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

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

far from anti-british.
sure, i certainly have no time for certain british institutions with good reason but that does not make one anti-british.
i'm also glad I can view things from a neutral point of view, without prejudice and all else, as that is what i generally do.

Sorry, but that's funny, your posts in particular for years across this site have been totally anti-British, that's your feelings, that's fair enough, but you're clearly not without prejudice!

end of the road

bubblypop wrote: »

So they left the royal family because the press is racist? Makes sense!

I don't believe anyone would have an issue with them leaving to live their lives away from prying media, but that's not what they did is it?
They wanted to pick and choose what work they did, and when they did it, but they also wanted to keep all the extras of being working royals without the work.
Their interview has done nothing but make them look like petulant teenagers.

You're so obsessed by British press! I don't read newspapers, I'm not on Facebook or twitter, and I don't believe their are posters who are 'anti-MH'

actually yes, stepping back from royal duties because of racist elements of the british press, believing that those elements would find something else to report on once they left, did make sense at the time.
now of course it turns out they were wrong on that score, but i can see why they would think such.
it was more the british tabloids they wanted to get away from, i don't think they ever thought they could simply leave and live a completely private life without any media interest, as to be honest that would be naive.
i think it would be naive to think there aren't people angry or at least annoyed that they stepped down from royal duties and emigrated, how many of such people there are is unknown.

walshb wrote: »

Absolute deflection

So, now it was the media who were the baddies, and the issue was that RF didn't stop the media writing things....

Unreal...

So, to get "their side" out on this, they then go on a global chat show and slate the RF...

I am completely lost with all the bull excuses being given here...

yes, elements of the british press are absolutely toxic, i'm sure you can figure out which news papers yourself.
anyway, yes they had to get their side of the story out there and obviously they felt the best way to do that was on a global chat show, which over 28 million watched that interview.
it was hardly slating in fairness, certainly allegations were made and they should be investigated but slating is a massive over exaggeration.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

actually yes, stepping back from royal duties because of racist elements of the british press, believing that those elements would find something else to report on once they left, did make sense at the time.
now of course it turns out they were wrong on that score, but i can see why they would think such.
it was more the british tabloids they wanted to get away from, i don't think they ever thought they could simply leave and live a completely private life without any media interest, as to be honest that would be naive.
i think it would be naive to think there aren't people angry or at least annoyed that they stepped down from royal duties and emigrated, how many of such people there are is unknown.

yes, elements of the british press are absolutely toxic, i'm sure you can figure out which news papers yourself.
anyway, yes they had to get their side of the story out there and obviously they felt the best way to do that was on a global chat show, which over 28 million watched that interview.
it was hardly slating in fairness, certainly allegations were made and they should be investigated but slating is a massive over exaggeration.

Have you got any examples of this toxic media?

end of the road

bubblypop wrote: »

Sorry, but that's funny, your posts in particular for years across this site have been totally anti-British, that's your feelings, that's fair enough, but you're clearly not without prejudice!

you are incorrect.
none of my posts are anti-british, anti british army sure, condemning britain's behaviour around the world yes, but actual anti-british, not a chance.

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you got any examples of this toxic media?

plenty have been posted in the thread already.

Itssoeasy

end of the road wrote: »

he chose to go to the press so as to immotionaly blackmail her into talking to him, i already explained this and it has been mentioned plenty throughout the thread.
using the media to immotionaly blackmail your child isn't the sign of a good parent in my and i suspect most people's world.
it suggests to you that she is an uber control freak who is obsessed with her public image and with appearing the victim instead of the instigator of any bad behaviour because that is what you want her to be and that is the narative you have created in relaton to her.
the non-vindictive interview where they both stated why they left and discussed how they felt they were treated among other things highlights that there are perhapse some questions for the institution themselves to answer.
it certainly doesn't highlight what you think it does.





far from anti-british.
sure, i certainly have no time for certain british institutions with good reason but that does not make one anti-british.
i'm also glad I can view things from a neutral point of view, without prejudice and all else, as that is what i generally do.

No it doesn’t make you anti British and neither should posters who aren’t of your opinion be called pro British.

As opposed to who end of the road ? I would class myself as someone who can look at something objectively and call goals and points so to speak. I’ll speak for my own posts, I am reacting to an interview given by Harry and Meghan.

That’s my only reason for engaging in this thread because In my opinion some statements were made that in some instances can be easily disproven to be a best economical with the truth and the racism claim which was just left hanging there which I feel was very poor form, regardless of who it’s directed at and the persons place in life.

Ms2011

bubblypop wrote: »

It appears to me, having followed this thread that the posters who are backing Harry and Megan are anti-British posters.

Pretty sure they couldn't care less about H & M, it just works out well for them to argue against the royal family.
I'm not a royalist, and I'm glad I can view things from a neutral point of view, without prejudice.

Your view doesn't count for much then if you're assigning the title of anti-British to me :pac:

walshb

bubblypop wrote: »

It appears to me, having followed this thread that the posters who are backing Harry and Megan are anti-British posters.

Pretty sure they couldn't care less about H & M, it just works out well for them to argue against the royal family.
I'm not a royalist, and I'm glad I can view things from a neutral point of view, without prejudice.

I said this right from the start..

People defending and backing Harry and Meghan for that lowlife interview are doing so out of being anti Royal far more than being pro Meghan and Harry

The old saying: an enemy of my enemy is my friend..

It’s the only real logical reason why anyone could take that show by the pair of them as being at all sincere and right.

Leg End Reject

So Meghan and Harry reluctantly left because of The Daily Mail and other tabloids. They printed mean and racist articles.

So, why accuse a member of the family of being racist when you can't even get your stories straight for a rehearsed and staged interview?

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

plenty have been posted in the thread already.

Really? I must have missed them. I read plenty of accusations but no evidence.

FileNotFound

Let's face it misery Meg threw a hissy fit and dragged horny Harry along for the ride.

Then she got pissy along with the hissy and highlighted whiskey cheeks Charlie loved a bit of playful racism.

Inherited from philly and passed onto young Harry, tis a bad situation for em all.

But since Kate wasn't racist, she played with the basest of claims that meany Kate made her cry.

And all of this was unveiled to an Ian Wright lookalike on the telly.

Meg got caught out in lying but the snowflakes supported her crying to the point they ignored all the BS that was flying about.

BettyS

Did anybody read the story leaked by Meghan’s friends stating that she wants to be there for Harry. She wants him to mend the divides between his family on his return. She is apparently willing to forgive them and to move on.

Hmmmmn.....

BettyS

BettyS wrote: »

Did anybody read the story leaked by Meghan’s friends stating that she wants to be there for Harry. She wants him to mend the divides between his family on his return. She is apparently willing to forgive them and to move on.

Hmmmmn.....

I didn’t think that she had any friends. Where were they when she walked alone down the aisle? Surely one of them could have given her away?

NSAman

BettyS wrote: »

Did anybody read the story leaked by Meghan’s friends stating that she wants to be there for Harry. She wants him to mend the divides between his family on his return. She is apparently willing to forgive them and to move on.

Hmmmmn.....

TV Guide interview?

Leg End Reject

BettyS wrote: »

Did anybody read the story leaked by Meghan’s friends stating that she wants to be there for Harry. She wants him to mend the divides between his family on his return. She is apparently willing to forgive them and to move on.

Hmmmmn.....

"They ignored me when I was pregnant and suicidal, let the press post mean articles about me, one of them is racist but I sure hope my husband gets back in their good books. They're loaded and handy for photo ops and publicity" is how I'd read that.

valoren

BettyS wrote: »

Did anybody read the story leaked by Meghan’s friends stating that she wants to be there for Harry. She wants him to mend the divides between his family on his return. She is apparently willing to forgive them and to move on.

Hmmmmn.....

A narcissist is both the hero and the victim in every story they tell. Same there.

ceadaoin.

Leg End Reject wrote: »

So Meghan and Harry reluctantly left because of The Daily Mail and other tabloids. They printed mean and racist articles.

So, why accuse a member of the family of being racist when you can't even get your stories straight for a rehearsed and staged interview?

Plenty of tabloids in the US. I see them when I'm in the supermarket queue. Many of them have also printed stories critical of Meghan. But its only the UK tabloids who are the problem. and also only UK paparazzis, despite the fact that they have been papped in Canada and the US since "escaping"

Leg End Reject

valoren wrote: »

A narcissist is both the hero and the victim in every story they tell. Same there.

Our megalomaniac Meggers is now trying to valiantly mend rifts of her own creation.

end of the road

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Plenty of tabloids in the US. I see them when I'm in the supermarket queue. Many of them have also printed stories critical of Meghan. But its only the UK tabloids who are the problem. and also only UK paparazzis, despite the fact that they have been papped in Canada and the US since "escaping"

perhapse the US tabloids aren't as bad as 2 certain UK tabloids?

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Our megalomaniac Meggers is now trying to valiantly mend rifts of her own creation.

she's trying to heal rifts yes, however she didn't specifically create those rifts given those rifts obviously existed before the interview.

Leg End Reject

end of the road wrote: »

she's trying to heal rifts yes, however she didn't specifically create those rifts given those rifts obviously existed before the interview.

Bit of a mad idea here so bear with me. If you had a rift in your family would you:

A. Try to mend bridges before moving to the other side of the world.

-or-

B. Insult your family in a highly publicised interview with a near global audience and then try to build bridges.

'Tis a hard one alright ...

Be right back

BettyS wrote: »

Did anybody read the story leaked by Meghan’s friends stating that she wants to be there for Harry. She wants him to mend the divides between his family on his return. She is apparently willing to forgive them and to move on.

Hmmmmn.....

Apparently she didn't want to go as so not to be the centre of attention. If that quote is real, unbelievable. The Queen will be the centre of attention.

Leg End Reject

Be right back wrote: »

Apparently she didn't want to go as so not to be the centre of attention. If that quote is real, unbelievable. The Queen will be the centre of attention.

So it's her modesty rather than "medical advice" now?

Bless her little cotton socks!

Be right back

Leg End Reject wrote: »

So it's her modesty rather than "medical advice" now?

Bless her little cotton socks!

And also her mum didn't want her to fly while pregnant. Didn't stop her during her first pregnancy.

end of the road

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Bit of a mad idea here so bear with me. If you had a rift in your family would you:

A. Try to mend bridges before moving to the other side of the world.

-or-

B. Insult your family in a highly publicised interview with a near global audience and then try to build bridges.

'Tis a hard one alright ...

well number 1 would depend on the reason for the rift in the first place.
number 2 i don't air my personal business in public anyway, but i'm thankfully not in the public eye either.

Be right back wrote: »

Apparently she didn't want to go as so not to be the centre of attention. If that quote is real, unbelievable. The Queen will be the centre of attention.

had megan attended the funeral the likely hood of everything being made about her by the tabloids is mid to high, so chances are that she would be the centere of attention.
at least with her not attending the tabloids will actually have to report on the funeral.

Leg End Reject wrote: »

So it's her modesty rather than "medical advice" now?

Bless her little cotton socks!

likely both.
wouldn't criticise her for that.

Leg End Reject

Be right back wrote: »

And also her mum didn't want her to fly while pregnant. Didn't stop her during her first pregnancy.

There seems to be more confusion, or should I say, more varying recollections. I'd say she'd love to be there.

Be right back

end of the road wrote: »

well number 1 would depend on the reason for the rift in the first place.
number 2 i don't air my personal business in public anyway, but i'm thankfully not in the public eye either.





had megan attended the funeral the likely hood of everything being made about her by the tabloids is mid to high, so chances are that she would be the centere of attention.
at least with her not attending the tabloids will actually have to report on the funeral.





likely both.
wouldn't criticise her for that.

The Queen as his widow will be the centre of attention and even if the tabloids did focus on her, why say it? She should show some respect to the Queen who lost her husband of 73 years.

Leg End Reject

Be right back wrote: »

The Queen as his widow will be the centre of attention and even if the tabloids did focus on her, why say it? She should show some respect to the Queen who lost her husband of 73 years.

And then people argue she's not a narcissist!

end of the road

Be right back wrote: »

The Queen as his widow will be the centre of attention and even if the tabloids did focus on her, why say it? She should show some respect to the Queen who lost her husband of 73 years.

well yes the queen should be the center of attention but the tabloids aren't exactly known for decorum.
why should meghan not make the statement she is claimed to have made if she feels it is true? she's not a robot and can say whatever she likes.
i'm sure she is showing respect to the queen, after all the queen is her grand mother in law.
again a big non-issue here.

end of the road

Leg End Reject wrote: »

And then people argue she's not a narcissist!

absolutely.
if she is a narcissist then she is doing a rubbish job of it, the worst job ever tbh.

ceadaoin.

end of the road wrote: »

perhapse the US tabloids aren't as bad as 2 certain UK tabloids?

Really? And you should see what the national enquirer have said about them.

Leg End Reject

end of the road wrote: »

well yes the queen should be the center of attention but the tabloids aren't exactly known for decorum.
why should meghan not make the statement she is claimed to have made if she feels it is true? she's not a robot and can say whatever she likes.
i'm sure she is showing respect to the queen, after all the queen is her grand mother in law.
again a big non-issue here.

Because she is drawing attention and publicity to herself by claiming if she would be the centre of attention if she attended the funeral.

Philip's remains are in a coffin in a Chapel in Windsor Castle, his funeral is in 5 days, his family are grieving and preparing for a televised funeral, and yet Meghan is getting herself into the news. That's as far from respect as you can get.

Honestly, how would you feel if a close relative died and an inlaw tried to make the death and funeral all about them?