Christmas and then New Year.
It's a crazy time of year with all the anticipation of gifts given and received. And followed by hopes of a good next year.
Them? well, it is rarely seems to be a dull moment. One or both always seem to have something going on.
Keep calm and carry on (while I wrap the gifts I have and order those I have not yet).
Comments
Happy New Year Nutties
Thanks abbyh
for keeping us going😘
Looking forward to their
Annus finis
Sod’im and Gohorrah
no more 😉
She should take the offer.
They're this close to bankruptcy.
There isn't another fish to hook on her line.
Endgame for Mrs. Loser.
-----
The tea with WME isn’t about failed contracts or ad placements. No L’Oreal bust up. Rather, MM coached to quietly settle lawsuit with Sister & reconcile on ALL fronts.
Of course, you know who doesn’t love being told what to do.
Besides, she’s cooking with gas with TP & MA.
https://twitter.com/BarkJack_/status/1742408770699792410
Some interesting comments under the post.
Blind Item #14
The alliterate one has been trying to snag Vanity Fair Oscar tickets. The thing is, her demands are through the roof and nothing that even the biggest of big A++ listers have asked for through the years. Not even close. Plus, she wants extra tickets for hangers on and publicists and they just don't do that. Finally, the buzz is her husband has no desire to attend at all.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2024/01/blind-item-14.html
Some names have been released today, but this isn't a complete list of Epstein associates.
What do you gals/guys think? Will she be named?
that's from the CDAN link I posted above.
I love the post at SMM. The poster took three outfits she wore as a royal and 'corrected' the colour to be appropriate for the occasion. The last one is an eye-opener to me and shows how simply changing the colour can actually make the messy witch look elegant and classy.
-----
@GWAH
No, I do not think she ever met or was associated with Epstein, but she was associated with men who were linked to Epstein. She could have got an invitation to the island and been in the private jet as a partner of Fitzpatrick, but the flight records have been public knowledge for a long time and she is not on any lists. I do believe the CDAN blind though!
A summary of Lady C's end of the year video, providing a great summary of the really bad year the duo had. I giggled over this comment from Lady C:
"I am not criticizing her for having bad legs. I am criticizing her for exhibiting them as if they are good legs."
People are losing interest in the dippy duo. Lawsuits and pap walks .... Zzzzz. The south park satire got more attention than they did - except todger cream and a few choice bits from the fauxbiography.
If M wants lots of attention, she should be a housewife! I don't watch the show, but I would watch it if she were on it - or at least watch the choice out takes on YouTube. She would get a paycheck, lots of swag, lots of attention ... everything a famewhore dreams about.
When I read the prediction about kidnapping, I hoped that M doesn't try a fake kidnapping a la Getty. If Archie is a real boy, he has endured too much trauma already.
I predict tax woes for the Harkles/Archwell. I predicted this last year too. What do I know.
A summary of what is in the depositions that were made public.
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
Long time followers count on us to cut through the truth. We told you: L’Oreal narrative debunked. Not true.
MM still with WME but her dealings aren’t always smooth. She’s triangulating industry players; & simultaneously concocting a project with TP. Uses MA as counsel often.
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
Triangulating as well Harry vs Family vs Her. etc. Always. Pitting one against another for gain.
https://twitter.com/BarkJack_
* really has boinked a lot of frogs on her social network ladder climbing; heck, she’s turned a prince into one.
The CDaN blind item is for the Vanity Fair after party. It’s supposedly the most prestigious after the Oscars party in HW. Of course, That One will never get an invite to the actual Oscars and red carpet. An in-the-know poster on Reddit wrote all about how the limited tickets ( to maintain exclusivity and fire codes) work. Oscar winners and plus one arrive first, get interviewed on VF red carpet, stay at party for as long as they want. Runner ups, directors , producers come next with plus one (space is very limited) and can only stay for only a set amount of time then they are asked to leave. Next come the A-listers, B-listers who weren’t nominated that year (think M Streep) and they stay a set amt of time and then come the eclectic crowd of HW’s C,D-listers, make-up, sound techs, wannabes, gonnabes, hanger ons, etc. Unless you are an Oscar winner or big shot, the tickets will cost you $80,000/ ticket, your time at the party is limited and fiercely observed, plus a committee still gets to decide whether to give you tickets or not. I find it hilarious that * is trapped once again in a HIERARCHY! At least the security is Royalty level tight. No security guards inside the party tent.
Uncle Elton John’s Oscar after party tickets are also coveted. Why wouldn’t she want to go there since she has such a close relationship with Uncle Elton and David? Remember they collaborated on Pearl.( I bet that was a shitshow of dysfunction)Also, it raises $$$$ for Elton’s AIDS Foundation and British actors tend to go more to this after party. Hmmmm….
Even if she can finagle tickets, who will talk with her, want to party and be silly around her. She stores/records every slight or faux pas for future blackmail or love bombs men, married or not, wive/gf present or not, for favors.
Wishing all the fabulous Nutties here a Happy New Year 🎊. May 2024 be the Year of Reaping for the Sparanoids. They sowed malevolence, greed, and lies. Let’s see what the harvest will bring.
Check out the farewell posts from this SussexSquad member. She sounds like the wife to me. What is happening with the SussexSquad? Those who follow their activities say that one or more were complaining that they were not given the bonus they were promised. It's all smoke and mirrors, but aren't avid fans like them usually lifelong supporters?
Another one of the more vile SS is deleting her vile tweets about William, Catherine and Camilla. There seems to be a big shake up happening in the SS. I wonder what it is about.
https://archive.ph/2024.01.04-113833/https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1851865/meghan-markle-mum-doria-ragland-moves-in
An interesting article about the grifter mom living in the guesthouse.
Yes, the SussexSquad member's farewell post does sound like *. The writing is too praiseful and sycophantic, "Today they are parents to two beautiful children, owners of a fabulous California home...". Beautiful children? How would anyone know?
I wouldn't put it past her.
She has no power due to lack of talent, lack of charisma, lack of intelligence, lack of anything except her nasty personality. She is a nothing in HWood.
@PaganTrelawnay. ·. Jun 6. As I’m not very bright, educated or a critical thinker; I believe it’s possible to have 2 hour high end pap chase, through Manhattan. But remember, I tweet...
Is this* trying to deny the accomplishments she assumes she has? (Opinions may vary)
Lace tells the story of four school friends, Kate, Maxine, Judy, and Pagan, who have reached the tops of their professions: war reporting, fashion, interior design, and PR.
Note the order - coincidence or what?
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/the-blagger-s-guide-to-lace-by-shirley-conran-7984883.html
Excerpts from The Housekeeper's Diary at above link. It is quite astonishing how some of Diana's really bad behaviour is mirrored in the wife. There are heaps of extracts and it is fascinating.
-----
@FifiLaRue
I agree! To triangulate one would need at least two interested parties. Perhaps she 'invents' intrest from a brand to try to get another brand interested? Maybe that is behind this fake news about contracts with big brands that then end up with the big brand issuing a denial. Surely all this does is actually devalue her even more?
The King and Queen meanwhile are relaxing in front of the fire at Balmoral, whisky in hand, dogs at their feet, as it's been a Cabinet decision and nothing to do with them.
Oh well. a girl can dream.
Well, now many of us are glad The Losing Grifters are circling the drain. It's over for them. Fini!
I'm not sure that's legal in the UK. There is two party consent for taping in the UK< I'm sure.
@Lily317,
I certainly hope so.
Quickie 🎤
Apologies: Julie Andrews
The Lonely Goatherd
No Kidding
High on a hill in Montecito
Lay di no lay di of soho
Cunning ma
going incognito
Mama gonna lay
lay down lo
Flaccid prince
ex aristo
Laddie laid it all for
lay di ho…
After reading the comments for the above thread, I have decided that the two videos of the interview with Samantha's lawyer are worth watching (Popcorn Planet). The links to the two videos are given in a comment on that thread if anyone else wants to watch them.
I was intrigued by the surname Trelawney. It is obviously a Cornish surname but * wouldn't have been able to make it up. She must have nicked it from somewhere and the character in Shirley Conran's chick lit 'Lace' can't be a coincidence, especially as she is called Pagan. We know * doesn't have any original ideas.
"Which one of you bitches is my mother?" Four elegant, successful, and sophisticated women in their forties are called to New York's Pierre Hotel to meet Lili -- a beautiful, young, and notoriously temperamental Hollywood movie star. None of the women knows exactly why she is there; each has a reason to hate Lili and each of them is astonished to see the others. They are old friends who share a guilty secret and who have for years been doing their best to keep that secret quiet. Their lives are changed forever, however, when Lili suddenly confronts them. When the women refuse to answer her, Lili proceeds to travel around the world through the playgrounds of the rich and famous, seeking to answer the question that has obsessed and almost destroyed her. From Paris to London, from the boardroom to the bedroom, Lace takes the reader into the rarified world of five unforgettable women who are as beautiful, as complex and as strong as...lace.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lace-Shirley-Conran/dp/1476725446 (probably publisher's blurb - its a shorter version on Waterstone's site. Here's a reader's review:
Lace gave me prolonged pleasure There was life before Lace and life after Lace, and nothing was ever the same again. I envy anyone who hasn't read it Sex, glamour, and bitchery to an epic degree. Lace is the classic that secured Shirley Conran's place in the same high-octane sorority as Jackie Collins, Judith Krantz and Jacqueline Susann, and it still thrills. It changed my life As sexy and smart now as the first day it came out A gorgeous, glorious, ground-breaking saga of sex, scandal and family secrets. Here is the return of an awesome blockbuster classic, as fearless and fabulous as it was thirty years ago. Lace is the definitive drama of passion, friendship, intrigue and betrayal. It is hands-down one of the best things to come out of the eighties. I adore it Lace features women you would be proud to call friends. Pick up this book and be sucked into the lives of four female characters who use their own intelligence and confidence to get ahead by themselves. I've loved Lace since I was a teenager and it's still as gripping as it ever was A big, brash, bouncy book Money and sex is what Lace is about - clothes, décor and haute cuisine In its gloriously melodramatic way, the book showed a group of bright, aspirational women making sense of their sexuality while fighting to the top of their professional trees Superwoman author, Shirley Conran, has really hit the literary jackpot . . . you can spend a few enjoyable hours finding out if it's more than sex and scandal that's the secret of its success.
Or did * write his herself?
https://www.waterstones.com/book/lace/shirley-conran/9780857863904
It's easy to imagine that Pagan is *'s role model. I've never read any of Conran's fiction but `Superwoman' was a favourite. I still quote it, especially the observation that must have come from a `jaded cook' - `The great thing about Christmas is that you don't have to think about what to give them to eat', though I don't think that applies any more.
@GWAH
It's illegal to tape anyone without their consent (not that the Harkles would bother with the legal niceties) - without clearance from a judge. Even the ordinary police need this.
Strangely, Trelawny was the name of one of the Non-Juror Bishops who refused to swear the oath of allegiance to the king (accounts vary as to whether it was James II or Willian III)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KRDP680VgE
Was it someone here who commented recently that history doesn't repeat itself but it rhymes
@Opus:
`Tre- Pol-, Pen-, by these ye know three Cornish Men.'
St Petroc (5thC) British, in the original sense, may have been born in Wales but is chiefly associated with Devon & Cornwall. Padstow = Petroc's Stowe (ie place)
I don't know where RL Stevenson's character Squire Trelawney came from before he arrived in Bristol.
I also looked up the name `Pagan' in FreeBMD (https://www.freebmd.org.uk/). Only 7 children were registered with that name from 1837, up to and including 1976. After 1981, it peaked, showing the influence of popular novels on naming habits. Conran must have searched long and hard for that unusual name.
Another great post where the person 'fixes' fashion fails of the wife. I think these are not as good as the first batch, but transforming that too tight mess of a red dress into an off-the-shoulder blue one is genius.
There's an item on CDAN asking people how many degrees of separation between * and Sarah Kellen, a person who was scheduling Epstein's "massages" they believe exist.
One poster showed a pic of the person in question, Sarah Kellen and * on a yacht together, so they definitely seemed to know each other.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2024/01/your-turn_5.html#disqus_thread
Then there's this tweet with photos and one has a text saying that Mr. Markle stated that his daughter should help out the police in the Epstein investigation.
https://twitter.com/Carole1258/status/1743359392194470069
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a46295800/will-king-charles-abdicate/
...until I pointed out the source - and the possible source behind that. Sloppy writing anyway, never say `everyone' when it is manifestly untrue, as is the idea that the Guardian is royalist!
Leaving aside *'s possible involvement, I resent the assumption that all old folk are past it. Rather, I suspect that those who say and do silly things have always been that way. Why do we have so little respect for the wisdom of age in those who have always learned from experience who still have unclouded minds?
Of course, I would say that , wouldn't I, given that I can't be the only Nutty who pounced on the very first issue of Cosmo, hot from the press?
The entire matter will be no more than material for historical royal-revelation TV, like `Who killed the Princes in the Tower?' or `What was George III really suffering from?'.
I'd be shocked, however, if MI5/6 weren't keeping tabs on their shenanigans. We may be more aware of traitors and aliens attempting to undermine the state with guns, bombs and knives but, IMO, the Harkles are just as much terrorists, even though they have gone about it differently.
An article from the Telegraph - I think that headline should read `only 900 complaints'
A fascinating video from a psychic/remote viewer. It was done about 11 months ago and she speaks to the late Queen, William, Catherine and the duo. For the wife it was always only about the money from the moment she met the Prince. She controls all their money - he just hands it over to her. They have made about 300 million. She will leave him and divorce when his ability to bring in money dries up. He will descend into drugs and alcohol. William will never reconcile with his brother. The wife will publish 'her story' and it will do well, but her perceptions are completely opposite to those of the royal family. The public in the UK and America (which did happen this last year) prefer William and Catherine and the popularity of the duo will fall (which it did). Diana is not happy with her idiot son (the remote viewer also spoke to Diana).
Aother fascinating insight is that hapless knows he cannot win when going up against the royal family but he does it anyway. The duo are filled with bitterness and anger and resentment and a huge sense of entitlement. They are not going to change.
(In another video she saw that the wife would have some kind of limited Hollywood success this year.)
So much more in this video, which is fascinating. There are heaps more videos, and most are not about the royal family. Here is the channel:
https://youtube.com/@psychiclizcross?si=I1i93uR4eCBAO7IG
thanks for the links.
We will have to follow up to see if she/he is accurate.
There are a number of differences between the two countries. She had been on the throne for quite some time. I believe I read that she had had a health issue in like the last year. Maybe what it was thinking about wanting to enjoy what time she had left and not be dealing with the whole responsibility of the country. She probably had a lot of knowledge about the health of QE (and what it was costing her to stay the course until death). Maybe QM just wanted to be in her garden, smoking and doing more art? Or enjoy the grands. I suspect that she took some of the decisions she did about one of her sons based on what she saw happening with them. It took the pressure of the heir not to have to deal with that as an issue (ie, he got an already cleaned house).
I suspect that having to wait this long, KC will not be so quick to dart off. What he got was a long run up of watching his mother guide and glide through not sticky and sticky situations. Her father, otoh, did not get that kind of long in training experience.
Transitions are often very bumpy and being able to help the next generation avoid some of it is a really good thing.
As for the complaints - pff. I have heard that not happy about a situation people will tell a number of people but something like for every unhappy person there are at least 10 who are fine with it. So ... some people look for something to complain about.
it's Sophie and Edward's 25th wedding anniversary today.
Another channeling video ... this one with the wife. Note this was a year ago. Yes she had ambitions to be president and her entry point in politics would be congress. No intention of studying the law and believed that her charity work and public speaking would be her entry ticket. (Are you laughing as much as I am?)
Her and hapless not getting along. Yes, he does stay somewhere else sometimes, because they just cannot stand being around each other. But, oddly, she believes he does not mind that she used him for his money.
The person she most admires (this was a year ago) is Oprah. She then added Michelle Obama and AOC.
Exactly! As complaints to the Beeb go, it’s very small beer, probably from die-hard republicans.
The attitude to/theory of kingship (term includes queens) is different in these 2 situations. (Wasn't it a Prince of Denmark who contemplated suicide so eloquently?) Here it is an oath-bound, sacred duty, with regency as a get-out; elsewhere, it's more like any other job. The law would allow Charles to hand over the work to William, but not the throne.
There seems to be confusion between the `Monarchy' and the `Royal Family' - even if every member of the RF were struck down tomorrow, there'd be a legitimate candidate for the monarch, even if it's someone we've never heard of, as long as there was a related person willing to pick up the reins. The monarchy is a concept, a system, not just the RF.
Mind you, if anyone really wanted the job, they'd be they'd be the last person one would want on the throne.
If the indoor staff at KP hated the outdoor staff like those at Clarence House did, they'd have pretty soon seen off a horny-handed son of the soil who presumed to be Mellors to Di's Lady Chatterley.
Not surprising that 900 complained the Coronation TV programme was biased in favour of the monarchy, it's the BBC. Did they expect it to be critical?
@Sandie
We know Diana had several affairs but I don't believe Charles is not H's biological father. I remember seeing a photo of H - just his head - wearing a soldier's helmet and wearing some camouflage paint on his face. I was sure at first it was Charles and the resemblance was absolutely uncanny. Also I simply don't believe she would have been stupid enough to get herself knocked up by somebody else while she was with Charles, particularly a palace staff member.
`Is Harry blaming the wrong parent? Housekeeper’s diary Episode 7'
A very interesting view of life at Highgrove.
@Maneki - I thought the headline was trying make out that revolution was imminent when only 900 had bothered to moan about it.
...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12933091/Kate-Middleton-heartbroken-Prince-Williams-decision-send-Prince-George-10-Eton-College-claims-royal-insider.html
The original source is In Touch. I have always suspected that the 'royal insider' is hapless, the wife, or someone close to them.
-----
@Maneki Neko and @WBBM
I agree that the notion that the biological father of hapless is a gardener from BP cannot be true. No way could Diana have been carrying on an affair with a gardener without the staff at KP noticing, and all the staff talk (especially Paul Burrell). Besides, one could refer to Charles himself as a 'gardener'!
Note that what this psychic/channeler says is not necessarily the truth because she is getting the information from the person. So, if she is channeling the wife, the wife is likely to lie about stuff.
----
I don't think I have posted this ... the psychic/channeler says the duo would have been stripped of their titles by the end of 2024. (William was ready to do that ages ago; Charles is taking a slow, careful, measured approach.) The duo will no longer be together then and may even be divorced. The wife will turn up with a team of lawyers and sue the monarchy, the government, the king ... Whoever she can in a desperate attempt to hold onto the titles for herself and the children.
Go to SaintMeghanMarkle
r/SaintMeghanMarkle•7 hr. ago
AurelieR1
`Samantha's lawyer is looking for evidence of Madame's lies'
Might Samantha’s case flatten them even before anything’s done here?
I think I've posted along these lines before but forgive me if say:
I hope your channeler is better than some mediums such as the ones that
a) contacted Napoleon, only to find he spoke not a word of French
b) discovered that one great composer was musically illiterate
c) or contacted Queen Victoria who proclaimed that she was `Victoria Vagina'.
The gardener as a candidate for Harry's dad? Whoever would have thought Diana liked a bit of rough? Nah, I don't buy it.
Seriously, it'll be interesting to see how many of the Harkle prognostications come true.
Yes, servants talk and their employers often forget that they know everything about them. If H told ERII that he should allowed to marry the mother of his unborn child, I'm sure Granny would have had the matter looked into. Whether or not servants volunteered any info, there were other ways, from the world of espionage.
The Harkles were living together at KP and it wouldn't have been that difficult to find evidence that she was still on the Pill (used packets in the bin) and/or was still buying and using sanitary protection. Going through her personal belongings undetected when she was out (eg on Chester visit) would have been a piece of cake for those on Her Majesty's Secret Service. After all, it was hypothesised that the reason for her going on that trip was to keep her securely in one place while the spooks did their work (accessing her phone was seen as the specific reason but it would have given them time to go through their apartment looking for anything suspicious.)
Sneeky yes, but entirely justifiable IMO - a matter of national security.
This is going to upset hapless. Although he was in Afghanistan twice and William was not allowed to serve in an actual war, William is featured and honoured in this book and hapless is excluded.
He completely denied that he had done anything wrong and blamed the media for 'twisting his words'. That's the problem ... he can neither see how his description of killing Taliban was inappropriate, nor take responsibility and apologize sincerely.
Invictus will wash their hands of Hawwy; 2023 was his final appearance. Too much grifting; and, disrespect, and wrinkled shorts by Hawwy's wife. Hawwy was left out of the Sandhurst yearbook because he violated the code of conduct by bragging about his supposed kills, not to mention he spent his time in the tent playing Call of Duty.
No speaking engagements for either one.
No more awards will be purchased d/t lack of funds, and lack of organizations willing to be victimized for $$$$.
Bankruptcy.
They will be upside down on the mortgage.
Samantha will win the lawsuit (her lawyer is a tiger.)
That's it for now.
they were joined by two female co-stars
for a moment, I really believed that * had gate crashed the Golden Globes but she wasn't there
The audio is not very clear, except the part: "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were paid millions ... for doing absolutely nothing". They were roasted at the Golden Globes and everyone laughed. On the red carpet, Suits cast who were there admitted that they do not have her number, are not in touch with her, and she is not in their group chat.
It is eerily reminiscent of *'s story. Substitute Doria for * and you have history repeating itself.
"Prince Harry has been left humiliated after being excluded from a prestigious book celebrating the Sandhurst's top alumni in what has been branded a snub by a top army commander. The Duke of Sussex failed to make the military academy's top 200 people to train at the armed forces military college, despite his brother Prince William making the cut and even penning the foreword to the exclusive guide. Even James Blunt made the pages of They Also Served for his stint serving for the military in Kosovo before becoming a multi-million-pound singer.
Instead the California-based royal joins other military outcasts, such as fascist leader Sir Oswald Mosley and Benson Freeman who joined the Nazi party to become a Waffen-SS officer."
. . .
Joking about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Jo remarked that the pair are being paid 'millions for doing absolutely nothing -and that's just by Netflix' to huge laughs in the auditorium, including one from Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos.
. . .
Koy's joke was seen as a 'brutal' dig at the couple following a tumultuous year which also saw their lucrative podcast deal with Spotify scrapped after just one season of the Meghan-hosted Archetypes. Spotify exec and podcast guru Bill Simmons later labeled them as 'grifters.''
Adding insult to injury... * is obviously not the toast of Hollywood, rather, she's toast. What about her comeback??
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12937757/Golden-Globes-Jo-Koy-outrage-Royal-Family-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle.html
Also, the host's joke about Imelda Staunton playing the Queen was so good, that Aitch called her asking for money.
. . .
Speaking to Variety at the Golden Globes, Torres seemingly revealed the reason behind the Duchess of Sussex's lack of appearance.
'We don't have her number. We just don't so. She'll see. She'll watch. She'll be happy that we're here,' said the 54-year-old US actress, who attended the Royal wedding between Prince Harry and Meghan in 2018.
Torres - who played Jessica Pearson on the hit Netflix show - was asked about Sunday's Suits reunion, with the interviewer asking: 'Did you plan this? Are you all texting each other?
She explained: 'When it all came through, we were all texting each other. Yes, our text thread is insane right now. So it’s very exciting.''
Markled or perhaps they didn't want her?
http://tinyurl.com/ct2m7bdb
Go to SMM to see the Red Carpet before the Golden Globes. One of the actors from Suits is briefly interviewed, and it's priceless.
Also, the host's joke about Imelda Staunton playing the Queen was so good, that Aitch called her asking for money.
Gina Torres isn't just an actor from Suits! She's drop dead gorgeous, a talented actress, bilingual in Spanish and English (Cuban parents), and has a beautiful singing voice. I think she's best known to the sci-fi community from Serenity and Firefly and a couple of the Matrix movies.
Yep, this Page Six article says an 'insider' at the Golden Globes says she was invited to be a presenter alongside her previous colleagues but she turned down the invitation because she was busy.
https://pagesix.com/2024/01/08/entertainment/megan-markle-turned-down-suits-reunion-at-the-golden-globes/
Nope. I don't believe a word of it. I assume that the Golden Globes is a huge organisation. A lot of people are involved in putting on that ceremony. The wife found one to be her flying monkey and put out this pathetic story.
"Though my time as patron of Mayhew has come to a close, my unwavering support has not. I encourage each of you to support in whatever way you are able," Meghan wrote in her message. "The emotional support of a rescue animal is unparalleled — as you'll soon realize: it is not you who saves them, it is they who save you."
https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-shares-heartbreak-over-death-friend-mayhew-patronage-ended/
Do you think she has a knee jerk reaction, puts out a story, then thinks of a better story and puts that out? She has done this so often that it is definitely a pattern. I can't help thinking that telling the simple truth right from the start would be easier and consume a lot less energy. (I was not invited. There is only one person from Suits that I am still in contact with and, by the way, she was not invited either.)
I don't know if this is some kind of morphic resonance, but I came across another tarot reader today predicting that the wife would have some kind of Hollywood success this year (he interprets it as acting and a behind the camera role), nothing significant work-wise for hapless (isn't he supposed to be doing a long trip to Africa for conservation work?), and a separation.
The duo in Montecito must be fuming though, and swimming in a pool of victimhood. The only way in which they may have been treated unfairly is the government's refusal to renew the lease for Frogmore Cottage. It has remained empty, not earning any rent for the Crown estates.
I was Kate Middleton’s postmaster – she stood by me when I was accused of stealing £16k, now I want justice for us all
A parody from The Royal Rogue (bless 'im) about how *'s PR director reacts, assuming she has one, ofcourse. It's brilliant & hilarious - thanks SMM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UqhvOwsu6M
Thank you for posting how the Middletons stood by their village postmaster.
This scandal is dominating the news here here, having festered for 20+ years. The Post Office has brought about what has been called the biggest miscarriage of justice ever in the UK, by insisting that their IT system was faultless. As a result hundreds of sub-postmasters (independent shop keepers running PO counters on their premises, under contract to the PO) have been accused of `having their hands in the till' because the computer generated `shortfalls' in their takings. The PO has behaved disgracefully throughout and almost a thousand innocent sub-PMs have suffered appallingly.
I don't know whether the scale exceeds that of the 17thC witch trials n the UK but I can see some parallels - those in authority had a blind belief in a received `wisdom' which was fatally flawed and nobody asked if their assumptions were correct.
There's a smell of something similar in the Harkle case. If only more people had had in-built crap-detectors, as suggested by Hemingway, at the start of the charade.
That story in the Sun is an eye-opener. The Middleton's are genuinely nice people.
-----
Why yes, that was the ginger haired one at a bar drinking a beer and chatting up a woman.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/
-----
The marriage: their public image is very important to them, especially her, as it is just about all they have to sell. That public image has become more than tarnished ... it is trashed. Does that have them clinging to each other as survivors (the marriage lasts), or does the marriage fall apart (toxic behaviour in response to troubles)? I still think he is the 'perfect' husband for her. She no longer needs him for fame and fortune (she has probably extracted all the millions she can out of him), but, at least up until at least a year ago, he supported her and gave her anything and everything she wanted and happily let himself be manipulated and controlled by her. However, I think he still has other options and could find a woman who is not as demanding and controlling and dominant. Is he going to leave this year?
She was certainly seriously networking at Soho House from the day it opened, sans Trevor even though she was living with him, but with her close friend (until she could replace her with Markus). Weinstein frequented Soho House. She tried to befriend Weinstein's wife, wore her designer clothes, and was photographed with her. That women worked very hard at the grifting and networking, so the fact that no photo of her has emerged of her with Weinstein or nothing has emerged that connects them directly seems to indicate that Weinstein saw right through her and saw no potential talent. Women, both the well-known and the wannabees, were fawning all over Weinstein so, sick that this sounds, the man had choices. I reckon he had no interest in her. But maybe I am wrong. Maybe Markus knew he was a sleazy predator and warned his friend to stay clear of him. But she did zero in on his wife!
We have the South Park ‘fan fic’, Invictus flooziness , a fake NYC car chase, a failed mic grab, a phantom family, flame from Family Guy, fame-hogging red carpet fantasy, frazzled Harry at two fancy concerts, flim-flammery headlines, fashion faux pas, and furtive footfall in car parks. Lots and lots of car parks.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/19372nt/meghans_2023_looked_very_different_from_catherines/
sorry, I didn't get the link. Too much was happening yesterday all around the world.
Re the Reddit link Meghan’s 2023 looked very different from Catherine’s, there is simply no comparison whatsoever.In fact, the first comment said 'It's like comparing the smell of an English rose to a fart.'🤣 It certainly is.
Harry should dump her, go home, and let his family forgive and rehabilitate him.
Markle is nothing but an albatross, and she did it to herself.
Please read the entire article. This organization is based in LA (Beverley Hills?). It seems the rich and famous can't get enough of awards. So, hapless is a 'living legend of aviation'. Lauren Sanchez received an award last year, or was it Jeff Bezos who got an award in the past and Lauren Sanchez is getting some kind of recognition this year?
This Hello! article gives all the information (written in very mangled English):
"Prince Harry is to be honoured at a thrilling ceremony next week, as he is honoured by the 21st annual Living Legends of Aviation Awards. Taking place in Beverly Hills and hosted by actor and qualified pilot John Travolta, the Prince is one of four new inductees who are being recognised for their contributions to aviation and aerospace."
https://archive.ph/2024.01.10-191759/https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/510988/prince-harry-ordered-huge-new-honour-star-studded-ceremony/
The problem with the Fujitsu computer program is inadequate testing of the software
Something similar is happening in Canada with the Canadian government payroll system called Phoenix. The government chose an Indian company to develop their new computer payroll system and the Phoenix company didn't do sufficient testing of the software. The result is that some government employees haven't been paid in years. Seriously.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_Legends_of_Aviation
Please could someone explain this to me. If it is a paid for award, who pays for it? How the heck has hapless made a significant contribution to the aerospace industry? And why are America and the UK obsessed with giving so many awards and having so many award ceremonies?
This is the full headline in the DM: 'Is this a joke?' Outrage as Prince Harry is to be named a 'Legend of Aviation' alongside moon heroes Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin at glitzy Beverly Hills ceremony... after flying a helicopter in Afghanistan
-----
The Duke bagged the award despite only ever being 'number two' in his helicopter, acting as a gunner in Afghanistan - with his gong success today branded a 'pathetic' publicity stunt by Lord Alan West, the former head of the Royal Navy.
Reacting to Harry's accolade, the Cold War naval commander told MailOnline: 'He is not a living legend of aviation. To suggest he is, is pathetic. It makes the whole thing seem a bit of a nonsense if they’re willing to pick someone like Prince Harry.
He is not a living legend. There are lots of people who deserve to be called this but not Prince Harry. I find it extraordinary he has been picked.
'He didn’t carry off any great exciting feat of amazing flying skill while flying for the Army.
'They’re just trying to get publicity. They know it will cause a stir. I find the whole thing really rather pathetic.'
Retired British Army Colonel Richard Kemp also lashed out, claiming the awards were about 'celebrities massaging each other's egos'.
'I can think of many people who did pretty extraordinary things while serving in the British and American armed forces which would be much more deserving of an award like this.' he told The Sun.
He added: 'It is obviously because of who he is - not what he did. An Apache is crewed by two people - a pilot and a gunner. Harry was a gunner. He was number two in the aircraft.'
https://archive.ph/2024.01.11-134714/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12950937/prince-harry-living-legend-aviation-tim-peake-royal-navy-admiral-fury.html
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/press-release-living-legends-aviation-2024-erika-armstrong-tysqe
Who would be of interest to the duo? And will she turn up?
John Travolta: famous, wealthy, Hollywood, owns planes
Lauren Sanchez: fiancee of billionaire Jeff Bizos
Mark Burns: President of Gulfstream
Who else on the list would they be interested in 'befriending'?
SMM just published something by someone who broke their NDA to tell what Hawwy actually did in Afghanistan. Hawwy who needed help and had to cheat to just barely graduate school was no way in H*ll a helicopter pilot.
What a Jacka$$.
Harry self does not understand the concept of shame anymore.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/194asq8/invictus_requesting_donations_on_x/
The comments under the post by IG are brutal. People are not willing to fund the couple anymore. The couple use the games to promote themselves, use a lot of funding for themselves, and draw attention away from the athletes.
This-one's-wife needs loads of money for her clothes in the next Canadian winter games.
You busted! 😂
Allegedly Harry has demands, like HIS Wife Meghan Markle HAS to be the one to give him the paid for award.
https://twitter.com/RestingDollface/status/1745605617526432078
______________________________________________________________________________
I have to find the Neil Sean youtube video about this!
the Neil Sean video mentioned above
Big rictus grin.
Dress slit up to her upper thigh.
Low cut dress.
No wedding ring on her finger.
Lots of bracelets.
Mic grab by Mrs. Fraud
Standing way too long on the red carpet.
Anyone else got bingo card ideas?
This is so funny I have tears running down my face.
@Fifi
Bare, linebacker shoulders.
her speech will be longer than his acceptance speech
@GWAH: Yes!
@Lily: Yes!
... Harry and Meghan have become like Idi Amin with his chestful of spurious medals – they are weighed down with meaningless gongs that have been bestowed upon them by friendly organisations. To list a few of the honours they have received in the last couple of years: there was Meghan’s Women of Vision award last year from the Ms. Foundation for her ‘lifelong advocacy of women and girls’. (I guess a talent for self-promotion counts when you are a woman and a girl yourself). There was the 2021 award from Population Matters for announcing that they were going to do their bit for the environment by limiting their family to two children. (I’ve got two children, so can I have an award too? Or what about all those couples who have one child, or even none – shouldn’t they have pipped Harry and Meghan to the stage?)
Most notoriously was the Ripple of Hope awarded to them in December 2022 by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Organisation, given, apparently, for promoting ‘racial justice and mental health’. That was given, it was suggested, for making a ‘brave’ stance against racism in the royal family. They join a pantheon which includes those other fellow battlers for racial justice, Kamala Harris and Taylor Swift. Then there was Harry’s nomination for the Hollywood Critics Association TV Award for the ‘best streaming non-fiction series’.
People may mock, but in truth, Harry and Meghan have achieved something useful: they have exposed once and for all the sheer vacuity of the awards industry. It is not too difficult to imagine why they have really been given these honours: because it gained the promoters publicity that they would not have received had they rewarded, say, genuine aviators or human rights campaigners. Awards ceremonies have become a multi-million dollar business which require celebrities, not ordinary mortals, on the stage – with maybe just one or two genuinely deserving recipients to make it look reasonable.
But by promoting Harry and Meghan as, apparently, history’s highest-ever achievers, the industry finally has ridiculed itself. So thank you, Harry and Meghan, for that. Maybe you should even have an award for it.
https://archive.ph/2024.01.12-112243/https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/harry-meghan-and-the-absurdity-of-the-awards-industry/
Marching if not running onto the stage, way ahead on This one.
In a new book, Robert Hardman sets the record straight about what happened the late Queen died.
Catherine was not told to stay away. She chose to because her children had just started at a new school. I presume that she also wanted to be with them and tell them herself about the Queen's death.
Supposedly William ignored the calls and messages from his brother that day. Hapless never tried to communicate with staff, which supposedly would have been the right thing to do. Ot was staff who were making all the arrangements and co-ordinating for the family that day, not the individual family members.
The behaviour of the duo that day was deplorable. All the details are given in the article, many of which we already know. I am still astonished that hapless was throwing a petulant fit about his wife while Charles' mother lay dying ... Charles, who would not be given time to grieve but would have to immediately take on the mantle of monarch for a grieving nation.
Also from Robert Hardman's book: this article by Rebecca English gives details of the late Queen's death.
Charles and Camilla were not by her side when she actually died. They had returned to Birkhall and Charles had gone out to pick mushrooms as they did not think the death would happen so quickly (actually thought it might even take days).
Anne and Angela Kelly took turns to sit with the Queen that day.
The famous red box (locked) was at the Queen's bedside. There was a sealed letter for Charles inside, and a letter for her private secretary. Also in the box:
... her final piece of paperwork and last royal order: her choice of candidates for the prestigious Order of Merit for 'exceptionally meritorious service' across the Commonwealth.
May I say again that it is astonishing how the duo, especially hapless, behaved that day! Sadly, I do not think either of them are capable of feeling shame or remorse.
Hmm...
Back in 1683 there was the Rye House Plot to assassinate Charles II & His brother James (at that time Dk of York).
It's now 340 years later - will all this become known as the Soho House Plot?
This is hilarious ... the claims are:
The hapless duo have been given new royal roles.
Archie and Lilli have been invited to Balmoral.
Charles has chosen hapless over William
Catherine has always been in constant conflict with Camilla and this has backfired on her
William is so angry that he has cancelled official appearances.
This is about a blind re. the wife and how she used Soho House to 'climb' the ladder. Yachting is the core subject. Yes, she was with Trevor at the time that she got involved with Soho House.
----
@WBBM
Thanks for watching that video for us. I do feel sorry for Beatrice and Eugenie, but the situation is complex. Epstein was not the only shady guy that the Yorks socialized with and took favours from. There is also that French guy (sorry that I do not have details) ... B and E were children when they were enjoying holidays with and paid for by the French guy. Those girls were exposed to a lot of shady characters from a young age. Neither Andrew nor Sarah have taken responsibility for the shady characters they socialized with, took money from, and exposed their daughters to from a young age.
A Timeline to Harry Appearing as an Inductee after Military comes out about his time in the Bunker.
On 2nd January, 2024 Harry was Not mentioned as an inductee. Only Fred George, Steve Hinton & Marc Parent were announced as inductees.
https://www.aerlex.com/ll2024/
On 7th January, 2024 Harry's left out of Sandhurst's book.
https://archive.md/wip/f9QuO
Between 7th - 9th January, 2024 Colonel Richard Kemp speaks about Harry being left out of Sandhurst's book & he was not significantly important with more highly ranked officers speaking out about Harry's time in the bunker.
https://ift.tt/C2KqAr4
On the 10th January, 2024 Harry is included & appears as an inductee for the first time:-https://www.livinglegendsofaviation.org/blogs/press-releases/prince-harry-the-duke-of-sussex-to-be-inducted-into-the-living-legends-of-aviation-alongside-other-remarkable-aviators-fred-george-marc-parent-and-steve-hinton
post link: https://ift.tt/kwiNOgz
author: Quiet-Vanilla-7117
submitted: January 13, 2024 at 07:22AM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit
'Prince Harry and Meghan Markle adopt Ellen DeGeneres' chicken named 'Sinkie' after being bullied by her flock - and will now live out her days at the couple's $14.5million Montecito mansion' (DM).
H&* are such animal lovers. We can now sleep easy. How ironical that they can rescue a bullied hen but * didn't mind bullying her staff.
silver wings are provisional wings
the person has passed the first stage of the pilot's test but not the second
gold wings are the real pilot wings from the air force
I've no idea why the wings are different colours but one's wings denote that one has qualified as a pilot, regardless of which Service one is in. Just for the record, Andrew was in the Navy, H the Army and William was RAF (most unusual for a Royal). Both Navy & Army have flying sections (Fleet Air Arm & Army Air Corps) whose task is to support forces afloat and on the ground, respectively.
And the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are now "walking a financial tightrope".
https://www.thesun.co.uk/royals/25353899/prince-harry-meghan-markle-no-original-ideas-hollywood/
The entire article is quite good in outlining the difficulties they face. However, I disagree that 'no original ideas' is their essential problem. Nope, their problem is that they act like lazy, entitled, know-it-all grifters with lofty ambitions. They do not work hard enough. They are hopeless at follow-through (latch onto something for major publicity then fade away). They are really bad at management, especially of people. They are completely oblivious of their real strengths and weaknesses, character and faults, so they self sabotage. Are there any other shortcomings I have omitted?
The article does suggest that she can make money and be famous by being an influencer. I agree. But she will have to hire people to do all the work then get out of their way and let them do it. And she will have to drop all the pretentious stuff and accept anyone and anything that will pay her for merching ... no Gucci, Dior, gourmet foods, elite luxury resorts. Nope, she would have to be content with gushing over, at best, middle class goods and services. And she will have to use hapless, the children and the dogs for merching, day in and day out.
Thanks for the feedback on the wings. I tried doing some research online and ended up more confused than I was before I started! This is the basics of what I found out, which echoes what you both said:
William: RAF pilot's flying badge/brevet (wings).
Hapless: Army Air Corps Pilot brevet.
Andrew: Fleet Air Arm pilot's wings.
Basically, all three earned those wings.
Hapless is not a pilot. He is not cleared to fly alone.
He had to sit the exam 3 times before he passed for the provisional pilot license.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/196nwqu/the_harkles_have_removed_their_netflix/
Speculation time ... why would they remove two of their biggest 'achievements' and biggest earners from their website? Are they trying to make the past disappear and 'rebrand' themselves?
Queen's fury over naming of baby Lilibet: Aide says monarch was 'as angry as I'd ever seen her' after Harry and Meghan claimed they had her blessing to use childhood nickname
'Queen Elizabeth was infuriated by Harry and Meghan's claim that she had given her blessing to their daughter being named Lilibet, a new book reveals.
One member of her staff says the monarch was 'as angry as I'd ever seen her' after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex publicly stated they would not have used her private family nickname if she had not been 'supportive'.
The couple even ordered their aggressive firm of lawyers, Schillings, to write to news broadcasters and publishers - most notably the BBC - saying claims she was not asked for permission were false and defamatory and should not be repeated.
But when the Sussexes attempted to 'co-opt' Buckingham Palace into 'propping up' their version of events, they were 'rebuffed'.
The illuminating revelation comes in the latest instalment of a fascinating new biography - Charles III: New King, New Court. The Inside Story, by the Mail's writer Robert Hardman, currently being serialised exclusively in the Daily Mail.' etc.
I think this will come as no surprise to most people. I hope more of their lies are exposed.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12962667/queen-elizabeth-II-fury-prince-harry-meghan-markle-baby-lilibet.html#comments
We all knew the truth ... that they co-opted that name without the Queen's blessing.
I found this interesting (about Charles and Willuam):
Of Harry's relationship with his father, Hardman says: 'Of course the King is extremely sad about Harry and Meghan but there is a sense of exasperation, that he has done what he can and now he is King, there are many more things to think about,' says one friend.
'He has tried listening. Now he just says: 'I don't want to know what the problem is. I'm just getting on with my life'.' For the time being, however, Harry has decided he wants to things differently and he is determined to give him to space to do that.
As for Prince William, staff say he hopes people will understand and respect the fact that he had kept his counsel over his brother's repeated attacks, particularly as regards his wife.
Another long article about Hardman's book. What struck me is that the revelations will be a huge blow to the narcs.
Charles, William, Camilla and Catherine did not watch the documentaries nor read Spare. They have aides to do that. And instead of being affected by the spiteful content, they have chosen to simply ignore it and get on with the job, not changing what they do or how they do it.
The delusional bubble of self-importance and imagined power that the duo live in has been well and truly popped. Hapless must be feeling immensely isolated and estranged from his family. Because it is of his own doing and his wife is incapable of giving him the emotional support and wise counsel he would need to stop blaming others and 'fix' this, that isolation and estrangement remains.
It seems that the only PR coming from Mudslide Manor is a story about a chicken!
And, yes, I do believe that they are still friends with Ellen and Portia, Oprah and Gayle, and so on. What the duo did to the royal family, their respective families ...none of what they did would bother these people. Get rich and get good PR is the only goal in life.
Markus Anderson was at Eugenie's wedding? The above thread shows the close links between Eugenie, Markus and the wife.
Not planning to do this now (friend did give me a copy - said it was the only copy they could find in the store that day but store claimed there were others but this was the one they could find "easily").
When I was reading the Robert Hardman bits, I realized I wanted more after each piece in a good way. The details are specific and full of nuance ... and, most of all, make sense (Occam's razor). The people lining the way, cleaning the tractors during harvest season, the horses, only being able to sip a drink on a bridge - I was caught up again with the same sense I had when it was happening of pride, respect, reverence for QE.
The same cannot be said about the OS book. It will be a lot of old tales retold, how horrible everyone else was in general and to them but how they never put a foot wrong in their walk and kept their heads up despite such horridness behind the scenes. I began to dread about what I would read (hadn't even started but there it was) and remembering what the other did to my stomach (and liquor budget). the body said: no.
Sorry.
Maybe sometime I will take a gander at it but not now. Never say never and all that.
Of course we all knew that the Harkles didn't seek the Queen's approval to use her name, or else they let her assume that by 'name' this would mean Elizabeth but I am glad that it's now out there for all to see. I'm sure they must have been people (and SussexSquad) who thought Lilibet was a sweet gesture.
They reach the point of no return a long time ago.
I'm glad the RF didn't rise to the bait and did not watch the documentaries nor read Spare. Total lack of interest and reactions is the best way of dealing with those two.
The difference is that Joachim's wife hasn't attacked the Danish royal family and Mary in particular.
Ignore the bad grammar but this is funny
'Prince Harry and Meghan Markle adopt Ellen DeGeneres' chicken named 'Sinkie' after being bullied by her flock - and will now live out her days at the couple's $14.5million Montecito mansion' (DM).
H&* are such animal lovers. We can now sleep easy. How ironical that they can rescue a bullied hen but * didn't mind bullying her staff.
If they 'adopted' this bullied hen, she will be killed by the existing flock. Pecking order is real. I take two to three weeks to integrate a new flock candidate(s) into the existing flock. They are inside a small enclosure for their protection while the hens get used to the interloper. But this is a hen from another flock. It would need to be quarantined for about two weeks first to check for contagious diseases.
They're idiots that know nothing about poultry, either.
In the article shared in the above thread, Celia Walden makes a convincing case for the wife being the one to choose the name Lillibet. I believe her motives were clear: spite. The Queen did not give them what they demanded so she had to have revenge. But she also always has to reduce the Queen to devalue her and to bolster herself. She is the sort of woman who thinks that demeaning others gives her more power and makes her more important. It is the typical tactics of a bully.
The Duke of Sussex is about to turn 40: he’s an adult and he needs to start acting like one.
All his endless therapy sessions don’t seem to have given him the tools to put his experiences into perspective.
He does not seem to realise that, while he has undoubtedly suffered personal loss, he is one of the most privileged men on the planet — not one of the most put-upon. The death of a parent in young life is no excuse to behave badly towards your surviving relatives as you grow — in fact, the opposite is true.
In his memoir, Spare, among other revelations, Harry chose to tell the world that he lost his virginity in a field. But how strange that, in the same book, Harry failed to recount the details of the phone conversation in which the Queen supposedly gave her blessing for him and Meghan to name their daughter Lilibet.
That, I think, tells us everything.
https://archive.ph/2024.01.15-171651/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12965727/NADINE-DORRIES-Queens-final-years-overshadowed-Harry-Meghans-hunger-publicity-embodies-virtue-lack-heart-broke-learning-anger-legal-threats-Lilibet.html
The entire article does not really give any new information, but it is yet another that expresses the anger of many people.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12965765/Queen-reaction-Sussexes-nickame-Lilibet.html
Many of the late Queen's granddaughters and great-granddaughters have proudly been given Elizabeth as a middle name in tribute to the family's beloved matriarch.
But Harry and Meghan went a step further when they called their daughter Lilibet, the very personal term of endearment for the former monarch used only by her closest family and friends.
In fact, I understand the Queen was so upset by the Sussexes' decision that she told aides: 'I don't own the palaces, I don't own the paintings, the only thing I own is my name. And now they've taken that.'
Harry and Meghan would not have intended to cause her grief – over this, at any rate.
Barricaded in their Californian cocoon, blanketed by the cosy schmaltz of their new showbiz life, it simply wouldn't have occurred to the couple that such a gesture would cause offence.
But it seems that it did – as well-placed sources made clear to myself and others at the time.
The row erupted again this week thanks to my colleague Robert Hardman's excellent – and well-sourced – new biography of King Charles III, which is being serialised in the Daily Mail.
Hardman says one member of the late Queen's staff told him that she was 'as angry as I'd ever seen her' after the Duke and Duchess publicly stated they would not have used her private family nickname if she had not been 'supportive'.
They were reacting to a story, not published by one of the popular British newspapers the Sussexes so openly despise, but by the BBC, of all places.
The national broadcaster's royal correspondent, Jonny Dymond, reported being told by a 'Palace source' that the Queen was 'never asked' by Harry and Meghan about the use of her childhood nickname.
Dymond said his source 'disputed' reports in the wake of the announcement of the name that Harry and Meghan had spoken to the Queen to garner her blessing.
It's what a lot of us were saying, one way or another, back in 2021.
But the fact that the BBC - the world's leading public service broadcaster - was now stating it added a whole new level of gravitas.
The Sussexes' spokesman did not hesitate to denounce the report and insisted the Queen was the first family member Harry called with the joyous news of his long-awaited daughter's birth.
He said that during their conversation 'he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name'.
They then used their favoured legal firm, Schillings, to issue a letter to the BBC and other media threatening action, suggesting the report that the Queen was not asked for permission was 'false and defamatory and should not be repeated'.
Notably, the BBC did not back down.
Indeed, there were further questions for the couple when it later emerged that they had registered Lilibet Diana as a 'domain name' on the internet before their daughter was even born and they had seemingly asked the Queen for permission.
In all honesty, I was not told at the time that the Queen was 'angry'. That was not a word that was ever used to me, personally.
But what at least two sources made clear – reluctantly, I might add, since in the wake of their score-settling Oprah interview, everyone at Buckingham Palace was treading on eggshells for fear of further hostilities with the Sussexes – was that the suggestion they had sought the Queen's approval was a rather one-sided interpretation of what had actually occurred.
As it was described to me, the then 95-year-old monarch was taken aback when she was told by her grandson of his intention to give his daughter the name Lilibet in her honour but didn't feel, given the circumstances, she could say no.
You might describe it as being pushed into an impossible corner.
And that certainly makes sense when you now consider her remark about 'palaces and paintings' which, as well as most of her jewels, cars and even furniture, were never hers to own.
She was, in most respects, simply the conservator of them for future generations on behalf of the nation.
However her pet name, Lilibet, which sweetly stuck after she could never pronounce her own name correctly as a toddler, was hers – and hers alone.
In fact until then it had only ever been used by her grandfather, her parents, her late husband and a handful of her closest friends and relatives.
As someone who had enjoyed a faultless career as an international stateswoman, the elderly Queen, it seems, was still willing to bite her lip (publicly that is) – until she saw her name being weaponised by lawyers in a fight against the British public service broadcaster.
And according to Robert Hardman, despite posting their good wishes on social media Buckingham Palace flatly refused to be 'co-opted' into 'propping up' Harry and Meghan's version of events.
They firmly 'rebuffed' their requests to do so, which ultimately, it seems, led the Sussexes' threats of legal action to quietly dissipate.
In truth, it is really rather sad that the name of a child continues to cause rancour. Little Lilibet deserves none of this.
But the fact that loyal staff speak about it even now shows that many consider the Sussexes' behaviour towards the late Queen to have been at best misguided and at worst unforgivable in the twilight of her reign.
Part 1
https://www.tumblr.com/brf-rumortrackinganon/735807724778127360/timeline-part-1-april-2015-april-2017?source=share
Part 1 - An Update (actually Part 2)
https://brf-rumortrackinganon.tumblr.com/post/735914196058931200/timeline-part-1-an-update
Part 3
https://brf-rumortrackinganon.tumblr.com/post/738539550207623168/timeline-part-3-may-2017-june-2017
Part 4
https://www.tumblr.com/brf-rumortrackinganon/739086884771414016?source=share
An appropriate name, which doesn’t disrespect a possible child is needed – any suggestions? I can only think of Baby Jane. Is that as bad?
Do you think using the name Lillibet was definitely to cause offence, and whose idea was it?
I think it was her idea. Her intention was not to cause hurt and offence. It just wold not occur to her to understand and respect the feelings of others, nor consider anyone or anything else but herself. She thinks she can grab whatever she wants, and impulsively acts on any idea she has. That it did cause such an uproar was a bonus to her.
They trademarked the name, with variations, before the child was born and thus before he informed the Queen. A lot of people forget that.
Full Telegraph article here:
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/justin-welby-quit-supporting-paula-172148455.html
Another instance of his being a poor judge of character
Shauna reminds us that when William and Catherine had tweeted congratulations after the birth, they used the name 'Lilli'. I was also reminded that this naming saga took place after the Oprah interview and after Phillip's death. At the time of Phillip's funeral there was much written about the card from the Queen on his coffin, signed Lillibet, and how there was no one left to call her that name.
Perhaps I am wrong and they did use that name deliberately, in defiance and spite, knowing they were crossing a line and would cause hurt.
https://skippyv20.tumblr.com/post/739648898007760896/this-is-not-a-firm-its-a-familyno-it-should
The photo of them returning to Frogmore Cottage, supposedly after visiting the Queen. It is very posed, and I think that is the publuc road that goes past Frogmore Cottage.
They had someone with them to take that photo, so yes, they did turn up to see the Queen with photographer/camera man in tow. How rude.
He is in jeans. The children are very dressed up (Archie in some kind of a suit), as is she. They went to see the Queen to get footage for their mockumentary.
See LinkedIn press link for some protesting comments railing against Harry’s laughable Living Legends of Aviation award:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/press-release-living-legends-aviation-2024-erika-armstrong-tysqe/
I feel good that people are protesting.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1983f45/talktv_discussed_the_ppow_hm_at_the_walkabout_for/
The entire post is interesting and has references.
Subreddit SMM has a good comment which resonated with me, in reference to the belief that WME has instructed Meghan to quit bashing the Royal Family:
“ She doesn't think she is bashing the RF. She is speaking "her truth", no matter that it is not any kind of truth at all.” Bingo!
The selfish and delusional concept of one’s own truth rather than THE truth fills me with contempt.
The “her truth” comment was read on this SMM link (is_legends_of_aviation_a_self_licking_wme_ice/?) with short URL:
https://shorturl.at/nqKPR
https://archive.ph/2024.01.16-100258/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-pilots-open-fire-after-prince-harry-is-deemed-a-flying-legend-3v7tfjngq
The entire article is filled with outrage, mostly in America. However, as the above excerpt says, hapless is not the only dubious person to be given an award by this organization. Lauren Sanchez. Harrison Ford. It gives awards to pilots who have become celebrities or celebrities who have become pilots. I guess hapless is the former (he did qualify as a pilot, and got his wings, even though he did not actually operate as a pilot in Afghanistan).
My guess that they will both show and accept the award seems to be what most people think according to the poll. The lure of John Travolta (a wealthy Hollywood legend who owns planes) and Jeff Bizos and Lauren Sanchez (billionaires with planes, helicopters, yachts) will be too much to resist for them. I have had a look at the list of people also receiving awards (yep, there are lots of legends in America) and I am sure there are people she would want to connect with and network with to get ahead in Hollywood.
They are both acutely sensitive to criticism or any negative press. In situations like this, she puts on expensive clothes, slaps on the make up and a rictus grin and makes the appearance anyway. He will turn up if she instructs him to do so, wearing a Dior suit and attempting to appear blissfully happy and successful but he finds it so hard to hide that sulky scowl. Maybe they will find a way to sneak into and out of the venue and evade the paps?
... in October, Meghan wrote her ‘a lovely email, saying she was giving up her career and we had to terminate our contract.’ Remarkable to be so sure, just four months after she and Harry met. Not just made of tungsten, but possessed of a crystal ball as well.
https://www.tatler.com/article/meghan-markle-mania
Two excerpts of an article, written in May 2020, that are rather telling.
Another important comment from SMM subreddit link, in reference to Harry’s award as a Living Legend of Aviation:
“…Notable accomplishments for Harry during his flight training (for which he’s receiving this prestigious Kidde award) include:
Being sent on an equality and diversity course after calling Officer Ahmed Kahn a ‘paki.’
Remarking to comedian Stephen K Amos that, ‘You don’t sound like a black chap—‘ a beautiful, heroic display of leadership.
What a record.”
Nutmeg is too self-absorbed to even remotely consider the tenderness wrapped up in the name, she just saw a chance to leverage a super cute name and score points with the Queen by naming the baby after her.
She changed her own name, (well, not exactly change, but she discarded her given name,) so she obviously doesn't attach any particular significance to them.
I suspect she and Harry will both view the uproar over this as another instance of how badly she/ they are treated by the BRF and press. Both of them are incapable of thinking, or considering the feelings of, anyone beyond themselves. They will certainly be thinking that if W&C had used the name, it would've been fine and everyone would have loved it. Zero capability of seeing how it was so hurtful.
Yes, California would give her custody and very generous financial terms, but these are grandchildren of a king so I do not think custody is that straightforward.
We will have to wait and see how true these rumours are. I keep tripping over them!
Also, there is a bizarre article on Mudslide Manor in Page Six. It reads like a sales pitch to me.
https://archive.ph/2023.11.16-191843/https://pagesix.com/2023/11/16/royal-family/step-inside-meghan-markle-and-prince-harrys-14m-montecito-mansion/
At first sight, H appears to be someone at least within shouting distance of 2 Standard Deviations from an IQ of100 but so I'm still astonished that his comprehension of what goes on around him suggests someone with very severe learning difficulties. Or else he’s given to deliberate f*ckery . It was widely known that ERII's pet name was exclusively hers, was more or less sacrosanct in fact, and that, now that the cadre of people who were privileged to use it had died, the name too should be laid to rest.
I read a report that, years ago, someone new to the innermost royal circle(a friend of Princess Margaret?) addressed Her Majesty by the name - and HM was very put out about it, seeing its undue familiarity as gross impertinence.
So I regard this episode as another instance of their intentional malice. Otherwise, why such a charade about `asking’ to use it and seemingly allowing her to assume they meant Elizabeth?
There was a well-known boundary around the use of the name. It’s true that narcissists find boundaries an irresistible challenge, especially when they know that it will distress their victim. That just adds to its piquancy. I’m sure in *s mind it was another chance to stick the knife into Her Majesty and that was the conscious intention.
== my opinion based on facts and connecting the dots==
The Living Legends of Aviation award is laughable…they choose a couple of honorees who are genuinely praiseworthy. This is to obscure the fact that the other nominees are unworthy, and only getting an award because WME has pulled strings to have their own clientele be named Living Legends so as to keep them in the public eye:
- John Travolta is WME client, and will host the event
- Harry is client via subsidiary speaker’s bureau
- Lauren Sanchez is ex wife of Patrick Whitesell who is a very big bigwig and co-CEO of WME (she is now the squeeze of Jeff Bezos but is still friendly with ex-husband with whom she shares 2 children). Oh, let me say that Lauren Sanchez is legendary, but not for aviation
One good has come from loser H and loser M being showered with so many unearned awards since they married: it has revealed to the world that the vast majority of these award shows are completely farcical and consist solely of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours”
“There was a well-known boundary around the use of the name. It’s true that narcissists find boundaries an irresistible challenge, especially when they know that it will distress their victim. That just adds to its piquancy. I’m sure in *s mind it was another chance to stick the knife into Her Majesty and that was the conscious intention.” - end quote -
I agree with you 100%. Over the years I had read numerous times that this affectionate unique name was only for the innermost family circle members’ use, and thus I was astounded that Harry and Meghan had the unmitigated gall to co-opt it, but even more astounded that QEII gave her blessing to its use after having made so clear for years that she wanted no-one else to be called by it. I couldn’t wrap my head around the whole situation. I now understand that one of two things took place: QEII wasn’t explicitly asked for her blessing to the use of Lilibet, she having been led to believe the name would be Elizabeth; or secondly, she was notified kind of in passing to the use of Lilibet but was constrained from saying “no” since all the race-baiters would immediately (and falsely) claim racist intent.
Either way, the loathsome twosome knew that grabbing the name Lilibet would be emotionally painful to QEII, and did so tactically, willingly, and with malice aforethought. My opinion…
I distinctly remember that shortly after the alleged birth, someone here did a search and didn't find any Lillibet or Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor registered as a live birth in California but found an Elizabeth Diana Mountbatten-Windsor registered.
I believe they are lying about the alleged child's name.
Lauren Sanchez is a licensed helicopter pilot, and owns an aerial production company.
Jeff Bezos, her partner, has a rocket business somewhere.
At least these three have some street cred when it comes to aviation.
Hawwy is just a deluded dumbs*t.
The name - I have always thought it was a power play myself pitched as a "oh but we did this to honor her".
In the same way certain people I know are mean teasers and if there is the slightest push back, they come back with: "oh, I was just teasing. You're too sensitive.".
Thinking back to his book, when he talked with his grandmother about the engagement, there is a kind of flatness (lack of emotion) to the conversation. I didn't get an overwhelming sense of happy, joy direct toward him but more he's telling her that I'm doing this and she comes back with more of a well I guess I gotta approve it tone then instead of asking her if he could bring her into the family.
I could easily see an implied Elizabeth conversation as well as a fait accompli for the reason mentioned (as it would also be another example of backing her into a corner like the engagement approval).
This permanent A list mostly movie director said he had been approached and asked if he wanted to direct the movie the alliterate one is behind. He thought it was a joke. His fee is more than the budget of the movie. They said they thought he might agree to reduce his fee in order to have a chance to work with the alliterate one. He laughed.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2024/01/blind-item-35-emmy-awards.html#disqus_thread
There’ s been discussion on SMM about the precise events that led to the Windsor Great Park Walkabout to see the flowers, and what precipitated Wm, H and their wives emerging to look at the tributes and engage with the crowd. Whose idea? As it planned to demonstrate unity & reconciliation? Were the Waleses doing it under duress?
Here’s my take on it:
I was glued to the BBC report – In the conversation among the reporters and camera folk, when nothing much was happening, someone off-screen said that the D&D of Sussex had notified the Press that they would shortly be doing a walkabout. No mention of anyone else. I may have imagined the sharp intake of breath but the general impression was that Press were in no doubt that this was a stunt - surely the King had been told, by someone in the Press not by the Sussexes and it wouldn’t be allowed? Shortly after, we were told officially that the Waleses & Sussexes would do a joint walkabout, presumably at the King’s command, to spike Meghan’s guns.
We all saw what happened. I like to think that. had I been next to the lady who cut them, I’d have folded my arms across my bosom and said `I don’t shake hands with traitors’.
The Body Language Guy - Royal Rogue skewers them
I thought I remember reading (on like SMM) that D&D S notified the guards that they would be doing this walkabout and the guards relayed up to P&P Cambridge (as a kind of "do you know about this?") where it then came down to D&D S as a "how about we do a walk about together?".
I can remember thinking: well that's a cut them off at the knees response.
Haznoballs got papped after the revelation that he upset his grandmother by giving his alleged daughter her pet name.
Photos by Backgrid ... hapless, supposedly leaving the gym in Santa Barbara and jogging, seemingly past a row of parked cars.
Why does he go to a gym when they have a fully equipped gym at home, and plenty of space on the property for jogging?
That blind about her trying to get an A-list director to work for her for a reduced fee is hilarious. I assume the project is the book that Netflix purchased for them. I wonder if the director is Kevin Costner.
"As is often customary with public figures, a significant number of domains of any potential names that were considered were purchased by their team to protect against the exploitation of the name once it was later chosen and publicly shared," a spokesperson for Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, tells PEOPLE.
https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-registered-domain-names-for-lilibet-diana-before-birth/
This came straight from their spokesperson. They registered the domain names before her birth, thus before they supposedly got permission from the Queen.
-----
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry registered domains for newborn daughter Lilibet Diana before speaking to Queen Elizabeth II about the her name.
LilibetDiana.com was purchased June 4, and LiliDiana.com was registered on May 31,
https://pagesix.com/2021/06/22/meghan-harry-registered-domain-names-for-lilibet-ahead-of-birth/
-----
There is a birth certificate, but her name is actually spelled Lilibet. She was born at Santa Barbara Hospital. Father's first name is given as 'The Duke of Sussex' and his last name is given as 'His Royal Highness'.
She was born 4 June. It was widely reported by the Telegraph et al. that they registered the domain name Lilibet Diana before asking the Queen's permission. There is proof, so I don't know why they got Schillings to threaten the BBC. The whole saga is bizarre.
https://images.app.goo.gl/RCtKaqYMKvCPJ7Ak6
Nom de fume
Harry the turncoat
and his weasel faced crote
Purloined a name
that now sticks in one’s throat
Mendacious, spiteful
payback for ‘Royal’
Those nasty bastards
make my blood boil
Taking the Queen’s
beloved nickname
I hope this year brings
an End to their Game…
Thanks for the link to the BLG video. Excellent summary of *'s behaviour. I love what he calls her, "the random coloured woman" , with a mosaic of 15 photos showing *'s various skin shades.
He hits the nail on the head when he says that she lacks the thick skin necessary to deal with bad publicity/infamy, 'you don't have the Kardashian-grade hide required to thrive in the mouth of millions'🤣. He is particularly perceptive when he says that * wants to be loved because that's something that she lacked (and mentions Dorito). An excellent video.
They are using US Weekly to clap back. According to them, they are hurt and shocked about these latest allegations and multiple sources confirmed that they did indeed have the Queen's blessing to use the name.
It is not as simple as that!
Birth: June 4 at 11:40 a.m. in the Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital
The UK is 8 hours ahead in time, 7.40 p.m. is birth time in the UK.
LilibetDiana.com was purchased June 4, and LiliDiana.com was registered on May 31. Domain names typically take 24-72 hours for the domain name registration, and up to a maximum of 72 hours for the DNS Servers to replicate worldwide. Is the date recorded, the date of the application (the date of birth) or the date of registration (at least a day before the birth)?
The birth certificate emerged in the media 24/25 June. We don't know when they had the birth registered. I always assumed it was at the hospital before they went home, but I can see nothing on the birth certificate to affirm that.
They wanted to call the child Lili Diana, but then changed their minds and decided on Lilibet Diana. It seems likely that Hapless spoke to the Queen after the fact ... after the domain name was registered (no permission was sought before doing that). It is very possible that the name had been put on the birth certificate before they phoned the Queen, but it is also possible that the phone call was made before the birth was registered.
Hapless claims to have phoned the Queen about an hour after the birth, if I remember correctly. It would have been just before 9 p m. in the UK.
I can see how they can convince themselves that they are telling the truth, but it is quite clear from the evidence that it was a fait accompli when the phone call was made to the Queen (how she tells the story through her courtiers). It is also quite clear that they had time to get permission before the birth.
The couple are so devious and so deluded!
Scroll down ... this is a long and detailed post about status in America. What the wife has always wanted is to be permanent A-list. She was Z-list then Suits pushed her into C-list (but it was not on a global scale). Marrying hapless pushed her into the realm of permanent A-list, but, like Sarah, she was C-list in the royal family. She fled to California, convinced that she would now be a permanent A-lister, in every field, but she has slipped back into C-lister status.
"Celebrity. It's nothing specifically to do with politics. It's nothing specifically to do with monarchy. It's all about becoming untouchably and permanently famous. What Meghan wants is to be so famous that no one and nothing can bring her down and that if/when she screws up, no one cares."
Yeah, she thinks her project is Scorsese-level important.
Frighteningly and, at the same time, laughably delusional.
my favourite line in the BLG guy's video: (to Hairy) "I am sure your mother is still telling you how stupid you are in your Ouija board sessions with her"
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/kate-britains-princess-wales-has-abdominal-surgery-office-says-2024-01-17/
Catherine has had abdominal surgery and will be in hospital for 10 to 14 days then recuperate at home. Sounds serious.
-----
@OKay
She is seriously delusional if she thinks Martin Scorsese would want to direct for her, and for a reduced fee! Now that I have carefully read the blind again, it does sound more like Scorsese than Costner.
from some DM comments, I read that the BBC said that it was a benign tumour
have you ever heard of this web site? meghanpedia?
Very sobering, regardless.
God keep her safe. William is probably in quite the state. Harkles best lay low.
Blind Item #7
Apparently, there was a problem with a risky pregnancy which is why the emergency surgery was needed, not planned. The ginger haired one reached out to someone about going over because of all the health emergencies, but you know who said nope to that. You know who also tried to buy a house but had to settle for renting a place in Los Angeles, because she didn't qualify for the loan.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2024/01/blind-item-7_17.html
But WTF on King Charles' pr team. today you release that he too will be having an operation but not til next week (um could have waited a day to get it out). and the palace is telling reporters he is sharing about his enlarged prostate (too much info) so others will get checked out. Um, that feels like a veiled slap at the Wales for not disclosing more? but really I am willing to give the palace a benefit of the doubt but why this today and not tomorrow. and this is why we have no clarity on what the BRF feels about the car-parkles. stepping on their pr
on another note - H is taking a a page out of his wife's book and was papped in a parking lot and no security around (unless they took the pic) Pappa needs to pay for those hair plugs.
Maybe fibroids or endometriosis, but she wouldn't need to stay in the hospital that long for those.
I don't know if you just happened to come across the meghanpedia website. I had a quick look and was horrified. Apparently, Megxit is 'a group comprised of far-right political individuals who mainly reside outside the UK'. Why does anyone who doesn't agree with certain agendas have to be labelled 'far right'? It has nothing to do with it. At the side under 'MEGHTIVATION' was a list of headline one being 'the grace she exudes'. Cue sharp intake of breath. This is the grace in question in case anyone was wondering 'The grace she exhibited under such intense, relentless, mental health-destroying attacks was phenomenal.' Are these so called journalists on the same planet? Do they admire * blindly without analysing her actions? It's mind boggling.
Under the word Meghanpedia, it says 'Fact checking Misconception and Preconception'. You could have fooled me.
Warning: the above mentioned website is not suitable for persons with a heart condition or high blood pressure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d11gxEFTkFY
No use speculating really, it could be so many things, we just have to hang on to the belief that she'll get the best possible care.
I hope this is "nothing" in the terms of what most women of a certain age deal with (female problems) and pray for good outcomes with whatever she is dealing with long term.
No, I saw the web site when I followed a link from someone on CDAN.
I am as appalled as you are, but couldn't stomach investigating any further.
I just would like to know that she's not in any danger and will be back on her feet soon.
I suppose they might have seen something on a routine exam/xray that needed dealing with, but can't think of what that might be.
I heard from friends that she hadn't been seen publicly since Christmas; can our British or Irish peeps confirm? My friends didn't really think much of it, but now wonder if she could've been ill since then.
Ian's Girl said: I heard from friends that she hadn't been seen publicly since Christmas; can our British or Irish peeps confirm? My friends didn't really think much of it, but now wonder if she could've been ill since then.
I thought she looked tired but no wonder! The stress must be horrible.
BP won't disclose the nature of the operation, quite rightly, and although we're concerned about Catherine, I don't think it's helpful to try and guess what the problem is. I just hope the maleficent one hasn't been practising some voodoo from California!
No medical procedure no matter how common is routine. I trust the Princess is recovering but can we trust the powers that be to be truthful?