SWC Show part trois

It's a downward spiral - the more the Sussexes flout royal protocol, do their own thing, and complain about public and press condemnation, the more the public and press condemn them.

Look at the thread's header. It's one of the Meg loon's posts. The thread was created by the Meg loon.

Beware of this thread.

Paranoid android Welp Troll at R2

The more people here talk about trolls, the more likely the threads are to be shut down.

Many thanks for the new thread.

What all of this has led to, and it makes it more interesting in my view, is the real question: whither the British monarchy now?

I think the recent action of the Swedish King and last year's warning by the Danish government to its royal family that only direct heirs from now on will get any state support for their "work" were shots across the bows of all European monarchies. The British royals appear to be ignoring all that. The institution has determinedly set itself apart as a special creature amongst special creatures, assuming that the less glorious "bicycle" monarchies have to do what they have to do but the British monarchy doesn't.

My guess is that the BRF, as it recovered from the Wales debacle 25 years ago, thought itself on safe and stable ground. The entry of Meghan Markle and the havoc she caused within 18 months of marrying the in real terms, if anyone is being honest, totally irrelevant sixth in line, and the Epstein scandal, should have demonstrated to them that they are not on stable ground.

In my opinion, the only safe way forward for the BRF, and lancing the Sussex-Cambridge-Windsor boil, is to do what the Swedes and Danes have done: restructure the monarchy to focus only on the direct heirs, and perhaps leaving the Sussexes their HRH titles, but no public roles whatsoever and no public funding. Let them take their little "Prince and Princess Henry Foundation" out into the competition of the big, wide, world, and see how much the Clooneys, Elton Johns, Jessica Mulroneys, Serena Williams, editors of VOGUE, etc., are interested in them when they are no longer doing photo ops for the BRF.

That's whither the BRF should go. Every Diana-Fergie-Andy-Meghan escapade has cheapened the BRF "brand" further. It is mistaken if it thinks it can get the brand back without having sustained damage - especially if it retains the Sussexes.

In my opinion, also, the BRF doesn't have a moment to lose, either. If it lets itself drift on, maintaining a dignified silence as the Sussexes trample over it, vainly waiting for time to blunt the Sussex's endless PR stunts, and vainly pushing the stolid Cambridges forward, the BRF is making a grave mistake.

Meghan is not that bad and Cathy is not that great.

Both of these women are really big fat nothings.

Swipe for the royal events for Remembrance Day. The Royals will have to suck it up and play happy families.

Kate's on the Hello cover.

Swipe for some lovely photos of the young Elizabeth and her family.

Apparently, Camilla will accompany Harry and Meghan this week on the couple's first trip to the Field of Remembrance.

Clearly, the royal family is trying to bring the Sussexes back into the fold, OR the Sussexes have simply gotten their way and the family are just going to let them do their own thing.

Some people never learn.

HM does have a sense of humor.

Previously Harry handled this event alone. He used to do this event with Philip and then assumed sole responsibility after Philip retired. Perhaps Camilla is coming along this time so that next year she can take over the event altogether (should Harry and Meghan not be a part of the BRF next year)? That way, next year when Cams takes over the BRF can say this was all according to plan. As impulsively as Harry and Meghan behave, the BRF have to plan in advance should the Harkles leave.

The BRF excels at forward planning. They changed the primogeniture rule for royal heirs once they knew Kate was carrying a boy, realizing the rule wouldn't affect who got the throne for at least another generation, when George has children. (Yes, Charlotte is ahead of Louis now, but since neither will get the throne it's not a big deal.)

Is this the new Megham thread?

No, the BRF is not "trying to bring the Sussex back into the fold." It will be Remembrance Day and this is their job for the moment. As the poster said, Cam chaperoning is a look forward.

The Welp Troll is banned from this thread. They got the other one paywalled for ranting on and on and on about tro*lls, which triggered Muriel.

Nobody on here is a paid poster. Being positive about someone does not mean you are being PAID. Please do not encourage their insane rhetoric.

Most of you cannot start threads. I can. Be careful.

Yes, the Harkles are "that bad." Attempting to quash opinions by the media and citizenry is worse than "that bad."

OP / R16

[quote] Most of you cannot start threads. I can. Be careful.

Ahem, sorry for breaking it to you, but MANY people here can start threads.

LOADS of us can start threads, r16 you berk. Indeed, someone just did, also part 3.

If you block the troll, you will deprive it of opportunities to threaten you.

What the hell? I've seen you claim you banned people from threads before but I thought you were a newbie who confused ignoring with banning. No, you can't ban anyone, and yes, almost everyone here can start threads. You don't have to be a paid member.

The Meghan-hater racists from the Daily Fail comment sections are a scourge on the place, but stop pretending you're working for Datalounge.

The only racists here, r21, are the Meghan-worshippers who would not give her the time of day if she wasn't half-black. The rest of us don't care about her skincolour, only her behaviour.

R12 - It still amounts to throwing the cloak of respectability over the Harkles by having Camilla attend, like a minder of two naughty children who might get into trouble left to their own devices.

The BRF never learn from their mistakes. They're clearly prepared to grin and bear the Diva Duchess thumbing her nose at them because they're afraid of their own shadows.

They deserve their cheapened brand.

Haha-be careful! What is the poster going to do-put us all on ignore? We are positively quaking in fear.

Happy that the mods refuse to tolerate the Meghan hate.

Go get yourself some super HIV, you fucking piece of Meg shit.

R26, I LOVE how angry and inarticulate I can make you! I really am THAT powerful. Look at you fuming because the mods deleted your hate thread.

My thread?!? Hahahahaha you idiot, MY thread is still here!

R28, I'm the OP of this thread, so where is yours, Fuglicia?

Yep, Meg's bellycupping again.

UGLY.

Charlotte has a heavy jaw, hooded eyes and a face like a bulldog, and her eyes are a murky green like Kate's, not blue like William's aa one troll here once claimed.

UGLY

George looks like a green, lumpy faced zombie and that heavy Windsor jaw on Fuglotte is going to be problematic later on.

Harry and Meg were relegated to the shitty seats at the Remembrance Festival. Again.

[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.]

They're just behind Charles, so if they are in Siberia, he is too. K and W have been exiled to a different balcony.

r35 W&K are front and center, right next to the Queen. They couldn't be more prominently placed if they jumped out in front of her. I see Kate is wearing HM's pearl drop earrings tonight, on personal loan no doubt.

H&M are in the back across the way from the Gloucesters and the Princess Royal.

Now is this THE real "Part Trois"??? I am almost a paying member and am just surprised there are only 35 posts, being Remembrance Day and all...Isn't anybody going to analyze the faces in today's DM photos??

The threads keep getting shut down by the Megstan/Harry Styles obsessive troll, r37. No joke. 5 separate thread were shut down within an hour after that one pro-MM poster was contradicted by multiple posters on the last big BRF thread yesterday.

So now, no one knows where the BRF threads are, hence, no posting.

Threads which feature racist discourse about 'nappy' hair are going to be nuked. I warned you before that the Spaz Troll was powerful here and always goes up against the Welp Troll. You fools have cultivated the Welp Troll bc it hates Meghan.

Oh bitch off r39. Show us the EXACT posts where that type of crap is, that discussion. As we say here: LINK please.

I haven't seen that type of openly racist crap here, except a poster TRYING to get shit shut down b/c they don't get their way. 99% of the discussion is typical bitchy DL froth as has been here for decades. We're NOT taking the bitch for the 1% either.

And stop your crap about named trolls. None of us give a rats ass about it or follow your insipid naming conventions ("Spaz", etc). No one is cultivating anyone here ffs. Bitch please.

Meghan are Harry are just behind the future king and the current prime minister. I don't see how that could possibly be considered Siberia? Only a racist troll would see that as SEGREGATION.

Kate does not look well. Skin sagging, and tired. Aging poorly compared to beautiful, golden skinned Meghan. Black don't crack.

I hereby dub r39 the "FCB Troll". Since we're on a troll roll and all.

Fuglotte and Goblin George.

r41 they're clearly in the Royal Box. They just aren't up front and center, like W&K. But as 6th in line for the throne, that's appropriate. Wtf does "segregation" have to do with it? That's YOUR word, no anyone else's. Stop putting negative pejorative spin on casual and factual observation.

Kate does age herself with the heavy black eyeliner. She's experimented with less of it, to good results. She could change up her makeup. Meghan looks very good lately, hair and makeup wise. Her hair looks lustrous - there may be help there (extensions? I can't tell) but it's used to good effect.

I think they all look stressed myself. Gosh I love these threads. Why can't we keep having friendly chitchat about these British Royals? We sure have struck a nerve. I love the daily analysis. I don't like too many mean statements, but this IS DL ....snarkiness and humor keep me coming back. I hope these threads continue.

I've been here 20 years. These threads are always here.

No mean statements? You would have died a painful death if you were on the DL of old. Some of the stuff posted about celebs was outright vicious. Today's DL is tame and mild comparatively.

Thanks R38 and R36... I've been lurking here maybe four years and it's become quite an addiction....right up there with morning coffee... I love all the snarkiness, and humor and great insights. I just skip over the comments I don't like. We should now get ready for the next thread. What comes after trois in French. We have to get around Muriel.

Quatre is next but they don't usually shut it down after 50 posts.

Ppl who say M bought herself a new face are wrong.

Meghan is 18 in the picture above. Same face she has now.

Meghan looks pregnant.

Women who go bare-legged in the cold months look so silly. It was a trend years ago, but that’s passed, thank god.

[QUOTE] Go get yourself some super HIV, you fucking piece of Meg shit.

Not only are the Meghan haters racist, they are also homophobic. Look at this one, furious and screeching abuse. How easy they are to bait.

Meg’s has had “work”: if you look closely and observe her facial movements (easy to ID in slow mo video)

-rhino

-blephs

-forehead

-jaw

-in addition to Botox and fillers: at times more than others

*also observe the balcony appearance today, she demonstrates an enlarged L philtrum/cupid’s bow

People who know what to look for can see the telltale signs of cosmetic procedures, so R48/R49 your comparisons are irrelevant.

R52, if you can't provide before and afters, your words are worthless. She had a pronounced cupid's bow as a child. She had a defined chin and jawline and cheekbones as a teenager. She had the ski slope nose with the retrousse tip then too.

To me they all look like they're being held hostage, except H & M. They're the only ones smiling.

R52, can you please clarify? What did she have done to her forehead or jaw? She wears her hair scraped back a lot, surely you'd see some scars.

[QUOTE] To me they all look like they're being held hostage, except H & M. They're the only ones smiling

Yes, agreed! They are the only ones who actually look in love. William looks mullish and bad tempered. Kate looks nervy and very tired and worn round the eyes.

[QUOTE] [R52], can you please clarify? What did she have done to her forehead or jaw? She wears her hair scraped back a lot, surely you'd see some scars.

The Megs detractors can never provide pictoral evidence, because there isn't any. At most, she's had a rhinoplasty to narrow her nose and the standard forehead/cheek Botox.

I am a Kate fan, but have always thought she would benefit from some cosmetic and surgical treatments, specifically, a lower bleph, a laser or chemical peel, more botox, some filler on her naso-labial folds, and some lip filler. Contrary to popular belief, the use of lip filler does not have to result in a ridiculous trout pout. It can be used to replace what has been lost through age or smoking.

And since she doesn't do her own hair for appearances, she could find a hairdresser who also does makeup. Plenty of them do, and they can always get a better effect than non-professionals.

Either MM is pregnant in that inappropriately revealing black jacquard dress or she is definitely shaped like a barrel.

She is only 6 months post partum but she does seem a bit bigger than she was in south Africa, so she might be pregnant again.

[quote] Kate looks nervy and very tired and worn round the eyes.

I have been informed that Kate is in early days of pregnancy #4.

Hence why she has not looked particularly well in her last several appearances.

I thought H&M looked great here. The black dress was appropriate and retro. She looked elegant and well put together. Harry looked about as good as he can today too. Two thumbs up for them. W&K looked a bit tired and severe otoh.

[quote] I thought H&M looked great here. The black dress was appropriate and retro. She looked elegant and well put together.

Nice dress.

However/

1) Too much chest acreage for the solemn event.

2) Dress would have looked lovely on someone taller with a small waist. On M, it emphasizes her plump and square torso.

3) With the weather as it is in London, bare legs come across as inappropriate. As do her blue shoes with the black dress.

Overall: NOT appropriate nor elegant (for the event or on her body habitus).

Disrespectful For The Memorial Ceremony

Ok R63 agree with points 1 & 3. I thought her shoes were black. But I still think this dress flattered her figure. There are many women who are Skippers rather than Barbies ya know.

Yes too low-cut for the event. She looks good in black.

Ya, it looked like a cocktail dress. Cannot see the point of bare legs in cold weather, especially with a black dress, except with a formal gown and formal open-toed shoes. A black dress looks fine with black tights. I would have thought the shoes were black suede.

[QUOTE] I have been informed that Kate is in early days of pregnancy #4.

Look at Joey Deacon here pretending to have connections at KP! Must be a paid shill, eh, Welpy? Who else but a social media manager would know such a thing?

NOBODY under 40 celeb land wears tights to a public event. Bare, tanned legs are de rigueur.

I think Meghan is pregnant, also.

Did the couples interact at all? I think it's really sad about the brothers.

She's not IN "Celeb land".

She's in "Royal Land", and that makes her gauche for not wearing tights.

[quote]She's not IN "Celeb land". She's in "Royal Land", and that makes her gauche for not wearing tights

^^^THIS

[quote] Look at Joey Deacon here pretending to have connections at KP! Must be a paid shill, eh, Welpy? Who else but a social media manager would know such a thing?

Not “pretending”, R66.

Take it or leave it.

*By the way, R66, we also have your number.

Ahem...I was wearing tights to this event.

[quote] Women who go bare-legged in the cold months look so silly. It was a trend years ago, but that’s passed, thank god

Agree R50.

[QUOTE] She's not IN "Celeb land". She's in "Royal Land", and that makes her gauche for not wearing tights

Modern royals are indistinguisable from celebrites. Why shouldn't M have bare legs at an inside event, like everyone else? So pleased to see her shrugging off another convention and fucking with TQ and the racist haters here.

[QUOTE] Ahem...I was wearing tights to this event - Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Of course you were, Conformity Kate. Every rebellious bone in your body has been ground down into splinters.

Yes, you are pretending, R71. Just like you pretend to have access to the royal finances. The gullible fools here give all MM haters a free ride, but it's clear to anyone else that you're a catfishing charlatan.

Fortunately, R75. With the country in the state it's in today, the last thing anyone needs is for the future Queen, and Queen Mother, to be anything other than reassuring.

Markle's hairline is literally on the top middle if her head.

[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.]

She's not worried about the Mexican cartels. She probably wishes the cartels get him out of the picture for her.

R61 - Informed by who? The Daily Express, which has been pushing the Kate is Pregnant Again, Here Are the Signs! story for the last three months?

Meghan looked overdone again, as usual, last night, and respectably dull today. The jacquard dress is actually lovely in and of itself - if you have a 20" waist and are going to a cocktail party not a Remembrance Service. She cleaned up fairly nicely, I will say that, for the concert, she just always managed to look as if she wandered onto the wrong set, got the memo, but misread it. It's way too cocktail a look for the event.

She and Harry were, as they were last year, put in their places by being seated in "second rank royals" rows, and as far as possible from Kate and William. I did not see one single photo of either couple so muc as glancing at the other. Kate's dress was lovely - understated yet elegant. And the Queen, if I may so, looked terrific in her black dress and those demmed pearls.

As for placement at the Cenotaph service today, Meghan was appropriately placed well out of the orbit of the Royals Who Matter - next to Pss. Anne's nonroyyal hubby and the Way Down the Line Sophie Wessex (fond as we are of her). The lines are clear and it's at least a relief to see the BRF not bending over backwards to show how much they love M&H, contrary to recent news stories. Too bad Camilla had to ditch the Field of Remembrance, leaving the, er, field to Meghan.

HELLO and the rest are all twisting themselves into corkscrews explaining why Meghan and Kate are never together at this event. They aren't wrong, but at least it serves as a reminder to Meghan that no, she isn't Kate Middleton's equal and never will be.

Is this the last we'll see of the Sussexes till after the hols.?

It would be delicious if Kate were up the duff again. Harry becomes 7th, Archie becomes 8th - tell us why we're paying for renovations of their home again?

That shit-stirring moron, Kaiser, on Celebitchy, refuses to acknowledge that the seating at the concert last night had anything to do with rank, but actually used the phrase, "the Queen sat the biracial duchess in the back of the bus. . . "

Those imbeciles really think that the seating at the concert had nothing to do with rank, but that somehow the wife of the sixth in line belongs next to the Queen like two future Queen Consorts - especially after said wife of sixth in line ditched her duty to the British government on her last tour and broke all the rules airing her Woe Is Us! documentary whilst the Cambridges were on an important tour of Pakistan, sticking it both to the Cambridges and the British government - again. Yes, Meghan, just because she's biracial, and despite all her idiotic behaviour over the last year, deserved to sit next to the Queen.

Back of the bus my arse. Meghan Markle should be down on bended knee thanking God she's in the frame at all.

R77 - Hear, hear. And that is just the function royalty ought to serve as the political arm tears things apart. That is what the royals are supposed represent: stability and reassurance in times like these.

R75 - As usual, you use mindless memes to create straw men, or women in this case. Kate never HAD a rebellious bone in her body - this is her actual nature, and that's why she makes such a good choice for the role she has carry out.

Of course, to the PC Brigade, anyone who isn't ready for the barricades is somewho psychologically deformed.

It's the limelight whore who can't stand the fact that she will always be behind Kate who has the psychological problem. Because if you don't like hierarchy, don't marry into a hereditary monarchy where birth order defines your place.

Meghan doesn't mind taking the perks of that institution, she just figures she shouldn't have to recognise that she owes something back for the leg up it gave her onto the world stage.

A position she tried for more than a decade to obtain for herself, but just . . . couldn't.

Why should Kate rebel? Against what? Her top rank social position, enormous wealth, future as an anointed Queen, adorable children, beautiful wardrobe, splendid city and country homes, affection of the nation (she comes out 4th in the polls to Meghan's 6th these days), approval of her grandmother-in-law the Queen?

Really? REALLY?!

Kaiser is a racist who would shit all over MM if she were not part black. It's all about race with the CB crowd.

R84 - In a nutshell - absolutely.

The DM says that the heart-shaped ruby earrings Meghan wore to the Albert Hall last night were £25,000. That must be a misprint, no?

I will give Meghan credit for going with a picture hat on the balcony, I like picture hats and I am sick of tilted fascinators. However the brim is a little too wide and the overall look is too Pilgrim-ish.

I’ve posted on other BRF threads that have been suspiciously shut down and removed. (The last one less than 12 hours ago on the “Prince Harry Drops Number 2 Baby Hints With Meghan Markle”).

In those threads, I’ve described my remarkable friend who has an incredible track record with BRF predictions. Truly. We are now keeping track because there are so, so many: little and big things (for example, narrowing down the date of Archie’s birth announcement to May 5th OR 6th, 2019 AND that The Cambridges would experience plane turbulence on their Pakistan tour that would indeed affect it.)

Once again, I will reiterate what said friend has stated recently:

1) Kate is pregnant (in VERY early stages) with baby number 4: a girl

2) The Cambridges are in a good place now maritally, especially following the birth of Louis. Things were a bit dicey after Charlotte, but that has resolved

3) Despite pretensions otherwise, friend DOES NOT see baby number 2 for Sussex. (Apparently a great deal of acting -or clamoring- for attention)

4) There are shifty things occurring with Sussex finances, hence why the BRF separated their financials from The Cambridge couple, poste haste following the Oz tour

5) There is also another “shady” dealing that had William drop the Sussex couple “like hot bricks” this year (according to RR, Richard Palmer). I mentioned I would leave this to others’ imaginations as it is a hotly- debated subject.

6) Despite much PDA and smiles, all is not well in the Sussex marriage behind closed doors.

7) H and M are rarely at Frogmore.

8) H and M are also on track for a divorce as well as their N. American “tour” where they may be “restless” and “moving about a bit”

Of note, friend also predicted that Markle would be placed on the Remembrance balcony with Sophie: friend stated Cam is fed up and William strongly did not want M positioned next to his wife. BRF would place her in a position next to someone who “they could trust to make superficial talk with Markle and yet keep her from harming” (aka Sophie).

There is a hateful poster we suspect is closing threads. This troll attacks many posters personally, calls everyone the “Welp” Troll/“Welpy” or “Spazz”. They may be working for The Harkle’s PR group, Sunshine Sachs who support others (like Harvey Weinstein and Michael Jackson). They apparently are notorious for dirty tactics.

R61

M and Sophie today

The poster you write about has been here for a few years, R88. He originally posted heavily about a boybander. Now he posts about the boybander and MeAgain using very similar tactics and scripts.

He starts threads when they go payroll, less traffic makes his posts stand out too much, I suspect.

Thousands upon thousands of posts - draw your own conclusions.

The tactic of getting threads closed or even deleted has been used for both of his clients/obsessions, take your pick as to how you frame his posting patterns.

That is one dated-looking, ugly hat.

[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.]

[QUOTE] Fortunately, [R75]. With the country in the state it's in today, the last thing anyone needs is for the future Queen, and Queen Mother, to be anything other than reassuring.

How is a woman wearing tights 'reassuring', you sexist dolt? The millennial/Gen Z support for Meghan is much more 'reassuring' in relation to the BRF's long term survival. Should she leave, that support will vanish and be replaced with suspicion and dislike.

Kate will be queen when she is 60, perhaps even older, and she'll never be a Queen Mother, unless George dies and Charlotte is queen. What an unintelligent person you are.

[QUOTE] They aren't wrong, but at least it serves as a reminder to Meghan that no, she isn't Kate Middleton's equal and never will be.

Meghan is superior to Kate. She is a talented actress who worked for seven years on a popular TV show. Kate trailed round after William for almost all of her 20s, not working at all.

Not only did they make poor Sophie stand next to MM, the DM called her Sarah Ferguson. Talk about adding insult to injury!

Was just looking at pictures of Diana in her black “revenge dress.” She did rock it, but what a slutty dress!

MM thinks she's channeling Audrey Hepburn in that hat. But she looks like a toadstool, haha.

[quote] Meghan is superior to Kate. She is a talented actress who worked for seven years on a popular TV show.

Have never understood the M vs Kate obsession. They are VERY different as are their roles. It’s like comparing apples and oranges. Why would you do it, R94?

And as far as superior or inferior, do not understand where you are coming from. Just b/c M was a supporting actor on a soap cable show (who really did not have acting chops , I thought), who was rumored to have gotten the position via her ex-husband, Trevor; does that make her superior?

If we are going by CURRENT standards, Megs seems to be struggling at the moment. Kate does not. K seems to be held in high regard NOW by most.

[QUOTE] It's the limelight whore who can't stand the fact that she will always be behind Kate who has the psychological problem

This is fiction. If MM had a problem with hierarchy, she would never have married Harry. There has never been any sign that she cares about being viewed as 'inferior' to Kate. In fact, she most likely feels sorry for Kate. As the future queen, Kate has to allow her face to collapse like an old sock (like HM), whereas M can nip across the pond for a sneaky Botox top up, as nobody cares too much what the wife of the sixth in line does.

Meghan has a degree of freedom which Kate can never have.

[QUOTE] In those threads, I’ve described my remarkable friend who has an incredible track record with BRF predictions... for example that The Cambridges would experience plane turbulence on their Pakistan tour that would indeed affect it.

This is the funniest and most stupid thing I have ever read on threads which are reliably brimming with all that is idiotic. Your clairvoyant friend predicted 'plane turbulence'?

Some individuals are tired of the “plastic look” and prefer natural appearances.

It’s obvious to the trained eye who has been “nipped” for “sneaky” plastic procedures. (“Sneaky” also describes Markle and her confused Stans, but that’s another story....)

In fact, most of the Brit Aristos could care less about undergoing the celebrity hoohaw of cosmetic procedures (thankfully). The $$$$$$ and pain are just not worth it. And the long term outcomes. Thankfully Mirren and Dench look far better than say, Madonna and Meg Ryan. ‘Tis a shame, really.

Another reason Meg does not fit with royalty.

[quote] Your clairvoyant friend predicted 'plane turbulence'?

She did indeed, R100.

[QUOTE] And as far as superior or inferior, do not understand where you are coming from. Just b/c M was a supporting actor on a soap cable show (who really did not have acting chops , I thought), who was rumored to have gotten the position via her ex-husband, Trevor; does that make her superior?

Yes, it does. She had a decent sized role on a long running show which was syndicated to the UK and Europe. It had great viewing figures, which is why it lasted ten years. Acting is one of the most competitive professions there is, yet Meghan thrived. Kate spent seven years as William's housewife, unemployed and lazy.

[QUOTE] Thankfully Mirren and Dench look far better than say, Madonna and Meg Ryan. ‘Tis a shame, really.

Judi Dench had a major face lift a few years ago.

[quote]The poster you write about has been here for a few years, [R88]. He originally posted heavily about a boybander. Now he posts about the boybander and MeAgain using very similar tactics and scripts. [quote]He starts threads when they go payroll, less traffic makes his posts stand out too much, I suspect. Thousands upon thousands of posts - draw your own conclusions. [quote]The tactic of getting threads closed or even deleted has been used for both of his clients/obsessions, take your pick as to how you frame his posting patterns.

R93 / R99 / R100 / R103 -

We are on to you as described above.

Cease your TROLLING and attacks.

[QUOTE] Have never understood the M vs Kate obsession. They are VERY different as are their roles. It’s like comparing apples and oranges. Why would you do it, [R94]

Why would I do it? In response to the plethora of posters who compare MM unfavourably to docile Kate Middleton. Why are you chortling about MM being placed on the 'inferior' balcony if you think they shouldn't be compared?

^^^^R106:

Harkle’s PR: GO AWAY!

"Meghan is superior to Kate. She is a talented actress who worked for seven years on a popular TV show."

LOL - she's such a talented actress that that was the one and only decent acting job she got in 20 years of trying, and her first husband got her that job, allowing her to skip the screen test.

Kate's skill set brought her the one thing she ever wanted. Meghan had to have successive husbands get her want she wanted.

Kate got the bigger prize and the bigger royal role; Meghan's career was about to dive as "Suits" was fizzling out and she hadn't a single professional prospect ahead of her at 35.

Harry rescued Meghan from the oblivion she was terrified of. Kate, on the other hand, moved way up the ladder at one stroke, and never had to look for another rung - the next rungs up were a given.

Give me Kate's acting skills, any day.

Yeah, Meghan was so talented as an actress that at 35 she didn't have bins big enough to hold all the scripts from Disney, Marvel, and Martin Scorcese that she was rejecting because they weren't on her level.

R105, I was first told that I'm a PR worker for SS fifty threads ago. Hardly new. You superstitious dunces who believe that your psychic friends can predict plane turbulence are typical tinhats, seeing conspiracy theories everywhere you go.

[QUOTE] Meghan's career was about to dive as "Suits" was fizzling out and she hadn't a single professional prospect ahead of her at 35.

Suits carried on for another four years after she left. You clearly know nothing about the industry if you think an actress is over the hill at 35. Maybe back in your era, the 1950s, but hardly today with dozens of actresses in their late 30s and early 40s still playing romantic leads. As a biracial actress, who is very attractive in a natural way, M would still have been hugely in demand.

Hugely in demand where? She's had one major acting credit and even with that, 99% of people had never heard of her.

Even dippy actresses on the CW have a higher profile.

There is a nagging familiarity about her look today..... (to be fair, Kate had a similar one some years back)

Kate's similar previous look.

R82-Kaiser on Celebitchy has a weird axe to grind. Her real name is Chandra DelGupta, and she's a blogger living in Virginia. Some theorize that her own background as an Indian and England's role in colonialism fuels her irrational hatred. It's ironic to me that she chose the name Kaiser, given what we know of Kaiser Wilhelm. Then again, given her dictatorial temperament, maybe it's 100% apt. I think that's in part why we get so many Frauen from Celebitchy. They're refugees who've been banned for disagreeing with her. I don't know why I'm so oddly fascinated with a Frau site, but there it is.

The Duchess of Sussex truly is one of us. She is as basic as I am. I love her.

Oops meant to be in the swooning appreciation thread ^^

I think R115 has hit on the reason for the fanatical loyalty of MM defenders in the face of her dodgy history and neverending gaffes - she truly is Cinderella. Her father may well have won acclaim in his industry and made a lot of money, but the family has some very trashy elements, and despite her education, MM is as basic as they come.

Kate's mother may have grown up in a council house and one of her grandfathers may have been a coal miner, but Kate and her siblings grew up in upper middle-class comfort - top schools, overseas holidays, lovely homes. She didn't exactly have to claw her way to the top.

MM is relatable in a way that Kate is not.

Her father had an excellent job at the studios as a lighting director and she went to one of the best private schools in LA. Hardly Cinderella.

Meghan is talented

Kate is not

Meghan was an actress

Kate is a thot.

No r117, her supporters only like her because her mother is black. That's it.

They are out-and-out racists who would be the first to mock her "cinderella story" mercilessly, would mock her gaffes, her inability to grasp basic protocol, her bump cradling, her grasping PDA, her general fakeness etc - if she were white.

Megstans give her a pass on all of this because, like all racists such as the KKK, they are skin-colour first, and skin-colour is the ONLY thing they care about.

Sigh, enough with this Kate vs. Meghan crap

The real story here is Camilla - she's feeling better enough to mount that bird's nest on her head, put down her vodka gimlet and go to the RD ceremony; she does look a bit thin so maybe she does have some health issues (other than just being old), but otherwise she looked lovely.

I'm always shocked how short QEII is compared to Camilla & Kate

Isn't the point of having a Public Relations firm that they do not leave their footprints or client lists all over the internet? They're supposed to promote their clients without leaving a trace of themselves, their clients, or their PR, right?

We've learned that Sunshine Sachs client list was scored by the many "VIPS" present at the NYC baby shower at the Mark Hotel. And we also know that Serena Williams and Amal Clooney are also SS clients

How good can a PR firm be if they keep tossing the gauze, surgical wraps, adhesive, and detritus all over their crime scenes, not to mention the blood they failed to mop up?

R121 - The Queen has shrunk with age; she was never tall, maybe 5'4" or so but it looks like she's barely over 5' now. But Kate is 5'9" and Camilla about 5'6", so it's hardly surprising HM is dwarfed by them.

[QUOTE] How good can a PR firm be if they keep tossing the gauze, surgical wraps, adhesive, and detritus all over their crime scenes, not to mention the blood they failed to mop up?

What a hilariously mixed metaphor. There wouldn't be any bandages at a crime scene, you dunderhead. When Kate stans try to be clever, it never goes well.

Doxxing is NOT cool r114, and will get this thread deleted. I can't stand Kaiser any more than most here, but doing that is unnecessary. We know they're batshit over there.

[quote]So pleased to see her shrugging off another convention and fucking with TQ and the racist haters here.

Sure, because "shrugging off conventions" and "fucking with the Queen" are such needed traits in today's new Royals. Everyone hates HM so much - getting to "fuck with her" makes so many loyal citizens happy. Go get 'em!

His goal is to get threads shut down by any means necessary, R126, no need to help him, just block. He wants threads about MeAgain and the boybander to read like positive PR and when they cannot be controlled they try to get them closed to minimize negative chat about client/obsession, take your pick. He is trying to provoke, likely from a script of points, in order to close this one too. No need to take his bait, that is winniing. He has been here doing this for years, why ampliphy his looniness?

amplify - no idea what autocorrect did there

Many Labour voters hope that MM destroys the parasitic royals, including crimson Charles and Prince Pedo. Let's see Kate Leech get a REAL job for the first time in her indolent life.

I don’t dislike Kate, but her main skills seem to be starving herself and curling her hair. She’s a high class skank.

By contrast, MM is a low class skank.,,

Why is this thread still here? Does that boy band troll know about the ravaged, bleeding adolescent goat in Muriel's closet?

Because the Megstan who usually gets them deleted is the OP, r131

Kaiser's real name is not a secret, nor has it ever been hidden. It's like mentioning Madonna's real name. Kaiser is her professional name, that's all. She talks about her mixed parentage on the site.

She's also bigoted, vicious, and has generated more silly hysteria around the royals than the DM has.

If Meghan Markle were white, Kaiser and that lot of worshippers over there would have skewered her alive for a good deal of her behaviour never mind the truly ugly, poorly fitted, and often inappropriate clothes Meghan puts on her back.

[quote]Because the Megstan who usually gets them deleted is the OP, [R131]

And there you had to go fuck the whole charade... LOL, you go for it!!!

Yeah let's fuck with the Queen whose permission that stupid Prince had to get permission from to marry me, and whose permission finally got me where I couldn't get myself no matter how I tred, let's really stick it to the people who control the purse strings: where I live, how I live, how much I can spend on clothes, and what kind of settlement I'll get in the event of a divorce.

R101, I count myself among the aging-gracefully-is-better crowd, but you’re deluded if you think Dame Helen has had nothing done. It is excellent work, though, rather than filler gone wild , Wildenstein botchedness.

Who is "Meghan S. Ferguson"?

R137 - Look closely: there's a period after "Meghan" indicating the end of a sentence. The sentence reads: Talk to me first, Meghan. Then comes the signature, S. Ferguson, ex-HRH Sarah Duchess of York.

R135

Oh, heavens to Betsy! This just clocked this back from the "Meg loon" who is also this thread's OP... A gift who keeps on giving. I had him on ignore, but it apparently has more than one subscribed/paid account here? Normal people really try to get around these Axis II self-sanctioned crazies

[quote]Look at the thread's header. It's one of the Meg loon's posts. The thread was created by the Meg loon.

[quote]Beware of this thread.

The Spaz Troll is all powerful and issued a warning you ignored at R16. Now this thread is the only one standing, and the OP is...R16.

I agree R98. Two different women being pitted against each other to score points, it's a little childish if you ask me.

[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.]

R141 - sadly, the immature monomaniac at R142 cannot stop making comparisons and alluding to 'Megstans'. It's pathological at this point.

Kate's hair and outfit are perfection in that pic. You simply couldn't do better than that.

But I wonder how unflappable Kate would be if PW cheated on her as often as Philip cheated on TQ.

Ooooh I see you ARE made apoplectic by that link, Megstan at r143.

I see the DM has managed to throw more shade at Meghan: Stella McCartney put photos up on her company website of Meghan in the SM coat she wore to the Cenotaph service, only to receive furious backlash for insensitivity and using a service for the fallen as an advertising opportunity.

That, of course, is not Meghan's fault, but at the close of the article, the DM actually prints "It is not known whether the coat was purchased or was given to the Duchess as a gift . . . "

The DM knows just how far to go: it doesn't accuse Meghan of trading PR for freebies, it simply puts the idea out there, and tars Meghan with the suspicion of trading on her royal status and with the More A Celebrity Than A Royal brush.

McCartney took the photo down in response to the backlash as well as her tweet about how lovely it was to see the Duchess wearing McCartney's coat to honour the fallen . . .

Right right right.

And on the same day it publishes its article about how the Queen appreciatis Kate's "unflappability" (unlike, say, certain other royal duchesses who make a fuss about everything and just - doesn't - get the royal gig).

Go DM!

R142 The last line of that story, meow!

[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.]

Time for royal jewels, bitches. Watch the video for a refreshing take - I love this man! And now I know about Granny's Chips.

[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.]

Meghan brought Archie to NY for Serena's match? A little later wasn't he "too young" to travel to Balmoral to spend time with, you know, the actual fucking Queen of England?

Fergie is in China riding around the airport. LOL.

R152 - And then they wonder why the Queen doesn't like Meghan and took the photo of the Sussexes down.

US Open across the Atlantic for a couple of days si; Balmoral, a few hundred miles away to see Archies' 93 year old great-grandmother and the woman who made Meghan's entry into a life of unbelievable privilege and fame, no. The baby's too young for that - although not, a few weeks later, to serve as PR for the Sussexes a few thousand miles away in Africa.

The Sussexes are lucky the rest of the family are willing to be in the same photographs as the Sussexes a couple of times a year (Remembrance Day and Christmas).

Say - remember last year when those summer family photographs were released of Charles and Camilla with the Cambridges and Sussexes (Meghan in the early stages of pregnancy), Kate holding Louis?

Have we seen any similar photos this year?

Just a random thought: The “private jets” dustup has been the most damaging story for Meg/Harry thus far. It’s the kind of obnoxious thing that sticks with people who aren’t really paying attention.

Oh. My. God. R153, that was one of the most delightfully nonsensical things I've seen in awhile. The BRF is wrestling with a viper, and there's good ol' Fergie squealing and riding around in an airport. Dead.

That cackle, R153! Heh heh!

I am gobsmacked that Markle is being outed by her BFF Serena about dragging the child on transatlantic flights on back to back days. WTF? How could the baby do that but not the few hours to Scotland? It's a double slap in the face to the Queen from Markle.

R148 - is MeMe trying to put out false rumors again so the Queen will feel sorry for her and invite her mother Doria to the Royal Family Christmas holidays?

Swipe for the life of Princess Louise, Princess Royal and Duchess of Fife. She certainly didn't inherit her mother Queen Alexandra's beauty.

Swipe for the life of the Queen's cousin, Princess Alexandra of Kent (one of my faves).

[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.]

R159 - I doubt it; the tactic hasn't worked so far. The fraus on CB said the same thing about the rumour that Doria was invited by the Queen to that second Christmas AND to stay in the BIG HOUSE! Everyone assumed it was fact, and it turned out to be hot air.

It is possibly a plant to prepare the public for the Sussexes complete disappearance from now till New Year's, getting "in front of the story" so to speak. Or it could be just titillating filler by the DM, which of course is posing it as a question, not a fact.y

They are allegedly taking six weeks off, which would pretty much take them to the end of December. Their absence at the Sandringham Christmas pap walk would certainly start the tongues wagging again, and unless they really are planning to leave, I doubt they want that.

I did not see a single photo of the Harkles interacting with any member of the BRF in the three Remembrance Day events or even walking near each other. When Camilla pulled out of the Field of Remembrance event (odd that she was suddenly recovered enough for the concert and the Cenotaph appearances), that would have been the only time you would have seen some interaction between the Harkles and a senior member of the BRF.y

I don't think they want anything to do with her any longer, and I don't think think the disappearance of the Harkle's photo from that little table that serves as a backdrop for the Queen being photographed welcoming visitors to her "drawing room" in Buck House was accidental.

For some reason, the removal of that photo, above everything else, keeps sticking in my mind as a possible silent clue to what is coming down the pike.

I am pretty sure this will be Prince Phillip's last Christmas.

New engagement for Will and Kate.

I was thinking that too R146! They didn't take any shots at her directly, but highlighted how much QEII loved "stiff upper lip" Katie and indirectly blamed MM for Stella McCarthy's misstep, though she'd have no control over that. They don't directly attack or disparage her - just drop one little nugget after another to cast her in a less-than-flattering light - particularly next to Kate.

The Harkles really did piss off the wrong people - you'd think DM would spend their time taking shots at a clear and loathsome target like Prince Andrew, but I guess no one really cares about him and they get more clicks from Harkle Drama

R166 - Curiously, I think you're right: the Harkle drama really does get more interest than Andrew. Andrew is no longer glamourous as he once was. Remember how handsome everyone thought he was in his early 20s and when he was the Falklands hero? People forget how good-looking he was, and what a catch. Now he's a fat, boring, sleazy has-been. The Harkle are a generation younger and as shallow as it sounds, no one cares what Andrew or Harry or William or Charles are wearing: it's the women's wardrobes that juice it up.

There are of course other factors in the interest in the Harkle drama: her mixed race, American, divorced, actress background, and Harry's lingering identity as that poor boy walking behind Saint Diana's coffin. But I think he's overplayed that particular card.

But the DM's real shade in that article was raising the question of whether Meghan takes freebies from desighers, something that is strictly verboten in the BRF.

Even if she didn't, as the lawyers put it in court, "the bell has been rung".

And they are going to go on ringing that bell forever, thanks to Meghan's and Harry's stupidity in threatening the UK press before they were even engaged.

And Harry looks quite disheveled and unappetising these days, doesn't he?

This is a very interesting turn with the DM. Merching has long been suspected, and if they open the floodgates to go after that, an investigation of the Sussex foundation could be next. It's really interesting that it's registered in Arizona, where by law only a very small percentage of donations have to go to the actual causes. The rest can be applied toward things like "business expenses," however one wants to label them. a $50,000 bracelet for an appearance? Put it down to needing to look right.

R163 Haz has an engagement on the 17th, so they probably will not spend Christmas in England. There has been a story floated about this too. Honestly, most of the BRF don't seem to want them there, and we know a few pray they will stay away. And the Harkles obviously hate them, so... As far as no interaction during Remembrance weekend, after the wreath laying and anthem, Will was spotted power walking ahead without a look back, leaving Haz and Andrew strolling together. It was a metaphorical scarfing.

Proof that the majority of gay men here do not give a fuck about the spazzy royals.

'Haz has an engagement on the 17th, so they probably will not spend Christmas in England. T'

They will definitely spend Christmas in their lovely refurbed cottage. Nothing like a frosty English Christmas. Maybe off to LA for new year.

asshole at r170 it proves nothing (all 8 posts of it.) it says 48% of DL posters LIKE royal threads here, either mildly or heavily. That's nearly half the respondents. Get a clue and quit posting meaningless polls about posting habits of others. BORING.

2 transcontinental flghts in 24 hours for a newborn? Thought it had been made clear that he was NOT with her?

Stories are always changing, anything to keep people talking, arguing, etc, as more and more side-eye or lose interest altogether.

Are you paid to post?

If so , how often

Which do you choose

The bot or shill option?

R174's super clever takes on West End Girls never get stale!!!

R175 is likely R174, having dropped his cookies.

Desperately allowing in negative attention, just like our dear Rach.

Trolls/shills never operate alone. His tactics are identical to those he uses on the boybander threads, just different details. Got a lot of those closed too. He used to bang on about his Tumblr blog, the one he has for MeAgain has multiple uses of the word spaz, one of his favorites. Working at McDonalds has more dignity than being a SS stooge.

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

R177 - Agree, the overall look is elegant but the trousers could be a bit longer or the pumps a bit less boxy at the heel, or lower. Adore the Prince of Wales check jacket with the wine-coloured trousers, though. She looks fresh and timeless. She could have worn the same outfit ten years ago or could wear it ten years from now.

She doesn't look remotely or give off the remotest pregnancy vibe. The poster whose friend, Zamorah Queen of the Gypsies, says she is, needs a new crystal ball.

I hope Zamorah wasn't just as wrong about her other predictions . . .

should be the spazz troll is WALLOWING in negative attention, above

Must be so demanding splitting time between a boybander whose career is based on puff and PR and Rach, a similarly empty vessel.

It appears my sarcasm wasn't pointed enough, R176

Kate looked sensational today.

I wasn't digging the shoes with the pants, R181, and somehow she felt just a hair too casual next to William. Love her, but this just didn't quite work for me. Because of course, the DoC is dressing for me. Me, me, me, dammit.

Swipe for the Queen's brooches Part One.

The Queen's brooches Part Two.

Swipe for the life of Princess Michael of Kent.

The Queen held audiences at Buckingham Palace today.

One of the reasons I really can't stomach Meghan - Remembrance Day and Veterans' Day is ALL about HER.

Self promotion is her reason for living. She really can't help herself.

Kate looked good today. I'm not a fan of high heels with pants. My preference would be a flat lace up shoe in an Oxford or Brogue style or a loafer type shoe with pants.

I'm not saying she couldn't have done a veterans post also, but FFS, you're a BRITISH DUCHESS now. At the very fucking least, do a Remembrance Day post separately and FIRST.

Typical Meghan: makes use of Remembrance Day to tout what SHE did five years ago, as if the day were about her, not the veterans.

Kate could have done ballet flats with those trousers, too.

That outfit is pretty horrible, only the jacket is okay. Kate's just not a fashion girl. I did like her rather severe overcoat (the one with the military style thingies on the front) at one of the Remembrance Day events.

In general I like her style, R191-she has a "uniform," which makes her a comforting, which is exactly what the future queen should be. She can, on occasion, ramp it up and look spectacular when she wants.

I thought she looked AMAZING at Remembrance Day - the coat, the hat, her hair - perfection. The only things that are beginning to let her down are her makeup - too dark and heavy, and she needs some cosmetic help - light lip filler, botox, some filler in the nl folds, and either an acid or laser peel to freshen up her complexion. She's looking a good 5 yr older than the other duchess, truth be told, and there is no reason for that.

Why is the British DoS mentioning the US Veterans Day in her post about Remembrance day? Do other royals do that?

Why is she still playing to an American audience?

The Queen's brooches Part Three.

Swipe for photos of the British royals with the late Princess Grace of Monaco (aka American Oscar winning actress Grace Kelly) who would have been ninety years old today.

Thread got greyed out.

I guess this is the first DM article where Kate is never called Kate Middleton. It's the Duchess of Cambrigde or Kate. Did the morons at the DM finally consider the people in the comments section complaining about the DM incessantly calling her Kate Middleton?

[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.]

R194 - Because she was sidelined in the Remembrance Day Cenotaph and concert and wants to milk more personalised PR out of her pro-veteran creds. And she's not British, yet.

I didn't think Kate's outfit horrible. It's a classic, classy look. Love the jacket. She just needed either longer trousers or flatter shoes, and the loose hair works with this kind of semi-casual look.

My favourites amongst the Queen's brooches are the enormous Prine Albert sapphire one surrounded by diamonds, the maple leaf brooches, and the lover's knot ribbon brooch, with its amazing artistry.

Factoid: the Queen had a replica of the Prince Albert sapphire brooch made for Pss. Anne, who wears it frequently.

More details r201, about the jewels. Love it.

Isn't there an enormous diamond brooch called Granny's Chips or some such?

R202 - The Fringe Tiara, which the Queen wore on her wedding day (and subsequently gave to Pss. Anne to wear on her wedding day), broke the day before the wedding and has to be rushed to the jewelllers to be fixed.

And the pearls the Queen wore that day, still as Princess Elizabeth, are nearly as priceless as the showier ones with gemstones as I believe they belonged to Queen Anne, so go back a long way, and, of course, are well-matched natural pearls of some size, not cultured ones.

The BRF took a trip to South Africe in summer 1946 (official not holiday) during which the two young pricesses were presented with some very fine loose diamonds in small boxes. Elizabeth and Margaret were said to be somewhat stunned when they opened the boxes at the quality and size of the diamonds.

Yes, one of the Queen's brooches holds an enormous drop-shaped piece of the Cullinan, anchored by a smaller cushion shaped piece. It is so heavy that it has to be anchored in back with stiffened fabric in order to be worn. The pieces of the Cullinan are called "Granny's chips".

One reason for the trip to South Africa was to pry Elizabeth away from Philip, who had proposed and been accepted. The King wanted to give his daughter "more time to think" about something she'd made her mind up about when she was 13, and delay the announcement. Finally, in fall 1946, when they returned, the King gave in and announced the engagement.

Philip gave the Queen a beautiful engagement ring made from pieces of a diamond bracelet his mother gave him. Now a nun, she didn't need it, and he was dirt poor, so it worked out well.

All that said, I'm curious about Victoria's diadem. I don't believe it's worn by consorts, only by reigning Sovereigns, which is too bad, as it's my particular favourite amongst the head pieces. With three Kings in line, unless it is allowed to Camilla and Kate, it will disappear for three generations. I'm fairly certain I never saw a photo of it on the Queen Mother. That will be a shame.

Well, in looking the piece ithe up, is more formally known as the King George IV diadem and dates back to 1820 - the Wikipedia page says it is worn by queens consort, among whom were Queen Alexandara and Queen Mary, so I stand correcgted. However, I can't find a photo of the Queen Mother in it whilst she was still Queen Consort.

It would be just like Charles to insist on Camilla wearing it at his coronation, to make a point. It's not the kind of thing one wears to a state banquet, you know.

I do hope he does, and that Kate wears it as well (lor', that will burn Meghan Markle's arse!).

Thank you for the information on Granny's Chips and the Queen's engagement ring. That's actually quite romantic.

I had to look up the diadem. Oh my!

Granny's Chips. The brooch looks like a large diamond pendant earring- that would be so heavy it would pull your earlobe down to your ankles.

Even though the Queen's engagement ring is honking huge, there's some rather quaint about it.

R210 - It's very Art Deco looking, which isn't surprising, because the bracelet that Philip gave to the Queen as a wedding present is very Art Deco in style. I assume the bracelet was also one of his mother's. It's quite stunning. Although the 1940s were the Retro style in jewelry (think huge brooches of semi-precious stones worn in films by women like Joan Crawford), I think that era isn't that well represented in the Queen's collection. It's Georgian, Victorian, Edwardian, Belle Epoque, and then Art Deco.

Cartier did a lot of Art Deco inspired jewellery in the 1920s and 1930s. The Queen's collection, therefore, has quite a bit of Cartier. The tiara worn by Kate on her wedding day was by Cartier.

I had always heard that Philip had the engagement ring made from one of his mother's bracelets - however, the story linked here says it was from one of her tiaras.

I'll try to find a photo of the huge diamond bracelet he gave Elizabeth as a wedding present.

In the closeup photo of the Queen's hands, I suddenly realised that Charles inherited his sausage fingers from her.

Here you go r212. Scroll down for pics, and also photo of Kate wearing it at the Chinese State Dinner a few years ago.

It's a step in the right direction that this pathetic threads are getting grayed out so quickly. The 29 obsessives who post here should fuck off to where they are wanted (a bag lady convention).

R213 - Ah, obliged to you. She leant it to Kate? That is indeed a mark of favour. I see where the confusion was: both the engagement ring AND the bracelet were made from jewels owned by Philip's mother.

Stunning bracelet, but I'd have preferred that Kate hadn't paired it with another bracelet on the other wrist, in a much more contemporary style. Her huge sapphire engagement ring could have carried the left wrist and the leant bracelet carried the right wrist.

Just a slight quibble.

Look at it this way: if Meghan Markle succeeds in destroying the British monarchy, if the BRF get out with the Cullinan brooch, a couple of Rembrandts, their one Faberge Fabergé egg, and the Vladimir and Cambridge Lover's Knot tiaras, they'll have the foundation of another family fortune.

Factoid: someone once bought one of those eggs at a flea market for $14,000. It turned out to be worth $33 million or so.

Eight Imperial Eggs by Fabergé of the ones known to exist are still missing. Keep your eyes peeled and hit those garage sales and flea markets . . .

Yes, even if the monarchy collapsed, Charles and Wiliam would do just fine. Harry would most certainly have to sing for his supper, though. I don't see his coming in for the same level of inheritance as Will, even if the whole thing collapses tomorrow.

R217- I'm afraid Corbyn's Socialistas would freeze all those accounts unless Charles and William got them diverted to Switzerland or Lichtenstein in time. And forget the Duchy of Cornwall revenues - those are OVER, and forget the Queen's racehorses, the polo ponies, the antique cars, and land holdings in Britain.

No, they'd have to leave with what they could carry. The two trust funds do belong to both Princes William and Harry, though, inherited from their mother's private funds. I wonder if any government could legally seize those.

Heh heh.

You know, Crown Princess Maryy is on tour right now visiting Africa, and did a tour of some of its worst slums today. She's there to represent Denmark at some summit about accelerating help for Africa. Oddly, there doesn't seem to be a huge drama brewing around her visit in Denmark. Imagine that.

Interesting point r219. Is she doing okay though? Had to ask.

Do you know anything about the provenance of the bracelet on her other arm at that State Dinner r215? is that a loaner as well. Thought I read at the time of her wedding to William that Charles gifted her a Cartier diamond bracelet as a wedding gift. Could be wrong about that.

'Do you know anything about the provenance of the bracelet on her other arm at that State Dinner [R215]'

The disgusting snob, the Provenance Troll, is back!

Learn to use quote functions properly r222 for chrissake.

R223, my computer keyboard doesn't have square brackets, you spastic. I can use them perfectly well on my phone.

'Oddly, there doesn't seem to be a huge drama brewing around her visit in Denmark.'

That's because nobody gives a fuck about the Danish royals. Meghan is a global superstar.

What type of keyboard do you use that doesn't have square brackets- one from 1984?

Nailed it, R225!!! She's a rock star, superstar. Those people in South Africa were lucky HRH graced them with her presence. Poor Mary shouldn't have bothered.

But did they ask Mary how she was DOING, is the key question. Because no one ever asks.

Right on. Mary is too dense to know how to use modern communication and empowerment tools, such as bananagrams! So old, so out of touch she is. Only someone as globally MEGA as our Duchess would be so wise and aware to create and implement such a supercharged and powerful tool.

Moving from Australia to Denmark and learning the language was so darned easy, compared to the pressure Meghan faces.

So true r230!! MM had so much more pressure, marrying the 6th in line and having to learn a new language too! Several in fact (does "Estuary English" count?). And the lack of amenities, compared to what she was used to in LA and Toronto. Not a Soho House within walking distance of Windsor Great Park! It must have been overwhelming. But she prevailed as she always does! that's our gurl!

Yes, R231. Let us all write eco-friendly bananas of support to shine a light on the many problems faced by HRH. Soho House will sponsor. Watch this space!

You are a Trailblazer!

You are a Modernizer of fusty old traditions that have no use anymore!

Soho Home Beatrix Farro sofa, $6500 USD on sale now online!

So many 73 year olds on this thread.

Let me count the trolls...

📍Faux Intellectual Troll

📍Fake Royal Insider Troll

📍 Provenance Troll

📍Welp Troll

📍 Sarcasm Trolls

[quote]my computer keyboard doesn't have square brackets,

Did your dog eat those standard keys to the right of the obvious YUIOP on your keyboard?

^^^^R234, the only TROLL on this thread is.......

Y.O.U.

Sunshine Sachs PR aka R234,...we recognise your projection of TROLLING. You are imitating your client, Meghan Markle, who is the queen of projection.

R236 is the PR obsessed Welp Troll.

@ fakeroyalinsidertroll

Why did Kate go to Zika infested Pakistan if she's in the early stages of pregnancy, as you claim?

Harry and Meghan have reportedly told the Queen they won't be spending Christmas at Sandringham.

From the article at R239:

[quote] A royal source said: “They need some time away to recharge and decide their plans for next year.”

The Shit must have Officially Hit The Fan for them to avoid the Queen a second time.

Remember? Archie was "too young" to go a few hundred miles up to Scotland (although he'd just returned back from France, and the week they were supposed to go to Balmoral Megraine and Archie took two transatlantic flights in 24 hours to see her best Sunshine Sachs bud Serena.)

And the Queen is 93. And Philip might go any minute. This could be the last Christmas with either, frankly.

What assholes the Harkles are - it's still genuinely shocking to me what complete assholes they are.

Meggy Sharp doesn't need to "recharge" over Christmas, narcissists don't get worn out by their own machinations, they become exhilarated, emboldened and empowered by the chaos they cause. Maybe Dimwit needs to recharge as he is lead by the nose and his nostrils are probably sore.

[quote]And the Queen is 93. And Philip might go any minute. This could be the last Christmas with either, frankly. What assholes the Harkles are - it's still genuinely shocking to me what complete assholes they are.

Saying it frankly and succinctly: It's totally flabbergasting, actually unnerving, that Harry is so dismissively saying a coded, or actually outright goodbye to the family when his beloved matriarch and patriarch are dwindling down, as he fucks off his own way.

He believes his ails reside with them, but actually it's becoming the other way around. The "Happy wife, happy life" saying turned on him with a vengeance. He was not meant to have a "happy" or "satisfied" wife. Don't know about the satisfaction end, but Meghan's orgasms are likely tied to the expensive objects that suddenly surround her now. Miserable husband who cannot please, unhappy wife = Datalounge GOLD.

I know the poster "Della" keeps championing Meghan, though even she must have come to view that the Duchess is essentially useless unless there is a self-promotional element or something to be pocketed for herself, not the UK.

It's so weird to see American "personalities" rise to her defense, like Hillary Clinton, lately. Clinton has too much stuff going on in her life, on her plate to come even close to understanding or acknowledging the circumstances under which Meghan has strived for attention and the spotlight. I would really worry if Clinton spent any time paying attention to the vapid Duchess, but she is expected to and delivers due diligence and a warm hug when in-depth understanding would likely make her recoil.

Charles is in India. His feet are as red and swollen as his sausage hands.

Swipe for photos of Prince William visiting Centrepoint.

Princess Margaret was the Diana of her time. Swipe for photos.

The Queen held audiences today.

Coronation Day May 1937 - Queen Mary with her children and in-laws (only the new King George VI and Queen Elizabeth are missing).

The whole family pictured together on Coronation Day 1937.

It's kind of poignant that the Princesses are looking at the camera gape-mouthed,

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

So Harry is turning his back on the family his wifey never had for.....what now?

Money & celebrity, it would appear, R252.

Only neither are remotely interesting enough or charismatic to obtain either of those things.

They already have money and enormous celebrity, R254 - you cretinous crone.

They have the BRF money not their own. Especially Meghan. Enormous celebrity?? On what planet? They have enormous infamy. Big difference! They are loathed globally. You keep telling yourself otherwise though sweetie. Your naivete is adorable. Perhaps you share the same personality disorder as Meghan? It going to be enormous fun watching her downfall.

They are not loathed globally. They are "don't cared" globally.

A small number of people with a lot of time on their hands loathe them.

Really looking forward to their upcoming antics. Will the rotund MM have regained her girlish figure? Will she be announcing a pregnancy? Will her charity/foundation/scam be launched? Will they announce they are leaving the UK and moving to the US? Or will they announce that they are breaking up?

Oh, the suspense!