BRF Gossip Part 101

Kate, William, Charles, and Camilla are out together today in a joint visit to the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre. It is raining and chilly and both royal women are dressed accordingly, which is to say, in dull wintry colours and coats.

I usually like Kate's military style wear, and the connection today is obvious, but I'm not fond of this new number by McQueen, it's too fussy. Too many details for the eye to take in, buttons, pleats, belts. I get that it's winter and navy blue, but I do think another way could have been found to liven it up. Colourful scarf as she did last week, or piping in a contrasting colour. She looks pretty, as always, but, er, I don't know - not as pulled together because of all the details.

I am liking her new style of hair half up and half down.

And I do approve the boots.

Camilla looks like . . . well, Camilla.

R1-Yes, Kate has buttons. So many buttons! I wonder if they're a psychological "shield" between her and the public (you won't get in!) or a Freudian slip into what a "buttoned up" (reserved, shy, introverted) person she is. Then again, sometimes a button is just a button.

Too bad about the Phillips marriage. Can the Tindalls be far behind? Wasn't he caught making out with a woman in a bar awhile back? Then again Zara and Mike seem like like-minded hustlers, so who knows. I find Zara likable and immensely unlikeable at the same time. It's odd.

The only Windsor that I am interested in is the Chrysler Windsor, built from 1940 to 1961. Love to have one.

R4-so start a thread on that. Why on earth are you here?

R4 - As R6 enquired, what are you doing here?

On to other things, Germaine Greer made some quite nasty comments re the Sussexes and particularly Meghan in the DM, excerpt below:

"Controversial 'second wave' feminist Germaine Greer has launched a brutal attack on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

The 81-year-old questioned whether Meghan Markle, 38, has been 'faking love' with Prince Harry, 35, and also cast doubt on how true their marriage has been.

'All I can think is she'd better be in love. If she's been faking it all this time, oh boy, what misery,' she said, speaking to Australia's 60 Minutes. 'How many orgasms will it take? How many fake groans will get her through this?'

The outspoken writer went on to slam the couple's star-studded wedding in May 2018 - which was flooded with famous faces including Oprah and George and Amal Clooney - as 'terrible.'

'The marriage was terrible too, because it was full of showbiz personalities, as if Meghan lived in a completely artificial world,' she explained.

'The whole point about showbiz - it's not real, and it won't sustain you.' "

I'm not much of a fan of Greer, who sometimes goes off the deep end, but I have to say she has nailed it on this one, particularly about the "artificiality" of the environment Meghan always seems to prefer.

And the bit about the orgasms was priceless.

^*As R5 enquired (not R6)

That's part of the reason that people can see right through Meghan, R6. It's the artificiality of her life. We can see the woke postering and visiting Africa and India pre marriage was simply a PR exercise to elevate her profile. We can see the celebrities invited to her wedding were there to bolster her ego. She's completely inauthentic. It oozes from her pores.

Checking in on Celebitche this morning to see what Kaiser had to say about the Phillips' split, you wouldn't believe it (or maybe you would), but her hatred for the Cambridges is so intense and so lunatic, that she actually suggested that because Dan Wooten of The SUN broke the story, and because Kaiser believes that Wooten is William's personal lapdog, it therefore follows that this story could be "William throwing his cousins under the bus".

No reason given, no rationale, it's just because, well, he's William. The cousins in question live private lives, don't represent the monarchy, aren't in the direct line of succession, aren't particularly followed by the public, aren't even "royal" - no titles, living privately in Gloucestershire . . . but William just MAY have wanted to throw his cousins under the bus.

You couldn't make it up.

[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 always amazes me how gossipy hausfraus discover their psychic abilities when it comes to this Markle woman. They know, just KNOW that she's 'inauthentic.' whatever that means. Greer has no idea what goes on in their marriage. R8 has no idea what Markle thinks or is like or basically even sounds like. You all are erecting this enormous fun-house of fantasy and projection on top of this woman with absolutely nothing to base it on except a very few very bland and innocuous interviews. So bizarre.

R9-Kaiser is mentally ill. She's driving people from that site, and I'm shocked the owners haven't canned her. She has to be costing them ad dollars. And what is with her weird obsession with using the phrase "throw under the bus?" She has to be one of the most dismal celebrity writers out there.

R11-when a woman signs with a PR agency to get her high profile spots doing "humanitarian" work in third-world countries and then invites just one family member and loads of famous celebrities she's never met to her wedding, I think we can pretty quickly gauge the authenticity of a person. We have eyes.

Unlike you R11, the rest of us OBSERVE Megs actions and words, both past and present, which have been very publicly displayed.

And on the topic of the Phillips, the tawdry and shameful behaviour of Peter's father and Princess Anne's ex Mark toward his now 30+ year old daughter whom he's never acknowledged, despite DNA tests affirming he's her dad.

R11 - Because this entire site is dedicated only to discussions of people we all have met and therefore have first-hand insights about, right?

Meghan Markle has left a long trail of shallow and inauthentic pronouncements in her wake, her wedding was "papered" with show biz people she'd either never met or barely knew, who ignored her until she married a Windsor, and her ambitions toward celebrity were unmistakable, her contempt for the monarchy and Britain palpable (how many times did she set foot in Scotland, Wales, and NI from the day of the engagement? Once, each.)

Sometimes, it's exactly what it looks like, mate.

Yes, the half up/half down hairstyle is good. She's getting a little long in the tooth for the long flowing locks, but this is an elegant compromise. Personally I wish she'd cut of six inches and go for early 70s-Jackie HEIGHT.

R11 is truly psychic, and SHE knows how absolutely genuine and authentic Meghan is.

R16-agree. It's time for Kate to undergo "the chop." Letizia looked infinitely better when she started sporting a shorter, sleeker do. It's time for Kate to leave the fairytale princess look behind and start looking more like a queen. Although, I do have to say the long hair allows her to do one hell of an updo with tiaras.

True about the updo, R18. Though I wish she'd go for a TOWERING one, a la Princess Margaret, with massive jeweled earrings.

I'm not claiming any special knowledge about this person. Unlike you all, I didn't spend even 3 minutes thinking about her, her husband or her wedding, no less forming Opinions on it. You people need to re-assess your priorities.

R19-but would/could Kate ever pull this off?

R20-so again, why are you here? Our priorities centering around snarking about celebrities are just fine. That is, after all, the entire purpose of Datalounge. Perhaps you'd best find another site that does not center around pointless bitchery as its raison d'être.

R20 - And yet it must have taken you at least three minutes to write that post.

How do you know what anyone's priorities are?

We don't need prefects and hall monitors here. This is a gossip site. We aren't accountable to you or anyone else about the deeply embedded philosophical subtext or ramifications or the lack thereof.

You aren't having fun? Then why are you reading these posts?

If you're not getting out of it, you're getting something out of it.

R23, your last line is excellent.

R20, if you don’t care for gossip, why don’t you post your PhD thesis here and we’ll discuss that instead. Would that be deep and meaningful enough for you?

It took 15 posts before it became another Meghan hatefest. You are fucking obssessed nutbags. Why don't you just be honest and call it an "Undercover Meghan hate thread that I have to name as BRF thread because it will get FF into oblivion.

How long before it all comes tumbling down and we’re left with Meghan on Assistance?

I'm just amazed at the degree of vitriol directed at this very minor and unimportant character. Feel free to keep hating on her.

I’m looking forward to Bea’s wedding! I know it won’t be televised, but the photos will be fun.

Will Harry and Meghan attend a draw all attention away from the lovely bride?

I've mentioned elsewhere that I was posting on DL about the BRF long before Harry's wedding. I don't particularly like or dislike people I'll never meet, although I've developed an appreciation for several personalities. On some other thread, someone suggested that Meghan must have been bullied by some of the other Royal women, and the York sisters were nominated as likely candidates. Someone immediately piped up that Bea and Eugenie did not have reputations as mean girls, at all. I was about to post the same thing. Some of you think that's tragic, that grown people would know so much about these people. I don't. Think of Jane Goodall studying the interactions of chimps in Africa, giving them all names, and tracking their family relationships. I enjoy knowing that Bea is a favorite among flight attendants (according to a flight attendant forum I visited). I think we had an influx of people here once Meghan joined the Royal Family. I find the unending Meghan vs Kate discussions unbearably tedious. My interest is in the whole complicated family dynamic. not just in one or two more controversial players.

I even like Tiara Time, so there.

R31, shall I get you a booking on Oprah?

I like your sensibility, R31.

R20 - You do know we don't give fuck all about your opinion about what we think of Meghan Markle, right?

Go home, troll: tell Kaiser and her minions it won't work.

R31, I feel the same way. And the addition of Edo is going to be fun, too. A new character!

The announcement re the Phillips, officially, is that far from returning to Canada, Autumn is staying in Gloucestershire, where Peter will also remain, so they can continue raising their two daughters. Princess Anne's estate is there, and that the divorce (so far) is amicable.

I would venture to guess that Peter, at least, and the two girls will continue to appear at the Trooping the Colour.

Whether or not Meghan will try to upstage Bea at her wedding remains to be seen. Frankly, I think it likely that just appearing at all will tend to draw focus from the bride - it's just in the nature of these things.

If Harry and Meghan have any decency, they'll thank Bea for the invitation and decline citing scheduling conflicts. Even with a private wedding, if their attendance gets out, it will turn into a press frenzy with telephoto lens trying to get images of how it's all still Happy Families - or, alternatively, very clearly NOT.

Poor Bea should be left in peace to enjoy her long-awaited Princess Bride Day unmarred.

R36, I agree, mostly. Personally, I think Harry should attend alone. I had been trying to determine which York sister was the one rumored to have introduced Harry and Meghan, which one was the SoHo connection. And then I got sidetracked by photos of Bea in her Georgina-Chapman-designed (fucking HIDEOUS) gown at her 18th birthday. And other photos of her with Weinstein. I can’t decide if I feel sorry for her or not.

My guess is that Peter wasn’t entirely faithful and that his wife eventually got sick of it. Might also have considered the example that she was setting for her daughters if she had stayed.

I'm here for that too r35! I want more Edo!

Beatrice's wedding is definitely jinxed.

It's not likely MM will show at Bea's wedding. She will probably "leak" some information or post new photos. My guess is she'll go full on crazy with a black and white pic of Archie in a "big brother" shirt or a photo will be sent to DM of her looking pregnant. She's a mean girl that one.

If Meghan wore another oversized coat to Beatrice's wedding and then announced her second pregnancy a few days later, she would be trolling at level 9000. I'd respect that.

[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.]

^ and they all felt "at ease" with her.

I get the notion that she thinks herself irresistible and figured she would at least win over the men of the royal family with her unparalleled beauty. Markle is attractive, it's true. But she's attractive in that dime a dozen type of way. She's not the showstopper she thinks she is.

Would Autumn even be able to return to Canada if she wanted to? Royal connection aside, her girls were born and raised in Britain. Is there really a court that would say, "Sure you can take your kids 5000 miles away?"

"I enjoy knowing that Bea is a favorite among flight attendants (according to a flight attendant forum I visited)."

I would REALLY like to know that those flight attendants think of Meghan and Harry!

And Andrew. And Anne. And any other major royals.

How can you look at this picture of Markle and say she's attractive? She's not. She's very plain. It's mind boggling how body dysmorphic she is.

Markle aims high. Could she have had plans for William?

[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.]

Why would Autumn return to Canada when she's probably living free of charge on Anne's beautiful Gatcombe Park estate in Gloucestershire? Charles' Highgrove House is in the area, as well. The kids were born there and raised there. They may have dual citizenship, but they've been raised as British kids.

Meanwhile, back at Money Central, DM has it that the Harkles are in discussion to participate in Goldman Sachs' "Talk with GS" series. There is no pay per talk, but it is reputedly something of a "golden handshake" that leads to other extremely lucrative opportunities.

GS is the biggest corporate criminal investment bank on the planet. It played a central role in the 2008 collapse, double-crossing its own clients and then getting back 100 cents on the dollar. Rolling Stone had a wonderful cover piece on GS by Matt Taibbi some years ago with an illustration of GS as a giant octopus with its tentacles wrapped around Planet Earth. It is an absolute despicable entity.

If the stories are true, then it rips the veil away from the "Progressive Woke Hignesses" and makes it clear they they'll make deals with any devil if it fills their coffers so they can live in Beverly Hills and Malibu.

The Queen made a mistake leaving them the name Sussex and their HRHs even in the background. These entities, too, will become tainted and worthless.

One of many mistakes HM has made over the decades in handling her relatives.

They don't call it "fuck you money" for nothing.

What on earth would the Sussexes have to say that might be of real value? Everything they say is at odds with what they actually do.

As it is Harry is the draw, not Meghan. She wasn't allowed to make her own speech, so had to bully her way into introducing him. I wonder how long until she's told that's not necessary. She's incredibly deluded as to there being any organic interest in her.

R53 - Not sure I agree. Harry is the source of Meghan's "royal" status, but in and of himself he's boring as dishwater. She has all the energy, she is, for what it's worth, what there is of the "star" in the couple.

Harry's worth even as the "real" royal lies mostly in being the iconic Diana's son, which is, in my opinion, the real reason he keeps peddling that card, although I doubt he'd admit that to himself.

But I don't doubt that the hard-headed Meghan gets it.

It will be interesting to see when the saturation point is reached, as it inevitably will. If they've build up the basis for their own fortune by then, I doubt they'll care much - but that won't resolve Harry's "issues", the major one of which seems to be that his entire persona rests upon his feelings about his mother.

It's as if he's more of a homonculus than a man: reduced in emotional size to this one aspect of his life, unable to get out of the formaldehyde jar and grow beyond it.

There is something awful about them, as a pair. He's a homonculus and she is reducible to the size of her ambition to be famous and rich and beat out the other girls.

I do hope they don't show at Bea's wedding.

Fergie has signed a book deal (again). Some of the children's books are already written.

Mmmm, what happened to reports that she was peddling her name with a line of High Street goods, like Megsy?

Agree, R53, they're the classic example of "he gives her class and she gives him ass."

R49 - If she could have, she would have, but 1) the timing was wrong, and 2) the BRF would never, EVER have let William marry a c-list American divorcee with Meghan's dodgy past and family.

She had no shot at William and probably knew it. But the sixth in line now that the second in line had a couple of kids to secure the succession - that, she figured accurately, she probably did have a shot at.

Meghan nearly lost him around the time of Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, but she followed him out there, sans invitation, and reeled him back in.

Kate had a blast with these Irish kids today.

R58 I'd love to know the real story behind this gossip that she nearly lost him. Did she really crash that wedding? I've always thought it took balls of steel to snare the prince, especially at a distance. So much to worry about: his short attention span, other women, his family's disapproval, whispers about one's own past, the sheer unlikeliness of it all. Imagine the strategizing and tactical skill that took. Plus she had to get away from a serious boyfriend first, that must have been a little stressful. I give her all due credit.

I saw Kate referred to somewhere as "The Children's Princess." While corny, it's rather sweet, a nice play on Diana's sobriquet. She could do worse.

Piers Morgan just tweeted about Harry and Meghan "whoring themselves out" for investment bank money.

They were feeding little lambs out of bottles, the Open Farm is a cute thing.

I loved Kate's McQueen jacket and skirt as a remembrance of his death. No ugly frau scarf on top of it, ugh.

Interesting how quiet things became once Harry rejoined Meghan in Canada. No pap walks, no unnecessary Insta postings, no ridiculous leaks. I wonder what the story is.

The Goldman news isn’t surprising. They’ll do the circuit and get paid. Even if GS isn’t strictly a paying gig, it’s an endorsement. As r51 points out, it’s an entree of sorts and will probably lead to lucrative gigs for a while. Pretty clever move.

Those IB guys aren’t all that cynical and aloof. They can be just as starstruck as any plebe.

R64-I've wondered the same. The timing is quite noticeable. As soon as Harry landed, Meghan's IG and pap outings stopped. He may exercise more control in that relationship than people give him credit.

Was just looking at pictures of Camilla at some appearance today. She has wonderful thick, glossy hair for her age, or any age really. As good as, dare I say it, her predecessor’s.

R66, they’re codependent, so I think you’re right!

r42 I'd find it contemptible

R50 Savannah has her mother's hard-faced look.

Autumn does *look* like a villainess. It's the catlike eyes and brows.

"Markle aims high. Could she have had plans for William? "

Charles would have been a better bet. Neither Charles nor William is getting divorced in the next few decades, but Charles would be a much better bet for showing his appreciation to a thirty-something mistress.

But she was right to go for Harry, he was much more of a mess than anyone realized, and he's the kind of dense straight man who'd try to deal with his troubles by letting his girlfriends run his life. A smart woman can get anything she wanted out of a man like that, and she isn't as smart as she thinks she is, but she's smart enough for that.

Pretty sure Meghan would find herself impaled on the railings of Buckingham Palace if that ever happened, R72. I really wouldn't fuck with Camilla.

Oh, I would bet money she tried the ole' doe-eyed act on him and he shut that down right quick.

Too bad about the Phillips'--I'd always thought Peter was the hunkiest of HM's grandsons. I imagine a nice beefy dad bod with a hairy chest. Likely he and Autumn will both live in separate but close houses on Princess Anne's estate. Princess Anne's ex lived in a cottage on the estate after the divorce so it likely seems familiar to them. Peter likely has been working in London during the week and maybe Autumn grew apart from him--it's bad.

Do we think Peter is circumcised? He's sort of the border generation for the RF and circumcision. All of HM's sons were cut shortly after birth following the tradition started by Victoria. Seems Diana wouldn't allow William and Harry to be cut but would Princess Anne have kept Peter intact? What's the verdict?

R60 - If you want to know the backstory on the infamous Inskip wedding, head for harrymarkle wordpress and go to October 2018, he has the whole story up and photos that make it clear a crisis was afoot.

I agree Peter Phillips was the Windsor male who got the DNA goods - with William running a somewhat distant second.

Whilst hardly Meghan's biggest fan, I would be cautious about Morgan's rant today. Tony Blair according to other reports attended a quite different conference at JPM, the Harkles fled before dessert was served, and as it was completely closed, no one knows who the other "celebrity" guests were. Morgan is just throwing out unconfirmed reports, it certainly isn't up on JPM's web site.

And JLo and ARod were apparently in L.A. for the Oscars at the time, so Morgan's assertion ARod was there is sheer rumour and speculation. No one has confirmed any of it.

He's pond scum himself, even if he is occasionally right about her. I haven't seen the slightest confirmation of most of what he claims went down at that investor summit.

It is interesting seeing everyone get the vapors about the Sussex's financials. This is what everyone wanted, no? We can hardly expect them to stay quiet in the Canadian bolt hole. Of course, they're going to try and make mega bank. What on earth did people expect?

R77 - I think it's exactly what people expected. But it's hardly what they announced in their resignation announcement, or in line with all the Woke Shit they post on their IG account, is it?

We've always known they are a pair of shallow hypocrites - now the rest of the world knows, too.

Yeah, they were going to carve out a "progressive role" for themselves WITHIN the institution. They want to save the Planet. They want people to be Kind.

Then they sell Harry's soul for filthy lucre to the biggest criminal investment bank robber barons on the planet.

Christ, they really are like some sort of scarlet W for Whore on the BRF's name. The Queen was a fool not to take the titles and HRHs.

She basically sacrificed the family's name, honour (what's left of it after Meghan and Andrew got through with it), and image for her deluded grandson's sake.

When it all comes tumbling down, Ma'am, you can look back at all that appeasement you agreed to with that L.A. hustler in the dim hope she'd one day return your grandson and great-grandson to the bosom of the family as the last nail in the coffin.

You'd better hope Kate and William are as up to the job of saving the monarchy as your parents were after Edward and Wallis trashed it.

R78, can the Queen revoke the HRHs after the review period? Or at any time in the future?

The Queen can revoke them at any time she pleases. She probably did not revoke them, yet, so as to leave open the door for Harry should he wish to return. They are probably bargaining that he will want a divorce before the year is up. If he decides to stay with her (or, she doesn't leave him because she is unable to find better), the end of the "review period" will be a good time to pull the HRHs and titles. They can spin some story about how Meghan and Harry no longer wanted the titles, etc.

It doesn't matter, really, as they are damaged goods at this point. They will be hired for gigs such as Goldman Sachs not because they hold any expertise but because they are a curiosity. Any forthcoming gigs will get progressively less grand as curiosity wanes.

Who, me?

Those pics at R74 and R81 are hilarious. Captions, anyone?

Aside from the many other reasons, there are two reasons that would make Meg going after Will impossible: the long game and being careful. Meg has proven she couldn't do either of those if there was a gun to her head.

Could you imagine if Kate had done that Vanity Fair shoot?

Is Kensington Palace some sort of high-class homeless shelter?

[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.]

Then came the scarfing.

R85 that's the one hat I liked her in. She's not a hat person. Points to 86, 81 and the YIKES at 74

R87 She definitely needed more time to work on her hat game.

According to this article from the time of Beatrice's birth, Charles planned to name his (ultimately non-existent) first daughter Princess Victoria. I can picture Diana approving that choice, actually.

Poster upthread is mostly correct. But Harry is an HRH twice over: once as a Prince of the United Kingdom as he was born, and again as a royal Duke: HRH The Duke of Sussex. Royal dukedoms carry automatic HRHs. The Queen can at any time revoke their ducal titles, but revoking Harry's natal title of Prince of the United Kingdom, styled as HRH, is a much harsher step.

I don't think she would ever do that. Harry would have to agree to surrender it, along with his place in the line of succession. Some time down the road, it would probably make sense, if he proceeds to live most of his life as an ex-pat outside Britain. If he does that long enough, he cannot be a Councillor of State and probably not Regent, either, should William as King die before Prince George is 18, and it will become ridiculous to hold onto his and Archie's place in the line.

I wouldn't be surprised if it had already crossed some courtiers' and perhaps the senior royals' minds. The problem is, that would move Andrew up into sixth place. If Andrew hadn't been such an jackass, it might have looked like an attractive idea.

Andrew really fucked up with the Epstein business, he really did. People think he got off scot-free, but he didn't. It probably made everyone think twice about forcing Harry out of the line, which in turn cost Andrew a move up that would have put his daughters in the more prominent position he always wanted for them. So he has paid.

I would actually wager that at some point a few years down the line, if Harry and Meghan are still together and business is booming and their lives are solidified for good outside the UK, that Harry will give up his titles and place in the line for himself and his descendants. Why keep up a meaningless farce?

Nixing names based on rank isn't uncommon in royal families. When Princess Margaret was born, the then Duke and Duchess of York wanted to call her Anne, because they felt that Anne and Elizabeth went so nicely together (Elizabeth was then four years old), but King George V didn't like the name, and nixed it. So the Yorks moved on to Margaret Rose.

R85 - What is she thinking?

"Ah, if only I'd had my eye on the ball, and gone to St. Andrews instead of Northwestern . . ."

Kate Middleton must think God hears all her prayers. Cressida Bonas was Kate's worst nightmare: a bona fide English arista 8 years younger than Kate; the half-sister of William's alleged "one that got away"; blonde, blue-eyed; slender, photogenic; beautiful skin; delicate bones . . . and that catchy first name. Cressida, HRH Duchess of Susses, would have been serious competition for Kate.

And then - Harry breaks up with Cressida or vice versa, however it went, Kate is relieved, and Harry turns up with the sleazy c-list divorced American actress who from the start doesn't know how to dress, has bad hair, pisses off the Queen quickly, wears a $75,000 dress for the engagement photo-call, refuses to go up to Balmoral that first summer, and has the courtiers already peering through their spectacles at the handwriting on the wall.

I'd have given a good deal to have been a fly on the wall at KP during that period between the Sussex engagement and Archie's birth.

^*wears a $75,000 dress for the FORMAL engagement photos

R83-When William and Kate were on hiatus, a journalist rang Kate up for an interview, and Kate responded, "You know, I've never spoken to the press before. I don't think I'll start now." The journalist was blown away by Kate's utter tact and poise and had to respect her. Compare that with Meghan's banana spooning Instagram post and the "Wild About Harry" Vanity Fair cover. Kate outclasses Meghan at every turn.

Have there ever been any reliable stories about how Kate got on with Cressida and Chelsy?

R96 - I think she got on with Chelsy quite well, although Chelsy, remember, lived in South Africa. There were charming photos of the two of them laughing and dancing at the Phillips' wedding 12 years ago.

But I don't think there was any interaction between her and Cressida. Cressida's half-sister, Isabella Calthorpe, also a beautiful blonde, was reputed to be someone William really considered marrying. She ended up married to Richard Branson's son. But it was all rumour, the kind of rumour everyone assumes is true. The other serious GF was Jecca Craig, who was more of the physical type Kate is, especially in informal wear. But Jecca and William had an amiable parting, I don't think he ever proposed but he has kept in touch with Jecca and I think may have been godfather to one of her kids.

But I'd be really surprised if there were any interactions between Kate and Cressida at all.

It's amazing how much Emily Blunt resembles the young(ish) Princess Margaret.

I enjoy the subtlety.

[quote] You people need to re-assess your priorities.

We did, and we determined we needed another British royal family thread!

[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.]

Stop spreading BS r93. That's all in your head. There is no "one that got away" nor was there any reported issues between Catherine and Cressida. Jecca was never a girlfriend *sigh*, just stop.

I wonder if meghan Markle ever flirted or even tried to sleep with William. The whole debacle has made me respect William and Kate. They have showed a lot of class through the whole mess

Great that Camilla revealed that domestic violence even exists among the upper class @R101

That tacky black dress cost how much?!!

MM thinks she's the hottest woman on the planet. A few months at Deal or No Deal will do that to you. But she has a warped idea of hot. That's why she'll have the same hairstyle at 80 that she has now. That's why she'll be carrying around that ratty hat while teetering in stilletos at 90.

R90, Harry give up his titles? What else has he got? You'd have to pry those titles out of his cold, dead hands.

Peter Phillips daughters are cute and sassy. You can see them leading little Charlotte astray when they are all teenagers.

According to yesterday's DM, Hello magazine reported that H&M were asked to present the Best Picture Oscar but they "respectfully declined.."

That's typical Markle PR to save face. Same shit she pulled when Archie wasn't given a title.

R102 - It's marvellous that you really know the truth about all this.Try googling Jecca Craig and you can give me a tenner for every time, including on her bio on Wikipedia, she is listed as "a former girlfriend of Prince William". Where did you get proof they were "just friends"?

And I used the word "allegedly" and "reputedly", I didn't say I was there and took notes.

This is a gossip site, remember?

And I was far from the only person who talked about the Calthorpe-William issue. Or are you trying to tell me that in all those 8 years he never left Kate's side for a moment or considered another woman?

You have any photos of Kate and Cressida interacting? No? Thought not.

I'm surprised none of you bitches has commented on the name "Autumn."

R102, Jecca was most certainly an ex of William.

Wills was hot to marry Isabella Calthorpe, who was lukewarm about the idea. In 2007, Isabella finally started making well, okay, perhaps marriage might work noises, and Wills immediately dumped Kate. In the end, Isabella said not having any of it thanx, Wills went back to Kate and the rest is history. Isabella eventually traded up, marrying Sam Branson.

R112, what's the problem with Autumn?

Nice photo from the joint appearance earlier this week.

R112-or "Savannah." Fraus obviously infiltrated the BRF.

What next, HRH Princess Kaylee? Prince Cole?

Autumn was born in May, btw. They should've named her May, or Spring at the very least.

Princess Kaylee ain't that far off from Duchess Meghan.

My bad, Cole wasn't the best example. Old King Cole, that merry old soul. Should have gone with Justin.

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

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

The Queen held audiences with new Ambassadors.

It's Tiara Time...swipe for Queen Mary's Diamond Bandeau Tiara. The Queen loaned it to Meghan Markle for her wedding to Prince Harry.

When Andrew was slim and Edward had hair.

R125, those Windsors have their brief shining moments, don’t they?

Then... SPLAT

The tiara Meghan got is actually quite beautiful in my opinion. Simple and appropriate for a new recruit to the firm.

R127, I agree.

And I guess this is why I’m not a rich and famous cunt: I’d have been thrilled with whatever they gave me.

Autumn might sound weird, but she has married into the BRF and can't help her name. Plus, imho, it's much less worse than fucking ARCHIE HARRISON who was born as the grandson of the future king, ffs.

Savannah is weird, too, granted, but the namebearer is totally irrelevant in terms of succession, so her parents might as well have christened her Tiffany Ariana.

[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 "takes everything personally". I'd bet 10K that he gets angry if other people take his remarks personally.

R118 - Well, in fairness, Autumn, Savannah, and Isla (I rather like the last one) aren't and never were Princesses. Archie, however, is technically Earl Dumbarton (do you think the Queen did that on purpose?), so small wonder his parents don't want him to use it.

I think it highly unlikely in light of recent developments that Archie will ever get that automatic HRH when Charles finally gets to the Throne.

I wonder if, now we know they had decided to leave by the time Archie was born, if not earlier, that's why the gave him the comic book pleb plumber name, and she pulled the Fuck You Public Mystery Birth and Mystery Godparents shit?

I wonder if Diana's sisters had any inkling, and if they did, would they still have attended? They surely would have known Diana would have hated Harry's leaving and blamed Meghan for it.

Diana probably would have liked to see Harry leave the BRF... as long as he did it on his own terms.

But he didn't, he did it on Meghan's greedy, fame-hungry terms.

[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.]

^Richard Kay has a piece after the main article.

Any proof of that r114?

So their staff including Sara Latham was let go. She's the only American, I wonder if she'll come back and spill the beans.

Did they hire some of those people knowing they would soon let them go?

They probably wanted to clean house because they were all snitches. Several reports could only have been leaked from her staff.

They clearly let everyone go because they have a completely new team across the pond, R129, and they don't expect to spend much time in the UK despite their PR to the contrary.

R134 I just love the main photo of them they used to illustrate this article. This particular shot gets used a lot. Harry glowering, Meghan smiling with her pursed lips, looking like the cat that got the cream.

The execution of their exit has been such a mess. They seem to have acted emotionally and impulsively despite having planned this for months. Harry has placed himself under enormous pressure, and he isn't thick-skinned or resilient enough to let the criticisms slide off his back. I have no doubt the family is concerned for his well-being.

r131, i took his remarks personally when he said buying carrots in plastic bags was evil and a dirty habit. Fuck him . I'd punch his light s out and take the peeler to him if I ever met the twat.

Sounds sane, r143!

Most of what the Sussexes put in that first announcement was a pack of lies. They had to know by then that no one was going to let them "carve out a progressive role WITHIN the institution", and the Queen had probably already nixed their half-in and half-out idea, and the "split their time between the UK and North America so that our son can learn about the royal tradition into which he was born" was just window dressing to make it look like THEY meant to do so, but those SOBs at the top wouldn't let them.

As Prince Hal said to Hotspur in Henry IV Part 2: "Two stars keep not their motion in one sphere."

It was totally unworkable and they all knew it.

So this was completely predictable. I'm thrilled for Sara Latham that she lost her plum job within a year. She should have known better. At least the UK taxpayer didn't pay her salary - Charles and HM split it.

It only remains for a decent interval to elapse so that all parties can make announce the surrender of their HRHs permanently and for Harry to renounce his place in the line of succession for himself and his descendants.

It's too late to stop them using "SussexRoyal" - the Queen and Charles should have seen to that. I suppose when Harry dies, they'll just retire the actual ducal title, otherwise Archie will inherit it. Who would want it after the Harkles taint it?

So the Africa Plan actually worked, only it wasn't Africa, but America. Meghan must be quite relieved. She got a title, she got lots of money, she got connections, she got her much desired A-list celebrity status, and she got to take it all back to her home town.

Clever girl.

R137 - Sara Latham is currently likely negotiating a golden parachute exit package from BP, and , no, she won't spill any beans because an NDA will be part of that package.

R127 - I think most of us agree with that.

It's Meghan who didn't.

The Stanford trip is to make them look serious again after the blowback from them greasing their palms with JPM's dirty money and cosying up to Goldman Sachs.

There are plenty of private consultants out there who help people start up foundations. They don't need academics at Stanford for that.

It's more PR by Meghan, and utterly transparent, as she always is.

And after axing their entire BP staff and making it clear that they have little to no interest in anything resembling a relationship with Harry's country, I begin to think that perhaps Andrew might, after all, get away with insisting that the Harkles NOT be invited to Bea's wedding.

I realize Katie Hopkins is hated by many on DL, but I find her Harry Meghan commentary spot on. My only criticism is that she doesn't place enough blame on Harry.;

r149 whyever would the DL hate a rabid frothing Brexit propagandist right wing troll??

Wow, on their last few instagram posts, the comments are brutal. And the negative comments, which are at the top, have lots of "likes". In the past, their defenders would typically drive positive posts towards the top, but now even they've seen the light.

Does Archie remain with the nanny while the happy couple jet around (to GS and Stanford)?

Camilla just told a story about "someone close to her" having a daughter with a strange husband who is controlling her and alienating her from her friends and family while eroding her confidence. This daughter lives in a foreign country. Is she shading MM? Wasn't there a story out there where it was claimed that Camilla got between Charlotte and Meghan during the family photo in order to stop MM from using Charlotte for publicity? It was said that Markle tried to bend towards Charlotte so she could get a picture that could be cropped to show the two of them interacting. Camilla anticipated the move and hugged Charlotte close to her.

R124, Queen Mary's Diamond Bandeau is really quite beautiful. It's odd watching some of the coverage of the Academy Awards, when we read that certain actresses are wearing millions of dollars worth of diamonds on loan. Most of the time, I struggle to even notice those diamonds on loan. When the Royals show off their jewels, you can't help but find yourself dazzled.

From the article at R149 - "A source close to the Palace tells of how, for her first date with Prince Harry, Meghan researched, bought and wore the perfume Princess Diana used to wear. "

I think what Meghan is quickly finding out is that Hollywood just isn't interested. She's nowhere near A list, infamous and notorious instead of famous, was "royal" for 5 minutes and has no real accomplishments. The big money isn't rolling in, and neither are the offers. Meghan isn't nearly as clever as she thinks. A clever girl would have played the game better.

" I begin to think that perhaps Andrew might, after all, get away with insisting that the Harkles NOT be invited to Bea's wedding. "

Andrew ought to consider the Harkles his dearest friends and most valuable allies!

They took the heat off him when he couldn't do it himself, after all.

[quote] Wasn't there a story out there where it was claimed that Camilla got between Charlotte and Meghan during the family photo in order to stop MM from using Charlotte for publicity? It was said that Markle tried to bend towards Charlotte so she could get a picture that could be cropped to show the two of them interacting. Camilla anticipated the move and hugged Charlotte close to her.

Ah, yes. The Camilla maneuver.

R153 - That's an odd story that Camilla allegedly told, because she only has one daughter, Laura Lopes (nee Barker-Bowles), who married a minor aristocrat,

"On 6 May 2006, she married chartered accountant Harry Lopes, grandson of Massey Lopes, 2nd Baron Roborough and Helen Dawson, as well as of Gavin Astor and Irene Haig of the Astor family. The wedding took place at St Cyriac's Church, an 11th-century Anglican church in Lacock, Wiltshire. Lopes wore a wedding dress by Anna Valentine, the designer known for designing her mother's dress for her wedding to the Prince of Wales in 2005. Between four hundred and five hundred guests attended the wedding, and more than two thousand wellwishers lined the streets after the ceremony. The reception was held at Ray Mill, the nearby estate of the bride's mother.

Lopes gave birth to a daughter, Eliza, on 16 January 2008. On 30 December 2009 she gave birth to fraternal twin boys, Gus and Louis. Eliza was a bridesmaid at the wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton on 29 April 2011."

I've never heard any whispers about Harry Lopes (note that apparently both Camilla and Charles have a grandson named Louis!), and I find it difficult to believe that Camilla would let information like that out about her own daughter.

But if she reversed the genders, that would certainly fit the undoubted view of the BRF where Meghan is concerned.

^*nee Parker-Bowles

Harry Lopes was the Director of Solstice Renewables, whose offices are in Marlborough and more recently,a s of 2017, is the Founder of Eden Renewables LLC, also in England which is the primary investor in the newest project, GridX Africa Development, which develops captive power projects for businesses in the Commercial & Industrial market segment across Africa, according to LinkedIn.

So if the couple are indeed now living in Africa, Camilla's story about her daughter may have some legs.

R158 - how do you know I didn't hug Camilla close to ME? That lady behind me is scary.

Having looked further into it, Harry Lopes does look rather strange.

I really am looking forward to seeing the family interactions next month at the Commonwealth service in Westminster Abbey, and thence to Bea's wedding,

The press are being merciless on the axing of the Harkles' British based staff and the indication it gives that the Harkles are, far from "splitting" their time between the UK and North America, are leaving Old Blighty behind for good.

I can't figure the Queen out, going all treacly over them as Meghan extracted Harry and Archie from the bosom of the family, quite obviously with no intention of doing anything but paying enough sporadic visits to remind the North American public that they actually are British royals and to keep Meghan's citizenship application alive - although why she'd want to keep it alive, I can't imagine.

She can't renounce her American citizenship now, it would spoil all her prospects there and complicate living in L.A. again. If she gets dual citizenship, and given that Harry is a UK citizen, whatever they earn together is taxable on both sides of the Pond.

The thing that comes across most strongly about these two is that whatever they say publicly is written on water. You can never believe any of it, including Harry's sentimental little farewell calling Britain his home, his country, etc., etc.

CNN just promo’d their special on the BRF.

Sounds like a friend of Camilla’s has the daughter in the bad relationship.

Victoria Arbiter (On CNN now) just referred to the Harry Markle exit as a “blip”. The 15 staffers axed was just mentioned by Max Foster; it must be true. And he’s sympathetic to them.

R149 - Ouch. But apt. Interesting bit about the perfume, that's the first time I've heard that.

"Along came a spider, and sat down beside her . . ."

R155 Wow, if she really wore Mom's perfume, that would be some truly masterful seduction technique. Fragrance evokes powerful sense memories.

The perfume tidbit is juicy. I can't imagine that next level kind of manipulation. I can just imagine Meghan having Diana's perfume express mailed so she could make sure to dab it behind her ears and on her pulse points. Harry would have caught a whiff and the memory association would have given him a sense of overwhelmingly intense well-being and love without really consciously identifying the source as the scent. He just would have "felt" loved, protected and comfortable in her presence. There is a reason some people with PTSD always have a vial of a comforting scent on them.

Camilla blocking Meghan from getting a photo with Charlotte is akin to Anne blocking her from HMTQ during the last Trooping. It also reminds me when William was caught on the microphone during the review of the POW ceremonial tat that Meghan just wanted to be in the pictures. The whole freaking family has been on to her for a long time.

The idea of Camilla blocking Meghan is juicy, but I have to ask, how does one arrive at it?

New engagement for William.

New engagement for Kate.

The Sussex Royal Instagram is STILL touting her Meghan's gig as Vogue editor. Who cares?

On looking back, I see that Camilla wasn't talking about her own daughter, but a friend's daughter. So the bits about Laura Lopes were unnecessary. But, of course, Camilla could well have invented the story and just changed the genders to disguise it, to make a point that it's obvious the BRF share, anyway.

In the end, both entities involved in this amazing and deliciously fruitful gossip stream will lose and gain something. The BRF have lost Harry and Archie, probably permanently, and had their brand tarnished. However, that tarnishing will fade with time once HM is raptured, Charles takes over for his relatively brief reign, and the Cambridges, as they are already doing, take full possession of the field, the undisputed victors in the Authentic Royalty Sweepstakes.

Meghan gets fame, fortune, and freedom, but rather too much sunlight on her backstory, which is that this is what she wanted all along, the Meghan, Duchess of Sussex won't fool anyone, she's a trashy gold-digging whore who took her dimwitted mark and his out of it family for a ride. She'll never be Real Royalty because she trashed that brand for herself within ten minutes of getting in. It's just a bit of flimsy window-dressing and even in North America, that's obvious.

The biggest loser isn't Harry, who after all is a grown man who has to sleep in the bed he made for himself, but Archie, bereft of extended family on both sides. Certainly, he'll grow up rich and privileged, especially as, to all intents and purposes, he's really a white boy. His royal relatives will try to reach out to him, but Meghan won't let them get too close.

Eventually, the sands of time will erode the edges of all this as the Cambridges increasingly set the style and frame of the family's future. The Harkles will turn into Edward and Wallis 2.0, but the modern edition with lots of loud-mouthed braying to keep the money coming in. As Harry hasn't remotely dealt with his Mummy issues, only acted them out, eventually there will be further drama, as those issues can't be contained if they aren't faced.

Someone on another site referred to Harry's peddling of his unresolved grief of Diana as "death porn" for money. I think that's true.

You have to realise that now that she's back in North America, Meghan has to start mining her "diversity" creds. Enninful is the first black editor-in-chief of British VOGUE. That video isn't just about reminding people that Meghan actually Did Something as a working royal, but to further establish her Diversity Creds.

This is much more important in North America (which is to say, eventually, America, no one believes for a moment that the Harkles are going to spend the rest of their lives in the backwater of Canada). She has to have an angle she can mine there, and this is one of several such angles. It's no accident that she wants that video of her with Enninful out there. No one will read closely enough to figure out that it was she who suggested the editorship, more or less ramming it down his throat, and also omitting that the price of the issue was slashed in half to make it sell better.

Isn't it interesting that she couldn't find "consultants" in Canada at its distinguished universities, or large investment banks there to support her "work"?

Archie will be the biggest loser in all this. Poor little mite.

R176, hmm good observations. That BS didn’t fly in England, did it?

Charles presented an OBE to Declan MacManus (aka singer Elvis Costello).

R171

[quote]The idea of Camilla blocking Meghan is juicy, but I have to ask, how does one arrive at it?

Here is the other picture with the same group of people in the same places.

The question was, "Why was Sparkle leaning forward?" with Camilla's corresponding action?

Archie won't be able to connect with his paternal extended family until after the divorce, and I've said earlier, the divorce will not happen any time soon (Harry won't want to admit his mistake, and she's nothing without him). And after the divorce, Harry will probably try to build a new life in a new country for himself, with a new wife calling the shots.

So yeah, Archie will meet his aunt and uncle and various titled cousins down the line, but he'll never be part of the enchanted circle. He'll always be the outsider, with his North American accent, his non-U ways, his Hollywood values, and his slightly darker skin. He's going to be SO pissed when he realizes what he's been deprived of.

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

I know you were being funny, r182, but she’s not going to let Archie near her family, either.

That’s what these mothers do. They cut the child off from anyone who might have any influence. Anyone who would make the child feel a part of something other than the mother. I’m sure some here know what I’m talking about.

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

MM reminds me very much of the Nicole Kidman character in "To Die For." This character wants most to be famous, no matter who she has to use or run over. After being spoiled rotten by her father and never hearing the word no, she flips out when her new husband puts his foot down on her selfish ambition. Her response is to manipulate some high school students into killing her husband. After the students have served their purpose, she ghosts them.

Now, I'm not saying MM would kill anyone who gets in her way...but I can totally see her singing "All by Myself" in front of the paps at Harry's funeral.

(If you haven't seen the movie, you may not get that last part.)

R185, they don’t make films like that anymore. That one is kinda genius. Was that a Buck Henry joint?

Very interesting BI from Blind Gossip just out today. Here's the story - believe what you will:

"[Blind Gossip] We have a fascinating story to tell you about a famous couple!

This actress has caused so much controversy – and caused so many disruptions to the family into which she married – that it is sometimes difficult to figure out exactly what kind of game she is playing.

Allow us to tell you about one game she played that was so public – yet so sneaky – that we all missed it!

There was actually a point at which his family could have made her “go away” by paying her off.

When was that? What was she looking for?

During the negotiations. She would have accepted a very large amount of cash to walk away.

Here’s what happened. She had her people pass along her number to several outsiders. They, in turn, publicly stated the number as the “value” that they put on her brand.

That was the amount of the buyout she was proposing!

That range was her ask. She would have liked the high end, but would have settled for the low end.

Why make that number so public? Why didn’t our actress just have her people negotiate directly with the family in private?

To have asked them for it directly – either verbally or in writing – would have presented serious legal issues. This way it looked like a simple and objective analysis done by outsiders.

Not to mention the fact that her husband would likely have discovered that she was willing to trade him for a very large, ransom-like payoff!

So the ask was made via some very public statements. How did his family react?

His family knew exactly what she was doing. They probably did debate the pros and cons of meeting her demands or making an alternative offer. However, in the end, they probably decided it was all so egregious that it was better to simply sever the relationship. They just hope that he will return someday.

Supposedly she was surprised that they did not make an offer, but not devastated.

While she did not get exactly what she was wanted – which was a quick buyout – she will now set out to “earn” that money alongside her hapless and naive husband."

R187 I never trust super obvious blinds. "Who could this be?"

Hmm. She wants so bad to be a Kardashian, it's a wonder she didn't "leak" a sex tape or photos.

If I wanted to create trouble in Meg and Harry's relationships, because I'd just been fired from my job or something, I'd invent something like the BI at R187 and send it to that ENTY troll.

He'll print anything.

Interesting BI. I can recall those headlines stating that the sussex brand could make anywhere from 500 million to 1 billion. I remember thinking how overblown those numbers were. I honestly believe that they would both take the money then renege on the deal. I don't think it would have been just MM.

r190 he also writes anything. Most of those are written by him, based on whatever seems to be trending.

R188 Super obvious are what blinds were originally meant to be. Since they were just so the gossip writer could avoid being sued by not directly naming names but making it clear enough for the audience to be interested. It's only because the current blind gossip sites are so self contridictary that they are posting more and more vague blinds.

R191 - I agree with you. Those numbers were absurd. But so was expecting the BRF to offer her tens of millions to "leave". Exactly what would that have meant?! They have a child already. She would take $50 million to tell Harry they were through, take their child, and "go away"?!

The odd thing is, she had to have a baby ASAP because without one, they could have gotten rid of her all too easily and cheaply - and, of course, Harry badly wanted kids. Wouldn't it be ironic if she realised late in the game that if she hadn't rushed to get herself up the duff with her insurance policy, she might have been able to pull off a huge payoff? But with a child in the mix, it would never have worked. For that reason, I question the BI.

Well, *I* question the BI because it was written by that ENTY bullshit artist!

An interesting twist to this sordid tale. I do think MM would seek and accept a golden parachute to walk away from her marriage and the BRF. Plenty of people do split up because of an oppressive family. But considering Harry's dependence on MM, I could see him killing himself. Question - would she leave her son with him, for enough money?

If this is true, it looks like the BRF figures they'll get Harry back eventually anyway, without paying ransom.

Germaine Greer on MM and the BRF:

"She thought she was among friends. She....was....NOT!"

I'm R176 - you lot have to take a look at the article the DM have up on that VOGUE celebratory video, but scroll down to look at the photos. SOMEONE, presumably Meghan and her PR team, has darkened Meghan's skin about five shades so that she looks almost as dark as Enninful himself.

https www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8005591/Palace-aides-cringe-Meghan-Markles-scenes-Vogue-video.html

Just go down the article and look at the stills of Meghan and Enninful smiling at each other - you can NOT believe what they did to her skin shade.

I told you in my post upthread: after a lifetime of trying to be white, she's now re-positioning herself as a Woman of Colour - even if it means artificially darkening her skin for PR purposes.

I told you - this woman has the morals of an amoeba. She'll do anything for a bit of advantage. I'm surprised more people haven't picked it up and commented on it already.

R196– Hopefully, Meghan realizes how “safe” she is while married. Once they separate, the BRF will use every resource at their disposal to destroy her. They will make her the most hated woman on the planet.

P.S. You really have to look at the photos farther down the article - in the initial ones she looks more like herself, if slightly darker but i the lower down ones, she looks absolutely startlingly dark. And please no one tell me it was one day in Miami that did it. The colour is not only far darker than she actually is, but a very strange, unnatural colour, almost blue-brown. Whoever altered the skin tone did a really shitty job.

Excerpt:

"Royal aides were ‘cringing’ last night after the Duchess of Sussex posted a ‘behind the scenes’ video from her Vogue magazine editorship showing her putting on a silly hat and playing with a party blower.

Meghan and Harry uploaded the clip to their Sussex Royal Instagram feed to celebrate the fact that the Forces For Change edition in August was the best-selling of the decade.

But the move was last night being seen as another salvo in the battle between the couple and Buckingham Palace, following their decision to step down from royal duties and move abroad.

The Mail understands that Meghan and British Vogue editor Edward Enninful had tried to put the video out several times since last summer but had been blocked by palace officials because it was seen to be too ‘inane’ and frivolous.

They feared the image of Meghan wearing a party hat with a blower in her mouth could come back to haunt her, and could even be made into a ‘Megxit meme’, a humorous viral picture. Almost all major decisions – and certainly their social media strategy – are now being made by the couple themselves, who are basing themselves in Canada for the time being, and a coterie of US celebrity agents and publicists.

They feared the image of Meghan wearing a party hat with a blower in her mouth could come back to haunt her, and could even be made into a ‘Megxit meme’, a humorous viral picture +5 They feared the image of Meghan wearing a party hat with a blower in her mouth could come back to haunt her, and could even be made into a ‘Megxit meme’, a humorous viral picture

‘In all honesty, people are just cringing about this,’ one royal insider said yesterday.

‘Both Meghan and Edward Enninful had tried several times to get the video released but were advised by far wiser heads than theirs that it wasn’t a good idea.

‘People have this idea that palace advisers are a bit po-faced but that simply isn’t true. Just look at the brilliant footage of the Queen when she took part in that James Bond skit with Daniel Craig to highlight the London Olympics.

‘But this just leaves her [Meghan] open to ridicule. Their staff advised them many times not to do this and, once again, she and Harry haven’t listened. It just goes to show where their priorities lie. Likes and clicks online.’

Insiders have told the Mail that the couple’s decision to hire a ‘meddling’ group of celebrity US-based agents and publicists has made life difficult for their palace staff."

[quote] ...akin to Anne blocking her from HMTQ during the last Trooping.

Can anyone provide a link to that please.

I remember seeing that clip, and I think there was even a slowed down version of it where you could see the shifting of people around the Queen and Anne's sudden movement to position herself directly over the Queen's left shoulder. Which blocked the approaching Sparkle who may have been aiming for the spot over the Queen's shoulder, which would have guaranteed her appearance in video and photos of the event.

There was even a bit where as the rest of the RF were coming onto the balcony where Anne turned around to see who was behind her, and her (Anne) appearing to relax when she saw it was Jack Brooksbank who was just coming out.

Anyone have a link to all that?

....

Just looking at the comments on their instagram - looks like they've given up deleting them. Every single comment is full of vitriol. Can't see how they can cash in, really.

A blast from the past - from 2011.

Thanks, R202.

Over 50 years ago, on 24th July 1967, Princess Alexandra, The Queen’s cousin, officially opened St Christopher’s Hospice in Sydenham. Since opening @stchrishospice has been committed to education and research, as well as excellence in clinical care.

This combination of science, care and sharing of experiences identified the opening of St Christopher’s with the start of the modern hospice movement.

It has been a centre of innovation and insight into palliative care ever since.

Princess Alexandra became Royal Patron of St Christopher’s in 1981 and has visited every year since 1982. Yesterday Her Royal Highness returned to St Christopher’s to spend time with patients, their families, staff and dedicated volunteers.

r204, holy shit a lot of those dancers look like the actual ppl, esp from a distance.

That video is so cringe. Jane Fonda gushing how amazing Meghan is. Meghan couldn’t resist, she had to get that out there.

R168, the problem with anyone wearing the perfume of someone who wore it in the 1980s or early 1990s, is that many, if not most perfumes of that era which still exist, exist in quite different form. There are agencies now who tell fragrance companies they can't use all kinds of ingredients that they always used, sometimes because they come from protected animals, but mostly because they were revealed as carcinogens and other poisons.

So most perfumes that existed in Diana's day have either ceased to exist altogether, or don't smell the same as they did and wouldn't trigger the same smell-memory.

Obviously if Meghan did this she'd have found a way to broadcast it to Harry and he'd doubtless have swooned and responded as she wanted, but it's not very likely that it actually triggered his primitive brain memories. I'm not sure what Diana wore; maybe it is still available in its original form, but if so it would be a rarity. Sometimes, for large amounts of money, you can buy original fragrances online that have been kept unopened for decades, but that's rarer still.

I found an Allure article about Diana and Kate's favorite perfumes.

[quote] Everything about Princess Diana’s wedding to Prince Charles was iconic — including her favorite fragrance, Quelques Fleurs by Houbigant Paris ($100), which she wore for the big day. Rumor has it, she spilled a few drops on her dress before the ceremony and spent the long walk down the aisle of Westminster trying to hide the tiny, sweet-smelling stain.

^The original formula was discontinued but later resurrected by Houbigant. Apparently it's quite close to the original fragrance, unlike some other vintage formulas that can no longer be manufactured identically (as R209 noted.)

R210 Odd that Houbigant and Diana and out of manufacture older perfumes should come up. My sister in her salad days was addicted to Tabu, which was originated by Houbigant and then sold to Dana, which I believe had it by the 1950s. The brief for the original formula (which has since been much diluted) was "a scent that a whore would wear", hence its musky very sensual character, and it became the most famous of the early "oriental" as opposed to "floral" scents.

Anyway, my sister to this day combs Ebay looking for vials of the "original" scent, which she does occasionally find and uses sparingly, hoarding them religiously.

Shalimar and Jicky were also famous oriental scents, both by Guerlain, and I do not believe Jicky is around any longer. How do I know about Jicky? Said sister was deeply enamoured of George Harrison and when it came out that Patti Boyd used Jicky, my sister was off to Boots like a shot, remaining a lifelong slave to oriental scents. She says florals smell like "soap" on her skin - as my Mum tried to get her into more ladylike scents like Muguet's Lilies of the Valley.

So, I would believe that Meghan played the scent game shrewdly. It costs to dig up those old formulae. My sister will pay almost anything to get her hands on that intoxicating original Tabu formula.

Another article says that Diana loved fragrance and had several favorites. Among them were Hermes 24 Faubourg, Christian Dior Diorissimo, Penhaligons Bluebell Perfume, Adoration, Celias Ultimate Gardenia, Isis, Gloria Vanderbilt Reverie and Lanvin Arpege.

[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.]

R214 - I see the exiled Greek royals were hobnobbing with the pervert as well.

[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.]

R214 - I find the shock around billionaires indulging tastes for young flesh has an "Emperor's New Clothes" feel to it. The fact is, given no issues about accountability or price or bad PR, men with power and money do what men everywhere would like to do: fuck pretty young flesh with no strings and no accountability. Liberal men, fascist men, middle of the road men: it's the wiring. Most men grow up and get past it, realise that civilisation is valuable and so is intimacy and family, and they relegate those fantasies to where they belong: occasional visits to the Id.

But men who don't grow up and don't get rich and can't insulate themselves from civilisation and accountability evidently feel they can have their cake, and have their cake eat them, too.

I suspect that what is riling people up so much is not just the surface indignation at Evil Doers Amongst Us, but the uncomfortable light they shine on men who might like the same opportunities, but don't have the allure of money and/or power to do so.

Andrew, of course, does face accountability and he should have realised that his membership in the BRF would outweigh any influence (he has no power to speak of) and money (which was paltry, anyway, next to that of these tycoons).

Andrew was more interested in living like the tycoons than he was in living like a dignified royal, so he's paying for it. He really has no moral fibre and his judgement is that of a squalling two-year-old.

^*Men who don't grow up BUT do get rich , , ,

R216 - And, of course, Autumn and Zara, or someone close to them, immediately contacted the DM with this information.

I do think Meghan Markle and Andrew have earned every bit of their bad press, but it does have to be said that these papers make stuff up out of whole cloth on a daily basis, and print it mostly with impunity.

No one inside those circles who had that much private information about this private a matter would ever have passed it on to the DM, which is just trying to go on milking a royal story in the absence of any other more exciting ones.

Eugenie wished Jack a Happy Valentine's Day by posting a photo from the year they met.

R221 - She looks quite decent there, not so fat. She really does have to keep the weight off, she's too short to carry extra weight.

R200. Haha, she’s so funny. Does what she wants.

You can almost hear her turning to Harry and going, “Fuck ‘em. Annnnnd......POST!”

Jack is adorable. Leak a sex tape, Eug!

[quote]The odd thing is that the heat is almost completely one-sided. Sometimes, Meghan-bashers adopt a quasi-crusading stance of waging war against knee-jerk sycophancy, of not being “taken in”. In truth, there are no heaving crowds of Meghan-faithful who need putting straight, no delusional masses claiming her as their showbiz Eva Perón. Those who like Meghan, who feel sympathy for her, who wouldn’t feel personally slighted if these strangers made a go of it as a regular celebrity couple, don’t make anywhere near the amount of fuss as those who hate her. These days especially, there is no mawkish reverence requiring a rigorous counterbalance. Increasingly, Meghan-haters are just screaming among themselves.

[quote]Why would they bother? Well, it’s an easy score, an instant headline, as supporting her never could be. The trouble is that it’s been open season on Meghan for so long, even vicious attacks have become weirdly banal and mainstream.

Kate took this beautiful photo of Princess Charlotte smelling the bluebells.

Swipe for the life of Prince William.

r224 So true! Even just a shirtless photo would be so hot!

Harry and Meghan heading to Seattle. What are they up to now?

Will and Kate enjoyed a Valentine's Day meal at a country pub.

Another photo of the Cambridges.

R231-That can't be them. Kate's hair looks longer and Will has waaaaay too much hair.

I like Kate, but her plummy voice in that podcast is quite something. She sounds like the parody accent from The Windsors. She actually says "bay-ing" instead of "being." I know there's such a thing as an upper-class British accent, but Jesus Christ.

The DM has a nice large piece up about Harry and Meghan returning to Canada all too ostentatiously using a commercial flight, carrying their own bags. and looking oh so terribly terribly ordinaire, right, see?

Of course, the paps were mysteriously on hand as Meghan smiled at them, touching her hair as always, which looks absolutely ghastly, as always. Yup, the paps are always waiting for these commercial flights to land at Victoria Airport in Vancouver.

They both look terrible, Meghan particularly, when you see photos of the top of her head you can see how horrible her hair is these days.

It is a transparent bit of PR to blunt the blowback from the Great Investment Bank Robbery.

R232 - It's not current, it's from years ago.

[I posted this a few min ago in the Caroline Flack thread but it belongs more in here:]

The Meghan fans on twatter used this woman's suicide to make "Meghan Markle" trend today. Because when Caroline Flack hits her sleeping boyfriend over the head with a lamp and splatters his blood all over the room in doing so, then commits suicide because she was afraid of all the legal and professional repercussions flowing from that act, it's all about how mean the media is, which in turn means it's all about Meghan Markle.

Meghan Markle is at the centre of this story, you see,because she was involuntarily "driven from Britain" by the meanies in the press who never asked her if she was ok and she most certainly did not EVER plan from the moment she got pregnant to leave the UK to make billions off her title at ALL.

At ALL.

R236-those women are well and truly delusional. Ironically, they are exactly the kind of women Meghan would look down on. They are a means to her end, but she wouldn't piss on a single one in case of spontaneous combustion.

"The trouble is that it’s been open season on Meghan for so long, even vicious attacks have become weirdly banal and mainstream."

But it's only been open season on Meghan for a couple of weeks!

I just saw this in another article about the pseudo-dynamic duo:

On their Sussex Royal website, Harry and Meghan have said that stopping climate change is one of the cornerstones of their foundation’s mission to support efforts to promote “healthy natural environments, strong social support systems, access to basic human needs, and a spirit of tolerance and resilience.”

The only thing they haven't listed is world peace.

r236 are you new? It's been going on for well over a year, before her wedding there was some and then shortly after her wedding is when the real onslaught began.

The cornerstone of their foundation's mission is to "stop climate change"??!!

Who do they think they are: Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman?!

There are dozens of huge foundations out there who have been working to slow climate change for years:

Paul Allen's Foundation

Alcoa

Kresge

Bloomberg

Architecture 2030

Nathan Cummings Foundation

Doris Duke

Hewlett Packard

Ford Foundation

J.M. Kaplan Fund

Macarthur Foundation

Mertz Gilmore

Packard

All three Rockefeller foundations: David, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Rockefeller Family Fund

Scherman Foundation

Starr Foundation (we're talking billions here)

Surdna

These are some of the biggest nonprofit climate change funders in the business, and we're just talking America here. Meanwhile, the level of carbon emissions has now reached and exceeded a critical point for which, realistically, there is no turning back. We're talking coping and managing now, not stopping.

For Christ's sake, why is it that everything this woman touches turns into some magnified absurdity?!

r241 has climate change been solved? No? Then clearly we need more people working on the problem.

R234, the airport is in the city of Victoria, in Vancouver Island.

^on Vancouver Island.

R243 - Thanks. Wherever, her hair still looks awful.

R212 tell sister that Vermont Cointry Store carries Tabu.

Kate has mum guilt!

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

I had always heard that Diana‘s parents’ nuptials were the “wedding of the year“ in their time. Well, I guess so! Here’s some interesting footage of the event, which was attended by the Queen, Philip, Queen Mother, Margaret, the American ambassador, with swooning crowds outside the church. Much like Diana‘s own wedding. This is why it’s so hard for Americans to wrap their heads around the idea that Diana was a “commoner,” even if only technically.

R246- I will tell her but she lives in England, and if the shop got it in new any time in the last 30 years, it's not the potent original formula. But thanks.

R249 - Diana's father hadn't acceded to the earldom yet at the time of the wedding. Diana was born an Hon, not Lady. She became Lady Diana in childhood when her grandfather died and her father finally inherited the title.

And, as if on cue, the notorious Lloyd Blankfein, the head of the even more notorious Goldman Sachs, prime architect of the sub-prime mortgage package scandale and a billioniare in his own right, comes out and says that Bernie Sanders will ruin America's economy.

Something about which, of course, the double-dealing GS, who sold those defective to their own clients, then got paid back twice over, once from the bailout package and from AIG, the huge client they screwed so royally, at 100 cents on the dollar, knows quite a bit about.

Oh, the irony! The Wokest of the Woke out of whose mouth the word "progressive" falls as naturally as "Pass the salt, will you, darling?" hits the headlines for dealing with GS and out comes its Lord and Master to diss the most progressive candidate on the slate.

Go ahead, Meghan: you're out of the royal game, you can be as political as you like AND you're a voting American citizen. Let's see you call out GS's mouthpiece for his rank utterances, whilst on the other hand your feckless husband tries to curry favour with the giant billioniares in GS's stud book.

^*sold those defective bundled packages

R252

The PR for Kate in Britain is just killing it. Patrick Jephson has a piece up talking about how refreshing she is compared to the antics of the cringeworthy couple who jumped ship. It's obvious to everyone which way the wind is blowing on the Cambridge side of the Pond, and everyone is being careful to get on the right social bandwagon.

Harry may call Britain his "home" publicly but the truth is, it isn't any longer. As long as he is attached to the toxic wife, Britain is no longer a place where he will find anything but bad comparisons to his "boring" brother and sister-in-law, carrying the weight of the future of the monarchy on their shoulders with boring, quiet dignity.

The Harkles can make as much money as they like in America and go on all the talk shows they like: they sacrificed their primo calling card to do so.

It's like that O'Henry story, "The Gift of the Magi". Each of the Harkles sold the thing that made the whole show go. Her chance at authentic class, his patrimony and birth distinction - which gave her the chance.

They'll never be class again. They can make enough money to buy and sell the Cambridges twice over, it won't matter. Meghan and Harry will always be declasse.

R254-that's what Meghan's acolytes never got about the silly Instagram numbers. They were genuinely invested in that.

Interesting tidbit also up in the DM today: the relationship between Harry and Tom Inskip, whose Jamaica wedding Meghan famously crashed in order to retrieve Harry, who told friends at the time that he was done with her, has apparently finally crashed and burned. Tom's wife, Laura, is about to give birth and Harry is not among the godparents.

On the other hand, Charlie von Staubenzee, close friends of both William and Harry, and godfather to Archie, is being bombarded with gifts of old clothes of Archie as Laura is about to give birth, as well, clearly angling for a return godparentship. Charlie's wife, Daisy, however, after the Harkles jumped ship, put up some ironic social media posts about things that "aren't working for me". They were taken down very quickly, probably on the orders of her husband.

The older brother, Tom von Straubenzee, is godfather to Princess Charlotte.

I guess the von S. boys will have to split their loyalties: Tom can have the Cambridges and Charlie can have the Harkles.

^*as Daisy is about to give birth (not Laura).

Diana's niece Lady Kitty Spencer is converting to Judaism to marry her older (by over 30 years) fiancee Michael Lewis.

R258 - Interesting. The article mentions that her cousin will one day be Supreme Governor of the Church of England as if it meant something, but it doesn't. Lady Kitty isn't part of the BRF, she's a cousin on her late aunt's side and is not in the line of succession at all. She has nothing to do with the BRF whatsoever, and has lived most of her life in South Africa, where her father moved the family years ago to get his children out of the spotlight their relationship to Diana put on them.

Whatever gets you through the night, I suppose, and I assume Lady Kitty wants to ensure that any children she has with Lewis cannot in any way be cut out of inheritance and that the family is "united" in its identity.

That said, marriages with this sort of age gap generally only last until the senior (which is nearly always the husband) gets REALLY old. Right now he's a spry sixty. But in 20 years he'll be a not so spry eighty, and she'll be (by all odds) a still beautiful woman of 50. They'll have had a couple of kids, the marriage will be long-lived enough to guarantee her a small fortune in settlement.

Converting for a marriage that is nearly guaranteed not to last more than 15 years seems to me somewhat specious. But perhaps he wouldn't have gone the distance if she refused.

Either way, Lady Kitty has ensured her future well beyond the more pedestrian wealth of the Spencers.

I do hope the wedding is hugely public, as it's bound to be the society event of the year.

By the way, Jews have married into the BRF. George Lascelles, the Earl of Harewood and a son of the last Princess Royal before Anne, married a concert pianist named Marion Stein. The family's resistance gave way to appreciating her class and dignity, especially when she was cheated on by her husband with Patricia Tuckwell - the family ended by taking Stein's side in the breakup. The luckless Stein married next Jeremy Thorpe - yes, THAT Jeremy Thorpe, who was tried in the Old Bailey because of his relationship with model Norman Scott. Stein stood by him during the scandal.

And, Earl Mountbatten's wife, a, was the granddaughter of Jewish banker, Sir Ernest Cassel, who converted from Judaism to Catholicism to marry his wife, a's mother. The bulk of Cassel's enormous fortune was left to a, which was one of the reasons the bisexual Mountbatten married her.

R256, I said in another thread that everyone in the British aristocracy is going to have to choose a side, and Harry's side isnt the one giving out knighthood and titles.

But there's an article up saying Margot Robbie wants to invite Harry and Meghan to dinner, so there's that.

Harry Markle's comments on the staff that were hired and let go.

R255, I think it was pitched hard as a way to give a feeling of buy in or ability to influence to stans. I think much was bought bots tbh.

Why don't you guys start a thread JUST for Meghan? That way you can talk amongst yourselves there. It's bizarre how out of the ENTIRE royal family you are focusing almost everything on her and through that lens. Like, there were hundreds of years of history before then and dozens of other royals to discuss.

Swipe for the life of Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge.

Queen Mary's Crown.

The renovation of Buckingham Palace continues. Here is the Yellow Drawing Room.

Shut the fuck up, whiny bitch r264.

r268 such class! What was it you didn't like about Meghan again? Please post a 27-paragraph diatribe on it!

R265 - Wow, Prince Louis really is the spit of his Mum!

Why couldn't I have thought of something interesting to be, like a wallpaper conservator? How many of those do you suppose there are in England? I could have gone in and out of palaces!

I am very suspicious of Kate's build up in the press after H&M's departure. It was not surprising but now it's just over the top. At some point when H&M sink into obscurity, the media will turn on her.

I do my best, R247. You have to keep them on their toes.

r272 I agree - it's all Kate, all the time lately. What is the point exactly?

I don’t dislike Kate at all, but it’s a little depressing to see how thoroughly “meek, mild, non-eating baby factory” is favored in this day and age.

If only Harry could have chosen a SANE career woman to marry. It might have been interesting to see that contrast (with Kate’s style) play out.

[quote]Insiders have told the Mail that the couple’s decision to hire a ‘meddling’ group of celebrity US-based agents and publicists has made life difficult for their palace staff."

Oh no, R200. That is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. 100% F-A-L-S-E

The Daily Mail has repeatedly printed that Meghan NEVER, EVER, EVER gave up her agents, publicist and manager when she got married. They also said since she never got rid of those people, that she always had a plan to go back to America (even though she's actually in Canada)

So how can she hire new agents (one isn't enough) and publicists (again, plural????), when she , according to the daily mail, already has an agent, a manager and a publicist?

I can't imagine the daily mail ever lying or making stuff up. That's your number one source for news

R276 they're simultaneously new AND she's fired and rehired them but worse! It all makes sense now because she's evil!

[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.]

After Louis, it was the plan that with the childbearing over, Kate would increase her events. The Queen ascended to the throne at 25 with two children under four at home, whom she she had to leave frequently. I believe she wanted William and Kate to have the time to bond and be with their young family as much as possible.

And it seems to bear constant repeating: doing "lots of events" wasn't Kate's real "job". Her job was to give William a happy and stable family life and support him as he inched toward ever expanded influence and rank, first as Prince of Wales and then as King. William and their children were always meant to be her primary role, not saving the world.

With the last pregnancy, childbearing, and infancy behind her, it was always planned that the Cambridges' programming would increase.

With the Harkles' abandonment of ship, it look like two sets of timing dovetailing, that's all.

Kate hasn't changed her persona one bit, except that since Louis she has looked more at east in the public sphere, more natural, and more confident.

As for the Harkles sinking into "obscurity" - I wouldn't hold my breath on that. Meghan will be creating headlines till she totters into the grave. It's who she is and what she does. The crass grabber we will have always with us.

^*more at ease (not east)

The Cambridges send a message of support for the Australian firefighters.

Kate on the cover of Hello.

Charles and Anne through the years.

It's Tiara Time...swipe for Queen Mary’s Diamond Lozenge Bandeau Tiara.

Prince Charles toured an Emma Willis workshop.

re 284's pics

Without the pretentious pearls put on, it's a fine, unostentatiously beautiful tiara.

This tiara might have been one of the tiaras offered to Meghan but to no avail as it's not a bling-bling tiara but a rather unostentatious one.

I guess as she couldn't get the tiara of her dreams, Meghan went with the blingiest one she was offered.

R287-It's a study in contrasts, isn't it? Kate wanted to wear flowers in her hair for her wedding, but was told that as future queen consort, she would be expected to wear a tiara. She ended up choosing the most modest of the three tiaras on offer. And then there was Meghan turning her nose up at all three and demanding Eugenie's, a tiara the York woman would have most likely chosen when she was a young girl.

It's too bad if this tiara were one of the ones offered to Meghan, because this one would have gone much better with her dress.

The medieval-style dress with an Art Deco tiara didn't quite match.

I guess Meghsy was aiming to wear one of Diana's well-known tiaras. Given her obsession with Diana, it's pretty clear she would've LOVED to emulate her late mother-in-law by wearing the Spencer tiara or the Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara.

I wonder if the diamond lozenge tiara is even in the Queen's possession anymore. According to the Court Jeweler website, it hasn't been seen in over 50 years.

I agree with R286. It looks terrible with those inverted pearl spires.

R289, the ridiculously long veil didn't either.

She's just an asshole.

A grifting, pretentious asshole.

Did anyone watch the new CNN series "The Windsors" last night? It started with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. There was nothing in it that I didn't already know.

[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.]

David Lynley and Serena Stanhope were, like the Phillips, alleged to be a real love match. Too bad. And their daughter, Margarita, looks to be blossoming into a real beauty.

I wonder if the moral of all this is . . . after nesting and breeding, marriage can get really boring. It just shows more with the rich and famous.

"One good thing about Megxit - Charles and William are getting closer. "

Nothing like a common enemy to bring people together.

Why are these hate-mongering right wing frau threads not auto-banned yet? Every single one of you fraupotomi should be IP blocked from this site.

R298 - Oh, are you back again? Waked up from your nap?

Go back to the nursery. The adults will call you when they're ready to dandle you on our knees for ten minutes or so.

r299 "adults" who are bashing a woman they don't know based on fabricated stories and their imaginations for NOT AT ALL RACIST REASONS I'M SURE

R300-Did you even read what I wrote above? I thought the woman was Canadian of Italian descent. It wasn't until after the wildly inappropriate spooning bananas and Vanity Fair cover that I learned she was biracial American. By then, it didn't matter. I thought she was crass. And I suspected she was a narcissist. The 75K tacky engagement dress just cemented it. Why can't you get it through your thick skull that many, many people just think she, as a person, is an asshole? It's her, at her core. It's things like the 500K baby shower and clearing out a section at Wimbledon. It's the peak-a-boo with the press over her son's birth. It's the maternity coat at Eugenie's wedding. It's barging in on the POW ceremony viewing when she wasn't supposed to be present. Those things are what make people think she's an asshole. Get it? The woman is a full-blown, puckered, prolapsed asshole.

r301 if you have to write a 500 word paragraph defending your racism...

R301 - "The woman is a full-blown, puckered, prolapsed asshole."

I will be dining out on that one for awhile.

Jesus, did Harry only take one set of clothes when he left the UK? That gray zip-up pullover must be starting to stink.

R304 - Perhaps he's been influenced by Meghan's brown roll-neck pullover with the stained armpits.

It's been mentioned before on this site that a deterioration in grooming is often evidence of depression and other emotional pressures. Both H&M have been evidencing same for more than a year. He's shown up in wrinkled suits, shoes with holes in the soles whilst in formal dress, an untrimmed beard, etc. Meghan's major signal is the uncut, unkempt hair, and more recently incomprehensible armpit stains, as they arrived in the country the day before that initially puzzling visit to Canada House in London, plenty of time to bathe and dress properly.

They both look like they need counseling.

Anyone watching the CNN series on the Windsors? It's BRF 101 for most of us, but has some great old footage, restored to high quality. First episode about the abdication. Edward certainly was a handsome young devil.

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

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

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

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

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

It's Tiara Time - swipe for The Girls of Great Britain and Ireland Tiara.

I'd love to see Kate in the Girls of Ireland. She has the best tiara hair.

Queen Mary sure loved those tear drop pearl toppers that ruined the lozenge bandeau tiara. She had them put on the Girls of UK/Ireland tiara. Ugh.

But wasn't it Queen Mary who got these stupid pearls on spikes removed?

*who HAD these stupid pearls on spikes removed

Swipe for Princess Anne at London Fashion Week.

I don't know about that R315, but the only royal woman I've seen with pearls on spikes is Mary wearing the lozenge and Girls tiaras. Margaret and Queen wore them sans pearls, thankfully.

Princess Anne at Fashion week is a puzzling paradox.

Swipe for Charles' visit to Stratford-Upon-Avon.

The story of Anmer Hall on the Sandringham estate. It's the Cambridge family's country residence.

Princess Margaret's grandson, Arthur Chatto, working out.

So sexy! We need more from that beefcake.

How long has it been since a new tiara has been commissioned?

Oh I like that Girls tiara, that is the best.

R308 - And another Labour politician evidences symptoms of mild insanity.

That should do wonders with the voters in the North Labour have been haemmorrhaging for years.

[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, we should try to anticipate what names they'll select as alternatives...and then we should register the web domains and trademarks. Sussex Global? Sussex Foundation? Sussex Dukedom Foundation? Duke and Duchess of Sussex Foundation (I guess that's the most royal option, since they still have those titles.)

r327 why would you bother? That seems a bit obsessive.

What will Charlotte and Louis's titles be when William becomes king? George will be Prince of Wales, presumably. Does Charlotte automatically become Princess Royal or does Anne keep that title until she dies? What about Louis?

Anne is Princess Royal until she dies.

Just as the previous Princess Royal, the Queen's aunt Mary, Countess of Harewood.

R329 Anne will be PR until she dies. When she is raptured AND Will is king, he can pass that to her.

Like EVERY OTHER PRINCE, Louis will get a new title on his wedding day.

Thank you, R330 and R331. So they'll just be Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis, with no "...of ___" at the end?

He will be HRH Prince Louis of Wales when William becomes Prince of Wales when Charles is King, HRH Prince Louis Mountbatten-Windsor when William becomes King, and HRH The Duke of [fill in the blank] on his wedding day.

There are quite a few extinct titles, titles merged with the Crown . . . Louis might get something like Connaught and Strathearn, which would be a nice gesture to the Queen's Scottish forbears through her mother.

R330 - Princess Mary the Princess Royal was quite lovely, and her niece looks a great deal like her, but more brunette, not quite as blonde.

She was the mother of the Lascelles boys.

Cancel the former suggestion of Connaught and Strathearn - those are associated with Ireland, not Scotland, and therefore would be extremely impolitic these days.

Let's see what else we can come up with for Louis . . . of course, if Andrew has been raptured by the time Louis weds, he will automatically receive the ducal title reserved for the Sovereign's second son: Duke of York.

If Edward hasn't assumed his father's title after Phiilip passes on to that great carriage course in the sky, and Andrew is still with us, Louis could also get Duke of Edinburgh.

R333

Louis will be The Prince Louis if he's unmarried when Bill ascends. Same with Charlotte.

R328 because when you do that, companies often will pay big $$$ to buy the domain from you.

Any Toronto or Soho House gays have any Markus gossip?

“Prince Louis Mountbatten-Windsor”, R333? Really? Where did you get that from?

R339, I'm not R333, but that's not really incorrect. It depends on the context, I believe.

[quote]Unless The Prince of Wales chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor.

Oh dear ------

I think they should rebrand themselves Sussex Common. They’re always banging on about community — they could turn their website and Instagram into a ‘commons’ for their fans.

^^^ Someone on another thread beat me to it.

There already is a Sussex Foundation...in Sussex. The Dumbartons should break free of the royal system that they hate so much.

[quote]There are quite a few extinct titles, titles merged with the Crown. Louis might get something like Connaught and Strathearn,

Titles revert to the Crown for a number of reasons. There is no heir apparant, as with the Connaught and Strathearn dukedom. Or the title is "in dispute", such as due to the stick situation from WW1 of German heirs to British titles. The dukedom of Cumberland and Teviotdale is one such title "in dispute". The current heir apparent of the title is Princess Caroline of Monaco's estranged hubby Prince Ernest of Hanover.

Fun fact: If anyone should be given the Connaught and Strathearn dukedom, it should be Ginger's son Archie. The subsidiary title of the first Duke of Connaught and Strathearn was Earl of Sussex.

R339 - The Queen, since you ask. Anne signed her marriage registry using Mountbatten-Windsor and it was the Queen who decreed that all her descendants would use the name in future as their surname - and, like Louis, she is a Princess of the Blood. It's a technicality.

Most of the time they shorten to Windsor or Wales. Wales was used by William and Harry for obvious reasons: their father is the Prince of Wales. But Charles' last name isn't "Wales": it's either Windsor or Windsor-Mountbatten.

But without his ducal title, Prince Henry reverts either to Wales or Mountbatten-Windsor, and once his father isn't Prince of Wales any longer, he won't be using Wales any longer.

Prince Louis does have one of those fluid "while the title lasts" surnames right now, which is Cambridge. He'll be Prince Louis of Cambridge until . . . he can't use it any longer. When he can't, if he hasn't married yet and gotten Duke of York, he'll revert either to Windsor or Windsor-Mountbatten. The Queen issued the edict as a courtesy to her husband, so that his children, like most others at the time, would also carry their father's name.

Windsor is the House's name, not Cambridge, Wales, York, etc. The Queen directed that for her descendants it be Mountbatten-Windsor.

Hence, HRH Princess Anne Mountbatten-Windsor on her (first) marriage registry signing.

Why do you think it would be any different for the Queen's other descendants?

[quote]The Queen issued the edict as a courtesy to her husband, so that his children, like most others at the time, would also carry their father's name.

The Queen, after much whinging, bitching and complaining by Prince Phillip about being the only man in England who couldn't give his children his name, egged on and stirred into a righteously indignant froth by that Master Shit Stirrer himself, Uncle Dickie Mountbatten, instructed her Privy Council to declare that the name Mountbatten-Windsor would apply to her male-line descendants without royal styles and titles.

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

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

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

Kate is on the cover of People.

Damn she looks old. I can't believe she's not in her 50s.

You’re incorrect, R346 - you’re confusing titles, styles and surnames.

Anne’s name on her marriage certificate was “Anne Elizabeth Alice Louise Mountbatten-Windsor” - there was no “HRH Princess” before it.

Her title at the time was “The Princess Anne” - as the child of the Sovereign she had “The” preceding her given name.

Her style at the time was “HRH The Princess Anne”.

The Queen granted permission for those of her descendants who would be in need of a surname to use “Mountbatten- Windsor”. It was a surprise at the time that it was used on the marriage certificate - it was assumed that this was an acknowledgement of her father.

But there has never been a style and title of “HRH Prince/ss First Name of Surname” in the British Royal family.

R352, damn you're a moron. I can't believe you've learned how to write.

FR353 - I agree. As I said, it was a technicality.

But the fact is, if Harry is deprived of his ducal title, he becomes Prince Henry . . . what? His brother has Cambridge, Charles is Wales. As long as Charles is Prince of Wales, Harry can still be HRH Prince Henry of Wales. But what happens when his brother is Prince of Wales?

He becomes. . . . Prince Henry . . . . ???

When the Abdication crisis hit, the six year old Margaret was said to have whinged plaintively, "I had just learned to spell York, Y-O-R-K, and now I am to sign myself 'Margaret' all alone.

So, yes, he can in the absence of his ducal title, sign himself "Henry". But if and when he does need to use a surname, it will be either Wales or Mountbatten-Windsor.

At R351 they've referred to her as "Princess Kate" which is in error. Why has Buckingham Palace permitted to the error, or at lease looked the other way? Currently, she's no more a Princess than is Meghan. She will not become "Princess Kate" until William becomes a Prince in his own right, assuming the Prince of Wales title. That's when she'll technically come Princess of Wales.

Upcoming engagements for Harry and/or Meghan from March 5-9:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will attend the Endeavor Fund Awards on Thursday 5th March.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will attend the Mountbatten Festival of Music at Royal Albert Hall on Saturday 7th March.

The Duchess of Sussex will mark international Women’s Day with an appearance on Sunday 8th March.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will join members of the Royal Family for a service at Westminster Abbey to mark Commonwealth Day on Monday 9th March.

Weren't they booed the last time the attended some event at the Royal Albert Hall?

R356, technically they are both princesses via their husbands, e.g., Kate is "Princess William of Wales", Meghan is "Princess Henry of Wales". As to why BP did not object, why would they? Kate is their shining star in the midst of the all the other train wrecks in that family. They are happy to push the fairy tale.

Yes, R358, they have been booed at Royal Albert Hall. It was also rumored that this is why Kate and Camilla had to ride with Harry and Meghan at the Trooping the Color last year. The thought was that Harry and Meghan would be booed if they came in a solo carriage but not if riding with Kate (lest the booers fear that it would be misinterpreted for everyone in the carriage. Harry and Meghan also got the backwards seat so that no one in the crowd could see them coming. Hopefully this year George will get to ride.

R356 because the Palace has more important things to do than chase stupid minor errors. Technically speaking "Princess Diana" was never her name but everyone calls her that.

R358 - Yes, they were. There was footage of it posted once but I don't know when, and I also don't know how to post such links.

Here you go, R358.

It just goes to show how stupid and arrogant they are to pour so much money into branding that was pretty obvious to everyone else they would not be allowed to use.

HRH George and I answer to George and Charlotte Cambridge at school. We are very Of the People.

(Also, neither of us cares about any title except Queen).

r364 no one knows how much money they spent on branding. All of the things they've done so far are standard and hardly cost millions.

R356, People — a cheap American gossip rag — is being deliberately misleading with that cover. The royal family would never grant them an interview. Rather, People is "reporting" on someone else's interview: It was Giovanna Fletcher who recently spoke with Kate for the Happy Mum, Happy Baby Podcast. She, of course, correctly introduced her guest as the Duchess of Cambridge.

^And you're surprised because . . . ?

As far as U.S. gossip rags go, People is on the high end of the scale

[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.]

Fifty years ago, Charles was talking about the environment.

It's Tiara Time...swipe for The Cartier Indian Tiara

Charles has always been a sincere nature boy, it's one of his admirable qualities.

Whoa, R372, that thing is a bit... much!

Has Camilla worn it? She does like her great big jewels.

When was the last tiara made for the BRF? Can they commission a new one?

R374 - the Duchess of Gloucester wears this tiara.

Swipe for the life of Meghan Markle.

[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.]

New engagement for William and Catherine.

r378 more like "everyone still thinks I'm an old slapper! More jewels will make them think I'm QUEEN! More jewels!@"

MM's pre-botox jaw is all I see. She has aged badly.

R377, That's sad (but not surprising) that the owner of that IG page had to turn off comments on that post.

Its sad that Meghan Markle was ever let anywhere near the BRF.

I can't see her turning up to any of the pre-Mexit engagements

R384 - Said it before, will say it again: she WILL show up. She NEEDS those photo ops to remind people that she IS still a British royal, and she to avoid nailing her flag to the mast and make it so plain that she hates Britain, hates England, and hates the BRF.

She would also put the Queen in an impossible situation: leaving Meghan her titles after sending such a message and proclaiming that the Queen is made of custard and utterly helpless to protect her family and its image, or do what the Queen should have done in the first place: taken all the titles away immediately, given them a big farewell cheque, paid off the Frogmore renos herself, and put paid to the whole sorry episode.

Meghan is still carrying the title Princess of the United Kingdom in her back pocket. Her son is still British. She presumably is still pursuing UK citizenship.

If she doesn't want to be booed in the streets at the Trooping, she WILL show up to these.

I'm still not sure about Bea's wedding, though.

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

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

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

One of Eugenie's causes is anti-slavery.

Charles arrives at an Aston Martin car factory in his own eco-friendly vintage Aston.

It's Tiara Time...swipe for George IV's State Diadem.

R388-that looks like Anne.

[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.]

Charles visited a Welsh hospice today.

Charles visiting Welsh flood victims.

MM is coming off as ridiculous and petty. Especially with those stupid "insider" updates. Everyone knows it's her providing the updates. That article makes Harry look like a fool.

How interesting that the piece about Meghan insisting the Queen can't stop her from using the word "royal" should emerge on a day when Charles is out in Wales today visiting hospices and flood victims.

She's pushing 40 and acting like a child throwing tantrum. What an embarrassment.

"She's pushing 40 and acting like a child throwing tantrum."

She and Harry have so much in common!

That article is hilarious in the way it ensures we know nutmeg is in charge. "..and Harry feels the same way."

Since the latest story about the Susseces 'defiance' is coming from the DM, I won't comment. But I just checked People, and didn't see confirmation there (yet). If the story shows up in People, watch out!

The George IV Diadem is my favourite of all the headwear.

Re the DM article: I really have difficulty believing it is anything but b.s. I cannot believe even Meghan would be stupid enough, as discussions are ongoing and a review still has to be held at the end of 12 months, to speak so unwisely.

Either behind the scenes Meghan and Harry have thrown in the towel and are getting ready to announce that they are relinquishing all titles so that they can move forward entirely on their own terms, and leaks like this are their way of preparing the groundwork . . .

or it's made-up bullshit by the DM.

The Sussex Royal brand is now extinct!

Moral of the story: don't mess with the Queen.

[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.]

A photo of Arthur, son of Pippa and Kate's nephew.

What will be the new name?

There will have to be, R406.

Who's going to start the thread soliciting suggestions for the Harkles' new name? Megs must be close to stroking out over being so easily thwarted. She thought she was so clever trademarking that name back when she was barely pregnant with Archie. This is too funny, really.

R408 - What probably isn't too funny is whose money did the Sussexes spend doing all that trademarking? We all know Harry's real cash income isn't that great and he had a high-end lifestyle, high maintenance wife, and home to maintain. If he spent part of Charles' $2 million per year "supplement" on the project, that's money the Sussexes will never get back, because Charles allegedly is only floating them till the end of this year.

I'd be curious to know how much they lost on this piece of ham-fisted stupidity. I have heard tens of thousands of pounds quoted, but who knows how reliable that is.

Why the dickens didn't they consult the lawyers first??!!!

R405 - Child is beautiful, looks a little bit like his Cambridge cousins, but more Charlotte than either George or Louis.

r493 The Mail Online is just making stories up now because they don't have their spies in the palace feeding them information.

R409-Because Meghan knows best. No one can tell her what to do. I'm sure Harry fell for her cock and bull about being a sophisticated A-Lister. I wonder if he's starting to have doubts. I can't imagine how angry she is having spent - i.e. pissed - all that money away.

Haha....stupid bitch!

r412 so you're just going to take some random article in the Mail, which only publishes negative stories about Meghan and definitely does not have spies in her camp any longer since they cleaned house, as fact, and then berate her for it? Deranged!

Also reported on the BBC which has way more credibility than the Mail (not that that would be difficult).

r415 oh really? Provide a link then.

Just look at R403's post, dumbass.

r417 nice try, but that isn't what the poster at r415 was referring to. He was referring to a story in the Daily Mail about an "insider" saying Meghan was mad blah blah blah.

Damn, you Meghan-haters are really dumb.

I guess the idiot here is R418.

A Megh fan? If so, quelle surprise ...

r419 just because I am not an anti-Meghan freak doesn't mean I'm a fan, but I know you Meghan-haters love to see things in black and white...

R418 / R420 having another "MEGHAN HATERS!!1!!!11! fit ... zzz ...

r421 I prefer "racist anti-Meghan freaks" personally.

She's a woman of colour. Don't forget that, bitch.

R416 meet R403.

Her shenanigans continue entertaining us. Upcoming episodes: What Tiggy/Goopy name will replace SussexRoyal? How will they signal "still royal, but now oh so free and progressive" during their final engagements in Feb/March? How much fatuousness will surround the rollout of their world-saving foundation?

Meanwhile Edo, who has so much potential, waits for his star turn ....

[quote]As Harry and Meghan embrace a kind of semi-exile, they might do well to bear in mind some words of advice from Shakespeare. In Henry IV, Part I, the king rebukes his son, Prince Harry, for shirking his duty and suggests he has "mingled his royalty with cap'ring fools". "For thou has lost thy princely privilege," the monarch berates his heir. "Not an eye / But is aweary of thy common sight."

I was surprised to see this article from the BBC,

I've always thought MM was very much the author of the backlash directed at her by the press, and her complaints about racism were off the mark. But this article in Royal Foibles has made me reconsider.

Something I just don't get - the BRF obviously did not like MM and it is said that she and Harry constituted a threat to them because of their unacceptable behaviour. The Sussexes obviously felt they had been driven out. So why do people think the BRF want to pull them back? Or is it just Harry they want to pull back?

I don't think that's the case at all. They are leaving the door open for the inevitable divorce, but I'm not sure Harry would be welcomed by the public when that happens, despite being welcomed by the BRF.

Like generations of Brit aristo remittance men, after the divorce, Ginger will be shipped off to South Africa or Australia until such time as it's decided that the Brit public won't spit in his face due to his appalling public behaviour and declarations.

Marion Crawford or "Crawfie" as she was known, was Princess Elizabeth's and Princess Margaret's governess not their nanny.

Well, in re the "door being left ajar" issue: today's DM has a piece up about an additional statement that the Sussexes put up on their site, which makes it clear that they feel ill done by and accuses the royal family, the Cabinet, etc., etc., of behaving punitively toward them and painting themselves, yet again, as victims of a brutal gang of Anglo Mafiosi.

After reading the statement, clearly added to make clear that they are furious and to attract sympathy and pity (and which, by the by, makes a few cagily inaccurate statements), I begin to believe that the door, if it was ajar, will be slowly swinging inward as the year draws on, as Meghan continues to shoot herself and her husband and their child in the foot by burning every possible bridge in sight by venting her spiteful puffs of self-entitled rage at every opportunity.

The statement compares their situation to other members of the royal family who have been allowed to pursue employment outside the BRF. What they fail to mention is that those who have weren't 1) senior working royals, 2) using their actual royal titles as gifted by the Queen as the brand name for their efforts to enrich themselves, and 3) if you factor in her maternity leave, Meghan did about 18 months of work at the job all told that she now feels entitled to milk for its status - especially as no one believes it's all for the sake of their foundation, that will be just the window dressing. She wants to be Amal Clooney, not Eleanor Roosevelt.

It will be interesting watching the BRF as this unspools: are they just going to ignore her continued vicious parrying, making decent family relationships impossible? Or are they finally going to realise it was always hopeless, bite the bullet, and yank the whole HRH-Sussex carpet out from under them, wish them well, and make a financial deal of a second trust fund for Harry and one for Archie, backed by an iron-clad NDA?

Truly, Meghan Markle is the gift that keeps on giving. She is keeping Harry Windsor out of the hands of his family. There is no way, I think now, she would voluntarily return to the fold, as that means returning Harry to the bosom of his family and their influence, and she can't have that.

There are more than 17,200 comments on the additional statement the Sussexes put up, almost all of them negative, and the talking heads are calling it an unmitigated PR disaster for the Sussexes, especially in view of the fact that they are both due on the shores of Merrie Olde within a week.

This entire situation has gotten so out of hand and so ceaselessly irritating that it should be clear to both sides that the only reasonable solution is for H&M to cut ALL their ties, put whatever money they can get out of Charles to secure themselves where their mouths are, and cut all ties, including their HRHs and the name Sussex.

I have rarely seen anyone with the talent for burning bridges that Meghan Markle demonstrates.

How they could have added that long, sour, whinging statement, rather than letting the dust settle at last, carrying out their last duties with charm and grace, getting on with rebranding and calling it a day, and aiming for mended fenced with the family and further financial indulgence from Charles, I do not know.

Where in God's name was their PR when this new statement was drafted?!

It's like watching lemmings head off a cliff.

R433 - mended fences

"Call Me Mrs. Kent". The secret life of the Duchess of Kent.

Her PR have probably long since learned not to waste their breath as it is clear that Meghan never takes anyone else's advice. This latest tantrum might have sealed their fate with respect to building partnerships with other entities. Who would risk being associated with them at this point given this latest petulant response? Meghan is clearly out of her mind with rage, but one wonders what Harry is thinking. Is it sinking into his skull that she only married him for his title?

I don't think she will show up at any of the events they are slated to attend in London, but the question is if Harry will attend.

[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.]

Swipe for photos of Edo.

Edo is beautiful, I love a blue-eyed Anglo-Italian.

[quote]I don't think she will show up at any of the events they are slated to attend in London, but the question is if Harry will attend.

Megs will never set foot in England again. She's not going to risk the snubs and side-eye to say nothing of open public hostility at her deplorable behaviour.

Ginger will return for a few engagements, but keep a low profile. He's abundantly made his point to his Father and Brother and need not belabour it.

Are you sure? I just read a story that Sparkles will be "front and center" at Harry's Invictus thing. Beyond that, Prince Dim will likely go out of his way to replay his point to his father and especially his brother whenever he can. It'll never be over.l for him.

I bet she will be front and center, swanning in like it ain't no thing. That statement makes it clear she likes to have the last word. It probably thrills Harry that she stands up to his family.

I don' think so, R442. I think he must feel he's really made a hash of it with his trainwreck choice of bride He's shown himself to be as stupid as everyone as always thought he was. And now he's really painted himself into a corner.

"Oi! Harry! When yer in a hole, stop digging!"

William singing the Welsh anthem at a rugby match.

I hope the Queen now removes 'Duke','Duchess' AND 'Sussex' but it unlikely as they won't want to come off as petty. They deserve to lose it all.

[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.]

Is there ever a day now when half (or more) of the British front pages don't feature the royals? The Mail on Sunday has three royal stories on one page.

R435's article is really fascinating. The story of a Royal who attempted to return her HRH so as to return to her passion teaching music. Proof that it can be done, if one has the confidence of ones convictions.

My word, dig the size of this tiara on Camilla. I assume it's not a photoshop.

I love how the caption refers to her and Charles as "The Princess and Princess of Wales." Well, she is....

I love that Camilla is not afraid to bring out the big ones!

I wasn't sure either, R446 (as correctly reported). So I held an audience with them. That seems to get the job done most of the time.