British Royal Family Gossip Part 91

[QUOTE] There would be a huge funeral but holding a grand coronation ceremony for Charles? the public won't stand for the expense. Then the idea that he'd only reign for a few years before he too dies and William becomes king, another funeral ceremony, another coronation. The taxpayers will revolt.

This won't happen. Why would a coronation and another funeral be seen as something to revolt over? The tax payers don't get their tax increased those months to pay for it. If they didn't object to Eugenie's big televised wedding (what is she, 15th in line to the throne?) why would they care about a coronation?

You seem very naive. Many Brits relish public events and fanfare. Any government who even suggested jettisoning a thousand year old monarchy would be voted out at the next opportunity.

Brexit isn't going to ruin the economy. You do have some bizarre ideas. Barely anything will change. Norway isn't in the EU and it does fine.

[QUOTE] When Charles becomes king, controversial outliers like Harry and Meghan will be gone.

No, they won't. As if Charles would banish his youngest son, any more than TQ will banish Andrew, who is facing criminal charges.

I think the queen will have a massive funeral but the days of OTT coronations are over. It was fine back in 400 B.C. when QEII had her coronation, but it won't fly now. I don't even expect to see a Will and Kate level wedding when George or Charlotte marries. IMO Will and Kate's wedding worked because it was post-Diana, and a celebration of people marrying who actually knew each other, were sane, and had a shot at this. It was the relief and normalcy for all the money spent that made it work.

Supposedly George hasn't been told he'll be king. IMO that's fine because I don't think he'll be king. I just don't see this whole thing still going on 50 years from now.

[QUOTE] . I just don't see this whole thing still going on 50 years from now.

It's been there for a thousand years. Abolition of the monarchy has never been discussed in parliament in modern times. The Brits love having a king or queen. Zero chance that it's going anywhere.

Wow, the obsessives seem to have fucked off, for the most part. Where did they go?

[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.]

For r1:

"Operation Yellowhammer identifies 12 areas of risk. These include the food and medicine supply chains and the status of UK citizens residing in the EU.

The twelve areas of risk are:

Transport systems People crossing borders Key goods crossing borders Healthcare services UK energy and other critical systems UK food and water supplies UK Nationals in the EU Law enforcement implications Banking and finance industry services Brexit and the Irish border

Specific risks to overseas territories and Crown dependencies (including the effect of Brexit on Gibraltar) National Security"

So, you're confident that's all sorted then?

Shit, formatting.

"Operation Yellowhammer identifies 12 areas of risk. These include the food and medicine supply chains and the status of UK citizens residing in the EU.

The twelve areas of risk are:

Transport systems

People crossing borders

Key goods crossing borders

Healthcare services

UK energy and other critical systems

UK food and water supplies

UK Nationals in the EU

Law enforcement implications

Banking and finance industry services

Brexit and the Irish border

Specific risks to overseas territories and Crown dependencies (including the effect of Brexit on Gibraltar) National Security"

Oh my god! My EYES!

R8 what's the point you are trying to make?

Sorry r10. Just pointing out to r1 who has posted that message in two threads re the Brits loving a good knees up down at their local toasting a new monarch and assorted hangers on despite the country likely being in the midst of a very severe depression due to an ill considered referendum that no one understood. BoJo at r1 thinks the UK can just get a do over and everything falls into place.

My point was, whatever bitching you see now about MM, Harry, renovations, private jets, and the sovereign grant will be a thousand times worse come November 1. No one will find the foibles of the BRF amusing when they're queuing for food because the deliveries are stuck in Calais.

[quote]No one will find the foibles of the BRF amusing when they're queuing for food because the deliveries are stuck in Calais.

This reminds me of the Y2K bug. Daily predictions of gloom, doom and disaster. And in the end? Zip. Nada. Nothing happened. Britain will survive its divorce from the EU. A bit bumpy, like all divorces, but, in the end, everyone will move on to more interesting endeavours. Like the BRF.

Well, this is a perfect opportunity for Meghan and Harry to show their political chops. They should l step up and show the people how much they care.

*snicker, snicker*

AND WHAT ABOUT OUR EYES R9!?!!😨😨🤢

On another note this thread was started over 24 hours ago and still isn't full yet. How did that happen?! I thought you people went through one thread a day.

Interesting analogy r12 but off the top of my head, there were a ton of programmers rewriting code for months/years ahead of time because private industry took it seriously. I read last year that Belgium had already hired hundreds of customs and immigration people to handle the expected demand whereas the UK hadn't started yet. There's a series on YouTube, just some guys sitting in a cafe, talking about just-in-time deliveries and how that's going to come to a halt.

Don't want to blow up this thread with off-topic stuff though. My point is that there will be less tolerance for BRF foibles when the full BREXIT disaster happens.

But who knows, maybe Boris will jettison Northern Ireland so the GB landmass will be the hard border.

[quote]Why do you have these persistent fantasies about reigning monarchs suddenly turning on their siblings?

Where indeed?

I wonder if William will have a pompous investiture ceremony like the one his father had. Probably not.

And I hope someone in charge will 'accidently' destroy Charles' investiture crown. That thing looks like fucking Sputnik.

Agree with r12. I’m waiting for all the doom and gloom prophecies to come true.

R3 - It was not only fine in 400BC (when, by the way, British royal coronations didn't exist), but it was also fine in 1901, 1910, 1937, and 1953. Or didn't you catch the footage of Elizabeth II's cornation and the cheering crowds lining the Mall and outside the gates of Buckingham Palace? It was the first filmed from start-finish coronation, and the film, called "A Queen is Crowned" played to packed houses across Europe and America.

What is more, Elizabeth's coronation took place when Britain was still struggling to recover from WWII and still in the grip of wartime austerity, which didn't end until 1956.

And yet, the British loved her and it.

Her spectacular royal wedding at Westminster Abbey was described sentimentally by Winston Churchill as "a flash of colour on the hard road we have to travel".

400BC my arse.

Much will depend upon the state of Britain at the time when the moment arrives. But well past 400BC, support for the monarchy was at a high, fed by the faultless behaviour of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth throughout the war years. Thousands of girls sent in their coupons for nylong stockings and other materials to Elizabeth for her wedding dress (all returned gratefully, needless to say).

You clearly aren't British or you would know all this.

I'll repeat the wisdom of constitutional monarchy expert Walter Bagehot: "There are arguments for having a splendid court, and arguments for having a no court, but there are no arguments for having a mean court."

The populace expects a coronation, which is treated as a religious sacrament sealing the covenant between Sovereign and people, to mean something.

What it doesn't expect, and which Charles does have to see it, is lots of hangers-on grabbing HRHs and thus a place on a gravy train whose places need severely to be cut down only to those in the direct line of succession.

Harry and Meghan have become the poster illustrations of what's wrong, not the once every few decades coronation.

^*nylon stockings

Charles has to see to

R19

Why would you tell a 6-year-old that he’s going to be King? Especially THIS 6-year-old? You just know he borrow Mommy’s tiara and prance around KP carrying a toilet plunger and draping a comforter over his shoulder.

R12 - Quite agree. The whole disaster thing is overblown, and so is the idea that BREXIT will also doom the monarchy. Fuck, wartime austerity didn't doom it (see post at R19), neither did the Wales debacle.

The whole point of the monarchy is that it is above and beyond the grubby political - it was the monarchy during the Wars of the Roses and it was the monarchy during WWII and it was the monarchy through the austerity years and the the economic doldrums of the 1970s.

That's its point. No one outside Britain seems to grasp this - and certainly no one in Frogmore Cottage grasps it.

Maybe someone down at the local they made sure to be seen eating at after their sojourn in the fleshpots of the Mediterranean can explain it to them.

Marina Hyde in The Guardian is brutal on Andrew.

'No one will find the foibles of the BRF amusing when they're queuing for food because the deliveries are stuck in Calais.'

This is absolutely hilarious. These lorries already have to go through border control and it's not going to slow down post Brexit. You seem to think the EU is borderless already, with nobody having to show passports. Not the case.

Agree with R12. The Brits cleave more closely to the monarchy in times of austerity. The last thing they'd do is turn round and say they didn't want a monarch. Spazzy Americans with no understanding or experience of a thousand year old institution will never understand this.

Brits may bitch about Harry and Meghan, but this has no bearing of their feelings for the monarchy as a whole.

R24, you sweet summer child.

R24, you sweet summer child.

R27, just fuck off with your prophecies of doom. All the people who trade with the UK have no desire at all to lose their business. People weren't queuing for food in the 1960s, before we joined the EU, and they won't be now. A lot of the fruit and vegetables come in from the US and South America, and they always gets here in plenty of time. You're a spaz.

Well, hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

R19, while I agree with you re: how the monarchy is ingrained in British culture, you’re citing stuff from 60 years ago to prove your point. The monarch (whoever that is) may really have to rise to the occasion if things get very bad (as in WWII). I don’t see Charles being capable of doing that (too spoiled, as QEII wasn’t), and QEII is, I think, too old. She’ll need a ton of stamina and I don’t think it’s there. Of course, things could be fine... but I don’t think so.

R27 what planet are you on? the UK isn't about to devolve into an anarchist state once they leave the EU, in fact there are some that believe it will maximise their trade opportunities with the rest of the world, UK trade with the EU is in massive decline anyway. It's not like Britain hasn't any of its own resources to feed its people. Their largest amount of exports go to the USA. The only place that there could be trouble in Northern Ireland with no backstop.

So no there won't be rioting or torch wielding Londoners at the gates of Buckingham Palace demanding the head of the Queen and the rest of the royals. The UK is a constitutional monarchy as are places like Australia, it's legally complicated but a very good stable form of governance. That will not be cast aside because of Brexit. There are other countries in the Europe that function very well without the EU like Norway and Switzerland. Yes there will be disruptions and hideous queues but it will stabilise.

There will be lorry queues, but crazy catastrophiser R27 thinks there will be queues for basic essentials like bread and vegetables! She pictures post Brexit UK as being like St Petersburg during the seige.

If Brexit brings about major inconveniences, the Conservatives will be blamed and voted out at the next general election.

Funny that R31 mentions Norway and Switzerland - two European countries, despite not being members, with LOTS of tight ties to the EU. These countries belong to the European Free Trade Association which makes them in fact half a member of the EU (with quite a lot of obligations but without the perks of being able to participate in decisions, of course).

"The car industry’s ‘just in time’ supply chains rely on fluid cross-Channel trade routes. >1,100 trucks filled with car parts cross seamlessly from EU into UK each day. We need to start talks now on how we make sure this flow continues if we leave without a deal"

Steve Barclay MP, Brexiteer, posted this two days ago.

Meant to add, he just thought of this now. Instead of like, two years ago.

R19 "the faultless behaviour of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth throughout the war years"

Following their support of appeasement, disdain for Churchill, and shameful support of Chamberlain on his return from Munich in 1939...

[italic]During the struggle over appeasement — the policy in the 1930s of giving Adolf Hitler what he wanted to keep the peace — the King had wholeheartedly supported Neville Chamberlain, then prime minister, against Churchill, even inviting Chamberlain onto the Buckingham Palace balcony when he returned from Munich in September 1938. It was the most unconstitutional act of any monarch in the 20th century, since both opposition parties were against the agreement.[/italic]

Hahahahaha

Typo: September 1938, not 1939.

[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.]

MEGalomaniac probably now wants another changes to get done to her engagement ring.

"What THE FUCKING FUCK do you mean I can't get the Koh-i-Noor for my engagement ring?!? What I want, I get!!!"

[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.]

Apologies if this has already been posted on another thread, but I just checked Eugenie's Insta and noticed that she congratulated her parents on their wedding anniversary a few days ago. Unsurprisingly, there are a few comments about Epstein. I can't decide if Eugenie is dim enough to have thought this wouldn't happen, or if she knew it would and simply wanted to publicly show solidarity with her father. Also, congratulating your DIVORCED parents on their anniversary is a bit odd, even if they still live together.

R36 - You seem to forget what the mood of the country was at the time barely two decades after WWI. What you also forgot to add is that once Churchill was in office and Chamberlain was proved wrong, King George VI through his support behind Churchill, refused although advised to leave the country, also refused to send his wife and children to Canada for safety, and steadfastly kept to rations like everyone else as he and his wife visited bomb sites and talked with people.

The runup to the war was one thing; but once in, King George and Queen Elizabeth behaved in an exemplary fashion, showing calm encourageing faces to their people. The mourning when George VI died was sincere.

No one wanted to go to war again. No one. It was like the return of a nightmare. Chamberlain was wrong, but everyone hoped he was right.

When he was proved wrong, the Windsors did their bit and supported the war effort in full.

Churchill was also invited onto the balcony on VE Day - remember? Did anyone consider that a misuse of monarchical power?

^*threw his support (damn this autocorrect!)

Cressida's engagement ring is stunning. And far more distinctive than Meghan's.

One thing Prince Harry was never accused of was having too much imagination.

Cress looks like she has been chopping cotton with those hands.

R44 I didn't forget it - it's in the article.

And yes, I know Churchill was on the balcony as he should have been. Were the Opposition parties opposed to winning WWII?

I'm not keen on Cressida's engagement ring. It's a bit ostentatious.

Chamberlain on the balcony was a bad choice by the King. Churchill on the balcony was a good one.

The King and the Queen Mother were beloved and respected. They are remembered fondly by the British public to this day. That's why that idiot Farage got into so much trouble for deliberately being offensive about the Queen Mother.

[quote]This reminds me of the Y2K bug. Daily predictions of gloom, doom and disaster. And in the end? Zip. Nada.

The reason nothing happened is because a lot of people worked extremely hard to make sure nothing would happen.

I noticed that too r47. Surprising for an actress.

If Meghan had chosen a bauble like that, you'd all have been screeching that it was too gaudy and ostentatious. Kate has to tolerate wearing Diana's awful vast sapphire but Meghan chose something plain and chic.

Kate is always showing off the sapphire if you notice in every picture it's front and center, even while skiing.

Maybe Kate likes the sapphire ring? I don't and I would have preferred another simply because of the history, but when they married perhaps the shine of Diana was still quite bright, or Kate simply loves a big sapphire? I don't like Meghan's ring and I doubt she does either, judging by their engagement interview and her subsequent alterations. Harry should have let her pick her own ring as Cressida clearly did.

At first, Megsy's engagement ring was just plain and boring - but with these tacky diamonds she had him adorned a while back, she managed to make this ring look hideous.

R33 I think Norway and Switzerland are pretty happy not having the "perks" of the EU (whatever that means) I doubt that Switzerland would like any interference in their banking or Norway in their Oil Fund or fisheries.

R56 MM's ring is so disappointing, you just know that Harry chose the whole thing without her input and she is now trying to bling it up in a typical trashy way.

R55, how do you know that she didn't choose her own ring?

Speaking of Kate/Diana's ring. I was just on a flight from O'Hare to Heathrow, and while I was in the British Airways lounge, I noticed two different women who had the same sapphire ring as Kate's. Not sure if the women were British or not, they probably were. Both were youngish (late 20's/30s) so more of the Kate generation than the Diana generation.

[quote]The reason nothing happened is because a lot of people worked extremely hard to make sure nothing would happen.

R51's use of emphasis "extremely hard" has more to do with personal agenda than reality. If one goes by the various sites dedicated to Y2K problems/solutions.

R48 - Don't be absurd, of course they weren't opposed to winning WWII. They were opposed to another world war barely 20 years after the first one. Do you know anything about economic conditions in Britain in the 1930s? The Jarrow Walk took place around the same time as the Abdication, only the papers paid little attention to the former and focused on the latter. Chips Channon called the decade "the thin-faced thirties". You think anyone WANTED to go to war - again?

Anyone who supposed then, let alone now, that politicians know things that the rest of us don't, and that at any critical time in history great leadership will suddenly appear, is living in Cloud Cuckoo-Land. Chamberlain and that part of the cabinet were bent on stopping another war and going down in history as the men who stopped it. They were wrong. Churchill saw Hitler for what he was, the rest stuck their heads in the sand with their fingers crossyed. Finally, when Hitler made it clear he wasn't at any price interested in peace and they'd been played for fools, the government turned to Churchill reluctantly - and so did King George VI - you may call George many things - limited, stammering, diffident, uncharismatic, dull - but calling him on his patriotism (he served honourably in WWI, as well, and was at the Battle of Jutland, remember?) is just petulant.

That said, it was true that there were always in the aristo circles a nice little set of proto-fascists who admired Hitler for precisely, and ironically, what they thought was missing from their own government: muscle and guts. Equally ironically, when Churchill came in and began displaying those same qualities, that same set mocked him, too.

But reducing the commitment of George VI and Queen Elizabeth to their country during the war years because they had Chamberlain out on the balcony before the war broke out, also in hopes there wouldn't be another war (the Queen's home in Scotland, Glamis Castle, was turned into a recovery hospital for wounded soldiers during WWI - AND she lost a brother to the slaughter, remember?) is ridiculous. They may have been fatuous, short-sighted, and foolishly hopeful, but to suggest they were traitorous is just bilge.

They earned the respect and love of the public during the war years. Ditto, their elder daughter.

Which is more than their grand-children and great-grandchildren can say.

R61, thanks for the history—you’re spot on.

R61 I can't argue with you for the simple reason you're responding to things I didn't say. I didn't say they were traitorous, nor did I so much as mention his patriotism. I questioned his judgement based on his acts. Nor do I limit my criticism to him - too many people, rulers and ruled in the US, Britain, France and elsewhere ignored Hitler's rise to their subsequent regret. An estimated 75-80 million people around the world, civilian and military, died as a consequence of WWII. Plenty of people, English royalty included, have blood on their hands for not opposing him sooner and more strongly. Their behavior during the war may indeed have been exemplary; their behavior before it was not.

Argue with the conclusions Times article if you want, but do not put words in my mouth.

[quote] too many people, rulers and ruled in the US, Britain, France and elsewhere ignored Hitler's rise to their subsequent regret.

Because all they thought that would happen is that Hitler and his European enablers would butcher Jews. They were perfectly amenable to that.

Actually, R28, one of the reasons you weren't queuing for food (or clothing) in the 1960s before the EU was that you were getting a ton of meat, wool and wheat from Australia and New Zealand.

You cut us dead when you joined the EU, causing financial calamity for farmers and the agricultural side of two small economies, and don't think for one minute we've forgotten.

No doubt you did the same thing to a lot of other Commonwealth countries, who will not welcome you back either.

R65 Shut up, you ignorant tosser.

Do you know how the EU works? Being part of it means you have very little choice in who you trade with - which is exactly why so many people voted to exit.

Nobody is going to refuse to trade with the 6th richest nation on Earth because they’re sulking over events from 50 years ago.

So fuck off and educate yourself, cunt.

Right...so Australia and NZ hate the UK.

Which is why our bars and hostels are filled with the fuckers and so many wet their knickers when a junior member of the royal family & his botoxed wife show up to wave at them.

But sell us some lamb & wool? FORGET IT.

Idiot.

R47 - Cotton was picked, not chopped, even I know that on the other side of the Pond. Cressida is actually quite fine-boned; but that close up, Pavlova's hands would have looked bad.

Another set back for r66 here. Be sure to read the comments for even more details.

I wonder if the Queen is annoyed with BoJo for dragging her into Brexit. She's always stayed apolitical, but many people don't seem to realise this and are annoyed with her for giving him permission to suspend Parliament.

Fergie and Eugenie arriving for the wedding of Ellie Goulding in York.

Twenty two years ago, the world lost Diana, Princess of Wales.

People still remember Diana. Photos of today at Kensington Palace.

Bea and Edo also attended the Ellie Goulding wedding. Swipe for photos.

Another lie about the Sussex pub visit.

Edo LOVES to be seen with his royal prize.

As he should.

[QUOTE] No doubt you did the same thing to a lot of other Commonwealth countries, who will not welcome you back either.

ALL countries welcome trade with the UK. Do you not understand basic capitalism, you bitter bitch?

Hugenie has her massive washerwoman's arms fully on display, I see, while Beatrash sports a post partum belly. Edo looks exhausted by it all.

A pedo's daughter. Not much of a surprise.

Ellie Goulding shagged fat Niall Horan and Ed Shrekran, so she doesn't have great taste in men. Her high necked wedding dress with long sleeves, in heavy, clumpy, smothering white fabric was hideous. The worst I've ever seen on a celeb.

Love Princess Bea's hair topper and Princess Eugenia's very flattering dress. Details appreciated.

More close-up pictures of the wedding and celeb guests.

R79, and MeghASS has got the derriere of a beached whale. So?

Ellie Goulding's wedding dress is pUrE sHiT.

I hope Beatrice won't take this atrocity of a wedding dress as an example for her own.

R69 - Oh, please. The Graun's position on anything, especially the EU, can be predicted a week in advance. It never met an internationalist idea it didn't like.

The Gospel according to The Guardian: the EU is Nirvana, everything else is just limping along till they see the Light.

R70 - She has no choice. She has no power. He's the PM. He has power. If what he is doing isn't illegal, she has to sign as the figurehead. He didn't need her "permission" as a practical reality, only a symbolic one.

Have you any idea of the foibles she has had to deal with PMs, from Churchill and Eden on ward through Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher, Major, Brown, Blair, Cameron, May, and now Johnson??!!

She's seen them all come and go. She remains.

R83, Meghan actually is post partum - Hugenie isn't, is she? Just fat. Meg still has her slender arms and legs and will work to get her flat belly and small ass back. There's not hope for HUGEnie, is there? She has always been fat.

Eugenie is a beefy girl with a great rack. She can carry a few extra pounds, but she’s no supermodel. Meghan looks good when she is skinny, but has lousy legs and not much of a waist. She’s no supermodel. Kate is underweight with relatively short legs in proportion to her body, but they are still fantastic legs. She looks pretty damn good.

Is it just me, or does Eugenie look like she's lost weight in R71's photo?

I just looked up Ellie Goulding's wedding dress. What possessed her to choose that?

R89, Ellie's wedding dress is horrendous. It has all the superfluous fabric of Meghan's without the wide neck as contrast. It reminds me of Charlene's monstrous wedding dress when she married Jason Donovan in Neighbours. Ellie has a good figure and looks very like that girl Bachelor Arie married, Lauren Burnham. No idea why she decided to wear the ugliest dress in the world for her York Minster extravaganza.

[quote] It reminds me of Charlene's monstrous wedding dress when she married Jason Donovan in Neighbours.

And that was in the eighties, a truly horrifying decade for fashion. What's Ellie's excuse?

It's rather sad that we have people frantically defending Meghan as some powerful feminist (sure) and then assigning insulting nicknames to Beatrice and Eugenie, In all of these threads, I've never referred to any of these people outside of their names. It's really unnecessary. You don't advance one person's public perception by diminishing the perception people have of others. In one of these threads, the results of a poll were shown, showing the York sisters at the very bottom of the poll. I've made fun of their crazy fashions, and their inept efforts to find steady employment, but I've never heard or read a mean or catty comment out of either of them. Anyway, good for Bea: I hope she'll be happy when she marries Edo. He's rather dishy. And yes, I wished Meghan and Harry happiness when they wed, too.

R92, Meghan has been assigned practically every nickname under the sun in these 91 threads, and you have done plenty of sniggering about how 'delicious' it all is, as well as starting that thread about Archie being a Downs baby.

Hugenie and Beatrash are the daughters of an ugly pedo.

R93, You're an idiot. I have never made any of those comments, and certainly would never have started that ugly thread about Archie, which I FFed at the time.

She likes it, is filthy rich and happy, and doesn't need an excuse.

Dear god, the Ellie Goulding wedding look is ghastly--not only the dress, but the hair and make up, too. Whatever made her think she could carry off such a horrible collar?

R92 The same boring MM fans come here to tell us how saintly and wonderful she is and they turn around and do the usual abuse to the York girls. It's so boring and unintelligent, I wish they would go and play elsewhere.

I agree with the general consensus. Ellie's dress is horrendous, like a little house on the prairie dress gone wrong. I would have expected better from a Chloe design.

[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.]

It's not my favorite but I don't think the Ellie Goulding wedding dress is the worst. The beaded motifs overall would have been super annoying but the material, crepe? was rich. Did you notice it was practically a gale force wind when she arrived at the church? Taffeta or chiffon would've been blown up around her waist. Satin would've been a mass of wrinkles.

Like I said, not my favorite but a classic style, she'll be able to look at her wedding photos in 20 years and not cringe.

R98 Wow, Thomas reappears! I was thinking her PR team had finally engineered something that involved him staying quiet for a while, which would then culminate in some kind of rapprochement for the cameras. He really goes in: her fibbing about putting herself through college, the fact that she actually mostly lived with him post divorce; his attempts at apologizing for his tabloid misstep being ignored.

Clever as she was to get where she is now, she's sure handled this stupidly.

[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.]

More Africa kitsch from the Sussexes: elephants! black children! zebras! colourful clothes! Harry's 2nd home!

DM has a story up that the Sussexes are looking for a home in an area of Malibu that is also home to Jennifer Aniston and the Kardashians [sic], according to the owner of the Rose Tree Cottage owner who taught Meghan "tea etiquette" before she stepped out onto the British stage, and that they have snubbed Charles's floated offer of managing an estate he wants to develop near the Welsh border in Herfordshire (oh, how nicely that would have flown with limelight seeking Meg: pushed farther off from the centre of things than she already is!).

It's gossip not fact at this point, but it does keep feeding the suspicion that so many already have, that neither of them really want to be working members of the BRF, they just want the perks, and they want to use their marriage to lever themselves out of the UK and into the lifestyle that Meghan really married Harry to get: the rich celebrity lifestyle.

Of course, if it does turn out to be true, it's how they'll handle justifying the money spent on renovating FrogCott. The UK taxpayer, I think, will only stand for so much, and supporting one iota of the sixth in line's lifestyle when he spends six months a year out of the country would be very, very tricky for the BRF.

If the BRF has any sense, it will seize the opportunity gently to shepherd the Sussexes out of the BRF and off the SG payroll. Charles can make a nice settlement on his feckless younger son, and the BRF can wash its hands of the grifter and her feckless poodle.

R47 - Diana's ring was quite beautiful, in its way, but it's really a cocktail ring. I'm sure the sapphire is top quality (probably much prettier in colour than it photographs, sapphires have lustre, not brilliance, yand tend to photograph darker than they really are unless the photos are taken by a jewellery photographer expert), but credit where due, she brought this kind of ring back as an engagement ring.

I doubt Kate could have done anything but accept the ring ecstatically, even if privately she might have preferred something less attached to so disastrous a marriage, or something less ostentatious. When Kate isn't wearing jewels leant for a state banquet, she is quite conservative and quiet in her jewellery choices for everyday wear. I didn't say inexpensive, mind, but not ostentatious.

But not accepting Diana's iconic ring given by the heir to the throne as he proposed over a campfire whilst glamping in Africa wasn't an option.

So it's a moot point.

And yes, Meghan's ring is incredibly basic and boring, for all the size of the solitaire - but that's true of Meghan, as well: essentially basic and boring when you get underneath the size of the fish she caught and her relentless PR efforts.

Factoid: Diana chose the ring from a tray sent to Charles by Garrard's, I believe, and picked it because "it was the biggest". At over 5'10" and with large hands and feet, Diana probably made the right choice - and forever changed the way women, especially in Britain, saw engagement rings.

R55 - sorry, my post ^ was meant for you, not R47.

R104

Agree r101 and having her bridesmaids all dressed in white was inspired, I wonder if that will become a trend.

The only reason Africa is Harry's second home is because of his long relationship with Chelsy and all time they spent there together.

R106, There was something very poetic with them all wearing white, dramatically being buffeted by the winds. I had some little fantasy about the Vestal Virgins, with the Head Virgin finally offering her virginity as a sacramental gift. Cheesy, I know. But then, so am I. Time to go to bed.

Goulding's dress suffered from the same issue as Pss. Diana's: beautiful material, bad design.

Pss. Madeleine of Sweden went for the country maid look ast well, using Valentino: she looked about half as good as she could have do, although Goulding's high-neck and cuffs looked twice as bad as Madeleine's ruffles.

Two pretty women (three if you count that overblown meringue Diana wore down the aisle) wearing the one outfit they should have looked spectacular in, looking dowdy.

^*could have done . . .

And most of the other women looked hideous, too. That includes Bea, Yuge, Cressida . . . Good God, what is it with these women?! They really do live on another planet! There was one women in a softly ruffled pastel belted dress with silver open pumps who was the only one that I saw wearing a dress that was appropriate, with the right shoes, and flattering to her slim, small-boned figure.

The rest looked like gargoyles, and they didn't have to, they really didn't.

Cressida Bonas is a very slim very pretty woman. She wrapped herself in endless silly cloth down to her ankles and added wedgies. Why, oh Lord, why? She'd have looked better starkers with just the engagement ring on.

Herefordshire, not Hertfordshire . . .

R103, typing too fast as usual.

Why? Because these women dress as they wish..

And speaking of dressing as they wish, Tracie Emin, two fingers straight up to the whole bloody lotta 'em.

One thing every successful con artist knows is to never let them see it coming til you are long gone. MM reminds me of my cat who would try to hide behind a curtain, but had no idea her tail made her entirely visible.

If as everyone says, MM's plan is always to move on to greater success, wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to go along to get along? Study Kate and Sophie's clothes and behaviour and do the same? Now she has barely a single ally in the BRF or the press, because of the dozens of obvious errors she made.

All I can think of is that her real plan all along was to make herself so obnoxious that the BRF and the public will beg her to leave, and will pay through the nose.

I think the high necked, long sleeve white dresses look like something out of The Handmaid’s Tale. I suspect it’s a reaction to the more general trend of sleazy-looking strapless wedding dresses (or is that just a US thing?), but IMO it’s an overreaction.

I liked Meghan’s dress, but she didn’t have the height or presence to pull it off. Missed opportunity there, as she looks good in white.

Meghan's dress would've looked nice without that TACKY five miles long veil. The tiara didn't show to advantage due to the veil visually sucking up everything else in its proximity. In fact (and sadly), the veil messed up the entire look.

Kate's veil was a bit on the short side. But the dress itself was perfection, delicate and with lots of details upon closer inspection. What I probably liked best about the entire ensemble (dress, veil, flower bouquet etc) was that Kate picked a rather modest tiara.

I liked Eugenie's dress. Another rather simplistic one, but it was just perfect for her shape. And it was a good decision to refrain from wearing a veil, as a veil too long (I'm talking to you, Meghan ...), too short or made of weird-looking material would've messed up the entire look (Meghan, sorry but I'm talking to you again). Plus, not wearing a veil helped showcasing the tiara.

May I add that according to tradition, Meghan should not have worn a veil in the first place as she wasn't a first-time bride.

From the looks of it, HM The Queen wasn't too fond of her wearing a veil (therefore disregarding tradition) either.

R114 - "All I can think of is that her real plan all along was to make herself so obnoxious that the BRF and the public will beg her to leave, and will pay through the nose.

They may pay, but not through the nose. Harry will have to bleed, if he's not going with her, but he's not that rich and the BRF know how to play hardball with their money. She's not the Princess of Wales and mother of a future King: she's the barely there wife of the sixth in line. She'll be richer than she ever would have been never havinrg married Harry, but she won't get what Diana got. If she thinks that, she's dreaming.

If Harry goes with her, which he is quite stupid enough to do, especially given there is a child involved now, she'll be more comfortable - but still stuck with the no longer quite the royal he was, and cut off from the SG and Charles funding her wardrobe. She may by then be shrewd enough to jettison Harry as no longer necessary baggage.

None of this will happen until after a second child is born, christened by My Lyord Archibishop, and duly added to the list of necessary payments.

I note Charles is off to church again today with Mum. 1st September and no sign of the Sussexes north of the Tweed.

R114, I don’t think “fitting in” would aid her in her goal of bigger and better than Prince Harry.

She doesn’t want to ‘just’ be a billionaire’s wife. She wants to be a fucking celebrity. Salma Hayek didn’t just relax into her husband’s billions. She’s still out there stunting with her giant breasts and acting like a global humanitarian. She’s aiming to be that kind of rich man’s wife. Some of them want a Melinda Gates, and some want a Wendi Deng.

Wow, I sure got vilified there. (Pardon me Muriel, I have to defend because the ripostes were so extremely rude, but I'll only do it once because I don't want to derail the thread.)

Nobody suggested that Australians and New Zealanders hate Britain. That's a silly extrapolation. It's just unlikely we're ever going to create policy out of blind loyalty to the UK again.

If you want to talk capitalism, O 6th Largest Economy in the World, you'd better understand that your former trading partners have moved on in the last 50 years. Australia's biggest trading partner now is China: same for NZ. I have no idea what Australian government policy is likely to be in the face of Brexit, but to divert product from a high volume partner, or to bid new stock away from them, according to capitalism you'd expect to have to pay a price premium. Britain currently buys only 1.4% of Australia's exports, coming in 14th, just below Vietnam. It's a long, expensive row to hoe to get back to the 23% of Australian exports and over 50% of NZ exports that you had when you "didn't have to queue for food and clothing in the 1960s".

I'm going back to the BRF now, because it's fun.

Oh, go away R65. We do employ economists, you arrogant toad...I think they’ll have figured out that things have changed a bit in 50 years.

Statistics about what we buy from where are somewhat pointless given that we’ve had little choice in the matter since the 70s.

Yes, go back to talking about hats and gaudy jewels - something you may stand a tiny chance of knowing something about. With regards to Brexit and trade agreements, shut your ignorant mouth.

Aimed at you, R120.

[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.]

For the tiara fans who congregate here, an article on tiaras in the Downton movie:

R115, the prairie dresses are having a moment and Ellie Goulding could've gone that direction, but the one she chose was horrid and unflattering. That collar alone is something only a great beauty (with darker coloring) would be able to overcome.

R107, didn't Harry also do some gap year white saviour volunteering there, or was that William?

The DM is dreadful, but their snark is fun. My favourite bit from the article on H & M supposedly rejecting Charles' country estate and moving to LA: "How times have changed. These days, Royal life – for the Sussexes at least – often consists of meaningful Instagram posts, private jets to Ibiza and weekends in France with pop stars who decorate their homes with Versace wallpaper."

Of course, times haven't changed; it seems like pop-culture-loving Diana all over again.

R127, I’d love to spend time at Charles’s estate!

Meghan wants to party with the Eurotrash. At her age. With a baby.

And didn’t she do enough of that in her days on the yacht with Ghislaine Maxwell? She wants MORE?

The engagement ring belonged to Harry, not William. After Diana's death, each son was told to pick an item of jewelry or something else to remember their mother. Harry picked the sapphire ring, William chose her Cartier watch (I think). Megs must be bitterly regretting Harry's generously giving it to Wills when he got engaged to Kate.

Come to think of it, now that Harry is fighting with William, he probably regrets it too.

Also, the Queen Mother was very fond of pop culture and film stars, she just never allowed them to imagine that they were her equals. She was never anything but the Queen Mother.

The diamonds set on top on the first and the third tiara in R124's link are pretty feckless. Just like the one on the tiara Sarah Ferguson got for her wedding.

Probably the worst BRF tiara EVER.

Sophie didn't deserve to get fobbed off with this poc headwear.

R130 - "The diamonds set on top on the first and the third tiara in [R124]'s link are pretty feckless."

Well, needs must, as they say. I was glad to have them, anyway.

R131 - See post at R132.

What, pray tell, is a "feckless" diamond?

The Express also has the L.A. Or Bust! story up, with lots of shade thrown at the Sussexes.

Can't wait to see the hysteria of the fraus on CB when this one breaks.

R134 - Technically, "feckless" can mean "useless"; I assume the original poster meant that those diamonds added nothing to the design or beauty of the piece.

That said, it is usually applied to human character rather than insensate objects. And that said, I do think it was charmingly used by the original poster re the diamonds, if a bit awkward.

The pub at R123 is a good one. I was there once while in the area for a wedding. Didn't see the Cambridges though!

The engagement ring did NOT "belong" to Haz. You probably think Frogmore Cottage was "gifted" to the Harkles, too. Or likelier, Frogmore House. You also believe that Sparkles is the queen's "favorite" I bet, and that the Brits just love their jet settin' ways.

"Many Brits relish public events and fanfare."

So true. They lined up for Ellie whatshername's VW wedding procession, they sure are not going to miss a coronation.

^^sorry, forgot to say R1.

No, hysterical frau @137.

....

'The Express also has the L.A. Or Bust! story up, with lots of shade thrown at the Sussexes.

Can't wait to see the hysteria of the fraus on CB when this one breaks.'

The Express has something hysterical like this every week. They used to scream about Kate and Wills moving to Canada too.

What's Herefordshire like? I thought MM wanted a country estate like the Cambs. It seems PC wants to give them one.

This Clifford Castle looks nice, very English-y and castle-y.

Megs will fix it right up.

Kate has managed to make the ring her own, but given what will probably happen to Harry and Meghan's marriage in a few years, the sapphire reminder of Charles and Di's doomed marriage would have more suitably gone to Megs.

Megs would have hated the ring anyway as she's too frauish in her jewelry choices. She probably would've been dreaming of the moment she left him and could hock the ring off to the highest bidder.

It looks like Kate changed the band. It had a single band, now a triple one, really a bad choice. The ring doesn't suit her at all actually. To me, it's part of a real 80s aesthetic, something Alexis Carrington would wear.

R147 - Kate didn't change the band. She is, however, wearing a barely noticeable second slim wedding band (possibly as a guard to keep the 12-carat stone from turning around on her finger, she has slimmer fingers than Diana did) between the engagement ring and her original Welsh gold wedding ring. This makes it look like she had the band changed. She hasn't.

Diana had the ring changed, though: when she first showed it off it had only four corner double claws. Diana had it reset with multiple claw surround later on.

It is very much an 80s aesthetic, and part of Charles's diffidence where his fiancee was concerned was having a tray of rings sent up from which she could choose. It sounds like fun, but it isn't very romantic.

By contrast, when he proposed to Camilla, Charles pulled out his grandmother's gorgeous emerald-cut diamond solitaire, hardly shyer than Diana's sapphire, but somehow more elegant.

But as I said above. Kate really had no choice. In a way, it was William's way of putting Diana's shadow on the throne as Queen Consort one day, as she was originally supposed to. I think that probably was in Harry's mind, also, when he agreed to let William have the ring to propose to Kate.

No woman with any sense would have said, "Oh, darling, Yes Yes Yes! but about the ring . . . "

The heart bleeds for someone forced to wear a beautiful 12-carat Ceylon sapphire surrounded by two carats of top quality diamonds every day, formerly worn by one of the world's most iconic and adored woman.

I consulted my niece: she said she would rather have that sapphire than Meghan's boring basic ring any day. She said Meghan's rink looks like Diamonique. Upon enquiring what Diamonique is, it is apparently a form of simulated diamond (that is to say, CZ) carried by QVC.

R143 = The area is beautiful and very rural and sparsely populated, but not isolated in the picture-book way the Cotswolds are. It's bordered on one side by Wales, in fact, is close to the Welsh Marches. It would seem like even more of an exile than Windsor, which seems positively urban by comparison. Although Gloucestershire, where Charles had his beloved Highgrove, isn't too far away. Factoid: I believe it's where Ellie Goulding is from.

I cannot imagine the story is true, as you would have to be a functional moron not to see that it's the last sort of place Meghan Markle hoped to find herself in when she snagged his son. I wonder if the pair have been whingeing to Charles about FrogCott.

No, what Meghan Markle wanted was a luxe flat in London and an estate like Anmer Hall in the Cotswolds. Instead, she got the dump at Windsor, not even in the castle itself or Frogmore House, a half hour's drive from the buzz buzz and fleshpots of London.

I doubt this entire story has a word of truth in it.

Good jewelry is very frequently re-worked. Diana’s ring is so iconic it would be odd to change the style. But it was certainly re-sized for Kate. Diana added prongs, but that was when it was just Diana the individual’s ring. Even pretty basic family engagement rings get upgraded stones, upgraded settings. It’s like the ax that George Washington used to chop down his father’s cherry tree - it’s original, but the handle has been replaced four times and the head replaced twice.

I think Meghan can be pretty tacky and her predictable affinity for Pinterest and instagram level taste is cringeworthy. But changing the ring is no big deal. And I’ve seen comments from “experts” suggesting otherwise. That’s just wrong. Now, criticizing the choice of alterations is fair game. I don’t love the diamond band, although I think the original band was too thin for the stones. Really, the diamonds are just too big for her hand. Tragic situation!

R150 - Meghan's ring would have looked much better with just the solitaire on a slender gold band. It's the two added diamonds on the shoulders that make it look somewhat tacky. Harry should either have picked a larger diamond from his mother's col lection for the solitaire, or smaller ones from one of her pieces to line the band with in the first place. It's the clunky three-stone look that ruins the ring.

Perhaps Meghan doesn't care - after all, it looks like three-carat diamond and she looks the kind of woman for whom the, er, size is more important than the style. It's still far eclipsed by Diana's sapphire on Kate's hand, in my view.

i also think the combination of a cushion cut with two round diamonds is weird. Not the same cut, but not enough contrast.

A Guardian piece on Harry and Meghan.

The Guardian piece is quite funny.

There's a countdown clock to the Africa tour on the Sussex Instastory. You can tap to save the date!

Lol, the countdown clock is so tacky.

R155, Is that so people can plan a Bon Voyage party, then lock the gates after they leave?

Won't anyone be joining them on their meaningful journey?

Lol, meaninful journey.... Meghan wrote this shit.

Can't wait for the pap pics of Ginger caught in a quiet tete-a-tete with Chelsey.

As if Chelsey would want to take him back.

Chelsey has a new, more stable Harry, without all the baggage. I doubt she's stupid enough to jeopardize that.

A bit rough, but at least he's got hair.

The Guardian piece is, for the Graun, surprisingly on target. This is the real nugget of the piece, and what so many of us have been pointing out for some time, and that the hysterical fraus on CB keep missing:

"Softly, softly and ever so silently, Kate Middleton is channelling herself into a Queen Mary of Teck figure: the less we know, the less there is to disrespect or question. Presently, she’s the biggest hope for survival the House of Windsor has."

Whilst Kaiser petulantly refers to Kate, last seen driving to church with the Queen, as one of "the trashiest members of the family", furious that the Queen appears to favour Kate over Meghan, she and her Everyone Who Criticises Meghan Is A Racist followers miss the real point: it's about the survival of the monarchy as an institution, and in that game, you cannot be yourself on your own terms, and hiding your personal thoughts, not the name of your kid's godparents or what time and where he was born, is what confers the appropriate mystery. Meghan and her mostly American middle-aged female Meghansgtans, keep wondering why dynamism and trendiness aren't the name of the game, and thus keep insisting that preferring dutiful, demure Kate over outspoken Meghan is racist and misogynist.

Of course, they also refuse to acknowledge that cupcake aphorisms are not really so admirable a form of "outspokeness", likewise the bawling about feminism from a woman who made the two major advances of her adult life thanks to marrying two men, one of whom got her the job on "Suits" and the other of whom finally got her the A-List status she craved. Three, if you count the father who paid her way through a first class university so she wouldn't get out of school in debt to her eyebrows.

If The Guardian is putting this column up, former champion of the first mixed race, let alone nearly middle-aged divorced American, to marry this high up into the British monarchy, you have to know that Meghan and Harry have well and truly already spent their social capital.

And the countdown clock to their trip to Africa is ludicrous. No one but the editors of the tabloids looking for more clickbait or their breathless stans on Celebitchy give a fine flying fuck about their Africa trip.

It makes them look like the hosts of a game show, not serious royals.

R163 He's sexier than Harry.

Given all the cries for privacy for Archie, it will be interesting to see if they trot him out during the tour.

The Harkles according to the Express are due at last to make their first trip to Balmoral this weekend. BP has refused to comment, so it's anyone's guess where the Express got the information or whether or not it's true. But certainly it will soothe the fraus on CB to see Meghan sitting next to the Queen in the limo to Craithie Church next weekend, so Kaise can exclaim, "See! The Queen does adore Meghan!" That the Sussexes were (if the visit is really upcomine) the last ones up after everyone else had come and gone (the Cambridges twice this summer, that was Kate's second foray to church with HM this year), will be lost on them.

That the Queen is likely doing what she (wearily, I'm sure) has gotten used to doing, throwing the cloak of her own status over Harry and Meghan to keep the last shreds of family coherence together, isn't something they'll admit is even a possibility.

R166, I think they will trot out the family--the fans on their IG page cream themselves over mentions of family/baby/Harry being protective of family/baby/etc. It's funny that they're supposed to be the woke ones, but the worldwide fans seem to see them as some kind of fairytale family.

WTF. This post is signed The Duke. What in fresh hell is this?

Sorry - link below

Signing as The Duke - OMFG, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

He's such a pretentious twit it's beyond fathomable.

It's pretty obvious that Meghan wrote that.

It's not only obvious that Meghan wrote it, but take a look at a this comment:

"the_luxe_brunette What about helping your own country, why is Africa taking a priority? Or any other country? Because you need to prolong summer vacation?"

I mean does he cringe, even a little bit, when he reads that? Dear god.

R173, well that’s a right wing bullshit comment, whatever you think of her. I get that from conservative friends when I post stuff about immigrant kids being locked up in cages. They post back, why don’t I worry about the poor people in my city? I reply, Democrats are worried about both. Republicans are worried about neither.

R174 - Bit late for that now. If he wasn't cringeing at the act she undoubtedly put on to hook him, why would he be cringeing now? It's the same soporific codswallop she wowed him with as they planned out their future together and how they were going to stand up for their beliefs and change the world and make Harry Just As Important As His Damned Brother!!!!!

A couple points about The Duke's Insta post. It appears that MM is staying behind in SA while Harry goes off to Botswana etc. I wonder if MM will have a separate itinerary? And elsewhere ppl have pointed out that the photos, while gorgeous, are very tourist-safari mode. Like there are actual modern cities in Africa. It's not all elephants and baobab trees.

Remember when Melania did her first (and last!) solo tour, it was around Africa? And she dressed like she was in a Ralph Lauren photoshoot, complete with pith helmet?

'Remember when Melania did her first (and last!) solo tour, it was around Africa? And she dressed like she was in a Ralph Lauren photoshoot, complete with pith helmet?'

As did Diana.

R175 Oh dear you do realise that MM lives in Britain and Trump literally is not our President. Neither to we have Democrats or Republicans in Britain or for that matter anywhere in the Commonwealth.

I call out racist conservatives as I see them, r175. That kind of attitude is what’s stunk up both British and American politics.

[quote]Meghan Markle hires crisis management company Sunshine Sachs to help improve her image

[quote]The company Sunshine Sachs has helped clients such as the late Michael Jackson, as well as Harvey Weinstein - and they have previously represented Meghan when she was an actress on Suits. According to The Sun, Sunshine Sachs is advising the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with their plans for their new charity foundation, which the couple formed following their split from William and Kate.

[quote]A royal insider told The Sun: "Hiring a Hollywood firm to represent you for PR while a member of the Royal Family is unorthodox, to say the least." "Senior palace courtiers have been left bemused ... that the couple have been ignoring advice from their own highly-professional team and will instead listen to outsiders in Hollywood."

Such a great track record with Michael Jackson and Harvey Weinstein. What could go wrong?

Sorry, here's the link.

R173 is spot on! Ginger Megs focus should be on the UK. So far, it's been everywhere else. The public footing their lifestyle balks and questions as they should.

R177, but Harry couldn‘t see Lagos as his second home, could he? Africa = big animals, savannah, kids to be saved, you know.

I‘m hoping for some safari-Diana, out-of-Africa cosplay from Meghan.

[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.]

🎵Welp Troll on the thread

Tra la la la la

There's a Welp Troll on the thread

Tra la la la la la

Welp Troll on the thread

Tra la la la la

He called me a PR shill and a bot

Bot, bot.🎶

Harry and Meghan DID focus their charitable efforts on people of color in Britain. Remember the cookbook?

But the ones in Africa are better. More authentic!

Perhaps someone should have a quiet word in Megs ear that she represents ALL people in the UK, not just a specific segment.

[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.]

Harry is such a dumbass.

He has to travel by private jet to protect his family but the Cambs can travel commercial with their 3 kids.

Try again asshole.

I don't understand why the BRF doesn't use videoconferencing for this kind of event.

You surely doesn't have to fly to an other country just to make a speech.

Wow, there are barely any comments defending the Harkles at all in that comment section. He's such a fucking idiot to agree to do that presentation after all that's happened. What a tool.

If Harry was smart (lol) he would have avoid the private jets to Ibiza (of all the places), the month before launching this project.

This project could be interesting, but it's killed in the egg. Nobody can take him seriously when his global carbon foot print must be the equivalent of 100 average british family.

R187 - Most of the women involved with the cookbook were Muslim, and Muslim isn't a race, it's a religion. They were broadly all ethnic minorities and included people of colour, but not specifically and exclusively. Balkan Muslims are white. Iranians are white, just as Greeks are, despite their "tint". A Nigerian Muslim and an Iranian Muslim are not equivalences in terms of PoC or ethnicity or even religious outlook - even there, it can be like drawing an equivalency between a Polish Catholic and a Cornish Methodist, or a Jewish American who practices Reform Judaism, and a member of the Heredi sect in Israel.

And all that said, if you read the lenghty, incredibly self-aggrandising introduction to the cookbook with the word "I" used in nearly every sentence, you would see that as usual, Meghan managed to make that project a showcase for herself, just like the VOGUE Magazine project. Both of which, by the way, were her own ideas. She wasn't "invited" to do the VOGUE project: she dreamt it up herself and then shoved it down the throat of VOGUE who of course made out they were thrilled but even if they weren't, as she well knew, wouldn't have been able to say, "Thanks, but no thanks."

She's full of hot air and only interested in her own image. The entity she's most interested in helping is Meghan Markle, former Nobody, now Somebody, and damned well going to enjoy Being Somebody if it's the last thing she does.

Looking forward to seeing her in tartan this weekend with a Dumbarton tartan beret on as she heads off to church with HM. I believe there is one - if not, she can always make do with Black Watch or Stewart or Campbell.

I wonder who is the brain behind Sentebale, Invictus and Travalyst.

I think Harry has a good heart, but not the brain to launch these by himself.

What will Travalyst actually do? So many words, so little explanation. Will Harry and Meghan be using its services in their travels?

Lol, no one knows and no one cares.

Many countries have heavily polluted rivers that people still use for water. There are any number of important issues these two could champion that would open them up to less criticism and possibly even garner praise. Given their lifestyle, sustainable travel shouldn't have made the list. They truly seem to be their own worst enemies.

^The new social media guy needs to get busy deleting comments on their IG account. Does anyone else think the Travalyst logo looks bit like a diamond?

Travalyst logo looks like some Hotel chain logo.

I still don't understand what Travalyst is about, besides buzzwords.

It sounds like an effort to make large travel-related corporations appear eco-friendly. Greenwashing. I would like to know how much money is going to the Sussex Foundation for this venture and how it will be used.

Exactly right. R201.

If your mission can’t be clearly communicated in a single sentence, it’s bullshit.

Chris Ship, Royal Reporter from ITV has said on his twitter that the money for the services of American PR firm Sunshine Sachs is not being taken from the Sovereign Grant but from the new Sussex Foundation Charity......

I am starting to think that the only qualification to be in PR is to be a complete moron. Every obvious PR stunt from the Harkles is laughably pathetic.

An American friend of mine (I'm in UK) just texted me to say he's currently in Amsterdam for a conference and saw Prince Harry today. My friend is not any kind of royal follower, so he had to ask someone who it was. Ha. But he said Harry is tall and handsome in person.

Just curious. How is Harry supposed to sign an Instapost?

Usually William and Harry use W and H.

Seconded, R207. "H" would be sufficient and not preposterously pompous like "The Duke".

[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.]

Travalyst is the way in which the Sussexes will now get free travel and accomodations. Expect to see the Travalyst hashtag on their Instagram very often.

Aren't Royals supposed not to take gifts of any sort?

R210, That's really pretty harsh!

Another brilliant day for the BRF. The Harkles take it up the arse in several places, including getting outed for using Sunshine Sachs, backlash on Harry's absurd "for the protection of my family" (My Family Is More Important Than Yours is the subtext here), Prince Andrew has an engagement cancelled so it isn't "tainted" by the Epstein mess, and East Sussex has enough signatures on a petition to enable a public discussion on ceasing to use the Harkles' ducal titles because it is undemocratic.

I imagine HM watching the vote in Parliament today and murmuring, "Welcome to my world, Boris."

So the Hairy Twat is doing a promo for some holiday/credit companies! ffs. Yea, everyone, get a "green visa" get yourself in debt the eco way! Support big companies that put local hoteliers out of business! I can't stand this creep, he always was a dickhead but I am glad people are seeing through his crap good guy facade now.

I found the petition - it seems to be growing.

Good for Brighton. I live just up the coast in Chichester and I detest the fact that these two cunts are using the name of Sussex. They are not my fucking Duke & Duchess.

Coming soon, BETHARRY34/6, On line eco gambling , shoe a horse for every grand you lose.

As a Duke he should simply sign "Sussex" and nothing else.

But since this was supposed to be him talking to his "followers" on social media, the less formal "Harry" would have been fine.

Apparently I missed the eco-travel hustle. These two are very tiresome.

[QUOTE] I am starting to think that the only qualification to be in PR is to be a complete moron. Every obvious PR stunt from the Harkles is laughably pathetic

The Welp Troll has SPOKEN!

[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.]

R219, I am not the welp troll. I do not know what welp means.

And furthermore, this continual outing of alleged trolls is getting very tiresome.

I love the waxworks gag!

Everyone should use their waxworks for all photos from now on.

R221, You're a Welp, I'm a Welp (so I've been told), we're all Welps if we don't toe the line with that asshole's point of view.

Anyone who rants about PR and accuses others of being shills/bots is the Welp Troll, or Welp Troll Adjacent.

And any self-appointed hall monitor who lectures or admonishes others about their on-topic posting is a pain in the ass.

The boring repetitive MM fan who comes on here and calls everyone some sort of troll.

RIP to Peter Lindbergh. I’d like to make a snarky comment that working with Meghan done him in - but I am genuinely sorrowful. I love his work and from all accounts he was a great guy.

Markle’s “tribute” to him on IG is all about her, naturally.

R228, too right. Her tribute was absolutely horrendous. She has no shame, no self-awareness, and no care of others outside of how it makes herself look. I was a fan when she first came on the scene. I thought, hooray! Bi-racial, hip, breath of fresh air, etc. Now I can't wait until her hour is over.

Wonder if she's offered the Queen wardrobe tips or anything yet?

This bird has no shame.

Just came here to say that comments at DL on the British Royal Family are even handed and fair 90% of the time.

Actual discussion can take place.

reply 223 "You're a Welp, I'm a Welp (so I've been told), we're all Welps if we don't toe the line with that asshole's point of view."

What asshole are you talking about?

^ Very likely about you, Frau.

Here's a comment of yours in another thread ...

[quote] Very few savvy readers and commentators are interested in boring Cathy Cambridge and her bald husband Normal Bill.—Proud CB Frau

... referring to William as 'bald' and to Kate as 'boring' ist just what the asshole mentioned above does all the time.

R223 Just stating my opinion on why many many people are interested in Meghan. Meghan is many things but she is not boring.

Also, I always sign my post so I cannot get mixed with this prolific posting "anonymous" person.

You should get yourself a real signature (a red one) instead in order to be somewhat credible.

R235 Since you do not have a signature at all should I assume you are not credible?

New to this blog and just want to learn the rules.

Are you 'The Duke' by any chance?

Because referring to the DL as a blog is something you'd expect this plonker to do, say respectively.

Cleeeearly "Proud CB Frau" is taking the piss. It's tragic that I have to point that out.

Oh God, what if I'm wrong. Please let me not be wrong.

R235 is here long enough to have special DL credibility status without using the red signature line. Being a noob, you can't see his cred status. In order to get special cred status faster than the average DL user you have to present hole to Muriel and the entire DL community. Alternatively, you can sign up and pay the monthly fee in order to enjoy special treatment.

The DL community would prefer you to present hole though.

I'm a subscriber who has posted several times on this thread and other similar threads, but I never sign, since I don't feel like being chased all over the board. I never use any nicknames or derogatory names on any of these threads, but I don't really mind the ones that actually are commentary about a person's character. Calling the York sisters ugly nicknames that mock their looks says nothing about their character, and a lot about the person who'd post that kind of thing. I'll sign this post, though, just to make the point that you can be anonymous, and still be a legitimate DL member, and not a troll.

Everyone must register now to post, r240.

Here a welp, there a welp, everywhere a welp welp . . .

R234 - Cathy Cambridge and Bald William understand that their very nonboring privileges come at a cost. Meghan Markle is certainly serving up nonboring gossip, but the outcome for her has better odds of turning up less than spectacular if she doesn't take a leaf out of her (still more popular in the polls) boring sister in law.

Boring Cathy Cambridge understands her job description better than Look How Woke I Am! Markle.

And, thus, Cathy Cambridge's survival chances in this game are much, much better.

I give the Sussexes three years before they are out of the BRF.

R237 No, I am not the Duke. I am just a person who wants some immersion in great culture and some great fun. Cannot afford a trip to NYC and the MMOA so I thought I would come hang out at the DataLounge for a while and let some culture rub off on me

R240 I understand and respect you feelings and wishes. Some Anonymous poster wanted to give me hard time so I pushed backed.

244 I agree with your comments and have posted like minded comments on other sites. The point I was trying to make is that the reason online MSM and tabloid print media cover Meghan Sussex to such a large degree is because she generates revenue and lots off it.

R244 Harry is too much of a coward to leave the BRF, if anybody will get to go, it's Meghan. I predict their crazy amazing divorce with extensive interviews. 2 years max.

R248 Why do you think they will divorce? I do not think they will ever divorce.

What the fuck is "proud cb frau" supposed to mean?

And what is it doing here?

Before the cunt gets snippy with me..

What the fuck is "proud cb frau" supposed to mean?

And what is it doing here?

R251, My understanding is that she means Proud Celebitchy Frau, although I welcome her correction.

R249 - That's what we all said about Charles and Diana. Oh, no, not the Heir, that could never happen! They'll just grin and bear it and show up in separate golden carriages to the coronation . . .

Harry's parents were divorced. Meghan's parents were divorced. Meghan was divorced after a three-year marriage. Statistically, divorce is more likely than not for these two.

As another poster pointed out, Harry probably admitted to himself during dark nights of the soul that he's nothing without the BRF - that's why he stayed in when he toyed with the idea of getting out - for five minutes, until he dragged the abacus out of the closet and did the maths of living solely on his $400,000 p.a. after taxes, no SG funds, and a greatly reduced supplement from Papa because Harry was no longer working for the Nation.

Meghan, however, is already More Than She Was Before . . . so she can, ultimately, shrug at a divorce, if one is in the cards, take the money, and run for LaCa.

Meghan is boring to me. (They all are.)

She doesn’t create anything but drama.

What makes me think they’ll divorce is:

1. Meghan discards people who are no longer useful to her. 2. As r253 points out, they are both products of divorce. 3. Two spoiled entitled cunts don’t usually stay married. 4. There is plenty of royal precedent.

Okay, this has probably been posted but I can't get the thread to refresh more than two comments at a time and it's taking forever so:

Per The Sun, HARRY and Meghan have snubbed the Queen by not accepting her invite to Balmoral.

R249 I think the Queen will give Harry an ultimatum: take your inheritance and leave the BRF with MM, but lose royal privileges and the dukedom, or divorce and stay in the BRF, save your royal status. I'm sure he will choose a carefree well-fed life under the same roof as all his royal relatives. He will never exchange this plate of gold for a plate of an uncertain future.

Oh my goodness no, R256.

One wonders if one ever invited them in the first place?

More from The Sun (Exclusive!!!!):

But this year the Sussexes declined, saying four-month-old Archie was too young.

William and Kate did go with their three children.

A source said: “Harry and Meghan had no plans to go to Balmoral this summer as they felt Archie was too young.

“It’s a bit odd, as his age didn’t stop them taking him to Ibiza for a week and then to see Elton John in France.

^ I mean, this is so stupid, it can't be true.

R259

[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.]

251 You are correct! I am Proud Celebitchy Frau. The trolls were also alluding to me so after a year of lurking I thought I would start posting!

*shrug*

You're not authenticated, you could be anyone.

R263 I guess I am going to have to get busy and get authenticated: To whom do I speak and where is their office.

R264, you need to change your official red signature to Proud CB Frau or these hoes will think you are several people trolling the board. The Welp Troll is targeting you.

Remember:

Sometimes, you're better off dead

The Welp Troll is here and is posting on the thread

The Welp Troll's mad, so unstable

Knocking down chairs and kicking in tables

On a Datalounge thread in a gay hoe town

Call the cops, there's a Welp Troll around

Running down, underground

To a dive bar in a Welp Troll town.

If you're a member, you're already authenticated.

Click the box next to whatever posting name you chose when you paid to join the Datalounge. It appears as an option each time you post, Einstein.

If you're a freeloader in addition to being an obvious moron, fuck off and die in a greasefire, cunt.

R266, you are the Welp Troll. Just fuck off with your racism, you fat bitch.

So I guess they weren't invited or they were summoned to Balmoral to be told off and refused to go.

The only thing worse than the Welp Troll are the Welp Troll accusers.

Ruh roh, the Harkles declined the Queen's invite to Balmoral, because little Archie is too young to travel.

There’s something seriously wrong if they’re turning down an invitation from HM.

I would have thought that even La Markle would manage to dredge up at least the pretence of respect for the Queen. But evidently not.

“Archie was too little” for Scotland, but not Ibiza & Nice?

Either they weren’t invited or they are so far gone they are even rejecting the woman who gave them the titles they smugly use every opportunity they get.

Something stinks to high heaven.

Some of us don't sign our posts because we have been here over 10 years and remember what it was like in the olden days when you could be stalked and harassed all over the DL. We didn't have the handy "ignore" button then (although trolldar was helpful). So don't just assume we are newbies or trolls just because we post anonymously.

[QUOTE] So I guess they weren't invited or they were summoned to Balmoral to be told off and refused to go.

What kind of fantasy world do you inhabit, Welpy? Balmoral sounds boring as fuck and COLD. The queen is an ancient, fussy spaz - why would anyone want to be around her?

Blocked, r273. You are a fucking retard.

Poor Master Archie. He’s not going to know ANY of his family. He’s got loads of cousins and they’ll all be strangers to him.

My mother did this to us. We have a HUGE family on both sides, with tons of cousins, and she estranged us from everyone because she was disordered. It was us against the world. She took us away from the safety net of family and isolated us. We are connected to some cousins on FB, but it’s not the same.

It’s a supremely selfish thing to do to your child.

So, Harry and Meg are snubbing the Queen.

Harry will leave the BRF to follow Meghan to the US then she will ghost him to marry Jeff Bezos.

If it comes to having to leave the BRF for Meghan, my guess is that Harry will follow Princess Margaret farewelling Townsend, not the Duke of Windsor clinging obsessively to Wallis.

He must have noticed Diana pulled the wrong card.

[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.]

Their way of trying to make the public love them is by trying to demonstrate that they are one of them and share their concerns whilst still clinging to the very worst royal excesses eg all the private planes, $75k engagement photo dress, couture outfits when doing social outreach to disadvantaged people, Wimbledon. The other members of the BRF may take private planes, but they do not do any do the other things mentioned. Charles, the heir, wears expensive suits, but many of which are 30 years old. The queen uses her own dressmaker. Etc.

I never thought I would dislike Harry, but now I do.

R280, Yes, I've gotten to the same point. I really never expected that.

I have an advantage on a lot of people, I never could stand Harry. I don't really like William, but Harry was always fake. William doesn't hide behind a smile or a joke, he is what he is.

A good part of the public never wanted to love Meghan because she's a mixed race american actress (don't come at me, you know it's true), but acting like Meghan and Archie have to be protected from British people is ridiculous.

Harry will pay for it and I'm so here to see his fall.

R282 It’s not true, and this nonsense claiming a significant proportion of people in the UK are racist has to stop.

It’s insulting, degrading and ignorant.

R283 Lol, sure.

Just look at comment sections under articles, twitter, listen to radio shows, UKIP.... A good part of UK population IS racist, which also explain the Brexit situation.

Denying there's racism in UK is just delusional.

I do not think the British public would have rejected a well-brought up non-Caucasian woman. Emma McQuiston seems to be doing a great job with Longleat and her children and marriage. She'd have been fine in the BRF but it would be a total no-fun zone compared to her present life.

We'll never know.

Emma seem to fit the BRF much better but she's pretty unknown in the UK and she didn't marry darling Harry.

I think the 'American actress' issue is a bigger stumbling block in the UK. I think the race issue is more important for Americans. And the reality is, some of us don't care about any of those factors. I had never heard of her until she was on the cover of Vanity Fair, so her career as an actress was moot to me. And I didn't know anything about her racial background until somewhere here spelled it out, and still don't care about that. I have seen some undoubtedly racist posts here, and elsewhere, and I just FF them when I see them here. I can't FF them on other websites.

I think a lot of people dislike Meghan for her behavior but for exemple people praising Kate for being an "English rose" are praising her for being white rather than for being such a great duchess.

I like Kate but she could do much more.

Haha, George looks like a little vampire without his front teeth.

R 287, I share your experience. No idea who she was, didn’t realize she was half black.

Some people can’t imagine not being able to see it, because it’s all they see. You know the saying “if your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks likely a nail”...

Charlotte looked like she wanted to do her royal wave, but had been told not to.

R284 Racism exists in every corner of the globe - but the UK is significantly more tolerant than most places. Brexit did not happen because of racism. It happened because many of us wanted some say in how many people come to live in our country - the same say the US/Canada/Australia et al all have. If you are ill-informed enough to think that’s racist, that’s your problem.

We (the UK) have more mixed race couples than almost any nation on Earth. It’s normal and unremarkable here.

Stop projecting - your country might be seething with racists, mine isn’t.

99% of people who dislike Markle do so because she’s coming off as an insufferably smug cunt.

R288 I do agree with you on the “English Rose” thing. Not just in relation to Kate, but any English woman.

It refers exclusively to white women and you don’t need to be peaches and cream to be English. It also seems more pointed now that Markle is on the scene.

So, on that, I agree.

Kate is looking stunning today. Her hair is so much nicer when it’s not so heavy, and I love that dress.

Love the $175 Michael Kors dress she is wearing and not a hideously expensive. She is really is the Duchess with the glorious hair!

Wtf is up with spazzy George and his mouth? Is he doing an impression of Joey Deacon?

Here they come on cue, the MM fans trying to derail the thread and get it shut down. They just can't take the Cambridge's looking so good.

I do love them pretending to be British though, the stupidity is outstanding. I'm looking at you R296

You will never find a Brit or European who admits there is racism in their country just like in the US.

R298 I'm French and I admit there's racism in France, no fuck off idiot.

If William is this machavillen bad man that cb and the sugars think he is then I wish he would just go all in on meghan, her friends and fans that say nasty things about children and family. Some actually wish the worst things so Harry and meghan can be on the throne.

Honestly, William is too lazy to orchestrate the press against his brother, but the schadenfreude must be epic.

This really is not surprising

[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.]

Ironic that telling Markle to "be who you are" is probably the worst advice anyone could ever give her.

Meghan is aiming the US, she doesn't care if she looks bad in the UK.

Oh no, r304, it's the best. It's how she exits soonest.

R305 It's not only about Meghan. If Harry wants "privacy" for his family, he should renounce his title and go live in America. Let him earn his own living. He cannot keep having it all. He is a donkey, he does what she says.

Harry is so, so stupid.

R264 I am honored that the Welp Troll choose me as a target. Better to be harassed than ignored!

[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.]

R310 I think this story about Harry & Meghan refusing QEII's invitation is 100% made up by the UK tabloid press. If QEII ask you to do something then it is basically a command.

It would mean she didn't invite them to Balmoral and it's not better.

Now, I would not be surprised if they're at Balmoral this week-end just to piss off Emily.

Ry 311 - Tend to agree. Either they weren't invited at all, or told HM at the beginning of the summer that they had other plans so don't botey oher (remember how they simply couldn't find a single date for the christening that didn't conflict with HM's and their friends' schedules?). I suspect they have already gotten word that the Queen is less than charmed by their debut as a ducal couple over the last year, and the negative PR for the BRF that Meghan has generated, especially as the Cambridges have been up twice to see Gran, and the Sussexes probably figure the Cambridges have already won that round.

If the Sussexes had brains, they'd had up to Balmoral this weekend to confound the tabs and make liars of them, but I'm not sure Meghan wants to compete with the image of the perfectly groomed English Princess sitting next to the Queen as they head off to Craithie.

And as for the Queen being "disappointed" - that's rubbish, too, as no one EVER knows what the Queen is thinking or feeling except those closest to her, and they don't talk to the SUN. It is likely more subtle shade the SUN is throwing at the Sussexes: "See? They hurt our gracious Queen's feelings, the heartless ingrates!"

^*don't bother

R313

R313 - I trust nothing "reported" by The Sun (i.e. The Dim), The Daily Express (i.e. The Slow), The Daily Mail (i.e. The Daily Fail) or InTouch (i.e. Out-of-Touch) as these tabloids literally make up stories. In the case of InTouch, they just print what their subscribers want to read such as "Jennifer and Ben Give It One More Try".

In the case of The Daily Fail, the online stories are simple for the purpose of driving the commentariat, feeding the trolls which also drives the commentariat and generating click$ for revenue.

R315 Most Frau at CB believe William has a affair because 1 crazy stan said so on twitter, maybe you should shut up sweety.

R315 - It is quite true that those entities make stuff whilst carefully adding in phrases like "a source close to the Palace" or "according to sources close to the couple" so that they're not on the hook, even though it should be obvious to a flea that no one really close to those entities would talk to the SUN.

That said, the tabloids do have some channels to and paid informants in Backstage At The Palace, albeit ones lower down than "close to", and not everything they report isn't corroborated elsewhere. The TIMES ran a few of the stories the tabs did, and they wouldn't have done so if they didn't think the story had legs, Tiaragate being one of them, and the abuse of staff by Meghan another. For the rest, Meghan handed the tabs all the ammo they could hope for with her series of blunders, all based on her assumption that no one could not adore her as Diana 2.0. What she forgot was that even Diana eventually cocked it up beyond repair, and Diana outclassed Meghan Markle the way a thoroughbred outclasses the dray pulling the milk wagon. Sorry, but it's true. In terms of beauty, photogeniety, charisma, breeding, class, charm - that mysterious something called "star quality", Diana obliterates that braying grifter from L.A. And yet Diana still failed and ended up pushing 40 with no place to go that fateful summer, ending by throwing herself into the arms of a rich child-man whose father was obsessed with sticking it to the British establishment. And we know how that worked out.

The tabs had been well aware of the depth of the problems in the Wales and York marriages for some time - the Palace for a long time poog-poohed the stories.

Guess who turned out to be right?

So where the tabs are concerned, keep a bucket of salt handy at all times - but don't assume that there's never any fire when you sniff smoke. They've been covering the royals for a long, long time and there are often nuggets of truth buried in the stories framed in hyperbolic fluff. You just have to figure out how to read between the lines.

If the Sussexes don't show up at Balmoral at all for the second year in a row since Meghan snagged Harry, you can put some money on it being an indication that there really is Trouble in Them Thar Hills - that the Sussexes are deliberately positioning themselves quite visibly as outside the BRF. Harry and Meghan may also figure, as noted elsewhere, that Kate's two outings this summer, sitting next to HM, impeccably groomed and giving off a Perfect English Princess and Future Queen Consort aura you can see through the limo windows, the Sussexes might as well concede that ground as lost.

Or they can get their arses up there to offset the perception that they've insulted the Queen - from whom, ultimately, all their blessings flow.

R277 - "He must have noticed Diana pulled the wrong card."

I wouldn't bet on it. Harry strikes me as being particularly lacking in shrewed analytical skills. And if it comes to it, it was Margaret who pulled the wrong card. Her marriage to Antony Armstrong-Jones was an unmitigated disaster. She should have been willing to give up the perks and moved to Paris or Brussels to be Mrs Peter Townsend. Actually, she would have kept the HRH, probably, and been HRH Princess Margaret, Mrs Peter Townsend, the way Anne was HRH The Princess Royal Mrs Mark Phillips (later Mrs Timothy Laurence). Her sister would have seen to it that Margaret was well taken care of financially.

If you look at it that way, Harry might very well conclude he was better off outside the BRF but with his wife and children, then inside it, divorced, and having to live like his Uncle Andrew. I'm not sure he wouldn't be right. It might not be the easiest bed he could lie in, but then again, it's a bed of his own making.

As was Margaret's.

Many "sources" are the Royal commentors.

They speculate and present those speculations as facts, so we have "The Queen organizes Meghan's birthday" or "Kate organizes Meghan's baby shower". If you read those articles, it's clear they have no source but present some more or less believable theories.

But, they also have real sources and don't forget that the Suxess themselves leak a lot and sometimes give fake news to journalists.

Emily Andrews have been tricked several times. The baby shower's stories came from the Sussex but they lied to her and then she was accused of lying.

Twitter is also a "source" for some journalists.

All that explain why Royal news are so not reliable.

R311, it’s a command to most people. Meghan does not give a single fuck.

As has been amply demonstrated.

[quote] Many “sources” are the Royal commentors.

That’s not actually true. I used to be a journalist (I know, I know...you don’t believe me, but I was) and I can categorically tell you that a royal source is someone who at least has some vague connection to the family. It might only be a caterer that worked there once, or someone that used to date a staff member who really only has access to rumours, but the “sources” are not fellow journalists.

Some of the sources are very high up indeed.

The reason a very good proportion of the royal stories turn out not to be true is that the people supplying them are not really in any position to know the stuff they are claiming. All the likes of Emily Andrews has to do is demonstrate to her editor that her source might be credible because they have some tenuous connection - that’s all. She doesn’t have to prove that what they are saying is true.

Also, the more damaging a story is to the reputation of a royal, the more likely it is to be true. No one will do a single thing about “HM is baking Markle a cake” because, even if it’s not true, it’s not damaging. But “HM had to stop Markle being rude to staff” is extremely damaging to Markle”s reputation so not only do the sources have to be highly credible in that instance, other supplementary evidence would be needed so that they could defend the story in court if it comes to it.

That there have been no attempts at refutation with regard to the worst Markle stories strongly implies to me that they are substantially true and there are a fair number of people willing to attest to it.

Shitting on staff is the stupidest thing this twat can do. Loyalty is considerably more valuable than any NDA because a source doesn’t have to go public to share information. And they will if they hate someone enough.

[Quote]He must have noticed Diana pulled the wrong card.

That's a big supposition there, r277.

[QUOTE] You will never find a Brit or European who admits there is racism in their country just like in the US.

I'm British and there is plenty of racism, especially in the small market towns. In the cities, Asian people and black people often hate each other. White kids grow up with black kids disrupting lessons and become racist that way. There is masses of racism.

“In terms of beauty, photogeniety, charisma, breeding, class, charm - that mysterious something called "star quality", Diana obliterates that braying grifter from L.A.”

-R317

I don’t like to pick on R317, but isn’t referencing someone’s “breeding” racist? Not specifically racist, it’s more classist, but I think it’s inevitably racist too. In the US, some people had ancestors who came over on the Mayflower. Some had ancestors who came over on slave ships. As cargo. And were sometimes literally bred. So I don’t understand how any reference to good breeding is acceptable. I can see “comes from a nice family,” because it is within people’s control to build a loving, considerate family that engages with their community.

And it seems like most of these aristocrat types are sleazy anyway. Prince Andrew being exhibit A.

First and second definitions of 'well-bred'

Meaning of well bred in English well bred adjective uk ​ /ˌwel ˈbred/ us ​ /ˌwel ˈbred/ well bred adjective (PERSON) ​ old-fashioned coming from a family that has a high social position: [ before noun ] a well-bred young English woman ​

mainly UK speaking or behaving in a way that is generally considered correct and polite

Eg, Diana did not exclaim FUCK as she saw the crowds from her wedding carriage.

R325’s last sentence. Exactly.

Also, sending thank you notes after the wedding.

I think it's really clear from Harry's choice of bride that he HATES his family. He hates what happened to his mother, he hates being used as a PR tool since birth, he hates having always been treated as second-best because he was second-born. Of course, he totally disregards the fact that he's still one of the most fortunate people on the planet, because Meghan feeds his 'poor me' syndrome.

He married a woman guaranteed to irritate his family: American, divorced, biracial, social climber and hustler par excellence, obsessed with Instagram-style fame, and disdainful of tradition. If they try to rein them in, her private PR firm cries 'racism.' If they let her do what she wants, she makes them all look like fools. It's a fairly brilliant revenge strategy for someone as dim and ill-educated as Harry is. He must have inherited Diana's cunning.

R315 - I am one of many crazy stans who believe he had 'something" with Rose Cholomondeley but I do not do twitter.

William probably does have a mistress. It's totally accepted in his social circle and has been for centuries. Now that Kate is through with bearing children, she take a lover herself. For them, the point is not what you do but what you are SEEN to do. William and Kate are seen to behave themselves properly, so they can fuck around if they please (in all sense of that term). If only Meghan and Harry would dress and act the part in public, they could do what they want in private and nobody would say boo.

*may take a lover

R329 - !00% agree with all you have said.

Many people on many sites very strongly disagree with me but I believe that Meghan's problems are as much (maybe more) due to being and acting like a Yank (US American) as they are to being bi-racial. I do believe that race enters into the equation but I believe being a Yank and acting like Yank is a larger factor in this mathematical equation.

I like Kate sporting a lighter hair colour, the reddish tinge suits her, it takes years off her face.

Speaking of her hair colour: She used to opt for a lighter colouring every time she was pregnant. Could it be that she's up the duff again?

They are NOT going to Balmoral because the Queen did NOT invite them. Period.

Charlotte's first day at school was on the fucking six o'clock news here in the UK. Charlotte's cute, but come on!

I'd be surprised if Kate has more children. They've already taken a little criticism for Louis, what with the-planet-overpopulated-another-Royal-mouth-for-the-public-to-feed, etc. She lasted through 3 miserable pregnancies, has her figure back, and is trying to polish her image for the fast-approaching day when she'll be Princess of Wales. Another baby wouldn't fit into any of that.

As others have pointed out, the use of the term "breeding" referred to Diana's background in aristocratic circles, the "to the manor born" aspect of her qualifications.

Not her skin colour, as those presenting Emma McQuiston as an example have also pointed out.

RE Diana and the wrong card (in re getting divorced), the wrong card that Diana pulled was thinking herself so adored by the People that she could wash the family dirty linen in public with the Morton book and triumph.

She didn't want the divorce. She wanted Charles at her feet, the royal family humble and apologetic, Camilla banished, and the People ready to storm the battlements with pitchforks and torches when they realised how ill done by Poor Diana was.

Instead, she got the boot. It was the Morton book that was the bad card, and she didn't pull it, she dealt it to herself. Once that cat was let out of the bag, the Queen called the Wales's in and said, Divorce. Now.

Margaret valued her status in Britain as an important royal more than she valued love and marriage with Townsend and less royal visibility and privilege. A truly terrible choice: Townsend was ten times the man Armstong-Jones was.

So both women were the mistresses of their own doom, as Catherine Deneuve would have put it.

And Harry has done the same.

It isn't the press, it isn't spiteful William, it isn't a racist BRF . . . it's Meghan and Harry, putting every foot wrong they possible can and then blaming everyone but themselves for the blowback.

R326 - People were astonished to get Thank-You notes hand signed by Diana dated the day after the wedding, posted from Broadlands.

Diana may have been many things, but unaware of the niceties of things, she was not.

It's too bad the government is in a state of implosion, or the BRF might already be considering the fastest way to get the Harkles out of Britain and out of the BRF aside from the all too brief Africa trip.

On the one hand, Harry suddenly removing himself and Meghan from the scene and renouncing titles, succession rights, etc., might prove a delightful diversion. Or, BREXIT could turn out to be a diversion from having the Harkles quietly walk the plank.

On the other hand, it just might be One Thing Too Many. Why, Fleet Street might have a complete breakdown if it had to cover both stories.

Don't hold your breath on the situation easing up soon enough to boot the Harkles out, as it appears that it's going to be Halloween in Parliament for quite some time.

Wondering about the ramifications if they move to the US (primary residence) before MM is officially a British citizen....what if she files for divorce? Is she setting up for a better position regarding Archie's custody and child support issues?

Harry will absolutely hate her in the end, but will be unable to express it - because of the racism bullshit they set up from day one.

It appears that the PM is headed up to Balmoral tomorrow, returning on Saturday, according to the earliest news of the day.

Which makes it unlikely that the Harkles will put in an appearance this weekend, as it would mean arriving on Sat., appearing in the Church Car Pap Sunday, and leaving right away.

I suppose it could be managed, though, give the miracles of modern transportation [sic].

One can only sympathise wit Her Majesty if that is the case, having to host an embattled, angry PM and the sullen, self-regarding Sussexes in quick succession in one weekend.

“As others have pointed out, the use of the term "breeding" referred to Diana's background in aristocratic circles, the "to the manor born" aspect of her qualifications.”

Right. And I think it’s objectionable to present breeding, AKA being born into an aristocratic family, as a positive trait. As a qualification, sure. “She’s a good choice because she’s grown up around all that.” But as a character trait? One that makes you superior to someone else? I think it’s awful. And I think it’s racist because, almost by definition, few American blacks are “to the manor born” types (I am aware that there are old school black social hierarchies in the US, but in previous generations they were not integrated with white “society.”)

It’s not a term I would use.

R334 - Personally, I think Charlotte is going to turn up a beauty. That photo of her looking toward the cameras from the side, close-up, alone - it can already be seen, a certain quality with the camera.

I think we should start preparing her to marry the future Crown Prince Christian of Denmark. All right, he's ten years older, but so what? He'll be 32, she'll be a beauteous 22, it will be perfect. I saw photos of Christian in Billed-Bladed a couple of days ago at the confirmation of Princess Ingrid of Norway (Christian's father is one of her godfathers).

Christina is now almost has tall as his Mum, with her dark hair, fair skin, and already, at 14, looking very handsome indeed.

I can see it now . . . the merger of these two ancient monarchies . . . Mary and Frederik, now King and Queen, sitting at the front of Vor Frue Kirke where they were married, across from William and Kate, either Prince and Princess of Wales or King and Queen, as well . . .

whilst somewhere in Brentwood, CA, Meghan watches the broadcast gnashing her teeth.

This simply must happen.

R341 - Oh for god's sake - nobody, anywhere, suggested it made one an inherently better person. But it's part of the package looked for when heirs to thrones marry. It's no guarantee of anything but a basic understanding of the landscape. Diana had it - hence those handwritten thank-you notes the day after the wedding that that crass grifter couldn't manage after a wedding on one-tenth the scale.

It has absolutely nothing to do with skin colour.

And it didn't make up for Diana being narcissistic, dishonest, driving her husband around the bend with her limitless emotional demands, or from making exactly the sorts of blunders Meghan Markle has made.

But it's nice if you can get it as part of the package, all other things being equal.

Find R334 and put her in the Tower.

I'm astonished at the delusion that kaiser and the cb assholes have. Go read their latest on meghan Harry and Kate. Apparently Williams men in gray ordered the 60 minutes hit piece. Harry and meghan are absolutely in the right for not going to balmoral to be with the vipers, especially after the vicious attack on meghan that was demonstrated by the car ride with the queen.

I don't even know why I go on there. I guess I'm a glutton for punishment. Will it ever occur to at least even one of them that maybe Harry and meghan are in the wrong and people who know more than them are right and aren't racist but are rightfully calling the sussexes out on their behavior. And William and Kate aren't evil. And they are the ones being treated badly?

I'm looking at the Charlotte and George school pictures and it occurred to me... George may have an emerging resemblance to George VI. I thought he was all Michael Middleton but if you look, you can see George VI. Charlotte is the Queen.

R324 Honestly stop with this racist narrative it's boring and it totally mitigates MM's offensive behaviour and lack of decency. Good manners are good manners regardless of colour. Also judging all aristocrats by the behaviour of one person, Prince Andrew, shows your lack of intelligence.

Thank you R325 R326

The CB twits are so stupid. I would assume the upcoming hit piece on 60 mins is more to do with a push for a Republic in Australia rather than a racism. The Harkles are an easier vehicle to push that agenda than the Queen, Charles or William.

'They are NOT going to Balmoral because the Queen did NOT invite them. Period.'

This is so funny. Whichever spaz posted this gets genuinely angry over what this couple do. Takes it really personally.

Charlotte and George have bags and shadows under their eyes already. Shame they didn't inherit William's eyes.

Charlotte is the Harrry of her generation, so will probably need to get a job when she leaves university.

God I miss the days of witty, literate queens in this forum.

^on this forum.

Bump

R341, you wouldn't use a particular phrase, bully for you, dear.

Your feeling that you are superior to those who clearly know more than you about Royal families and the aristocracy has been duly noted.

Now go fuck yourself, God knows no one else will.

[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.]

R350, but unlike dim Harry, she will very likely not have any problems with that.

Ha, now the Balmoral cold shoulder reason comes out: MM flew (commercial) to NYC to see her bff Serena play in the US Open which is on Saturday.

I hope she packed those aviator sunglasses and white fedora!

Jetting off to the US Open is no problem for Megsy as she and her pussywhipped hubby never got invited to Balmoral in the first place anyway.

Did she take Archie with her? (Granted, I can't be arsed to go to the Daily Fail to find out.)

That is sad; having close cousins is a great feeling. Little Archie's "aunts uncles cousins" will all be Celebrities, cause that's what's important to mommy and daddy.

[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.]

According to Hello! site:

The Duchess of Sussex has flown Stateside to support one of her closest friends, Serena Williams, who is competing in the final of the US Open. According to The Times, Meghan made the last-minute decision to fly to New York for the weekend. She boarded a commercial flight on Friday morning, leaving her husband Prince Harry and their baby boy Archie at home in Windsor. Meghan is understood to have travelled alone, without her staff, but she was accompanied by her security team.

The Duchess' last-minute trip will explain why she and Prince Harry have decided not to visit the Queen at Balmoral this weekend. The Sussexes were expected to travel to Scotland for Archie's first stay at the Queen's official summer residence, but earlier this week, it was reported that their plans had changed. Harry and Meghan see the Queen regularly when she is based at Windsor Castle, given that they live just a stone's throw away at Frogmore Cottage.

This may explain the many glaring missteps.

Hollywood PR would never advise properly for Royalty. Even the best of them would inadvertently advise almost exactly wrongly on everything to do with her new life. The two worlds are like chalk and cheese.

Also, her agent is there to handle "deals". What deals?

She's such a disaster.

They were never invited - have to save face somehow.

Those pesky Cambridges with their gorgeous photogenic kids and Kate with her glossy hair were getting way too much attention in the press. What is a crazy with jealousy MM to do? That's right, hop on a plane to NYC to get maximum press exposure at the tennis and around the city, pretending you don't want to be seen but making sure you have paps follow you everywhere and get your face all over the news. Then people will have forget the adorable little Prince and Princess but most of all people will have MM to look at rather than the willowy Kate with the bouncy shiny locks.

Oh dear someone is in a rage and hasn't thought about the consequences of this little weekend away.

whoops..... ^^ Then people will have to forget

You're a green activist and you jet across the ocean last minute to see a tennis game. Unbelievable. Emma Thompson laughs at Meghan and Harry!

I wouldn't be too surprised if Duke Pussywhipped and Duchess Diva had a minor altercation and leaving him and the kid for a couple of days is Duchess Diva's way to punish Duke Pussywhipped.

She's a horrible problem for the monarchy. Selfish, shallow, insincere, ignorant. The sooner the divorce, the better. Sure Dim will go through an embarrassing drunken binge for a few years, but we're used to that.

I'm hoping things turn out different for Charlotte, the new "spare". Charlotte has something her predecessors didn't have. An attentive, hands-on mother who grew up in a non-royal environment. Harry's mum was divorced from his dad and died while Harry was still young, leaving him somewhat parentless, as it doesn't seem like Charles was really the fatherly type. Andrew's mum was a young queen who, by all accounts, neglected her young children for most of their childhoods due to her responsibilities as monarch. And probably over-indulging the children to make up for it. Not sure what to say about Margaret, she was a force unto herself.

Say what you will about Kate, but her influence will hopefully keep Charlotte (and indeed Louis) from falling into the same traps.

[quote]Not sure what to say about Margaret, she was a force unto herself.

Yet funnily enough her daughter is supposed to be lovely (to be around, not to look at, obviously.) The son is a bohemian like his parents, rumour says, but he's been successful in business beyond just leveraging his relations.

If George is gay, Charlotte becomes a major figure beyond her presumed future status as Princess Royal (come the day. Anne will probably live to be 200 and still are wearing dresses - well - from 1986.) Charlotte will possibly, presumably briefly, be Queen and her children next in line. The rules right now for inherited titles say that adopted children can't and, usually, that heirs to a title have to be the product of parents lawfully married to each other. It presumes opposite sex. So they could change the rules for the monarchy but what a nest of complication it might open. I suggest if George is gay he will simply make it known his will reign for his lifetime and the throne will pass to either his sister or her first born.

IF George turned out to be gay, he could easily declare his sister's first born child to be his successor on the throne. There'd no need for him to hand over the crown to Charlotte.

He could declare Charlotte's first-born offspring to be his successor if that kid got born legitimately, born within wedlock, that is. At least according to the laws of succession presently in force.

Of course, there could be changes to the laws of succession, like the 2011 Perth Agreement.

R351 - I beg your pardon?

R374 - The Sovereign cannot declare anyone to be his or her "successor". The succession can only be changed by Parliament. Those days are over and have been for a very long time.

The succession follows the natural hereditary form UNLESS extreme circumstance causes Parliament to reconsider that succession, as it did for several days during the Abdication Crisis of 1936, when it considered bypassing Prince Albert, Duke of York, the next one on the line after Edward abdicated, for one of his younger brothers. If hathey had done so, there wouldn't have been a thing anyone in the BRF could have done about it.

Parliament can at will abolish the monarchy, and its approval is needed for any changeto the order of succession.

So, no, William can NOT "make" or "declare" Charlotte to be his "succesor".

R370 - Charlotte also has the advantage of being the only daughter between two sons, thus escaping "middle-child" syndrome and having her own special place in the family.

And never mind that "say what you will about Kate", as it has become quite clear that she has ten times the savvy about the role of the monarchy in Britain in one strand of that glossy hair than Meghan Markle has in her whole overweening body.

My estimation of Kate has risen an hundredfold watching her handle herself in the wake of the blaring surrounding the arrival of The Sussexes!

Her shrewd appreciation of what is really required of her now and later on as Queen Consort- a happy family life for the next heir, discretion, graciousness and warmth in her public role, rocking cradles rather than boats - has made Meghan look like the arriviste blunderer she is.

Small wonder the Queen made her quiet favor known through two, not just the usual one, photo op with Kate sitting next to her, off to church at Balmoral. Small wonder the CB fraus are writhing in anger and envy.

I think the Queen dislikes Meghan profoundly, wishes her at the bottom of the Thames, and after watching the Sussexes make one blunder after another, didn't even want them up at Balmoral. And as for that, oh, they see the Queen regularly at Windsor because they live so nearby - please.

The Cambridges live a half hour's drive from Windsor, and during their stays at Anmer Hall in Norfolk, live a stone's throw from Sandringham during the Christmas hols. They also live a stone's throw from BP at Kensington Palace.

The idea that the Queen drops in regularly to FrogCott to have tea with Harry, Meghan, and baby Archie, or that the three head to Windsor Castle for tea with HM once a week, is laughable.

Balmoral visits are a primal optic for the rest of the BRF vis-a-vis the Queen. Invisible, not to mention questionable, assertions of regular visits at Windsor are not.

The situation is clear: Meghan and Harry are on the outs with the entire BRF, including the Queen. They are destested by the rest of the family, and the feeling is mutual.

Good work, Meghan. In one year, you've managed to piss off the Queen, separate Harry not only from his brother, but the rest of the royal family, slip down in the polls, make your hated sister-in-law look like Princess Perfect, and nail your, "I'm only here to get my A-List celebrity status nailed to the mast, but as soon as I can, I'm going to get the fuck off this dreary island for sunnier climes" flag to the mast.

Off to the States for a two-day visit to see Serena play - as that moron, Kaiser, put it in her column today, "(the real queen)", forgetting that it wasn't Serena Williams who put that HRH in front of Meghan's name.

The sooner the Sussexes bite the bullet and get out of the BRF, the better for all around.

You couldn't make it up.

R370 The Queen's father was a spare and he turned out to be a great King. I think both Margaret and Harry both were overly indulged children because they both had only one sibling, the heir. Plus Harry has inherited the unfortunate traits of both parents

I do agree that the Cambridge children have a huge advantage having a mother like Kate. Say what you will about the Middleton's but they are a loving stable family and that has also rubbed off on William too in his younger years.

Ugh, I never thought about the succession consequences of George being (possibly) gay. What if he is gay, but wants kids? I could see him getting pressure both ways - to have kids or to not have kids. But I doubt he would consider having kids and allowing them to be skipped over. Which may put pressure on him NOT to have kids- to avoid the awkwardness. Crap. I hope the poor kid just gets to do whatever he wants. Having to do (and not do) stuff they don’t want is their job, but it shouldn’t be more restrictive for a gay monarch than a straight monarch.

Kate's sensible motherliness shows up really well in the "Charlotte starts school" clip. She must be conscious that Charlotte is hanging back and clutching her hand, both signs she's uncharacteristically nervous. It is, in fact, the first time that Charlotte herself is the main focus of the cameras.

Meghan, being needy herself, would probably crouch down and have a cutesy sympathetic conversation with her, but Kate knows that even looking at her would draw more attention to the kid. Instead, she holds hands, then when she has to let go, she keeps her body behind Charlotte, protecting her and also steering her in the right direction. Kate's focus is on the teacher and her body language is all about the normality of the transaction, which in the end is doubtless more reassuring than making a fuss about her. (After all, when the plane is doing something weird, you don't want the flight attendant to comfort you, you want them to go about their business like they've seen this 100 times before.)

If a putatively gay George wants children, R379, he'll do what lots of gay celebrities still do: a brief marriage to a suitable gel, and heir and a spare, and then an amicable divorce and a coming out. If he manages to do all this before meeting the love of his life, life is beautiful.

If not, and love of life can't be reasonable about George's peculiar duty to the succession, then they marry. If they have children which are provably George's biological children, he could apply to Parliament for a ruling.

Otherwise, when George dies Charlotte is next in line (as she is now), then Louis. Whichever of them is alive to succeed him, the line will then pass to their children. There is no need for anyone to declare anything if a childless George rules till he dies.

If George ever becomes King, it won’t be for at least 50 years.

Gay marriage is already legal in the UK, so that wouldn’t be a problem - and if we can’t, in 50 years, cope with the thought of two men having a child together, one of whom donates the DNA, then we don’t deserve a monarchy.

All these tedious history lessons from Americans are pointless. The law will change when and if it needs to.

Making Charlotte next in line, rather than after Louis, overturned 1000 years of protocol. Do you really think change won’t happen in the future?

You really don’t understand the UK at all, do you?

If George ever becomes King, it won’t be for at least 50 years.

Gay marriage is already legal in the UK, so that wouldn’t be a problem - and if we can’t, in 50 years, cope with the thought of two men having a child together, one of whom donates the DNA, then we don’t deserve a monarchy.

All these tedious history lessons from Americans are pointless. The law will change when and if it needs to.

Making Charlotte next in line, rather than after Louis, overturned 1000 years of protocol. Do you really think change won’t happen in the future?

You really don’t understand the UK at all, do you?

Er, you said what I said, R382.

George would still have to apply to Parliament for the change in protocol, because his would not be the biological children of himself and his marriage partner (distinction has to be made between a child brought into the world in this way and one born out of wedlock). But since they did overturn protocol to remove discrimination against girl children, almost certainly they'd do the same in this case.

So why all the eye-rolling and name-calling?

The Welp Troll at R381 will always fantasise about lavender marriages.

[QUOTE] Those pesky Cambridges with their gorgeous photogenic kids

They are both ugly. Tiny eyes with huge dark swollen shadows underneath. Charlotte has a meaty jaw and never smiles.

"IF George turned out to be gay, he could easily declare his sister's first born child to be his successor on the throne. There'd no need for him to hand over the crown to Charlotte."

R373 - It does not work that way. There is a law of succession and the reigning sovereign has NO say in the matter.. If George has no legitimate children, for whatever reason, the crown goes to Charlotte then to her first born if she has a first born. For all you know Charlotte may be a lesbian. If you are interested in a gay out-of-the-closet Prince of Wales-UK King, check out the mini-series "Henry IX" on Acorn TV.

R385, Calling young children 'ugly' is quite ugly, in and of itself.

I forget, why do Royals threads at times come to screeching halts?

Because interlopers don't want to pay to join DL when they only post in one thread.

Because causing popular threads to come to a screeching halt is Muriel's Brilliant New Business Plan.

R3, Because, people are very eager to post their thoughts, but very few people are willing to own them.

I think paying a small price to post is fair. Anyhoo, interesting times with Meghan. She really is just brazenly doing her thing, isn't she? This Serena Williams jaunt, wow, zero fucks given. She really is the best nighttime soap opera adventuress. As always, most of all I wish I could be privy to the conversations within the family about her and Harry. Come on, are there no aristos on this board with a little inside gossip they could throw our way?

Why is it only the most boring posts are ever double-posted?

I'm waiting for her security to tell people in Forest Hills they can't take pictures of the side of the stadium where she's seated and see how that works out.

I'm wondering how much the security team accompanying her on her last-minute jaunt is costing the hard-pressed British taxpayers and how that'll go down in the popular press.

I'm curious to see how it'll play out if Serena loses. She did the last time Megs showed up and her coaches were reported to be worried if she showed up this time.

I'm laughing because her PR people think her little jaunt across the pond will somehow offset the awful PR hole she and Prince Hairy have dug themselves into this summer.

Speculating about how Archie will grow up, I picture him a super-sophisticated young trendsetter. Think of all the "cool" factors in his life: royal, rich, UK/Euro, LA/showbiz, mixed. Meghan will use him for her own relevancy. Will they end up like Liz Hurley and Damien?

R338, it's none of those reasons. It's because people with no social skills start new threads without signalling this on the old thread. I'll try to post the link to the next one, but if I fail, search BRF Gossip and it should show you at least the last several threads, including the new one. Do this each time you see the Screeching Halt.

https://www.datalounge.com/thread/24603885

R396 - might you have meant R388?

Oops, yes, sorry.

The HS/Spazz troll is overwhelmingly likely to be a paid poster, he has been spamming with volume for a few years now. When the threads go subscriber only he cannot make his quota without being even more obvious, thus he frequently starts a new thread. It is also a tactic to get the majority, who have blocked him, to unblock him so follow the new thread. He has been red tagged and given time outs before, we can only hope it happens again. SS and their minions are aggressive.

Tip, reply to a new thread and it shows up in your follows. No reason to unblock him in his various guises.

I read that Serena has mixed feelings about Meghan showing up. I don’t blame her. Is this really necessary? It’s going to be largely about Meghan now, when Serena is trying to focus. Wimbledon is one thing, it’s BRF turf, but your high profile friend making a high profile overseas journey to watch? It’s a little questionable. Methinks Meghan just couldn’t resist the opportunity to have a big tennis event all to herself, no Kate. She’s probably envisioning an “iconic” photo of herself by the side of a winning Serena: Two strong American women of color, triumphant! Not to mention the chance to bust loose for a weekend.

Oh and maybe take a few meetings.

So in other words, this is the elite BRF thread.

Serena lost.

Some friend, the Duchess.

It's unfortunate for both Serena and Meghan, given how the whole "unlucky charm" story will go.

What a stupid, irresponsible thing to do, jetting across the Atlantic for a tennis game. Kate would NEV-ER.

^Pardon moi, tennis MATCH

MM really has zero style, she looked a mess at the tennis

I see her style as casual Los Angeles New Age showbiz hipster. Like, Jennifer Garner and that tribe of cool LA mommies. This, to a longtime royals fanatic like me, is unacceptable!

On the bright side, she sported a new wig and a bucket of bronzer.

[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 other thread has devolved into “rip her to shreds,” and not in any kind of amusing way.