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

Lisha

Lisha wrote: »

She said it was by someone in the organization, which to me suggested one of the comms staff/people they have.

Hardly likely that the staff would sidle up to the princess or whatever she was to engage in racist banter off the cuff. Not that they wouldn’t be classist and racist - the staff are the worst. But it’s probably a family member.

Also the British upper class tend to engage in ironic or droll humour, not always reflective of their opinion.

I could imagine Anne coming to Meghan, asking about the pregnancy and saying something like.

“Whatho! Great to see everythings going ok, hope for the sake of the great British public the child is a lighter shade, not sure how we’d cope otherwise”.

This kind of ironic statement is easily readable over here, some Irish people do it.

I’m saying something I don’t believe because if I did believe it I wouldn’t say it.

If you don’t get irony you don’t get it. Of course Meghan hasn’t said exactly what was said.

ShowMeTheCash

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

What sort of disingenuous claptrap are people going on about when they state the mere mention of skin colour re the royal newborn is not racist? It's like tabloid throw-away reasoning to suit my narrow wee mind.. don't ya think they'd know the difference? A clear high-handed way of saying I'm smart to figure it out, but they are clueless. Yeah, right.. lol.

We all know the difference between someone making an odd remark with innocent intent and another with crushing racial or bigoted bias. The RF have form for this. Plenty of evidence of Philip as a nasty old snob insulting many with hateful comments. No evidence whatsoever that MM has misconstrued anything other than the dished-out claptrap, lies and hearsay via the tabloids.

I live in the UK and some of you need to live here with the gammon brexiteer hater rabble, you'd fit right in.. :pac:

I personally could care less about the RF personally I could care less if it was dissolved as an institution... But MM did not hear this comment so it is really not for her to misconstrue. It was Harry the comment was made and he is saying very little apart from "He was taken a back by the comment and it made him feel awkward".

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Cienciano wrote: »

Beatrice and Eugenie had security until they were 18

Beatrice and Eugenie were grandchildren not great-grandchildren of the Queen. How far must the security fan out?

randd1

To be honest, does anyone really care? A bunch of posh people in a posh spat.

Cienciano

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

What sort of disingenuous claptrap are people going on about when they state the mere mention of skin colour re the royal newborn is not racist? It's like tabloid throw-away reasoning to suit my narrow wee mind.. don't ya think they'd know the difference? A clear high-handed way of saying I'm smart to figure it out, but they are clueless. Yeah, right.. lol.

We all know the difference between someone making an odd remark with innocent intent and another with crushing racial or bigoted bias. The RF have form for this. Plenty of evidence of Philip as a nasty old snob insulting many with hateful comments. No evidence whatsoever that MM has misconstrued anything other than the dished-out claptrap, lies and hearsay via the tabloids.

I live in the UK and some of you need to live here with the gammon brexiteer hater rabble, you'd fit right in.. :pac:

Prince Philip is a piece of shít but most people seem to think his racist comments are hilarious and excuse him for it.

Mr.Wemmick

gozunda wrote: »

So you believe any reference to skin colour of a 'royal' (not yet born or otherwise) is racist - regardless of context? Or the fact we don't what was said or who said it? Interesting perspective there for sure

Nice bit of the old racist "claptrap" being applied to others I see .

Gammon hater was a reference to a person emotionally red-faced upset shouting brexit means brexit as experienced in the UK - did you not know that? Different races and cultures can also get red in the face. :rolleyes:

As if that takes anything at all away from the fact the people are assuming in thick-fashion exactly how someone else interprets intent, racial or otherwise, in a conversation.

Case in point, though.. lol

jetfiremuck

Bad and all as Sarah Ferguson was she was stigmatized and harranged for years. There is no doubt that she had enough and either couldnt or wouldnt conform.......maybe she was a nutter.

ShowMeTheCash

Cienciano wrote: »

Prince Philip is a piece of shít but most people seem to think his racist comments are hilarious and excuse him for it.

This is how progress works!
Sometimes bigoted views don't change they just die out.

Dual wheels

siblers wrote: »

I thought Harry looked quite a bit like Charles in the interview

I think he’s the cut of captain Hewitt, it’s no secret that Charlie holds distain for Harry due to the fact that he is not likely to be his son but it doesn’t really matter as he’s the spare and georgie boy is now next in line for the throne after Willy therefore Charlie took the opportunity to lose Harry, imagine Willy was the one who was hewitts son! They would have to get the white fiat out of storage as they couldn’t let the firm become the house of Hewitt

Lisha

jetfiremuck wrote: »

Bad and all as Sarah Ferguson was she was stigmatized and harranged for years. There is no doubt that she had enough and either couldnt or wouldnt conform.......maybe she was a nutter.

Meghan referred to Sarah Ferguson as Fergie during the interview. I assumed that her friends would call her Sarah that fergie was a tabloid nickname .

Dual wheels

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

This is how progress works!
Sometimes bigoted views don't change they just die out.

Ah auld Phil is a gas character, he does a great line on the japs!

seamus

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Beatrice and Eugenie were grandchildren not great-grandchildren of the Queen. How far must the security fan out?

It's not really "fanning out" though. If it's typical for grandchildren of the monarch to have security, then it seems logical that the rule would extend to the grandchildren of any heir apparent as well. It doesn't exactly make a lot of sense for Charles's grandchild to not have security until Charles is crowned.

Sure, it's a fair question if you were talking about Andrew's grandchildren. But that's because Andrew is not in line for the crown.

Rules aside, from the outside it would be fair to say the media created a situation in the UK where the safety of Harry's family was at risk, so it seems only logical that the right thing to do, would be to extend security protections to his children.

But the royals were unwilling to change the rules, so Harry had to do what he felt he had to do.

Lisha

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hardly likely that the staff would sidle up to the princess or whatever she was to engage in racist banter off the cuff. Not that they wouldn’t be classist and racist - the staff are the worst. But it’s probably a family member.


If you don’t get irony you don’t get it. Of course Meghan hasn’t said exactly what was said.

I didn’t think the staff would sidle up to them and say it but from what’s published the initial meetings/communications are done by staff and then the queen rubber stamps it at the end.

Penn

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Beatrice and Eugenie were grandchildren not great-grandchildren of the Queen. How far must the security fan out?

Charles will one day be King which would make Archie a grandchild, so by that metric he would then be in line for security. But even outside of that, given the regular abuse being aimed at Meghan I don't think it would have been unreasonable to simply extend the security to her and Archie.

How many of these rules or traditions would have been written at a time when it was unlikely that a sitting monarch would have great-grandchildren anyway?

ShowMeTheCash

Dual wheels wrote: »

Ah auld Phil is a gas character, he does a great line on the japs!

So does Clint Eastwood!


There is an element in today's culture where people want to go back in time and hold people accountable for things by today's measure of what is right or wrong.



These same people don't get that if they where born into the same time they would probably just have been as narrow minded as the rest of society! Albeit I am sure they think they somehow would of been more enlightened which just makes them naive!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

BloodyBill wrote: »

It ll be interesting to see what Buckingham Palace does next. I see Harry and Megan as a pair of low IQ individuals with multiple issues of their own making. They've damaged the Royal family bit if they think they can go back to Netflix and Spotify and expect no retaliation. Oprah never asked one hard question.. like why did Megan have 1 family member at her wedding and why Harry has decided to drop this bomb about race when he's not prepared to point the finger directly. That's painting everyone as racist. It's all a fabrication. Now Joe Biden and all the Americans are out behind Megan..when there isn't an iota of proof around anything she's said.

Ah, in fairness, Harry did NOT look happy that Meghan brought that up in her solo interview. If they have a couple argument about anything interview-related, I’d place my money on that. Meghan dropped that bomb, not Harry.

And I think Oprah really grilled Harry at one point. She followed up on a few of his answers when they were unsatisfactory. She also managed to get him to admit that if not for Meghan, he’d still be a working royal.

MoonUnit75

She seems like a cunning head-melter. She goes on and on about how much security is central to her falling out with the royal family then complains that she couldn't just pop out with her besties any time she wants. It sounds to me like she didn't take into consideration the cost and logistics involved in facilitating a carefree, leisurely life like before she got involved with one of the most prominent royal families in the world.

She seems to have narcissistic traits. What struck me was she would state an opinion or some version of events and say 'right?' at the end of the sentence, presuming that every listener already agrees and should see it from her point of view. Seems a manipulative person.

Given their notoriety for taking legal cases, I can't see how ex-staffers would make things up about them being manipulated and bullied out of their jobs. They certainly can't say they earned their junior's loyalty and respect when they had a revolving door spinning out of control.

Beechwoodspark

Dual wheels wrote: »

I think he’s the cut of captain Hewitt, it’s no secret that Charlie holds distain for Harry due to the fact that he is not likely to be his son but it doesn’t really matter as he’s the spare and georgie boy is now next in line for the throne after Willy therefore Charlie took the opportunity to lose Harry, imagine Willy was the one who was hewitts son! They would have to get the white fiat out of storage as they couldn’t let the firm become the house of Hewitt

Hewitt met Diana 2 years after Harry was born...

walshb

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Hewitt met Diana 2 years after Harry was born...

People don't want to see or hear this....it doesn't suit their silly story

Harry is either Charles' son or Philip's....absolute spit of Philip. Everything about Harry is the grandad.....even the gait.

clairevoyant

Meghan and her mother didn't realise or know who Princess Di was - hard to believe

Meghan didn't receive coaching on how to behave like a Royal etc but her friends got coaching on how to behave around the press once it became knowledge she was dating Harry - WTF??? made no sense

in the beginning wanted her child "protected" and at the end wrote to have her husband protected but she didn't care about herself and the baby - distinct smell of crap off that chestnut

I made Kate cry - no she made me cry about flower girl dresses - get over it lady - happens in normal land at most weddings not to mind your own "spectacle" as you called it

Racism - I'm calling that pure tripe and I genuinely think there were musings (prince Phillip possibly but his 2 plodders in it) and natural wonderings about what baby would look like and possibly a joke flung in that he could be dark with ginger hair............................oddly I don't remember seeing harry whingeing about the pee being pulled about his follicular hue

this interview wasn't vetted or rehearsed????????PLEASE - they are BOTH actresses...................pure crap.

for the record I am not mad about the Royal Family - I think Meghan is GORGEOUS - I think Harry is a troubled soul and probably needs more help than his diva wife in the mental health stakes. it is a complete s**t show for all involved.

Muahahaha

One thing I did think interesting about the interview was Meghan revealing it was Kate who made her cry before the wedding. There are literally thousands of online articles from 2 years back stating that Meghan made Kate cry, i.e.the direct opposite of what actually happened. Im presuming Meghan is telling the truth here because if she wasnt there would be an almighty backlash from Kate & William.

The thing is it was a massive lie that the tabloids had a field day on. Someone within the Royal family or institution completely flipped what happened by 180 degrees and fed the lie to the media and they ran with it over and over and over again, it was relentless. I even heard female friends discussing it and they took the lie as the truth, as did everyone.

Whatever people might think of Markle it cant of been nice to have the literal opposite of the truth being reported as 'the truth' via the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Daily Express, etc. At any basic level it was character assassination but what was was telling is that neither Kate nor anyone in the Royal Family would shut the lie down. All it needed was a simple statement from Kate saying 'that never happened' and that would have been the end of it. But instead it was allowed to go unchallenged which meant millions of people believed the lie for the last two years and the tabloid media had a field day thrashing her over it.

As Markle said the Royal Family will tell lies to protect some people but when the truth was at stake she was told to keep quiet despite the media pile on. Tbh I cant blame her for wanting to get out of that toxic environment. Like imagine being lied about, millions of people believing the lie and the very people who can shut it down and tell the truth refuse to do so? Its an insane situation to be in where you are not even allowed to protect your own reputation and theres no help forthcoming either.

Nqp15hhu

Very interesting view from Meghan Kelly: https://youtu.be/ynhfXIHvOtU

newuser99999

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

She seems like a cunning head-melter. She goes on and on about how much security is central to her falling out with the royal family then complains that she couldn't just pop out with her besties any time she wants. It sounds to me like she didn't take into consideration the cost and logistics involved in facilitating a carefree, leisurely life like before she got involved with one of the most prominent royal families in the world.

She said she hadn’t been out of the house for months. It’s not like she’s off to lunch in central London everyday of the week.

People are really picking and choosing what they want to hear in this.

jos28

I thought the entire interview was carefully staged and constructed. Meghan made sure to drop the words that would ensure outrage - racism, mental health etc. I found her totally unconvincing, the wiping away of a tear for effect :rolleyes:. Oscar worthy performance in my opinion.
I felt very sorry for Harry and I'd be more concerned about his mental health.
I thought he was still struggling to deal with her Mother's death and who wouldn't in fairness. I remember listening to a BBC radio interview he did before he met MM where he spoke about going off the rails for a long period of time. He said that William and Kate were incredibly supportive and encouraged him to see a counsellor. It was a very raw interview, like most people he was reluctant to go but once he went into the therapist's office he bawled and years of pent up emotion came out. I'll have a look for the interview and post a link. It was very clear that Will and Kate were very concerned for him and a great support to him.
He has left his family and it will be very hard to go back after that interview.
I got the impression that Meghan calls the shots. I thought it strange that she didn't mention that she regretted the break up of his family. I just wonder how he will cope in the months/years to come.

walshb

clairevoyant wrote: »

Meghan and her mother didn't realise or know who Princess Di was - hard to believe

.

It's a complete lie....

And also claiming she didn't know who Harry was, or didn't know he was the blind date...

An absolute spoofer.

And if someone can be so brazen with these clearly ridiculous claims, then it's not too difficult to tell that pretty much everything last night was for show and for attention and for career.....

If it is not that, then what? Makes no sense whatsoever.....

Nqp15hhu

Lillyfae wrote: »

Definitely Anne! She's the out and out baddie in The Crown :pac:. I wouldn't exactly say she's lying, like I said she wouldn't even really know because it was said to Harry, not her. But there were quite a few embellishments of the truth there, the ceremony 3 days before the wedding, Archie's title etc etc- we know that she's not telling the truth with those, although there is an element of truth in both of them.

You clearly don’t know anything if you think Anne would say something like that. The Princess Royal is fantastic, she puts her head down and gets on with her work quietly and without much fuss.

Her own children don’t have titles because she opted out of it.

Feisar

walshb wrote: »

People don't want to see or hear this....it doesn't suit their silly story

Harry is either Charles' son or Philip's....absolute spit of Philip. Everything about Harry is the grandad.....even the gait.

He's carved out of Philip.

Lillyfae

Nqp15hhu wrote: »

You clearly don’t know anything if you think Anne would say something like that. The Princess Royal is fantastic, she puts her head down and gets on with her work quietly and without much fuss.

Her own children don’t have titles because she opted out of it.

I was joking- I don't have a clue who said what to who, no one does!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

seamus wrote: »

It's not really "fanning out" though. If it's typical for grandchildren of the monarch to have security, then it seems logical that the rule would extend to the grandchildren of any heir apparent as well. It doesn't exactly make a lot of sense for Charles's grandchild to not have security until Charles is crowned.

If Harry still was a working royal, he’d have security and it’s unlikely that his children wouldn’t benefit from that. So when Archie was born, Harry would still have had a security detail. I don’t really believe that wouldn’t have included making sure his infant son was safe.

Now he and Meghan don’t have security because they distanced themselves from the royal family. This is where they came across the most entitled. Harry spoke a few times about needing to make dough to pay for security. So they know how much it costs. But seem aggrieved that the British taxpayer will no longer fund it for them. That and the constant references to Archie not getting a title which as a great-grandchild, he wasn’t automatically entitled to. I imagine William’s children have titles because they are ahead of Harry in the line of succession.

retro:electro

Muahahaha wrote: »

One thing I did think interesting about the interview was Meghan revealing it was Kate who made her cry before the wedding. There are literally thousands of online articles from 2 years back stating that Meghan made Kate cry, i.e.the direct opposite of what actually happened. Im presuming Meghan is telling the truth here because if she wasnt there would be an almighty backlash from Kate & William.

The thing is it was a massive lie that the tabloids had a field day on. Someone within the Royal family or institution completely flipped what happened by 180 degrees and fed the lie to the media and they ran with it over and over and over again, it was relentless. I even heard female friends discussing it and they took the lie as the truth, as did everyone.

Whatever people might think of Markle it cant of been nice to have the literal opposite of the truth being reported as 'the truth' via the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Daily Express, etc. At any basic level it was character assassination but what was was telling is that neither Kate nor anyone in the Royal Family would shut the lie down. All it needed was a simple statement from Kate saying 'that never happened' and that would have been the end of it. But instead it was allowed to go unchallenged which meant millions of people believed the lie for the last two years and the tabloid media had a field day thrashing her over it.

As Markle said the Royal Family will tell lies to protect some people but when the truth was at stake she was told to keep quiet despite the media pile on. Tbh I cant blame her for wanting to get out of that toxic environment. Like imagine being lied about, millions of people believing the lie and the very people who can shut it down and tell the truth refuse to do so? Its an insane situation to be in where you are not even allowed to protect your own reputation and theres no help forthcoming either.

They probably made each other cry but Kate was the one who apologised, probably to ease things over before the big day. Meghan apparently wanted to break with tradition and have all the flower girls (bridesmaids?) wearing dresses with no socks or tights. Kate apparently took issue with this as any mother of a little girl would.

Charlotte would be wearing tights shoes that hadn’t had the benefit of been worn in without any protection for her foot. Imagine too if she tripped going up the steps and her little bum out for the whole world to see. I can see why Kate recommended wear something other than a bare leg but apparently Meghan couldn’t be told. Meghan seems to have taken the fact that Kate apologised as proof that Kate was the one who over stepped and was wrong. When it’s likely they both over stepped, but only one was decent enough to apologise. Any decent person would have let the mother’s of the little girls decide on such a trivial issue like tights. Control freaks on the other hand..