Buckingham Palace issues a statement.

Ok, that’s nice and dandy, but Meghan trying to get help for herself and not getting it, is not concerning to them?

I know the Queen was stuck between a rock and a hard place and had to say something, but that’s a very short statement.

Brief, straight to the point; what else is there to really say at this point?

What else could they say but this.

If they categorically denied it they’d get criticism for not taking her seriously and it would open the Me Too floodgates.

If they offered 100% support to the two of them and said they believed it they’d get criticism for not taking her seriously in the past.

It’s the perfect first response, they throw shade about inaccuracies in mm’s statements, condemn racism and say they will investigate.

Not to go all "armchair royal watcher", I don't sense much affection there. I think they're done with both of them

"Recollections may vary" is beautiful.

R1 is easily manipulated and lacks a bullshit detector.

[quote]the Queen was stuck between a rock and a hard place

Pics please.

As a DL Brit, may I offer my translation services?

She's telling them to fuck off.

Okay, DL Brit - for those of us that don't speak British, why is that your interpretation? While somewhat terse, it seems non-committal.

What else can you say. Rich peoples’ drama

"Sounds good." Is the American version. Means "fuck off."

She's saying: "That's a shame. Moving on now."

[quote] ... will be addressed privately.

We will not comment on that particular issue any further.

I am sure any reporter interviewing any member of the royal family will be asked not to ask about who was concerned about the color of the baby's skin.

R10, it's fairly non-committal but it covers all grounds and puts the ball back into the Markles' court - not that the statement wants them to respond.

You don't need to be a Brit to understand it - it's basically saying a many of the Markles' allegations are false or exaggerated, these are family issues and we're not going to fight them out in public, and we're not going to get dragged into their game of a public bust up.

It's a very reasonable statement.

[quote]"Recollections may vary" is beautiful.

The Windsors' people make sure to deploy only the very best quality gaslight.

I bet Kate's recollection certainly varies from Meg's!

R14, why should any reporter ask about that unverified allegation? If someone made a stupid comment in private (which Meghan herself didn't even hear) then why on earth should it be an issue for the media to discuss and ask random members of the royal family about? The royal family don't do sit-down interviews with TV chat show hosts anyway. They talk to the media about their work and the causes they support.

"Senior royal" can mean anything (Meghan seems to think it means everyone in the extended family and their exes) and wondering what a baby might look like is not racist.

There was never any indication that any "senior royals" had any problem at all with Harry marrying and having children with a biracial woman.

"... but we're still not paying for anything for them and they aren't invited to anything, and we've all changed our phone numbers. They quit The Firm."

So I don't get to see my cousins?

No. You black.

“We are saddened to learn of our behaviour.”

Let me post my own translation:

"The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been to Harry and Meghan" = we fucking already know because you whingers have been stamping your feet, bullying staff and still can't shut the fuck up about how horrible your life is. You would never be happy with your lot.

The issues raised particularly about race are concerning = we know race is a problem in society but you really can't compare your life to those mixed race/black people who live with real racism every bloody day of their lives in this country or the US.

"While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately" = you two are proven liars and drama queens since before you got engaged so we will take everything you say with a grain of salt. We will investigate the racist remark about Archie's skin color and the mental health requests with the people involved but we will be keeping our findings quiet. I would suggest that you two keep your traps shut for the time being and enjoy your privacy. Now, kindly piss off!

"

[quote] Ok, that’s nice and dandy, but Meghan trying to get help for herself and not getting it, is not concerning to them?

When was she prevented from that dear? When she was jetting off to NYC for her baby shower? Or when she was hanging out with Elton John in France? Why didn’t Elton help Meghan in her time of desperation? He could’ve smuggled her out in the trunk of his Mercedes.

"Recollections may vary" is fucking brilliant.

“Privately”? This family of inbreds exists only to be gawked at and gossiped about.

They are never, ever, ever

getting back together.

This is one of the few times I’d like to hear Fred Armisen’s version of the response.

What a great statement.

And the deal with it privacy may be a jab regarding their choice to air their grievances publicly on TV shows and that BRF will take the high road and keep it all in the family.

Yeah I was wondering why Meghan talk to her doctor? Though she was pregnant at the time so she couldn't be prescribed any antidepressants.

I watched the Woody Allen documentary and was amazed at how much 'psychotherapy' everyone in it had. Each child Moa, and Woody appeared to have several therapists. Guess they don't do that in Britain for royals. Just shove it away and stiffen that upper lip.

Honestly. I think less is more was the right approach. Also the fact that it is from "Her Majesty the Queen" and not Buckingham Palace means if H&M respond to it, it's a direct attack on her this time.

It is kind of a very British way of saying "Fuck off you lying twats."

[quote]So I don't get to see my cousins?

{quote]Archie

Bide your time, darling. One or more spares might go rogue - after all, your Dad's set a precedent.

I heard Princess Anne will be on the Wendy Williams Show next week, giving her side of the story.

And your grand uncle too ^

What help did she expect to get, though? What protection did she expect? I’m confused by what Meghan is alleging happened. It just sounds like she is butthurt that people didn’t like her. It’s not like the BRF ever have Camilla any protection. The public bashes her relentlessly and I have never heard anybody from within tell the rags to back off. Meghan just comes off as a sensitive American cry baby.

It’s actually a good statement. Why get drawn in? This will blow over and H+M will have no other card to play. Even if it’s revealed who made the remark, so what? Harry wore full Nazi uniform and truthfully, families will make remarks like that. The point is those are conversations that should remain private. Harry is really a moron, he’s going to go down hard when Meghan is through with him and his family shouldn’t life a finger when it happens.

It’s nice that we have these little discussion pits for britgay bigots to congregate and seethe.

Andrew must have been using condoms.

In other words, the locks have been changed!

This was a brilliant reply to their despicable behavior. The Duke and Dutchess of Grifting clearly have mental and personality instability issues. Most galling, they think they can blatantly and repeatedly lie to a few million people and get away with it.

It’s masterful:

1. It’s coming directly from the queen, which shuts down a response from them after all that ridiculous bowing and scraping to her in the interview

2. Recognizes the most serious allegation—racism—and the need to address it

3. Says it’s a family matter—which it is. Thus casting a fish eye at their ridiculous public display of petty gripes

4. Acknowledges that both Harry and Meghan have struggled with the situation (not just Meghan)

5. Points out that there are differing views about the events

6. Closes with generous declaration of warmness, which translates into—the hate is coming in only one direction. And a signal to Harry that if the marriage explodes, he’s welcome to return

I read somewhere that the best way to respond to a narcissist is to be a rock—meaning, give them nothing to react to. This statement is a master class that.

Honestly, what can M/H say other then to scream into the wind that it’s not enough?

Brilliant response! The Sussex's should be cancelled, completely.

[quote]"The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan. The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning," the statement continued. "Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.

Translated for the non-Royals:

Dear Harry and Megs,

We didn't realize just how fucking awful you two were until we saw you trash the entire family during a world-wide broadcast. I mean, we knew you were ungrateful, whinging, bullying cunts, but FUCK! We didn't also know that you lie like your last name should be 'Trump.' Now that we do know, you and your bullshit made-up issues can FUCK RIGHT OFF FOREVER. Have fun paying that huge California mortgage with your trustfund, Hazza! Love, Granny

This statement is the verbal equivalent of a cold, smooth, marble wall. There are no handholds for climbing it and there are no cracks for breaking it. Meghan and Harry are DONE.

This shit is sad all around. I think the statement is important in that it helps diffuse the situation and lessens tensions.

I want to know what the draft statement looked like, the one that HM reportedly rejected. This seems pretty definitive that they’re done with their antics. It just makes Harry and Meghan look overwrought.

"She's a liar."

"They're both nuts."

"Idiots."

It was a perfect response to the absurd, inappropriate, selfish and hatefully greedy attempt by these two grifters to jump the long con of the royals.

And "long cons" do have their uses for myth making, nationhood, commonweal and idealism. Certainly the family have given back more than they've taken in the last 100 years. If people can't see it, they are willfully blind.

It's a slightly longer version of the standard 'U' response when anybody gets het up about something: "Sorry, didn't know you cared so much."

If they thought the interview was going to get them any more money or an HRH for their kids, they were sadly mistaken. All you can hear echoing from this statement is the sound of heavy palace doors clanging shut.

I really wish someone could point to scenarios that have cemented William and Charles as kind-hearted. There are 2 sides to every story, and in a rush to demonize Meghan, people are hiding 2 of the biggest assholes in the BRF behind The Queen. She is not them and they are not her. The Queen deserves love and admiration, but as her pedophile son highlights, the family is not perfect.

The queen - “yes we are racist” DL racists - “perfect response”

lol

This really is as good a response and as in line with “don’t explain, don’t complain” as a statement could be.

I think Harry was hoping this bombshell interview would make his family beg him for forgiveness and welcome him back into their graces and pocketbooks. I don’t like him so I’m glad that’s not happening. I do like Meghan though, she’s only acting the way any American who grew up not wealthy would. I don’t blame her for not following their stodgy rules. But he should have known better, especially since he still wants their money and I bet will want to go to events in the future. He’s also lost his relationship with his brother, who will choose his own wife over Harry.

The Queen clearly isn't going to take any titles or air any dirty laundry: Harry and Meghan will remain the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. But they won't be getting anything from this either--not from the BRF, anyway. If they can whip this up into some kind of Hollywood deal, more power to them, but the Palace is, as always, taking the long view and betting that they will burn themselves out in due time.

[quote] I do like Meghan though, she’s only acting the way any TOXIC NARCISSIST would

Fixed that for you.

The British Royal Family SERIOUSLY under estimated Meghan.

The fact that they have to now play defense, is very telling.

They're running scared!

The fact that the "Men in Gray" have no power over Meghan, has really cut off their balls.

They have no choice but to defer to QUEEN MEGHAN.

Bow down, bitches. Bow down and BEG.

I like how they just refer to them as Harry and Meghan and not by title. It is clear that while they are still family, they don't see them as part of the BRF any longer.

R49, you slide from William and Charles to Andrew with suspicious quickness. They are not Randy Andy, and he is not them. While Charles and William are far from perfect, they never trashed their entire family in front of the whole fucking world, for starters. There ARE two sides to every story, and the side we're hearing from the people who worked closely with Meghan and Harry during their brief tenure as working Royals paints anything but a glowing picture of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

R53 yes she is, but I expect that of Hollywood types. He knew what he was marrying

This predictably noncommittal statement, purportedly from that ancient hag clinging to the trappings and riltuals connected to a fading monarchy was probably really crafted by a run-of-the-mill "PR person for the "royals." It's also not the subdued brilliant snark some of you think it is, I mean, com on. There are no winners on either side of this melodrama, but good lord, the lengths some of you will go to genuflect before your "betters" is truly pitiable.

If you don't understand subtlety and nuance, R58, nobody can explain them to you.

This is still not good enough.

The Queen is the head of the Commonwealth and the organisation has confirmed that Prince Charles will succeed her in that role. Presumably, if the British monarchy lasts, Prince William will eventually become the head of the organisation too.

The Commonwealth is comprised of large swathes of African countries and India, none of whom are going to take these alleged comments against Archie (and by extension the new baby) because of his potential skin colour well.

This episode is not going to end well.

Saying they will deal with it privately as a family is a masterstroke. If Harry and Meghan continue to go with the public psychodrama route then many will conclude they are not quite so genuine.

R60 you very much want that to be true and it very much will not be.

Actually, it has been widely reported that they engaged a psychiatrist on an emergency basis for Diana, while on her honeymoon, R30. Charles, William and Harry have all been reported to see therapists.

Keep telling yourself that, R62.

[quote]This is still not good enough.

R60 has stated her boundaries. I’m sure the Queen will be reading this and paying close attention.

Yes r60, I’m sure the Darfur orphan is just sickened by this racism charge against a bunch of old white people.

Go peddle your Western-centric CRT bullshit elsewhere toots. Black and Indian people of the commonwealth have actual problems to deal with.

How much you want to bet H&Ms Netflix and or Spotify programming launches real soon.

[quote] Whilst some recollections may vary.

That's the fuck off to Meghan and Harry.

The accusation that Chuck or Wills is a racist will stick though. Expect to see more black Realms become republics and distance themselves from the BRF like Barbados is.

What makes you think I'm white or a westerner, R66?

The Queen’s statement is further proof that one is not well served when they bring toothpicks to a sword fight.

H&M may have scored the interview, but the 1,200 institution will hand them their lunch and show them the door.

Just in case they were wondering, the answer is No. The BRF will not be moving heaven and earth to make it possible for H&M to attend Prince Philip’s 100th birthday celebration or other festivities this summer.

They shot their wad with the Oprah interview. Even if they DID have more 'secrets' to spill, to release them now would make them look vindictive and money-grubbing. If they don't have anything else, all they can do is repeat what the public already knows. That will get tired fast. If they did name names, that would leave them open to a motherfucker of a libel suit if they can't back up their claims. I'm guessing they can't, which is why the big stuff--what Kate said to Meghan to make her cry, who questioned Archie's skin tone--won't be elaborated on.

Sudan is also not part of the Commonwealth

[quote] Expect to see more black Realms become republics and distance themselves from the BRF like Barbados is.

If more countries leave the Commonwealth, it won't be because of anything Meghan Markle said.

[quote]"While some recollections may vary ..."

This points out that:

1. Some of what they said was true and accurate.

2. Some of what they said happened but family members remember things differently.

3. It doesn't say that none of it happened, in any way, shape or form at all.

[quote]The British Royal Family SERIOUSLY under estimated Meghan.

For all of America's faults, Americans won't be silenced for too long. They were never going to be able to control her. That's not how Americans are raised. It's all, independence! Me! Me! Me!

While that can be a bad thing that can also be a good one as well.

[quote]I think Harry was hoping this bombshell interview would make his family beg him for forgiveness and welcome him back into their graces and pocketbooks.

Doubtful. I think this is the kind of interview you give when you don't give a damn anymore. The only person they praised was the Queen. Their friends from the family (like Eugenie) will always be their friends and no doubt witnessed some of what they were speaking about.

R59 - Oh honey, I understand them, but apparently you're the sort to assign such qualities to a typically bland PR statement because you're so enamored of the queen. Whatever gives you a little life, my dear.

Too bad posts here can't be pinned. R74's sums things up perfectly...

H&M have already said this was their final say on the matter and they won’t be speaking about the royal family again. But what happens when people aren’t interested in their chicken coop rescue org, or her lifestyle brand?

Dunno about that--Diana thought her public airing of grievances would make the Royals understand how badly they'd treated her, how much she was hurting, and welcome her back with kisses and comfort and appreciation. Instead, they gave her the boot. (According to Tina Brown's excellent bio.)

Emotionally, Harry is exactly like her, so he may be looking for apologies. But if he thinks this will get him anything else from his family but stony silence, he's vastly mistaken.

The thing is that, thanks to Andrew and his Epstein business, the BRF is in a much more vulnerable position public image wise. Allegations of racism is the last thing they need on top of the Meg & Harry drama.

The BRF and their handlers should've negotiated a deal that would have kept Meghan quiet and just keep her and Harry on "friendly terms" while they go on about their merry ways all over the world.

R50 is like the McCarthyites screaming "reds." An all-purpose tar brush. Quite Trumpian.

As for race, Markle is whiter than blacker, and she and her cotillion of racists using race as a razor.

I'm biracial and she's the kind of boojie cracker that is all take and no give when it comes to family and community. She doesn't even have a community. Montecito?

And using "suicidal ideation" as a first resort? Wanting a princely title and full free security when you've got millions? Blaming everyone and lying and never showing an interest in anything but yourself? No real job and wants the bling? Uses race against her own people? Stirs shit in her own and her husband's family? Finds a stupid man and like a spider sucks the life out of his dumb hide? Plots and schemes? Wants to sit on her fattening ass and PRONOUNCE sermons on how the world should be? Pretend to values and never go to church or support the people who really need it - REAL HELP, not just being a gimme-gimme face raking in all the care that regular folks need. Purely materialistic? Lies through her teeth and lazily shits on the people doing the work?

How dare she embody every racist stereotype about African Americans and every person of African descent?

And as for R75, "bland" is honest, direct and non-escalating. The matter is not a bonbon for you to linger over, cunt, while drooling your dears and darlings.

Charles and Camilla visited a vaccination center today in North London that coincidentally had quite a diverse clientele.

R75, Oh Sweetie, I am not enamored of the Queen. I am enamored by the subtle wielding of power and influence. Like Diana, Harry and Megs understand tactics but not strategy. The long game will go to the Palace, and this masterful statement is the first indication of that. But if you want to keep kissing Megs' manicured feet, you do you, boo.

Unlike Diana R78, Harry doesn't need them any more.

He has his own life, his own family, and he now lives in a completely different country - thousands of miles away from all of their negativity.

It's what he has always wanted, and now he has it.

I have a feeling that this was all about getting some satisfaction, and having matters handled on HIS terms, and not the BRF's.

No doubt, both Harry and Meghan feel empowered by this interview.

My God, R80--that was fucking BEAUTIFUL.

That is a good statement.

If only you Brits would pay as much attention to your dental care as you do these welfare queens

[quote]Unlike Diana [R78], Harry doesn't need them any more.

Then why be so upset about the titles?

How many plates did the Duchess of Victimhood throw agains the wall after reading that statement?

They tried that, R79. They gave them a year of financial support and their best wishes while the Sussexes sorted themselves out. As soon as the Queen made it clear that she was sticking to her original terms--in or out, no half measures--they went on Oprah and whined to the whole world.

I don't think most people care about Andrew, who is in permanent social Siberia, as much as the Sussex stans seem to think. The Palace has done what can be done to him, considering he hasn't been convicted or even formally charged with anything.

I think that Eug and Bea are on team Sussex.

Given the way the BRF has treated Andrew and Fergie, I'm sure that the girls are enjoying this bit of payback.

However, they're smart enough to play both sides, and remain in the Queen's good graces.

R79, the Andrew/Epstein thing doesn't make the royal family vulnerable because Andrew is not relevant. He really has fuck all to do with anything.

The Markles' whining doesn't make them vulnerable either. Most Brits can see through Meghan's bullshit and understand that Harry is dim. They're also not really relevant to the functioning of the royal family either.

A good response. Not much more to say.

R10

The 'recollections may vary' bit means 'you're lying'.

The 'full extent' part means 'you weren't telling us most of this stuff at the time'.

The 'we will address this privately' means 'We wouldn't lower ourselves to this woman's level'.

R79 raises a good point. All of this could've been avoided if Charles didn't have such a mean streak. It was quite possible to throw Harry and Meghan crumbs to keep them feeling a part of the team, while achieving the goal of a slimmed down monarchy. People who feel helpless can often act carelessly...so putting a sheltered prince in a position where he and his family have no money or security was just dumb.

Gay people seem to be European in their view of life in general (and anti-woman) so it's understandable a lot of people here are Team Windsor. But Harry and Meghan live in America now, and Americans seem to be solidly behind them based on the media and social media posts. The wish they end up out in the cold with nothing simply won't come true. The mansion has been bought and paid for, and the multimillion dollar contracts have been signed.

I’m wondering how this statement can be called brilliant, considering it’s coming from a pack entitled, racist, rape-covering liars. I understand that y’all hate H&M, but showing support for this isn’t a good look.

[quote] As for race, Markle is whiter than blacker, and she and her cotillion of racists using race as a razor.

Yeah, that's not how it works at all which you would know if you were actually ...

[quote]I'm biracial and she's the kind of boojie cracker that is all take and no give when it comes to family and community. She doesn't even have a community. Montecito?

Doubtful unless you really hate yourself. She's never hidden who she was as a black or biracial woman. She parades her mother around with her every chance she gets. She has friends who are black and darker than she is. This is just nonsense.

[quote]Finds a stupid man and like a spider sucks the life out of his dumb hide? Plots and schemes? Wants to sit on her fattening ass and PRONOUNCE sermons on how the world should be? ..... blah blah blah nonsense

Did she piss in your cornflakes?

[quote]How dare she embody every racist stereotype about African Americans and every person of African descent?

I think you need to seek help immediately for your identity crisis.

[quote] The mansion has been bought and paid for, and the multimillion dollar contracts have been signed.

Exactly.

Which is why they had absolutely nothing to lose, in terms of doing the interview.

[quote]Whilst some recollections may vary.

Kate, swearing to anyone that will listen, that she DID NOT make that bitch cry!

Now Princess Anne, should could make Putin cry...Kate, not so much

Isn’t the mansion mortgaged? No doubt they have money but Harry was used to spending without a care. Meghan is probably more used to budgeting so maybe they’ll be fine.

Still, unless Harry is a sociopath, he must be a little sad about losing his family. He was very close to his brother and his brothers kids.

[quote]"The whole family is saddened..."

As has been deconstructed above, The Queen's response is expertly, economically deft. So much conveyed in so few words. Not yet noted though is that the above little segment conveys: 'You're totally outnumbered. We're all in agreement about what we think of you, and you can guess what that might be. You wanted this breach, you've got it. It'll be a long way back, and no fun at all if you dare to try.'

I am not sure that is possible with people like her, R79. They thrive on endless drama and victimhood. Not sure money could have bought peace. If you have no direct experience, count yourself lucky. Harry is so much like his mother. And MeAgain plays him like a fiddle. It will not end well for him or the kids.

[quote].so putting a sheltered prince in a position where he and his family have no money or security was just dumb.

The prince put himself in that position by quitting his job. Had they stayed in the UK as working Royals, they would have had all the money and security they ever needed.

If history has shown us anything it’s that the Queen will throw those closest to her under the bus to preserve the power of “the institution.”

A very good statement. Well done PR pack at Buckingham Palace.

I think some of you are giving this ancient hag with a 3rd grade education way too much credit. This reads like a statement churned out by a junior PR associate.

R101, Lady C. is a bitter cunt. I tried watching that video and had enough after about 30 seconds.

It really doesn't matter what the fucking BRF think any more.

Harry and Meghan have declared their independence.

Those of you monarchists should be able to understand this now, in terms of the American Revolutionary War.

We won in 1776.

And now Harry and Meghan have won against the monarchy, 245 years later.

If I was the Palace, Ii would say this is a private family matter and we have no comment.

You live in England, you stay at Lizzie's house, you eat Lizzie's food, you wear designer clothes, and Harry's father picks up the tab. If you get bored, you let me know, 'cause I'll do it. Ha ha. I'll do it.

Perfect.

If they were truly independent, they would renounce their titles (or not bother using them), and not whine about a title for their kids. But they haven't. Even Meghan knows the only thing interesting about her is her marriage to a prince. Oprah sure as fuck wasn't ever going to interview her about her stint on Suits or opening suitcases on a game show.

Why do people keep going on as if missing out on Prince philips 100th bday party is some kind of major PWN. who in their right minds would want to attend that?

R112, do we even know if Philip will attend?

[quote]Doubtful unless you really hate yourself. She's never hidden who she was as a black or biracial woman. She parades her mother around with her every chance she gets. She has friends who are black and darker than she is. This is just nonsense.

Oh c'mon. Meghan would never have dated or let alone marry a black man.

[quote] R112, do we even know if Philip will attend? —#Dead

More like, #WalkingDead

She straightens her hair and had her nose narrowed. She was in an all-white sorority in college and only dates/marries white men. She only plays up her African American heritage when it suits her.

What beautiful lukewarm sentiment.

r90 The Queen has always had a good relationship with Fergie despite the ups and downs. This is well documented and known. You have got your facts wrong there.

R116, you do realize that straightening your hair and being in an all white sorority does not change the fact that you are biracial? How exactly is she playing up her African American heritage when it suits her?

The BRF has perfected the art of saying absolutely nothing, in 100 words or less.

R118, that's wrong. Fergie was shunned after the toes sucking pictures came out and was not invited to any events until Harry's wedding. It is true that the Queen liked Fergie very much prior to that.

It wasn't about talking to doctors r30 (and everyone else who is deliberately misinterpreting what was said), she was requesting to go to a hospital for a while, and was told no.

I completely agree with r51. Harry with Meghan's help, has removed himself from the Royal family for good, there will be no apologies from the BRF with plea for him to come back, he's done.

They're just racist, R119. It's all "she doesn't look black, therefore was never exposed to racism, and besides SHE'S appropriating WHITE culture so she's the real evil" with these guys.

R95, the BRF trolls were going to call ANY statement released "brilliant" and then make up stories where they pretend to "read between the lines" and can deduce what it "really means."

Just for fun, the Queen should have said “We are praying they get all the help that they so desperately need!”

It seems the most important men in Meghan's life have always been white men. Why didn't her mother walk her down the aisle which would have been so much more fitting than Charles? Not good optics? Vacationing with Elton John, designer clothes, private jets, flying back to NY for a baby shower, cordoning off hundreds of seats at Wimbledon for what exactly? Yet she's so concerned about women's empowerment and the environment when she insists on being coddled like a Faberge egg and is deeply offended that her children don't get titles? What a handful this woman is. Their measly millions, from the BRF of course, will not last long when Harry has been used to living a billionaire's life. His resentment will only grow. There is no way of quenching it. Until Meghan is tired of this little boy she married and will eventually end up with a man and he'll go back to his family where he belongs where private jets and blowing away animals is just how it's done.

Having lived in both the UK and the US, the people who are saying this isn't enough are clearly Americans. Unlike Americans who pontificate, and like long pleading pleas for forgiveness, the Brits are the masters of understatement. In the UK, this will play well. Race divisions are as pronounced (yet) in British Culture like they are in the US because the British aren't as "woke" as the American left.

In all honesty, one of the Queen's strengths, and her greatest weaknesses at times, is that she is a completely unimaginative person. She says what see means but never more and does so in a very understated manner. During the Scottish Referendum, her saying "I think the people of Scotland should give it some thought" (which way to vote) was considered daring for her. But this lack of imagination makes her too trusting. She believes people when they tell her what they will or won't do. So the idea that a member of her family would tell her they won't do anything to embarrass the institution, and then do the opposite, that is not comprehensible to her. This is why she's had so much trouble with her family, because she always assumes they have the institution's interests at heart like she does. She (along with rest of the family) ignored the warning signs about Meghan because they wanted Harry to be happy. He had been troubled and they hoped that Meghan would be a good influence on him like Camilla on Charles, and Kate on William. Instead, they were played. I think William was the only one with the smarts to see Meghan's game at work and when he called it out, she worked to play on Harry's jealousy of his older brother.

Eventually, this will come back to bite Harry in the ass more than the royals. Who are wounded, but will ultimately survive. Meghan is narcissist and they are never happy, they always want more. The truth about her will start to seep out in time.

After Sparkle's mean girl stunt at Eugenie's wedding and a follow up bitch move right after the news of the birth of Eugenie's baby, I find it hard to believe that either Eugenie or Beatrice want anything to do with either of the Sussex.

And, it has been well reported, that the Queen has known Fergie since she was a little girl. (See link below with Fergie at left, the Queen, and Andrew with his back to the camera.)

When Fergie and Andrew were splitting up, the Queen met with Fergie and asked her what she wanted.

Fergie's response to the Queen was "Your friendship, Ma'am." And she got it. And still has it.

I don't get all the Meghan hate on here. Celebrities are generally messed up, untrustworthy people, but even THEY don't deserve to be ostracized for being too dark skinned for some or too light skinned for others. Meghan did not choose to be a light skinned biracial woman. Let her date/marry whoever she wants to.

Perfect statement. Lilibet has good advicers and writers.

[quote] It's all "she doesn't look black, therefore was never exposed to racism, and besides SHE'S appropriating WHITE culture so she's the real evil" with these guys.

Oh please. We’re not talking about Stacey Abrams or Lupita Nyong’o here. Whatever racism Meghan experienced as a biracial woman isn’t the same as what black women experience. She chose to permanently chemically straighten her hair and get a nose job; that says more about her and her perceptions of race than anyone else.

The now-blocked R80 is full of shit; if he's bi-racial I'm Ivanka. Plus he must be old as dirt: did he actually use the word "cracker?" Oh, my sides!

You do know that the 500 pound gorilla in the room is Andrew, who holds the fate of the most powerful men in the world in his hands. If "the good guys" cannot flip Ghislaine, chances are they will make Andrew an offer he can't refuse, an offer that will be countered by "the scary thug guys."

The Andrew/Epstein scandal is going to make the ballad of Harry and Meghan seem like a benign nursery rhyme ("...and the plate ran away with the spoon."). Stay tuned.

R129, while life in your delusional mind must be exciting, Meghan and Eugenie are friends. Before Meghan entered the picture, Eugenie and Harry were known to be quite close. Furthermore, during the interview Meghan spoke fondly of Eugenie and “Fergie” (a familiar nickname that was used multiple times).

There’s no need to make up stories...the facts are interesting enough on their own.

I'd love to know the text of the statement the Queen had refused to sign off on.

[quote]the BRF trolls were going to call ANY statement released "brilliant" and then make up stories where they pretend to "read between the lines" and can deduce what it "really means."

And Sussex stans were always going to see Sunday's interview as an honest, moving dialogue wherein Harry and Meghan won the hearts of the world, when in reality it was a pitiful, whining display of lies and self-aggrandizement.

R135, the original statement said:

“Homegirl ‘bout to fuck around and find out!”

I saw part of the interview. I do not feel sorry for Megan but I do for Harry.

If you can't defend Harry and Meghan without dragging in Andrew, you must realize at some level that their behavior can't really be defended. The fact that Andrew is awful doesn't mean that Harry and Meghan aren't greedy posers.

[quote] [R60] has stated her boundaries. I’m sure the Queen will be reading this and paying close attention.

Several queens, in fact.

The statement is a perfect articulation of Fake Concern, leaning in and cocking the head to feign "empathy."

What the Palace really meant: "We're fed up to the back teeth with the whingeing and moaning of these ungrateful two attention whores. But we can't actually say that, of course, lest we be accused of racism and triggering their 'trauma'".

R129, your story about Fergie and the Queen sounds like a load of bollocks.

What a fuckin' fantasy!

Bullshit, R139. Andrew highlights how the BRF will circle the wagons when they want to protect someone. Meghan has a valid point in that the craziest stories were printed about her before, during, and after the wedding, and nobody other than Harry ever came to her defense. If Buckingham Palace can be mobilized to explain why Andrew won’t meet with the FBI or even to arrange a disastrous interview, why can’t they refute allegations that Meghan made Kate cry? Don’t wag your finger at others when you yourself are willfully ignorant.

I wonder if this is just the tip of the ice berg and she has more stories and even worse racial incidents.

There is such a story here. But Helen Mirren is too old to play a 94 year old.

R131, unlike you.

I see the Queen didn't go with the original heartfelt message.

What I cannot believe are the comments that Meghan experienced "years" of abuse. Years? They got married in 2018. They bailed at the beginning of 2020. That's two years!!

A 94 year old woman with a husband on his deathbed does not deserve this. It is absolutely shameful of Meghan and Oprah to proceed with their money-grubbing drama. However much money Meghan makes from her race-hustling (and I think the Netflix accountants know how to make sure the 'share of profits' projects never actually make much profit), no decent person will ever forgive her for what she has done, and what she intends to do. Even Wallis Simpson achieved a certain dignity in her later years. Meghan Markle will not. Meghan Markle will never get whatever it is she is so desperately looking for in this life.

[quote]Andrew highlights how the BRF will circle the wagons when they want to protect someone.

Andrew has been banished from public Royal life. Given he has never been charged or convicted of a crime, there is not much else they can do. Keep in mind that they ALSO 'circled wagons' when Meghan was bullying her staff into nervous breakdowns.

[quote]Meghan has a valid point in that the craziest stories were printed about her before, during, and after the wedding, and nobody other than Harry ever came to her defense.

The Palace almost never comes to any individual family member's defense. Kate was shredded in the press for years with very little Royal intervention. She kept her chin up and kept working, and the press frenzy eventually died down. Meghan just has a bloated but fragile ego, as most narcissists do.

I wish the Queen could have just spoken the truth and called Meghan a psychotic liar. I bet the Queen wishes she could also.

R150, thank you for reminding me why it’s best not to engage with online trolls.

What exactly has the royal family done to "protect" Andrew, r143? Did they speak out against the huge media coverage? Did they try to pay off Virginia Giuffre to retract her accusations against him? Did they try to use their influence with the FBI?

I don't know if the Queen thinks that way, but I guarantee that William and Kate wish they could call out Meghan for the liar she is. But they know better: Acknowledging the Sussexes beyond this cool blanket statement would just feed the flames.

R142 Fergie grew up with the Royal Family. That is fact.

Despite the formal shunning of her they've had to do, she still lives at Royal Lodge in the grounds of Windsor Castle. If she wasn't liked by the Queen and other members of the family, that wouldn't be the case.

She's held at arms' length at formal events but it's very obvious she's still very much liked within the family.

Meghan has issued a statement, in response to the BRF statement:

[quote] I WIN.

Bwahahahahahaha!!!!

I give the Farkle marriage three years tops.

Kensington Palace means the Cambridges' staff, R152. The Cambridges were defending themselves. Notice that Buckingham Palace said nothing.

The article linked below lays out everything Kate went through during her time with the family. They didn't lay off her until around the time George was born.

So, R143, sorry to burst your bubble but Buckingham Palace no longer says anything about the Andrew/Epstein thing any more since he got fired from official life and his office was closed at Buckingham Palace in November 2019. I think that was before Meagain blessedly ran away to start her circus. He's banished. His daughter married and the official photograph was of her with the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh. You have a curious definition of circling the wagon. I know it makes the Megalomaniacs feel better to equate their distortion of the facts about York with the unbecoming if less sordid antics of Miss Markle, but the truth of the matter is, in plain speak, you're making shit up.

"Buckingham Palace declined to comment on Mr Berman’s remarks. It is understood that the issues are being handled by the duke’s legal team and palace officials are not involved."

I'm sure you're not being wilfully ignorant.

R150 Meghan specifically said that what was done to Kate by the press was ok because it wasn’t racist. She should have said it’s not ok either and the royal family should start taking care of everyone for the sake of their mental health, but she chose the route that would get people riled up against Kate and in her favor. It was pretty shady and not kind.

'They're running scared!

The fact that the "Men in Gray" have no power over Meghan, has really cut off their balls.

They have no choice but to defer to QUEEN MEGHAN.

Bow down, bitches. Bow down and BEG.'

You are one insane twat. The Queen has dismissed Meghan the Cunt as one would swat away an annoying fly. The Queen "defers" to NO ONE especially Meghan the Cunt. You can like Meghan the Cunt's anus all you want but it doesn't change a thing. The Royal family has essentially told cunty Meghan to kiss their royal asses.

[quote] The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan”

How stupid of the Palace to claim they didn't know all along what H&M were going through. It's tantamount to them saying "the Palace, like an ostrich, prefers to keep its head in the sand when unfortunate news about a member of the Royal Family being put through hell by the press has been stated to everyone time and time again".

[quote] The Palace almost never comes to any individual family member's defense.

It made them look like total assholes for not coming to the defense of a new member who gets vilified for being mixed race. I admit, it was a totally new, unprecedented situation, but they should've made it clear that race should've been off limits when it comes to tabloid coverage of Meghan and Harry.

[quote]Ok, that’s nice and dandy, but Meghan trying to get help for herself and not getting it, is not concerning to them?

I'm sorry but this is complete fucking bullshit. If my spouse was telling me they wanted to kill themselves, I would get them help, not look to protocol. I think Markle is a big liar but she should have dumped his ass as soon as he said, "Oh, you want to kill yourself. Hm, let me go see what grandma says." You put her in a car and drive her to the hospital. You can lie about why later if you want.

The Men in Grey that Meghan blames for all her troubles were actually mostly women, including two women of color. She tortured them mercilessly.

Well, there goes the Invictus Games. No patron now.

Where is Melanie when we need her?

If you're going to join the royal family, you are going to get kicked around by the press for a year until they find a new shiny toy to play with. Deal.

Let's think about this: The BRF's newest duchess, a pregnant woman, says she's feeling suicidal. Why WOULDN'T they get her help? Consider the alternative: a pregnant royal mom-to-be dead by her own hand. There's a story that they would never, ever live down.

When young Princess Diana was making suicidal gestures by slicing herself with a lemon grater, they got her the best therapists around. To think they wouldn't do that for Meghan, if only to protect the family's reputation as a whole, is ludicrous.

They tortured Kate from the moment she was first identified as William's girlfriend until shortly after George was born. That's more than a decade of abuse. In the New Zealand Herald article linked above, it says that at some point when George was a baby, the Cambridges managed to make peace with the press. And you can't blame the Cambridges' detente on having Meghan to kick around, as she wouldn't be on the scene for 3 more years. It must have been some kind of mutually beneficial negotiation.

I wonder if this is what Harry was referring to when he said other royals 'wined and dined' the press to be left alone. If so, it makes the Cambridges look smart, not corrupt. Any famous person has to learn to negotiate their press. There's no reason to think the Sussexes couldn't have made a similar deal: They chose to sue the press instead.

Wow r15 you're so fluent, eh? Many of you on that bitch Lilibet's side, I wonder how you would feel if you experienced her laughing at one of Prince Phillip's poofter jokes (you know he made fun of gays all his miserable Nazi life)

^ Hey, tapeworm.

r121 Wrong she went to the Balmoral estate and also saw the Queen privately with her daughters. She was invited to the Queen Mothers funeral. Your barometer of being asked to big royal events is an odd one though to apply to an ex member of the family . Her being invited to Harrys wedding was indeed a big deal but she'd met with the Queen in private family time very often over the years.

Receipts, R171? The Palace is so full of gays you couldn't swing a tasteful black leather bag (like the Queen carries) without hitting one. They are used to gays and employ scads of them.

Meghan was never vilified for being mixed race, r163. And, no, a stupid article about Compton, written by an American in LA for the American online edition of the Daily Mail is not being "vilified" by the media for being mixed race.

Meghan was treated very mildly by the press to start with. If she had any genuine problems with the media, then she would point out that the tabloids have a record of attacking new members of the royal family. What Kate, Camilla, Fergie and Sophie had to put up with was a million times worse than what she got, even Edward was vilified.

If Meghan's concern was really the tabloid press, she would have spoken out on their long history of going for the royals. But Meghan wanted to present herself as an oppressed black woman - racism being the easiest allegations to make these days, which is bound to immediately get you legions of supporters, even if you're lying through your teeth, as Meghan is - and a Diana figure.

Changed their tune, eh?

They used to call Fergie "Duchess of Pork" so get in line Smegs

[quote]When young Princess Diana was making suicidal gestures by slicing herself with a lemon grater, they got her the best therapists around. To think they wouldn't do that for Meghan, if only to protect the family's reputation as a whole, is ludicrous.

After the way Diana made them look when she was able to leave, you don't think they wouldn't have tried to keep a tighter leash on Meghan?

After Diana's therapists speaking out about how horrible they were to her, I can completely see them not wanting her to talk to anyone while hoping she'll "snap out" of it. The more people who knew how she felt and what was going on with that bunch, the more likely that the information would come out.

[quote]Meghan was never vilified for being mixed race ...

Look, Klan Granny, you should have tried a different angle here. It happened in the press and it happened here too. If I read one more post calling Archie a monkey or any other random racial loaded terms I would have screamed!

[quote] Let's think about this: The BRF's newest duchess, a pregnant woman, says she's feeling suicidal. Why WOULDN'T they get her help?

The BRF isn’t a fairytale with magic wands, or even medical degrees, to make Meghan feel better. Meghan could have afforded the best psychiatrists in the world to visit and treat her privately and she or Harry could have made the appointments herself. It’s just another example of something that shows she’s lying or intentionally misrepresenting the situation.

People used to hide having such significant mental illness or procrastinating on treating it until it got to the point of a mental hosptial. She is so focused on blaming others for her state but wouldn't this make getting their projects insured an issue? Seeming unstable and vindictive probably will not help too much re: future deals either I would suspect. She was doing her LARPing as Diana thing but surely there are raminfications to such information, no? Why have MORE children with someone who professes to be so unstable?

A psychiatrist was hired to treat Diana on her HONEYMOON she was so unstable. Look how that turned out re: nutty Harry?

Remember the "Sophie tapes", when the tabloids literally tried to entrap Sophie, the Duchess of Wessex. It's shit but it comes with the territory, Meghan. It's nothing to do with racism. Sophie let it wash over her, and now she's a beloved royal.

The royal family's seen all this before. They know how to deal with such provocations.

Word by word, Sophie digs herself deeper into trouble

Special report: future of the monarchy

Gaby Hinsliff and Burhan WazirSun 8 Apr 2001 17.58 BST

It is the worst possible news after the worst possible week for the royal family. The News of the World this morning lays bare across 10 pages the full and excruciating contents of the so-called 'Sophie tapes' after days of frenzied speculation.

The pages will make explosive reading at Buckingham Palace where officials will this morning meet to consider an official response to the newspaper's allegations. The news is also bleak for the Countess of Wessex and Murray Harkin, her partner in PR company R-JH.

The paper devotes two pages to the secretly-recorded boasts of Harkin, 37, who appeared to suggest he had used hard drugs.

Harkin is alleged to have told Mazher Mahmood, the News of the World reporter who posed as a sheikh's assistant, that he had taken cocaine and ecstasy. Harkin is reported to have told Mahmood he could arrange for the countess and her husband Prince Edward to endorse various business deals which the fake sheikh pretended he was trying to establish. The Queen is fiercely opposed to members of the royal family cashing in on their position.

Palace officials will also find it difficult to brush aside disparaging comments made by the countess about figures such as Prime Minister Tony Blair, Chancellor Gordon Brown and Camilla Parker-Bowlers and Prince Charles.

Here we reprint an edited version of the transcripts published by The News of The World.

What the Sophie tapes say

The countess of Wessex has ridden roughshod over the convention that members of the royal family should never comment on politics.

Her indiscretion on the so-called 'Sophie Tapes' raises disturbing questions, given her delicate constitutional position and access to confidential information, about her role as a PR company director. Her business partner at R-JH, Murray Harkin, is also revealed as less than discreet in his boasts about royal influence, the Earl of Wessex's sexuality and drug-taking.

In the News of the World 's transcripts, the countess appears to betray strong Tory sympathies, describing it as a 'shame' if William Hague loses the election. She dismisses Gordon Brown's Budget as 'pap', criticises Labour's attempts to ban fox hunting, and accuses former Prime Minister John Major of leaking damaging royal information to distract from his political problems.

The thoughts of the countess and Harkin were secretly recorded at a lunch in London's Dorchester Hotel on 14 March. Also present was R-JH account director Brett Perkins, and two undercover 'fake sheikhs', the News of the World 's Mahzer Mahmood and photojournalist Conrad Brown.

Asked about hunting, the countess accuses Blair of not understanding countryside issues.

Sophie: 'He's ignorant of the countryside. His wife is even worse, she hates the countryside. She hates it! And because the popular vote is within the city, he's going to go with that all the time. I mean because of the foot and mouth situation they've been forced to take notice of the countryside.'

Mahmood: 'She [Cherie] seems low key.'

Sophie: 'She's an intelligent woman and I think she wanted to keep her hand in. Or maybe she didn't think her husband's government was going to last long so she'd have to go back to work anyway.'

The reporter then asks who is going to lose the forthcoming general election.

Harkin: 'The Tories.'

Sophie: 'I think the majority is too great. Labour will lose a lot of seats.'

Harkin: 'Portillo seems nice. Has a bit of panache about him, a bit of style, which Hague doesn't seem to.'

[continued at link]

[quote]After Diana's therapists speaking out about how horrible they were to her, I can completely see them not wanting her to talk to anyone while hoping she'll "snap out" of it. The more people who knew how she felt and what was going on with that bunch, the more likely that the information would come out.

Your comments are out of the 1950s. Charles, William, and Harry have all undergone therapy. They wouldn't expect a depressed person to snap out of anything. Also, she said she was SUICIDAL. A dead pregnant duchess on the one hand or a few indiscree stories on the other? Nobody with a single working brain cell would choose the dead duchess.

Dragging him to CA was genius. Wonder why it did not come up that Markus is living with them? She will dump him as soon as she can, she is rumored to actually be in her early 40s already. She will need one of those guys who is into a project in a wife and who lacks the self preservation and common sense to flee from her.

Americans really have no clue what the UK tabloids say about the royal family. They believe Meghan's bullshit that she's getting some special treatment.

Prince Edward embarrassment: Royal sparked Palace fury with major faux pas

PRINCE EDWARD sparked the furious reaction of the Royal Palace when he embarrassingly made the mistake to film his own nephew,

Prince William, at a time the Family had made a deal with the press to leave the Duke of Cambridge alone whilst at university.

By ALESSANDRA SCOTTO DI SANTOLO

PUBLISHED: 09:49, Sat, Sep 5, 2020 | UPDATED: 10:44, Sat, Sep 5, 2020

The embarrassing mistake was revealed by ITV News producer Lizzie Robinson who told Royal Rota's viewers Prince Edward's short-lived TV company broke the Palace's own rule of privacy. Ms Robinson explained that while the Royal Family had made a deal with the media in order to protect Prince William's privacy while he was at uni, the Earl of Wessex broke the rule as his own TV company filming the Duke of Cambridge's campus.

She said: "His production company had a bit of an incident around 2001 when Prince William had just started at the University of St Andrews.

"There was a deal where the press would leave him alone and his (Prince Edward) production company was found out to be filming.

"So that didn't go down brilliantly."

The youngest of Queen Elizabeth II's children was also the first royal to issue a formal statement to the press in order to keep them away from his then-girlfriend and later wife Sophie, Countess of Wessex.

According to royal experts, Prince Edward's decision had been forged by his older brothers' experiences, Prince Charles and Prince Andrew, and has later inspired Prince Harry to do the same to protect Meghan Markle.

Speaking on the Channel 5 documentary 'Edward&Sophie: The Reluctant Royals?', Viscountess Hinchinbrooke Julie Montagu said: "We see Edward as the first royal putting out a statement telling the press to back off of Sophie's.

"Stay away, this is the one thing that I get to be private.

"Please, please stop."

Echoing her comments, Richard Kay, Daily Mail's Editor at Large added: "Possibly, Edward's action had been forged by the experience of seeing how miserable his two brothers had been.

"They conducted their romantic lives in the full Blair of publicity and their marriages had not worked out."

Sophie, Countess of Wessex had private photos of herself with Christ Tarrant published in a British tabloid after announcing her engagement to Prince Edward.

Sophie was left devastated when the pictures were published and said it ruined her engagement.

Channel 5 narrator Glynis Barber said: "Just weeks before the wedding, they learnt how difficult it would be to escape the glare of the press.

"Sophie and Edward were given the taste of the unwanted intrusion of the tabloids."

Royal expert Ingrid Seward added: "The Sun newspaper got hold of a photograph that was 11 years old and it was Sophie when she worked for Capital radio.

"She was larking about with Chris Tarrant who was also a big part of Capital radio."

Ms Barber continued: "The photograph showed Sophie with her chest partially exposed.

"It was taken during a 1988 business trip which saw Sophie, Chris Tarrant and his co-presenter Kara Noble travel to Spain."

[quote]Charles, William, and Harry have all undergone therapy.

With their permission. I'm not sure why that's not clear. They were playing the game. That means they get permission to do things. That means if she wanted a therapist she'd have to ask which she says she did. Then nothing came of it.

There's a big difference between William, Charlies and Harry and Meghan, the outsider.

Some of you can't decide if she's a drama queen, actually in trouble, a grifter or misguided.

Surely Meghan must have known about the vilification of Fergie by the tabloids and by large segments of society. Her very mild treatment in comparison was nothing special to her - and a lot of the criticism of Meghan stemming from her narcissistic behaviour was deserved.

She's a grifter and drama queen, r185.

[quote]They were playing the game. That means they get permission to do things.

What does that even mean, 'playing the game'? Meghan was a working royal, pregnant to boot, when she says she was suicidally depressed. You're acting like the Royals are so evil that they treat married-ins as subhuman. They got Diana therapy when she was pregnant and melting down, and that was in the early 80s. Of course they would have helped Meghan if they had known about it. Even if they didn't give a fuck about her, they wouldn't risk the terrible publicity if Meghan did serious harm to herself.

There are plenty of discreet mental health facilities that people of means can access if they really need it. Hell, we didn't see Meghan for months during her pregnancy--she could have gone in-patient if she wanted. Her husband, if nobody else, could have arranged it and paid for it out of his big trust fund.

I don't believe the "I asked for help and was denied" narrative for one second.

r183 who is Markus? Sorry but I haven't been following this story closely.

Markle talks of years of abuse and mistreatment. Bullshit. She was a member of the royal family for 19 months. (May 19, 2018-Jan 8, 2020). While she and Harry were dating, she got overwhelmingly favorable press, but nonetheless dating is not an official member. She lasted 18 months. Of those 18 months, she was "off from work" for more than six months for maternity leave. Then before they officially left town, they spent more than two months in Canada for "family time" at the end of 2019. Therefore, Markle was a working member (actually going to events and functions) for10 months.

Ten months is not "years." It's bullshit and another Markle lie.

If Meghan was genuinely suicidal and begging to be sent to a hospital and Harry didn’t say “fuck this” and immediately take his sick wife to a hospital he’s evil himself. And if his family didn’t let them leave, and he still talks to his granny (the head of the family and literal queen) and says he respects and loves her he’s even more fucked in the head. These things do not add up.

Woke Twitter is all for Meghan.

During Markle's brief time in the royal family, the "Fab Four" (William, Kate, Harry and Markle) headed up a mental health campaign called "Heads Together." So, as Duchess of Sussex, she couldn't find a mental health professional to receive counseling in private? Harry couldn't help her with finding anyone to whom she could talk?

Instead, she throws the HR department under the bus that it wouldn't help her. That may be true, but it's rather hard to believe that she could connect with anyone in her role as one of the leaders of the "Heads Together" campaign.

The very things that could have saved the BRF

are the things they've worked the hardest to destroy

[quote] Woke Twitter is all for Meghan.

Which is why the BRF will never win this war.

Suicidal can mean a wide variety of things. It can be very passive - just having passive thoughts of I wish I was dead or I can't do this anymore or some days I think the world would be better off without me type thoughts or it can mean active thoughts where one is actively thinking about ways to harm themselves. I am guessing she was having more passive thoughts related to her frustration with her situation - hence why Harry didn't rush to seek her help and why they went out that night.

But she said it was so bad she thought she needed in-patient treatment. If she told Harry that and he didn't immediately take his pregnant, despairing wife to a hospital, he's the one she should be angry with.

They told MM she couldn't go out for lunch with a friend, because she had already been twice in two months...

What is that called? Who would tolerate that?

If you think the Monarchy isn't controlled primarily by old white male bureaucrats, you don't get out much either

Are they finished with the "Private Family" investigation of Prince Andrew?

Did they tell her she couldn't go to NYC for her baby shower? That she couldn't visit Elton John? Those seem like much higher profile outings than lunch with friends, and she did them.

[quote]Which is why the BRF will never win this war.

As it was with Diana, they don't even understand they're at war

Markle said she didn't have access to her passport (along with her keys and driver license). Well then, how did she fly to NYC for the $500,000 baby shower? How did she fly to the U.S. to watch Serena Williams play tennis? Fly to Lake Como, Italy to visit the Clooneys for the weekend? Fly to France on Elton John's private plane?

Regarding her keys...no, your keys to your Los Angeles apartment don't work at Kensington Palace. Regarding her driver license...no, your California driver license isn't legal in the U.K. after you become a resident there and where you get driven everywhere by a palace driver.

Markle lies.

The night Meghan 'forced' herself to go to that event because she was afraid to stay home alone, was there nobody who could stay with her? Aren't the palaces lousy with aides and equerries? Didn't she have a personal assistant? Surely that would have made more sense than going out and sobbing in the Royal Box every time they turned the lights down.

R37, aided and abetted by the US eldergays who worship the Royals and, er, "don't see race"

^^^ Whoops, wrong thread, sorry

[quote] They told MM she couldn't go out for lunch with a friend, because she had already been twice in two months... What is that called? Who would tolerate that?

Yes, who would? It’s almost like it’s... unbelievable.

The woman who threw hot tea at her assistant and bullied the rest of her staff into quivering jelly just meekly submitted when told she couldn't go out to lunch with friends.

Right.

I guess it doesn't fit Meghan And Harry's narrative that the Queen openly opposed apartheid in South Africa and that Nelson Mandela himself credited the royals for playing a role in putting pressure on Commonwealth Governments to impose sanctions to bring about its downfall

The stench of psychotic frau is overpowering in this thread 🤮

Funny how every negative claim is treated as fact (throwing hot tea at an assistant?) yet great lengths are taken to disprove any claim Meghan makes (That lying cunt! Her real name is Rachel!)

Get it out your system dears. Once you leave DL, you’ll just be treated like the maladjusted racists you are.

R206... and who was the friend? Was it a heavily papped celebrity? She misleads and obfuscates.

If a pregnant woman threatens suicide, she should absolutely be committed to an institution and then never be allowed by her husband and family to get pregnant again, without constant care and medication (some of which you can take while pregnant). She has to be lying- that is a very, very serious claim. Americans might be dramatic and sympathetic, but threatening to murder your fetus and letting an entire staff know about that would PROBABLY get a stronger reaction than she's letting on.

R209, we're simply showing the gaping logical gaps in Meghan's sob stories. We'd do the same if any celebrity of any race threw a giant pity party like the Sussexes threw on Sunday.

It's far more racist to assume a woman of color is incapable of self-interested deceit. That's reducing black women to victim stereotypes instead of treating them as individuals.

Markus Anderson, who Meghan calls "Lady A"

R209, you're disordered. But mostly you're a tapeworm. All the value, merit, intellect and desirability of a tapeworm. You are nothing but an irritant. Congratulations.

R212, I love it! They had a whole cabal of social climbing nobodies and snagged Harry. But they couldn't hang on.

It's a fascinating ascent and then burn (despite the "woke Twitter" win, which is hilarious. Those losers don't have money to spend on a brand. That's why they're woke Twitter.) with Markle, Mulroney, Scobie and this jumped up Waiter.

The queen is running scared, clearly, and now Klan-Granny-in-Chief Piers Morgan has been kicked off his show for abusing Meghan too. Not a good day for the Datalounge racists.

R215, yeah! The Queen just left the palace with all the art and jewels she could carry under her arms and is fleeing to Canada!

The Queen assigned her own private assistant secretary to Meghan for the first year to be sure she had an experienced person to help her with everything. (Samantha Cohen). Cohen had been working for the BRF since 2001. She transitioned out of the role of Meghan's secretary (as planned) after the Australia trip. They had also taken two new incoming secretary's to Africa with them along with 10 other staff members in addition to the 3 secretaries. They also had Clara Madden on that trip who had worked with Harry and William for years and the new secretary Fiona McIlwham who had previously been the British Ambassador to Albania, and they privately paid for Heather Wong to join as an additional secretary . They had a very experienced team of aides and staff with them. They also had a four person press team, a nanny, and a hairdresser.

I wish that team would talk! In addition to the bullying claims, any claims that she didn't get help during her first year are nonsense.

R201 Remind me, where is Diana now?

I thought that Sophie was supposed to be helping Meghan learn what to do, like the Queen Mum did for Diana. So Sophie was thrown under the bus during this interview too.

IS IT TELLING that one of Meghan's best girl buds is drama queen incarnate serena?...

Is Anderson still her goodle or has he been cast aside too? It's like a revolving door with that user but then again he seems the type to cling on.

R198 You’re assuming that she’s telling the truth about not being allowed to go out to lunch.

Considering that she’s been proven to have lied more than once in the “interview”, why would you believe anything that she says?

Thanks r212

Here in Canada, all the news seems to be about leaving the Commonwealth.

What I'd like to know is what is the reaction of the people in other Commonwealth countries. There are 54 of them.

OMG!! Such a classy shade which sMEGAcunt never knew existed!!!

hahahahaha

R222, he is said to be living with them at present as Soho House was closed during the pandemic.

Oops, R221.

Marcus is said to be living with them in Montecito. Cozy! They all go way back...

Isn’t this the point where the RF’s personal dysfunction overcomes their purpose? I mean a simple cost benefit analysis rn would show them just bring a liability. They’re fucking up the relationship with the US right when they UK needs a trade deal (service to country not happening) hiding sex abusers (social guidance not happening / damaging role model to children), stealing money and not paying tax (welfare cheats and criminals) they’re just not fit for purpose. And the problem is their personal dysfunction. They’re just not fit for task. It’s like a shitty Jaguar that has so many running problems but nice materials on top, it’s just a piece of shitty old english engineering better off crushed to a cube for scrap.

[quote] They’re fucking up the relationship with the US

OMG, you actually believe Harry and MM could hurt the relationship between the UK and the US??? lmfao

How are they 'hiding' Prince Andrew? It's not like they stuffed him in a cupboard at Balmoral.

The Windsors had a fairly peaceful two decades after Diana left. They seemed quite functional for a while there.

R229 no I mean the royal family as an institution. They’re mishandling it. This kinda stuff matters for trade deals. Its bad vibes!

Can the Queen sue M&H for publishing private matters as Meghan did so enthusiastically for publication of her private letter to her Father? Anyone see hypocrisy here?

R232 wouldn't be screaming for the abolition of the Royals if Harry were the heir.

r195 I'm not sure about that at all. Is twitter really representative of public opinion? If it was the UK would have elected a Labour government in 2015, 2017 and 2019, Brexit and Trump would never have happened and Scottish independence would have happened.

I think there is also an age question. If someone had asked me in my younger years whose side I was on Princess Diana or the royal family I'd have said Diana .If the Diana situation was happening now I'd say the royal family because I'd see the broader picture and not just a victim martyr narrative of Diana.

A UK barrister commented on that, and the answer is yes, r234. But of course, no member who can do so will bring action.

R234 no actually - I’ve no interest in H&M as royals or as people really, but they’re useful in damaging the institution of the royal family. Love watching it, care little for them. I’ve hated the royal family all my life.

Piers would’ve been proud of you all, his fellow comrades in arms.

[quote]Look, Klan Granny, you should have tried a different angle here. It happened in the press and it happened here too. If I read one more post calling Archie a monkey or any other random racial loaded terms I would have screamed!

Sure. Links? There must be six million posts on this by now. Where are all these racist posts?

The tabloids/median in the UK seem to see it as their job to haze all the new royals for a year or so. If you can't take the heat, leave. She did. She was too weak and narcissistic to last. If you couldn't see that she was acting in that interview, you have some "sparkly" glasses on.

I love that Piers’ last moment on the show was side profile, let’s just say it’s not a good angle for him.

R239, or maybe some posters on here just don’t hate Meghan Markle and disagree with you?

Perhaps Meghan Markle did not realize that Royals need to work and the Queen is the Head of State and supported to some extent by taxpayers. Like any workplace, she cannot go on lunches and goof off. For a life of leisure, she should have a trust fund. There are probably certain rules and stuff, which she did not realize because the tabloids and Disney present the glamorous angle of monarchies such as the pomp and splendor. It ended up being a mismatch of expectations and reality. And as far as being dark is concerned, such comments happen in families, especially you will hear it a lot in Indian families. Theoretically the American media should not get involved in private family affairs for ratings.

For R239, but I’m sure you could have googled it yourself instead of creaming your panties with your Meghan hatred.

I wasn't a fan of Meg's purplish mourning gown she wore in the interview. I think that she ought to have moved on to light violet or lavender by this point.

R242, the funny thing about this is that Meghan is used to working hard and she was working for the BRF after they got married.

William and Kate are the ones who have always gotten bad press for being lazy and. It working enough. Who knows, maybe they didn’t like the fact that M&H rolled up their sleeves and were rather busy, because it made William and Late look even lazier.

Right, R243. Billions of pages all over the internet and millions of posts on here and you link to one? Uh huh. You're an idiot. Are you in love with Meghan or Harry or both? There is literally not one celebrity out there who doesn't have awful, awful things posted about them and their children all the time. One tweet? Ha.

[quote]And as far as being dark is concerned, such comments happen in families, especially you will hear it a lot in Indian families.

I wonder what the answer would have been if Oprah had said, "Didn't you two ever discuss that yourselves?" because you know they did.

Where are the racist articles about Meghan in the mainstream press, aside from the infamous 'straight outta Compton one' which was published by an American outlet? Where is the racist commentary in the British press in particular? I'm not talking about random assholes on Twitter or DL, I'm talking about the tabloids Meghan and Harry love to sue going after her specifically over her skin color?

You mean to tell me that there was NO ONE Harry could have called for a confidential session for his suicidal wife? Didn’t he and Will have a mental health initiative?

[quote]The Windsors had a fairly peaceful two decades after Diana left. They seemed quite functional for a while there.

They are functional. What they have is dysfunctional man child and the grift bride and the media and the internet. I defy any of you to come up with a plan to handle that hybrid beast.

R246, it’s the first thing that came up, but you’re tedious. Your hatred is tedious. Harry will never marry you, and you will never be a princess.

I don’t care much for the BRF, but the crazy Markle haters need to be institutionalized.

[quote]If I read one more post calling Archie a monkey or any other random racial loaded terms I would have screamed!

against my better judgment, where the hell do you hang out, tapeworm?

I've never seen the child called a monkey here at least. If you can't pick your sites why make that our problem?

Also, hey, tapeworm.

Uh, Harry's a fucking moron, R250. Not sure where you got the idea I like him. They deserve each other. You seem like the one that wants to marry both of them. Why don't you go hang out in front of their gate? They'll love the attention.

You know they both discussed how dark their kid might be and if he'd have red hair and if he was darker with red hair whether he'd look weird. Because every pregnant couple does that.

[quote]Woke Twitter is all for Meghan.

Woke Twitter is for all kinds of silly things.

This is the kind of person Megastans have shown themselves to be. Pure class.

Lower class.

I’m going to come back and study that statement a bit more because it’s genius. Pithy.

R252, basically you’re discrediting M&H and their experience, because you know better? Why?

A brilliant statement. Disarmed the loony couple and their weird stans (some of which are lurking here on DL, spewing their venom).

The palace always wins.

From Richard Kay, the royal reporter:

Giving her account of this apparently petty incident, Meghan insisted she was not ‘sharing’ it to be ‘disparaging’ to Kate. The duchess, she said had ‘owned it’, had ‘apologised’, and ‘brought me flowers and a note’. But within 24 hours of the Oprah interview being aired, another account of the episode was at odds with Meghan’s version. The Times newspaper reported that Kate had indeed left the dress fitting in tears.

The following day, she reportedly took flowers to Nottingham Cottage — Harry and Meghan’s home at Kensington Palace at the time — as a peace offering.

The newspaper claimed that Meghan slammed the door in Kate’s face.

Last night, a royal source told me that Meghan had thrown the flowers away. In the interview, Meghan told Oprah that she had forgiven Kate, but then added: ‘I think it’s really important for people to understand the truth.’

Class, just like her tapeworms.

“I’ve forgiven her” - excuse me?

Surviving Angel, how dare you even sign your name, you repulsive racist Klan troll. KKK leader.

R256, you're playing a rhetorical game with R252? Why?

Or are you too thick to understand that this couple have crapped out a "story," not "their experience." And they are readily dismissed as une aventurière épouvantable et son larbin because of (1) the manner of their attack on their family. (Got it? THEIR FAMILY.); (2) use of their "pain" in a grandstand assault on matters of importance to many people in order to enhance their brand as victims; (3) pretenses that they do not know the present protocols for titles; (4) lies, as in the female claiming she never looked at the male's online profile, etc; (5) the lack of interest, compassion, understanding, care, concern or common decency towards anyone but themselves and (6) the trivializing of important issues of race and suicide by pasting them onto themselves for cover.

And if I were the queen I would let it be known that the Winfrey person is non persona grata and unwelcome in my realm. Disgusting fame whore.

Mentioning Kate like that, and the obsession with comparing their press coverage, was all you need to know.

I absolutely hate this phrase. But Kate lives rent free in Meghan's head.

Harry used to seem so much happier. But he does not seem to have any insight into what has happened and his role in it.

[quote]A brilliant statement. Disarmed the loony couple

What is brilliant about it is that it leaves no room for a response from the Harkles. And the fact that the statement came directly from the Queen puts a lid on it.

There's no "next move" here about this issue on the part of Harry and Meghan.

This story will die a quick death.

'And if I were the queen I would let it be known that the Winfrey person is non persona grata and unwelcome in my realm. Disgusting fame whore.'

Check out the racist cunt grandstanding with its pompous prose. Fuck off, Klan Granny. Oprah is richer and far more influential and intelligent than the decrepit queen.

You also mean 'persona non grata', you illiterate lump.

Oh bullshit, R258. I got it...you hate Meghan, but that doesn’t mean you should grab on to any old story that reinforces your bias.

Does anyone with a brain think Meghan would’ve gotten away with slamming a door in the Duchess of Cambridge’s face? You honestly think William would’ve let that go? Charles would’ve still walked Meghan down the aisle? Give me a break.

At this point, people who hate Meghan are proving to be no different than QAnon followers who hate Hillary Clinton and Democrats so much, they believe wild conspiracies involving pedophile cults and Trump being a godlike figure. Be honest in why you hate her...don’t debase yourself by relying on unsourced claims.

So what r208 you think the Queen would publicly support Apartheid during that it was worldly unpopular? Ha. OPEN YOUR FUCKING EYES. I'm not saying she's racist or privately supported it, I'm saying at that time it was the popular thing to do. Funny how she never spoke against it in the 40s or 50s

[quote]Does anyone with a brain think Meghan would’ve gotten away with slamming a door in the Duchess of Cambridge’s face? You honestly think William would’ve let that go? Charles would’ve still walked Meghan down the aisle? Give me a break.

Think about the statement today, Einstein. These people aren't Real Housewives of Anything. They deal with the untoward privately. And with the occasional investigation into bullying.

Have a good day.

R266 has learned a new term "Klan Granny". Lke a child who has just learned the word "poo poo". He really gets the giggles from it.

R265, you can't actually think Oprah is more important than the QUEEN OF freaking ENGLAND? You're taking this too far. You are comparing a talk show host to a national leader who has been in our history books since WWII. Stop it. It's embarrassing for all Americans.

You can claim the future for Meghan all you want. But have some semblance of reality.

^^Meant for R265

This thread started out as completely civil & within a matter of hours, has gone completely off the rails.

You know who is strangely silent through all this? Elton John. You'd think if there was anyone who could corroborate their tale of woe, it would be him. Yet he says nothing - that seems very out of character.

r260 Get help .Seriously get help. This obsession of yours with posters you disagree with is unhealthy.

R265 is low IQ.

'you can't actually think Oprah is more important than the QUEEN OF freaking ENGLAND? '

Why has DL been invaded by white supremacists like this sad bitch? Muriel needs to deal with them because obviously they're going to be homophobic too.

Well done, Queen.

R274, you should get help before the police come knocking on your door and you're arrested on multiple counts of hate speech.

I kind of love that the debate about this has turned into the exact same type of debates people have about the real housewives. Everyone is equally trashy, even royalty!

Can we work together please to F&F R260? This thing needs to be banned. It is unhinged and, worse, really boring.

Thank you r279

I think not, R279. Not only have I never been banned, I now have the whole site using the phrase I coined to describe you sad racist crones. I win and you lose. None of your nicknames have caught on.

Surviving Angel is R279 and R280, by the way. Typical duplicitous snake. Sometimes she deliberately doesn't sign her name as she knows she's hated on here.

The Queen is a demented old hag

While I strongly disagree with SurvivingAngel, they haven’t said anything remotely racist. Authenticated users always get targeted for harassment.

The Queen is set to announce a sit down interview with Oprah for March 30.

r282 No I ain't and any poster can easily check that by experimenting with the block button.

r284 Many thanks to you

[quote] Oprah is richer and far more influential and intelligent than the decrepit queen.

Oprah Winfrey is an American celebrity. She is not a superstar on a global level, nor in any way influential.

Oprah and CBS should not have gotten involved. It's a family affair. These things happen in every big family. What is Meghan Markle expecting? CBS and Oprah are forgetting that the Queen is Head of the State and as such the British government can deny anyone coming to the UK. They will not do it as Oprah is a celebrity. Also, why is the media giving such a platform to Megan Markle. Why is she so important? Did she invent a drug or work on the front lines during Coronavirus? Did she work on vaccines? False celebrities.

Lol, r289 thinks that the Queen would deny Oprah entry to the UK due to the interview. This is a perfect example of the delusional frau commentariat that infests this site.

R288 Yeah Oprah is not as well known outside of the US. She's well-known in the UK but not the icon she is in the US.

BTW Oprah is having "financial" troubles. In the last few years she's had to close her magazine, she sold off most her ownership in OWN, she's laid off a number of her staff and there's rumours she is looking to sell some of her property. Her H&M interview was partly about trying to become relevant again.

Rolls eyes at, R50. lol

R209 made me burst out laughing.

Meghan will fade into irrelevance as she ages. William's kids are going to get the lion's share of attention as they mature and they'll be the stars of the family. The Monarchy will continue. Meghan will be like the Duchess of Windsor, Princess Margaret and Fergie as time goes on. Yesterday's news.

And when she copes with that poorly, R294, what then? Her sense of grandiosity and narcissism will focus where?

John Oliver was on target three years ago:

The bizarrely obsessed posters here using over the top language "tapeworm??? grandiosity & narcissism? " and slashing at any poster who doesn't share their extremism?

This is what the darkest corners of the internet foment. Think of all the extremist obsessives you've backed slowly away from? Now you're looking in the mirror.

You know what would really shake things up? Philip dying now

So tapeworm is extreme but klan granny is just fit conversation?

[quote] I like how they just refer to them as Harry and Meghan and not by title.

It sounds more personal coming from the Queen, rather than she referring to them as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

R295 Her children of course.

The Queen was exactly spot on with her release.

This is an internal family rift.

However, the sack-of-shit lying Meghan chose to spin it in to a money-making venture.

Should be beheaded.

Oprah used American tabloid headlines to demonstrate British Press bias.

No R290, the royals will just ignore Oprah now. Hope she enjoyed her big day at the fancy wedding, because that’s it for her. She ain’t getting the first interview with “it” girl Princess Charlotte or whatever.

R303 oh, I noticed that. All the ridiculous supermarket tabloids nobody cares about.

[quote] You know who is strangely silent through all this? Elton John.

He doesn't want them to take away his CBE.

[quote]The issues raised particularly about race are concerning = we know race is a problem in society but you really can't compare your life to those mixed race/black people who live with real racism every bloody day of their lives in this country or the US.

On the contrary. I think you'll find, R23, that I can stand 100m from disadvantaged South African children and cry about how none of my many staff ever asks me whether I'm OK.

r295 What direction do you think it will go?

Bit sad, Harry seemed to relish offering her "the family she never had." Now she has Markled them and his kids are due for a rocky road quite isolated too.

Remember her sashaying out of that garden party?

[quote]At this point, people who hate Meghan are proving to be no different than QAnon followers

Uh, QAnon is a personality cult. The Harry and Meghan lovers are the ones in the personality cult, dear.

Meghan hated her family (other than her mom) and was never close to them so it’s no big deal to her to cut off relatives. Harry actually was close to Will and Kate and their kids. But he deserves what he gets.

Apparently Meghan did not like the Queen’s statement and is ready to leaked which royal made the remark on Archie.

I told you they were expecting the Palace to grovel. But if there is as much dirt out there about Meghan as is rumored, she'll see she's in a firefight she'll ultimately lose. The deep pockets of the BRF can buy a lot of gasoline to pour on the flames.

They already said it wasn’t the queen who said it, so why did they expect the queen to apologize? Anyway, they already said they’re done with interviews so they’re going to have to leak this somehow. It’ll cause some social media drama but if it’s Charles or William, and they leak that? they can really never return to England again. Even for funerals.

I don't understand. Even if MM names someone, what evidence is there? Is there a recording? If not, then it's just Harry and MM's words against whomever they name. It's he said/she said.

R312, It's incredible! Some woman named Murky_Meg has all the answers! Thank you Murky_Meg!!!!

Sort 'em out. Shut 'em down!

I think the Sussexes may be panicking because they are not getting the response they wanted. Ratings were solid but not spectacular. The Palace has stonewalled them with its calm and measured response and even made the Sussexes seem histrionic and a bit foolish. The press is busy tearing Meghan's claims apart. The Sussex fans on Twitter are supporting them, but this interview doesn't seem to have won them a lot of new supporters. The British Public is solidly behind the Queen. In a week's time, will anyone care about this interview and, by association, the Sussexes? Not unless they add more fuel to the fire, and there's only so much of THAT they can do without revealing themselves as petty and vengeful.

They've painted themselves into a corner with this interview. It will be interesting to see them try to find a path out.

R79, nothing would ever be enough for Meghan. She's been self-centered and demanding from day 1. If Kate had acted the way Meghan has, although she was very badly treated early on, she would not still be married to William. And as far as Meghan's growing up, Kate grew up as the child of first generation business owners. She helped out in the business. So any laments about poor Meghan with her private school education and paid staff at home are misplaced.

Here's a pic of the Queen in Montecito this morning. It's pretty serious.

If Kate had behaved like this, William would have shown her the door within a few months of dating. Doesn't matter how much of Diana's favorite perfume she dumped on herself.

[quote] I know the Queen was stuck between a rock and a hard place and had to say something, but that’s a very short statement.

What were you expecting? "Remembrance of Meghans Past," in seven volumes?

What was Diana’s perfume brand allegedly worn?

Lol R321 didn’t he cheat on her with her best friend while she was pregnant? She prob would have been better off if she’d never met him.

The less she says, the more hysterical the Sussexes look. Especially when you realize that they chose to leave the UK in a fearful hurry, didn't consider the security, money, and title issues (though cooler heads at the Palace begged them to slow down and consider), and ran off like two rebellious teenagers instead of thirtysomething parents. A year later, they have huge lifestyle bills and no way to pay them but a rapidly diminishing trust fund and two media deals that are going to require a huge amount of work to make lucrative.

Until very recently, they were clearly hoping that the Palace would extend the trial separation a while longer, maintaining that thin connection to royalty they need so badly. The Queen dashed those hopes when she stripped the patronages and sent them packing.

This result is the Oprah interview, which is half-tantrum, half-blackmail attempt. They want their HRH titles and Archie's Prince status, they want enough patronages and invitations to Royal events to let them keep the shine on the Sussex title, and they clearly want a big fat check, too. The not-so-subtle threat is that if these things are not forthcoming, they will spill even more dirt, like naming the alleged racist in the family. In response, the Queen wished them well and sent them on their way, just as she did when she stripped the patronages.

So now it's your move, Sussexes. But you don't have many pieces left on the board, and you'd do well to remember that the Queen can move as far as she likes in any direction. In the grand scheme of things, you're just pawns.

It was a brilliant statement in its simplicity and targeted parsing. At first I thought it too sparse, but after re-reading it really hit how well-crafted it was.

R326 It was deliberately crafted to be brief and on-point. A perfect counterpoint to two hours of childish whining.

[quote]The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.

Speak for yourself, Liz. Personally, I couldn’t give a shit.

Thanks, R158. This is a good description. The issue isn't so much racism, as it is crapping all over the nonpeerage contender for spouse, before and after the marriage. If Meghan were less egotistical, she could have gotten some good advice from Kate, who has been through it. Meghan gets a lot more mileage out of the race card, though. Apparently, Harry is too clueless to figure it out. If he had been aware in the slightest he would have remembered what his SIL has been through before and after the marriage.

R169, the Harry and Meghan are not children and they weren't when they got married. They would have access to the best medical care in the UK. Had they wanted a doctor of any type, they would have had one. They can't make up things after the fact and complain they were not addressed.

Yes, I know, R330. That's why I said that the idea that she couldn't get help was ludicrous.

Meghan's mother Doria, to boot, is a licensed social worker in the US. She'd know how to get her daughter assistance even abroad. Are we to assume her own licensed specialist mother couldn't help her? She was in the UK with her for some time near the birth. The entire narrative about this is fishy to say the least.

R312 Murky Meg is a rampant anti-Meghan YouTuber but I don't think she has serious connections. That being said, of course Meghan is withholding the name for black mailing purposes. I do believe it will eventually be leaked and that would the dumbest move yet by H&M. This Statement was from the Queen is the retort it or anything leaks, it will be seen as a direct act at her.

If H&M are expecting an apology, they are dumber than I think they are. The Queen has never publicly apologized for anything that is not her way. And frankly why the fuck she should apologize. Even if I believed H&M 100% (which I don't) they went after the whole institution while her husband lies dying in the hospital! Frankly, if I was the Queen I'd arrange for Meghan and Harry to take a little car trip in Paris.

R332 Megs doesn't want help. She wants to whine what a victim she is. How everyone has failed her. How she's right and everyone else is wrong. How she's OK, and everyone else isn't. Megs isn't about truth-telling, she's about revenge. And once she's taken what she believes is her revenge, Megs is about annihilation, permanently excising from her life and very conscience anyone who may be able to question her narrative.

R208, just because the Queen used her common sense about apartheid doesn't mean that her children and grandchildren inherited any logic. You could see their pale faces smirking at Harry and Meghan's wedding, particularly when the African American pastor spoke. They need to do a lot of reflection before they can think about making speeches to the Commonwealth countries.

The leaks are already starting to happen again in BG regarding Meghan taking photos inside Will and Kate's Amner Hall and then never being invited again after Meghan was busted. I agree with whoever said there will be small but constant leaks from "sources" while the palace stays silent with open arms for the Sussexes.

[quote] Are the couple victims?

She is not innocent nor is she a victim. In fact, much of her past was quietly handled by his family to protect her so as not to become an issue.

He is not innocent either. He knows that many of his past indiscretions were also quietly handled in a way to protect him.

Thus the assertion that they were not protected is erroneous.

Frankly, she was caught engaging in untrustworthy behavior from the beginning, so she should be grateful that the family protected her.

[quote] What did she do that was untrustworthy?

There was an incident of her surreptitiously taking photos at a family member’s home. She was never invited to the home again and seems to have held a special grudge against those family members since then.

Preaching in Commonwealth countries is not the African American tradition, r335.

[quote{R18 If someone made a stupid comment in private (which Meghan herself didn't even hear)

Except it was “several conversations”.

Stop trying to soft pedal it.

Can't you read, R337??? The Brit Royals are the ones that give speeches to everyone in the Commonwealth.

[quote]You could see their pale faces smirking at Harry and Meghan's wedding, particularly when the African American pastor spoke.

That wedding was an embarrassing farce of identity politics. The Black Bishop was a repetitive windbag who was damn well going to get his 15 min of fame even if he had to bore everyone into a coma to do it. I wonder how many of the 30 million people who watched the wedding were screaming "Oh shut the fuck up already" to the Bishop's TV image.

And speaking of pale faces smirking . . .

R335, I got up early and watched the wedding. There was no smirking.

Not reasonable or a good look for the family. What they should say is that the palace strongly condemns racism and will investigate any claims. A "fuck off" makes the look like rich MAGA.

[quote]Except it was “several conversations”. Stop trying to soft pedal it.

It was only "several conversations" per daffy-headed "I'm not related to the Romanovs" "this is the real Greta isn't it? "we should all be raindrops!" borderline Harry. Not a trusty source.

Not soft-pedalling at all. I'm far more inclined to believe it was a single conversation, given the topic. Why would someone continue to discuss a topic with Harry, over several conversations, that was that upsetting to him?

I don't buy the idea that Charles or William seriously didn't want Archie a prince because he was bi-racial. Absurd - why would they allow Harry to marry Meghan at all if that were the case? Why attend their wedding or be seen anywhere with them at all in that case. It's not as if they had to - Harry has much less power than those two have, in that hierarchy.

MM was invited for dinner and went to take a phone call out of the dining room. Charlotte followed her and MM tried to take a photo of her with her phone. There was also some story that she had taken photos of private areas of KP before she was married.

This is all such a car crash. I can tell you from personal experience, when you have thin-skinned rich elderly relatives, the last thing you want to do is antagonise them.

And what's up with the alleged racism remark? How the hell can anyone know how a child will look before it has been born? Since bi-racial MM is so light and Harry is the whitest ginger on earth, then it's likely the child will not look too African, but who knows? Anyway, who cares what one relative said? A lot gets said in families anyway. Didn't the queen say, 'At least he didn't get his father's ears' or something like that about one of Charles' sons? (By the way, it was Andrew.)

The Sussexes blew it big time and the sad thing is, they don't even realise it. Everything they said has been heard through the filter of the serious allegations of their bullying staff. So much of their rant has already been shown to be lies - the last time she saw her sister, the fact that she did have her passport because she traveled, that Charles did indeed support them financially, the fact that Kate did leave the dress fitting in tears. And all of it is utterly tone deaf, these multi-millionaires moaning from their mansion about their hard lot, in the midst of a cataclysmic pandemic where people have lost family members, jobs, savings, homes.

In the future, whenever I think about 'a life changing decision that was the beginning of an irreversible downfall,' I will think about this interview.

[quote]What they should say is that the palace strongly condemns racism and will investigate any claims.

Uh, no. Never give credence to or engage a narcissist. It will only embolden them.

There was some tittering in the royal pews r341. Camilla and Kate in particular were caught on camera passing the side eye and trying to suppress laughter.

Frankly so was I, given the bombastic, hyper-energetic Un-Englishness of the American pastor. I liked his sermon, but seeing him do his thing in front of that specific crowd was entertainment in itself.

Harry And Meghan Markle’s Revelation Raise Race Issue In Commonwealth Nations

The value of the Commonwealth has been debated before, with critics questioning if countries once colonized should remain in such an association with a former colonizer.

In countries with historic ties to Britain, allegations by Prince Harry and Meghan that an unnamed member of the royal family had “concerns” over the colour of their unborn baby's skin have raised a thorny question: Do those nations really want to be so closely connected to Britain and its royal family anymore?

It was expected the interview would expose more rifts in the royal family. Now it seems to be risking divisions within the “family" of the Commonwealth — an association of 54 countries, most of them former British colonies, held together by historic ties. For decades, Queen Elizabeth II has been the driving force behind the Commonwealth.

After the TV interview, shown in the US on the eve of Commonwealth Day, former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull cited it as another reason for the country to sever its constitutional ties to the British monarchy.

“After the end of the queen's reign, that is the time for us to say: OK, we've passed that watershed," Turnbull told Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

"Do we really want to have whoever happens to be the head of state, the king or queen of the UK, automatically our head of state?

The value of the Commonwealth has been debated before, with critics questioning if countries and people once colonized — and even oppressed — should remain in such an association with a former colonizer. Its stated aim is to improve international relations, but Britain's relationship with the members has been clouded by diplomatic missteps and the legacy of empire. In a speech to mark Commonwealth Day on Monday, the queen spoke of “the spirit of unity.”

Charismatic royals like Harry and Meghan have been deployed in the past to Commonwealth-related events with young people, businesses and volunteer groups.

But their interview this week “opens our eyes further” on the merits of the Commonwealth, wrote Nicholas Sengoba, a newspaper columnist in the former colony of Uganda.

He cited “unresolved issues” in his country relating to the abuses of colonialism and questioned whether the heads of Commonwealth countries should still be “proud to eat dinner” with members of the British royal family, considering the accusations.

Meghan, who is biracial, had said in the interview that an unidentified member of the royal family had raised “concerns” about the colour of her baby when she was pregnant with her son, Archie, and that the palace failed to help her when she had suicidal thoughts. Buckingham Palace said Tuesday the allegations of racism by Harry and Meghan were “concerning” and would be addressed privately by the royal family.

Reaction to the interview was especially fierce in Africa. It was encapsulated by one Twitter user in South Africa who wrote: “It's Britain and the royal family. What did you expect? They oppressed us for years.”

Meghan and Harry travelled to South Africa in 2019, where their impending split with the royal family became clearer and they even spoke of possibly living there.

Mohammed Groenewald, who showed them around at a mosque in Cape Town, was still digesting the interview, which was only shown in South Africa on Monday. But he said that, more than anything, it sparked memories of “British colonial racism.”

“It comes out very clearly,” he said.

In Kenya, a former colony where a young Princess Elizabeth was visiting in 1952 when she learned about the death of her father and thus that she would become queen, news of the interview also has begun appearing in the country's newspapers.

“We feel very angry seeing our fellow African sister being harassed because she is black," said Nairobi resident Sylvia Wangari, referring to Meghan. She added that Kenyans in 1952 did not show Elizabeth “any racism, and she stayed here without us showing her any discrimination.”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declined to comment on the interview. He said many institutions in Canada are built around colonialism and systematic racism, including Parliament, and he said the answer is to listen to Canadians who face discrimination so that institutions can be fixed.

“The answer is not to suddenly toss out all the institutions and start over,” Trudeau said.

“I wish all the members of the royal family all the best, but my focus is getting through this pandemic. If people want to later talk about constitutional change and shifting our system of government that's fine, and they can have those conversations, but right now I'm not having those conversations.”

Jagmeet Singh, leader of the opposition New Democratic Party, said the monarchy "is in no way beneficial to Canadians in terms of their everyday life."

"And with the systematic racism that we've seen, it seems to be in that institution as well,” he said.

The interview was not shown on TV in India, the Commonwealth's most populous member country with 1.3 billion people, but it still was covered by the media and drew negative reactions from the public toward the royals.

“Behind that whole elegant facade are thoughts that are not so elegant.” said fashion writer Meenakshi Singh.

Lawyer Sunaina Phul said the Commonwealth “is relevant to the royal family, of course, because it shows that they ruled so many places. I don't know why we are still a part of it.”

[quote]R106 Lady C. is a bitter cunt. I tried watching that video and had enough after about 30 seconds.

She’s repellent. Sets my teeth on edge.

I'm having trouble posting the link, but if you want to look for it the article is from Outlook India.

Link to the Camilla-Kate side eye at the wedding (which I find amusing):

[quote]R149 A 94 year old woman with a husband on his deathbed does not deserve this. It is absolutely shameful of Meghan and Oprah to proceed with their money-grubbing drama.

The interview was taped before Corpse Philip went into the hospital. They’re not in charge of when it airs.

There is also a conflict about when the black baby remark was made. In the interview Harry said it was before the wedding when asked and Meghan said it was during her pregnancy.

[quote] What was Diana’s perfume brand allegedly worn?

Penhaglion’s Bluebell

I posted this on another thread, but given R347's article and the mention of Former Oz PM Malcolm Turnbull, it's relevant here for perspective on the issue.

Commonwealth populations love their Queen, their Head of State. Back in 1999, former Oz PM Malcolm Turnbull thought it was time to dump the Queen, spent months bludgeoning Aussies to death that the polls were on the Republican side, that Aussies wanted to go it alone as a republic. Then came the referendum, in which Aussies firmly told Turnbull, "Get stuffed, Mal. We want the Ole Chook".

(The 1999 Republic Referendum: 55% No; %45 Yes)

LMAO! Check out William at bottom of screen at 1:19:

If there is a lesson to be learned by this, white people, avoid WOC like Meghan at all costs. Don't hire them, don't befriend them, and don't let your friends/brothers marry them. When someone like MM can make allegations completely unsubstantiated and be believed because of the color of her skin, it's not good. Hillary Clinton renouncing the Royals and making a big deal out it. These women are nothing but trouble. If Meghan was her but was actually white, the palace would have said "gurl, bye" and all of America would be tasting marshmallows on her dumpster fire of cancellation due to her unchecked privileges and micro aggressions.

That should be "palate" btw at r356 (my post).

[quote]R353 There is also a conflict about when the black baby remark was made. In the interview Harry said it was before the wedding when asked and Meghan said it was during her pregnancy.

It was SEVERAL conversations. That covers more than one timeframe.

R352 It was filmed after Philip was admitted to hospital. They talk about it in the interview.

Hahaha - look at Elton John's face at 1:42 - it's like an awkward smile turned upside down @ R356.

R355, I live in the developing world. We do not share Australia's love for monarchy. We may respect the Queen, but the Commonwealth is just another grouping to us. It could be tossed aside anytime.

I thought that was an insert... shot later. And doesn’t Oprah just mention it in voice over?

^^ r360 In response to:

[quote] It was filmed after Philip was admitted to hospital. They talk about it in the interview.

Does anyone have a picture of the Tindalls? Zara looked peeved.

Corrected formatting:

———

[quote]R352 The interview was taped before Corpse Philip went into the hospital. They’re not in charge of when it airs.

[quote]R360 It was filmed after Philip was admitted to hospital. They talk about it in the interview.

I thought that was an insert... shot later. And doesn’t Oprah just mention it in voice over? (Implying post production update.)

Zara's in r356, keep watching.

Thanks.

[Quote]How are they 'hiding' Prince Andrew? It's not like they stuffed him in a cupboard at Balmoral.

He no longer undertakes any royal duties and does not appear at public family functions. He was not seen with the family walking to Christmas service at Sandringham pre-pandemic. No pictures of the father of the bride when Beatrice married. I don't know if he'll make another balcony appearance.

So three major claims of Meghans have been disproved....of course the American Media is too chicken to report it:

1) Archie isn't a Prince because the great-grandchildren on the monarch are entitled to it unless the child of a direct heir (e.g. William's kids) This is guided by the Letters Patent 1917.

2) In England you cannot get married in a garden that's against the law. So they didn't get married before their wedding it was just a rehearsal.

3) The Home Office not the Royal Family decides who gets publicly funded security. Their security was ended when they left the country. Also US Law prevents foreign protection agents to carry arms on American soil.

[quote]I live in the developing world. We do not share Australia's love for monarchy.

R362 You have your own personal views about the Commonwealth/Monarchy. You are ASSUMING the views of the "developing world". Perhaps, like Mal Turnbull, you will be very surprised that the majority do not hold your personal views.

[Quote]In England you cannot get married in a garden

What?!

Poor Zara Tindall was only a couple of weeks away from giving birth and the seating didn't look very comfortable. It must have been exasperating.

I think Corpse Philip went into the hospital on Feb. 17th.

The Oprah interview was done some time before Feb. 19th (no specific date)

R371, you are lost.

R374 Lost? You mean there's been a referendum in the entire "developing world" and via that referendum, the majority of people have decided that they don't like the Monarchy and want out of the Commonwealth? Or are you simply ASSUMING based on media agenda?

A lip reader said that Zara said, "I need the toilet."

Poll conducted yesterday (Mar 9) after the interview. Support for the royal family in the UK largely remains unchanged.

Does someone have a Valium for the douchebag from Oz?

YouGov poll also confirms public support for the Monarchy remains largely unchanged.

Why did the White House and Hillary Clinton respond? Is there a hidden agenda going on?

Apparently you can get a core group of supporters no matter what. Shockingly looking at the raw data women are apparently more negative to him than men.

Count on Hillary to pipe up..

[quote]A lip reader said that Zara said, "I need the toilet."

I was thinking that too; the look on her face says "buddy, I got a piss like a racehorse! Wrap it up NOW!"

Kate looked quite good with the little extra baby weight and Elton John is clearly morphing into Violet, Dowager Countess of Grantham.

In 10 months she’ll blame this trainwreck of an interview on being pregnant.

[quote]Count on Hillary to pipe up..

*sigh* Why is she doing this shit? She knows better.

[quote]*sigh* Why is she doing this shit? She knows better.

My bet is still that Chelsea/Clinton Foundation has some kind of Netfix/Spotify business connection with the Harkles

What about the White house?

Well, notice the WH didn't really weigh on what they actually said (particularly about race); they just make some generic statement about speaking out about mental health. While we consider Smegs a drama queen and an "adventuress", they have to take it at face value when someone says they thought about suicide while pregnant and struggled with depression.

Besides the score-settling, the interview seems like a brand launch. Archewell is about mental health and wellness. Previously, Harry was always referencing his struggles, now she can, too. They're set to go as experts because of their authentic experiences, these days just as important as actual expertise.

And it also neatly undermines the Cambridge's efforts in mental health, portraying them as cold, unfeeling, trapped baddies. How can they deign to weigh in on such issues when they were so awful to Meghan?

‘Recollections may vary’! So much classier than ‘fake noos’ or ‘alternative facts’. And far more classy than what many would really want to say. ‘Shut yer lying yap, Markle’.

You are likely right, R389, though it sounds like their brand should be "Grievances R Us"

R132 The big nose that Meghan fixed is the ugly, white Markle nose that she inherited from her father.

R149 Netflix does not "share the profits." Netflix buys everything outright.

R351, Camilla was laughing inappropriately. She does that a lot during official events, and it’s a shame that she doesn’t know how to behave in public.

R202 Meghan probably had a California Drivers License and a Canadian one. Both can be used in the UK. The California one could be used up to a year after she arrived. The Canadian one would be fully valid.

R351 Camilla and Kate were smirking in response to the black preacher. I don't find that amusing.

R396, in Kate’s defense, it’s hard to keep a straight face when someone else is laughing and wheezing beside you, even if you don’t find the situation funny.

I can get over the smirk on Kate’s face, but every time I see Camilla, I want to hit her over the head with a shovel. She is always vile, inappropriate, and the perfect example of putting lipstick on a pug.

^^^ putting lipstick on a pig, not a pug.

Given the BRF's penchant for dogs, lipstick on a pug is appropriate.

That guy was a clown, R396. And, worse, a long winded one.

[quote]The big nose that Meghan fixed is the ugly, white Markle nose that she inherited from her father.

Pretty sure she inherited his metabolism and fat ass, too.

All this bitterness wasn't over the monarchy, it was over mom jeans.

Everyone in the UK was laughing at that preacher. It was so embarrassing.

[quote]given the bombastic, hyper-energetic Un-Englishness of the American pastor. I liked his sermon, but seeing him do his thing in front of that specific crowd was entertainment in itself.

The whole thing was hilarious for its contrasts and cliches. Not the least of which was Meghan Markle leaning into a church service. I'd like to know prior to the wedding the last time she set foot in a church.

[quote] Woke Twitter is all for Meghan. Which is why the BRF will never win this war.

Totally! If Woke Twitter can get Gina Carano fired from Disney+, getting the BRF fired as Constitutional Heads Of State should be a sinch!

[quote]should be a sinch!

R404 Getting you to spell cinch correctly obviously isn't one.

I support Meghan and Harry completely! They instantly came to my defense when I told my story of being set on fire by a bunch of frat guys as I sat in my car, minding my own business. Yeah, that's it. They set me on fire! Honest!

[quote]MM was invited for dinner and went to take a phone call out of the dining room. Charlotte followed her and MM tried to take a photo of her with her phone.

I apologise. It was unprofessional of me. I wasn't polished enough at running a tail and she ambushed me.

In my defence, I did shout, "Mummy! She's taking my picture!" as loudly as I could. I thought it was a pretty good save.

R406 Sorry - Althea Bernstein. I was so traumatized by the racially motivated attack on me that I sometimes forget my own name.

The Australian correspondent above is missing out some important details. 1. Malcolm Turnbull was years from becoming PM at the time.

2. The actual PM was John Howard, a very nasty conservative, who ensured that the way the question was put it would have been irresponsible of anyone to vote for a Republic. The question of how the head of State would be chosen had not been properly settled before it went to the referendum, and that was on purpose to maintain the status quo.

So while I'm sure some people voted "No" because they love the monarchy, a significant proportion of republicans also voted No because it would have left us with a mess at the top and a PM we didn't trust an inch to resolve it. All this is very well known in Australia, though possibly not by the Tik Tok age group.

[quote] At this point, people who hate Meghan are proving to be no different than QAnon followers who hate Hillary Clinton and Democrats so much, they believe wild conspiracies involving pedophile cults

Not that one should expect logical consistency from Meghan fans, but I believe the Prince Andrew story they love to deflect with proved there are pedophile cults out there. Epstein was a "rumour" for decades before it became a "fact", just like Weinstein.

And it is possible to be disgusted with manipulative Meghan Markle, and not be a mindless Royalist and defender of Prince Andrew.

Prince Andrew will never come to justice, because it's the perfect excuse for the FBI to stall the investigation. "The Queen's son won't hand himself in for questioning? Oh well, we can't investigate any further then!" There are hundreds of people who did the same as him, but again, Andrew is a convenient decoy to stall the investigation. Maybe go ask Trump? Or how about Bill and Hillary Clinton? Or does that not suit your simplified black-and-white view of the world?

R409 I don't know where you were mate, but I was in Oz while this was going on. Mal was head of the Republic Movement, and his ugly mug was all over the news trying to convince people that the average Aussie wanted to dump the Queen, cut ties with the Old Country, stuff the lotta 'em, etc. What Mal didn't realize or chose to ignore was that Aussies for all their larrikinism and disdain, hate change and quite like the Old Chook.

From the Times:

Describing Kate as “a good person”, she added: “I’m not sharing that piece about Kate in any way to be disparaging to her. I think it’s really important for people to understand the truth. I would hope that she would have wanted that corrected.”

However, other accounts of the incident are at odds with Meghan’s version. The Times has been told that the Duchess of Cambridge left the bridesmaids’ dress fitting in tears. The following day she took a bunch of flowers to Nottingham Cottage, Harry and Meghan’s home at the time, as a peace offering. According to Vanity Fair in an article last summer, Kate was told in uncertain terms it was not enough. A source told The Times that Meghan slammed the door in Kate’s face.

The truth is coming out about this one.

“Manipulative Meghan Markle”, see that where the obsessive parts come in where people attribute traits to a person they’ve never met.

You really think that Harry couldn’t be the one who wanted to escape this family, and he married Meghan knowing that she could be a ticket for him to leave the BRF?

Harry knows that Charles is responsible for the breakdown of their marriage, he saw how the press hounded his mother, he walked behind his mother’s coffin at the funeral, and as the icing on the cake, Charles ended up marrying the woman with whom he betrayed Diana before and during their marriage?

I don’t know if that’s the case, but it would make a lot more sense than the “manipulative Meghan Markle” angle, and I don’t blame him one bit.

I was also in Australia, R411, though I don't need to talk like Paul Hogan to prove it. Of course Turnbull was the head of the Republican movement - when did I suggest he wasn't? And yes, he was talking about cutting ties etc.

A lot of Australian progressives thought it was important to cut those ties because we vividly remembered the Palace's role in the coup against Gough Whitlam in 1975. But we didn't vote for the motion, because Howard had distorted it until we could have ended up with something a lot worse.

Nothing you said contradicted anything I said first time round: you just wanted to state your view again.

R410, what about William cheating on Kate? That story was conveniently killed, while the BRF willingly offered up Markle on a silver platter to the British press.

[quote] You could see their pale faces smirking at Harry and Meghan's wedding, particularly when the African American pastor spoke?

Did you listen to it? Even Harry and Meghan couldn't help but smirk at it! R. Kelly gave a more nuanced sermon in Trapped In The Closet!

William never cheated on Kate, r415. And, even if he did, that's a private issue which is none of our business. There was no story in the tabloids and the royal family did not "offer Markle on a silver platter to the British press".

Cruella Blackamoor must be in heaven.

Yes the untreated mentally ill is the expert and should now become the therapist r389

[quote]we vividly remembered the Palace's role in the coup against Gough Whitlam in 1975

R414 The Dismissal!! How DARE that Old Chook interfere in a system that Oz signed on to.

[quote]The Australian correspondent above is missing out some important details. Malcolm Turnbull was years from becoming PM at the time.

I posted that Turnbull was a "former PM", not that he was PM at the time of the referendum.

As far as Howard "distorting it" (interesting that Turnbull said the exact same thing when the referendum failed, including that "the voter was confused"), how in the world did Howard "distort"?

As far as Howard being "a very nasty conservative", ever met Johnny Howard? I have, several times. Lovely, intelligent, concerned about Oz and its future. A man with an agenda, definitely, but then so are you.

“That piece” - wokespeak. So I live in LA and am conversant, but it’s super annoying, right?

[quote]Harry knows that Charles is responsible for the breakdown of their marriage,

He does - he told you this? Harry would also know that his mother was no saint, engaged in multiple messy affairs herself and was also responsible.

[quote]he saw how the press hounded his mother

And how his mothers worked with the press and called them, sometimes daily, to manipulate them and plant many stories. She had several on speed dial. She actually spoke with Richard Kay the day before she died.

[quote]walked behind his mother’s coffin at the funeral, and as the icing on the cake, Charles ended up marrying the woman with whom he betrayed Diana before and during their marriage?

Do you get your news from Mills & Boon novels. He married a woman with whom he'd had a decades-long running relationship. Many people do it, it happens often. Charles has been happy and settled in his 2nd marriage. You think Harry's problems stem from his father re-marrying?

The Queen played them like a virtuoso.

I would like to know what Charles thinks of all this mess. It seem Charles started it all in the first place. Why do the grandkids always have to go running to granny every time they have problems. I realize that parenting wasn't taught to the royal children very well, but it seems someone, besides granny, should be able to wrangle the family together.

Prince Philip was the family hammer, but he gave up that role about 5 years ago due to extreme age.

[quote]The following day she took a bunch of flowers to Nottingham Cottage, Harry and Meghan’s home at the time, as a peace offering. According to Vanity Fair in an article last summer, Kate was told in uncertain terms it was not enough. A source told The Times that Meghan slammed the door in Kate’s face.

My sister is a toxic narcissist, and this is EXACTLY the kind of shit she does. I feel sorry for Kate having to deal with that.

[quote]Describing Kate as “a good person”, she added: “I’m not sharing that piece about Kate in any way to be disparaging to her. I think it’s really important for people to understand the truth. I would hope that she would have wanted that corrected.”

Passive-aggressive bullshit. If Kate wanted to comment on the story, she would have done so a long time ago. This is a way of getting Meghan's version out to the masses, though it's as unsubstantiated as any of the pro-Kate versions.

Feel for you, R425, anyone with one in the family or who has worked with one can see all the signs.

Harry and I have discovered that cradling someone who is suicidal is an instant cure. In fact, we're doing an entire documentary on our discovery. Be sure to watch on Netflix!

Piers Morgan is gone but the Sussexes complain about him anyway.

R422, I have a half sibling who told me at age forty that she’s hated me since the minute my mother got pregnant, because it meant my mother would never get back together with her father. That relationship was long over and she’d been married to my father for years before she got pregnant. She wasn’t kidding either, she’s treated me like shit my whole life. I only understood why, when she said it.

Yes, people do deeply resent subsequent spouses and they do never get over it. And that’s without having it splashed all over the news and having it happen during the actual marriage. Or when it’s breaking up a marriage with small children. I’m not sure there’s anything Camilla could have done to make them forget Charles dumped their mother for her, or was sleeping with him during the entire marriage. There’s a difference between not showing your feelings and not feeling them. Children often aren’t allowed to show feelings in these situations, their feelings are glossed over or denied. When they get older and can express an opinion, it comes out.

I don’t really know how you can be so insensitive as to think the children were never affected. Of course they were. One is just an extrovert and the other is an introvert. Doesn’t mean they didn’t both feel something. One was affected by thinking it meant he could cheat on his wife with impunity, the other was affected by thinking he had to back up his wife at all costs no matter what she did. That’s being affected.

When I think of Megan why do I picture Eva Peron?

I do not like anyone in this fucking mess but you gotta hand it to Piers, he stood by his opinions and he went down for it. it takes guts. no matter what the opinion, that is something. I believe in free speech for everyone.

I don't like the Royals, think they are just there for the tourists. I don't like Harry or his wife, entitled spoiled brats. I support everyone's right to free speech, they make themselves look so bad. sometimes the less you talk, the less stupid you look.

R422, and how do you know everything? Are you William or Charles? Are you unable to consider any opinion other than your own, because that's what you're offering just like everybody else. An opinion, not facts.

R323, Diana’s signature scent worn most days was Diorissimo. Revealed in several books.

R432 As depicted in "Evita" at least, there are some striking parallels.

R422, the confetti-throwing Harry indicates at the least he wasn’t happy with his father on Charles’ second wedding day.

She is a real piece of work. I know many actresses and they are super sensitive. If you comment on how pretty their hair is, they will think, does that mean you don't like my dress/shoes etc? You tell them you look great today, they will think, does that mean I looked terrible yesterday? Everything revolves around them and they can cry very easily.

You take everything with a grain of salt, they love to dramatize shit. so I ain't gonna believe 100% that comes out of her mouth. esp when her acting is subpar

I think Meghan experienced heinous racism from the UK Press"We've got a niggling feeling" was one tabloid headline - I mean WTF. I also think that she married a man in his mid thirties who wore a Nazi uniform and said he liked dropping bombs in Afghanistan because "it was like Playstation". Sorry- you married into a racist institution for clout and money, this is the outcome. How could you think it would be different. I found Harry so unattractive in that interview. He has nothing going on.

Yes, r339. I can read. The point is, the African American manner of preaching is a foreign concept in Commonwealth countries.

yes, Harry made himself look bad. He's still a dumb, clueless baby. very sad and pathetic.

Also if Harry had been a grip on the set of Suits would Markle have found him attractive? If he had been a lawyer from LA? I doubt it. She wanted a big catch and boy, did she get one. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in years to come. As a biracial woman - I would have been out the door when the darkness of my future children's skin was questioned. According to Harry this came up while they were dating. Pretty repulsive and I would have been out the door then.

Race is a club for Megs to beat people into control. A weapon that can be used effectively and repeatedly until submission - financial and otherwise - is obtained.

R442, Meghan is the brains of the two, so if she wants this to work, she better get out there and make some money somehow. Harry is househusband material at best. Everyone thinks she runs him, has it occurred to anyone he has no coping or survival skills and wanted someone to tell him what to do? Because he doesn’t know how to manage on his own at all, his family told him what to do and that’s how he functioned as an adult. Living away from them must be terrifying for him.

r325, The Queen's Gambit, as it were.

She will dump him in short order, is my prediction, R444. Her shelf life is short. Who would have her now? But, she will be hustling.

His family will have to take him in hand. She will keep the kids.

"Recollections may vary" is the new YMMV.

she ain't gonna dump him until he's broke. she gonna use him up first. She's gonna be networking for projects with billionaires and try to sink her hooks into one of them...

In the interview, Harry told Winfrey that he had felt more solidarity from those MPs than from members of his own family. “I guess one of the most telling parts, and the saddest parts, was over 70 … female members of parliament, both Conservative and Labour, came out and called out the colonial undertones of articles and headlines written about Meghan,” he said. “Yet no one from my family ever said anything over those three years. And that hurts.”

Recollections may vary, Haz.

Those courtiers are like barracudas.

Meghan's dad is a freak but I think he called it when he said Meghan was a mother to Harry. Fussing over him, taking care of him. You have to wonder how long she will be happy with that role.

R452 Until someone more lucrative comes along.

Harry has major mummy issues. He should go to therapy. mommy left him millions, he should use it.

Do we believe Charles has cut him off completely?

If there is an investigation that finds that he was funneling taxpayer derived funds to them there will be an outcry.

Harry has no way to fund their current lifestyle. "Dry" might not be far off.

Rumors were that Netflix was close to cutting them loose. What content are they likely to create that anyone would be interested in?

The Piers thing was clearly meant to instill fear in the BRF. The statement, in light of that, was measured. Now they are issuing threats through the DM. Wonder what real life issues we are being distracted from?

“Meghan was a mother to Harry.”

And your point is?

Meghan made it clear she had serious mental health issues, which obviously persist to this day. It's very sad. She is mentally ill.

That's right R457. Married twice to the same person within three days by an archbishop? Yes, Princess ...

I'm starting to see this through a new perspective. Meghan isn't in control at all. It's her mental illness driving all this. Consider all the allegations she made 'they' 'them' - sounds a little paranoid, doesn't it? - and the unsubstantiated claims she wouldn't - or was it couldn't - substantiate? This looks like someone who is suffering and probably needs help. Shame on Oprah for taking advantage of two people who are so mentally fragile.

but Meghan t̶r̶y̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶g̶e̶t̶ ̶h̶e̶l̶p̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶h̶e̶r̶s̶e̶l̶f̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶g̶e̶t̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶i̶t̶ is crying like a professional victim and is hoping to parlay that into cash.

As much as Meghan has her fame and fortune now, if she is bright and Harry is dull, that will wear on her over time. The excitement of being rich and famous wears off and you are left with a spouse who is a passive, not bright, few life skills person.

It seems Meghan hasn't stayed at much for long. She was a social climber for years, moving her way up and she lucked out and hit the jackpot. But now what. Will she be comfortable just staying there or will it be stagnating for her. She needs ongoing validation and attention - she isn't the type to fade into the background and just enjoy her family and luxury life.

[quote]She needs ongoing validation and attention - she isn't the type to fade into the background and just enjoy her family and luxury life.

Exactly. If she were that type, she'd have leaned hard into the Duchess of Sussex gig in the UK and bided her time. Frogmore was not a top-tier Royal property, but once Charles ascended the throne the Sussexes would have come in for a lot more, especially if they'd been doing good work in the interim years. And the truth is that even if they hadn't come in for more, they'd have been living a life of luxury and security that few people ever get to experience.

[quote]According to Vanity Fair in an article last summer, Kate was told in uncertain terms it was not enough. A source told The Times that Meghan slammed the door in Kate’s face.

I picture this scene like Joan Crawford/Mommy Dearest "no wire hangers!", where Megs comes to the door in curlers, in a bathroom with cold cream on her face & SCREAMS at Kate before dramatically slamming the door.

meghan is the type who expects people to treat her extra nice and if that doesn't happen, pulls out the race card.

The vibe likely was not far off, R463.

Nothing can be done to appease such types, particularly when they are trying to build a brand based on victimhood. How will she manage to monetize it? Clearly there are ongoing threats to the BRF through "friends" that are ongoing. Anyone think they will be paid off for silence? Charles is notoriously cheap.

Harry looked literally beaten down. His description of being trapped but not realizing it until Meg clued him in was so sad, remember he had quite proudly claimed his family would be "the family she never had." She is SUCH bad news.

Is she still with Sunshine Sachs? Thought I saw that may have changed? She does not keep any relationships for long.

Meghan Markle’s former ‘Suits’ co-star Wendell Pierce rips ‘insignificant’ TV sit-down

Meghan Markle’s former “Suits” co-star Wendell Pierce has ripped her and Prince Harry’s TV sit-down as “insignificant” — given problems like the global pandemic, according to a report.

Pierce — who played Markle’s lawyer dad on the TV drama — told Britain’s LBC talk radio station Monday, “Today, 3,000 people are going to die in America from COVID,” according to the Daily Mail.

“A couple of hundred people are going to die, even this hour, in the UK,” said the actor, a native of New Orleans, La., who also starred in “The Wire” and “Jack Ryan.”

But instead of focusing “on the throes of death that we’re in,” “everyone” from the royal couple and the palace to Oprah Winfrey and CBS have been too busy focusing on the “insignificant,” he said.

It’s all “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing,” Pierce said of the interview and ensuing fallout, quoting Shakespeare’s “MacBeth.”

Markle and Prince Harry said during the sit-down that racial issues were a large part of why they left the UK — and that a royal once expressed “concerns” to him over how dark their son Archie’s skin would be. Markle is biracial.

Pierce told the station that he and Markle never really talked in depth about race.

“We didn’t have long discussions about it, besides what was in the script and what was happening in our personal lives,” the actor said.

I have worked for the royal family for 10 years — they’re not racists

As a Deputy Lord Lieutenant, I am a personal representative of Her Majesty The Queen in the English county of Nottinghamshire. I am also an Islamic scholar and translator of the Quran. I am intensely proud of my Britishness, my faith, and my South Asian heritage.

In the 10 years I have spent representing the royal family, they have been nothing but respectful of my background. The notion that they are racist is simply out of touch with reality.

This is not to delegitimize Meghan Markle’s experience, or to belittle the inevitable difficulties of someone adapting to royal life — to an existence based on duty, not stardom.

But on many occasions, I, and other members of minority communities, have spent extended periods of time with the royals. If racism was in their DNA, I would have certainly smelt it.

The narrative being eagerly lapped up in parts of the US is that, as the heads of the ex-British empire, the royal family must be the last remaining representatives of colonialism and the ideology that underpins it.

But the royal family is committed to equality through one of the most equal and multicultural institutions in the world: The Commonwealth.

The experience of racism is not the same as racism. There are, for example, lots of innocent reasons to ask about a baby’s skin tone, eye color, or hair color (I’m sure someone will have asked if the baby was likely to be ginger; evidently Oprah Winfrey did not see this as newsworthy).

My faith requires me to have husn al-dhan — to give others the benefit of the doubt. It also instructs me to preserve familial relations, and respect others’ privacy. That’s why the interview was painful — and disappointing — viewing for me.

Airing a family’s dirty laundry (and I am not sure how much laundry there really is) so publicly will not only injure the sensibilities of many Brits, but could be seen as an attack on family values.

The first rule of family life is to support each other, and to air your grievances — however deeply felt — privately. That is true for the Royals, and it is true in my own home.

I fear that all Ms. Markle’s actions will achieve is, ironically, to make the Royals more cautious when dealing with outsiders. And that will be a loss to us all.

Dr Musharraf Hussain OBE, DL is Her Majesty The Queen’s Deputy Lord Lieutenant in Nottinghamshire, and translator of “The Majestic Quran” — a plain English translation of the Quran.

They don't seem to be holding control of the narrative.

I hope they don't panic and get uglier.

Meghan Markle is so much cooler playing the bitchy character on Suits than trying to pretend to be royal miss sweetheart.

I love the line in R468 about adapting to an existence of duty, not stardom.

Perfect!

Sorry, in R467

Yeah, you can see the tide starting to turn. If they do spew more venom, it won't benefit their public image one bit. The best thing they could do is let the matter rest and start publicizing their podcast and upcoming projects, but I'll be surprised if that happens.

And timing wise, the Kate / Meg spat over Charlotte's flower girl dress not fitting was one week after Kate gave birth to Louis. being one week post partum, hormones are still raging.

[quote] Dr Musharraf Hussain OBE, DL

DL in his case does not mean this DL.

Worse for them, CBS is rerunning it Friday night.

Two more days of 'well, the fact is' stories.

Granted, in our youth we are very foolish. However, Harry, and wife, have basically accused the Queen and the next two King's of England of complying with racism. In nobody's lifetime will this ever be forgotten! H&M really didn't think this thing out and the ramifications for their children.

She is making non too thinly veiled threats through "friends" in DM, R468, MM seems to have thought the family would shower them with money after the interveiw. Clearly that did not happen so she is trying to shake them down.

Harry seems even more The Hostage now, no? Not to mention the kid. Surely he worries about her suicidal ideation and the new baby as well. She is horrifying.

It seems increasingly likely, after the divorce, that Meghan will wind up like Fergie... a pathetic figure from whom people feel a mix of pity and contempt, and who is cared for by her ex-husband because he feels responsible for the mess she made of her life.

What is DM, R477?

Daily Mail?

R477 She has friends at the Daily Mail?!?

Yep, in 20 years when they're nearing 60 and William and Kate are King and Queen or about to wear the crown, where will Harry and Meghan be?

Their 2 kids will be 20, raised in California and ? No one will trust or confide in Meghan or Harry, because he will tell Meghan whatever. They won't want any interaction with Meghan because her wildcard recollections will be aired.

Meghan thinking this interview would patch things up and bring them closer is like Thomas Markle thinking doing an interview will heal the rift with his daughter. But Meghan's smarter than that. I don't think she cares about patching things up. She wanted to raise her public profile and live her life in California.

[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.]

That article makes me wonder if she's blabbed to other people, privately. Because somebody will spill if they have.

I have never seen anybody with such a knack for hoist on her own petard. 72 hours on and the tide is already turning.

R485, it's already been knocked from the main news cycles here in Canada.

MSN fact check: link

Even the Mail is soft peddling it.

Just read the posts about what Meghan and Harry are thinking.

Their haters aren’t just cunts, they are clairvoyant cunts.

[quote]'Meghan said the Royal institution should be relieved that she didn't name names or go into even more details of what went on behind closed doors. . . .She said she's moved on, but is open to communicating with anyone from the Royal family who wants to engage in a constructive conversation."

The blackmail couldn't be more transparent.

The problem for her is that if she does name names, it's going to ruin the kindly earth mama image she's trying to espouse. The Royals would be fools to pay her a cent.

She said she's moved on = current interviewing ghost writers

but is open to communicating with anyone from the Royal family = is expecting a call

who wants to engage in a constructive conversation = with a lot of zeros in it

They didn’t want to “hurt” the person who supposedly was racist in wondering what their baby would look like. If they name names they’re going to be seen as vindictive and trashy.

The problem is they already had the US on their side. Americans love that they can defend their own against the Brits who have always acted like they’re better than us. Plus now we are seen as less racist than another country (amazing and not true). But M&H don’t want Americans alone on their side, they want the British public on their side. The opposite has happened. Harry especially, must be very upset about that. He’s convinced the only reason Brits don’t like her is because of the racist press.

If they think the majority of the British public will support an American interloper over the Queen, they are insane.

She is not a happy person. Apart from issues with tabloids or royal work, it's a sweet life which she threw away because of envy of Duchess of Cambridge (I love all these titles and such after reading PG Wodehouse novels). She should realize that the Duchess has more responsibility than she would ever have yet lead a wonderful royal life. Envy of others' life is never so good because everyone's life situation and experiences are different. And being unhappy with the cards dealt in life will impact her children. I can tell that from my own experience.

I used to think she was a grifter and a scammer but I realize now, she's deeply mentally ill. Harry really failed her. She needs help so badly.

R493, her mistake, and Harry's is that they think she is as loved as Diana.

Exactly, R494.

They literally do seem deranged and disconnected from reality. How is having "friends" threaten the Queen with blackmail in the DM going to work out for them? Trev and that chef must be on their knees thanking God that she is no longer in their lives.

Coming up - Megsy suicidal whilst knocked up, again.

Best thing would be if those 2 freaks lost custody and those kids were raised with their cousins.

R496, this type of personality disorder is really not something that can be fixed. He looked to be barely hanging on himself.

The problem with the racist baby rhetoric is that it brushes with too broad of a brush. She's saying, "See everyone who is not like me is racist."

If Oprah wasn't like that herself, she would have said, "Did you confront the person who said it? Did you make them aware that you felt what they said was racist and that you won't tolerate that type of rhetoric?"

Instead, everyone chooses the passive-aggressive route. We're not going to confront the person, we're just going to make blanket statements and paint everyone as a racist. "

Harry is playing out the Diana drama all over again--seeking to please and pacify a mentally unstable woman. No amount of love and support will ever make Meghan happy, but sadly it may be years--if ever--before Harry figures that out.

I mean, it's possible someone could have said something as innocuous as "I wonder if he'll be a pale ginger like you or dark-haired and olive-skinned like his mum?" You could certainly twist that statement as speculating about how dark the baby's skin would be for racist purposes, when the speaker didn't mean that at all.

He definitely thinks she’s Diana - beloved but misunderstood, threatening suicide while pregnant, without flaw in his mind - and he’s making up for what his father did by standing by her. Such an unhealthy situation over there.

R494 Yup. Honest truth, the only reason why there is sympathy for the couple at all is became Harry was beloved by much of the public. He was one of "Diana's Boys" there is a lot of empathy for him. But that only goes so far. I don't think Americans fully understand how deeply ingrained the monarchy is in the cultural life of Britain. Even if you are kind of 'meh' about the whole institution (as I am), it's still hard to see the country without the it. Unlike the US, we don't venerate politicians as personalities or people we'd want to have a drink with, in fact we loath most of our political figures (even the ones we vote for). The Royals provide an outlet that is about something other than political in national life. Now I agree that the whole idea of the head of state being determined by an accident of birth is ridiculous on the surface, but the system we have works very well and it's not going anywhere.

I don't think is going to end well for Harry. Even in America this mudslinging will can only last so long before people grow tired of it. They claim to want to be free and do good, but if all their doing is attacking the royals, that can only get them so far.

Meghan, IMO, has narcissistic personality disorder. Narcissist often take an event where they were clearly at fault and turn it against the other party. BTW People on Twitter have found articles that appears in the British press in 2018 in which Buckingham Palace stated to the media that the story about Meghan making Kate cry was categorically untrue. So there goes the claim the palace wasn't protecting her.

I'm amazed Oprah chooses to exploit her, not help her. A wise, true friend would have said I will help you tell your story in a way that helps you and at the right time.

[quote] Americans love that they can defend their own against the Brits who have always acted like they’re better than us. Plus now we are seen as less racist than another country (amazing and not true).

One thing I've seen a lot on social media is Americans claiming that Harry and Meghan can now live in the US in peace, away from racists and away from people that care about the skin colour of an infant. The disconnect is quite amazing.

[quote] Meghan, IMO, has narcissistic personality disorder. Narcissist often take an event where they were clearly at fault and turn it against the other party.

I never liked her. I didn't know she was nasty.

Oh some juicy gossip in this clip re: the bullying allegations against Meghan. One person (believed to be Samantha Cohen) who worked for Meghan at Kengsinton who claims that Meghan bullied her is threatening to sue Meghan and Omid Scobie after they claimed she was fired for gross incompetence.

R506 was for R493.

[quote]I don't think Americans fully understand how deeply ingrained the monarchy is in the cultural life of Britain.

Exactly. The monarch is the head of state, not a president or PM who can be voted out or a celebrity who can be cancelled. It just doesn't work that way.

The Queen has been there since Eisenhower.

If the Queen makes it another few years, this will blow over. The monarchy will be more vulnerable under Charles or even under William, though I expect that William and Kate could win the hearts and minds of the public quite efficiently. William is Diana's son too, and the Cambridges are already quite popular. Charles might be a harder sell.

yes, Kate made Meghan cry over some dresses but also keep in mind that Meghan the cunt has been rude to everyone, demeaning to staff, maybe Kate's staff (if memory serves) remember the Queen had tell the whore that they don't speak to the help like that. (when the cunt was nasty to cooks about vegan food, she thought it tasted too good to be vegan etc). so maybe Kate was just giving Meghan a piece of her mind, put her in her place. delusional bad actress thought she was gonna be more important than the queen with marriage to dumb ginger.

It's basically hoped that Charles will have a short reign, R512. I don't think he'll abdicate and pass the title on to William though. You're right that William and Kate are popular, as are their children.

Has anyone asked if Camilla is OK? I mean, does she want a gin and tonic and a cigarette?

You're only supposed to ask if Meghan's OK.

Didn't you hear about her suffering in Africa?

Also, Meghan told Camilla not to smoke in her presence. And made Camilla cry.

R487, the "fact check" is provided by the DailyMail. I'll pass.

R518 The DM is under Megh's thumb now, so it's ok.

The monarchy would be better off if Charles abdicated in favor of William, but I agree it won't happen. He's been waiting his turn for half a century, and he's going to have it.

Also Megh told George not to be such a little gay boy. And Charlotte told her to fuck off. And made Meghan cry.

Meghan to Camilla: does your face hurt?

Camilla to Meghan: well, no, why do you ask?

Meghan to Camilla: cause, bitch, it’s hurting me!

So Allegedly the curtain began to fall on Kate/Meghan's friendship when over Christmas 2017 when the Cambridges hosted Meghan and Harry at Anmer Hall. Allegedly Meghan, snapped photos of the house and one of those photos was leaked to People Magazine. The trail ultimately lead back to Meghan. Kate was hugely upset by this because she felt it was an invasion of her privacy and a security risk for their children. When William confronted Harry this lead to the conversation about how well do you know Meghan should you date her longer etc.

Timing-wise, the best time for the Cambridges to take over would be 5-7 years from now when they are still youngish and photogenic and their kids are young and cute. Having a lanky teen George at the Coronation also underscores the continuity of the whole institution. If Charles weren't in the picture, the timing would really be perfect, as it's unlikely the Queen will reign for more than another 5-7 years.

Kate must have had some idea of what Meghan was like even earlier than that. Didn't Meghan also leak a story about Kate not being 'friendly' to Meghan by inviting her to go shopping or something? This is when they had just met, and it would have been silly for Kate to issue an invitation like that.

R523 I thought she had also taken a picture of the kids too without asking.

R523, she was said to do something similar on a visit to Charles. It is the behavior of a disturbed person. Wonder how much $ she got for it?

So her invasion of other people's privacy is ok then?

R528 Well the Oprah interview attests to that. She wants privacy but doesn't respect the privacy of others.

But, but, R529 she didn't name names...

Not just disturbed but idiotic. You've got a big Royal fish on the line and you jeopardize it by selling pictures that might go for a few thousand at most?

Of course, Harry was so dumb that it didn't blow the engagement, but it did set the family against her.

All the WORKING Royals who don't get full protection demanded by Harry and Meghan: Members of The Firm like Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex don't have 24/7 security despite hundreds of engagements a year

Working members of the Royal Family such as Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie, Countess of Wessex don't receive 24/7 taxpayer-funded security despite carrying out hundreds of engagements each year, it was revealed today after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle complained about losing their own protection.

The Queen, Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Charles, Camilla, Prince William and Kate all get round-the-clock protection - while Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie are guarded only on official duties and engagements.

Senior royals carried out 3,567 engagements in 2019 - including 295 by the Queen, 521 by Charles, 194 by Camilla, 220 by William and 126 by Kate. In the same year, Harry did 201 and Meghan carried out 83 - while Anne did 506.

Other royals including the Queen's granddaughters Zara Tindall, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie do not have state-funded security, while Prince Andrew lost his after stepping down from royal duties in November 2019.

Beatrice and Eugenie's security is no longer paid for by the British taxpayer, despite them being princesses and grandchildren of the monarch, because they are not working royals and have full-time jobs instead.

Beatrice and Eugenie had police protection costing £500,000 until 2011 when this was removed amid a row over the cost, with the Queen having made it clear that she expected them to pursue their own careers after university.

Princess Diana also famously jettisoned her police protection team in 1993 after her divorce from Charles - despite the Metropolitan Police making efforts to get her to change her mind before she died in Paris in August 1997.

The budget on air travel for royal bodyguards hit £4.6million in 2018-19, while their hotel stays cost £2million in 2017-18. Anti-monarch group Republic estimates that taxpayers foot a £106million annual bill on royal security.

It comes after Harry's assumption that taxpayers would pay for their security after the Sussexes left the UK was branded 'arrogant' and 'unworkable' by an expert after he spoke about the issue in the Oprah Winfrey interview.

The Duke of Sussex said in the chat, shown on ITV on Monday, that he had to cut deals with Spotify and Netflix after his family cut him off financially and stripped his security, forcing him to foot the multi-million bill himself.

But in reality the couple, who now live in Montecito, California, had moved to a country where their royal protection officers would have been legally unable to carry out their duties and therefore their lives could have been put at risk as British officers cannot carry guns under US laws or access intelligence about potential threats.

And if an officer harmed someone in the course of protecting the Sussexes, they could have found themselves facing an expensive lawsuit or even criminal charges as they had no legal basis to operate in a foreign country.

The level of protection given to royals is based on a threat assessment conducted by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre, reported The Times.

The JTAC gathers intelligence from security services in Britain, the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand - known as the 'Five Eyes partnership' - and then makes recommendations to to the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec), which is chaired by former civil servant Sir Richard Mottram.

Scotland Yard provides automatic protection to only the most senior royals and members of the Government, but the force will also give protection for any individual who faces a big enough risk, according to the newspaper.

Simon Morgan, a former royal protection officer, told MailOnline today how decisions on what publically-funded security is given to individual royals are made by Ravec, which controls the security budget for the Royal Household.

[quote]You've got a big Royal fish on the line and you jeopardize it by selling pictures that might go for a few thousand at most?

She probably didn't think she'd be around in the long term either. But when she realized how dumb he is... well, grifter's gotta grift.

Damn, that's a nice bundle of receipts at R532. It also underscores two essential points: 1) Meghan and Harry jeopardized their own security by leaving the country and 2) titles don't determine round-the-clock security; need does. Little Archie didn't need to become a prince to be protected, and being a prince would not have guaranteed a security detail.

The victim narrative was set up from the jump, R531. The better to cast it as the 2 of them against the world. Harry is deeply uncomfortable with all of it, he is the more likely of the 2 to off himself. No wonder he looked like he was going to his execution at the wedding.

Titles do help the merching...R534.

How frustrating this must have been for William, watching this awful grasping woman getting her claws into his brother, knowing the damage it could do to Harry and the family, and not being listened to. I'll bet the spouses for his children will be vetted back, front, and sideways before official permission is given to any marriage.

William has a lot of his grandfather Philip's stern temperament and as well as his own share of the Spencer temper. I think things will run far more smoothly once he is in charge.

If Diana, who was the most popular woman in Britain (if not the English speaking world) for 15 years couldn't bring down the Monarchy, Meghan Markle certainly won't. The British Royals know how to survive. Unlike most celebrities, the royals always take the long term view about things. Like all celebrities, H&M have a much more limited life cycle outside of the royal fold.

I bet you Meghan is terrified of Harry going back to the UK for family events like funerals because the family will be able to get their claws on him and maybe "deprogram" him.

DL Brits, do you think a divorced Harry could eventually be accepted again as a working Royal or has he thoroughly burnt that bridge with the UK public?

I love how the hardest working Royal, Princess Anne, who was once actually subjected to an attempted kidnapping at gunpoint doesn't demand security but Harry and Meghan think they're so special they NEED it

I wonder what the Spencers think of all this.

R530 She named Kate specifically (re. Crying) and then painted the whole family with allegations or racism

Not a Brit, R539, but I live in a Commonwealth country and lived in the UK for several years. My opinion is that Harry would be welcomed back, eventually. The response would be tepid at first, and he may have to grovel, but he'd eventually be welcome.

Can you imagine how much round-the-clock security in a foreign country (where the security structure already in place in the UK couldn't be accessed) costs? And keep in mind they wanted this AFTER they quit as working royals, soaking the UK taxpayer for millions of pounds a year without giving a thing in return, all of it just to stroke their egos. The security people in Canada was being used to pick up groceries, for Chrissakes.

They will leak the hell out it. He's full of regret, feels a fool, fears for his children... if he wants back he comes back. Redemption arcs sell. Narcs, less so.

She will try to keep the kids but suicidal while pregnant does not telegraph stability.

Marcus is her only longstanding relationship. Curious that he is now living with them.

R539 Harry would be welcomed back but likely would be required to do some rehabilitation of his image. Meghan will never be accepted as a working royal in this country again. The press have basically hinted that the Olive branch at the end of the Queen's statement was more about building a bridge for Harry and Archie to come back should the marriage end. I suspect the feeling with the royals is that that marriage will end one.

R539 Brit here. I can't see it ever happening. Our relationship with the Royal Family is that we'll pay their expenses as long as they do the work. It's not a popularity contest.

He's explicitly shown he has no interest in being a working royal as the work wasn't interesting or good enough for him yet has also shown he still feels entitled to the public support such work affords. We don't want him back. If he'd divorced Meghan and all this shit was her on her own, we might be more forgiving, but he's there holding her hand and moaning about having to spend the vast inheritance his mother left him. Boohoo.

R539 I think younger people would be more open to Harry returning but I highly doubt people over the age of 50 would. I think if the marriage ends, he would be welcomed back into the fold by the family but I'm not sure if he'd be allowed to undertake royal duties again. He's proven that he can't be trusted.

[quote]Curious that he is now living with them.

Seriously? Her goodle lives with them?

That chicken coop must be crowded.

Interestingly, if Harry and Meghan did split, he could take custody of the kids according to UK law. Found an explanation at the Independent:

[quote]More than three centuries ago, a law was enacted that means the sovereign has full legal custody of their minor grandchildren, royal expert Marlene Koenig explains. The law, called “The Grand Opinion for the Prerogative Concerning the Royal Family,” was introduced by King George I in 1717.

[quote]“George I did not get along with his son, the future George II,” Koenig tells The Independent. “I believe it came about when the Prince of Wales [George II] did not want to have the godparent for his son that his father wanted - so George I got Parliament to come up with something.”

[quote]This means that when Charles, Prince of Wales becomes sovereign, he will have custody of his minor grandchildren. According to Koenig, issues surrounding the law arose in 1994 when Diana, Princess of Wales separated from Prince Charles. Diana expressed wishes to take their sons, Harry and William, to live with her in Australia, but couldn’t due to the regulations laid out by the custody law.

Charles might not choose to interfere in a Sussex custody battle but let Harry and his lawyers sort it out, but it's an option which could be invoked. Don't know how Meghan's American citizenship would affect things, of course.

Sad that Archie’s view of his British relatives may have been poisoned. How frosted would Mom be if he one day shrugged off the innuendo and eagerly took his place in the family. I for one think chances are he will.

Let's not put too fine a point on it. She can be bought.

H&M were photographed at dinner with David Foster and Katherine McPhee last night. So that’s where they’re at now. Maybe planning their own reality show.

What we really need to examine is how the other countries in the Commonwealth are handling this story (not that they're a monolith). What are the headlines in countries like Kenya, India, Malaysia, Nigeria, Belize, Jamaica, etc...

Something like 60 - 70% of Commonwealth nations are POC - what do they think of the allegations of racism in the BRF. If those countries turn on the Queen, then that may be a bigger indicator of the survivability of the BRF outside of Britain. In this case, what they do is far more important that what Americans say/think.

'"Shocked Queen Refuses Comment"... BITCH!'

'BITCH!'

'BITCH!'

R538, Diana didn't want to bring down the royals.

R539, no, Harry won't be welcomed back as a working royal for two reasons: 1) he burnt that bridge right down; 2) why should he be a working royal? He's not needed and what exactly is he going to do anyway? Whatever patronages and duties he would have had will have been parcelled out. To be a working royal, you need a level of dignity and a sense of duty to public service, as well as something to contribute. He will also be too controversial a figure, and that's not what we need.

He may in quite a few years time wish to return to the UK, if he divorces Meghan and his kids have grown up. He won't necessarily be welcomed though. Why should the nation "welcome" him? Do you expect people to cheer his car in the streets on his prodigal return? He can come back as a private citizen.

The royal family is not about celebrity or popularity. It's about service and duty. It's when people don't understand that and think they're bigger than the role that things go wrong. In the next few years, I have no doubt that Harry will be causing more mayhem and trouble and will be even less welcome.

I don't know if this has been brought up in any of the bazillion threads, but I found it curious that they called the Duchess of Cambridge Kate throughout the interview when the family has publicly referred to her as Catherine since the marriage. It seemed like a way to diminish. I can see Harry doing it since he's known her for years, but it's not as though she and Meghan are great friends. It seemed almost pointed.

The Commonwealth fall-out might have been greater if Harry had married a WOC from a Commonwealth nation. Why would the Commonwealth countries rally 'round Meghan Markle, a biracial American actress who, despite bleatings about being excited to be representing the Commonwealth as part of her royal duties, fled those duties as fast as she could?

“The Queen missed a crucial opportunity to publicly acknowledge and condemn racism in her response to the allegations made by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, equality campaigners have said.

Casting the issue as a “private” family matter meant there was “no public accountability” from a public institution and the head of state and Commonwealth, they said.“

I think we can all see the reality tv coming, R554. Not much else left now. Rumors were that Netflix is close to cutting them loose.

Harry has previously referred to his SIL as "Catherine" or "Cath" - Kate is what the tabloids call her.

I asked because from what I've read, Canadians on social media (I know, I know) seem to be taking the side of Meghan and Harry, R559.

I'm betting the Royals are working on some big conciliatory gesture towards the Commonwealth countries. Maybe a tour by Charles/Camilla or Kate/William.

It's so hard to know if social media is a clear indicator. You can buy influencers and bots so easily. Trudeau did say he didn't think this was the time to restructure the government, and by the time the pandemic is over will anybody care about Harry and Meghan's hurt feelings?

R560 The Queen held bring about the fall of apartheid in South Africa. They can go fuck off now please!

The big question has to be, what will Harry and Meghan do for people of color? They've got this big Netflix deal and they'd better start working on content which features the stories and opinions of POC pronto, or they'll look like posers. It's easy to tear things down; it's much harder to build things up. The Sussexes have yet to prove that they can build anything.

Harry has a history of drug use and mental instability himself. Those kids are going to have shit genes and a toxic and isolated environment with a lot of turnover in caregivers.

Ha, good idea, R563. I'll bet you're right. There'll be a tour as soon as Covid is no longer a threat.

R564, I don't know if you watch any of the Canadian news network shows, but most of the guest panelists have been for Canada leaving the Commonwealth and ending the monarchy in Canada.

Also, R566, what have they done to combat climate change?

I hate to say it, but I think the possibility of Harry's offing himself is very high.

R555, people from Africa and the Caribbean probably see Meghan as a narcissistic, self-centred, privileged American. Especially since it was when she was on her trip to South Africa, a country with many social and economic problems that has suffered from one of the worst forms of real institutionalised racism in history, that she was whining about how much she was suffering because no one asked how she was feeling. Instead of using the trip to highlight the issues of South Africa, it was all about "look at me, I'm so important, me, me, me!"

It's ok, Commonwealth countries have a good understanding of Britain's legacy of colonialism and racial discrimination. It's not as though they need Meghan to make some unsubstantiated and vague allegation about something that's not even that terrible for them to be confronted with the horrors of racism.

So what if Caribbean countries abandon the British monarch as their head of state? That would probably be best for the royal family too.

[quote] Also, [R566], what have they done to combat climate change?

Pontificate and fly on multiiple private jets within days for $200, pls.

[quote]Also, what have they done to combat climate change?

Well, the Sussexes did buy that giant 14-bathroom house in parched California . . .

[quote] Harry has previously referred to his SIL as "Catherine" or "Cath" - Kate is what the tabloids call her.

No one in the royal family refers to her as "Kate"--that has always been a tabloid device to shorten her name for the headlines. The BRF all address her as "Catherine," except her husband (and Harry once upon a time) call her "Cath."

You can’t even question some of Meg’s claims on social media without being branded a racist. Even wondering why they should have British taxpayer funded security while living in the US, and not working for the royal family, is considered racist.

Before this thread falls off a cliff, a link to Part II:

Ending the monarchy in Canada will be extremely difficult constitutionally. Even if there was mass agreement, opening the constitution makes it possible for Quebec to act up and nobody wants that. From an article describing it: "the House of Commons, the Senate and all 10 provinces must sign off on any plan to make Canada a republic. Simply put, there has been no major peacetime issue in the history of confederation that could have garnered that level of consent. The Constitution itself, notably, was passed despite Quebec never signing it. Even if Canada awoke to a world where every single provincial legislature suddenly concurred with firing the monarch, it’s reasonable to assume that Alberta, Quebec, and any number of other provinces would make Ottawa pay dearly for their “yes” vote."

The UK could get rid of them easier.

[italic] people from Africa and the Caribbean probably see Meghan as a narcissistic, self-centred, privileged American

Has anyone of note said this, or are you still prognosticating? Did you read at least a post in the comments section of one of the online Fleet Street tabloids? Anything in writing or on a news story that says this? Is it at least someone that you know?

I’ll wait...

The Quebec thing may be one of the few times in history that the French actually made something easier for the English.

^^And by that, I mean the UK government, not the Canadian one.

I've read, but nit sure if it's true, that even if the Brits got rid of the monarchy, (hypothetically), that nothing would change here in Canada? She'd still be our Queen, no?

[quote]It's ok, Commonwealth countries have a good understanding of Britain's legacy of colonialism and racial discrimination. It's not as though they need Meghan to make some unsubstantiated and vague allegation about something that's not even that terrible for them to be confronted with the horrors of racism.

The Commonwealth has real benefits beyond making the UK feel better about its lost empire, doesn't it? In other words, would the Commonwealth nations give up the benefits of being part of a big international group just because one biracial American felt discriminated against?

It's always been a mystery why Trudeau the Elder made it so difficult to boot the Crown. There's some speculation he knew it would be easier to add to the Constitution than to rewrite it, which tied the knots tighter around Quebec. Anyway, removing the monarchy here is nigh on impossible. Nothing stays static, even attiudes, so Canadian society could drift away from the monarchy or manifest contentment with the historic model. It is very low-key Canadian, having a head of state who isn't resident.

R574 Social media is a snakes den of tribalism. There is no nuance allowed. You are either for something or against something that's it. You are for us or your are against us. While Twitter is not real life (which is why people are constantly surprised when votes or referendums don't go the way they expected) it is part of the reason why the "silent" majority is increasingly conservative; why the white working class is increasingly voting GOP in the US and Conservative in the UK. By diminishing valid concerns about an issue into "isms" or "phobias" it's going going to serve no one because it'll only create massive push back.

Meghan sycophants are no different than Trump sycophants: they are both personality cults. Speaking your truth is no different than fake news.

Australia hasn't wanted to boot out the Queen either--nor has Jamaica.

R584 Australia did have a referendum in 1999 about the monarchy. It was expected the country would vote to become a republic but the monarchy won the day partly out of respect for the Queen and partly because people deemed the alternative systems proposed were actually worse than just keeping the status quo.

Well, I for one would miss question period, distribution of power, and the adaptability of government if Canada were to ditch the monarchy and our Westminster Parliamentary system.

[quote]The monarchy would be better off if Charles abdicated in favor of William, but I agree it won't happen. He's been waiting his turn for half a century, and he's going to have it.

Over my dead body!

If Meghan had worked for the BRF for over 10 years like Diana, and she'd spent much of that time promoting the interests of Commonwealth countries, I could see them feeling protective of her. But what has she done for them?

[quote]Over my dead body!

Yes Ma'am, that's how it works.

You're on to something, R587. Maybe Charles will die before the Queen? That'd probably be best for all.

[quote] I've read, but nit sure if it's true, that even if the Brits got rid of the monarchy, (hypothetically), that nothing would change here in Canada? She'd still be our Queen, no?

That is correct R580.

[quote] It is very low-key Canadian, having a head of state who isn't resident.

Lol R582

[quote]Maybe Charles will die before the Queen? That'd probably be best for all.

And then poor Archie will NEVER be HRH. Oh, the humanity!

Something about embroidery on her veil, R588. The white princess drama for a 2nd or perhaps 3rd wedding was a bit much.

I call on UN Peacekeepers to occupy Britain and get Archie his title!

Can't be ruled out, R592. And they surely do stress him out, thus him refusing to be harangued by Hazbean on the phone. It is remarkable how they act against their own stated goals over and over and over again.

One does wonder if they hope to both bring down the monarchy and become penniless themselves?

Barbados is firing the Queen this year.

[quote]One does wonder if they hope to both bring down the monarchy and become penniless themselves?

What the Sussexes would like is to have William removed and Harry put in his brother's place. Sadly for them, the heir to the throne is not determined by Twitter poll.

If Barbados fires the Queen does that mean she will not be Queen in Canada anymore as well?

Most adults have Meg's number. Working with oen is bad enough, but having one as a family member is the worst. Meg needs to work harder on not coming across as a vengeful narc. We are not all as cowed as Hazza and her tall tales do not add up. A typical comment from the Yahoo story

GreyD 3 hours ago

Someone that is suicidal is not emotionally healthy. Their perceptions of reality are distorted so that you must question their veracity. I question whether she actually was suicidal and whether anything she says is truthful. She is an actor and knows very well how to portray a victim. From the overall picture of her behavior she is a toxic, attention seeking person that has manipulated Harry and distorted his own perceptions so that he has turned against his family, his friends, and his own country. She is likely an emotional abuser and well adept at manipulation. Anyone that has had a relationship with someone like this knows what I am talking about.

Barbados had planned to withdraw from the Commonwealth last year, though. Or can you fire the Queen as head of state but still stay in the Commonwealth? I'm not clear on that.

Does anyone remember during the interview with Oprah, after Meghan said she was suicidal, did Oprah follow-up with anything of substance or did she throw on the BRF?

Cause I’m thinking if she didn’t say anything of substance, it surely sounds like a setup and Oprah wasn’t blindsided