Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Might Get Their Royal Titles Yanked

As delicious as it is to contemplate, it's doubtful that Charles would yank the poisonous pair's titles. That would also mean that the make-believe children's titles would also go and no way would Charles want to deal with the drama that would come with that.

Cool!

You always hear rumblings of their titles being taken away, but it always ends with this:

[quote] “Charles and William have had lengthy discussions about stripping Meghan and Harry of their royal titles.” He doesn’t believe either royal will go through with it because of the PR mess it would likely create for them.

[quote] “They are terrified this would backfire and make the situation worse,”

Pfft.

[quote]That would also mean that the make-believe children's titles would also go and no way would Charles want to deal with the drama that would come with that.

Their children only hold titles of prince and princess since Charles became sovereign. They don't have other titles, nor would their children have titles. They're essentially no different from Beatrice and Eugenie's kids at this point.

Frankly, it's probably better to let it just die from lack of oxygen than to feed the flames by getting rid of the Sussex's titles. I mean, Luane still call herself "countess" even if she lost it during the divorce. No one is going to stop calling Harry prince.

Does anyone really care ? They're yesterday's news.

How idiotic do you have to be to repeatedly post an obscure trash site like SheKnows? Are you the mom of the site creator? Embarrassing.

R6,I get what you are saying about reputable sources but royal gossip seems pretty low level to begin with. Do we really care if it is crappy gossip?

Have the Invictus Games been a success? No one ever hears about them outside the context of Harry, and he only brings negative coverage.

Moreover, they're not really his, he's just the patron, he does nothing for the actual organisation. They are organised by the Invictus Foundation in conjunction with Ministries of Defence, so they have that "official" element to them. Moreover, when they were first founded they were significantly supported by William and Catherine, as Harry wasn't able to do much on his own. Harry was only able to have the Invictus Games set up for him because he was Charles' son.

[quote]The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry, in partnership with the Ministry of Defence, today announces that the ‘Invictus Games’ presented by Jaguar Land Rover, an international sporting event for wounded, injured and sick Service personnel, will take place in London from 10-14 September 2014.

[...]

[quote]The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry, will contribute a significant grant to staging the Invictus Games. The events in September will mark the beginning of a legacy programme to support accessibility of adaptive sport and further employment opportunities for transitioning Servicemen and women leaving the Armed Forces. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, is also supporting this important cause by matching the Royal Foundation donation with £1million from the LIBOR fund.

The Invictus Games, while a noble effort, are not a success. They cost a fortune, do not generate any income, rely almost exclusively on the host country donating money to produce the games, garner hardly any positive public relations or media attention, generate no or little income from ticket sales...and have no more than 500 participants.

The Games have turned into a vanity project for Harry because he has nothing else to do and a fashion show for Markle, who is utterly useless at the the Games.

I saw they had a huge caravan of SUVs and tons of police protection on their Columbia trip, who is footing the bill for that?

^^Colombia

He gets the tour because of the titles, but he also gets this:

They left behind life as working royals in order to sell themselves to the highest bidder. Harry can’t have it both ways, and he knows it. This is a severe case of pussy whipping.

This:

3,000 police, snipers and a bio terror van follow the couple's every move, despite barely anyone turning up to see them

R16, sounds like a huge carbon footprint for a private social call. What good did the trip actually do for the people?

Hopefully the plane will besearched when they get back. Ten to one its full of coke and Blood emeralds.

Frsu Dreams ^^

Harry needs his cock yanked, not his title.

Titles are granted by a Letters Patent, which has the same force as statutory law passed by Parliament. The only mechanism to revoke, rescind, remove a title is an Act of Parliament. That is not one of the sovereign's powers.

Peerages are created by letters patent: a legal document issued by the Sovereign and adorned with the Great Seal. The Great Seal (formally known as the Great Seal of the Realm) is the chief seal of the Crown. It is used to show the monarch’s approval of state documents. As explained in Halsbury’s Laws of England, the Crown does not have the power to cancel a peerage once it has been created. A peerage can only be removed by an act of parliament. The most recent act that did this was the Titles Deprivation Act 1917 (TDA). The TDA received royal assent on 8 November 1917. It was used to remove British peerages from “enemies” of the UK during the First World War. No new laws to remove peerages have commenced since the TDA.

They live in the US, where titles are meaningless anyway.

[quote]Meghan and Harry would carry on traveling the world as if they were royals and most people in the world will still welcome them

This seems like a bold statement. "Most people in the world"?? I haven't noticed that the crowds for them are rivalling Taylor Swift's.

Who?

That's what she should do! Cut an album!

Meghan Markle Sings the Blues

We're in the Money

Material Girl

I've Never Been to Me

Scented Candle in the Wind

They will end up like the repulsive Duke and Duchess of Windsor, on the socialite scene and singing for their supper.

At first I read this as "Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Might Get Their Royal TITTIES Yanked"

A legend in her own mind.

The BRF should let it go. Don't initiate more drama. Besides, title or no title, Harry will always be, as they put it, a Prince of the blood.

I can believe it is William who is the vindictive one here.

[quote]They live in the US, where titles are meaningless anyway.

This is the excuse the Crown and Parliament could use to pull the titles. They have no use in the US. Everyone would understand that.

I thought the President of Columbia resigned?

Does that mean the Vice President who met Harry and Meghan is in charge now?

“The Royal Family are meeting at Balmoral to discuss a number of different things, but one of them will be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex,” the palace insider claimed."

“The Grifters are meeting at Balmoral to discuss how to suck money and a number of different things, but one of them will be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex,” the palace insider claimed.

There, fixed it for ya.

R33 =dimbo who doesn't know what the royal family is.

Harry hasn’t had anything yanked in a long time. I’m surprised there are no reports of infidelity.

Shouldn't you be PEGGING Prince Wiliiam in his uptight ass, R35/Rose?

We've all heard how much he loves getting pegged by you, which is why he cheats on Kate with you.

But who can blame him, since she's anorexic and probably frigid.

[quote]But who can blame him, since she's anorexic and probably frigid.

She popped out three heirs. She did what she was hired to do.

They can strip the Sussexes of the titles of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (though that would indeed require an Act of Parliament), but I seriously doubt they would strip them of their other titles as "The Prince Henry" and "The Princess Henry." That would be unprecedented for the son of a sitting monarch.

But I doubt they would be so stupid as to strip them of those titles. The smarter thing to do would be to refuse contact with them, and make it clear to other nations that there will be repercussions if they invite the Sussexes, who no longer represent the Crown, on these ersatz-"state visits."

[quote] The smarter thing to do would be to refuse contact with them, and make it clear to other nations that there will be repercussions if they invite the Sussexes

And what "repercussions" would there be? Lol.

Please.

The BRF has no power. The only thing they can control, is each other.

BEGONE!

They would actually have a lot more credit and respect know had they given up their titles at the time of the Oprah interview. If racism was the real reason the left the BRF and the UK then stop associating yourself with both by ditching the titles. Of course their departure had nothing to do with racism and everything to do with cashing in their royal connections as much as possible. Had the late Queen allowed Harry/Meghan to be half-in/half-out then the Oprah interview, Spare, and the Netflix doc wouldn't have happened, or would've been far more pro-monarchy. Frankly, the only reasons they played the racism card was so the royals couldn't take their titles away and to force Archie and Lilibet to get titles despite the original plan that regardless of who Harry married, his children were not supposed to be given HRH status as part of Charles' notion of slimming down the monarchy.

Honestly, all non-working royals should be stripped of their titles. It should be like Anne's and Edward's children. Those who are not expected to have any role just be commoners.

R39 The BRF has had no official political power for nearly 100 years. They are now apolitical figure heads who serve the UK has representatives of the country has a whole. When they travel abroad they are representing the UK (as the travel overseas only on the behest of the government of the day). Meghan and Harry represent no nation which is why they technically shouldn't be making these trips or being received as representatives of a nation. They should be treated like any other charity figures might.

Except the King is head of state, r39, and a visit from him to a country is one of the highest signs of good bilateral diplomatic relations between the UK and that country. Ditto when a foreign head of state goes on an official state visit to the UK as a guest of the King. When other royals make official trips abroad, they represent the King and therefore represent the United Kingdom.

Harry and Meghan are completely irrelevant, no one sees their faux royal trips as representing the United Kingdom, even the Vice President of Colombia (notice how they haven't met the actual president, just as they didn't meet the president of Nigeria). If there was any confusion, however, and Harry did try in some way to make it appear as though he were on some kind of official visit abroad as the representative of the King/United Kingdom in any way, then it wouldn't be Charles or William who would slap him down but the British government and British state officials. This is why the British ambassador to Nigeria made it very clear before they visited that country that their visit was a private one and not an official visit in any capacity.

To quote the ambassador:

[quote]“But they are visiting in a private capacity, not an official one. So, the British High Commission is not involved in arranging or facilitating their programme. They are not representing the work of His Majesty’s Government on this visit.”

R36, I hope you're proud of that ugliness. You might as well wear it. You're ugly.

R32 Columbia University

Colombia is a country.

I don’t think William will pussy foot around this when he is in charge. I think Harry is in for a big kick in the cuntbone.

[quote]I think Harry is in for a big kick in the cuntbone.

William broke my cuntbone!

And at Granny’s funeral, William got two more sausage rolls than I did.

Spare 2: A Sequel

The sequel should be called Despair.

I think there's a legitimate issue with Harry and Meghan going on these tours while still using their titles. Working royals only go on tours when the UK government asks them to. Royal Tours are planned around the government of the day's foreign policy. Harry and Megz gallivanting the globe could find themselves at odds with British policy. This happened at the very end of Diana's life when she travelled to Angola and pissed off Blair who originally had thought about offering Diana some kind of representational role.

Just ignoring them is working just fine.

R15 The bald bastard just has hair (and cock) envy.

[quote]I think there's a legitimate issue with Harry and Meghan going on these tours while still using their titles.

It might be if anybody took them or their titles seriously. But they're down to third world countries and a handful of bitter diabetics from the internet.

They don't need to yank their titles. That will backfire spectacularly.

No need anyway, their "brand" is circling the drain. Has been for a while now.

[quote] Harry and Megz gallivanting the globe could find themselves at odds with British policy

And?

The BRF wants no part of them, and Harry & Meghan are independent citizens, and residents of the U.S.

They can do as they please, and no one can stop them.

So Buckingham Palace and the BRF can just PISS OFF.

R52 Why do they insist on keeping those titles? Why does Meghan insist on being called Meghan, Duchess of Sussex?

[quote] Why do they insist on keeping those titles? Why does Meghan insist on being called Meghan, Duchess of Sussex?

Because they can.

😛😛😛😛😛

That's dignified.

Has Harry ever made a good decision?

First, he could not see a grifter when he met one. She had scoped the Wealthy Eligible Bachelors territory, including on yachts; found rich AND royal Harry and immediately understood his neediness; "became interested in" Africa; and got an introduction arranged. Played the "Not 'Mum', But I Care" card while being what Harry positively perceived as "Not What The Firm Wants." Mutual success!

It has been reported that William advised his brother to move more prudently with his new romance, and that this suggestion was not received well. Fraternal distancing commenced.

And then Harry and Meghan perceived BRF racism. She wanted a Royal without the duties. He felt the cold shoulder from his kin. She encouraged his profound sense of entitlement, of aggrievement, of abandonment, and he published it all and then some, saddening his father and infuriating his brother. William and Kate will never forgive Harry, never mind his wife, for his betrayal.

So now Harry might as well be a Prince of Greece or Yugoslavia or the Ottoman Empire, for all the legitimate prestige and privilege he has tossed aside.

The Duchess of Sussex looks lovely, in her first official visit to Colombia.

Cheers to many more!

She looks heinous, particularly the newest set of veneers, the bad skin and big botox bumps above the eyebrows that light up her forehead veins. No comment on 90% of the wrinkled, horribly styled and fitted clothes.

R53, I thought that's how you refer to a dowager or divorced duchess, but i read a theory that its' now correct since is no longer an HRH. A british podcast was talking about how they are using "Sussex" as their last name, which is not correct since that is their title. Also they were not supposed to profit from their titles. Their last name is "Mountbatten-Windsor".

Also pointed out was that if their Sussex title is taken away, she becomes the Princess Henry, taking her title from her husband's (cf. Princess Michael of Kent).

Princess Henry of Montecito

Isn't Harry still the Earl of Dumbarton?

And that would make her Mrs. Dumbarton.

Does the title come with any cash and prizes?

Actually, if you hold a title it is your last name. Titles are granted by Letters Patent, which is a legal document, in effect changing your name. Your passport bears the title name. Let's take the example of the newly married Olivia Henson, wife of Hugh Grosvenor, 7th Duke of Westminster.

So, as the holder of the title you are The Duchess of Westminster (letters patent.). Your given name has nothing to do with it. If you are referred to in the context of your title, it would be as The Duchess of Westminster.

Informally, you might use the name Olivia Westminster. Your family and friends will use your given name, privately.

If you are widowed you are The Dowager Duchess of Westminster, a courtesy title (no legal standing.) So her mother-in-law is Her Grace, The Dowager Duchess of Westminster. Informally, privately and legally, she is Natalia Grosvenor, the family surname. If The Duchess has a son, as heir to his father's title, he receives the courtesy title Earl Grosvenor. (The Duke of Devonshire's heir is The Earl of Burlington, known as Bill Burlington. His wife, The Countessc of Burlington, is called Laura Burlington, privately. Legally, they are Bill and Laura Cavendish the family surname until such time as he inherits the dukedom. The heir to the Devonshire title is typically the Marquess of Hartington, the most senior of the dukedom's subsidiary titles.)

So legally, their surname is Sussex. Their children would be Mountbatten-Windsors.

Why? Why? Why to all this?:

Violet Crawley, Dowager Countess of Grantham: [correcting Tom on how to address a noblewoman] Don't call her "Your Grace."

Tom Branson: I thought it was correct.

Violet Crawley, Dowager Countess of Grantham: For a servant or an official at a ceremony, but in a social situation call her "Duchess."

Tom Branson: But why don't I call you "Countess?"

Violet Crawley, Dowager Countess of Grantham: Certainly not!

Tom Branson: There's no logic in it.

Violet Crawley, Dowager Countess of Grantham: If I were to ever search for logic I wouldn't look for it among the English upper class.

The Duchess of Pine Valley had so much more class. More money too.

Money can't buy you class, r63.

Hi KGT R36! Surfaced from your latest meth binge, I see.

Go easy on yourself, trolley! Coming down is never easy, especially for the unhinged such as yourself.

What would Henry VIII have done?

🪓🪓

R49 Agree. Harry looks like Friar Tuck and should just shave it off. Harry handed off his balls to Meghan and she carries them around in her handbag.

R57 Oily skin, clogged pores, moles, horse veneers, & big giant vein in her forehead. Wig. Her clothes are a hot mess. She has a mirror in her home that reflects Catherine’s image and makes Meghan believe that she’s tall and willowy rather than short and square.

Let's see what anorexic Waity Katie looks like, R68.

Oh, wait. I forgot.

She's been IN HIDING for the past 8 months.

Hi KGT R69! Put the pipe down and pour yourself some more boxed wine.

R52, if Harry attempts in any way to claim that he's representing the United Kingdom on his faux royal tours then it's the UK government that will publicly slap him down, not the royal family.

As for doing "what they want", r52, the only reason they get invited anywhere is because Harry is the King's son. No one could care less about these two talentless goons if it wasn't for that.

It's especially hilarious when Meghan insists on being referred to as "Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex" in the US.

Do you really think they would give a fuck.

R69 Catherine has cancer and is undergoing chemotherapy. Meghan is not.

Are you ok?

It’s disgusting to make fun of the weight of a cancer patient. Disgusting.

The government and Foreign Office work out state visits years in advance, and the whole point is the use of soft power to improve relations and promote both countries’ interests.

The late Queen was seen as the UK’s greatest diplomatic asset because of her experience and extensive knowledge. These two are on an ego trip, and have absolutely nothing of value to offer.

Harry shall be drowned in boxed wine!!

R74, plainly not. More than just a low intelligence troll, there's something really wrong with you when you're picking on a cancer patient. No decency at all.

I think the RF played it right, let them have a long, slow, boring death to irrelevancy. Without the RF, they are a pair of boring, untalented, exhausting, dumb losers, which the RF probably saw from the get go.

R56 And that’s what it all boils down to.

Harry is and has always been an idiot.

And he'll probably achieve it even without my help, R77.

Oh STFU R74 and R75.

As if you people haven't said much worse about Meghan.

If that's the standard you want to operate under, r82, you're pathetic.

Link, r82.

Meghan's dog biscuits.

Could anything be more lame?

So she took some of her dog's biscuits, put them in a jar you can find in the homeware section of Target.

The "rustic" bow. The label held on with Elmer's Glue. No brand name, no ingredient list. No story to tell. Just a handwritten "Dog Biscuits".

I mean, c'mon, really?

Harry’s pilot HOF award must be a comfort.

Prince William and Prince Harry have reportedly not spoken to each other since Queen Elizabeth II's funeral in 2022, and according to a royal expert, the brothers are not likely to reconcile anytime soon.

Biographer Andrew Morton has shared that William and Harry's strained relationship will persist, especially as the Duke of Sussex and his wife, Meghan Markle, have "worked out a life together" in the U.S. with their own "agenda" and "causes."

Morton's claim comes after it was alleged that Prince William is navigating crisis talks with Prince Harry with the help of their royal cousins, Princess Beatrice and Zara Tindall.

Harry and William's relationship has been evidently fractured since 2020, when the duke and his wife, Meghan, decided to step down from their roles as senior working royals and relocate to the United States.

During a chat with Times Radio, Morton noted that Harry and Meghan's new life in the U.S. shows the unlikelihood of a reconciliation between William and his younger brother.

"I think that Harry and Meghan have worked out a life together," Morton said, per The Express. "They have their own agenda and they have their own causes. And I don't see any movement whatsoever towards a reconciliation."

"I would say that they've got an established pattern in their lives," the royal expert continued. "And if any year could have brought about a reconciliation with the King suffering from cancer, and we all know about Kate [Middleton] and her medical problems, this would be the year to have done it."

"But there's obviously been no movement in that regard," Morton added.

When we go low, R82 goes lower.

Michelle Obama would like a word about your priorities.

R82 Is it usual for you to find the weight loss of a cancer patient undergoing chemotherapy amusing?

Fuck off. Psychopath.

The nastiness of Meghan's fans towards Catherine is really bad. First, the whole "where's Kate?" obsession. Then, when it's revealed cancer and a debilitating surgery are what she's dealing with, still more criticism.

We rag on Meghan's outfits (how can we not?) and her ridiculously laughable antics, as well as her proven lies and meanness. But WTF has Catherine actually done wrong to merit such hatred?

Meghan should just lean into her reputation and sell "cunt" pillows.

[quote]Biographer Andrew Morton has shared that William and Harry's strained relationship will persist, especially as the Duke of Sussex and his wife, Meghan Markle, have "worked out a life together" in the U.S. with their own "agenda" and "causes."

The Markles have worked out nothing. They simply throw a plate of spaghetti at the wall every once in a while to see what sticks. Nothing ever sticks.

Megs isn’t worried about losing her title. Like the phoenix she is, she has secretly been in talks with the United Nations to secure her next role and title via a crank caller from the Howard Stern show:

Countess (of)

United

National

Territories

Sources say she was born for this position and can’t want to get started representing the UN as its CUNT.

[quote] —Camilla- laughing in her smoker’s voice while taking a shit.

Laugh it up, Camilla.

The minute Charles dies, you're out on your ass.

William the Terrible will see to it.

His reign of terror will start with you.

Because he never liked you.

Hi KGT!

I read the videos they are giving the press have no sound. Probably because you could hear crickets chirping because there were no crowds to see them.

I don't claim to know what the personal dynamic between William and Queen Camilla is.

I've seen video of them interacting pleasantly when they're "on duty". Sure, they know the cameras ore on them. They aren't going to be icy to each other.

But, I'll take Tina Brown's word for it when she wrote that that both William and Harry, since long ago, have been on good terms with Camilla.

The notion that William will cast her out unmercifully is nonsense. Thye know the game. In fact, if she survives Charles, it probably will be a great relief to her to retire to HER OWN HOME, which she has retained, and that the BRF has no claim on.

That was smart of her, r97, to retain her own home. Apparently she is more into Charles than the status being his partner affords her (the total opposite of Diana), so will likely leave the limelight immediately and gratefully should he predecease her. I don't believe Harry's depiction of her as ruthlessly seeking approval and press coverage. Although, after the hatred Diana stirred up towards her, I could understand her seeking a life where people didn't throw food at her in supermarkets...

People like r94 have no idea what the royal family is or does.

The drama of yanking their titles is not worth it to the Royal Family, so the thought is utter rubbish. I think Harry and Meghan are jokes on the world stage. They have zero credibility and nothing of worth to do, say or represent. Everything they do has a tinge of desperation to it. Harry and the wife will end up on the dustbin of history just like his great uncle and his slag.

The Royal Family cannot yank the titles. That would take an act of Parliament and it's been more than a hundred years since that happened.

"The Royal Family" cannot collaborate with Parliament to "yank" titles, but the King could. At the least, as has been mentioned, ending the dukedom upon Harold's death is an easy fix.

[quote] The notion that William will cast her out unmercifully is nonsense. Thye know the game. In fact, if she survives Charles, it probably will be a great relief to her to retire to HER OWN HOME, which she has retained, and that the BRF has no claim on.

I see the damage control is already being done, for Camilla's inevitable ouster from the BRF "inner circle."

You fools know very well that William AND Harry both can't stand Camilla, and that William just tolerates her now because he has to. His father is the King, and William has no say in the matter.

The minute King Charles is gone, she'll be packing her bags and on her way from whence she came.

THAT is the real reason she kept her home. Because she knew she'd need it when she gets kicked out by William the Terrible.

Hell, she still goes there now, when she gets sick and tired of the Palace bullshit. She uses it as a place to get the hell away from those people.

Something Diana was never allowed to do. Diana was a prisoner. Camilla is free to come and go, as she pleases.

Just like things changed drastically once QE2 died, things will change even more when Charles dies.

William the Terrible will be quite alone, surrounded only by Kate (maybe) and his kids.

He has alienated his aunts and uncles, his cousins, and his brother. He has been horrible to all of them, and they can't stand him.

Of course they'll all "kiss the ring," but none of them truly like him.

He is a tyrant.

William will purge the Palace, starting with Camilla, and then Harry. And then anyone else he holds a grudge against, which is pretty much everyone.

Then he will be all alone. A King with no Kingdom.

HA!

What's the opposite of fan fic called?

R103 has to be the most mentally ill post I've ever read on DL.

R103 I hope you are 15 years old posting such childish garbage.

If you really are an adult then you must be a ‘special’ one. Do your carers know that you frequent this site?

R103 = moron.

[quote] Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Upset the British Tabloids With Their Savvy Move During Colombia Tour

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pulled off another successful tour that might have the British press up in arms. In May, they were invited to visit Nigeria on behalf of the Invictus Games which led to Colombia requesting the Sussexes’ presence in their country. However, the U.K. media hates that they aren’t given access to the couple which might be Harry and Meghan’s savviest PR move yet.

The Telegraph criticized the dynamic duo for keeping them at bay instead of allowing their reporters and photographers to get a close-up view. “Unlike a traditional royal tour of old, the media were not invited, save for one handpicked reporter whose job it was to relay each event to newspapers and other outlets across the world,” the outlet complained. “The chosen journalist was an online reporter from US publication Harper’s Bazaar, who duly filed a brief overview of each engagement.”

What The Telegraph is failing to see is that Harry and Meghan are no longer senior royals. As private citizens, they can control the narrative. If they allowed members of the Royal Rota to join in, we all know what those headlines would look like. There’s no reason for the Sussexes to subject themselves to such harassment or abuse willingly. While curated snapshots only tell one part of the story, the British press is forgetting that the video coverage will always tell the real story.

Meghan’s use of her linguistic skills in speaking Spanish to the crowds made an impact. “For Meghan to say my friend in that way is such a powerful statement and shows just how close they have become. People will take note of that,” a Colombian journalist told the Daily Mail. It’s those connective moments that make Harry and Meghan very popular during their visits to promote the Invictus Games, which is being courted by many countries for future games.

While the royal family may not enjoy the Sussexes’ goodwill tours, it points out the magic the palace is missing — especially with Kate Middleton largely out of the public eye with her health battles. Tina Brown, author of The Palace Papers: Inside the House of Windsor–the Truth and the Turmoil, might have summed it up best after the couple’s trip to Nigeria.

“When I saw him and Meghan in Nigeria, I had a nostalgia. I felt this is what it could have been,” she told the BBC in May. “These two, who are enormously appealing to the public and who are very good at it, were out there in Nigeria sort of looking really attractive and being appealing people.” Harry and Meghan had left a “charisma vacancy” at the palace.

The latest stories by "entertainment reporter" Kristyn Burtt of "She Knows" are titled "Why Kevin Costner ‘Made a Promise’ To Continue With Horizon Despite Its Box Office Disappointment" and "Khloé Kardashian’s Reason for Staying Single Might Have Everything To Do with Tristan Thompson", so I think it's fair to say she has no idea what she's talking about, especially when it comes to the royal family of the United Kingdom - a foreign country for Burtt.

Haha, sheknows would NEVAH dispense misinformation. Harold says that would be wrong.

Hardly anyone gives a shit about these two anymore. In five years or so when Will & Kate's kids hit the teens they'll be really old news. Especially if they all turn out attractive. It looks like they will.

[quote] Especially if they all turn out attractive. It looks like they will.

ROFL!!!!

You have GOT to be kidding.

George will be fat and bald, resembling Elton John.

Charlotte will look like Princess Anne.

And Louis will be medicated and locked up in a mental institution.

Those kids are UGLY.

HI MEGHAN!

Well if Louis does wind up in a mental institution I hope you won't physically threaten him.

Oh look, KGT has dropped in R112. Hi KGT! Off your meds again, I see.

They're $150.00 away from Meghan having to carry a briefcase again.

[quote] These two, who are enormously appealing to the public

What is Tina Brown smoking?

Eco warriors that the private plane-flying Harolds are. they have repurposed the briefcase -- loaded it with material to stop a bomb. Really, did you see the pic of the giuy holding the case over Harold's head whilst he was in the midst of sone poors?

LOL... from the Maul:

"Why do the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's videos have no sound, depriving us of eavesdropping on their chit-chat while on parade?

Former BBC royal correspondent Michael Cole suggests: 'Perhaps to avoid instances such as the one when TV cameras (with sound) filmed them coming out of a door, side-by-side, and Meghan snapping at Harry, 'HAND!' – obliging him to clasp hers for the camera.'"

[quote]"Why do the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's videos have no sound, depriving us of eavesdropping on their chit-chat while on parade?

Because Markle said she is fluent in Spanish--and she's not. The sound is off so the public could not see/hear that she was lying.

The brief talk she said in in Spanish was rehearsed and memorized.

R103 Are you in the hospital? A psychiatric unit?

R112 Is it meth? Because those children will grow into attractive adults.

There are some real sicko’s on this thread. Likely from the “Sussex Squad.”

Meggy's Spanish was so marvelous. I hope all the reporters keep after it, asking her questions in Spanish on each fake vacation until she can't fucking stand it anymore.

[quote] 'Perhaps to avoid instances such as the one when TV cameras (with sound) filmed them coming out of a door, side-by-side, and Meghan snapping at Harry, 'HAND!'

I have no hesitation believing this tasty morsel. It's consistent with my speculation that Markle is bored out of her mind by Harry, and he irks her to no end.

If they keep up these stupid tours, parliament may act to take the titles in response to public indignation.

R126 We don't care enough about them to be indignant. They have close to zero media presence in the UK these days.

Grifting poor countries.

No sound in case they encounter boos. Colombians don't seem to be too thrilled with their government spending thousands and thousands of their tax dollars to fete those two nobodies.

The whole “fluent in Spanish” bit. I thought she’d taken it in college before her internship but no, she claims to have learned it while she was in Argentina for what, six weeks? at the embassy where everyone would be speaking English all day so not even immersion.

[quote] Prince Harry & Meghan Markle’s Critics Don’t Seem To Understand the Invictus Games’ Global Power

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s critics can’t seem to understand why the couple continues to travel the globe in what looks like a royal tour. Well, the answer is quite simple: the Invictus Games. The Sussexes have found success with the sporting event that offers “a recovery pathway for international wounded, injured, and sick servicemen and women.” Countries are duking it out to host future games, but the naysayers don’t want to admit that Harry has a hit on his hands.

The popularity of the event doesn’t go unnoticed by the royal family either. In 2027, the Invictus Games will return to the U.K. for the first time since its launch in 2014 in London. Birmingham will be the host city and King Charles III is reportedly keeping it penciled in on his calendar. “I think he would acknowledge it would be a good thing to go to. He would not want to look punitive,” a source told The Times, via GB News. While the games are still three years away, Charles knows that the palace’s decision to skip the 10th-anniversary celebration in May looked petty.

“[Charles] is not going to throw the weight of the institution behind Invictus again,” a former royal staffer told The Daily Beast. “This all seems very logical inside the Palace bubble, but the trouble is that people who don’t particularly care about such things, who are dimly aware that the royals spend their days visiting community centers and opening supermarkets, are going to wonder why they are boycotting this terrific charity that is headed by the king’s son.”

Newsweek‘s chief royal correspondent Jack Royston told The Royal Report podcast in September 2023 that the Invictus Games in Dusseldorf, Germany show why Harry and Meghan remain popular outside the U.K. “Harry’s speech [at the games’ opening ceremony] I suppose, had this flash of optimism in it,” he explained. “And I think it’s one that shows a path for the couple to rebuild a little bit and do the job, but kind of the way they used to, you know doing it in the old-fashioned royal way.”

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex might be ruffling feathers at the palace, but the Invictus Games is hitting all of the right notes with global leaders. Harry and Meghan are making their passion project a massive brand name.

Invictus Games global power is zilch. The British Royal Family's global power is huge. The Sussexes aren't being treated anywhere like royals. Meghan and Harry aren't popular anywhere.

Harry can salvage the Invictus Games if he makes it clear that Megs won’t be part of it going forward.

But then he will be sleeping in the chicken pen, r133.

He's not much better than she is, merching his family.

R120, ¿Eet ees a chame, no? La Duquesa Pobrecita. That ees my new name for her. My, how you say "maid," Juanita helped me sooo much weeth that. ¡Muchas Gracias, Juanita!

I must go now. The 5? 6?--Juanita could tell you-- cheeldren are calling for their Mamacita Eelaria.

A source told OK! Magazine the trip was to help "elevate their status in Hollywood", but instead the Montecito-based duo have been left "embarrassed" by the reaction.

Elevate what status? FFS. Do they have chickenfeed for brains?

Like everywhere, Hollywood is data driven. Their data will suck. The only way back is to shut up and do some diligent, substantive philanthropy that shows results or create a successful business enterprise that shows results. They did a soft launch of American Ridiculous Owngoal in March. It's approaching six months. What? Some burlap on Instagram, with fancy writing. There's nothing to suggest they can actually produce anything sustained on their own. They are all talk and everybody knows it.

Another word salad statement on the Archewell website.

They are a total joke.

[quote]Another word salad statement on the Archewell website.

Do they ever follow any of this up with actual action? Will any of these people see any benefit from their visit?

I didn't think it was possible for either of them to be embarrassed about anything.

Like Meghan said, it's time to move on.

Even if their titles were "yanked," they will still continue to use the Sussex moniker. Nothing can stop them from doing so.

They'll continue to make foreign visits, and they'll continue to do whatever they please.

Because that's how it is in America. The freedom to do whatever the hell you want to, without some Men in Gray suits constantly telling you what you can and can't do.

Harry can finally BREATHE.

Yeah, he's doing a great job of all that breathing.

Ever had a big wedding in the family, on a Saturday? Ceremony, reception, dinner, dance?

Remember that flat, what do we do now feeling on Sunday?

That's how I reckon Moanicello feels now they're home from their grand tour.

Do keep up, R141 - the last of the "Men in grey suits" was Robert Fellowes - private secretary to Queen Elizabeth as well as brother-in-law to Diana and second cousin to Fergie - long retired and died a couple of weeks ago, so he's no longer telling people what to do, if he ever did.

The majority of Palace administrative and senior staff are female (sources - the annual reports of the King and of the Prince of Wales), did not attend Eton or equivalent and a number, not great but improving, are people of colour (source - "Courtiers" by Tom Bowers).

If anybody was telling Harry what to do it's because he is an idiot and essentially unemployable so he needed all the help that he could get.

But do keep up with your "Men in Grey Suits" fantasy - you got that from "The Crown", didn't you?

[quote] do keep up

And be as obsessed as you? No thanks.

I think he's currently being told what to do by some Woman in Earth Tones, isn't he?

Hardly obsessed, R145 - simply acquainted with the facts.

There are few facts in this thread. Try to keep up.

Lol R148.

How dare you!

You're a clever one, aren't you, R148?

Amazing and informed commentary from an alleged adult who uses "LOL", R149.

Hi KGT R141!

The Invictus Games did a lot for them. Wait until the start their UNO tournament.

And slots! They could get a residency in Branson!

Fergie was the first person I ever heard use the term Men In Grey Suits back in the 90’s.

35 years ago, yes, R155.

And she’s always been such a reliable witness!

I did a little googling but so far that seems to be right. I thought it was a much older term. It might come from “eminence grise”.

+ and Diana might have used the phrase in her Panorama interview, or “grey suits”.

Diana's Panorama interview cost her her marriage and the chance to be queen. She would have loved to stay a part of the BRF and was only looking at a house in the US following her divorce - and being ostracised by most of UK society.

People judged her for her attention whoring, chasing/stalking married men and inappropriate revelations.

Not in Panorama but maybe Diana: Her True Story? Apparently it's an established idiom. She didn't invent it. One idiom site says it originated in the U.S. in the 1930s.

Even Diana conceded Panorama was a whopper mistake. Another lesson #2 failed to learn.

Did she, r161?

The Harkles are super stupid for copying the move, however Diana felt about it.

"Diana, Princess of Wales "very much regretted" the infamous Panorama interview she had with Martin Bashir, the inquest has heard.

Rosa Monckton said that the princess conceded just before she died that the programme had been a mistake and she wished she had never done it.

At the time, the interview was seen as her revenge against the Establishment. But on a holiday with Miss Monckton just days before her death in a car crash, the princess said she thought it was an error of judgment.

"She said was that she really, really regretted that interview," Mrs Monckton told the inquest."

I think William requested that the Panorama interview be pulled from public view.

And I think the BBC may have granted that request given that their own investigation revealed that Martin Bashir concocted false documents and lied to Diana to get her to do the interview.

Still, I just saw a segment of some tabloid show that aired the snippet of her and the famous "3 people in her marriage" remark from the Bashir interview.

So, obviously there isn't a legal basis to prevent airing what is showed of it that has been videotaped when it aired and put out by other media.

“It is a matter of great regret that the BBC did not get to the facts in the immediate aftermath of the programme when there were warning signs that the interview might have been obtained improperly. Instead, as the Duke of Cambridge himself put it, the BBC failed to ask the tough questions. Had we done our job properly Princess Diana would have known the truth during her lifetime. We let her, the royal family and our audiences down.

“Now we know about the shocking way that the interview was obtained I have decided that the BBC will never show the programme again; nor will we license it in whole or part to other broadcasters.

"It does of course remain part of the historical record and there may be occasions in the future when it will be justified for the BBC to use short extracts for journalistic purposes, but these will be few and far between and will need to be agreed at Executive Committee level and set in the full context of what we now know about the way the interview was obtained. I would urge others to exercise similar restraint.”

[quote] I think William requested that the Panorama interview be pulled from public view.

Can someone please give a brief summary of this interview?

I've never heard about it before.

[quote]Can someone please give a brief summary of this interview?

Diana spills her guts about the Royal Family.

^^genius doesn't know thst she was lied to and manipulated by her interviewer

[quote]genius doesn't know thst she was lied to and manipulated by her interviewer

That doesn’t negate what I said. She did spill her guts about the Royal Family.

Her personality disordered, skewed, lying guts.

I bet if she was still alive, Harry would be whining about her too. He'd be jeolous as hell that she would have been fawning over William's kids as much as she did William.

R171, she didn't "spill her guts about the Royal Family", she gave her somewhat distorted version of the breakdown of her marriage, with the interviewer lying to and manipulating her in order to secure his "scoop".

Harry blames the infamous interview and the media culture it represents for his mother's death, so it's not really a "weapon" for the the Sussex stans in their hate campaign against Charles and William.

[quote]"Our mother lost her life because of this, and nothing has changed," Harry concluded.

The key thing about the Panorama interview was that, although the Waleses were already officially separated when Diana did it, it provoked the Queen to write to them and say she insisted they divorce forthwith. Diana had NOT seen that coming and was as floored by it as Meggsy would have been in the same circs.

In the interview, she not only implied that Camilla had been a third in her marriage since before it began (Charles swears this is untrue and that he stayed away from Camilla for years of the marriage, until Diana's behaviour drove him back to her), but she also went on with incredibly seditious crap along the lines of, "I don't think Charles would make a good King. He's not temperamentally suited. I really don't think he WANTS to be King, actually."

We have all seen since then that Charles very much wants to be King.

William was 15 when she died. My view is that once he turned 16, Diana's intention was to do more public appearances accompanied by him instead of Charles. William was a very beautiful teenager and a legit Heir, and Diana was the most famous woman in the world, so of course this would have sold a million newspapers and magazines, and eventually (Charles being manifestly unable to compete with anyone on the basis of glamour) have led to the appearance of a rival court in public opinion. I am very happy for William that the Queen put an end to any chance of this by chucking Diana out of the RF, because his life would have been hell whether he went along with Diana or stood up to her over it. Maybe the Queen also twigged to where Diana was heading from watching the interview.

I doubt William would have had anything to do with a "rival court", especially as no such thing is possible. The Queen was the Queen, Charles is the King, and nothing can ever rival that, even in some court of superficial glamour magazine opinion. In any case, Diana had curtailed her public engagements and her private life was her focus.

Diana was also very committed to William being King one day, and she would never have done anything that would have undermined his credibility and reputation. If she had lived, she most likely would be reminding everyone that she was William's mother, but I doubt she would have tried to rope him into some kind of anti-Windsor PR campaign. Even if she had, he wouldn't have anything to do with it.

The difference in William's and Harry's responses to the revelations that Martin Bashir had lied to and tricked Diana into doing that interview are revealing. William made a video response, and his analysis is - although rightly angry - measured, with specific demands, indicating that he understands the issues, what the deceit was, and the conclusions of the inquiry. William also calls out the BBC and those who failed to take action at the time. He stands up for his mother and her memory, but isn't sentimental about her, but raw and honest. Harry, in a written response, indicates no engagement with the specific issue at hand, but is sentimental and dramatic, accusing the media of killing his mother and self-servingly exploiting the situation to promote his personal legal conflict with the media.

[quote]In a video statement, Prince William, the Duke of Cambridge, called the findings of former senior judge Lord John Dyson's report "extremely concerning."

[quote]"It is my view that the deceitful way the interview was obtained substantially influenced what my mother said," Prince William said. "The interview was a major contribution to making my parents' relationship worse and has since hurt countless others. It brings indescribable sadness to know that the BBC's failures contributed significantly to her fear, paranoia and isolation that I remember from those final years with her."

[quote]"But what saddens me most, is that if the BBC had properly investigated the complaints and concerns first raised in 1995, my mother would have known that she had been deceived," the prince continued. "She was failed not just by a rogue reporter, but by leaders at the BBC who looked the other way rather than asking the tough questions."

[quote]The royal, who is second-in-line to the throne behind his father Prince Charles, called the interview illegitimate and a "false narrative," and said it should never be aired again.

Harry's written statement:

[quote]Following William's statement, his brother Prince Harry released his own written statement on the investigation, in which he called their mother "resilient, brave, and unquestionably honest."

[quote]"The ripple effect of a culture of exploitation and unethical practices ultimately took her life," said Harry, the Duke of Sussex. "To those who have taken some form of accountability, thank you for owning it. That is the first step towards justice and truth. Yet what deeply concerns me is that practices like these — and even worse — are still widespread today. Then, and now, it's bigger than one outlet, one network, or one publication."

[quote]"Our mother lost her life because of this, and nothing has changed," Harry concluded. "By protecting her legacy, we protect everyone, and uphold the dignity with which she lived her life. Let's remember who she was and what she stood for."

Let’s not forget Diana’s failed power play.

When Charles and Diana divorced, the Queen was going to leave Diana’s HRH title in place. Her reasoning was that Diana was still the mother of the future king and should be respected for that.

In the divorce settlement, Diana demanded the HRH title.

Big Liz said, “Don’t fuck with me. I was in this before you were even born.” Big Liz yanked the HRH title and busted her down to Diana, Princess of Wales.

Some misguided miscreants believe that when William becomes King, he will restore Diana’s HRH posthumously.

[quote]The difference in William's and Harry's responses to the revelations that Martin Bashir had lied to and tricked Diana into doing that interview are revealing.

Yet they refuse to acknowledge their uncle’s (Diana’s brother) part in all of this. He was egging her on to stick it to the monarchy. There was nobody that sat down with Diana and urged her to proceed with caution.

Perhaps they do acknowledge their uncle's part, r180, but it wouldn't achieve much for them to start criticising him publicly.

Exactly, r180. Charles Spencer should have at least hired an esteemed private detective to ensure Bashir's claims were true. If not, then at least domeone with a brain should have explained to her the likely consequences of saying such things in a prime time TV interview.

Spencer later wouldn't even grant her sanctuary at Althorp, but was happy to exploit her in death to an astonishingly tacky degree.

That Diana couldn't see that saying what she said would result in being given the boot is astounding. She thought the public wanted her as a part of the BRF she razed to the ground?

As for ERII, didn't she urge Diana to keep her protection staff paid for by the Crown?

Diana's tale is a cautionary one about the dangers of untreated MH issues.

William seems to see that, referring to the last years of her life as featuring paranoia and isolation.

[quote]As for ERII, didn't she urge Diana to keep her protection staff paid for by the Crown?

Diana was very paranoid. She frequently used the entrance to Kensington Palace that didn’t have CCTV.

Bashir also had to sneak himself and his crew into the Palace to do the interview.

Diana would have only thought that Palace protection was spying on her and reporting back to the Queen.

She also frequently used the entrance to KP without CCTV when smuggling her married lovers such as Will Carling, in for the night.

I'm a fan of Diana - flaws and all - but let's not pretend that she didn't give her protection good reason for keeping an eye on her.

Diana was on the phone to Richard Kay of the Daily Mail a lot. Sometimes they'd meet. He's still a good-looking man and would have been smoking hot in those days.

I had to google him, R185.

Here's a photo of him in his younger days.

Richard Kay and Diana pretending not to know each other....

R176, were you around at the time? The BRF's stocks were extremely low, and Diana was capitalising on that with the "Charles doesn't want to be King" stuff. Obviously she didn't want William to knock the Queen off the throne, but she also didn't know the Queen was going to be more or less immortal. What she was aiming for was to have Charles so unpopular when the Queen died that the Government really might consider having William succeed the Queen in order to save the monarchy. As it was, Blair was worried the monarchy might topple over the Queen's reaction to Diana's death. Diana was planning to put in several more years of white-anting before the Queen died. I think you'll find her focus on her private life came after the divorce, not after the separation. During the separation she was all about pulling focus from Charles whenever she could, and she was doing a lot of public appearances (cf the famous Revenge Dress appearance).

Knowing William as we do now, I don't think he'd have had any part of it either, but Diana probably didn't know him all that well. She certainly wouldn't have had the slightest interest in his view of The Firm as a business and his birthright. We all now know that if Harry had been offered the same opportunity (to make heaps of public appearances with Diana AND get the throne early) he'd have jumped at it. She could easily have thought William was the same.

r141 Harry went from one prison to another.

Yes, r188, I was around at the time, and many people thought Diana was whack. She was attempting to cause huge problems for Charles, but they wouldn't have come to anything. Her public engagements would have become as ridiculous as Harry's are now. Moreover, any appearances Harry may have made with Diana would have been as irrelevant - and ultimately damaging to him - as the appearances he is making now.

Let's not forget the circumstances in which she died - with her jet-setting playboy boyfriend, son of a controversial foreign billionaire with legal issues, in a car driven by an employee of her very new boyfriend's father who had been drinking despite being on prescription medicines, having refused the UK police protection she'd been offered. A few weeks before her death, she'd made sure that the paps pictured her in her bikini on Dodi's glamorous yacht. This woman - charming in many ways as she may have been - was no serious threat to the royal family, however acting in scorn she may have been.

Oh, not for a second am I defending Diana. She WAS whack. Nor did I mean she'd have used Harry, who was always a nobody in the lineage--I only meant she probably knew William so little that she thought he'd go along with her like Harry would've.

But I do think you are confusing the period of the Waleses' separation with the period after the divorce. You're wrong that her engagements would have become ridiculous had there been no divorce. Until then she was a full member of the BRF, the mother of the Heir, an HRH, and charities wanted her far more than they wanted any other member of the family as their patron. And unlike M&H, she DID do the work. It was the divorce that deprived her of official Royal engagements, and incidentally also made the children squarely the property of the BRF, though obviously she was allowed to see them and take them on holidays.

I can remember walking home from work one day after the separation. There was a big building near where I live in London that used to be a hospital and had been turned into social housing, a really nice place.

There was a few cars hanging about the entrance when I walked past and also some photographers etc. I spoke to a guy and asked what was going on, he sad that Prince Charles was there to officially open the development and that he was actually his driver. It was a miserable afternoon with a light drizzle of rain, but still there was hardly anybody turned up to see him. Even the people who lived there were just hanging out of their windows to have a look.

His driver said to me that Diana has an engagement in Kensington that same afternoon, and that there would be hundreds of people turn up for her. A couple of hours later whist watching the early evening news Diana’s engagement was shown and there was a ton of people turned up for it, I can’t remember if Charles even got a mention. His driver was right, people loved Diana.

Diana wouldn't have been able to use her public engagements to rival Charles. It just doesn't work that way. But even the bulk of her patronages tend to have come from before the separation in 1992.

Not sure what the children being the property of the BRF means. She lived in Kensington Palace with them, aside from when they were away at boarding school.

But, yes, she is like Harry in that she threw it all away because she thought she was more important than the job.

Love the photo of sexy young Richard Kay. He pops up sometimes on Palace Confidential, the YouTube channel from the Daily Mail about the royals. I love Jo Elvin the host and frequent panelists Rebecca English and Richard Eden. The new younger woman on the panel is growing on me, she sounds a lot like Lady Mary (Downton Abbey)

How can you lie and trick someone into an interview? I don't get it. Anyway, as soon as Diana died William belonged to the Queen.

Bashir faked bank statements to make it appear as though people were being paid to spy on Diana and provide information about her, r195. He showed these to her brother to get an introduction to her.

Some people are not only ignorant, but they can't even be bothered to look up basic information, yet they continue to pontificate.

Agreed, R196

I remember someone close to Diana writing about giving her the news that after the divorce was finalised, her schedule was pretty much empty. I think it was her private secretary at the time. She was a bit upset about that and it was yet something else she hadn't foreseen when giving the Bashir interview. She had to find other causes to occupy her.

TIL that it was her private secretary, Patrick Jephson, who was accused by Bashir of accepting off-shore payments to spy on her for the BRF. That is serious white-anting and unbelievably hurtful. How Bashir lives with himself is a total mystery. He still maintains she would have agreed to the interview anyway.

No wonder she didn't consider any adverse consequences when planning the interview. Her brother is an idiot for not seeing if the story checked out.