an affair between ILBW & one of her security team. Lots of experts are blaming the whole 'chase' on the Todger security team. Did the alleged paramours cook up a gaslighting plot to push Todger over the edge? I should take my over-active imagination to the Lifetime Movie Channel, LOL!
The PR in in the Harry's Grey Suit Twitter item I linked to today was mostly about Megsy, & claimed that America's Gen Z like her better than Harry. Are these signs of a separation of sorts? Will the public be subjected to another royal/celebrity slanging match? If so, ILBW is going to make the Charles/Diana split look like a cake walk for the RF in retrospect.
On the other hand, apparently there's a story in the Independent saying that the RF needs the Todgers, & if they become working royals again, their security needs could be taken care of by the UK taxpayers. The Independent is owned by Evgeny Lebedev, yet another Russian. The Todgers always seem to be able to find a useful Russian connection.
HGT speculates that the `floodgates are about to burst'.
IMO the RF has no need of the Todgers; they are a liability and very unpopular in the UK, and getting to be very unpopular in the US.
-----
One paparazzo, who has photographed Meghan and Harry numerous times, was asked on a podcast whether he or other snappers had ever been tipped off by Meghan. “I’m going to have to say no comment,” he said. “You boys interpret that as you wish, but I can’t say it’s a categorical no and I can’t say it’s a categorical yes.”
-----
From this article:
https://archive.ph/2023.05.23-232254/https://thespectator.com/topic/rent-a-pap-paparazzi-harry-meghan/
-----
Home Office Case 1 Harry is challenging the February 2020 decision to remove his Metropolitan Police bodyguards after he stepped down from his working royal role and duties and left England. The date for this judicial review is unknown at this time.
Home Office Case 2 Harry's judicial review of his claim that he should be allowed to pay for UK police protection. Judge denied this JR on May 23rd.
Home Office Case 3/ Newspaper Libel Case Harry argues that a Daily Mail article disputing that he offered to pay for security mischaracterized the case and what he said. DM said the article was their "honest opinion" and is not libelous. Decision pending.
Harry vs. The Sun (NGN) Invasion of privacy and unlawful information gathering. Hugh Grant is also a claimant. The Sun wants the case dismissed because of the amount of time that has passed. Harry claims his response was delayed because of the publisher's alleged secret agreement with the RF and William took a "secret" settlement. A decision is expected later this year.
Harry vs. The Daily Mail (ANL) Invasion of privacy and unlawful information gathering. Harry is 1 of 7 claimants, including Elton John. Pre-trial stage. Judge due to decide if the case will go to trial.
Harry vs. The Mirror Invasion of privacy and unlawful information gathering. Trial currently ongoing. Estimated 6-7 week trial with Harry scheduled to testify in June.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/13q3zpy/summary_of_prince_vexatious_litigants_5_current/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12117501/Royal-insiders-fear-Princess-Waless-visit-Chelsea-Flower-overshadowed-King.html
Who are these 'royal insiders'?
The following post sums up my reaction to tabloids articles perfectly:
calicosmoke
The media absolutely hates that the coronation proved how irrelevant the Sussexes are. They loved the Royal Family vs Sussexes drama, painting it as a battle between two equals, and now that everyone finally acknowledges the truth that they aren't equal, that the Palace is always going to be top dog, that the Sussexes are meaningless, that the public doesn't care about them, suddenly, the big, high-stakes "the Sussexes could bring down the monarchy!" Chicken Little cash-cow has dried up.
Mark my words.
We're going to see more articles arguing that the Sussexes should come back to be working royals again, and we're going to hear (obviously false) rumours of huge fights and falling outs behind the scenes trying to set up a King and Queen vs Prince and Princess of Wales narrative, because the media doesn't want the big royal drama to stop.
It's embarrassingly transparent.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/13q3z18/look_at_their_pr_nowdo_they_miss_something_in_the/
As to the royal family, the Independent article, as I implied, was obviously a plant by one or the other of the Todgers begging for a return to the RF, in an outlet which always supports the Todger narrative.
The working royals in the real royal family do hundreds of low key engagements among ordinary people every year, the sort of engagements ILBW despised. Several of the working royals are over 70. The RF 'needs to be seen' as the late queen said, in order to retain support. Princess Anne, in her usual no-nonsense way, has said she doesn't think the RF should 'slim down.' The question is, who is going to pick up the slack when the current working royals step back? It's unlikely that the unpopular Todgers will be re-enlisted, but one or even both of them might wish it.
It's so hard keeping up with Harry's courta cases, but ... Is this win even a win?? Did Harry reeeeeeeally lose the case!? Because it's not like he was actually going to pay for his security, had the judge ruled in his favor.
If memory serves right, this is how it all went down... -
1. Harry made a big deal about RAVEC decision to take away his RPOs after the trial separation from was over in 2021.
2. Then Harry said how unfair this was and there was a conspiracy against him, because he had already offered to pay for security during Sandringham summit.
3. Then he accused Ed Young of conspiring against him and said he had told Young he would pay for security and Young did not forward that request to RAVEC.
4. RAVEC said it makes independent assessment of each case and that Young was a liason with the BRF, not a deciding member.
5. One of the deciding members was Priti Patel, and she was offended when Harry suggested she/RAVEC had been imflueced by the palace in this decision.
6. Priti Patel and met police (I think?) came forward and said the Met police is not for hire and Harry's offer is stupid.
7. Then home office said Harry had never actually made the offer to pay, either in writing or verbally to anyone. Not even Ed Young (who had notes from Sandringham summit, I think?)
8. Then Harry said he had intended to pay, but didn't actually say it to the home office. But if the option was available he would totally pay. Basically, future faking.
9. Then at some point he also said that he didn't actually have the money to pay to hire met police, but if and when he did have that money he would totally pay.
10. But the met police again said, dude you can't pay because it's not even allowed.
11. And then today the judge said, yes dude the Met Police is right, you can't pay because it's not allowed. And I can't make a new rule up for you. So, no you don't have to pay for anything at all.
I'm confused as to why this was a court case? Like, could someone sit Harry down, give him a sandwich and a fanta and make him understand that you can't pay the police to protect you, it's already their job. And that if you need protecting they will do it anyway.
..
Why is Harry so dumb?
Thank you for posting about all of Harry's court cases and thank you for the numerous other great articles you post along the way.
I guess they can just Fedex it to her.
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/493730/meghan-markle-misses-gracie-awards/?viewas=amp
from a comment over at CDAN:
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2023/05/blind-item-8_23.html#disqus_thread
TUESDAY, MAY 23, 2023
Blind Item #8
The ginger haired one already gets security paid for by the government when he is home. He just wanted to play the victim again. What he really wanted was the massive team of security he used to get. But, he left that to go make money, so now he gets what every other dignitary gets.
Also from that CDAN thread
It he's not careful, he'll be deemed `vexatious' which would snooker him.
As for the Waleses taking attention from the King, (as reported in SMM) that's bloody stupid. CRIII's off on a well-deserved break in Romania for R&R.
sounds like sour grapes to me
but I could be wrong
could really be over-egging it
“They insist their account of the car chase was absolutely not exaggerated, and for people to say otherwise is so hurtful and out of line,” the insider adds.
Despite facing backlash over their version of events, Harry, 38, and Meghan, 41, refuse to be silenced. “As far as staying out of sight and being scared to show their faces, that’s not going to happen,” the source tells Us. “[This has] just strengthened their resolve to keep standing up for themselves and speaking out when they feel wronged.”
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/prince-harry-meghan-are-shocked-by-nyc-car-chase-reaction/
Here is my problem with their stance ..
Yes, we all perceive things individually and differently. However, if someone insists that everyone accepts their perception as the absolute truth and responds accordingly, we have a big problem. At worst, this is seen in facist dictators like Hitler or those who led Rwanda into the worst genocide of our time.
If they were generally feeling besieged and under attack, then we can sympathise eityh their feelings and urge them to get help and drop out of public life if it makes them so paranoid.
However, none of the photos show either of the women stressed. She was smiling smugly in many photos, and her mother was unconcernedly checking her phone. The hapless prince was trying to film the paps. The behaviour of their security was worrying and driving around for two hours in a ridiculous attenpt to lose the paps was bizarre and the wrong thing to do. (Their security were out there goading the paps before they exited the theatre; it is rumoured that they told the paps that they were going to a restaurant for dinner, and they do love to pretend they are mingling with A-listers; but most of all, they seemed paranoid about the paps knowing where they were staying ... these are all their issues.) Their behaviour on the night and subsequently was immature, and they have shown no indication of being capable of learning anything from it, or growing up. That is why they can never be working royals again, and probably why they cannot be trusted to even step foot in any private royal residence again. Low intelligence + immaturity + entitled narcissm + too much money = a toxic, if not fatal, mixture.
Since the Coronation and particularly after events of last week, the Suxxit PR machine is in overdrive. You can tell it's Harry's wife because all the stories include 'allegedly' and 'reportedly' and 'Sources/friends say . . ' and if you look at the byline it's guaranteed to be a Hearst publication (Elle, Seventeen, Marie Claire, Town & Country, etc.) or a tabloid website with a feminist slant like SheKnows. All of these publications work for * and churn out her tripe because they are paid by contract to do so.
Top of the Pops is Catherine's feud with Camilla after her siblings were denied the permission to bring their spouses to the Coronation. Meanwhile the Queen Consort had 20 family guests to Catherine's four. Phrases like 'We always knew Camilla would be coming for the Waleses' are popping up. Even Tom Bower is joining in with this nonsense.
Gaining traction is the tired old Rose Hanbury rumor. Catherine was livid that her husband's mistress attended the Coronation (allegedly Camilla invited her, another reason why Catherine refused to acknowledge the Queen Consort with deference.) I just read another reference to William's fondness for 'pegging', which of course Kate is too prissy to engage in.
Now WHO is the source most likely to be well-acquainted with the term for some deviant sexual practice, huh? Harry's wife is so transparent.
---------------------------------------
https://youtube.com/shorts/hbuLkUXXmVY?feature=share
Harry's Catastrophic Car Chase: (caution: one F bomb but so worth it)
------------------------------
https://youtube.com/shorts/vYOkIVUolvU?feature=share
Presumably the Royal premises there have indoor sanitation so there's no prob. about the King encountering bears en route to the loo at night. We were there in 1999 and the general standard of the facilities we came across was pretty dire - perhaps matters have improved.
What clearly hasn't improves is the foul thinking and speaking of the Sussexes and their supporters, always ready to project their enthusiasm for b*ggery onto everyone else.
HappyDays. Al Cowlings. ha. don’t give them ideas
WBBM. to be fair she was either advertising of perhaps over all these years and use she can’t close the legs
Hikari. i like yahoo. the more outrageous the more it says to me they are losing. notice how the rose stuff or kate versus camilla fight didn’t happen when madam did the princess declarations
saw somewhere that moving trucks were outside the house? maybe sold it to pay for the WME fees? 😉
have a question about H’s diana trust fund. do we know the terms. i vaguely recall he can access it unrestricted at age 40? if so mrs is hanging around til then and would try to get some in a divorce or a death. my speculation of course
mrs didn’t show up for her reward. found out when you are half way through a pdf of a list of winners you are probably not going to be on stage to receive and award. or perhaps she couldn’t afford to be a major sponsor or couldn’t fill her table. she looks likes a coward for not showing her face.
finally we know harry keeps pushing for paid security. i still think it was a way to not only save money but scam money (submit bills while in the US). with the rumors that she was having an affair with the body guard (ala Diana of course) i do wonder if she and the paramour have. cooked up a way to charge for security with Harry paying an inflated bill and she and her “love “ interest have found a way to skim a little or a lot off the top. that i would believe.
Dlisted.com
@Hikari
Thank you, beautifully written
@WildBoar
Golden power shower hose…
A host of golden staphylococcal
@Maneki
arrogance, ignorance, stupidity
and they’re her strong points…
As usual, they grabbed headlines, people are talking about them. What * she wants.
Their stories obviously embellish the coffers of the publishers. Money is always the bottom line.
I particularly endorse the Sarah vine article in yesterdays paper.
At least someone speaks the truth. At least, my truth. And we all have our truths,
Just ask the Dook and his missus.
When Travalyst launched just three and a half years ago it was set up as a pilot, to rapidly test the hypothesis that an independent and neutral not-for-profit could help the travel industry accelerate its progress towards net positive impact. We would do this by convening and leveraging the collective power of some of the most influential travel and technology companies in the world.
Fast forward to 2023 (a global pandemic notwithstanding) and the original coalition comprising five Founding Partners has now almost doubled in size to nine Partners with a combined market value of nearly $2 trillion. The group has worked incredibly hard together throughout, with deep commitment to our shared principles, and has delivered on what it set out to do: collaborate pre-competitively to bring clear and consistent sustainability reporting to the mainstream of travel for the first time ever – together, for the benefit of all.
There are now two unified Travalyst frameworks driving consistent sustainability reporting in both accommodation and aviation that are live and out in the world. As Partners implement those frameworks and bring sustainability information to the mainstream consumer experience, we are raising awareness and supporting more positive choices at a scale the industry and world has never seen before, for billions of consumers.
But this is just the beginning.
Today we formally mark the end of Travalyst’s pilot phase with the appointment of a new Board to govern and guide us on our journey ahead to delivering major positive and system-changing impact.
The Board is composed of individuals with world-class expertise in impact, systems change, not-for-profit governance, advocacy, and campaigning for a just and sustainable world. The new Board members are:
Chair: India Gary-Martin, Founder & CEO – Leadership for Execs
Clea Kaske-Kuck, Director for Policy, Advocacy and Member Mobilization – World Business Council for Sustainable Development
Dr Sally Uren, Chief Executive – Forum for the Future
James Whiting, Chief Executive – Doughty Street Chambers
Henrietta Worthington, Lawyer – Vedder Price
This is an incredibly exciting moment for Travalyst and, I believe, for the industry as we stride ahead into our next phase of growth and expansion to ensure our work is freely available to all, used by all and catalyses the positive transformation of the sector.
We look forward to announcing further strategic partnerships in the months ahead, such as the recent news of our vital collaboration with IATA to drive fully consistent and aligned emissions reporting across the sector, with all stakeholders represented around the same table. I look forward to seeing the Travalyst frameworks continue to expand and incorporate leading edge research to deliver best-in-class impact calculations, implemented not just on all our Travalyst Partner platforms but across the industry at large. And above all I look forward to when we can say that all travellers everywhere are not only empowered to make more positive choices but are doing so – every single day.
Travelyst requires partners to list the carbon footprint of their services (so, what is my carbon footprint for this holiday if I take these flights and stay at this hotel?). Some big tech company (which one?) developed a tool to make it easy for companies to calculate this. They pay a fee to be listed on Travelyst and use the tool to advertise carbon footprint of using their services. So, customers supposedly choose the option closest to zero when making choices about travel.
My problems with this:
Most people do not make travel/holiday choices based on carbon footprint. Besides, how sure can we be that the tool is accurate?
What is it really for? Do companies who use the tool and sign up have to pay a subscription fee? How does hapless make money out of this operation?
Finally, who are these people who are board members, why do they have such odd titles, and what is the purpose of having a board?
I use Yahoo as my home page ‘cos that’s what I learnt on the last IT course I did (there’s now a complete lack of local courses now, hence I struggle to keep up)
They must have learned, at last, that I don’t click on the Hearst sugar reports because today they are absent. Instead there are three full court reports from more reputable : D.Telegraph, Sky News, & Press Association (this last one is on a par with Reuters). They follow seamlessly one to another but have individual URLs:
https://uk.yahoo.com/style/prince-harry-loses-bid-second-092633099.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/prince-harry-loses-bid-second-094300544.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/duke-sussex-loses-bid-second-094108226.html
I use Yahoo as my home page ‘cos that’s what I learnt on the last IT course I did (there’s now a complete lack of local courses now, hence I struggle to keep up)
They must have learned, at last, that I don’t click on the Hearst sugar reports because today they are absent. Instead there are three full court reports from more reputable : D.Telegraph, Sky News, & Press Association (this last one is on a par with Reuters). They follow seamlessly one to another but have individual URLs:
https://uk.yahoo.com/style/prince-harry-loses-bid-second-092633099.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/prince-harry-loses-bid-second-094300544.html
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/duke-sussex-loses-bid-second-094108226.html
Quickie 🎤
Apologies: Faron Young
It’s Four in The Morning
Wake up weepy bean
She’s trying to hold on
and grab any going gong*
Whilst suffering from PTSD**
But it’s four in the morning
and suddenly its dawning
She forgot to turn up at Gracie…
*Gong-Old English
outhouse, lavatory
**PTSD
Post taxi sham drivel
We got wind of PW's project and hurriedly scrambled to put this together, so we could get it out to the public before EarthShot.
Sadly, we didn't really put much thought into it, publicity being the main point of it. So it never really went anywhere.
Then my shady mil suggested money laundering. This was the perfect vehicle!
When 'Travaless' (H's braindead idea) first came on the scene I remember we discussed it here and it was by consensus it seemed to be a loser. We thought it wasn't going to take off...and it hasn't. Another maassive fail to their credit.
From what you posted as their statements on the scheme is it bountiful word salad so Megsy most likely generated the description, purpose, ad nauseum... I started to get a headache just beginning to read it and finally my eyes closed and revolted and I had to quit.
The stupid ill-formed idea (as opposed to what it could be) is still a loser and I never see it mentioned anywhere. The company is another venture that is bleeding money for them. In total they are just plain incompetent even with advisors. Of course, * can't listen to advisors and thus failure results.
William is doing a series of engagements around commemorating the Greenfell Tower fire tomorrow. Note, the Greenfell disaster was a project taken on by The Royal Foundation, and when the idea of promoting the work of the community kitchen through a cookbook came up, the project was handed to the newly married Duchess of Sussex (who professed to be a foodie).
Will she make contact with the Greenfell kitchen and do some kind of publicity stunt, because she has considered the project and the community as something belonging to her, to distract from the royal engagements? Or is she too distracted by the 'disaster in New York' and her plan to conquer Hollywood and the world?
I have felt rather sorry for those brave English soldiers who lost their lives in the Indian wars of the 1750s. The Indians themselves so I understand being wary of the Americans were in the 1770s on the side of the Crown. More people left the colonies after 1776 than left France after its revolution, so I understand.
Although it is a long time since I was last State-side (so maybe out of touch in my views) for me the most memorable or perhaps poignant experience I had in America was this: I was walking with my gf in the Maryland countryside and passing an old farmhouse were invited in by the owner, a woman in her seventies if not older. On hearing my accent and thus realising where I came from she sat us down in her drawing-room and produced a scrapbook of her family going back to their arrival on that side of the Atlantic in the mid-eighteenth century. She had little trace of an American accent. We were as I said in Maryland but might as well have been in Oxfordshire from where her family had embarked for the new world. For me the word American is a synonym for English.
I think they are going to do this. They do have some footage because they were filming without permission. It will mostly be a huge whine-fest about the family and the courtiers. It will get high viewing figures, so Netflix will be pushing for it.
The article says she is really keen but he is being more cautious.
Despicable, because we know how much they lie and love throwing dirt at people who are not in a position to defend themselves.
Fate has a way of pulling the rug from under their feet, so the hour-long feature will probably air just as some kind of tragedy hits the royal family and they will end up looking bad!
Aren't people tired of them complaining?
Thanks for the link. I think the whole world has had its fill of the Harkles and their dramas. I don't think 'their experience of living inside the palace' would be of interest to many. In any case, blabbing about life inside the palace is not the done thing,the Queen would have been absolutely appalled at the idea.
There are a lot of nuances from their story that they feel are still missing after the documentary and Harry’s book. No. They don't do 'nuances'. In any case, what's left to say? It would be a thinly disguised attempts at digs and slights. And once they've made that film, what next? They're trying to get a lot of mileage from life in the BRF but the topic is getting trite through overuse. They have nothing to sell.
H says "That's hurtful."
Good sweeping view of the role they played, play and will continue to play for and with the monarchy.
With the Queen, many came from foreign service as HM and PP would see them here and there on the various tours. Others from more varied places.
This person and that person is discussed in a lot of detail - why were they considered really good by X or how they appeared to others.
Slimming the monarchy? that was started years ago.
Diversification? also tried to get that in motion as well.
A lot of stuff before more current events.
Mention was made that no one could convince H that he had only a short time before he would be run over by the Wales. Mention was also that H had difficulty with waiting - he was a let's do this now but that immediacy was not an option a lot of the time.
And how and why the protective letter went out about her instead of a mere acknowledgement of her as girlfriend.
More specifics about the American team for her.
There is a great quote about being beaten down by them (the family situation) and had to leave to save their own life ... Sarah F long before *. And a lot about how this and that person tried to help * adjust and succeed. And that the system didn't have a way to handle someone who was not following the social rules.
It has some nice nuances about her behavior. How she rode over boundaries - calling through the evening and picking up again in the morning.
An example of how things were never enough was the office division. It came off that they really wanted to set up at Windsor, not elsewhere they would not only be supervised but be in the same situation as royals of lesser rank. What PW got versus what they were offered ... rankled might be a word. And yet, PW was always known to be on a different trajectory.
What was really interesting was when she described as being D Difficult. How it was pitched as well she's an American, so it is a cultural thing. Points out that it falls apart when you realize that Jason K is ... American. Nobody had similar cultural issues with him.
Or she refused to ride with assistants when she learned that one had given notice (others knew before her plus there were the others who had left before and the exit count was being publicly discussed).
Or the Megxit summit. The staff prepared the options but ultimately it was HM (and possible input from PC) about what the options were. Clearly the Queen could see the potential difficulty in allowing them total control of how frequently they could help support the monarchy. Or not.
At the end, it is brought out that the courtier treads a fine line between the monarchy as an institution, working for a family member of it and not always knowing that if you tell them something they don't want to hear, you could be out of a job tomorrow.
Fascinating read.
This tea comes from a video Neil Sean uploaded to YouTube at 00:00 am on Mar 26, 2023, https://youtu.be/aU7IHtlWeV4
Lest I summarize incorrectly here's what Mr. Sean said of Harold's wife:
"She's definitely separating away from him. She definitely wants to do things independently. We've always known that . . . But now according to a very good source Megan is pushing it even further and, well, Prince Harry now wants something in return. "
He goes on to say that Harold has - allegedly - always found it strange that his wife never wanted him to meet any of her family. But now Harold is "very keen" to connect with Thomas Markle. For one reason it would "ease the brand pressures"; for another in Harold's 'deepest heart he feels very sorry for Thomas. Mayhem is resisting and this has caused "volcanic erruptions".
Allegedly one of Harold's last remaining friends has suggested that a one-to-one meeting with Thomas could perhaps "clear up a lot of mishaps, mistruths, and more importantly if possible put their marriage back on track in a more solid unit."
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/13ry9wd/harold_wants_to_meet_his_wifes_father/
To be clear, Backgrid hasn’t heard from Team Sussex since the response. And the photos from that night? Ardalan says “they don’t show anything remotely representing a near catastrophe or a two-hour chase through the crowded streets of Manhattan.”
https://www.avclub.com/harry-and-meghan-hollywood-lawyer-smackdown-backgrid-1850472390
https://theconversation.com/colourism-how-shade-bias-perpetuates-prejudice-against-people-with-dark-skin-97149
Thanks for that post about Valentine Low's book Courtiers. All commentators on royals should be required to read the book every year. It gets forgotten as people grab onto the next sensational headline article. Your summary is so useful, and clearly shows that the duo did not fit and were not suitable to be working royals. Not only has that not changed, but the 'problems' in their characters have increased and become entrenched, in my opinion.
Maureen Callahan’s tribute
to the brilliant Queen of Rock
Tina Turner 👏
Takes a swipe at madam concito
who runs to oprah/gayle over the
“slightest emotional paper cut”
Perfick👌
This caption to one of the Callahan article photos is priceless:
The night was pure Meghan Markle: A manufactured build-up of anticipation, a highly dramatic entrance afforded no other actual activist — Meghan climbed on stage to the Alicia Keys she-ro anthem ‘Girl on Fire’ — and then... a whole lot of nothing.
That dress fabric - we've got sheets of insulating material like that in our loft only it's it's `silver' not yellow.
@Maneki
Ongoing from the Mayflower
Rev Ezekiel Rogers from Rowley
East Yorkshire
set sail in 1638 on the
“John of London” from Hull
carrying the first printing press
to the colonies
Lord Beaverbrook is a descendant
Nice to know a bit of Yorkshire
goes a long way😉
Lady C says that some of the other recipients of the Gracie awards didn't want * there
Just for fun ... I particularly like the coffee mugs. (Scroll through the comments and open the image links.)
Hugh Grant's case against the Sun has been dismissed because it falls outside the 6-year limit.
Is hapless heading for lost court cases and massive bills to pay?
I must admit that I do not understand. I wonder of someone behind the scenes really wants the phone hacking stuff to go away and has the power to make that happen. This may not be the royal family but could be a politician or other powerful figure. I am probably thinking like hapless!
Nice to know a bit of Yorkshire
goes a long way😉
It certainly does. When I was in Melbourne, I visited Captain Cook's cottage. The cottage was built in North Yorkshire in 1755 and transported to Melbourne in 1934. The interior is furnished in the style of the the period.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooks%27_Cottage
Comments on this thread say this is not a credible person ... but here is the gossip: she is attending lots of parties, on her own ... she leaves hapless at home.
Before she met hapless, she used to always be out having dinner or attending events, and went on holiday with friends. I could see her wanting to surround herself with friends a lot of the time.
What do you think?
Another little legal setback for hapless, in his case against the Mirror. Applied to submit an additional three witness statements. Judge denied the request (much too late).
Prince Harry losing Duke of Sussex title 'discussed at highest level', book claims
The Royal Family is reportedly contemplating on the possibility of removing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's titles, downgrading them to the names Mr and Mrs Mountbatten-Windsor.
https://tinyurl.com/4tsztwr2
https://twitter.com/shooter_breeze/status/1662117207441121283
There seems to be a straightforward legal reason for HG's phone hacking plea to be dismissed - it was out of time.
He was arguing that he had heard about it only within the last few years, despite the actual event being longer ago, and so would the Court allow his claim to be considered? This was, as solicitors say `something for the Court to decide'.
The Court has decided and has said `No'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yX4God7fseE
https://www.etsy.com/listing/838923359/meghan-markle-duchess-of-sussex-suits
She poses as if she's a 32F , although there's no way she fills Championship cups. Isn't it wonderful what they can do with preformed clothes? Though I thinks she's got a pair of H's rugger socks stuffed down there as well.
Dear me! (32F). And the come hither eyes and bed hair trying to look sexy. She did have breast implants in her Deal or No Deal days so I suppose that's when the photo was taken, no way does she look like that today.
- a full Telegraph article reporting a further loss for H, published by Yahoo.
He'd asked to be allowed to present more witnesses in his support but this has been refused.
Then when she had them removed, whatever came next was placed too far apart. So it looks like she has a very manly chest. Too much flat muscle between her boobs. No cleavage.
The 'Yacht Girls' offering sex for sale at Cannes: Behind the glitz and glamour of the French Film Festival lies a seedy underbelly of high class escorts charging €1,000 an hour aboard luxury vessels afloat in the Riviera
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12129241/The-Yacht-Girls-offering-sex-sale-Cannes.html
Prince Harry has ‘finally woken up to the truth’ about Meghan, royal expert says
https://nypost.com/2023/05/27/prince-harry-has-finally-woken-up-to-the-truth-about-meghan/
none other than TBW was featured in a role as an F.B.I. agent!!! She was actually decent in the role, not overacting. Some of the series was filmed in Canada so I suspect it may have been during her "Suits" time?
Summary from the Radio Times: 'The Duke of Sussex has spent the last four years across the pond in the Golden State, attempting to live a life free from stress and the trappings of his royal upbringing. This programme takes a look into his new life in the sun, with a Hollywood home, celebrity neighbours, new high-profile friends, and public appearances with huge big money deals supporting his lifestyle'.
I'll pass but if anyone is brave enough to watch, do let is know what the programme uncovers, if anything.
H may well have woken up to the truth re * but as this statement is from Paul Burrell, I don't think he knows much personally. He's probably not seen H for years.
New Post.
With the flurry of comments that there could be some major split, a new post.