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

walshb

Cienciano wrote: »

I bet plenty of the same people hated Diana at the time buy now swear they always loved her. Anything different is bad.

Anyone loving or hating complete strangers is weird.

To feel hate may be easier to imagine, IF the person did something universally vile....

I never ever got the outpouring of grief when some celebrities die....

Grown men and women crying like 6 year old children for people they never remotely knew, other than from the TV

Ms2011

Deleted User wrote: »

Even if new shoes rubbed against her feet?

Stick a plasterer on for the duration of the wedding, change of shoes for the reception, job done.
But in reality how much rubbing would happen walking the few steps she would have had to walk, she'd have been sitting for the majority of the wedding.

MoonUnit75

Cienciano wrote: »

One of the good outcomes of this story is how outraged the Daily Mail/Express/Sun readers are about it. Any Daily Mail article on it has thousands of comments of what can only be described as pure outrage. It's hilarious, the typical brexit little englander really doesn't like it.

I dislike hereditary authority as much as the next republican but one thing you can't take away from the queen is that she addresses those who eat beans on toast as well as those who eat avocado on toast. Meghan and her cult appear to think the working class beans on toast consumer is subhuman and are not entitled to their outlook on life being heard or represented in the mainstream. It's good they have left the royal family, they do not subscribe to the ethos of universal representation.

retro:electro

Ms2011 wrote: »

Stick a plasterer on for the duration of the wedding, change of shoes for the reception, job done.
But in reality how much rubbing would happen walking the few steps she would have had to walk, she'd have been sitting for the majority of the wedding.

Or just don’t be a bridezilla about it and be a decent person and allow the mother of the child to choose what every she feels the little girl would be most comfortable in. Like most normal people.

walshb

This thread has gone bat sh1t crazy now

Debating the merits of kids' shoes and what is and isn't comfy!!!:P

Meghan, you had to open your big mouth, didn't you?

Ms2011

retro:electro wrote: »

Or just don’t be a bridezilla about it and be a decent person and allow the mother of the child to choose what every she feels the little girl would be most comfortable in. Like most normal people.

Or don't feel like your child is the centre of the world and suck it up for the sake of 30 minutes to make your potential new family member happy.
You can spin it anyway you want.

walshb

Does anyone reckon Kate sent Meghan a whatsapp to thank her for being so kind when she was explaining to Oprah how Kate made her cry, but that Kate was a little dote about it in sending her flowers and apologizing?

MrMusician18

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

I dislike hereditary authority as much as the next republican but one thing you can't take away from the queen is that she addresses those who eat beans on toast as well as those who eat avocado on toast. Meghan and her cult appear to think the working class beans on toast consumer is subhuman and are not entitled to their outlook on life being heard or represented in the mainstream. It's good they have left the royal family, they do not subscribe to the ethos of universal representation.

What? There's a fair bit of projecting ones own views onto this story.

I suppose that has been one of the successes of QE2, she says so little that she's effectively a blank canvas so people project what they think onto her. It makes her all things to all people and she's been smart enough (along with a complicit media , I might add) not to break that illusion.

dogbert27

Cienciano wrote: »

One of the good outcomes of this story is how outraged the Daily Mail/Express/Sun readers are about it. Any Daily Mail article on it has thousands of comments of what can only be described as pure outrage. It's hilarious, the typical brexit little englander really doesn't like it.

But to know how outraged the readers of the Daily Mail / Express / Sun are about this mean that you would also have to be a reader of the same papers to verify your statement?

Ms2011

walshb wrote: »

This thread has gone bat sh1t crazy now

Debating the merits of kids' shoes and what is and isn't comfy!!!:P

Especially when that wasn't even the point of the story being told:rolleyes:

Cienciano

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

I dislike hereditary authority as much as the next republican but one thing you can't take away from the queen is that she addresses those who eat beans on toast as well as those who eat avocado on toast. Meghan and her cult appear to think the working class beans on toast consumer is subhuman and are not entitled to their outlook on life being heard or represented in the mainstream. It's good they have left the royal family, they do not subscribe to the ethos of universal representation.

Meghan and her cult? I think it's probably not a bad idea to for people to take a step back from this story and just ignore it for a while.

retro:electro

I saw a clip just there of William and Kate visiting a school this morning, and as they’re walking in alongside a black lady who I assume is the headmistress, a reporter shouts “are you a racist family sir?!!”.. to which he responds “we are very much not a racist family”. This is the kind of shlt they are going to have shouted at them from now on. I’m sure it was extremely uncomfortable especially walking alongside a black woman. Well done Harry.

MoonUnit75

Cienciano wrote: »

Meghan and her cult? I think it's probably not a bad idea to for people to take a step back from this story and just ignore it for a while.

Yeah, apparently she has a little cult on Twitter who organise reviews of her biography and responses to stories critical of her.

Penn

walshb wrote: »

Does anyone reckon Kate sent Meghan a whatsapp to thank her for being so kind when she was explaining to Oprah how Kate made her cry, but that Kate was a little dote about it in sending her flowers and apologizing?

Ultimately Meghan had to make that point in order to challenge the media lie that Meghan made Kate cry.

If Meghan just said it was false and left it at that, you'd be b*tching at her for not giving further information and therefore she's lying.

If she didn't add the point about Kate being nice about it and sending flowers, you'd be b*tching at her for not pointing that out.

She literally can't win because you've completely swallowed the media hatred of her. Meghan might very well be a thunderc*nt for all I know. I don't particularly care if she is or not. But this parroting of biased media narratives, pure Daily Mail standard sh*te, is just nonsense.

retro:electro

Ms2011 wrote: »

Or don't feel like just because it’s your wedding that you are the centre of the world and suck it up for the sake of 30 minutes to make your potential new family member happy.

Fixed your post!

you can spin it anyway you want

You certainly can!

walshb

Ms2011 wrote: »

Especially when that wasn't even the point of the story being told:rolleyes:

It absolutely was

People are debating what caused grown women to cry....

And it seems it was something to do with kids' shoes....

And a Royal wedding

And an American chat show queen.....

Truly bonkers!

MoonUnit75

MrMusician18 wrote: »

What? There's a fair bit of projecting ones own views onto this story.

I suppose that has been one of the successes of QE2, she says so little that she's effectively a blank canvas so people project what they think onto her. It makes her all things to all people and she's been smart enough (along with a complicit media , I might add) not to break that illusion.

A little bit of catch-up. That's what a head of state is for. You have political parties and politicians who represent their partisan constituencies, the house of lords who are supposed to counter balance populist politicians and the king or queen who are above politics, factions and 'identities'. They are supposed to be a single unifying figurehead that all sections of society feel represents the best of the entire country. The queen has acted this out in a very well considered manner.

Ms2011

retro:electro wrote: »

Fixed your post!



You certainly can!

My post didn't need fixing thanks and my point still stands.

walshb

Penn wrote: »

Ultimately Meghan had to make that point in order to challenge the media lie that Meghan made Kate cry.

If Meghan just said it was false and left it at that, you'd be b*tching at her for not giving further information and therefore she's lying.

If she didn't add the point about Kate being nice about it and sending flowers, you'd be b*tching at her for not pointing that out.

She literally can't win because you've completely swallowed the media hatred of her. Meghan might very well be a thunderc*nt for all I know. I don't particularly care if she is or not. But this parroting of biased media narratives, pure Daily Mail standard sh*te, is just nonsense.

Utter garbage

Her saying it was false and leaving it there means eff all to anyone...could be true, could be false

Her saying it is false and then making out it was Kate who made her cry means eff all. Could be true, could be false

You are completely missing the point here

One side has given one side's version........that is it....

Kate and RF do not comment on such petty and silly stories and tales.

So, completely pointless for anyone to believe anything here as being true....

RF and Kate do not comment, so we cannot know any truth here....

Meghan had no need to claim it was Kate who made her cry. No need. Whether true or not, no need

Because Kate and RF will not tell their side. They are above this.

Meghan, if she had any decorum and class, would have simply refuted the claim and left it there. We could then choose to believe it or not.

Her adding on that Kate was the "guilty" party shows us nothing but vindictiveness..knowing damn well that Kate cannot defend against it.

Ms2011

walshb wrote: »

It absolutely was

People are debating what caused grown women to cry....

And it seems it was something to do with kids' shoes....

And a Royal wedding

And an American chat show queen.....

Truly bonkers!

I feel like a broken record now, the point of telling the flowergirl story was to show how a small disagreement was twisted and blown up in the media to purposely paint Meghan in a bad light.

MoonUnit75

Penn wrote: »

Ultimately Meghan had to make that point in order to challenge the media lie that Meghan made Kate cry.

If Meghan just said it was false and left it at that, you'd be b*tching at her for not giving further information and therefore she's lying.

If she didn't add the point about Kate being nice about it and sending flowers, you'd be b*tching at her for not pointing that out.

She literally can't win because you've completely swallowed the media hatred of her. Meghan might very well be a thunderc*nt for all I know. I don't particularly care if she is or not. But this parroting of biased media narratives, pure Daily Mail standard sh*te, is just nonsense.

No, she was very specific in how she portrayed Kate. She said every one else was being supportive (giving her anything she wanted) except Kate who thought established protcol and practical comfort were still important.

Sir Oxman

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56360671
"The Duke of Cambridge has said the royals are "very much not a racist family" in his first comments following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.

Speaking on a visit in east London, Prince William said he had not yet spoken to his brother but will do so."


That sounds like one pissed off brother!

sebdavis

walshb wrote: »

Meghan would absolutely love you....!

I don't know her so why would she?

walshb

Ms2011 wrote: »

I feel like a broken record now, the point of telling the flowergirl story was to show how a small disagreement was twisted and blown up in the media to purposely paint Meghan in a bad light.

I know this

And we have people here going into great detail about kids' shoes to solve the riddle....

walshb

sebdavis wrote: »

I don't know her so why would she?

Don't be so obtuse now.....

She'd love your take on it....

And you knew I meant this....

sebdavis

Sir Oxman wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56360671
"The Duke of Cambridge has said the royals are "very much not a racist family" in his first comments following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.

Speaking on a visit in east London, Prince William said he had not yet spoken to his brother but will do so."


That sounds like one pissed off brother!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/duke-of-edinburgh-forced-to-apologise-for-racist-remark-1111947.html
Yeah not racist at all :P

retro:electro

Sir Oxman wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56360671
"The Duke of Cambridge has said the royals are "very much not a racist family" in his first comments following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.

Speaking on a visit in east London, Prince William said he had not yet spoken to his brother but will do so."


That sounds like one pissed off brother!

But Meghan has never been happier apparently! Her friends have stated that the Oprah interview was the best decision of her life. Imagine the only way to ensure happiness is by being the catalyst that drives abuse and harassment in a different direction. I don’t think that would make most decent people very happy.

So humanitarian!

Leg End Reject

sebdavis wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/duke-of-edinburgh-forced-to-apologise-for-racist-remark-1111947.html
Yeah not racist at all :P

Philip is well known for his clangers, and at 99, he's a product of a bygone era.

It's a pity M & H don't just name the individual they've accused of racism, because any or all the family will be suspected now.

JoChervil

walshb wrote: »

It's completely pointless to speculate here.

The RF will not meddle and squabble here....so all we have is Meghan's tale on this.

We cannot know the details on this.

A grown woman is alleged to have cried because another grown woman upset her...

This is the crux of it.....as pathetically desperate as it sounds...

And one grown woman decided to go and tell the world her version about this, to clear the air.

Knowing that other party won't give their side of the story.

I find it really mean when the best trait of someone, like for example dignity, is used against them.

sebdavis

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Philip is well known for his clangers, and at 99, he's a product of a bygone era.

It's a pity M & H don't just name the individual they've accused of racism, because any or all the family will be suspected now.

I suppose racism isn't too bad when you have a paedophile knocking around the house....
I didn't see the same reaction when that came out?