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

sebdavis

kowloonkev wrote: »

I would envisage she'll get bored of Harry in a few years and she'll be back on Opera in a few years while he will have nowhere to turn. Harry really is thick.

Yes someone who has signed a 20m deal with Spotify, 100m deal with Netflix and also seems to have a deal with Oprah & Apple is a "thick"

cnocbui

kowloonkev wrote: »

I would envisage she'll get bored of Harry in a few years and she'll be back on Opera in a few years while he will have nowhere to turn. Harry really is thick.

Well he did manage to get his quals to pilot an apache attack helicopter. I suspect he knows the difference between Opera and Oprah, too.

cnocbui

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I genuinely don't understand how Andrew was allowed to quietly fade into the background. I've said it before here, but that's the interview, and allegations, that should have harmed the RF.

Possibly the Queen's faceless background men who actually run things now, cut a deal with the DM and it's ilk along the lines of - you can have Meghan, just shut up about Andy.

Incredibly convenient distraction, she's been.

cnocbui

walshb wrote: »

Not what you’re calling it

Seriously, read up and research before jumping in with OTT outlandish claims..

As far as I know he was alleged to have slept with a 17 year old female..

So, can you please explain how you have arrived at him raping children..?

rince Andrew pal Ghislaine Maxwell 'groped girl during naked massage'

The British socialite is accused of sexually assaulting Annie farmer, then just 16, at Jeffrey Epstein's New Mexico ranch, while paedophile watched

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-andrew-pal-ghislaine-maxwell-21776234

cnocbui

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!

Send him my way, I'll gladly serve him up some of Phillip's racist remaks down the years. He has absolutely no genuine basis for being pissed off, apart from embarrasing facts being calle out and shown the light. Harry and Meghan are the ones who have grounds to be pissed. The RF did nothing to defend Meghan from the onslaght of spin, innuendo and lies hurled by the press against her.

retro:electro

cnocbui wrote: »

Possibly the Queen's faceless background men who actually run things now, cut a deal with the DM and it's ilk along the lines of - you can have Meghan, just shut up about Andy.

Incredibly convenient distraction, she's been.

This is quite paranoid speculation and makes absolutely no sense. The Palace didn’t make Meghan and Harry do the interview with Oprah which is why people are currently talking about them and stories are being written.

I couldn't figure out the distinctions made between family and firm. I understand that the firm is basically the business end and included advisors and private secretaries. The family is the individual members within. Meghan spoke about the close relationship she had with the Queen. The Queen is the head of all the households.

At any point during her distress could the Queen not intervene? Also I something else which struck me as odd, after they had decided to leave Maj offered to meet with them and invited them to lunch. She then changed her mind on the advice it would appear of a private secretary or some such.

Does she not have any agency at all here?

cnocbui

retro:electro wrote: »

This is quite paranoid speculation and makes absolutely no sense. The Palace didn’t make Meghan and Harry do the interview with Oprah which is why people are currently talking about them and stories are being written.

I'm not referencing current events as I am fairly certain you realise, but nice deflection. I am talking about the endless attacks on Meghan when she and Harry were still living in the UK.

partyguinness

Deleted User wrote: »

I couldn't figure out the distinctions made between family and firm. I understand that the firm is basically the business end and included advisors and private secretaries. The family is the individual members within. Meghan spoke about the close relationship she had with the Queen. The Queen is the head of all the households.

At any point during her distress could the Queen not intervene? Also I something else which struck me as odd, after they had decided to leave Maj offered to meet with them and invited them to lunch. She then changed her mind on the advice it would appear of a private secretary or some such.

Does she not have any agency at all here?

"The Firm" is the collective term for the Royal Family and the men in grey suits that do the day to day running and planning.

partyguinness

I don't get this notion that MM was not 'protected'. The press will write whatever they want. The Royal Family cannot control that so I am really not sure what type of protection she expected.

It seems that she didnt like any headlines that were less than glowing and everyone else is to blame.

retro:electro

cnocbui wrote: »

I'm not referencing current events as I am fairly certain you realise, but nice deflection. I am talking about the endless attacks on Meghan when she and Harry were still living in the UK.

So you think the queen offered her up as some sort of sacrificial lamb in order to prevent stories coming out about her son (that were written anyway) about an incident that hadn’t even been exposed yet?

Right..

Andrew got a grilling in the press and he was mocked and ridiculed the world over, and rightly so. Anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly uninformed, maybe selectively so. He needs to be dealt with firmly now by The Palace, which most people can agree on.

cnocbui

Deleted User wrote: »

I couldn't figure out the distinctions made between family and firm. I understand that the firm is basically the business end and included advisors and private secretaries. The family is the individual members within. Meghan spoke about the close relationship she had with the Queen. The Queen is the head of all the households.

At any point during her distress could the Queen not intervene? Also I something else which struck me as odd, after they had decided to leave Maj offered to meet with them and invited them to lunch. She then changed her mind on the advice it would appear of a private secretary or some such.

Does she not have any agency at all here?

You might find the link I posted earlier of interest: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116540737&postcount=1385

Lillyfae

partyguinness wrote: »

I don't get this notion that MM was not 'protected'. The press will write whatever they want. The Royal Family cannot control that so I am really not sure what type of protection she expected.

It seems that she didnt like any headlines that were less than glowing and everyone else is to blame.

It's really simple- all they need do is say "That's not what happened". But they don't under the guise of "dignity" or some other such nonsense. They can't claim dignity with the carry on of multiple family members.

sebdavis

partyguinness wrote: »

I don't get this notion that MM was not 'protected'. The press will write whatever they want. The Royal Family cannot control that so I am really not sure what type of protection she expected.

It seems that she didnt like any headlines that were less than glowing and everyone else is to blame.

They had a guy on from the UK press the other ,morning on radio. he admitted because Megan didn't do the standard photo outside the hospital with her baby this was taken very bad by the UK press.

He said they more or less have agreements with the Royal family that they do XYZ on such occasions. So yes the Royal Family do control the press and the press control the Royal family

partyguinness

sebdavis wrote: »

They had a guy on from the UK press the other ,morning on radio. he admitted because Megan didn't do the standard photo outside the hospital with her baby this was taken very bad by the UK press.

He said they more or less have agreements with the Royal family that they do XYZ on such occasions. So yes the Royal Family do control the press and the press control the Royal family

On that basis I wouldnt go so far as to say the Royal family control the press at all but rather they are expected to throw the press a few bones every now and then to keep them happy.

"Basically pose for a few nice staged pics, throw out a few quotes from "sources" and we wil leave you alone by posting nice cutesy articles."

On the face of it it may seem a symbiotic relationship but I would have to say that the press need the Royal family more than the RF need the press.

anewme

partyguinness wrote: »

I don't get this notion that MM was not 'protected'. The press will write whatever they want. The Royal Family cannot control that so I am really not sure what type of protection she expected.

It seems that she didnt like any headlines that were less than glowing and everyone else is to blame.

Piers Morgan orchestrated a long campaign against her for some perceived slight.

He ran off in a huff when it was served up to him as he could not face it.

cnocbui

retro:electro wrote: »

So you think the queen offered her up as some sort of sacrificial lamb in order to prevent stories coming out about her son (that were written anyway) about an incident that hadn’t even been exposed yet?

Right..

Andrew got a grilling in the press and he was mocked and ridiculed the world over, and rightly so. Anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly uninformed, maybe selectively so. He needs to be dealt with firmly now by The Palace, which most people can agree on.

Prince Andrew took part in orgy with nine girls on Jeffrey Epstein’s private island, alleged victim says

‘I was around 18 at the time. Epstein, Andy, approximately eight other young girls, and I had sex together’

Virginia Roberts: 'Sex slave diary' published containing alleged intimate details about Prince Andrew

Radar website says it has what it claims are 24 hand-written pages of 2001 events
Wednesday 14 January 2015

Monday 21 October 2019

Meghan Markle flies Off to Vancouver Amid the Royal Family turmoil
January 15, 2020

I quite agree - 'right'.

walshb

sebdavis wrote: »

They had a guy on from the UK press the other ,morning on radio. he admitted because Megan didn't do the standard photo outside the hospital with her baby this was taken very bad by the UK press.

He said they more or less have agreements with the Royal family that they do XYZ on such occasions. So yes the Royal Family do control the press and the press control the Royal family

This is the absolute nubb of the problem. Meghan

She joined the family and then cried and moaned at what the rules and protocols asked of her...then made it all out to be her being victimized and bullying...

The RF are owned by the sate.....they have to serve the state whether they want to or not..

This jumped up nobody actress arrived in and thought she could do as she pleased....that is not how the RF works.

Whether one agrees with the rules, protocols and service is irrelevant....that is how they operate

You don't like it, don't join it.

She joined it. Didn't like it. Did a runner

But that wasn't enough publicity and fame for her....she then decided to keep using the RF status to peddle that petty and trashy interview to the world's media..

retro:electro

cnocbui wrote: »

I quite agree - 'right'.

It still doesn’t ring true to me because the press did report on all of this when it was exposed and he got a bashing for it. I’d wager he doesn’t get reported on much nowadays because he hides away in the background and seems to be quite boring. But I guess you’re entitled to believe what you want to believe.

sebdavis

partyguinness wrote: »

On that basis I wouldnt go so far as to say the Royal family control the press at all but rather they are expected throw the press a few bones every now and then to keep them happy.

"Basically pose for a few nice staged pics, throw out a few quotes from "sources" and we wil leave you alone by posting nice cutesy articles."

On the face of it it may seem a symbiotic relationship but I would have to say that the press need the Royal family more than the RF need the press.

Not really, if the press went after the Royal Family and started to question what they actually bring to the UK it wouldn't take long for the public to potentially start turning on them.

Listen to any of the royal corresponded in the last few days it is clear the Royal family are seriously afraid of the press turning on them.

partyguinness

Lillyfae wrote: »

It's really simple- all they need do is say "That's not what happened". But they don't under the guise of "dignity" or some other such nonsense. They can't claim dignity with the carry on of multiple family members.

Well no it's not that simple. What are they supposed to do...respond to every single allegation or negative article? That's just a never ending circle of allegation and counter allegation.

Tease that out and then any tabloid hack can go off making up all sorts of rubbish and the RF will be forced to deny it...keeps the journalist in a job and the advertisers happy.

MM and Harry are overly precious. You would swear this was all ground breaking stuff without precedent.

sebdavis

walshb wrote: »

This is the absolute nubb of the problem. Meghan

She joined the family and then cried and moaned at what the rules and protocols asked of her...then made it all out to be her being victimized and bullying...

The RF are owned by the sate.....they have to serve the state whether they want to or not..

This jumped up nobody actress arrived in and thought she could do as she pleased....that is not how the RF works.

Whether one agrees with the rules, protocols and service is irrelevant....that is how they operate

You don't like it, don't join it.

She joined it. Didn't like it. Did a runner

But that wasn't enough publicity and fame for her....she then decided to keep using the RF status to peddle that petty and trashy interview to the world's media..

So what if she did? what difference does it make to you

You seem to take a big issue with this but have no problem with some guy using his title to go after children? personally I would be angry with the man raping girls than a woman deciding she had enough and was heading back to the US with her family and going out on their own

partyguinness

sebdavis wrote: »

Not really, if the press went after the Royal Family and started to question what they actually bring to the UK it wouldn't take long for the public to potentially start turning on them.

Listen to any of the royal corresponded in the last few days it is clear the Royal family are seriously afraid of the press turning on them.

Well there you go. Then it is not an equal relationship.

Sure the RF can control the info they release to the Press but purely under sufferance to keep them happy. It's like the oppressed wife who does what the abusive husband says just for peace and quiet.

The Royal Family are very very safe and deeply embedded in the UK national psyche. They are going nowhere.

Lillyfae

partyguinness wrote: »

Well no it's not that simple. What are they supposed to do...respond to every single allegation or negative article? That's just a never ending circle of allegation and counter allegation.

Tease that out and then any tabloid hack can go off making up all sorts of rubbish and the RF will be forced to deny it...keeps the journalist in a job and the advertisers happy.

MM and Harry are overly precious. You would swear this was all ground breaking stuff without precedent.

They physically can if they want to. They clearly didn't in this instance, valuing Andrew and Kate above Meghan. Do you think the staff in Buckingham Palace's PR prefer Andrew to Meghan? I doubt it very much, that came straight from the queen.

I'm not taking sides, I truly believe that Meghan and Harry are vacuous and delusional aswell- the whole thing is hilarious. Imagine, neither Kate nor Meghan had the ability to stand down over a pair of socks or a bunch of flowers? What kind of utter morons are these people? It wouldn't be out of place on "Big Fat Gypsy Weddings"

cnocbui

partyguinness wrote: »

I don't get this notion that MM was not 'protected'. The press will write whatever they want. The Royal Family cannot control that so I am really not sure what type of protection she expected.

It seems that she didnt like any headlines that were less than glowing and everyone else is to blame.

The owner of the Daily Mail is Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere.

I believe the Queen could make his life a living hell if she was allowed to put her mind to it. If in the wake of the phone hacking scandal she had made a public statement about the inadequacy of the proposed strictures on the press, I think the UK would now have legislation that would have prevented their recent and current harrasment of Meghan.

If the Queen, just for once, had made a public plea for the UK press to knock it off, I suspect they would have. If she just once mentioned Harmsworth by name publicly, he would have called the dogs off. He might have more money then her but she has some very hard men at her service.

cnocbui

cnocbui wrote: »

You might find the link I posted earlier of interest: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116540737&postcount=1385

Thanks for that. I thought it was something along those lines. It still seems strange though that the Queen is coming across as powerless.

partyguinness

cnocbui wrote: »

The owner of the Daily Mail is Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere.

I believe the Queen could make his life a living hell if she was allowed to put her mind to it. If in the wake of the phone hacking scandal she had made a public statement about the inadequacy of the proposed strictures on the press, I think the UK would now have legislation that would have prevented their recent and current harrasment of Meghan.

If the Queen, just for once, had made a public plea for the UK press to knock it off, I suspect they would have. If she just once mentioned Harmsworth by name publicly, he would have called the dogs off. He might have more money then her but she has some very hard men at her service.

The Queen is never get into that type of situation.

She won't even comment publicly on important constitutional matters such as Brexit or Scottish independence i.e. issues of real importance let alone get into some sort of tit for tat with a tabloid.

cnocbui

cnocbui wrote: »

Send him my way, I'll gladly serve him up some of Phillip's racist remaks down the years. He has absolutely no genuine basis for being pissed off, apart from embarrasing facts being calle out and shown the light. Harry and Meghan are the ones who have grounds to be pissed. The RF did nothing to defend Meghan from the onslaght of spin, innuendo and lies hurled by the press against her.

This is just ridiculous.
Why can't a grown woman, behave like a grown woman and ignore gutter journalism?
When the press did something illegal, H&M brought them to court, which is as it should be.
It's pathetic to think that the Royal family have to come out and reply to every sort of rubbish that is printed about them.

walshb

sebdavis wrote: »

So what if she did? what difference does it make to you

You seem to take a big issue with this but have no problem with some guy using his title to go after children? personally I would be angry with the man raping girls than a woman deciding she had enough and was heading back to the US with her family and going out on their own

Why are you deflecting here?

Open a thread about Andrew

"What difference does it make to me?" Are you serious?

Makes no difference at all..

People here are just offering their opinions on the interview and on the couple's behaviour.....

Princess Calla

Lillyfae wrote: »

Imagine, neither Kate nor Meghan had the ability to stand down over a pair of socks or a bunch of flowers? What kind of utter morons are these people? It wouldn't be out of place on "Big Fat Gypsy Weddings"

Kate needed to up the passive agressive ante......throw the shaggin tights on in the car to church... meghan wasn't going to have a meltdown at the church.... anyone asks the child's feet were starting to bleed... didn't want to risk getting blood on shoes/dress ...said as sweetly as possible.