Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…140141143145146…732

Comments

  • Options
    #4262
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    bubblypop wrote: »
    I know exactly how the security works, it works the same as the VIP close protection in this country. I have experience in that. I have also worked with the British royal families close protection.
    The royal family have no say in how their security works, it is neither decided by them not paid by them. Police carry out risk assessments regularly and they decide how the close protection works.
    Firstly, you cannot expect police in Britain to provide security for non working royals who live in a different country.
    Secondly, you cannot expect Canada to foot the bill for non working royals who have decided to live in their country.
    That's not the way it works.
    Harry would have been told that when he left, his security also leaves, he would have been well aware of that. It is their own responsibility to get security in place for when their own is gone. I'm sure they knew the date.

    Oh we have a live one here folks! Suuuure.... :rolleyes: I read some things online too.

    The exact details of the royals' protection, which is paid for by the British public, is not widely known due to security reasons, says Robert Finch, Dominion Chairman of The Monarchist League of Canada, a monarchist advocacy organisation that promotes the Crown in Canada.
    So there is a lot of speculation about what the truth is, he says.
    "The degree of security depends on seniority and visibility of a royal - some are given protection only when performing official duties, not 24/7 - though some live within a protected cordon, such as Kensington Palace."
    Within Scotland Yard, there is a Royal Protection Unit made up of uniformed and plain clothes officers.
    Many people suspect that there is a specialist commando unit, possibly made up of SAS troops, that "shadows" the palaces occupied by the Queen "and possibly the homes of the two next heirs by generation [Prince Charles and the Duke of Cambridge] - as the threat level rises or falls", says Mr Finch.
    "But this is never discussed."
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56328790

    So if Harry would have been told what you claim, then why would he have been left surprised and scrambling to figure it out? That just doesn't make sense, obviously.


  • Options
    #4263
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    bubblypop wrote: »
    What terrible ordeal at the hands of the royal family?
    Meghan said she was welcomed into the family and Always treated well.
    The only thing I heard her complain about was the press, no I would suggest that all the royal family have been subjected to press intrusion on their private lives. That's unfortunately due to the level of interest people have in them.
    Meghan seems to blame the royal family for things that journalists wrote about her, I'm sorry but I don't understand her reasoning.
    Royals do not go tit for tat against rubbish tabloid newspapers. That's not something they lower themselves to.

    And as for the 'racist' remarks about their unborn son? I don't believe we have been told what was said, so I have no idea whether there even was racist remarks. She brought it up in the interview, said their was a conversation and concerns, no details and then Harry refused to talk about it.
    There is absolutely no evidence at all about any racist behaviour towards her or the baby.

    So what exactly was their issue?

    LOL. THere's a whole two hour interview covering your question and some clips released the following morning by Oprah. Knock yourself out.


  • Options
    #4264
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    walshb wrote: »
    She absolutely could have shut down that story.

    Simple: No. absolutely not. I did not make Kate cry. The story is a nonsense. Nobody made nobody cry.

    That’s how any decent person would have answered..

    She went in to make a claim that cannot be challenged or verified. That is the deviousness of her.

    This makes fascinating Good Friday reading. Here’s just some of the discussion concerning Kate. “ Oprah: So, there were rumours about you being Hurricane Meghan, for the departure of several high-profile palace staff members. And there was also a story — did you hear this one? — about you making Kate Middleton cry?

    Meghan: This I heard about.

    Oprah: You heard about that. OK.

    Meghan: This was . . . that was . . . that was a turning point.

    Oprah: That was a turning point?

    Meghan: Yeah.

    Kate made me cry days before wedding, but I got blamed... that was hard.
    (Oprah narrates) Six months after Harry and Meghan’s wedding, headlines began to swirl about a rift between Meghan and her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton. It was reported that Meghan had left Kate “in tears” over the bride-to-be’s “strict demands” over flower-girl dresses.

    Meghan: The narrative with Kate — which didn’t happen — was really, really difficult and something that  . . . I think that’s when everything changed, really.

    Oprah: You say the narrative with Kate, it didn’t happen. So, specifically, did you make Kate cry?

    Meghan: No.

    Oprah: So, where did that come from?

    Meghan: (Sighs)

    Oprah: Was there a situation where she might have cried? Or she could have cried?

    Meghan: No, no. The reverse happened. And I don’t say that to be disparaging to anyone, because it was a really hard week of the wedding. And she was upset about something, but she owned it, and she apologised. And she brought me flowers and a note, apologising. And she did what I would do if I knew that I hurt someone, right, to just take accountability for it. What was shocking was . . . what was that, six, seven months after our wedding?

    Oprah: Mm-hmm.

    Meghan: That the reverse of that would be out in the world.

    Oprah: The story came out six, seven months after it actually happened?

    Meghan: Yeah.

    Oprah: So, when you say . . . 

    Meghan: I would have never wanted that to come out about her ever, even though it had happened. I protected that from ever being out in the world.

    Oprah: So, when you say the reverse happened, explain to us what you mean by that.

    Meghan: A few days before the wedding, she was upset about something pertaining — yes, the issue was correct — about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings. And I thought, in the context of everything else that was going on in those days leading to the wedding, that it didn’t make sense to not be just doing whatever everyone else was doing, which was trying to be supportive, knowing what was going on with my dad and whatnot.

    Oprah: This was a really big story at the time, that you made Kate cry. Now you’re saying you didn’t make Kate cry, Kate made you cry. So, we all want to know, what would make you cry? What . . . what were you going through? You were going through all of the anxiety that brides go through putting their wedding together and going through all of the issues with your father: Was he coming? Was he not coming?

    Meghan: Mmm.

    Oprah: And there was a confrontation over the . . . the dresses?

    Meghan: It wasn’t a confrontation, and I actually don’t think it’s fair to her to get into the details of that, because she apologised.

    Oprah: OK.

    Meghan: And I’ve forgiven her.

    Oprah: Mm-hmm.

    Meghan: What was hard to get over was being blamed for something that not only I didn’t do but that happened to me. And the people who were part of our wedding going to our comms team and saying, ‘I know this didn’t happen.’ I don’t have to tell them what actually happened.

    Oprah: OK.

    Meghan: But I can at least go on the record and say she didn’t make her cry. And they were all told the same . . . 

    Oprah: So, all the time the stories were out that you had made Kate cry . . . you knew all along, and people around you knew that that wasn’t true?

    Meghan: Everyone in the institution knew it wasn’t true.

    Oprah: So, why didn’t somebody just say that?

    Meghan: That’s a good question.

    Oprah: Hmm.

    Meghan: 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.

    Oprah: Mm-hmm.

    Meghan: But also I think, a lot of it, that was fed into by the media. And I would hope that she would have wanted that corrected, and maybe in the same way that the Palace wouldn’t let anybody else.

    Oprah: Yeah.

    Meghan: Negate it, they wouldn’t let her, because she’s a good person. And I think so much of what I have seen play out is this idea of polarity, where if you love me, you don’t have to hate her. And if you love her, you don’t need to hate me.”
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14277841/meghan-markle-oprah-interview-full-transcript/


  • Options
    #4265
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    Be right back wrote: »
    For people nearing 40, they rely an awful lot on others helping them out until they have stuff figured out. They wanted independence, surely that covers financial independence too.

    Anyone else nearing 40 you know is also an international person of interest with high security risk and therefore tab? Thought not.
    They have financial independence now so your point is moot.


  • Options
    #4266
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,672 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    “And I’ve forgiven her.”

    Sickening..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4267
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    walshb wrote: »
    As I thought.

    Oprah asked Meghan if she made Kate cry.

    Meghan wasn’t happy just answering no. She then went on (childishly, vindictively and pathetically) to add on that Kate made her cry..

    But at least she got to tell “her truth.”

    Nothing childish, vindictive or pathetic about the way she set the story straight and didn't throw her under the bus by revealing details about it, even said Kate was a good person.


  • Options
    #4268
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    walshb wrote: »
    “And I’ve forgiven her.”

    Sickening..

    What's sickening is the palace keeping quiet and allowing Meghan to be vilified and bullied with this false story, while taking the time to clear up ridiculous bs such as no, Kate did not get botox. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #4269
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,672 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Nothing childish, vindictive or pathetic about the way she set the story straight and didn't throw her under the bus by revealing details about it, even said Kate was a good person.

    You fell for her backhanded compliment..

    Didn’t throw her under the bus? You serious?


  • Options
    #4270
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    walshb wrote: »
    You fell for her backhanded compliment..

    Didn’t throw her under the bus? You serious?

    Backhanded? Do you know her? I'm sure it was genuine, and she didn't reveal all she could have.

    The palace could have simply handled this by saying the story about Meghan isn't true, and not put Kate in a bad light by saying it was actually her. They could have just simply said it wasn't true and treated both women fairly. Why didn't they do that?


  • Options
    #4271
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    walshb wrote: »
    “And I’ve forgiven her.”

    Sickening..

    Yes, it's comments like that that are so askew from the image Meghan is trying to portray that give the game away. We can all recognise a passive aggressive bitchy comment when it's staring us in the face.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4272
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,387 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Backhanded? Do you know her? I'm sure it was genuine, and she didn't reveal all she could have.

    The palace could have simply handled this by saying the story about Meghan isn't true, and not put Kate in a bad light by saying it was actually her. They could have just simply said it wasn't true and treated both women fairly. Why didn't they do that?

    Because it was about children's tights. Why in the name of Jesus would the press office concern themselves over a grown woman being brought to tears over something so utterly trivial and petty?


  • Options
    #4273
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,672 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Backhanded? Do you know her? I'm sure it was genuine, and she didn't reveal all she could have.

    The palace could have simply handled this by saying the story about Meghan isn't true, and not put Kate in a bad light by saying it was actually her. They could have just simply said it wasn't true and treated both women fairly. Why didn't they do that?

    You expect the RF to issue statements relating to grown women and allegations of crying?

    Come off it...

    Meghan set out to do what she did. Arranged and staged questions...and off she went..

    Like I said: a firm and clear no. Nobody made nobody cry. A complete nonsense story..

    But that wasn’t enough for Markle...


  • Options
    #4274
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    Yes, it's comments like that that are so askew from the image Meghan is trying to portray that give the game away. We can all recognise a passive aggressive bitchy comment when it's staring us in the face.

    If Meghan were a boards poster you'd be carded for uncivil posting :pac:


  • Options
    #4275
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    Because it was about children's tights. Why in the name of Jesus would the press office concern themselves over a grown woman being brought to tears over something so utterly trivial and petty?

    Why in the name of god would they concern themselves with a botox story about Kate? :pac:

    It was important because the media were creating a "good" and "bad" duchess. It's ridiculous.


  • Options
    #4276
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,672 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Why in the name of god would they concern themselves with a botox story about Kate? :pac:

    It was important because the media were creating a "good" and "bad" duchess. It's ridiculous.

    This Botox story...

    What about it?

    Did the palace release an official statement on it?


  • Options
    #4277
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    walshb wrote: »
    You expect the RF to issue statements relating to grown women and allegations of crying?

    Come off it...

    Meghan set out to do what she did. Arranged and staged questions...and off she went..

    Like I said: a firm and clear no. Nobody made nobody cry. A complete nonsense story..

    But that wasn’t enough for Markle...

    Yet they issued a statement to deny a grown woman's alleged spa treatment?
    Come of it yourself.

    Actually, Kate made Meghan cry. As she said. Kate then apologised by note and flowers. Of course that happened. You think it didn't and she lied? :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #4278
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    walshb wrote: »
    This Botox story...

    What about it?

    Did the palace release an official statement on it?

    You know you can google, right?

    https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a28506237/kate-middleton-kensington-palace-botox-denial/


  • Options
    #4279
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,672 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Yet they issued a statement to deny a grown woman's alleged spa treatment?
    Come of it yourself.

    Actually, Kate made Meghan cry. As she said. Kate then apologised by note and flowers. Of course that happened. You think it didn't and she lied? :rolleyes:

    Of course it happened?

    Because one party alleges it?

    You’re missing the point...

    There was no need, other than being vindictive to hang Kate here with this allegation ..

    A near 40 year old woman on a global chat show telling tales about her ‘sister in law.’ It’s beyond pathetic...


  • Options
    #4280
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    irishblessing wrote: »
    You know you can google, right?

    https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a28506237/kate-middleton-kensington-palace-botox-denial/

    They denied it because a certain company was using Kate's picture as an advertisement for their services by suggesting she was a client there.


  • Options
    #4281
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,672 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    irishblessing wrote: »
    You know you can google, right?

    https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a28506237/kate-middleton-kensington-palace-botox-denial/

    Another nonsense..

    A spokesman for the palace...?

    Just like the Daily Mail and its sources...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4282
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    They denied it because a certain company was using Kate's picture as an advertisement for their services by suggesting she was a client there.

    No, a plastic surgeon commented on a "before" and "after" pic of Kate on social media. They never made that claim or used her as an advertisement.

    They still denied a silly tabloid story about botox.


  • Options
    #4283
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    walshb wrote: »
    Another nonsense..

    A spokesman for the palace...?

    Just like the Daily Mail and its sources...

    It was reported they actually issued an official statement.

    Regardless, the palace could have chosen to clear up the false story that was vilifying Meghan and creating a good/bad persona of them and they chose not to.


  • Options
    #4284
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    irishblessing wrote: »
    If Meghan were a boards poster you'd be carded for uncivil posting :pac:

    It was a suitable adjective to describe the "I forgive her " comment. Perfectly civil. Now if I called her the b word, that would be uncivil.


  • Options
    #4285
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    It was a suitable adjective to describe the "I forgive her " comment. Perfectly civil. Now if I called her the b word, that would be uncivil.

    This isn't uncivil?

    " a passive aggressive bitchy comment "

    You and I both know if you labelled my posts as that, and I reported it you would be pulled up. Nice try though.


  • Options
    #4286
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    irishblessing wrote: »
    No, a plastic surgeon commented on a "before" and "after" pic of Kate on social media. They never made that claim or used her as an advertisement.

    They still denied a silly tabloid story about botox.

    A plastic surgery company uploaded to Instagram a before and after photo of Kate with a list of their services for baby Botox. You can read it your way but I read it and the Palace obviously read it as her image being used for advertisement.


  • Options
    #4287
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    irishblessing wrote: »
    "Probably." :rolleyes: The racism against Meghan is well documented. You'd have to be living under a rock to not have seen it, I don't even need to google to know it happened. If it never happened, then what was the statement released by the Palace when they were still dating all about? From the PALACE:

    Published 8 November 2016
    Since he was young, Prince Harry has been very aware of the warmth that has been extended to him by members of the public. He feels lucky to have so many people supporting him and knows what a fortunate and privileged life he leads.

    He is also aware that there is significant curiosity about his private life. He has never been comfortable with this, but he has tried to develop a thick skin about the level of media interest that comes with it. He has rarely taken formal action on the very regular publication of fictional stories that are written about him and he has worked hard to develop a professional relationship with the media, focused on his work and the issues he cares about.

    But the past week has seen a line crossed. His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment. Some of this has been very public - the smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments. Some of it has been hidden from the public - the nightly legal battles to keep defamatory stories out of papers; her mother having to struggle past photographers in order to get to her front door; the attempts of reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home and the calls to police that followed; the substantial bribes offered by papers to her ex-boyfriend; the bombardment of nearly every friend, co-worker, and loved one in her life.

    Prince Harry is worried about Ms. Markle’s safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm. He knows commentators will say this is ‘the price she has to pay’ and that ‘this is all part of the game’. He strongly disagrees. This is not a game - it is her life and his.

    He has asked for this statement to be issued in the hopes that those in the press who have been driving this story can pause and reflect before any further damage is done. He knows that it is unusual to issue a statement like this, but hopes that fair-minded people will understand why he has felt it necessary to speak publicly.

    Which were....

    Can you not find examples? You said they’re available on Google


  • Options
    #4288
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    A plastic surgery company uploaded to Instagram a before and after photo of Kate with a list of their services for baby Botox. You can read it your way but I read it and the Palace obviously read it as her image being used for advertisement.

    And you'll read it yours. There are comparison pictures put up of them all the time. Like how they each held their baby bumps but only one of them was put in a negative light for it? Or how Kate was given avocado to eat for her medical condition and aww wasn't that lovely and Meghan was seen to contribute to nefarious systems around the production of avocados when it was revealed she eats them too?

    The palace and media are obviously quite comfortable with the disparaging image being put forward on to one of them, while defending the other.


  • Options
    #4289
    irishblessing
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 962 ✭✭✭irishblessing


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Which were....

    Can you not find examples? You said they’re available on Google

    Google it. They also already been posted here and you've been on this thread long enough to know. You're being deliberately disingenuous about this.

    For one you just took part of my quote from the larger context the palace itself said the racism was happening in.

    Meghan and Harry's child was referred and pictured as a monkey.

    The shíte about her mother being "straight outta Compton."

    That's just off the top of my head. You can google the rest if you can't seem to remember what's already posted here or don't want to believe the official palace statement about it.


  • Options
    #4290
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    The Palace did once come out with a simple statement which quashed any rumours of a rift between Kate and Meghan

    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.vanityfair.com/style/2018/12/meghan-markle-and-kate-middleton-feud-rumors-stamped-out-by-palace/amp

    Maybe they didn’t specifically deny the “who made who cry” story because, recollections may vary.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4291
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,747 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    irishblessing wrote: »
    Google it. They also already been posted here and you've been on this thread long enough to know. You're being deliberately disingenuous about this.

    It's the convention on boards and indeed most other discussion sites, that when one makes a claim.
    One provides the evidence to back it up.
    You have been asked multiple times by more than one poster, to provide evidence for the claim.

    Telling people to "Google it" is arguing in bad faith and ironically given the accusation you have lain.
    Incredibly disingenuous.

    If you make a claim it's incumbent upon you to back it up, to cite a source and to stand over it in a manner more open to rebuttal than "Google it".


Advertisement