Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21

dogbert27

end of the road wrote: »

because there is no actual evidence they are lies and don't stack up.
all we have so far is 1 statement that has been proven to be simply incorrect.
no evidence that statement was made with the intention to deceive, which is what is required for it to be a lie.

It wasn't a statement. She presented as fact that they were married 3 days before the actual ceremony.

It's not a simple incorrection. It's either complete stupidity of not knowing how getting married works (which seeing as she was married before cannot be a defence) or a lie to present a romanticised fairy tale version of events for the US public to believe.

If you tell someone you were married 3 days before your actual wedding you are either deceiving them or deluding yourself.

Also making an open accusation of racism about a member of the Royal Family and leaving the world to guess who it could be is nothing short of creating innuendo to be deliberately talked about.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

because there is no actual evidence they are lies and don't stack up.
all we have so far is 1 statement that has been proven to be simply incorrect.
no evidence that statement was made with the intention to deceive, which is what is required for it to be a lie.

So she is either deceitful or stupid, are those the choices?

end of the road

bubblypop wrote: »

So she is either deceitful or stupid, are those the choices?

there could be other choices, however realistically only she and i would assume harry, will know which one she actually is
we certainly won't unless some sort of dramatic proof comes along that can't be disproven, i would expect.

Leg End Reject

bubblypop wrote: »

So she is either deceitful or stupid, are those the choices?

Or worse, assumed the rest us mere plebs were all stupid enough to believe it.

Be right back

dogbert27 wrote: »

It wasn't a statement. She presented as fact that they were married 3 days before the actual ceremony.

It's not a simple incorrection. It's either complete stupidity of not knowing how getting married works (which seeing as she was married before cannot be a defence) or a lie to present a romanticised fairy tale version of events for the US public to believe.

If you tell someone you were married 3 days before your actual wedding you are either deceiving them or deluding yourself.

Also making an open accusation of racism about a member of the Royal Family and leaving the world to guess who it could be is nothing short of creating innuendo to be deliberately talked about.

I thought Harry's body language was interesting during that clip during the interview. Kept his head down until she had finished talking. As if he wanted nothing to do with it.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

there could be other choices, however realistically only she and i would assume harry, will know which one she actually is
we certainly won't unless some sort of dramatic proof comes along that can't be disproven, i would expect.

What other choices could there possibly be?

retro:electro

She had previously stated that she has evidence to back up “everything” that was stated during the interview. Well, they have already had to release a statement today stating that the “marriage 3 days before” did not happen. And so the walking back begins. So either she deliberately lied, or she got the wrong end of the stick about what was taking place, which begs the question; what else could she have gotten the wrong end of the stick about? She wasn’t even privy to the “racist” conversation(s) she suggests happened so how exactly will she present proof of their existence? Could it be the case that she has got the wrong end of the stick with this too? We also know that her statement about Archie not receiving a title due to his colour was incorrect. It seems like the whole thing is unravelling for them

Purple Mountain

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I disagree. I think her saying about her "secret wedding" and that the Archbishop never told anyone was clearly 2 fingers to the RF because asvtye head of the Church of England, QE2 would have a very special and unique with the Archbishop.

But it's been confirmed there was no secret wedding

Leg End Reject

retro:electro wrote: »

She had previously stated that she has evidence to back up “everything” that was stated during the interview. Well, they have already had to release a statement today stating that the “marriage 3 days before” did not happen. And so the walking back begins. So either she deliberately lied, or she got the wrong end of the stick about what was taking place, which begs the question; what else could she have gotten the wrong end of the stick about? She wasn’t even privy to the “racist” conversation(s) she suggests happened so how exactly will she present proof of their existence? Could it be the case that she has got the wrong end of the stick with this too? We also know that her statement about Archie not receiving a title due to his colour was incorrect. It seems like the whole thing is unravelling for them

I'd say Piers Morgan is beside himself with excitement.

Be right back

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I'd say Piers Morgan is beside himself with excitement.

Probably writing an article for the Daily mail as we speak!

Mules

Be right back wrote: »

Probably writing an article for the Daily mail as we speak!

And no doubt I'll read it

walshb

Folks are getting bogged down on the dictionary definition of a lie/liar.

In their interview it’s nothing to do with making lies and liars of them

Some of the guff they came out with was just nonsensical and ridiculously difficult to believe...it’s that simple.

And it was delivered deceitfully and vindictively by both...and propped up and encouraged by a fake interviewer.

Anyone who can’t agree here is either very naive or being deliberately obtuse.

Purple Mountain

Augeo wrote: »

But it's been confirmed there was no secret wedding

I'm standing over my theory that it's lost in translation. She's talking about a symbolic/fluffy exchange of vows.
But leaking that only 3 of them knowing, one being the Archbishop was definitely a crack at the monarchy.
The Archbishop kept their secret she says but she was very smug to leak the secret to the world.

Baggly

walshb wrote: »

Folks are getting bogged down on the dictionary definition of a lie/liar.

In their interview it’s nothing to do with making lies and liars of them

Some of the guff they came out with was just nonsensical and ridiculously difficult to believe...it’s that simple.

And it was delivered deceitfully and vindictively by both...and propped up and encouraged by a fake interviewer.

Anyone who can’t agree here is either very naive or being deliberately obtuse.

Mod

Go away out of that with your bad faith arguments.

The tone in this thread needs to improve folks.

Harry’s gotten himself a job. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9393225/Prince-Harry-gets-job-San-Francisco-based-mental-health-firm-Better-Up.html

retro:electro

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Harry’s gotten himself a job. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9393225/Prince-Harry-gets-job-San-Francisco-based-mental-health-firm-Better-Up.html

I hope he is not let near anyone who struggles with their mental health. Didn’t he say he was ashamed to tell his family about Meghan’s mental health crisis? What are his qualifications for this role?

MoonUnit75

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I'm standing over my theory that it's lost in translation. She's talking about a symbolic/fluffy exchange of vows.
But leaking that only 3 of them knowing, one being the Archbishop was definitely a crack at the monarchy.
The Archbishop kept their secret she says but she was very smug to leak the secret to the world.

I don't think she was confused or believed a rehearsal was an actual wedding, or that it was 'symbolic'. She opens by saying they called the archbishop and told him 'we want our union to be between us' and that three days before the televised ceremony they got married. She's either extremely dumb or Harry rang the archbishop in advance and told him 'look, Meghan's going to ring about a private wedding in the garden, just nod and agree and go along with it. I know it wont be a real wedding, but what Meghan wants, Meghan gets, so say nothing'.

MoonUnit75

retro:electro wrote: »

I hope he is not let near anyone who struggles with their mental health. Didn’t he say he was ashamed to tell his family about Meghan’s mental health crisis? What are his qualifications for this role?

It's corporate speak for 'social media influencer under contract'.

Purple Mountain

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

It's corporate speak for 'social media influencer under contract'.

Blogger?
Or as I call them salespeople.

retro:electro

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

It's corporate speak for 'social media influencer under contract'.

It sounds like he is just the show pony. He’ll be paid handsomely for doing nothing only lending his name to this foundation and wheeled out at events. He shouldn’t be let next nor near anyone vulnerable

Be right back

retro:electro wrote: »

It sounds like he is just the show pony. He’ll be paid handsomely for doing nothing only lending his name to this foundation and wheeled out at events. He shouldn’t be let next nor near anyone vulnerable

He didn't know how to help his wife so hopefully it is what you said.

Leg End Reject

Be right back wrote: »

He didn't know how to help his wife so hopefully it is what you said.

He can bring people who need help on nights out ...

Wonder did he always want to be a sales rep. Best of luck to him.

They finally admit that they didn’t get married twice! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9392537/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-admit-DIDNT-marry-secret-three-days-Royal-wedding.html
“ Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have admitted they did not get married three days before the Royal wedding after an official certificate blew their claim apart.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex confessed the ceremony with the Archbishop of Canterbury in Kensington Palace saw them just 'privately exchange personal vows'.”

superflyninja

Deleted User wrote: »

...blew their claim apart.
...

Lol, no bitterness there.
So its as we thought, it simply was a private ceremony for them. Sure does colour the rest of their interview thats for sure.

Btw Oprah is a terrible interviewer.

BettyS

I find it a bit frustrating. Harry barely scraped his A-levels (remember the art teacher debacle). He has zero training in the domain of mental health. As another poster pointed out, he will be handsomely paid for his “work” in the area. Ultimately, it is great to draw attention to mental health. It is a real problem. However, between financially benefiting from the Oprah documentary (indirectly, before I am corrected), and then the Netflix series, and this new job advocating good mental health, when does it become cynical cashing in? Please don’t misunderstand me. I wholeheartedly support them discussing their plight. But the lucrative contracts make me squirm a little. Am I being harsh?

Neyite

Well in my head they are now the Duke and Duchess of Netflix so no, I don't think you are being harsh there Betty

Be right back

BettyS wrote: »

I find it a bit frustrating. Harry barely scraped his A-levels (remember the art teacher debacle). He has zero training in the domain of mental health. As another poster pointed out, he will be handsomely paid for his “work” in the area. Ultimately, it is great to draw attention to mental health. It is a real problem. However, between financially benefiting from the Oprah documentary (indirectly, before I am corrected), and then the Netflix series, and this new job advocating good mental health, when does it become cynical cashing in? Please don’t misunderstand me. I wholeheartedly support them discussing their plight. But the lucrative contracts make me squirm a little. Am I being harsh?

If she is mistaken about their wedding, what else is she mistaken about? Don't think you are being harsh, Betty.

TobyHolmes

Deleted User wrote: »

Harry’s gotten himself a job. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9393225/Prince-Harry-gets-job-San-Francisco-based-mental-health-firm-Better-Up.html

wow hes an expert on it now is he. just because his wife suffered from it AND he couldnt even attempt to help her. as a result she was so desperate she had to find help herself.



wow he is the right man for the job for sure.

Be right back

Neyite wrote: »

Well in my head they are now the Duke and Duchess of Netflix so no, I don't think you are being harsh there Betty

Or the Duke and Duchess of Montecito?