British Royal Family Gossip: Part 34

The Queen Mum with Elizabeth and baby Margaret.

The Queen in blue at Princess Anne's christening in 1950.

Diana could rock a tiara!

A young Lady Sarah Armstrong Jones photographed by her father Lord Snowdon.

I wonder if Camilla will get to wear the Queen Consort's crown?

Does anyone know the name of the tiara Princess Diana is wearing at R3?

R6 - I think it's the Spencer Tiara. She wore it on her wedding day.

That's her family tiara r6, the Spencer tiara. It is back with her brother now.

All the Spencer ladies (Sarah, Jane and Diana) wore the family tiara.

Thanks for the responses about the tiara. It looks so much smaller to me in R3's photo. (then again, when I first see the H in the Susses logo optical illusion) I'm surprised Diana wore it so often after marriage when there are others on loan from HM. I've read the tiara is so heavy she developed a terrific headache on her wedding day.

Diana's niece, Celia McCorquodale, wore it more recently at her country wedding last year.

I'll ask my question again for the new thread.

This may seem way too dumb of a question but I am genuinely wondering about the celebrity relations with Harry and megain. If the celebrities that are friends with HM and their new Instagram fans like Blake lively, goop etc were at a event with will and Kate, would they kiss ass? Be openly rude and dismissive as a way to show loyalty to megain? Or be normal and respective. I think they've shown such gang handed behavior towards will and Kate in order to keep Harry and meghan up and essentially creating teams. (do these celebs realise children would have to die for megain and Harry to be on top?!) I hope william would snub the celebs and get them where it hurts, especially Beyonce.

Silly question really. The celebs would probably show due deference to whatever royalty was present. William and Kate don't really hang around with celebs, so being friendly with them isn't in the cards. It seems to be more important to Haz and Meghan, although it remains to be seen how their pack of friends will shape up in the coming few years. It will probably be a mixture of aristos and celebrity folk.

Any famous person would be stupid to "gang up" on William and Kate or any other senior royal. I don't see where they've done that either. People forget, royals are NOT celebs in the strict sense. They don't live and die by record sales, movie revenue or other measurable output. Their public popularity is important but not the be-all, end-all to their standing.

R12 Most people don't get involved in fandoms related to the BRF. I suspect the celebrities you listed would be polite to most people they meet, including the Cambridges. Liking or following someone online doesn't mean you've joined their "team." It's possible to have cordial relationships with both the Sussexes and the Cambridges. I doubt any of these people think about Will, Kate, Meghan or Harry beyond the a momentary click, handshake or cocktail party conversation as necessary.

Diana looks good in tiara in no small part due to her short hairstyle, plus the tiara offsets her long and large nose. She looked fabulous in tiaras.

R12, in previous threads you've repeatedly expressed your wish for William to 'get even' with Harry and Kate's celebrity friends. As the posters above said, the celebrities would be polite to anybody they encountered socially, especially someone at the top of the food chain like Wills and Kate. Do you understand now? There will be no Mean Girls-like day of reckoning for Meghan. She is not Regina George, and life is not a high school movie.

You can see a father's love for his daughter in R4's picture: Snowdon used all of his considerable talents to make Lady Sarah look pretty. It's the only picture I've ever seen of her where she isn't distressingly plain. Yes, I realize she's a nice person, but a beauty she is not.

Celia McCorquodale has Diana's blondeness and her nose. But she married a ginger and has ginger genes (the Spencer ruddiness), so she'll almost certainly pop out a red-haired baby or two.

Regarding Frogmore Cottage: It is not Harry and Megan's fault that the place had been allowed to fall into a state of disrepair. The cost of renovations could have been covered by the Queen who chose not to do so. Many here have noticed how close tourists could get to FC so security had to be added. Again, not the fault of H and M. The Queen told them to move there. She chose the manner in which the costs of repair would be paid. All that is on her. I'm not a fan, but everything that goes wrong for the BRF is not Meghan's fault.

Thanks for that Princess Anne story. Personally I could do with less of the crouching down and hugging that Diana popularized. Warmth and concern does not always have to be conveyed physically. reply 568 Part 33

She worked the room wonderfully and was very charming and smiley. I can't imagine her feeling the need to hug anyone - it seems a theatrical gesture meant to cover up the fact that the Royal can't think of anything to say. Seems very risky to me - haven't they watched (or read) the Mirror Crack'd ? The Elizabeth Taylor version for preference with that wonderful hat.

Oh my god, MM's PR is ruthless. It is not a popularity contest!

R21 - no, we wouldn't. William is better suited for the job. Harry has turned into a wuss since his marriage. New nickname for the Sussex Shitstorm Couple: Fool and Fake. It's catchy and appropriate.

R21

God, that article is so obnoxious. Poor William. No wonder he has affairs.

Is it still treason "to imagine the death of the King?" How would this apply to one in direct line of succession?

R18, so what?

R604 - referring to your post at end of Part 33 in reply to mine about potential for damage - by the time the divorce rolls around, Meghan will have two kids whose lives would be blighted by her washing the family dirty laundry in public - because it's not only their family, too, but it's the family that gave them their privileges titles and wealth.

Of course, that didn't stop Diana with the Morton book - for all her pretensions to being a loving mother, that she thought that someday it would be in their interests to read it says something else about her.

I suppose the same could be true of Meghan - but no matter what she threatens, she will not get what Diana got, come the day. And the BRF may be holding things in reserve that it would be willing to threaten her with if she tries it on.

R3 - That's the Spencer tiara, the one that belongs to her own family, not one of the BRF's.

Just noticing the play of genes, R25. If you don't find the post interesting, feel free to skip it.

Celia McCorquodale and her husband look like a karmic match.

R19 A house that size does not require more than £3m to renovate it. Pulling it down and starting again wouldn’t have cost that much. And the disrepair can’t have been that bad given that it was inhabited by staff until recently.

Ginge & Cringe wanted more than just a renovation.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

How come the Spencer's have a tiara? Are they royalty too?

R30 - "A house that size does not require more than £3m "

LOL - it does if you're putting in boilers that cost £50,000.

It is true, though, that Charles and the Queen between them could well have afforded these renovations. Sticking the taxpayer with the bill just because they can, because it's part of the Crown Estate rather than the Queen's personal property, is sickening.

Harry is sixth in line. Charles and the Queen should have paid for this as a gesture to a struggling British economy.

Neither Harry nor Meghan justify that amount of investment (on top of her handbag collection) by the amount of "work" they do, let alone his place in the line of succession.

Here's a good read ( yes it's me again, but I do find some of these blogs and accounts really well written, and I've been on the sofa all day, ill, on the Frogmore threads).

Refering to R31's link, it is painfully easy to visualize Meghan in each picture Harry is in; she would be leaning over the table obstructing his view, she would be pawing his shoulder to gently control him, she would be pushing ahead. And with the children she would be mugging and interpreting for Harry, dragging him this way and that.

I think the Instagram thing will work out well for all parties.

Nutty Flavor is very good R35

R35 - the best lines in the article:

"And when Meg had her own Instagram account before the marriage, a cursory check found that a large percentage of the followers were from a bot farm in Kazakstan".

"At any rate, a great deal of money was spent - probably the British taxpayers' - to launch an Instagram account that celebrates the Sussexes. Not necessarily the British and Commonwealth citizens the Sussexes are supposed to serve, but the Sussexes themselves".

"And that gets to the crux of the matter. Not only can Meg (and Harry, who just seems like a passenger on her magic carpet ride these days) still not tell the difference between royalty and celebrity, but this account has no visible benefit for the people of the UK".

You don't say?

Best line = "Harry who just seems like a passenger on her magic carpet ride". This pretty well sums him up.

The Instagram launch seems to be another example of this, since it includes yet another black-and-white photo in which Meg and Harry stand with their backs to the audience.

The Sussexes 2018 Christmas Card

What possible message is this supposed to send? Turning your back to someone is a cross-cultural symbol of disdain and rejection.

And to do turn your back twice on the public, after being criticized for it on the release of the 2018 Sussex Christmas card, shows an exquisite hard-headedness.

R39 - "exquisite hard-headedness". WTF? I've never found that character trait "exquisite".

R26. Thank you for your reply. I don't believe Diana received compensation for the Morton book, but I could be wrong. My thought was that Meghan might better off financially if she sold her "story" rather than signing an NDA as part of a meager divorce settlement. But I had forgotten about the children! The hope is that Meghan wouldn't throw the royal relatives under a bus for her own personal gain. Also, Harry and the children will probably inherit significant sums from Charles when he dies. My guess is that Meghan will try to hang in there with Harry, knowing that his wealth will increase when the Queen dies and again when his father dies. We'll see if she can manage it.

R35 - It is a good read, and here's my favourite bit from it:

"And when Meg had her own Instagram account before the marriage, a cursory check found that a large percentage of the followers were from a bot farm in Kazakstan."

Feel better.

I agree that any royal who isn't the monarch, the heir of the monarch, or, in the case of the long-lived Windsors, the heir's heir, has no business living in a crown estate property restored with public funds. Especially when the monarch and her heir have private fortunes that probably total at least half a billion dollars. Harry and Meghan's shameless publicity campaign just further highlights what a massive scam on the British Public the Royal Family really is.

R26 "Also, Harry and the children will probably inherit significant sums from Charles when he dies. My guess is that Meghan will try to hang in there with Harry, knowing that his wealth will increase when the Queen dies and again when his father dies. We'll see if she can manage it"

I do agree with this possibility - although it is less possible re the Queen than Charles. She does, after all, have many grand- and great-grandchildren. Charles, however, is likely to leave both sons a large trust, and they are the natural heirs to his £300 million personal fortune.

It depends on how long she has to wait. HM could go on for another five years. If Charles inherits at 75, and follows the family pattern and reigns till 95 or so, Meghan would be waiting a quarter of a century for that large inheritance from Harry's father.

She'll need to keep Harry happy for all that time.

R40 - I believe R39 used the word to express "incredibly finely sharpened", as in "exquisite pain". It works, just not literally.

R34 But that was my point. Nobody needs £50k boilers. And nobody needs to spend £3m+ renovating a 5 bedroom house. Nobody.

In the UK there’s a show called Grand Designs about very extreme, high-end house renovations. I don’t think anyone has ever spent that much, not even when the houses bear almost no relation to what was there originally.

R35 I love Eugenie's "Welcome, cousins" post. Can't put my finger on it, and don't know if it was intentional, but her familiar way of addressing them knocks them off their Instagram high horse a bit.

The reason Meghan doesn’t want to pose with newborn after leaving the hospital is because she will post photos of her with baby on their Instagram account. The photos will be professionally shot and portray her in saintly poses, with Harry as afterthought.

R46 Now, now. It is a low-carbon, green energy unit to provide all the heat, hot water and electricity for FrogCot. There really wasn't an alternative for them.

If Camilla is still alive when William becomes a king, what her title will be? Queen Mother-in-law?

One day the BRF will take one step too far off the Glaring Privilege Cliff, and Meghan Markle might be just the thing to give them the final push.

Their maxim should be: Remember the Romanovs.

Instead, it's, "Oh, I think we can get the Sovereign Grant and Grants in Aid Programme to take care of this!"

R50 My prediction is Dowager Duchess of Cornwall. By rights, she should be Dowager Queen, but she may not even want that.

"Prince Harry says social media is more addictive than drugs...." Is he aware that his wife has set up an Insta account? lol.

I think it would be most empowering if she Instagrammed the entire birth, from the breaking of the water all the way through to Dim shoving a cigarette in each nostril, flopping the placenta on top of his head, and doing a goofy monster dance.

As the leader of world's women, it's the least she can do.

R48 I agree. She wants to control and edit those first photos, as well as sell them to magazines. I wager we never see an unedited photo of them from now on.

R50 That really depends on whether she is crowned Queen on her husband’s accession. If so, then widowed Queens consort until now have been known as “Queen firstname” to distinguish them from their successor who is known as “The Queen”. E.g. Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth (the “Queen Mum” - always tricky as she had the same first name as her reigning daughter) were known as such in their widowhood. If so she could be “Queen Camilla” to distinguish her from her stepdaughter in law who would be “The Queen”.

When the current Queen’s father died there were three living queens for a while - Mary, Elizabeth and Queen Elizabeth II.

If Charles dies before his mother, Camilla could probably be called “Dowager Duchess of Cornwall” as noted above. We’ll have to wait and see.

Why doesn’t Harry grow his hair a bit longer, gel it back, and cover the bald bit at the back either with toppik or a quick hair transplant?

He would look a million times more fuckable.

Does he manscape? DO British guys manscape?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R53 LOL Harry thinks its irresponsible for parents to allow their kids to play Fortnite and it will end with broken families. Spoken like someone who doesn't have children. Will the Sussex kids have to sneak to their friends' houses to do anything fun?

R33, yes, the Spencer family is nobility, have a huge estate, and a hereditary peerage.

Is Meghan permitted to sell pictures as a royal? Does the public have any way of knowing whether she's making money?

R59 I don't know about "broken families" but there are lots of parents who agree that children shouldn't play Fortnite or be involved in server-based network multiplayer games.

R62 Apparently I know a lot of terrible parents.

New Insta post from the Sussexes. He's dedicated to working "in the mental health space."

New material to bitch about.

R47, I agree! Not only the lack of formality, but that she was there first. Tee hee.

R65 It was like the royal equivalent of "what's up, bro?"

R63 You are better placed to assess that I am ;-)

I know a fair number of parents and fewer than 10% let their kids play server-based games. Obviously that's not statistically valid, I'm just saying Harry didn't invent the opinion that Fortnite is bad for kids. There have been a truckload of "think pieces" and articles about it.

LOL the lengths some of you will go to make out the rf hates meghan.

Need I remind you shortly after Yuge's wedding bump-coat controversy, Yuge herself LIKED a pic of meghan on instagram. I know it hurts your soul that the yorks aren't burning her at the stake. Even andrew posted a pic and welcomed her and harry to insta. Hell, even fergie defended her in an interview, an article the dm posted a while ago.

Get a clue, R68. The Yorks have their own public images to maintain, you know. How fucking dim to think either of those (very small) gestures means they like Hazbean.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Give me those jewels, bitch.

R71, I forgot about her moustache in that wedding picture. Yikes.

It cracks me up that the Yorks are welcoming Meghan to social media as if she’s a noob. Hahaha. That must piss her off. She thinks she invented it. Oh, hello there, cuz! I see you’re just getting around to Instagram finally. Welcome!

Never mind the moustache, that picture brings back the reality of how shockingly awful the cut of the dress was.

R69 IKR?! They all must secretly hate her because....reasons.

lol you're pathetic. I genuinely pity you.

"I need them to hate her because I hate her!! Validate me Eugenie!". You read into every little gesture and twist and contort it to suit your own agenda. Formal welcoming? "They were forced! They were doing the bare minimum. If they really liked her they would make the welcome more familiar and casual!" Familiar and casual? "They were shading her!! To make her seem less royal! It's all part of the plan to get rid of her!."

😂

Looking at R71's article I'm reminded that Diana had perfect tiara hair. Kate wears the Cambridge tiara very well, but Diana was next level. Seeing the Spencer tiara on her siblings at R9 reinforces it. The tiara is gorgeous (better than the Cartier Scroll Tiara IMO) but Diana makes it look even better.

Mustache in wedding photo? Why did I miss this? She does seem like the hairy sort, must spend a shitload of money on hair removal on top of botox.

R70 I thought nobody cared about them?

Back when the Queen Mother was alive, she was known as Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, sometimes as just Queen Elizabeth, to distinguish her from her daughter, known as Her Majesty The Queen.

I read once, and I really do hope that it’s true, that when the Queen Mum phoned her daughter for a daily afternoon chat, that she was put through by the Buckingham Palace operator with:

“Your Majesty? Her Majesty, Your Majesty”.

R74 I have never said they hate her. Regardless of what people on here keep insisting, facts are few on the ground and nobody actually knows anything.

But it takes a true cretin (you) to insist that vague public acknowledgements indicate warm feelings.

R33 Tiaras can be owned by anybody who can afford and have use for them. These have traditionally been royalty, the aristocracy and the people who could afford to socialise with them at white tie occasions.

All the titled British families (and the same in continental Europe) traditionally had at least one family tiara which was shared among the female members for occasions that they were invited to, and especially their weddings. E.g. the Spencer Tiara.

Through the generations as tiara events became less common and as the upper classes became more cash strapped through death duties they have sold off their jewels so that there are fewer tiaras in private hands today. Fewer, but still quite a lot!

R67 A friend of mine has a 22 year-old son who has played an online game called Dota for several years. My friend curtailed his playing time while he lived at home, but then he left for college. He's so good he made it to their leader board for a time. He's currently getting his masters in software engineering and has met real job contacts through the darned game. He has a good job lined up after he graduates. I don't know. But I do know that Harry shouldn't reduce a complex parenting issue like technology access and use to a sound bite about the evils of Fortnite, irresponsible parenting and how the game should be banned. Does he want to ban teen girls from looking at social media/influencers? Studies show it negatively impacts self-image. How about banning smartphones, because many teens have anxiety around text messaging and having constant access to their phones and social media? It's more complicated than he thinks.

R80 I was responding to others who were reaching for the stars insisting Eugenie hated her and was trying to somehow communicate her dislike by writing 'Welcome cousins'. You would actually know that if you read what was written and not projecting and making assumptions like a right plonker.

R70 I await the moment the number of Sussex followers exceeds the number of KP followers. At the end of the day, whoever has the most Instagram followers "wins."

Are bitches actually going on about number of instagram followers as if it's some sort of a virtue or talent? Reminds me of that instagram sociopath mom who begged her followers to click on one of her son's photos because he needs more views to validate self-confidence. WTF people get a fucking grip. If this is what Meghan stans are like then they are indeed a scary bunch.

R85, you just reminded me of a friend of a friend who has a sweet overweight early-teens daughter. She’s really a nice kid. Friend was asking everyone to like her IG posts because she was getting picked on and it would boost her self-esteem. I’m not sure how likes from a bunch of middle-aged people will help, but I couldn’t not.

R83 You don't think Eugenie was upset that Meghan broadcast her pregnancy at the wedding? I don't know if she hates Meghan, but I wouldn't blame her for disliking her after that.

R86 That's heartbreaking. I would not have done it either.

R87, perhaps Eugenie wasn’t upset about Meghan’s cunt stunt, but I bet her parents were. Maybe Eug is magnanimous enough and knows that her family will punish Meghan duly.

R82 I agree that it is a complicated issue and a big one. I was responding to R59's comment that Harry's concern about Fortnite was limited to non-parents.

To be fair, one anecdotal case of an avid gamer who became an engineer doesn't negate the evidence that for most children extensive gaming is potentially problematic. Fortnite is marketed to young children and preteens so the effects on their levels of physical activity and social interaction may be more pronounced that on your friend's 22 year old son.

[quote] I do know that Harry shouldn't reduce a complex parenting issue like technology access and use to a sound bite about the evils of Fortnite, irresponsible parenting and how the game should be banned.

The Telegraph didn't say Harry called for the game to be banned or that he accused the parents of being irresponsible. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed, but he wasn't that dimwitted at this photo op. He said "it's irresponsible." He could have been talking about the marketing or design of the game. Like you said, it's possible he was talking about the parents but I'm not assuming so. Harry's been on about physical activity and mental health for a while, and he was at an YMCA event so that may be his angle on this.

[quote] what is the prize?

R84 Prom Queen

R90 Harry didn't say the game should be banned, he said "it shouldn’t be allowed" and that having it in your household is "so irresponsible.”

R86 No, the psycho woman wasn't comparable to what your friend was trying to do, which although I don't agree with teaching kids to link instagram views with self-confidence, I wouldn't fault someone for asking that of friends. What I was referring to was this sociopath/ narcissist blogger mom.

Waiting to see how well Harry and Meghan do parenting their own child.

I think Eugenie is simply a nice girl - she also seems like a very happy one these days, having married her great love at last with a beautiful wedding. Perhaps she was too happy to care about Meghan's Mean Girl stunt at her wedding. But I doubt it went by Prince Andrew, who many think leaked the Tiaragate story in retaliation. It's fair to say no one really knows how the BRF feel about anything, but I think it's also fair to say that given what we know of their concerns and how they operate, Meghan had dismayed them this year. They know perfectly well what the signposts mean of the grandstanding, the Mean Girl stunt, the request for her own "brand" and court (really? the sixth in line?), the hugely expensive clothes, and the ill-timed, OTT baby shower. She works for them and Britain, not for herself and Harry, and she just doesn't seem either to grasp that or to accept it.

I think the offer of Frogmore Cottage, which had to be a disappointment to Meghan, with no base in London, the refusal to give her her own court and PR operation, or a base in London, and the optics of Remembrance Day, do not point to anyone but Harry being thrilled with her first year; Charles perhaps is being more forgiving for his son's sake. But refusing to suppose that the Cambridges, the savvy, down to earth Anne, Prince Andrew, or Camilla are under any illusions about her is naive.

^And, I would add, the Queen herself being under any illusions about her after this year, although she will, as always, put the best face on it publicly. The tiaragate story, which has never been denied and appeared in Jobson's official biography "Charles at 70", related that the Queen had to take Harry aside and tell him that his bride needed "attitude adjustment".

They were also the only major royals not seen at Balmoral last summer, and don't believe that story that they visited Charles and Camilla at the Castle of Mey "instead". No one substitutes anyone else for the Queen. If they weren't there, it's because they weren't invited, so the Queen must already have been fairly angry. She did the little outing with Meghan as she did with Kate and it was a one time, and Meghan didn't wear a hat as instructed. She really doesn't give a fuck about anyone, and when you're dependant on one end by the Sovereign and the other by the good will of the British public, that's a foolish attitude.

Is this an homage by Amanda Peet (wife of one the producers of GOT) to Meghan. Here she is on the Red Carpet at today's season premier at Rockefeller Center.

R92. Yes. He may have meant parents shouldn't allow it. That's not the same as saying it should be banned by regulators.

I did a bit more digging on his views. In October he said "what's wrong with parents?" when he heard that 8 year olds are allowed to play Fortnite by their parents so yeah he probably thinks it's a symptom of irresponsible parenting, but he didn't say that. I don't disagree with his concern, but it's not "on brand" for the BRF and its aversion to controversial statements so he should probably steer clear. His father is a bit of a meddler and his wife is an activist (or says she is) so perhaps Harry is taking his cues from them.

I remember seeing a photo, taken at last year's Christmas pap stroll, of Eugenie putting a gentle hand on Meghan's shoulder. (I haven't been able to locate it). Meghan received a lot of criticism for a similar gesture on Kate's back. Eugenie's most recent post wasn't her only post recognizing Harry and Meghan.. I think she's just a pleasant young woman, and I doubt if she paid much attention to Meghan's stupid stunt while she was in the midst of her own wedding.

Sorry - Amanda Peet in Meghan's Morocco Dress.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I am surprised Will and Kate didn't invite Fergie to their wedding. Seemed cruel. Practically a faux pas imo.

As posted upthread, Anne has had her share of scandals. While married to Mark Phillips, he had an affair that resulted in a child. Meanwhile she was having an affair with Tim Laurence and some love letters were stolen with a threat to publish. She was also very close to one of her protection officers and intervened when he was nearly fired because of that. I guess the difference is this was all pre-social media. And/or she just ignored the fuss. Impossible to imagine that today.

I very much doubt the Yorks or anyone else have much at all to do with the Harkles. High days and holidays - that’s about it.

Haven’t we all seen this somewhere in our own families? Previously fun family member (usually male) hooks up with a controlling partner & gradually changes for the worse. Everyone starts off trying to be nice and welcoming until the “happy couple” respond to the undercurrent of dislike by ghosting everyone.

We don’t know for sure what’s going on, and probably never will but the one thing I am absolutely certain of is that Markle has NPD (actual NPD not just narcissistic traits) which means that even the smallest hint of criticism from anyone will be blown up out of all proportion & become a major issue. It’s this that will drive dislike of her within the family.

As far as millions of IG followers goes....meh. Most of them are not British and nearly all of them are brainless screamers who wet their knickers whenever their manipulative idols hold hands or look at each other. Popularity with such people doesn’t actually mean much in the final analysis...Markle is very unpopular with the people who actually count....the British press. And that is only going to get worse as she continues to blatantly use the BRF for her own self-glorification - AND taking down the previously popular Harry as she does so.

We ain’t seen nothing yet.

Bea and Eugenie had their run-ins with Pippa and Kate during "the girlfriend years." It went both ways. In addition to the fashion show incident, which Pippa took graciously, Kate "forgot" to tell Bea it was fancy dress 80s party.

R192 How is it a faux pas not to invite one’s uncle’s ex-wife (who he divorced fifteen years previously) to one’s wedding? Especially when the ex-wife is a reckless drunk who had been caught out selling access to her husband? And had publicly embarrassed William’s mother in her tell all book published the year that Diana died? And who Diana wasn’t in contact with when she died?

Faux pas? Oh there were plenty! From Fergie, that is. The woman is shameless and just as much of an embarrassment as she was back in the nineties.

^^ R102, I mean

I see your point R106, but it's not like Fergie wasn't always sort of around. She's close to Andrew and the the girls. She's someone Will and Kate will be bumping into at family gatherings still. I dunno.

I hope the Sussexes IG explodes with followers. The faster Meghan believes that she has solidified her "brand", the faster she'll leave for what she thinks are greener pastures. The christening should be the last Meghan-centered event to endure.

R108 Fergie has always been a royal fringe dweller since her divorce TWENTY THREE YEARS AGO - with her hand out, as always. I’m sure that Beatrice and Eugenie are used to their mother being excluded from family and other gatherings due to her embarrassing and ridiculous behaviour.

I doubt Will and Kate had much input or choice in whether or not Fergie was invited. As it was the wedding of a future king, the invite list required more circumspection. If anybody made a call as to whether or not she was invited, it was probably Prince Phillip. Doubtful anyone blamed Will or especially Kate for her lack of invitation as they all would have understood the politics at play. Harry got to invite her to his wedding because, why not? It was going to be a shitshow anyway.

Exactly, r110, she's embarrassing to the point of parody.

Apparently Sarah Ferguson is still quite friendly with the Queen, and the Queen invites her to visit her when Philip isn't present. Harry apparently was pretty insistent that she should be invited, since he's rather close to Bea and Eugenie, and didn't want to hurt their feelings, even though he was risking infuriating Philip.

And you know this how?

R98 For the record, I think Harry means well and I agree with him that parents shouldn't let their pre-teen or even early teen children play Fortnite and similar games. Kids that age shouldn't have much access to "screens" at all, as far as I'm concerned. For me, these issues are more complicated with older teens.

R106 You're cutting it both ways. Fergie is either the long forgotten ex or she's close enough to sell access to Andy. There was no tell-all book. Sarah made a shitty comment about shoes in her 1995 autobiography and Diana stopped talking to her. It wasn't worth a 15 year grudge.

The rumour is that they divorced to limit the embarrassment to the Firm, not because Andy wasn't willing to move past the affair. Fergie and Andy continue to live in the same house, they vacation together and he bailed her out financially long after their divorce and well after their children were grown.

In an intimate wedding there might not be room for a truly estranged former in-law, but the Cambridges had 1900 weddings guests including Ian Thorpe, Charles' old teacher and the owner of a bar on Mustique. Fergie's always been OTT but there were all sorts at that wedding so she would have been one of many. In the middle of that crowd there was no room for Fergie, who is basically Andy's common-law wife? I find that hard to believe.

R114, I will correct myself. Apparently, the Queen herself invited Sarah to Eugenie's wedding.

[quote]Sarah, however, tried to win the Queen over by directly asking for her friendship again. The Queen forgave her, and the two rebuilt their friendship and now spend time together over tea. An insider described the Queen as forgiving and always sees the best in people. While the Queen has moved past the scandal involving Sarah, Prince Philip has not. Prince Philip considered ditching invitation for Princess Eugenie and boyfriend Jack Brooksbank’s wedding on Oct. 12. For the sake of his granddaughter, Prince Philip agreed to be photographed with Sarah for a family portrait.

R115 No, I don’t rhink Harry “means well” at all. How dare he presume to give out parenting advice when he’s not even a parent himself yet?

He’s also overstepping the bounds of his duties. We don’t need “advice” from any member of that family. Show up, highlight the charity you’re visiting and then fuck off. His platform is completely unearned so he has absolutely no mandate to start telling others how they should live or what games their kids should be playing.

I genuinely wonder whether some people on this thread still don’t understand the function of the royal family and exactly why it is that The Cambridges are getting everything right while the Harkles are getting everything wrong.

Their glitzy “look at us” IG is abhorrant and solely designed to inspire worship from morons. Any causes & charities are incidental and all the babies they tickle and Muslims they cuddle are simply set dressing.

They truly are an arrogant pair of cunts, and their downfall is going to be very, very well-deserved.

Again, Fergie probably wasn't an option for Will and Kate's wedding if Prince Phillip had the final say. It has been said he is the head of the family (although, obviously, he had gotten frail in the last year or so) and he despises Fergie.

Andy and Fergie are not practically common law married. Thieves-in-common, sure, with their access selling nonsense. She's a mess in all sorts of ways. As despicable as he is, he seems to love his daughters. He couldn't very well abandon her, given her instability, and remain on good terms with his daughters. It seemed pretty clear from Eugenie's wedding that he could barely tolerate Fergie, drunken sot that she was that day.

Oh please, r118, you’ve lost your mind. Just because he isn’t s parent yet he can’t offer his opinion? He can’t point t out something that he-and a lot of parents-think might be inappropriate for children? I for one don’t want a dolt to just show up, smile and be a smiling dolt. If you’re going to get a huge royal sum of money, try and do some good with it, don’t just show up to store openings or visit schools.

There will be no downfall for 'them'. Meghan will bolt, frame Harry and the BRF as her tormentors, and move move on to whatever insta influencer, Real Housewives life she has planned.

Harry will be a laughingstock in the UK and reviled in the US. It will serve him right.

[quote]r109 The faster Meghan believes that she has solidified her "brand", the faster she'll leave for what she thinks are greener pastures.

Or that she does something that's so over the top it'll be game over.

I believe that the Royal Family (barely) tolerate Fergie because they have a little control over her while they keep her close, no doubt doling out just enough cash to keep her quiet and providing a roof over her head.

She would be a more respectable character if she got a job - in a shop or something - anything, really, to show that she’s not just leeching off her former husband’s family. Her behaviour at Princess Eugenie’s wedding, which she had at least a year to prepare for, knowing that her disapproving former in laws and the eyes of the world were on her, was a joke. The gurning, the leaping out of the car upon arrival at the chapel to run up to someone in the crowd, having to be chaperoned by her eldest daughter rather than Beatrice being a bridesmaid to her sister. She’s clearly incapable of not making a complete twat of herself at every opportunity.

r71 Has that Sun article re Sparkles not wearing jewelry previously worn by Diana include the pieces willed to her sons by her ?

Is William grabbing all the good stuff?

Does Meghan allow Harry to let William visit the vault w/out her being present?

Have there been wrestling matches between the brothers at the vault's location?

We need answers.

I can see Diana's jewels as a major breaking point b/t the brothers. Maybe that's what all this is about. B/c I can see William grabbing stuff and I can see Meghan fuming.

R59, what friends?

The Clooney twins?

Or the scary-looking Mulroney twin boys?

R119 After their divorce Princess Anne and Mark Phillips continued to live close together but not in the same house. If one is maintaining affairs for the sake of providing stability for the children, this is understandable.

Based on publicly available information we know Andrew and Sarah share a residence at Royal Lodge and share a vacation home. She throws him birthday parties and they eat together daily. They were together in Bahrain this week. The York girls are grown and have moved out. There is no need for Andrew and Sarah to maintain a joint residence anymore and yet they continue to do so. That's not the behaviour of a man who can't tolerate his ex.

This thread has assumed affairs, PR campaigns and murder plots with a lot less information than this. Do you need a leaked photo to believe Andrew and Fergie are fucking?

FWIW, I don't find Fergie a particularly likeable or sympathetic character, but I think it's disingenuous to pretend she and Andrew are not a couple.

R120 Who cares what you want? Get your own royal family, pay for it and then you’ll have some right to decide what their duties are. OK?

The BRITISH Royal Family are the recipients of unearned privilege & in return for everything WE give them they spend their time drawing attention to the hard work of others. They do not presume to make pronouncements about how others should live. That is simply the way it is.

Frankly, if you don’t understand even that what is your interest in the subject at all?

Thank you, R116. You put it better than I could have. Good point about it being a big wedding, and therefore a particularly stinging snub.

Didn’t Fergie bolt out of the car at Euge’s wedding in order to hug an old friend of her mother? If so, I think that was rather endearing.

PS, I’m glad the nickname “Fergie”has reverted to its rightful owner instead of that popstar.

Well R116 you’d better believe it, because there was no room for the old drunk slapper!

Is it true that a journalist called Markle "repugnant" in front of the cameras?

He was shocked that she had pushed ahead of Harry to greet some royal. That's when she was wearing that purple mumu. She further embarrassed herself when departing.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I had never heard her voice before. Does she always come off this phony? She practically lunges as she loudly proclaims "Thank you SO MUCH for your hospitality!!" Harry is a fucking fool if he's not embarrassed by her.

R116 I’m not privy to why the swimmer, the bar owner or the teacher were invited to the nuptials of the Duke of Cambridge and his fiancée, however I’ll hazard a guess that none of them was caught trying to sell access to the Duke of York in his then role as British Trade Envoy for £500,000 twelve months before.

Yes it was a sting, yes she was drunk and yes the same tabloid caught out the Countess of Wessex ten years earlier. Doesn’t make it ok, though.

The bottom line is that Sarah, Duchess of York wasn’t invited, for reasons best known to the groom, bride and their parents.

[quote]"At any rate, a great deal of money was spent - probably the British taxpayers' - to launch an Instagram account that celebrates the Sussexes.

I'm sure it will take a great deal of manpower to maintain their Instagram account since nothing will stop people from posting thoughtful, critical dissections of the Sussexes or the as per usual hate and trolling, but how much money does it take for a lackey to start an IG account? They were going to get their damn logo anyway.

[quote]Fergie and Andy continue to live in the same house, they vacation together and he bailed her out financially long after their divorce and well after their children were grown.

Don't forget that he got Jeffrey Epstein to cough up £15k to help pay her personal assistant, which somehow allowed the "restructuring" of her £5M in debt. Sarah issued a groveling apology about her bad judgement (see link). This was just a month before the Cambridge wedding. I'm sure Andrew has never apologized, but he was stripped of his trade envoy position. Of course, he was invited despite the Epstein stench which would have been compounded by Fergie's presence.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

If they loan some jewelry from Diana to MeAgain they will never see it back I can tell you that

Well this is just temporary, the Queen will not last much longer, and Meghan is besties with Charles, don’t you know.

I don't think Eugenie has a grudge against MM for her showboating at the wedding. The backlash against MM for her behaviour was so swift and forceful and everyone was angry on Eugenie's behalf.

She is ? If I recall he banned them to frogcottage . For the media he will be gentle to her but If she is stealing his thunder or put the monarchy on danger he will not be so benevolant . Charles is ruthless in that regard !

Good point R141. Um your royal majesty um I'll bring the big tiara with eyeball sized stones back just as soon as I finish changing baby Diana Charles. Grueling life I've got, no time to turn around, no time at all.

I don't know what to tell you, hopeful r142, but however long the Queen lasts or not, to bar the mother of Diana's grandchild from accessing any of Diana's Royal Collection jewels is a major slapdown from her to Meghan not likely to be forgot anytime soon in the halls of the various houses of Windsor. It's actually a stunning rebuke.

Also, even if the Queen were to die tomorrow, her advisers will certainly go on well into Charles' reign - if only to make it easier for lazy him - and you know Camilla has Meghan's number (up, down, and sideways), so I wouldn't expect much to change under Charles now that his Mother has laid down this particular law.

Meghan has been physically exiled to the servants' quarters, and now she is being exiled from a common privilege that all the other Windsor women theoretically have for the asking.

Apparent the Royal Collection of jewellery has over a million pieces.

R142 Well dear, I went on to live 101 years , so I think darling Lilibet has a while to go yet. I saw off Wallis Simpson and I'm sure The House Of Windsor will see off her equally odious American divorcee successor!

R128, if I’m going to fucking pay for the royal family, then I want them to at least make a difference in people’s lives, not show up for mall openings and pat people on the back. Just because you prefer your royals neutered doesn’t mean you’re right.

I'm LOL if the bling ban in true.. SLAP! But I have a hard time believing it. The Queen's decades old track record of soothing feelings, rather than inflaming them, suggests this isn't something she would do.

If it is true, though, I suppose it means Megantoinette leaked it. Making herself look the victim and the rest of the family look mean to her, won't change anything. Unless she's already laying her exit strategy along the same lines: I just couldn't cope... they made my life torture... does anyone know the feminine form of Sheik?

So you have so much love for MeAgain . All her merching on the taxpayers back and God nows whatelse . She has a very expensive taste your Meghan . She shows up to an event or charity and makes it all about her . Not to shine the light on the charity or event or the people who are honored but only on her . Look at me i’m a Duchess .

So the exit of MeAgain is after the christening . The fact that she is not allowed Diana.s jewelry is a telltale for that . The RF knows theyre not gonna have any jewelry back when she is out of the RF . Like I told already in the dangling tendrils threads .

R120 (and, I suspect, R128) - I'm going to quote your first post here: "Oh please, [R118], you’ve lost your mind. Just because he isn’t s parent yet he can’t offer his opinion? He can’t point t out something that he-and a lot of parents-think might be inappropriate for children? I for one don’t want a dolt to just show up, smile and be a smiling dolt. If you’re going to get a huge royal sum of money, try and do some good with it, don’t just show up to store openings or visit schools."

This is basically a textbook example of People Being Wrong About The Royal Family. I don't mean that your personal feelings regarding royals and their public statements (you're in general favour) are wrong, I mean your overall assumption that this is somehow up for debate is wrong. It's just definitely wrong. Harry, who has already shown a marked tendency to foot-in-mouth syndrome, definitely stuck his foot in it again with his comments on Fortnite, AND his comments on social media - although for slightly different reasons.

I'm not saying this because *I* disagree with Harry. I actually don't, and my own opinion is harsher than his was. But it is not his place to make comments like that in public. I'm a little surprised there hasn't been more of a press response to him doing so, and wouldn't be surprised to see it mentioned over the next week or so. Whether you or I or anyone personally agree or disagree with his opinions, it is literally part of his job to say nothing controversial, ever. And that comment on Fortnight has the potential to be quite controversial (hell hath no freakout like middle class people whose parenting techniques have been mildly questioned).

I constantly see people doing this - thinking 'oh well I don't mind when member of the BRF does X so X is fine.' No, it isn't. Their job is to show up, smile, shake hands, grin at babies, have their photos taken, engage in chitchat etc. The only reason Harry has gotten away with his dimwit pronouncements is because he's so popular. Charles would have been absolutely crucified for that 'no one even wants to me King' boo-hoo comment Harry made awhile back.

In conclusion, you are free to prefer your royals opinionated. That has no bearing on the fact - the fact! - that they're basically banned from having public opinions on anything more controversial than babies being cute.

There's always that one nutter on these royal threads who insist that Andrew and Sarah are still a couple and are going to re-marry.

The Spencer family has three tiaras actually. The famous one Diana and her sisters wore to their weddings, a less famous one which is on display at Althorp which is an awkward combination of Greek Key and flor-di-lis, and a third rarely seen one which might have left the main line decades ago else sitting in a bank vault somewhere. Countesses needed tiaras back in those days, as did their daughters. One had to wear a tiara to be presented at Court, a countess might accompany her husband to the State Opening of Parliament, and they were worn for coronations and portraits.

R153, and you basically summed up why I hate the idea of the royal family. We prop them up with millions and millions of dollars, and all they have to do is smile at babies, and they’ve fulfilled their duty. It’s infuriating.

R156 you are speaking of dollars so you’re an American and not English . So long they want the RF its OK with me . Its not my money and not yours they’re living on .

It's interesting, the battle between r128 and r153, with the interlude from r156.

I've never seen so many pro-Republic comments as I've seen since Meghan. Since she has (half)dropped her mask it's been astonishing how many commenters have said "I've always been a Royalist but...." in reaction to Meghan's latest 50,000$ gown for a small diplomatic visit, or, worse, a 20,000$ givenchy for a visit to a charity. To say nothing of the her writing "Work hard!" on bananas to be given out to sex workers.

Can the MegStans on here explain to me why they like her? She's anti-black in all her plastic surgery and marriages - she's never so much as dated a black man. She's anti-sister/friend if how she deals with Eugenie and Kate are any indication. Her only recommendation is Soho House and that foul Canadian hag.

Oh. And the Clooneys. Her "new" friends.

So what gives? Why do you like her?

Tiara fans! Rare Historic Fabergé Tiara Of Imperial Russian Provenance Unseen For Century To Sell At Christie's.

Actually, I think this has already been posted, but it's worth a double post.

Be pretty without the aquamarines.

Fabolous tiara R160 .

I very much hope that one of the Russian oligarch wives will wear that tat at r160. Aquamarines - especially very large ones- suit that type.

Can YOU guess what Harry's first girlfriend posted?

Hmm. Meghan wears Diana's aquamarine ring. How much do you want to bet she's haranguing Harry to purchase that Imperial tiara - especially now that Her Majesty has cut her off from the family jewels? I'll show you, Lilibet! I'll buy my own damned tiara!

Meghan is a goner.

R166 - Diana's aquamarine ring was Diana's personal property; she purchased it to replace the sapphire engagement ring. So as William got the sapphire, Harry was free to give Meghan the aquamrine ring, which doesn't look particularly nice on her. Her hands are too small for it. Diana had big hands. Harry can certainly buy her a tiara if he wants, but it ain't gonna be anything "imperial". The BRF don't sell that stuff off unless it's a later purchased piece.

This article is incredibly juicy and confirms my post above that Meghan managed to piss off the Queen before the ring was even on her finger, and that her pushy grandstanding is causing the BRF to circl the wagons and see that she stays in her lane. Meghan thinking that the wife of the sixth in line could get her own court probably didn't help, either.

I'm sure Meghan IS haranguing Harry and has been for some time, egging him on to stand up to the "snobs" in his family.

She shouldn't count on Charles, either. Underneath all that modernisation bullshit, he's a feudal snob out of the Edwardian era, and he won't tolerate disrespect to the monarchy or his mother.

Great job, Meghan.

Oh, they'll all show up at the christening, don't worry. As long as Meghan behaves.

From article:

[quote]Buckingham Palace has reportedly applied the stringent new rules to Meghan in a bid to 'maintain order, hierarchy and precedence' within the Royal Family.

This is what I was referring to earlier (not sure if this thread or other). Meghan, being American, hasn't been brought up to understand these British Royal ways, as archaic as they may be. She should have know what she was marrying into.

R169 - I'm sure Harry half-heartedly told her what she was getting into, and she said, "Yeah, honey, don't worry, I can handle them, and between the two of us they won't know what hit them. Now take that thing out and relax . . . "

I can only imagine the rage brewing on Celebitchy as they pooh pooh the story as more smearing by Carol Middleton with her mysterious power over the British press.

Exactly R141, any jewels she gets, she will never, ever give back. Thats just reality.

And yes, the future relationship of Meghan and King Charles will be interesting.

r170 Exactly.

[quote] In conclusion, you are free to prefer your royals opinionated. That has no bearing on the fact - the fact! - that they're basically banned from having public opinions on anything more controversial than babies being cute.

What utter tosh!

The Queen would have to know that it would look petty to ban "Meghan" from jewelry. Perhaps the new rule is more subtle, limiting certain pieces to the direct heirs and their spouses, with an exception of blood princesses? Hmmm...how could it be diplomatically worded?

I'd like to know the cirmcumstances of Charles telling Meghan she should not wear a tiara in Fiji because it would be too extravagant.

Did she put in a request to survey the tiaras for the event? Did the Queen review the request with Charles at a meeting, pass over the request to him, and say, "this time it's your turn."

I wonder if she accepted his explanation right away or if she argued with him.

The point, r175, is that the Queen is always diplomatic, except in this ONE instance she has Let It Be Known that she would entirely deny Harry's thing the most important recognition of all.

This means everything.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R177 The jewellery ban is quite a juicy story but it was reported by The Sun. That's not the mouth organ of the Queen. It could just as easily be a shit stirring journalist or an angry courtier. BP will never respond to such a story and Meghan looks like shit. That's success enough.

Wow, the Queen Mum had rotten little teeth most of her life...knocking back gin and stuffing her gullet with sweets...her breath had to stink.

R171 - The second most important recognition of all: at this point, if HM has not yet issued Letters Patent granting the Sussex kids HRHs, as she did for the all future Cambridge kids by the time Kate's first trimester with her first baby ended, it's not likely to happen. So, no historic jewelry for Meghan, no London base, no independent court, a PR team that has to report to the BP PR Chief, and a shabby five-bedroom building in a dull suburb with inferior shopping and not nearly the cachet of Gloucestershire, Norfolk, or the Cotwolds.

HM is known to be mild, to abhor confrontation, and generous of mood. What this says is that Meghan Markle in less than a year has managed to anger a woman known to be slow to it, to show herself grasping and ungrateful, and to completely separate Harry from "the family she never had".

R179, do you think the Sun have no ins at BP or CH or KP?

The Sun is the first port of call for the RF, because, historically, the Sun was most vicious and also because the Sun was one of Diana's favourites.

Has she been pregnant for about 1000 years?

10,000 ,r183. That's why she is acting like she's got the Second Coming in there

R179 - It's in the Daily Mail now, but the truth is, even Kaiser at Celebitch, Meghan's staunchest stan, said,

"The weird thing about this story is that it comes from Dan Wootten at the Sun, and Wooten gets some good scoops and he has some good sources."

This story has legs and was deliberately leaked to The SUN.

R182 R185 I didn't say the story was unsourced. I merely pointed out that saying it came out of BP or CH isn't the same as "this is a statement from the Queen." It might be, or not. If it were in the Times then we'd more likely be talking opprobrium from HM.

Here's the problem

R179 - There is no press organ that is the mouthpiece of the Queen, she doesn't need one. She has a private secretary and press chief; if you think they'd have leaked a story using her name like that without her PR Chief knowing about it, or that he would have allowed it if he thought she'd object, think again.

They don't need to prove it "came from the Queen". All a reporter like Wooten needs is to tap his liaison at The SUN, The Telegraph (which always has an inside line to CH), the TIMES, the DM . . . we don't need a word for word statement from the Queen or Charles.

The Queen would immediately deny if it it's untrue. If she does, fine, and Wooten's source is mincemeat. But she never denied Tiaragate, did she? That statement didn't come from her, either, did it?

*I meant to say: "All a reporter like Wooten needs is to tap his liaisons in the press offices of BP, CH, or KP . . . we don't need a word for word statement from the Queen." Of course, the network amongst journos at all those papers can work together, as well, but I meant his sources inside the royal households. The Telegraph, particularly, is known as a mouthpiece for Clarence House and Charles.

We recently discussed that Fergie wasn't seen in tiaras other than the York. Does anyone know why she was cut off from the Royal Collection jewels?

R188 Tiara-gate wasn't a Sun story at first. It was originally in the book Charles at 70, which was sanctioned. That was the basis for its credibility. The Sun reported it after that.

It's unlikely BP would issue a statement about the supposed jewellery ban. It's petty and beneath them. The story may well be true and it was leaked by a courtier. If you want to believe it's a direct statement from the queen please go right ahead with that.

R190 - I think, again, it was hierarchy. By the time she married Andrew, Charles had two sons and Andrew was fourth, not second, in line. As it was, the Queen gave them Sunninghill Park, including millions in renovations, and they bought her the York tiara as well as a ruby and diamond parure, and a diamond necklace, bracelet, and earrings. But the Queen leant Diana, as Princess of Wales, lots of magnificent jewellery.

In point of fact, Meghan not getting historic jewels out of the royal collection to wear, whilst Kate does, may be something of a comment on the Queen's dislike of Meghan, but it isn't without precedence, either. Leaking the story may have been prompted by Meghan's constant overreaching, and a reminder of who she is and she isn't.

To my knowledge, r190, no one has ever been officially cut off from the Royal Collection until Meghan.

R191 - You're deliberately misunderstanding me. I never said it was a "direct statement" either from the Queen or her official PR. I said it had been LEAKED by them, and it wouldn't have been if they thought she would be furious at the leak. It doesn't have to come directly from her or her PR office. It only needs to be whispered to a known source inside who then leaks it someone like Wooten. The message gets out, Meghan is duly reminded to stay in her hierarchical lane, and the Sussexes are warned that their attempts sttrke out on their own comes at a price.

If the Queen's press office comes out with an emphatic denial, I will absolutely agree that Wooten was had by his source.

R191 - Oh, and a bit of history here: for years the tabloids dropped stories about increasing problems in the Wales marriage that the Palace denied heatedly or jeered at over and over again. Most of the journos with inside sources knew the Palace was desperate to paper over the rumours and stop them, until Diana made it impossible to do so with the Morton book. But the tabs had the real story, didn't they?

They may be bottom feeders, but they have very deep pockets, the BRF don't pay that well, and they are often right.

What was really miraculous was how badly the Wales marriage was collapsing from the honeymoon on, but somehow, the BRF managed to keep it out of the public eye until after Harry was born. The public went for years believing the fairty tale, whilst the tabloids for the most part kept mum about what their sources told them was marital disaster inside KP.

R194 You seem to have trouble following a thread. I responded to R177 who did say it was a statement from the queen. You chose to respond to my statement and now you accuse me of deliberately misunderstanding you. Perhaps you should just make whatever statement you'd like without trying to argue against points I'm not making.

I'm not saying the story is untrue. I'm merely sceptical that this was a sanctioned news release by the BRF as opposed to well-informed unsanctioned gossip coming out of the palace(s). You need not share my skepticism.

R196 - oh come, now. Poster said the Queen has "Let It Be Known" initial caps. He or she was being slightly ironic. The Queen would never make such a statement, we all know that. But, as has been mentioned many times, the BRF operate through code, not direct confrontation. In allowing the story to be leaked, the Queen in some senses is "letting it be known". That's different from a direct statement, which no one, anywhere, is suggesting HM made.

And excerpts from the Jobson bio first appeared in the DM, which is where everyone first got the Tiaragate story, which was then picked up even by the TIMES.

When Meghan's P.A. quit immediately upon their return from Down Under, the Palace never flatly denied that Meghan had been abusive and difficult with staff. Instead, they issued a press release praising the aide's experience and years off service. Translation: they knew the aide was telling the truth, so they gave her a public recommendation and maintained a deafening silence on reports of Meghan's abusive behaviour toward staff on the trip.

As I said, in these circles everything is communicated in code. You just have to learn how to decipher it.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R197, your last paragraph is exactly right. Bulldozer Meghan doesn’t understand... yet. The British are especially good at damning with faint praise and subtle digs. The RF isn’t going to do anything blatant; it’ll be a demise of a thousand small cuts.

I find the new tiara story strangely disjointed . On one hand, Meghan will not be allowed to wear the jewels due to her lower position in the hierarchy. On the other hand, Meghan will not be allowed to wear the jewels (for now, and especially those worn by Diana) because the Queen is displeased with her behavior. Not sure what to make of it.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R172, her relationship with the future king WILL be interesting. I think she thinks she’s got PC wrapped around her little finger, and she’s totally discounting Camilla.

Maybe I’m a wimp, but I wouldn’t tangle with any of the women in that family. A better bet would have been to come in quietly, make some strategic alliances and establish a place for herself. It all could have gone differently.

^^ strategic alliances with the WOMEN of the family.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I think once that baby arrives, M is going to feel ever more powerful. Can’t wait.

The Telegraph is running a sweepstake for naming the Sussex baby.

Victoria?

Arthur?

Print and play.

According to this guy, Hazbean have moved to Frogmore.

Henrietta.

The young Queen (then Princess Elizabeth) greets a man in a wheelchair.

If Chris Ship is right R208, Baby Sussex may be born at Frimley Park.

I love this - the Queen from babyhood to maturity in a minute.

R206, I can’t, either. She won’t disappoint, I’m sure.

Is this Frogmore Cottage today? If so, it looks like a completely different house.

Other photos of Frogmore Cottage.

Some photos of Frogmore.

Nice. Perfect for the House of Frogula.

A body expert discusses the messages behind the new Sussex Instagram account.

Little Lottie lost in space.

[quote] PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle's baby is thought to be due this month - but how will we know when the Duchess of Sussex is about to give birth?

[quote] Well, according to royal fans, yellow parking signs will begin to appear outside the hospital where Meg is set to deliver her first child, prohibiting vehicles from loading, stopping or waiting.

[quote] According to News.com.au, eagle-eyed royal fans have already started waiting around "a hospital near Windsor" for the signs to appear.

Which of you stalkers is camping outside Frimley Park Hospital?

R218, my two cents about the knots are:

• Those two love to show their backs to the viewer. • Plenty of headscarves. How woke.

^^ photos, not knots. Wtf, autocorrect?

Replaced

What do you want to bet there’s going to be LOTS of posting on the Sussex Insta?

As far as showing their backs in the photos, this is an effect Meg enjoys, probably for its sort of cinematic quality. She used it for her invitations to her first wedding, a pic of her and Trevor on the beach, taken from behind.

She's flying in her makeup and hair people, so nix the idea that Ms. Feminist isn't keen on getting dolled up soon after birth. Not for free though and on the steps of a plebeian place such as a hospital. No, it'll be for a big photo shoot from which photos will be sold to People Magazine and Vanity Fair and posted on their instagram. Why else would she fly in her beauty team? Oh and the beauty team will include botox injector, her naturally mannish, muscular jawline is starting to creep back up, you need to inject those masseter muscles at least every 6-10 months for them to stay atrophied.

Well that "fab four" photo at r223 was distinctly unfabulous so no surprises there. Really, that's the best they could come up with?

Harry inveighing against Fortnite got some attention.

It's Prince Charles' turn to handle the investiture duties.

Someone cut and paste the last instagram post text from Royalsussex for a laugh, I'm to lazy to cut and past. I'd love to hear what well educated datalounge scholars think. It's a goldmine, I'm not an English major but I almost stroked out reading it over all the grammar errors, creative punctuation and how ego driven it was. It mentioned the Duchess of Sussex herself even though she wasn't in attendance and made it sound like Harry and her were personally running each patronage instead of just attending an even for 10 minutes.

Too lazy to cute and paste.

R225 I think the photos of her and her men taken from behind (haha) signal her viewpoint of an "us against the world" mentality. It sees to be a reoccurring theme in her psyche.

sussexroyal “After serving in the @BritishArmy for ten years, The Duke of Sussex has committed himself to promoting the welfare of members of the Armed Forces and veterans.

The Duke knows the lasting effects military service can have, as soldiers recover from PTS after battle or struggle to get back into the normalities of civilian life. Through his work with servicemen and women, The Duke has also seen how families benefit from extra support when their loved ones are away and adjusting to life back home.

He met many soldiers and their families at the Lord Mayor’s Big Curry Lunch in London today. This is an annual event which raises money for @soldierscharity to support those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Duke’s work with wounded servicemen and women has included creating @weareinvictusgames, volunteering with the Army's Personnel Recovery Unit in London, trekking with wounded servicemen and women to the South Pole and in the Arctic and supporting a number of adventure challenges through his Endeavour Fund. The Duchess of Sussex was unfortunately unable to attend today, but has joined her husband in supporting the troops at the Invictus Games, Endeavour Fund and with the TILS Fund, as an extension of her previous work in this space.

By participating in events like today’s, The Duke hopes that servicemen and women are recognised for their unique skill set and abilities, and that we all work together to ensure that they and their families have the support they need and deserve during and after service.”

For comparison, here is the same meeting as reported on the Buckingham Palace Instagram:

The Duke of Sussex visited the Lord Mayor’s Big Curry Lunch in London today – the annual event raises money for @soldierscharity to support those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Duke met servicemen and women and their families here today, who have been supported by @soldierscharity.

The event has raised more than £1.9 million since 2008 to support soldiers and veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Duke of Sussex served in the British army for 10 years and is committed to promoting the welfare of members of the Armed Forces and veterans. The Duke founded the @WeAreInvictus games in 2014, which uses the power of sport to inspire recovery and support rehabilitation for our wounded, injured or sick servicemen and women. 📷 PA / Royal Communications

So did this ban just happen or are we just finding out about it?

That Sussexroyal account redirects the spotlight on Harry/Meghan and how THEIR endeavors are helping the lowly, suffering veterans. That's the main difference, reads like a fucking resume that even allows for the absent wife to take a piece of the glory. Fucking pathetic self-promotion if you ask me.

Harry seems to have struck a nerve.

God, that Sussesroyal post is grandiose and self-congratulatory. It does read like a heavily padded resume.

"her previous work in this space" what the chuffing hell does that mean?

"her previous work in this space" means her previous work in self-promotional platform e.g. social media.

One definition of "space" from Urban Dictionary: A vapidly non-descriptive alternative to area, domain, subset, segment. Frequently, and most comfortably, employed by marketing, advertising and public relations professionals in jauntily referring to their own or someone else's narrow universe. "While we are undeniably impacting the lives of the users of PDAs positively, we believe our commitment to sustainability provides a significant and leverageable point-of-difference that will enable us to achieve a better than 50 percent share of the under-30 sub-Saharan market in this space before the end of 2Q09."

R239 Her previous work in the area, with the issue ie with troops. She did a USO tour in 2014.

The wording in the sussexroyal post is cumbersome. It definitely sounds like cover letter for a job application.

The instragram post style is very reminiscent of the speech she gave last year about the importance of education. She started it off talking about herself and how she paid for her own education. I thought it was weird to reference your own accomplishments to kick off a speech that is supposed to be about helping other people. But they've done the same thing in this Instagram post, putting the focus on Harry instead of the actual event he attended and the charity he's supposed to be boosting. The Palace instagram post got the tone exactly right.

I really don't feel there is any truth to this. What is wrong with this person?

R242 "Previous work" is not supposed to mean something one-off, particularly within the context of a resume, which that promotional release comes across. Anyways, it would apply more to Harry rather than Meghan, but the resume makes it sound like it was/ is an issue that Meghan has been championing for greater than 1 USO tour or posting something supportive of troops on social media. Sorry, real world doesn't work like that. When I was putting my resume together upon getting my doctorate, I even hesitated including about 60 counseling hours that I had done at a women's shelter. I'm so put off by the self-aggrandizing in that resume post, so indicative of people who've never done any substantial work with the people they brag about helping.

No one should be surprised that the Sussex Instagram page will be ALL ABOUT THEM. Anyone could see the writing on the wall. Buckingham Palace should never have allowed them to have their own Instagram. It will just be propaganda for their "brand".

I predicted on the deleted Dangling Tendrils thread that once Meghan gets the ring with the title and a taste of royal life, she would become insufferable. I was correct.

I take it the Pussy Popper is writing the IG posts?

You want to know why this reads as a self-aggrandizing, padded resume? @soldierscharity doesn't get mentioned until third paragraph, and only then as an afterthought, as if the organization has less to do with veterans' services than Harry/ Meghan. I've highlighted the self-aggrandizing parts in

sussexroyal “After serving in the @BritishArmy for ten years, [bold]The Duke of Sussex has committed himself to promoting[/bold] the welfare of members of the Armed Forces and veterans.

[bold]The Duke knows the lasting effects[/bold] military service can have, as soldiers recover from PTS after battle or struggle to get back into the normalities of civilian life. [bold]Through his work with[/bold] servicemen and women, [bold]The Duke has also seen how families[/bold] benefit from extra support when their loved ones are away and adjusting to life back home.

[bold]He met many soldiers[/bold] and their families at the Lord Mayor’s Big Curry Lunch in London today. This is an annual event which raises money for @soldierscharity to support those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[bold]The Duke’s work with wounded[/bold] servicemen and women has included creating @weareinvictusgames, volunteering with the Army's Personnel Recovery Unit in London, trekking with wounded servicemen and women to the South Pole and in the Arctic and supporting a number of adventure challenges through his Endeavour Fund. [bold]The Duchess of Sussex was unfortunately unable to attend today, but has joined her husband in supporting[/bold] the troops at the Invictus Games, Endeavour Fund and with the TILS Fund, [bold]as an extension of her previous work in this space[/bold].

By participating in events like today’s, [bold]The Duke hopes that servicemen and women are recognised [/bold]for their unique skill set and abilities, and that we all work together to ensure that they and their families have the support they need and deserve during and after service.”

Compare with the simply worded statement from BP instagram where @soldierscharity is mentioned in same sentence as Harry and it's actually mentioned twice, whereas Meghan was mentioned twice and made to appear to have done more than @soldierscharity in supporting veterans' causes. Not making shit up but the fact is staring at us, these two are fucking self-important cunts who indict themselves with their own words and actions.

BP instagram "The Duke of Sussex visited the Lord Mayor’s Big Curry Lunch in London today – the annual event raises money for @soldierscharity to support those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Duke met servicemen and women and their families here today, who have been supported by @soldierscharity.

The event has raised more than £1.9 million since 2008 to support soldiers and veterans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Duke of Sussex served in the British army for 10 years and is committed to promoting the welfare of members of the Armed Forces and veterans. The Duke founded the @WeAreInvictus games in 2014, which uses the power of sport to inspire recovery and support rehabilitation for our wounded, injured or sick servicemen and women. 📷 PA / Royal Communications"

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

With all of the talk that Meghan is out of her depth due to being an American with a limited understanding of history, traditions, and protocol, I'm puzzled why BP approved of Sara Latham's hiring. Of course, hiring an American is a conciliatory gesture. She has dual US/UK citizenship and has done some work with British firms, but her primary experience is in American politics. PR in politics is aggressive and underhanded. Is she really so talented that she can tone down the bluster and make it palatable to the British public? From the appearances of the IG post, no.

R160 Thank you- that's heavenly! I popped onto the Christies website to drool over the rest of the Magnificent Jewels auction contents. I almost fainted with pleasure ( MARY!)

R248, you have to read three paragraphs to get past all the fluff about Harry so you can find out what the photographed event is actually about. So weird. How can she not see it?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Queen is probably afraid she wouldn't get the jewelry back from Meghan, or Meghan would want to hold onto it to wear again. And she doesn't want that kind of bother. AND I imagine the queen does not want "important jewelry" used to market both the merchandise Meghan is always merching nor Meghan's own grandiose ideas of her importance.

I like how Hilaria Baldwin pretends there's no such thing as workout gear and insists that's why she must do yoga in a push up bra and thong.

R180 maybe Harry inherited his own rotton little teeth from great granny. And he's knocked back plenty of stuff to make it worse.

R254, @soldierscharity should be extremely grateful that the magnanimous prince and Duchess even mentioned them. The cheek!

Will and Harry Deep Freeze.

House of Frogula. Hilarious.

Prince Harry is trending on Twitter over his Fortnite comments. I hope nobody sues him

The men in the royal family do not age well. Harry is currently the best of the lot, but William's hair loss is tragic and Charles is red and puffy. With all of that lovely money, couldn't they do better? Also, why is a Netflix release such a BFD?

R262, he made a big mistake calling out one game in particular. Whoopsie.

Perhaps it will get it through their thick skulls that this is why you maintain neutrality at all times In public. Say what you like at home - and I bet their conversations are riveting. I somehow doubt it though, they are both obtuse and need minders.

[quote]The Queen is probably afraid she wouldn't get the jewelry back from Meghan

How could that even be possible? Doesn't the jewelry have guards that protect it at all times? Where would Meghan stash it? In some safe behind a painting or put it in a vault in Switzerland?

It doesn't make sense to me that there'd be fear of it not being returned.

In other news, they just spent £15K to enlarge a hedge at Kensington Palace so the public won't see when they use a helicopter on their way to lecture the world about climate change.

I wonder if this is MM - after all we know she's at home tonight. If so it seems that the Instagram is going to get wild.

How is a hedge supposed to stop people from seeing a helicopter taking off? Wouldn't telephoto lenses be able reveal who the passengers are?

R267 - pretty well ALL of the senior members of the Royal Family use a helicopter. Even Princess Anne showed up to visit Kate and the baby in a helicopter. Lots of them are ALL talk when it comes to climate change but the reality is that convenience is the name of the game.

If you look at the Kensington Royal Insta, Catherine is not shoehorned into every post about William and vice-versa. So why does MEGain warrant a mention in all of Harry’s?

R271 - because she's an attention whore. Duh.

Meghan will do ANYTHING to keep her name in the spotlight. That includes stealing her hubby's thunder on SM, upstaging her husband in public every chance she gets, leaking bad stories about her rivals and good stories about herself. The Instagram account shouldn't be called Sussex Royal. The title should be Narcissist Central.

[quote]WE CAN ALL SEE HER GAME

Yes, but can she see that we can see it? Or she just doesn't care?

R252 - I don't believe for a moment that it's becase she's American and doesn't get it. I think it's because she's Meghan with serious delusions of grandeur, narcissism issues, and an inability to accept realities that challenge that - she isn't interested in working for the monarchy, she's interested in using the monarchy to work for her. I don't accept tht there isn't an American alive who can't grasp the symbolism of the institution of constitutional monarchy and its needs.

But the general public adores her. So disappointed in MMarkle, and why would Beyoncé support her.

She is soooo toxic and had such an opportunity to be of service.

There will be no photos of Doria at the airport because she never left. She's been staying in a special apartment at Buckingham Palace.

R276 - Actually, they don't. The March 2019 yougov poll showed places virtually unchanged from last year at the same time, with Meghan in sixth place at 52%, and Kate in fourth on 64%, 12% points ahead.

R266, Meghan Merchle has balls and no compunction. I wouldn’t put it past her to try to keep borrowed jewels. Just like Lindsay Lohan.

R270 I'm reminded of Bono’s save the planet campaign and subsequent claims that U2's 2009 tour had a carbon footprint big enough to fly the band to Mars and back.

Surely Meghan will pause for a few beats once the baby arrives? Adjusting to motherhood and the demands of a newborn is exhausting and there are only so many hours in the day.

No she won't pause. Hilaria Baldwin never pauses and she had a passel of kids in quick succession. Baldwin and Merchkle are cut from the same cloth, the LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME narcissistic cloth.

I can't wait for for the beleaguered nanny leaks.

R281, it’s exhausting if you’re a normal woman and taking care of a newborn 24/7. It’s also very boring. Especially in the beginning when they don’t do anything but sleep and soil diapers.

People like Meghan Markle hand their babies off to someone else.

R276 Oh so you’re one of those fraus who uses Beyonce as a barometer of goodness and morality in the world. Why would Beyonce support her? Because she’s a trashy grifter like Markle.

Didn't QEII take off on a big ship when Charles was quite young, and wasn't she gone for at least half a year? I suppose Charles had nannies caring for him then. Why is it any different with the younger royal set - of course they use nannies as well.

Really r285? So Beyoncé is a grifter too? It strikes me that Beyoncé, of all people, is no grifter. But she’s black too... admit it, that’s what you REALLY mean. Black, grifter, same thing.

Because HazBean aren’t reigning monarchs r286?

R286 - I think that was the Queen's mother, then Duchess of York, who with her husband was sent off on a six-month tour Down Under when Elizabeth was just six months old. The then Duchess got so upset at the parting that her husband had to direct the chauffeur twice around the Palace before heading to the ship so his wife could calm herself. The Duchess later wrote to a friend, "The baby was so sweet playing with the buttons on Bertie's uniform that it quite broke me up."

R287 Are you out of your fucking mind? Don’t you dare put words in my mouth. Both of these women are self-aggrandizing, narcissitic attention whores who perpetuate a fraudulent image of who they are. You can put Amal Clooney in that category, along with Jessica Mulroney. Race has nothing to do it. Rich, considering I’m a person of color. Fucking dimwit race baiting asshole.

Katie Nicholls of VF has rushed out a story citing "a source" denying the Ban On Meghan Getting Her Greedy Hands On Royal Jewels. After all, the source pointed out, didn't the Queen let Meghan wear Queen Mary's tiara at the wedding? And hasn't Meghan been seen in pieces of Diana's jewellery? (Of course, she's only worn the tiara once, was told not to wear one again in Fiji, and while she has been seen in some of Diana's smaller piece, except for the aquamarine, she has never been seen in ICONIC MAJOR pieces associated with Diana, like stuff from the Saudi sapphire suite.)

But, Nicholls goes on to say, the Palace declined to comment on the story.

The CB fraus, of course, are blaming the Cambridges for the story.

Too lazy to scroll up, but to whoever was wondering why a Netflix release is getting such attention....it’s because it’s David Attenborough. He truly is adored in this country.

R290 yeah, suuurrrre, you’re a person of color. Yup. Absolutely.

Haha HazMat's chaps must be frosted because they had People give a frothy tesponse too. I think Di's jewelry is owned by the brothers, so Sparkles using it doesnt change BP's cold shoulder.

Fuck off, R293. Your brand of ignorant, knuckle-dragging racism has no place here. If you want to make judgements about people based on their colour, that’s up to you....but it’s sheer projection to think we’re all doing it.

Go away.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R281 I've never seen or read anything in MM's past that mentions experience with babies or children, not family or friends. Babysitting, tutoring, sports, crafts, cooking, nothing with children. Based on how she has treated her dogs, kids aren't a focus. New borns are messy, disruptive, challenging and exhausting if you actually take care of them yourself. I'm guessing she will have more than one nanny at all times so that she has time for her oh so important self. I'm sure motherhood only means posting highly edited photos and handing the child back to current nanny. Where is that new puppy, by the way?

R291 There are almost 450 comments on Celebitchy. You find the usual speculation about the Cambridges and Andrew being the source, and some questioning whether the Queen's assistant Angela Kelly put her neck out, but not one person (unless I missed it) speculated that Meghan or Harry may have been the source. Who looks bad in the story? Who looks victimized? The "rebuttal" in Vanity Fair by Meghan's friend Katie Nicholls doesn't raise any flags for them either.

R291 - Yes, I noticed the number of comments was twice the usual number.

We know both People and Vanity Fair are mouthpieces with direct conduit to Meghan. Because why only less than 2 days after QE2 banishes Meghan from royal jewels story hits, someone on Meghan's side is already talking to VF. Keep this up and she will never get her hands on said jewels. Less than 1 year of marriage and already pulling a Diana 2.0 with running to favorite press to gain upper hand. Even Charles will be lost to her if she keeps pulling Diana stunts like this. Swear to god, she's like the worst of Diana's traits while having none of the better ones.

Can you pls copy and paste, R268. Despite having never heard of that account, I appear to be blocked.

I wonder what the queen mother and princess margaret would've made of megain and how they would've dealt with her.

R296 - Oooooohhhh is right, Moir as usual is shooting from the hip, no holds barred - and, right on the money.

Hang on to your mouse mat, because the royal Batman and his feisty Robinette are fighting the big one this week; the evils of the internet.

'Growing up in today's world, social media is more addictive than drugs and alcohol,' said Prince Harry on Wednesday, with his usual flair for talking urgent nonsense.

It was a particularly ridiculous thing to say, given that the Sussexes have just launched their own social media account on Instagram, which has already attracted 3.6 million followers and counting. 'It's not hypocritical,' insisted their official spokesman, but many of us would beg to differ.

Increasingly, he seems to think there is one set of rules for him and his wife, while everyone else must abide by a completely different moral code. More stringent for a start. Let them eat Meghan's special recipe austerity soup, they silently cry, while we live like well, royalty, amid the lush and plush of our Soho House set.

. . . . We are in good times, but we are also in bad times. We are up and we are down. That is because we are a royal mass of contradictions, aren't we? 'Kids need a human connection,' he said, digging out his prompt sheet, which was surely handwritten in beautiful flowing calligraphy and scented with crushed macaroons. [I really love the bit about the calligraphy and macaroons]

For when Harry speaks these days, all I hear is the avocado mulch of Meghan's impeccable socially liberal concerns, filtered through the obliging vassal of her husband.

. . . With all this, plus his dutiful trips to a herbal wellness centre and his exhortations to millennials to find their true north star, Prince Harry is fast becoming the woke dope royal — and I rather wish he was not. [DO YOU LOVE THE WOKE DOPE ROYAL BIT OR WHAT??!!]

Behind the scenes he still leads a life of unthinkable luxury and entitlement. Yet in public he wants to sound good, he wants to do good and he wants to look good.

They may see themselves as caped crusaders, but people would love Harry and Meghan more if they set an example, rather than just kept telling us all what we should be doing and feeling and thinking.

The problem with Prince Harry is that he has become more Soho House than House of Windsor, and that is not good."

Oh, I SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "More Soho House than House of Windsor"

[quote]I've never seen or read anything in MM's past that mentions experience with babies or children, not family or friends.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You can clearly see a photo of a baby in the beautiful gallery adorning her private refrigerator. I ask you, what is more intimate and personal than a freezer door? It's sacred space.

It's at 3:05, right after she says "little Meg; long, long legs." So, yes, she does have a profound depth of experience with babies and children going all the way back to [italic]at least[/italic] 1999.

Can you say the same for Kate?

I'll wait.

R296 Thank you for this.

R293 Looks like you’re triggered that I insulted your pwecious, wittle Qween Bey. The bar is low with you. Be gone bitch!

"For when Harry speaks these days, all I hear is the avocado mulch of Meghan's impeccable socially liberal concerns, filtered through the obliging vassal of her husband."

R304 I remember seeing that video a few months back and it really stuck out how she referred to herself in the third person as “Little Meg.” Who does that?! Other than the Jimmy? Totally a red flad for narcissism.

R302 Wasn't Princess Margaret a fan of the scathing approach?

R281 Well to be fair, she did take some selfies for the Tig with those poor, unwashed African and Indian kids during her “humanitarian” trips before marriage.

whoops that was for R297

R300 " Swear to god, she's like the worst of Diana's traits while having none of the better ones."

Especially between the hips and ankles.

R304 I assume you are sarcastic. If not, wow...

R310 Yes...and BFF Jessica handily posted pics of her enchanting a child at Christmas. Remember that?

I don’t think Markle had any intention of having children until the chance of having a royal one presented itself.

R304 LOL! I feel sorry for the child, who will have to both please Mum and appease Dad. I feel like it will be worse if the baby is a girl.

I thought the "Celebitch Playbook" signature made it clear. In any case, after I searched for that video this forgotten favorite popped up in my sidebar. Thank you, YouTube!

#kindness

In the article posted at R296, if you scroll down there is a bit about the current trend in nursery colors called "Spare us the shades of grey."

R230 “The Duchess was unfortunately unable to attend today...”

What do we think, DL? Will the baby portraits be glamorous, or glamorously au naturel?

The comments on the Jan Moir piece are being moderated. Does the DM undertake this on their own, or does someone pay them to do it?

I hope we get a little bit of this...

A little bit of this...

And a whole lot of this...

R322 One can only hope.

Yes I think we will get some artsy black and whites.

R322 - OMG. Out to the chemist for some anti-nausea medication in advance of the photos.

R324 - But will the baby have its back to the viewer?

Instagram baby name reveal

I loathe Jan Moir with the heat of the thousand microwaves she heats her cakes in daily. I have never forgiven her for the Steven Gately column. But I'll give her the truth in this line: "people would love Harry and Meghan more if they set an example, rather than just kept telling us all what we should be doing and feeling and thinking. The problem with Prince Harry is that he has become more Soho House than House of Windsor, and that is not good."

Oh yes. There will be soft-focus, black and white shots of the besotted parents gazing at their sainted child.

The lack of self-awareness of these two is nothing short of astonishing.

The “Brand Sussex” thing is going to be their downfall. They already have a brand...”Brand Monarchy”. That is why they are in the position they are. It’s incredibly arrogant to decide that’s not enough for them.

I have never liked Markle - but she’s turned out worse than I ever imagined.

This thread has taken a deranged turn.

Deranged and racist, r331. I hate when racists scream back, “Me, racist?? You’re the racist!” That’s how they defend themselves now. Where did these people come from? Did a frau forum get shut down somewhere and someone told them to come to DL?

R326 exactly what I was thinking!

A moody monochrome cityscape with SoHoBéBé outlined against the turbulent dusk skies, alone, naked except for a silk diaper with lambskin trim, pensively surveying the future with only a sixth-in-line fortune to shield from the harsh tides of the ocean of life.

QEII dumped baby Charles to party with Phillip...

SohoBébé x Birks

[bold]Royal Jewelry article from Sun. Read for yourselves. Note how the Queen informs William. [/bold]

[quote]The Queen has banned Meghan from wearing jewellery made famous by Princess Diana. The move has escalated tensions between the Duchess and senior royals — and upset Harry. [bold]The Queen made Prince William personally aware of her decision to ban Meghan from wearing jewellery from the Royal Collection — sparking further tensions between him and brother Harry.[/bold]

[quote]Last night our impeccably placed royal insider revealed: “This is a surprising situation that has been going on behind the scenes over the past few months and has caused tension and upset, especially for Harry. It is at the discretion of the Queen and trusted advisers which items in the Royal Collection she chooses to loan out and to whom. [bold]Aspects of Meghan’s behaviour, including before the Royal Wedding, caused resentment with forces within Buckingham Palace.[/bold]

[quote]“To be perfectly honest, [bold]the Queen herself was not impressed with some of Meghan’s demands, especially as a new member of the family.[/bold] As a result, Buckingham Palace has decided that not all items from the Queen’s royal collection will be opened up to Meghan. As part of that situation, the Queen informed Prince William that the items from the Royal Collection worn by Princess Diana would not immediately be made available to Meghan.”

[quote]The senior source added: “The Queen likes Meghan personally [bold]but this is about the hierarchy. She is showing that maintaining the correct order and precedence within the family is important.[/bold] Even if Meghan is the most popular woman in the world, she is of a lower rank than Kate.”

[quote]Another senior royal insider explained: “It is true that Buckingham Palace did not want all the items in the Royal Collection to be opened up to Meghan at this time. Obviously Kate as the next Princess of Wales and a senior member of the family does have them made available to her. [bold]That’s not to say items won’t be loaned to Meghan in the future if situations change.”[/bold]

THIS IS BRUTAL

A lot of the coverage of the jewelry embargo is saying “but Kate gets to wear what she likes!” as though they were on an equal footing and it’s somehow unfair to treat them differently. That was never the case. Kate will be Queen one day, Meghan will be in Duchess of Gloucester territory - if they’re still married. Kate has access to the important jewels because she is a senior royal, Meghan is a rapidly diminishing nobody in the great scheme of things. It won’t be Harry’s head on the postage stamps.

R298 Told us about this very quickly written Vanity Fair article which disputes the jewelry embargo story, but I think the reasoning used is pretty flimsy.

Spare us the shades of grey

Forget the pink and the blue and the colourful mobiles, grey is now the most popular colour in baby nursery home decor. What more proof do you need that it’s all about the selfish parents, not about the welfare of the little children?

Poor little grubs, growing up in a monochrome prison of dreary asphalt and elephant paint shades.

Their little buggy eyes must yearn for something bright to alight upon, but they have to realise mummy and daddy’s good taste must come first.

John Lewis has reported that the paint trends for the nursery of 2019 finds parents opting for neutral shades in grey and cream. Naturally, Harry and Meghan (them again) are bang on trend.

They are using expensive Auro paints to decorate the nursery at Frogmore. A ten-litre pot of the German brand paint costs £120 — several times the price of Dulux. However, it doesn’t smell, isn’t toxic and it breaks down pollutants, too.

Even the names of the colours are marvellous. Have the royals gone for Wood Spurge, Constance Spry, Meconopsis or Yorkshire Fog Grass? How about Mind Your Own Business? Not being rude, it’s another paint name, for a lovely pastel brown.

I haven't been paying much attention to the BRF this week but Harry's fortnite comment is hilarious. He really has inherited the worst traits from both his parents.

The pictures of the baby will be MEghan centric with baby and Dimwit as background accessories. It will be full shot of MEghan sitting front and center in some big throne like chair and baby partially visible in her arms with Dimwit standing behind the chair mostly obstructed by the chair, side face shot of him looking down at baby.

These two twitter handles are rumoured to be Meghan herself - but it is especially rumoured that the second one is definitely Meghan. The second one is saying that jewelry ban story is untrue, that the Queen adores Meghan (how is that possible when everyone else in the UK hates her?) and that Meghan will be seen in the Queen's jewels after the baby is born. It comes off so smug that it really sounds like it could be Meghan.

"Anne Boleyn" https://twitter.com/TudorChick1501

"Write Life PR" https://twitter.com/StrongWrite

.........

r338 The language used in the Sun article was brutal. It is very business-like, almost as-if Meghan was put on probation. Katie Nichols, who has close ties with Kate & Camilla (wow - yeah) must have typed this out at full speed to contain the damage.

The language in the Sun sounds like it came from a courtier. So my question is -- why does this have to be made public?

* To humiliate Meghan - that will backfire. * To make sure the Queen does not change her mind - I can see that happening * To assuage William who demanded this - I can see that happening, too.

Very strange.

R338 I have no idea where the story originated or if it is true. My point was simply that posters at Celebitchy debated, at length, every conceivable conspiracy theory other than the theory that Harry and Meghan's own PR was at work. Then, they jump with relief at the VF article written by one of Meghan's admirers. I simply found it amusing and a bit concerning that everyone else is a suspect except for two people who we know for a fact are privy to the facts.

Why do you care what Celebitchy says one way or the other? It's not like they are privy to any real dirt any more than you are. If you don't like their take, why don't you just ignore them?

R322 Do try not to be a moron your whole life.

You...on the basis of no evidence whatsoever...want to call everyone who dislikes Markle a racist.

This can only be because you feel that Markle is not a whole personality in her own right, but merely a shade of skin colour. In your rather tiny mind this translates as “Doesn’t like Markle = racist”.

You have “othered” her. You will not allow people to treat her as a fallible human being as open to being liked or disliked as anyone else. You won’t allow her to be judged by the “content of her character” but want her, first and foremost, to be adored for a skin tone she didn’t choose. This is racist.

You are an abhorrent and repulsive person, so please stop infecting this thread with your rancid presence.

R345, I just read the comment upthread, and went looking for the article, to read it for myself. There seem to be a couple of different camps at work floating stories that push agendas for different members of the BRF, which I remember from the days of Charles and Diana. I never really expected to see that again. I've read plenty of other stories about members of the BRF where news has been hushed up, but the idea of different factions waging a war against each other in the Press is frightening to me.

Me-Gain has done a lot of damage to the institution in less than a year.

Charles throws both of his sons under the bus to make himself look better. Me-Gain has a PR machine that is 90% dedicated to trashing William and Catherine and floating the idea that Dim & Co. be put on the throne instead - treasonous. The combined effect is dangerous for the BRF to be sure.

The We Are With You rhetoric is creepy and manipulative. It also suggests that the rest of the BRF, is, well, not.

R348 Sadly, it may be brother against brother against father. Charles and Diana in the age of social media.

R349, it sure makes things interesting to watch, though. But yes, the damage is like some virus or something. Only a very damaged person can lay waste so quickly.

I was going to say it’s fun to watch, but it’s very sad because there are children involved.

Harry’s Fortnite comment was not well-received. To say the least. Some of the Reddit comments had me laughing.

I'm really addicted to good documentaries and books about Mary Queen of Scots. Hope Harry doesn't take them from me.

What do we think was the straw that broke the back of the camel and triggered the jewelry ban and public humiliation?

The trashing of the Cambridges? The sex tape? The stunt at the POW ceremony? The treasonous statements about them taking the throne? The baby shower? Something else?

She is the type that will not dial it back or knuckle under. She will get more vicious and fight harder.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Share Never-Before-Seen Photo from 2017 Botswana Trip on Instagram

WHO is funding the PR tsunami? That is an enormous piece of all of this.

R262 R353 Very interesting that Harry is now getting such a public beat down over his negative remarks re Fortnite game. Many months ago, during one of his and MM's early public appearances he berated 2 young schoolboys and knocked their heads together, albeit gently, when they told him Fortnite was their favorite game. He further asked them if their parents knew that they played Fortnite, and the boys replied that they had their parents permission. Harry responded that the game was not appropriate for children. (which many people do agree). This was reported in one of the stories covering that early PH & MM visit, but obviously got no real coverage.

So Harry began negatively commenting about Fortnite last year - but only now is this getting major traction. Timing is everything in the news cycle....

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

So impressed by this couple and so here for this information we didn't know! Whomever is writing these captions deserves some kind of award! So informative! You inspire us! Prince Harry met his Princess!!!

[quote] Whomever is writing these captions deserves some kind of award!

Oh DEAR.

It's a pretty good summation of the worshipful comments on the sussexroyal posts. They specifically rave about "all this amazing content." Bizarre. Did some kind of orders go out?

Newest headline in the Mail (they should call it the Maul.)

Meghan and Harry splash out £33,000 on three-night 'babymoon' in luxury hotel before she gives birth (well, one does need a break from one's palace, Cotswold bolthole and Windsor cottage)

Your captions shows so much respect for us readers. It gives us the context of your actions. Now that’s the type of photos and captions I’ve signed for ! Loving the information in the captions! Beautiful cause! I love the caption too! It's very informative! love the details in the caption! The new director of communications already deserves a raise.

Sorry, I can't resist one more: Whomever is writing these magnificent captions has my profound and undying love and respect.

R362 Indeed.

What about me?

[quote] What do we think was the straw that broke the back of the camel and triggered the jewelry ban and public humiliation?

r355 Good question. Like most falling outs it derived from an accumulation of frictions. With few exceptions, each misstep on its own did not merit a second thought. However, each disrespectful act of a particular person created greater and greater antagonism. And, Meghan extended the slights to different members, so that everyone had a reason to be offended.

[bold]If I had to pick one moment, after which opinions solidified, it would be Down Under tour.[/bold] Just using the jewelry indicator - she asked for a tiara, she was given a large pair of diamond drop earrings belonging to the Queen. Have we seen her wear any significant jewelry since.

During that tour, Meghan antagonized her entire staff, with her PA quitting upon return. This hurt her the most. In the BRF the aides, adjutants, staff, security officers often boast aristocratic lineage. And the BRF members get their information filtered through them. They are opinion makers. Meghan assumed this was Hollywood where she could treat her underlings with contempt. Big mistake.

The knives are out for her at palace.

I guess the baby's name will be announced on the Instagram account.

>> >> The Queen is probably afraid she wouldn't get the jewelry back from Meghan

>> How could that even be possible? Doesn't the jewelry have guards that protect it at all times? Where would Meghan stash it? In some safe behind a painting or put it in a vault in Switzerland? It doesn't make sense to me that there'd be fear of it not being returned.

Someone on tumblr speculated that now that HM has MeAgain's true number, HM is afraid if she loans out a major piece to Sparkle, she'll get back a paste copy while the original ends up on the black market.

That poster may have been half tongue in cheek but maybe not. This would not be the first time HM has run across a bald adventuress. HM has certainly realized by now what she is dealing with. HM's refusal to loan out major pieces to the narc is not only telling but unprecedented for a royal Windsor woman.

“Harry responded that the game was not appropriate for children. (which many people do agree)”

It doesn’t matter whether many people agree with him or not. He’s still not entitled to say that. His opinions on anything are utterly irrelevant & he has no business sharing them.

So few people seem to understand this, so let’s be clear:

The Queen represents every single one of her subjects equally. The right/the left, the rich/the poor, the young/the old, the good/the bad, the religious/the atheist....all are equally represented by HM. That’s the agreement we have with her, and that’s what she lives by.

She does not express political views because that would mean siding with one POV over another. She also has a platform that she has not earned either by election or previous experience, so she has no right to use her position to influence anybody - and this neutrality in the monarch goes right back to the reformation.

It’s the single most important thing she does - to remain an impartial focal point for every single subject.

Markle & her dickless husband represent her. She cannot be everywhere at once, so they (and other royals) go out on her behalf. The curtseys and bows are for her by proxy. Everytime Harry opens his smelly-looking gob in public, he’s speaking on behalf of HM.

Like it or don’t like it...that is how it works and that is the only scenario that is acceptable if we’re to continue to have a monarchy at all.

So.....”Fortnite is not suitable for children” alienates all the parents who let their children play it. It’s also using an unearned platform to try to influence others without any expertise or invitation to do so. It’s arrogant, presumptuous and rude - not to mention in direct conflict with what his role is supposed to be.

Brand Sussex is offensive. These two are proving that the only cause they represent is their own. Thousands of years of monarchy is not enough for these two cunts to be associated with...oh no...they are so amazingly special and have achieved so much more in their lives than anyone else (one got born and the other got married) that they need to strike out on their own to save the world & “make a difference”.

So, please....any more remarks about how people “agree with Harry” or how he should be “speaking out” rather than being a clockwork royal opening hospitals and shaking hands displays a fundamental lack of understanding of what the monarchy is supposed to be about.

If they want to run their mouths off, they are free to do so...but they must give up the titles & the privileges and go and be “private” citizens. If they want to remain royal then they play the game properly or not at all.

It's the nature of fame these days. For someone like Markle or, say, the Clooneys, it's not enough to be known worldwide. The higher goal now is to be a "thought leader" and "change maker." Problem is, the monarchy is about maintaining steady tradition in a changing world. That's why the Sussex approach is nervous-making.

She - or they, meaning both Harry and Meghan - are in the wrong business and sailing on the wrong ship if that what they want to become r372. No room for 'change makers' in the BRF. Try sticking to the job description you were given when you signed on.

R356 And so it begins. The self-promotion is thick and nauseating in that IG post.

Whether one agrees with the dumbass and his salad tosser or not, their position is not to lecture the public.

FuckIng assholes.

Instagram is more of the rope they are being given......wait and see.

R375 Exactly.

R374 Right you are - and despite H&M posting the tuxedo'd foursome pic, seen at R356 on their IG, Not A Single Word introducing or highlighting Sir David Attenborough - who's in the picture - despite multi paragraphs of environmental concern focusing on the wonders of Harry. ABSURDLY self-absorbed! The event was to honour Sir Attenborough and his work with his new series and yet he is completely ignored!

R378 Oh my God you are absolutely right. Attenborough isn't even identified in the caption, at an event centered on him. It’s astounding.

They need to get back in there and edit the caption to acknowledge Sir Dickie.

R379 R380 Obviously they don't know who he is. It's outrageous.

R381 It’s impossible for them not to know who he is. They just don’t think he’s important.

They get worse and worse and worse, don’t they?!

I'll tell you exactly what ginger cunt and spark plug will do when the baby "arrives."

She will want the entire world to stop when the child is born. She will want this occasion to trend and to top the news. So insecure is she that her sprog will never be as important as the Cambridge kids, she will make a way for this baby to get more attention. Look for her to be coy at first. She'll call the press and let on that she "may be" in labour. That way, people will start the speculation. This will go on for a day, then they will release a statement. She will wait to the very last minute, when she is sure every last person on earth and some on mars are talking about the birth, to release professional photos on instagram.

Pretentious cunt will then have celebrity "friends" papped going in and out of frogspit manor for a postpartum visit. You'll see Amal Clooney, in the latest season-inappropriate gear, prancing to the front door. If all this isn't revolting enough, we'll be subject to months of tabloid stories on the "dramatic birth!" complete with "near-death experience!" and "if they die, let them die..and decrease the surplus population" quote attributed to Kate.

Next stop celeb playdates!

The shit storm that will ensue once the poor child is finally born will make all this current stuff look like a party.

Who’s gonna pay for that 33K babymoon getaway ? Let me guess : oh yes the British taxpayers ! I don’t think Dimwit is gonna pay or PC .

I would be incredibly fucking pissed off if I was British and I kept getting bills from the BRF because of the bottomless pit known as M.

how long the British people will put up with these two before they are stripped of their titles and get booted out of the RF ?

I hope Forthnite sues Dimwit for all the money he has .

the brittish task payer shuld not be allowed to complan about they have to pay for our babbymoon. where is the benifit of complaning about it in your household? complants are create to adict, a adiction to keep you in front of an computer for as long as pot... post... possibal saying un kind shit about my beutifull wive. its so iresponsible!

beutifull wive meagin also wants me to say too you what meagin wants meagin gets. because she is kind. and she has babby in side. she also said i am not a good feminnis if i dont tell you that other stuff. shit. she want me to say that other stuff to but i don't rememmber. fuck! again, you are not aloud too complan or say un kind shit about us.

R389 looool

I'm watching LA Story, and the Sarah Jessica Parker character reminds me so much of The Duchess of Exess, except that SJP is a bazillion times better looking and isn't nearly as catty.

Very good, R389. You sound EXACTLY like him!

R389 I love you.

LOL R389

More, more r389!

So Maghan's PR has put out "Meghan WILL be wearing the Queen's jewels after all" rebuttal pieces. Interestingly, each of these rebuttals argue that "Well she wore a bandeau tiara for her wedding, so the Queen has lent her jewels before." and then "Well the Queen GIFTED her pearl-drop earrings in the past, so the Queen is clearly fine with her now" and "Well, Meghan wore an aquamarine ring that once belonged to Diana so Diana's jewels are clearly not off-limits."

None of these rebuttals are actual rebuttals to what the Sun reported. The Sun said that as of NOW and going forward, Meghan would no longer have access to the Royal Collection jewels. That wipes the bandeau off the table. Also, any gift from the Queen would just be that - a gift - not a loan from the Royal Collection, so that wipes the earrings excuse off the table. And then, it turns out that any jewelry Diana bought for herself was gifted to William and Harry, and so are not part of the Queen's Collection - explaining the Aquamarine ring (and also Diana's butterfly earrings Meghan was once seen to wear).

Whoever her PR people are, they are not doing a very good job. It's all very transparent and does nothing to rebut the claims originally made in the Sun.

Wasn't it determined that those weren't actually Diana's butterfly earrings but a pale imitation?

I wonder what kind of music they are into? All the main royals I mean.HM, PC, PW, PH, (camilla , kate n mm too) any guesses? What do they rock out to? Which musicians/bands/songs make them turn up the volume and sing out loud?

I am very curious.

Why should she care about the Crown Jewels when she can wear the finest wire rings from Birks?

Just kidding. It must rankle.

Was reluctant to share this before but what the hell: A boyfriend of a good friend was personal security for a high profile UK attendee to the Harkle wedding. The attendee grew up (or at least family friends) with Harry. All that group hate - I mean really, really HATE - Sparkle's guts. Apparently they mocked her behind her back while at the wedding itself.

They're obviously concerned about loaning the grifter any jewels of importance, and THAT is a total slap in the face. I hope Miss Smoothie is gnashing her ugly fake teeth over this, because it's a loud and unusual message.

R400, it seems pretty unanimous. Did Charles have that same problem with Diana? I guess they were all in the same set and familiar.

R401, it’s delicious. And I believe it.

Excellent, R400. Thanks for sharing.

My own contribution (think I’ve said before) is that a friend was on the florist team for the wedding. The air freshner story is true - Markle was refused & appealed to Harry, who was refused too. Lots of palace staff were also tallking about the Kate/Markle fall out too. I heard about both of these things before the hit the headlines (although didn’t know specifics about Charlotte).

Yes, R400, thank you for sharing, especially since you were reluctant to do so.

R398 I don't know about musical tastes but Kate let slip that they are partial to a takeaway, on one of her engagements a few months ago. I can't remember which one, but the children present asked them if they go for it themselves, bless. Kate is partial to a curry ( I was surprised) and William is most definitely not, he prefers a pizza.

r403 Yes apparently the fallout story is absolutely true - and it is between the two women as well as the two brothers - he didn't know details -and he didn't elaborate further than to say he thinks H and M will definitely divorce (And he said this from merely standing around on the sideline at their wedding!)

Sorry r403, I should clarify I'm r400 and r406

R403 What's the air freshener story - I missed it. I had to take a mini sanity break from MM. I shudder at what awaits.

R407 Don’t worry...I figured that out!

If you hear any more good stuff - we’re all ears!

Here ya go, R408.

R408 She didn’t like the way the chapel smelled so wanted to spray air freshner around on the day. She was told no. Seems minor but she wouldn’t take no for an answer and tried to get Harry to pull rank. He was told no too.

r409 I know - I feel bad now that I didn't press him further - I myself am dying to know - but if I see him again I'll definitely try to get more!

R410 R411 Thank you! Febreezing the old church =The woman is completely Hollywood insane.

Harry is beyond stupid. Marrying this grifter AND defending her, despite the enormous personal cost and negative fallout all around, shows that he's utterly incapable of managing his life. (He's provided us with plenty of clues to that effect in the past.) R389 was brilliant and nailed it. This debacle can't go on indefinitely. They'll either both be kicked to the curb, or he'll be 'rescued' with a divorce orchestrated by the palace. Like a cult deprogramming. And put back on his meds.

Why the palace gave permission for this wedding after doing a background check on MM, is truly puzzling. It would have been clear that she's entirely unsuitable for the job. Did they think they could contain her?

Holy shit look at the unbridles hate in her eyes as she looks as unaware Kate. It's chilling

Ugh 'unbridled' and 'AXE'

They want to be global brand ambassador , well that they do that on their own dime and not on the taxpayers dime .

And is Doria already in the UK ? I never saw footage of her coming in the UK . I think she will wait as long as possible to go to MeAgain . She knows she will be a doormat for M to use as she pleases .

R414 Yeah, I noticed that too - her true colors are frightening. Imagine her now completely drunk with self-importance! Horrible.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Pa Markle has been quiet, recently.

R400's reluctantly shared story from the friend of a friend who worked security for Harry's friend at the wedding sounds very credible.

Kate has everything that Smegs wants and will NEVER have: the clothes, the money, the hair, the body, the position, and did I mention THE MONEY, THE MONEY, THE MONEY.

[quote] Why the palace gave permission for this wedding after doing a background check on MM, is truly puzzling.

Well, if the press had found out that the Queen refused to let Harry marry a woman who happened to be biracial, it wouldn't exactly have done wonders for the BRF's public image.

Certainly true R422 😂

I don't know what to tell you, r421. Sorry to disappoint but yes, it's entirely true. I don't get any benefit from posting it here so I'm not sure what you are trying to imply. All I can say is that if you don't like it, maybe you should just block me.

Ignore that poster, R425. I’ve seen enough fake “insider” tips to spot one that’s probably real. I believe you, for what it’s worth.

Didn’t Williams’s friends make fun of Kate because of her background?

Thanks r426

R427, totally different thing. I would think that people would not so much be making fun of Sparkle's background, more of her attitude. More of her sense of entitlement since she first shagged the dimwit.

Remember that guy that directed the Reitman’s ads? He said on his IG that she was the “meanest person I ever met”. Not an anonymous source...a quote directly from the man himself.

I just don’t think she’s a very nice person & I am certain more stories will emerge. Harry has relied on loyalty from his friends all of these years....but now he seems to have dumped them all, so they owe him sweet FA.

FA??

Wow. The meanest person he's ever met. Not ONE of the meanest. Yeah, she's an industrial strength cunt, that's for sure.

That story sounds entirely credible to me, as well. And if Harry's friends, who are part of his social circle, hate her, you can imagine how the Queen, Andres, Kate, and William view her.

R430 - Wait till the nannies start quitting. It's hardly surprising, is it, that when the KP and Sussex "households" parted ways, the staff that had been working for both chose to stay with the Cambridges.

I suspect, as I have all along, that Meghan is one of those people who know that if they have that one person or two people who are key to their survival wrapped up in butter and honey, they can afford to skewer the rest. Further, I suspect that that was one of her charms for Harry: she could do his rebellious dirty work for him, whilst feeling insulated from what she dishes out to everyone else.

After all, she did it to her father, didn't she?

She really does remind me of the Jeanne Crain character in "Leave Her to Heaven".

Of course, in the film, the character eventually gets her comeuppance. Remains to be seen if that pretentious twat posting photos of herself with Harry "tending to an injured bull" will do the same.

Sooner

Sorry, R431. British phrase...sweet Fanny Adams aka sweet fuck all.

Basically, his dumped friends owe him fuck all.

Everyone talks about how badly MM treats people but I think Harry gives her a run for the $.

Weren't there stories of MEghan being nasty and difficult to Servers at that wedding they attended of one of Dimwit's friends when they were dating (reported here that they had actually broken up but she showed up anyway)? What does it say about Dimwit that he witnesses her being nasty to Staff that early on and it doesn't give him pause? If they had already broken up he must have had other misgivings, how did this bad behavior change his mind in her favor? Was he just sooo flattered at her persistence?

Yes R436 he just sat there and did nothing . She really hunted him down not that he is such a price !

I suppose what it says about Harry is that he's shallow, stupid, self-entitled, immature, incapable of confronting his family issues, and actually isn't a studly chav who wandered into a palace accidentally like the British public affectionaly see him as.

They deserve each other . And everything that will come to them . He chose her because he is lazy and can fly under the radar and she takes care of all the other stuff .i don’t think they live thogheter but maybe now they have too . He is not in love with her never will be . She is just a convenience for him .

About the Reitman's ads. That second ad assumes that she's a big celebrity, because the women in the ad were whispering "Is that Meghan Markle?". I doubt people in Canada knew the name of the supporting actress on the little-watched Suits show. Was that ad shot after she had already been revealed to be Harry's girlfriend?

On several occasions, Diana wore an Art Deco choker loaned to her by the Queen. It was part of the Queen Mary Emerald parure. She also wore it as a headband. I wonder if this is the "tiara" that Meghan wanted to wear on her wedding day?

So is Serena Williams the new Pampers spokesperson? She's putting it out there that she has had Pampers shipped over to the UK for Sparkles. Ermmm....you can pick Pampers up at any corner shop in the UK, never mind having them delivered with your online grocery shop. And wouldn't Sparkle be using some sort of recyclable, vegan, undyed piece of cloth, anyway? Of course not, she is so faux in everything she does. Even on her Tig blog she was raving about the taste of Rabbit Ragu. One has to have the memory of one of the dim Prince's elephant friends to keep such charades up.

What a beautiful choker and Diana looked very good in it .

Is this the kind of merching stuff everyone keeps referring to, r442? If so, it's genuinely awful.

All these women like Pryanka and Selena and Meghan and Sophie Turner and Amal they all look so fake . They all have the same PR agency . All are married or engaged to men with money and all think they are a godsend for humanity .

R441 - That beautiful emerald choker was never converted to dual use as a tiara. Diana wore it as a headband just that once but it was made as a choker and always worn as a choker just that once. The Queen inherited it, but doesn't like chokers, so passed it on to Diana.

Sophie Wessex's aquamarine tiara and diamond tiara were minor pieces from the collection. The Queen has another and far more valuable aquamarine set including tiara. Generally, wives of princes farther down the succession never get access to the major historic pieces in the collection. If Meghan ends up at one of those state occasions in the near future, she'll either be given the Queen Mary bandeau tiara to wear, or they'll buy her a new one that's suitable but not out of the historic collection, as they did for Fergie when she married Andrew.

That said, they bought that tiara for her as a wedding gift. I think it telling that they bought nothing of the kind for Meghan. Kate obviously was given a magnificent emerald and diamond necklace ("Privately purchased" was the Palace's comment) which she only wears on very special occasions, and doesn't need much else as she has been allowed to wear at least half a dozen magnficent pieces the Queen has leant her.

Meghan asking if she "should" (hint hint, picture her fluttering eyelashes and sweet little voice as she "consulted" him) wear a tiara with that plain blue gown in Fiji was comical and typical. At least her father-in-law had the spine to tell her NO. One hopes that Charles finally gets who she is, too.

R442, did she really? As if Harry couldn’t afford to buy his baby diapers...

What, Serena sent Pampers to MM? Huh? I can't understand why a millionaire married to a billionaire shills for diapers in the first place, but then she pops some in the post to a member of the British Royal Family who is supposedly environmentally concerned? I cannot understand.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

MM's true nasty self always seeps through her ego like when she bitched about a woman at Smart Works charity who didn't want a purse donated by MM. That's really bitchily low.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Bea's boytoy is going to break her heart! They seem like they like to party.

I just can't get over this picture of Megs staring daggers at oblivious Kate

R454 She's not even looking at Kate, they are both looking at something else to their left.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Sorry to say this, but by those pictures Serena should be the spokesperson for Trans Diapers

Almost every fucking week, Hello Canada has a ROYAL on their cover. Last week it was Diana because Diana was the No# 1 Soho/Sussex baby name.

Serena looks indeed like a men . How she got married is the greatest mistery of this world . I think he is gay and she is a lesbian because who want to touch this as a straight man .

James Middleton (Kate's brother) will be featured in French royal mag Point de Vue.

Transatlantic Trans Diapers.

The Queen Mum often took care of Charles and Anne when their parents were traveling. Here in these two photos, there pictured in the little Welsh cottage that was a gift for the Queen when she was young. It's near Royal Lodge Windsor (Prince Andrew's home).

Every child's fantasy - a miniature cottage all their own.

What we see with M and H is just the tip of the iceberg. There is a whole continent beneath it . We will never fully now what these two have done . The RF will never disclose that info to the public .

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

How do you expect Royals to live? What would be a good example of a reasonable lifestyle for Harry & Meghan?

I think we are going to see a flurry of posting on the new Instagram account. One has been pent up with things to say for some time now.

They should live no better or worse than Zara lives, r466. Quietly nonextravagant and unpretentious.

R468, as I pondered that ( very much agreeing with you ) it became glaringly obvious that Sparkle has no interests, no hobbies, unlike Zara and Mike., so couldn't live a life that . Her only interests are herself, publicity for herself, and well, herself, herself, herself.

R469 You're exactly, exactly right. I hadn't thought about it that way before but you put it better than I ever could.

The Queen Mother's Coronation Dress and Robe. I wonder if Camilla will be just as extravagant?

Lilibet.

One of my favorite tiaras of the Royal Collection. It reminds me of the ones worn by the Russian Imperial Family.

Swipe for photos of royal babies through the years. I think the older royals were much cuter as children than the younger ones.

Camilla won't DARE be extravagant r471, so long as we are in the Age of Meghantoinette

If you need a laugh today.

Sad eyed Diana.

She looks like my grandmother here.

The play Cottage at r463 is darling. And looks more homey and stylish than Frogmore Cottage.

Somehow I don’t think the Harkles made the taxpayers cough up for their babymoon. It was probably a mercy opportunity, like the apothecary visit.

And MSNBC is discussing the Harry Fortnite kerfuffle.

^^ merch opportunity.

Autocorrect doesn’t like “merch” either.

Sohobébé will either be (1) gorgeous by a freak of nature or (2) homely as hell.

I predict that Harry will be getting angry alot in the future. His wife's behavior (as well as his own) is ripe for criticism.

She looks better at r481. Her eyes may be crossed but they don look as rat-like as they look post nose-job

This guy seems to be a real Sussex mouthpiece. Why is he announcing upcoming events BEFORE any official website?

I don't remember seeing this photo of a solo Eugenie at the time of her wedding last year.

Frogmore Cottage looks bigger from the air.

R486, it does. Thank you for that photo.

Frogmore Cottage from the road.

R469 Can't wait to see the plastic surgery, botox and injectables I'm sure she will have. Will she look like Jessica or Michael Jackson? Could be her new hobby.

The paparazzi really are scum. Topless Kate on vacation.

Photos of Anne and her daughter Zara at the Grand National.

You try wearing a fur collared hood over a tiara and see how silly you'd look!

I think Meghan is probably a real bitch, only because I think Harry is so fucked up that is what he would gravitate to.

I think Princess Anne and her first husband Mark Phillips had the best engagement photos. Here is one of them.

R484 , he certainly is that, a mouthpiece, being an associate of MeGain's. Very shady. On meeting her in 2016, he registered a company and suddenly styled himself as a royal reporter. Another one with connections to SoHo House, and Farmhouse. He's in on this whole lucrative money-making journey. MeGain leaks through him.

Princess Anne wore the same tiara as the Queen did at her wedding. Anne's is my favorite royal wedding dress EVER!

Another engagement photo of Anne and Mark. She never looked so good.

Anne has/had a rack, if you are into that sort of thing.

Beautiful.

Where did Anne's looks go?

R500, Right? She was sort of a dreamy beauty back then. Has morphed into one of her horses.

Yet again, my favorite photo of Princess Anne.

I have just gotten the chance to catch up on this continuing telenovella.

R389, I think you have created a new phrase in the DL lexicon! The Duck of Sussex forever!

Anne made a perfect curtsey to the Queen at her wedding. Notice the kilted page Prince Edward fixing her train. Lady Sarah Armstron Jones is the bridesmaid. Anne only had two attendants because she didn't have the patience to put up with a gaggle of young children acting up. She has said she's not very "maternal" so it's a miracle that her children Peter and Zara turned out ok.

Swipe for full Royal names - some long, some short.

A cute photo of Anne with her young family.

R502 Nice photo.

A gorgeous engagement photo. Too bad the marriage didn't work out.

Edward is laughing at Anne, Philip is laughing at Mark and the Queen is laughing to herself.

Engagement day for Anne and Mark. Here are photos of the couple and the ring. I don't care for her hair but her outfit with the scarf is adorable.

A family group shot at Christmas. A big thumbs down to the oversize coats on Diana and Fergie. Will and Harry are cute in their matching coats. Dig Zara's teddy bear.

Stand aside everyone. Miss Edward is running the show!

They loved horses but it wasn't enough.

The Queen with her first grandchild (and some say favorite grandchild), Peter Phillips.

Princess Anne actually wearing a skirt with her uniform. For many years now, she wears pants.

When Anne and Mark were engaged, both sets of parents were in attendance.

Happy family but it didn't last.

It really is quite astounding what happened to Anne's looks through the years. I mean, everyone gets older (myself included, as my mirror tells me), but she has aggressively committed to that horrid hairstyle and then accentuates it all with her Oakley blades. A few small tweaks would bring her back to attractiveness.

Her character as portrayed in The Windsors cracks me up (as does Camilla's character!)

Her veil blowing in the breeze, Anne poses with her new husband on a Buckingham Palace balcony.

Eugenie taking a selfie with cousin Peter Phillips and Zara's husband Mike Tindall.

In this pic she actually looks a bit like Meghan! Around the eye area.

Mark looks dreamy. I wonder how big his cock is.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I'm sure R471 that Camilla will most certainly dare to have the Royal School of Needlework craft some beautiful fabric for a coronation dress. And she should!

Beatrice at the Helen Arkell Dyslexia Centre. She suffered from dyslexia as a girl and is now patron of this charity.

R521, I have also noticed a resemblance to Meghan in a few of Anne's photos.

r525 They also share the same Sun sign combos in their marriages: Meghan and Anne, Leo; Harry and Mark, Virgo.

R526 - If I remember my astrology, Virgos and Leos are not compatible. Am I right?

My oh my....you deranged fraus have really lost your minds.

Now you're literally reaching for the stars hoping astrology will somehow help you. It's funny to witness the meltdown. The more you realise harry actually genuinely loves this woman, and it is real and not some froho conspiracy, the angrier you get.

[quote][R526] - If I remember my astrology, Virgos and Leos are not compatible. Am I right?

Maybe they are. They do end up together fairly often it seems like. Madonna and Guy Ritchie. Halle Berry and Gabriel Aubrey. JLo and Mark Anthony.

Haha. Harry doen't have a genuine bone in his body, so they are matched well in that respect.

R529 And they all lived happily ever after... I love a happy ending!

R433

[quote] She really does remind me of the Jeanne Crain character in "Leave Her to Heaven".

No.

You mean Gene Tierney. Jeanne Crain was the sister.

Gene Tierney was the lead.

r531 I know, right? But which marriages last forever these days anyway? Maybe Kate and William's will, out of a sense of duty.

[QUOTE] why would Beyoncé support her.

‘cause she black

E528 - no one is melting down but YOU!

I'm bored with fucking Fool and Fake so we have to talk about something.

^ R528. And one other thing - don't call me a FRAU. That description is so dead wrong, I'm laughing as I type.

R528 I don’t believe in astrology myself but it is definitely interesting to see behavioral commonalities in people who share a sign. That being said, Harry can love his wife all he wants but these two ingrates have done more to damage the BRF in the span of a year than any other factors in the past 20 years.

fuck! my wive is furyous! first of, calling her ‘wive’ is dimening and she think i callt her that ‘wive’ to enbarass her. she sayed im stuppid and dumb and fuckin iddiot and when i dont call her Dutchess it put’s her off my knob. its been 9 hour now. nuthing. :-(

i remmember wat im supose to tell you last morning and she tollt me dont fuck it up thistime so pay atention ok?

1. unbillicle rights is womans’ rights unbillicle rights is intersectional jusstice. this is the cause that has all ways been most preshus to my, Ducks’, heart for my whole live and after babby come we shall lunch our campane for unbillicle rights for all woman vagginaed and not. unbillicle rights is not just for vaggina unbillicle rights is for all womans’. you dont have to have babby you dont have to have certain jenitals you still get unbillicle rights. as this is as i sayed the cause all ways most preshus to me, Duck, i shall fite tirelesly in spaces of white power and apression for your unbillicle rights. This shall be my lives’ work. fuuuuuck i hope i did that right

2. you brittish task payer are not us. you donnot get to dicide how you’re money is spent. you dont get to compair you’re lifes to our’s. we are difrent to you %100. be cause we are exhaust from wroking so hard to make the world better FOR YOU if we wan’t too fly in one singel Pamper on a other wise empty private plain 12X per day, WE CAN DO THAT (she wont me to stress that parts in capitol leter). you task payer need to be more greatfull of the gift i, Duck, has brot to you. if you cant she wont me to tell you….i mean i, Duck, want to tell you to fuck off out off her realm. GTFO!!

***ALL THOTS ARE MY OWN***

R537 How much damage can they have done if they made people start liking the Cambridges? Need I remind you what was said about them just two years ago? Not all of us have forgotten. Just check the dm comments from 2011-2015/16. If anything our megs saved them. All of the sudden dolittle...sorry, kate, isn't so bad. So lazy, so flashy. Remember The Grinch? No one bought her animated huge gurning smile back then. It was fake and unnatural. Just like her hair. Oops. You probably forgot that one too. It wasnt just CB who called her wiglet. Froggy legs, remember that one? Calves thicker than her tighs. masculine male balett dancer legs. Loooooooooong torso. Saaaaaaging face. Toooooo much makeup. OTT. Fake veneer teeth. I can go on and on and on. She was even called marie antoinette at one point. Big spender. Shopping, shopping, shopping. Two new kitchens. Plastic surgery for nose refinement and god knows what else. WhAtDoEsShEdOaLlDaY. Accused of this that and the other. Same people now calling her wilted...sorry, EnGlIsH rooooose. She was accused of using a surrogate and being fake fake fake,

How quickly we forget 🙄

R389 R538 This is utter genius and needs to be a regular blog, a column or a book deal. I am DYING here.... xx

R539 - I must have missed most of these insults. I do remember Willnot and Cannot and the boring bit.

People often forget that for Royals, "boring" is a GOOD THING!

Remember Duchess DoLittle?

Well, then I'll enlighten you. Before meghan entered the scene there were talks about ending it all after HM or Charlie. People were fed up with the Cambs. The comment sections were scary. So much negativity for those two. If meg in any way propped them up then she has done her job. BUT, people are fickle...people don't necessarily like the cambs, hell, most people don't feel they know them at all, they just dislike meghan for superficial reasons. If meg and harry divorce, which I don't think they will, then it's back to hating on the cambs. Btw, I think the more likely to divorce are the cambs.

R542 - yeah, I remember that nickname for Kate but then I remembered that she had young children and the Queen wanted her and William to enjoy them while they were young. It was something that she missed with Charles and Anne because she became Queen at 25 years old. I think it was the right choice. I bet the Cambridge kids will be closer to their parents than the Queen 's children.

R543 - "they just dislike meghan for superficial reasons". Wrong.

Actually, we dislike Meghan because SHE is SUPERFICIAL.

R543 - I think the exact opposite. I think the likelihood of the Cambridges divorcing is pretty low. At least, Kate had a relatively normal upbringing in a loving home and they seem compatible as a couple. They knew each other a long time. The Sussex couple (both from broken homes) is a disaster in the making. Meghan wears the pants in the family and Harry is a lost soul. Harry doesn't realize it (yet).

This is what the Queen and Prince Charles wore to watch Prince Philip play polo in the 1950's.

It's always the ones you least expect...

No one thought Prince Charles and Diana would divorce.

Live separately and have lovers on the side? Yes. Divorce? No.

And I wouldn't be so sure about the normal middletons goldsmiths. Carol acting like a svengali to kate is hardly normal. There is a lot more to that family and it will all be revealed in due time. Starting with their shady business and drug dealing brother-uncle gary.

Princess Anne has BDF!

R548 - I actually had misgivings from the start about Charles and Diana. My uneasiness began at the time they were dating and Diana was photographed where she worked. I felt sorry for her for the way she was hounded by the paparazzi and the Palace did nothing to help her. I thought to myself: He is an old soul and she was so young and naive. What the hell would these two have in common? My gut feeling turned out to be correct.

R550 Same here, same here. God, even my grandmother knew it wouldn't last.

The Queen looks like Dorothy Kilgallen in R509’s photo.

Eugenie posted this cute photo of herself with her Mom. Fergie has that Hillary Clinton headband thing going on. And don't get me started on the yellow striped jacket.

A slide show of the Royal Week of engagements.

I never noticed the resemblance until R553.

Camilla has her moments.

Anyone know where Diana is here and the baby's name? Just a guess but it may be a godchild of hers or one of her siblings' children. Anyone know for sure?

R543 Once again...so what? Yes, the Cambridges got criticised. ALL THE ROYALS DO. But if you think it’s comparable to the serious level of dislike Markle is facing, you are completely deluded.

Oh Bea! All kinds of wrong.

@ r559: OOOF. She looks related to Sarah Fuckabee Sanders.

“Carol acting like a Svengali to Kate”.

WTF? On what evidence? It’s so annoying the way you people just make shit up.

Can anyone else see an improvement from the outfits on the left to the ones on the right?

R532 - Right! It was Tierney - who was in my view far more beautiful than Crain. Rmemeber her in "Laura" in that ridiculous rain hat? Only Tierney could have looked like an angel in it.

And in The Ghost and Mrs Muir . . .

Here is the next thread Part 35. Sorry but I didn't finish my Sussex baby name poll. Please ignore the next thread until this one reaches the magic number of 600 posts.

Was there ever a second baby shower in London? Does anyone know?

Instagram Post of Sussex Royal. Swipe for more photos and video.

R548 So a mother who actually did a proper job raising her kids is a svengali? She did her homework to make her family upwardly mobile and good on her for that. People get very jealous of others who are successful in their professional and family life.

False modesty on display. At least they remembered to put in the charities.

I wonder what’s on Meghan’s Vision Board.

R508 Anne looked better in this engagement photo than she did at her wedding - better hair, better tiara, better dress.

Harry's male English friends are unattractive, immature and short. The only good-looking friend is the gay guy in Africa.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The picture at R510 proves that all of Anne’s beauty comes from a photographer.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I'm thinking that Pippa is the one who leaked the story about Mrs. Turnip Toff screwing William. She's trying to protect Kate. It could have been Harry who wanted get back at William and support Kate.

R440, I had never heard of Markle when she did the Reitman’s commercials-2, I believe, and both that I’ve seen were filmed before she met Harry.

Who is better endowed, Wills or Harry? Are they both uncircumsized or circumsized? Who has had more sex?

“The gay guy in Africa”, R571? Do tell.

Some of the hints at the baby shower of the millennium suggested the baby was a boy. Interesting that anyone could let slip the sex of Sohobebe if the parents supposedly don't know.

"My heart is limping with joy"

R584 - Nutmeg has lied in the past so it wouldn't surprise me if the couple actually know if they're having a boy or a girl. Sadly, I've come to believe that she's such a fake that I don't believe a word that comes out of her mouth. Harry said that he wanted a girl so I've always felt that it will be a SHE.

A rare photo of the Queen in pants.

Please finish this thread before using the next one. Thanks.

The baby in R557's looks a bit like baby George in one of the two official christening photos.

I guess there's some kinship relation between the babies.

Btw, I don't think the baby is little Prince William.

Dancing Queens

Until 600

R585, is that a real quote? I don’t care. I’m stealing it.

Well someone ran sussexroyal through Phlanx.com which is a paid instagram engagement calculator. 30% of the followers are and 2% are influencers.

Funny

Diana, if she was "special"

R583 Harry's friend in Lesotho is Adam Bidwell .He works for Harry's charity Sentabale. DL has talked about him many times before.

Who's the bottom of them two?

The look of love?!? Cambridge marriage

R599, fuck you. You deliberately picked a video where the next seconds are left out.

They share a broad smile after the end of your stupid slow-mo video.