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

sebdavis

sebdavis wrote: »

You said it was different, so please explain why it is different. As I said twitter/facebook and boards are all the same. No difference in my opinion at all.

Well anonymity for one thing. Most people dont know each other and are not connected to real world friends, family, work colleagues etc.

Moderators would be another big thing. Bullying is not a big problem on boards, thankfully.

Those are just two massive differences.

yourdeadwright

sebdavis wrote: »

You said it was different, so please explain why it is different. As I said twitter/facebook and boards are all the same. No difference in my opinion at all.

Well your opinion is wrong




Twitter users 330million
Facebook users 1.69billion
Boards.ie users at this moment 3899


Boards is largely anonymous, Twitter & Facebook are largely not ,(so much more you could get into there )


Boards is moderated in hugely more successful way (because of its size ) than the other two, If I called you a bad word now or had an outlandish comment I'd be banned,


People of prominence post news & updates directly onto the other two
There are no blue ticks here ,


You can earn money from Twitter & Facebook accounts in ways you could not here,


The difference are massive and endless id be here all day going through them ,

If you think they are the same thing or even close , I cant help you should really see a professional ,

Boards.ie is a discussion forum , The other two are much much more

chooseusername

chooseusername wrote: »

Well he had a few "little Paki friends" and "ragheads" (his own terms) as army pals

And they were his friends so clearly didn't take as much offence as you seem to. I love white people feeling offended on behalf of non-whites. Could there be anything more condescending and inadvertently racist?

walshb

anewme wrote: »

You seem to have a vendetta against her, similar to the one Piers did.

So you dont know why Harry s gone strange, but you've no abuse for him, only her.?

Says a lot.

Very telling.

No abuse for Harry?

Would you prefer that I did?

If you have read some my posts I have clearly said that both are behaving in a lowlife trashy way...

If that is abuse, so be it

If me not believing her casual suicidal claim is abuse, so be it....

I have nothing against Meghan. I don't know her. We can only judge on what we see, read and observe

To me, her whole demeanor is one of insincerity here....

Both have come out of this as lowlifes to me.....behaving like lowlifes. Trashy!

yourdeadwright

Deleted User wrote: »

And they were his friends so clearly didn't take as much offence as you seem to. I love white people feeling offended on behalf of non-whites. Could there be anything more condescending and inadvertently racist?

While what you say is correct,
I'm not sure any of them would be brave enough to say they where offend by the Prince while serving in Her Majesty's Armed forces,


Maybe they would be I don't know

Shelga

I have mixed opinions on the whole thing, but both of them repeatedly saying "riiiight?" after earnestly making a point, was highly highly irritating.

walshb

No matter what side people are leaning to, I think most would agree that Meghan has "played" this perfectly, and she knew exactly what she was doing.....

To throw in two of the most sensitive and emotive of society's cards, Race and Mental health, knowing that anyone in the media who challenges her will be vilified as being racist or against those suffering with mental health challenges...

It's the world today: People are searching like lunatics for offense and outrage....

Anyway, give it a few more days and it will all be forgotten...

Until the next time these ever so caring and private of people think of their next venture.

retro:electro

partyguinness wrote: »

I believe in time Harry will regret all of this noise.

There was no need for it and I am not entriely sure what he will hopes to ultimately acheive. He seems to be just acting out and venting and reaching for any sort of branch for maximum effect.

I think so too. When the dust finally settles from this and things quieten down, people go back to work, the pubs reopen and we all get back to living again, we will have long gotten over this debacle. For Harry though, this has permanently damaged his relationship with his family. I feel for him somewhat because I could tell he was uncomfortable with addressing the race question and had it been primarily him in the hot seat and not Meghan, I don’t think he would have brought it up. But that comment is all anyone is talking about. Was it your goal Harry to have everyone play guess the racist with your entire family? Was it your goal to have your wife sit there and not once refer to her own ****show of a family but instead repeatedly bash yours over and over in a series of vague comments just enough to stir the pot but not committed or responsible enough to elaborate? Because if so then I guess congratulations?

walshb

Another thing that didn't sit with me was the comment on the skin color...

Ok, fair enoigh if it was comments and comments....

She is tell-taling about one comment that was allegedly said....One......

The context we know nothing of

Was this one incident really worthy of this global news?

I would have taken far more notice if it was some pattern or repeated claims/comments. It was not

And they bring this ONE comment into an interview whilst dissing their family....?

The RF and institution are people....many people, workers, security, secretaries and all that......every one of them now tarnished by this pointless claim.

One comment by one person through all of this, with no context, and they both throw that in to create a racist angle....to make it out as being so bad....as if the whole institution and its people were out and out racists...

Can folks not see the deviousness here, and complete unnecessary need to do it....?

Think of the mentality of people here: "Did you hear something about skin color, Harry? Yes, I think I did. What was it? Not really sure. Will we use this one comment that one of us heard, with no real context, and make it into some big racist issues when we go on live tv to speak to Oprah and the world about how nasty your family are? Yes, let's go for it."

It deserves absolute no reaction whatsoever...

forumdedum

I know Piers can be and has been in the past an absolute twit but I'm not completely with the Alex guy on that GMB interview. In fact Alex coming over a bit presumptuous to me.

Just shows when you don't focus on the actual issues what problems can be caused. Harry & Meghan suggested much without fact.

Overall, I'm with Piers on this one. He is entitled to say he does not believe Meghan. And I really hate to admit that. I wouldn't engage with Alex either. Not completely rational. I know it was TV but I'd just walk away from him too.

Also I wouldn't be surprised if Oprah's producers went looking for what is most relevant today - racism and mental health. I'm sure with all their money that even if the RF didn't want to admit to mental health issues that some way could have been found for Meghan to have a confidential meeting with a mental health officer. They do have to be confidential as part of their profession.

Neyite

retro:electro wrote: »

I think so too. When the dust finally settles from this and things quieten down, people go back to work, the pubs reopen and we all get back to living again, we will have long gotten over this debacle. For Harry though, this has permanently damaged his relationship with his family. I feel for him somewhat because I could tell he was uncomfortable with addressing the race question and had it been primarily him in the hot seat and not Meghan, I don’t think he would have brought it up. But that comment is all anyone is talking about. Was it your goal Harry to have everyone play guess the racist with your entire family? Was it your goal to have your wife sit there and not once refer to her own ****show of a family but instead repeatedly bash yours over and over in a series of vague comments just enough to stir the pot but not committed or responsible enough to elaborate? Because if so then I guess congratulations?

It looked to me like he wasn't expecting Meghan to have told Oprah about it in the interview as he looked startled tbh. And if that's the case, then the two of them should have had a very clear idea going into the interview what stuff was going to be shared and what stuff was to remain a private family matter.

I don't think that he is able to think strategically very well. Which is why he's smart enough to decline to answer or do a no comment. Further reinforced by his text to Oprah the following morning after it aired to clarify who it wasn't. That was weeks after the interview, and the oncoming shítstorm is only occurring to him then?) But by that stage the cat is out of the bag now.

The Queen rarely makes statements as it's almost always Buckingham Palace as an entity that issue them so for her to personally issue one, worded like that, is a clear signal to Harry that One is not amused. By way of comparison, Buck Palace issued the statement about Andrew when that furore was happening, the Queen didn't.

yourdeadwright

walshb wrote: »

Another thing that didn't sit with me was the comment on the skin color...

Ok, fair enoigh if it was comments and comments....

She is tell-taling about one comment that was allegedly said....One......

The context we know nothing of

Was this one incident really worthy of this global news?

I would have taken far more notice if it was some pattern or repeated claims/comments. It was not

And they bring this ONE comment into an interview whilst dissing their family....?

The RF and institution are people....many people, workers, security, secretaries and all that......every one of them now tarnished by this pointless claim.

One comment by one person through all of this, with no context, and they both throw that in to create a racist angle....to make it out as being so bad....as if the whole institution and its people were out and out racists...

Can folks not see the deviousness here, and complete unnecessary need to do it....?

It deserves absolute no reaction whatsoever...

Again another reason why Harry is an awful Husband ,
If this did indeed happy at the start of there relationship and again when she was pregnant why didn't aul Harry have the balls to stick up for his girlfriend/wife and his unborn child


Everything makes him come across such a spineless man , Why would she continue to be in a relationship with him, if he lets his family say these remarks over and over

acequion

anewme wrote: »

Cant speak for the other poster, but for most people the cut off is calling people liars when the speak out about mental health.
So someone says, I'm concerned for my mental health, the response should never be, you are a liar or I dont believe you. The risk is just to high.

I know they are celebrities, but that does not make it any more appropriate. When you look back now, the media shots of Brittany Spears having a public breakdown should never have been printed.

Unfortunately, there are not too many of us who have not had some kind of depression/mental health at our door. So we should be conscious that it can manifest itself very differently. I know someone who did not take a persons behaviour seriously (attention seeking) and it ended very badly.

Why are you being so extreme about it? There is a massive gulf between disbelieving a famous celebrity on TV who does a show for dubious selfish reasons, not for awareness raising, and discrediting a mental health claim in our daily lives. A massive gulf and I'm actually getting quite insulted by the number of posters accusing me and others of being unempathetic and callous and what not because we don't sympathise with Meghan and Harry.

Also, getting all outraged about disbelieving someone is a bit ott. Everyone has the right to believe or not believe. A person on trial tells his story and the jury have the right to believe or not believe. So again let's quit the faux outrage.

Of course mental health issues must be taken seriously. But what must also be taken seriously is the possibility that somebody is manipulating the concept of being depressed or suicidal for their own gain. A balanced approach is needed.

And one thing is clear here. We're only getting one side of a story. Just one side. The other side may be equally revealing and deserving or undeserving of sympathy.

partyguinness

Deleted User wrote: »

And they were his friends so clearly didn't take as much offence as you seem to. I love white people feeling offended on behalf of non-whites. Could there be anything more condescending and inadvertently racist?

I live and work in England and I interact with Pakistanis and South East Asian's every single day through work. I have known some for many years and I would never dream of saying "my Paki friends" or "ragheads" (bloody hell the thought of it)....those expressions are not acceptable and just because he is Prince 'Arry does not make it any more acceptable...If you are from a council estate and in a football jersey you are a racist bigot.

You see, the likes of Harry and we have seen Borris Johnson tread a similar vain are quite cool with casual racism...it is just dismissed as "bantz" when you are from the Establishment. They do not see it as such as nobody has taken them to task.

Not sure about the "clearly" part of your post. Are you sure it may have just been acceptance rather than not taking offence? Mr Singh would have found it hard to kick off on camera at Harry's remarks.

cnocbui

Multipass wrote: »

I have a similar history to you. I have been suicidal more than once, so no need to lecture me on that. I used ‘if’ in the sense of ‘if you feel this way then you would do this’. If she felt suicidal she would expect help from the person she was sharing her life with. Why would her in-laws be her focus? I found her interview to be unbelievable and insincere.

...

cnocbui wrote: »

I don't believe you have ever had a suicidal thought in your life. I think It's a contrived story intended to add credence to the rest.

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you denying that person their lived experience? Shockingly insensitive to people who have had mental health struggles to be told they are making it up.

Nicely done, I like well executed irony.

anewme

acequion wrote: »

Why are you being so extreme about it? There is a massive gulf between disbelieving a famous celebrity on TV who does a show for dubious selfish reasons, not for awareness raising, and discrediting a mental health claim in our daily lives. A massive gulf and I'm actually getting quite insulted by the number of posters accusing me and others of being unempathetic and callous and what not because we don't sympathise with Meghan and Harry.

Also, getting all outraged about disbelieving someone is a bit ott. Everyone has the right to believe or not believe. A person on trial tells his story and the jury have the right to believe or not believe. So again let's quit the faux outrage.

Of course mental health issues must be taken seriously. But what must also be taken seriously is the possibility that somebody is manipulating the concept of being depressed or suicidal for their own gain. A balanced approach is needed.

And one thing is clear here. We're only getting one side of a story. Just one side. The other side may be equally revealing and deserving or undeserving of sympathy.

I'm not being extreme, you accused the other poster of attacking you. I'm pointing out what I believe was a step too far and why there is such a furore about that point.

Irrespective of who it is, no one has the right to call someone a liar without knowing the facts. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

People cant make wild unfounded allegations against a person calling them a barefaced liar and then take insult when challenged on it. If someone called you a liar, you'd take offence and rightly so.

You are saying it's not sided and its definitely not, but until there are both sides out there, it's not balanced.

I'm not taking Meghan or Harry's side, what I am saying is there has been an obvious orchestrated vendetta against Meghan driven by the press and one particular individuals hatred. That's wrong.

retro:electro

Would love to have a nose into the WhatsApp group with Kate, Camilla and Zara. I’d say the tea and gossip is off the scale

partyguinness

retro:electro wrote: »

Would love to have a nose into the WhatsApp group with Kate, Camilla and Zara. I’d say the tea and gossip is off the scale

I would say it is the complete opposite- boring as fcuk...they know better.

Cienciano

walshb wrote: »

Another thing that didn't sit with me was the comment on the skin color...

Ok, fair enoigh if it was comments and comments....

She is tell-taling about one comment that was allegedly said....One......

The context we know nothing of

Was this one incident really worthy of this global news?

I would have taken far more notice if it was some pattern or repeated claims/comments. It was not

And they bring this ONE comment into an interview whilst dissing their family....?

The RF and institution are people....many people, workers, security, secretaries and all that......every one of them now tarnished by this pointless claim.

One comment by one person through all of this, with no context, and they both throw that in to create a racist angle....to make it out as being so bad....as if the whole institution and its people were out and out racists...

Can folks not see the deviousness here, and complete unnecessary need to do it....?

Think of the mentality of people here: "Did you hear something about skin color, Harry? Yes, I think I did. What was it? Not really sure. Will we use this one comment that one of us heard, with no real context, and make it into some big racist issues when we go on live tv to speak to Oprah and the world about how nasty your family are? Yes, let's go for it."

It deserves absolute no reaction whatsoever...

Absolutely none of it is "global news worthy" if you think News is only important stuff that effects your life. But you have over 50 comments in this thread in less than 2 days, so it's definitely got your attention.

News these days is generating clicks unfortunately. So this is incredibly newsworthy. It's making the news in America too, which is another big plus. Any story where you can have 2 camps of equal size, but both hold opposite opinion is gold for news websites. This is the perfect news story in that regard.

partyguinness

Look, it is all a big conspiracy to get Covid off the headlines.

retro:electro

I know it would never happen for obvious reasons, but can you imagine if The Queen gave Piers a knighthood after this It would be like the ultimate masterclass in passive aggression

acequion

anewme wrote: »

I'm not being extreme, you accused the other poster of attacking you. I'm pointing out what I believe was a step too far and why there is such a furore about that point.

Irrespective of who it is, no one has the right to call someone a liar without knowing the facts. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

People cant make wild unfounded allegations against a person calling them a barefaced liar and then take insult when challenged on it. If someone called you a liar, you'd take offence and rightly so.

You are saying it's not sided and its definitely not, but until there are both sides out there, it's not balanced.

I'm not taking Meghan or Harry's side, what I am saying is there has been an obvious orchestrated vendetta against Meghan driven by the press and one particular individuals hatred. That's wrong.

Sorry now but you need to either a] get a grip, b] get over it, c]take a step back and realise you're taking it all too seriously and too personally, or preferably a combination of all three.

At no point did I call the woman a "barefaced liar." Your words. At no point did I make "wild and unfounded allegations." Again your words. To say you're not siding with Meghan and Harry has actually nearly made me choke on my morning coffee, such is my astonishment.

Your extreme over reaction to my reaction to a hugely famous celebrity couple who chose to whinge and whine in public, accuse their family of racism, show disloyalty [on Harry's part] to your blood family without much thought, it appears, to how hurtful that is, is all more an indictment of your mentality than mine.

I also don't agree that there has been an "obvious orchestrated vendetta" against Meghan. I've noticed little of strong hatred or hostility towards the woman and I wait with interest for all you Meghan defenders to post really clear examples from the media of this unprovoked hate campaign.

In the meantime I suggest you calm down, maybe get yourself a morning coffee. I'm off to pour myself another cup and then get back to matters of real life and I won't be engaging with you again.

Multipass

cnocbui wrote: »

Nicely done, I like well executed irony.

Not really - you neglected to include the post to which I was responding, which was preaching about what I can and can’t say because I have no understanding of what it’s like. Selective quoting isn’t so clever.

Leg End Reject

retro:electro wrote: »

I know it would never happen for obvious reasons, but can you imagine if The Queen gave Piers a knighthood after this It would be like the ultimate masterclass in passive aggression

And the 2 of them discuss tackling racism with pained expressions and dramatic pauses. :pac:

AMKC

I thought it was a really good interview and that she came across as very sincere and open about all of her experiences. I would not blame her for wanting to be out of the Royal Family institution after the way they were treated. I know for one I certainly would not like that life either where you have no freedom or say in your day to day life and where you do not even hold your own passport or driving license and where there is no help for anyone with mental health problems. They are only human after all. How could they think that they are so perfect that they could not have mental health issues especially the way the world has changed so fast in the last few decades.? I think it must be a shame thing.
I think this interview was a good wake up call for the Royals that was badly needed and if they do not create reforms in it from this then it will just keep getting worse and eventually crumble under it's own weight just like all former empire's gone before it like Rome Austria-hungaria etc.

Multipass

AMKC wrote: »

I thought it was a really good interview and that she came across as very sincere and open about all of her experiences. I would not blame her for wanting to be out of the Royal Family institution after the way they were treated. I know for one I certainly would not like that life either where you have no freedom or say in your day to day life and where you do not even hold your own passport or driving license and where there is no help for anyone with mental health problems. They are only human after all. How could they think that they are so perfect that they could not have mental health issues especially the way the world has changed so fast in the last few decades.? I think it must be a shame thing.
I think this interview was a good wake up call for the Royals that was badly needed and if they do not create reforms in it from this then it will just keep getting worse and eventually crumble under it's own weight just like all former empire's gone before it like Rome Austria-hungaria etc.

She didn’t want to be out though, don’t you remember what they wanted when they got to Canada - their titles, a few gigs back in the uk when they chose, the Sussex royals brand name! People have short memories.

Leg End Reject

Multipass wrote: »

She didn’t want to be out though, don’t you remember what they wanted when they got to Canada - their titles, a few gigs back in the uk when they chose, the Sussex royals brand name! People have short memories.

And the money and security. Everything really except the "work"

dark crystal

acequion wrote: »

Why are you being so extreme about it? There is a massive gulf between disbelieving a famous celebrity on TV who does a show for dubious selfish reasons, not for awareness raising, and discrediting a mental health claim in our daily lives. A massive gulf and I'm actually getting quite insulted by the number of posters accusing me and others of being unempathetic and callous and what not because we don't sympathise with Meghan and Harry.

Also, getting all outraged about disbelieving someone is a bit ott. Everyone has the right to believe or not believe. A person on trial tells his story and the jury have the right to believe or not believe. So again let's quit the faux outrage.

Of course mental health issues must be taken seriously. But what must also be taken seriously is the possibility that somebody is manipulating the concept of being depressed or suicidal for their own gain. A balanced approach is needed.

And one thing is clear here. We're only getting one side of a story. Just one side. The other side may be equally revealing and deserving or undeserving of sympathy.

It's quite interesting how you feel insulted by posters questioning your disbelief of some stranger's claim to have felt suicidal at a certain point in their life. How nice it is that you have a forum on which to reply to such comments. The right to reply is very important, is it not?

Now, place yourself in a situation where millions of strangers were commenting on your appearance, your family, calling you a bully, a gold digger, a liar etc. The fact you got so indignant about some stranger on an internet forum expressing an opinion that your opinion was wrong should perhaps give you a tiny insight into what some people in the public eye deal with on a continuous basis.

There may be only so much you could take before cracking. People in the public eye are only human too and you'll never know until you've been in that situation yourself. From looking at her from the outside, you would never think Caroline Flack would be the 'type' to kill herself. Or Kate Spade. Or Robin Williams.

Watching a two hour snippet of someone who has been under relentless scrutiny and on the receiving end of so much criticism from the gutter press, who make vast amounts of money from tearing people apart, for years and you think you have the innate ability from that one interview to say you've come to the conclusion she's making the whole thing up?

It is incredibly dangerous rhetoric to dismiss someone else's experience as merely "attention seeking". She might not read it here, but someone else will. You can dislike her all you like based on one interview, or whatever you've read in the tabloids, but to call her a liar in regards to her mental health is not only stupid, but incredibly callous. Now bring on the faux outrage!

Princess Calla

retro:electro wrote: »

I think so too. When the dust finally settles from this and things quieten down, people go back to work, the pubs reopen and we all get back to living again, we will have long gotten over this debacle. For Harry though, this has permanently damaged his relationship with his family. I feel for him somewhat because I could tell he was uncomfortable with addressing the race question and had it been primarily him in the hot seat and not Meghan, I don’t think he would have brought it up. But that comment is all anyone is talking about. Was it your goal Harry to have everyone play guess the racist with your entire family? Was it your goal to have your wife sit there and not once refer to her own ****show of a family but instead repeatedly bash yours over and over in a series of vague comments just enough to stir the pot but not committed or responsible enough to elaborate? Because if so then I guess congratulations?

To be honest I think it was the security detail that really put him over the edge.

Imagine for your whole life always being told you couldn't go anywhere without security detail because of xyz risk.

Then being told actually no more security detail for you, xyz risk still exist , best of luck. ....to me that's a throw you to the wolves move, we no longer care about your welfare.

Knowing full well the mirror/mail were following them in Canada.

The tabloids were shredding his wife , just as they shredded his mother.

The risk of history repeating itself is pretty real, especially to him...if it can happen to my mother...it can happen to my wife. Etc.

Harry has over the years been pretty outspoken about his disdain for the tabloids, I can't help but think they've hounded Meghan as some sort of retribution as they know better than attack Harry.


I think Harry naively thought he could do some duties in the queens name in canada, probably have canadian security detail and move on with life away from the british press.

That didn't work out, so he has left his world for hers.

acequion

dark crystal wrote: »

It's quite interesting how you feel insulted by posters questioning your disbelief of some stranger's claim to have felt suicidal at a certain point in their life. How nice it is that you have a forum on which to reply to such comments. The right to reply is very important, is it not?

Now, place yourself in a situation where millions of strangers were commenting on your appearance, your family, calling you a bully, a gold digger, a liar etc. The fact you got so indignant about some stranger on an internet forum expressing an opinion that your opinion was wrong should perhaps give you a tiny insight into what some people in the public eye deal with on a continuous basis.

There may be only so much you could take before cracking. People in the public eye are only human too and you'll never know until you've been in that situation yourself. From looking at her from the outside, you would never think Caroline Flack would be the 'type' to kill herself. Or Kate Spade. Or Robin Williams.

Watching a two hour snippet of someone who has been under relentless scrutiny and on the receiving end of so much criticism from the gutter press, who make vast amounts of money from tearing people apart, for years and you think you have the innate ability from that one interview to say you've come to the conclusion she's making the whole thing up?

It is incredibly dangerous rhetoric to dismiss someone else's experience as merely "attention seeking". She might not read it here, but someone else will. You can dislike her all you like based on one interview, or whatever you've read in the tabloids, but to call her a liar in regards to her mental health is not only stupid, but incredibly callous. Now bring on the faux outrage!

Sigh 100 times. No point talking to some people it seems :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Thank heaven for the ignore list.