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

superflyninja

Lol this is all GOLD. it would be lovely for a change to have the ars%h**e get hoisted by their own petard.

Be right back

More fibs!!

lazygal

Next we'll hear that she gave birth before she actually gave birth, like her claim they got married before they got married.

ceadaoin.

Be right back wrote: »

More fibs!!

I'm sure the queen is only delighted to have her childhood name not only appropriated but turned into a domain name.

Be right back

lazygal wrote: »

Next we'll hear that she gave birth before she actually gave birth, like her claim they got married before they got married.

First time for everything, I suppose!!

lazygal

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I'm sure the queen is only delighted to have her childhood name not only appropriated but turned into a domain name.

And for people who rejected her family to make a few quid out of it because they're determined to stand on their own two feet.

Lollipops23

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I'm sure the queen is only delighted to have her childhood name not only appropriated but turned into a domain name.

Much as I can't abide the pair of them, they usually buy up these domains to stop OTHER people making money off them.

I doubt they'll be selling LilliDi babygros any time soon!

HildaOgdenx

Lollipops23 wrote: »

Much as I can't abide the pair of them, they usually buy up these domains to stop OTHER people making money off them.

I doubt they'll be selling LilliDi babygros any time soon!

I can't stop laughing at this.

HildaOgdenx

HildaOgdenx wrote: »

I can't stop laughing at this.

Did you read it as Lidl too?😂

MoonUnit75

HildaOgdenx wrote: »

I can't stop laughing at this.

I wondered was there a subliminal message in there; 'Lilibet Di(e)'

Sardonicat

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

I wondered was there a subliminal message in there; 'Lilibet Di(e)'

I wonder will we see s rush if Lilidis now? 'Lili-Di, c'min for yer dinner! Your Ramen are going cold!"

Purple Mountain

Lollipops23 wrote: »

I doubt they'll be selling LilliDi babygros any time soon!

No, they'll be selling 'LilliDi' bamboo cotton blankets with the logo "Be Kind" handstitched on them.

Sardonicat

Purple Mountain wrote: »

No, they'll be selling 'LilliDi' bamboo cotton blankets with the logo "Be Kind" handstitched on them.

"Action Compassion' vomit bibs.

lazygal

https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/amp/culture/story/princes-william-harry-explosive-argument-meghan-bullying-allegations-78397819?__twitter_impression=true

Neyite

Purple Mountain wrote: »

No, they'll be selling 'LilliDi' bamboo cotton blankets with the logo "Be Kind" handstitched on them.

Made by some obscure subsidiary of a company that uses child labour in Bangladesh.

I saw a few of those stories lately Lazygal. I think the independent investigation that started off the back of the bullying allegations after the Oprah interview was due to be concluded around now. That will be interesting. And I don't think the Palace would be inclined to go to great lengths to keep the contents of the report quiet after the recent shenanigans.

To me, it seems fairly obvious that there is smoke because there's a fire - any place that has had toxicity usually had frequent staff turnover. Workplaces that dont have that kind of turnover have staff that management treat with consideration, fairness and respect. It's not always about money.

The various households of the royals have tended to have staff stay with them for years - for example one of the Cambridge nannies has been with them since George was a newborn. A Sussex nanny didn't last 24 hrs before she was fired by the couple - from their Finding Freedom book. When you've got a staff that used to stay for years all of a sudden quit, and the only change to their job was Meghan joining the ranks, it seems obvious that she's the reason, and people can't ALL be snobs and racists.

The fact that Harry thought it was perfectly acceptable to verbally abuse the Queen's wardrobe manager - and her close friend of decades - over a tiara not even owned by them, because Meghan's hairdresser wanted to play dress up with it, just reinforces my opinion that bullying did take place and that working for the two of them was very unpleasant.

lazygal

It'll be interesting to see how the 'bullying' report is leaked/released.

Drip drip after a Harry and Meghan attempt to control the narrative or a full on drop to editors the Firm has relationships with.
I am always wary of people who can't keep a child minder. Our first minder only stopped because she wanted to retire and even now we stop for a chat and she's delighted to see my kids. Our second minder has been with us for nearly 6 years. I know some families that are in a perpetual state of chaos when it comes to childcare arrangements, usually because they won't pay proper rates or have totally unrealistic expectations.

And for the Royals a nanny seems very much a part of the family, didn't the Queen 'look after' her old nanny until her death, and Harry and William had long term contact with some of their old nannies.

Neyite

I agree. The calibre of childcare they could afford means they'd have the best of the best thrilled to work for them.

How do you manage to fire a highly trained expert with an exemplary cv in less than 24 hrs for 'unprofessionalism'?

MoonUnit75

The same story is repeated with their Archewell staff. The major coup they pulled off in poaching Catherine St-Laurent from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for Archewell, only for her to leave just a year into the role should send out serious alarm bells. They said she will be retained in an 'advisory' role, ie. she ain't taking orders from that pair no more.

Then there's the recent grumblings about their £18 million Spotify deal which has resulted in just 35 minutes of content in over six months. Thousands of YouTubers are pushing out broadcast quality video content on a daily basis from their tiny apartment bedrooms and they don't have time to record a bit of audio at home in over six months?
Now they are awarding themselves 5 months parental leave. This suggests they love the announcements, deals and rubbing shoulders with the great and the good but feel putting in any actual work is beneath them. None of this paints a very flattering picture, there's a pattern there of entitlement, expecting adulation and reward without earning it. Expecting others to put in the actual hard graft for them.

Neyite

That's a key difference between getting your millions from Mummy's inheritance, Daddy's Duchy and the taxpayer of the realm combined - nobody expects much of a return other than smiling and waving and a few speeches.

The corporate expect a return on their investment. They don't invest millions out of the goodness of their heart, and they expect the return to be substantial.

lazygal

Harry strikes me as workshy. He doesn't seem to realise how good he had it in the UK, especially once his brother got married and his wife popped out an heir and a couple of spares. He's way down the line of succession, he could have a grand time in a country pile not having to grift at public events for his wife's acting jobs.

valoren

Neyite wrote: »

I agree. The calibre of childcare they could afford means they'd have the best of the best thrilled to work for them.

How do you manage to fire a highly trained expert with an exemplary cv in less than 24 hrs for 'unprofessionalism'?

My guess would be that if you or I were part of the general staff assigned to them then the idea that a Nanny, who has obviously gone through all the interviews and necessary processing, was fired so soon then it would tell us that those we are assigned to are "trigger happy" when it comes to staff i.e. a general warning for staff to be on their toes, to be “professional”. Or else. We’d be walking on eggshells trying to avoid getting sacked. I guess that stress took its toll on some staff and it was a toxic working environment they chose to get out of i.e. the supposed dream job that is actually a nightmare in reality.

lazygal

My first 'proper job' after college was a toxic environment, caused entirely by one manager. She took a month off when one of her kids was getting married and it was like a different place, productivity improved, the atmosphere was better and I started to wonder why I was putting up with her at all. We had so much turnover because of her.

HildaOgdenx

I always think it tells you a lot about someone's character, how they treat those whom they perceive to be less important than them.

One gobsh1te I worked with years ago, sticks in my mind for that. He was a complete lickarse to senior staff, and could be charm personified when he so wished. I saw him in action twice, in relation to people whom he perceived to be unimportant in his climb to the top. And he disgusted me forever more.

I think this tells a lot about Harry's character, if the allegations are true, about how staff were treated. He grew up in the environment of having staff at his beck and call, and presumably saw them being treated respectfully. Some staff apparently work for many years, for various members of the royal family.

No excuse whatsoever for either of them, being disrespectful towards staff, but once again I think it points at weakness in him.

lazygal

HildaOgdenx wrote: »

I always think it tells you a lot about someone's character, how they treat those whom they perceive to be less important than them.

One gobsh1te I worked with years ago, sticks in my mind for that. He was a complete lickarse to senior staff, and could be charm personified when he so wished. I saw him in action twice, in relation to people whom he perceived to be unimportant in his climb to the top. And he disgusted me forever more.

I think this tells a lot about Harry's character, if the allegations are true, about how staff were treated. He grew up in the environment of having staff at his beck and call, and presumably saw them being treated respectfully. Some staff apparently work for many years, for various members of the royal family.

No excuse whatsoever for either of them, being disrespectful towards staff, but once again I think it points at weakness in him.

Isn't that the sort of thing to watch on a first date with someone? How they treat the person serving behind the bar, taking the order, serving the food, bringing the bill etc?

Given how little staff turnover there appears to be over the years with the Royals, and the fact that apart from Diana's butler who's made himself into a cottage industry, there's been no kiss and tells about what really goes on behind the scenes, it is revealing that the arrival of one person into the family caused so much difficulty with staffing. The queen has had the same dresser for years, they have the same household staff for years, William and Kate's nannies appear to be loyal.

silverharp

HildaOgdenx wrote: »

I always think it tells you a lot about someone's character, how they treat those whom they perceive to be less important than them.

One gobsh1te I worked with years ago, sticks in my mind for that. He was a complete lickarse to senior staff, and could be charm personified when he so wished. I saw him in action twice, in relation to people whom he perceived to be unimportant in his climb to the top. And he disgusted me forever more.

I think this tells a lot about Harry's character, if the allegations are true, about how staff were treated. He grew up in the environment of having staff at his beck and call, and presumably saw them being treated respectfully. Some staff apparently work for many years, for various members of the royal family.

No excuse whatsoever for either of them, being disrespectful towards staff, but once again I think it points at weakness in him.

where I work the cleaners and janitor seem to have the best handle on who the arsehol3s are in the company

Lollipops23

HildaOgdenx wrote: »

I always think it tells you a lot about someone's character, how they treat those whom they perceive to be less important than them.

Agreed- years ago I worked in admin for a major company and we had a massive AGM (branches from all over Ireland were at it). I was one of the main organisers of the event and ended up jumping behind the hotel desk to help the workers there with room assignments etc. The way some of our staff treated me, thinking I worked for the hotel, was despicable and I made sure to let their own managers know. I was mortified on our company's behalf.

Be right back

Nice fans. This was sent to a telegraph journalist.

retro:electro

Lol

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1407806843360063491?s=20

y0ssar1an22

retro:electro wrote: »

Lol

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1407806843360063491?s=20

from the telegraph but surely a rip the piss?

ceadaoin.

Lol what? Is that real? Cringe. I suppose the Queen giving the title to Harry was a micro aggression really. The bitch.