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

AckwelFoley

Terrible nonsense in an age where one scrambles to find some reason to be a victim or offended. A Prince and Princess feel hard done by becaise they were cut off and have to live off the 50 million they have. Big news. Worth discussing

In other news there is a global pandemic which has killed two and a half million people caused financial hardship on countless and left many people in a position of true misfortune

Of course neither are mutually exclusive but I genuinely could care less about either Harry or Meghan

BettyS

AckwelFoley wrote: »

Terrible nonsense in an age where one scrambles to find some reason to be a victim or offended. A Prince and Princess feel hard done by becaise they were cut off and have to live off the 50 million they have. Big news. Worth discussing

In other news there is a global pandemic which has killed two and a half million people caused financial hardship on countless and left many people in a position of true misfortune

Of course neither are mutually exclusive but I genuinely could care less about either of them.

People might be trying to escape the horrors of the pandemic. There are only so many articles that one can read about C-19. And the financial hardship may be directly affecting posters on here. This is light relief and escapism. You cannot judge us for this?

BettyS

I am interested to read that 5/8 racist headlines presented by Oprah as British were indeed foreign and one Dailymail headline was edited to look racist when in fact, the story was about a member of UKIP who was disgraced and kicked out for his racist comment about Meghan. Thoughts? It makes me squirm a little

ILoveYourVibes

As an Irish person ..i never EVER stand up for the British Royal family on principle.

Itssoeasy

The Prince Andrew issue is a serious but separate matter and I don’t understand why it’s been mixed in with the serious issues raised in the Oprah interview. From what I’ve been able to gather the UK public seem to have an issue with how and when the issues were raised and not what was raised.

I did hear one of Meghan’s friend on UK tv this week bring up someone in the palace being fired from gross misconduct when the bullying allegations were brought up. That’s surely easily clarified because you can’t be saying stuff like that without stuff to back it up.

AdrianBalboa

AckwelFoley wrote: »

Terrible nonsense in an age where one scrambles to find some reason to be a victim or offended. A Prince and Princess feel hard done by becaise they were cut off and have to live off the 50 million they have. Big news. Worth discussing

In other news there is a global pandemic which has killed two and a half million people caused financial hardship on countless and left many people in a position of true misfortune

Of course neither are mutually exclusive but I genuinely could care less about either Harry or Meghan

It sounds like you’re “offended.”

anewme

walshb wrote: »

Nobody is saying Andrew is a saint, but folks here want to slap these horrendous labels on him as fact, when not a single crime/charge has been levied against him.

But people want to stick horrendous labels on Meghan, questioning her morals and calling her a liar, when she has not been convicted of anything either?

BettyS

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The Prince Andrew issue is a serious but separate matter and I don’t understand why it’s been mixed in with the serious issues raised in the Oprah interview. From what I’ve been able to gather the UK public seem to have an issue with how and when the issues were raised and not what was raised.

I did hear one of Meghan’s friend on UK tv this week bring up someone in the palace being fired from gross misconduct when the bullying allegations were brought up. That’s surely easily clarified because you can’t be saying stuff like that without stuff to back it up.

That is exactly what I have been railing against on this thread. It is the unsubstantiated allegations against other people, that are potentially life-destroying and career-destroying that are dangerous.

BensMixed

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The Prince Andrew issue is a serious but separate matter and I don’t understand why it’s been mixed in with the serious issues raised in the Oprah interview. From what I’ve been able to gather the UK public seem to have an issue with how and when the issues were raised and not what was raised.

I did hear one of Meghan’s friend on UK tv this week bring up someone in the palace being fired from gross misconduct when the bullying allegations were brought up. That’s surely easily clarified because you can’t be saying stuff like that without stuff to back it up.

The Prince Andrew issue sheds some light on the mentality of these people. His antics and infamous interview coupled with the palace protecting him spoke volumes. I don't think he has spoken to the FBI about his dear friend Epstein has he?

Stateofyou

AckwelFoley wrote: »

Terrible nonsense in an age where one scrambles to find some reason to be a victim or offended. A Prince and Princess feel hard done by becaise they were cut off and have to live off the 50 million they have. Big news. Worth discussing

In other news there is a global pandemic which has killed two and a half million people caused financial hardship on countless and left many people in a position of true misfortune

Of course neither are mutually exclusive but I genuinely could care less about either Harry or Meghan

Yet here you are. You obviously could care less, but clearly you don't.:pac:

What do you want people to do, talk about covid every day of our lives and that's it? We can do both.

Also the things raised by Meghan and Harry intersect with racism, sexism, effects of colonialism, toxic family/fallouts, etc. Issues relevant to a great many people.

walshb

anewme wrote: »

But people want to stick horrendous labels on Meghan, questioning her morals and calling her a liar, when she has not been convicted of anything either?

Glad you mentioned this..

It’s a nonsense to even compare the two

Being labeled a child rapist is so so far more serious than wondering if an actress that married into the RF, and who is now involved in interviews dissing said family, is being sincere, genuine and in any way afflicted here..

I don’t buy into Harry and Meghan at all here on their take..

This charade is a theatrical tit for tat by two people against the RF

Andrew’s situation is far more serious, hence the indiscriminate labeling him a rapist and paedophile here with not even a charge or case is not remotely comparable to Harry and Meghan.

BettyS

anewme wrote: »

But people want to stick horrendous labels on Meghan, questioning her morals and calling her a liar, when she has not been convicted of anything either?

I must repeat that I am disgusted by Andrew! He is despicable

It seems what walshb is saying is that there is a distinction between levying very serious criminal allegations at somebody, as in Andrew’s case, in the (questionable) absence of substantiated evidence and levying allegations that are simply vexations and by no means criminal, as in the case of Meghan

BettyS

Stateofyou wrote: »

Yet here you are. You obviously could care less, but clearly you don't.:pac:

What do you want people to do, talk about covid every day of our lives and that's it? We can do both.

Also the things raised by Meghan and Harry intersect with racism, sexism, effects of colonialism, toxic family/fallouts, etc. Issues relevant to a great many people.

Nothing like an outside poster dissing the regulars interest in the topic to bring us all together

AckwelFoley

BettyS wrote: »

People might be trying to escape the horrors of the pandemic. There are only so many articles that one can read about C-19. And the financial hardship may be directly affecting posters on here. This is light relief and escapism. You cannot judge us for this?

I'm not judging people that are fodder for this.

I'm never one to judge what people use for mental chewing gum, but is this the earth moving story that the media are trying to set it up as. No.

Lots of feelings are hurt. They can dry their tears with the $$$ they'll make off the back of this

Millions go through real hardship. This is just nonsense

But certainly not judging ones interest in it. Its no different than being entertained by reality TV and nothing wrong with it. Bit let's not make it out to be earth moving

Itssoeasy

BensMixed wrote: »

The Prince Andrew issue sheds some light on the mentality of these people. His antics and infamous interview coupled with the palace protecting him spoke volumes. I don't think he has spoken to the FBI about his dear friend Epstein has he?

I don’t think he has. It’s not like the palace are carrying on like nothing happened and he got slated in the press after that car crash of an interview which didn’t help things. He’s been more or less told to **** off from sight and wasn’t even shown in wedding pictures from his daughters wedding. He does need to speak to the FBI because he needs to help them into that esptein mess.

anewme

BettyS wrote: »

No connection? He occasionally is a guest-writer. He certainly didn’t write the rebuttal. Its tone is dispassionate

The article refutes several of Harry and Meghan’s claims

Piers Morgan has used the Daily Mail as the vehicle to carry out his vendetta against her.

Piers Morgan writes more than occasionally for the Daily Mail. He is a regular columnist and I believe was editor for them or their site at one time.

The Mail has been targeting Meghan for a long time - back as far as the straight outta Compton headline- which Harry challenged back in the day.

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/what-does-straight-outta-compton-mean-the-racist-tabloid-headline-used-to-describe-meghan-markle-explained-3159559

BettyS

AckwelFoley wrote: »

I'm not judging people that are fodder for this.

I'm never I've to judge what people use for mental chewing gum, but is this the earth moving story that the media are trying to set it up as. No.

Lots of feelings are hurt. They can dry their tears with the $$$ they'll make off the back of this

Millions go through real hardship. This is just nonsense

But certainly not judging ones interest in it. Its no different than being entertained by reality TV

If you look at Greek versus Roman theatre, Greek theatre stood the test of time. What is the difference? Roman theatre was largely political and satire about the political tale of the day. We don’t know the people and political in-jokes, so why would we care? Greek theatre on the other hand centred around human tragedies that are universal to all. We can all relate to the human-interest stories, such as the grief of losing a love one or being betrayed by a friend.

Not to sound facetious, but the Meghan and Harry story takes on the Greek qualities. It is a universal human story. Man seems close to family. Beautiful wife comes along. Man shuns family. This story will repeat itself in all echelons of society throughout the ages. It is this relatable aspect that piques the human interest

ILoveYourVibes

Its fair to say Piers Morgan is like the most unprofessional man in the UK. I don't know how he has a job or what he knows about someone to keep that job. He has got to know where some bodies are buried though to stay afloat.

BettyS

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Its fair to say Piers Morgan is like the most unprofessional man in the UK. I don't know how he has a job or what he knows about someone to keep that job. He has got to know where some bodies are buried though to stay afloat.

My objections to the man arise from the Iraq and the hacking scandal.

AckwelFoley

BettyS wrote: »

If you look at Greek versus Roman theatre, Greek theatre stood the test of time. What is the difference? Roman theatre was largely political and satire about the political tale of the day. We don’t know the people and political in-jokes, so why would we care? Greek theatre on the other hand centred around human tragedies that are universal to all. We can all relate to the human-interest stories, such as the grief of losing a love one or being betrayed by a friend.

Not to sound facetious, but the Meghan and Harry story takes on the Greek qualities. It is a universal human story. Man seems close to family. Beautiful wife comes along. Man shuns family. This story will repeat itself in all echelons of society throughout the ages. It is this relatable aspect that piques the human interest

Fair enough, but she's no Rosa Parkes.
Rosa didn't get an Oprah interview and a spotify contract

He's never going to be king so he can be more bold with his choices

cnocbui

BettyS wrote: »

I am sickened by Andrew. Are there allegations that he has sex with an under-16s? I don’t recall such claims?

It does appear it's possible he didn't have sex with any under aged girls, but it also seems he might have, as several times prosecuters in the US have put the question to involved parties and they have refused to answer the questions.

But, when quizzed under oath by lawyers, Epstein’s bedroom slave Nadia Marcinkova refused to say if she had sex with Andrew.

Well, true enough. But a refusal is an admittance of nothing. She also refused to say that she didn’t have sex with Andrew.

KUVIN: “Would you agree with me that you have been present where Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew have had sexual relations with underage girls?”

KELLEN: “On the instruction of my lawyer, I must invoke my Fifth Amendment privilege.”

KUVIN: “Would you agree with me that Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein used to share underaged girls for sexual relations?”

KELLEN: “On the instruction of my lawyer, I must invoke my Fifth Amendment privilege.”

KUVIN: “Do you know who Prince Andrew is?”

KELLEN: “On the instruction of my lawyer I must invoke my Fifth Amendment privilege.”

Marcinkova, under oath, answered questioned fielded by lawyer Brad Edwards.

EDWARDS: “Has Jeffrey Epstein also made you perform sexually on his friends?”

MARCINKOVA: “Fifth.”

EDWARDS: “Do you know Prince Andrew?”

MARCINKOVA: “Fifth.”

EDWARDS: “Have you ever been made to perform sexually on Prince Andrew?”

MARCINKOVA: “Fifth.”

https://www.anorak.co.uk/275335/royals/when-prince-andrew-partied-with-billionaire-paedophile-sarah-kellen-and-nadia-marcinkova.html

Nadia Marcinkova was 15 when Epstein bought her from her family in Yugoslavia. It looks like she and Kellen were financed in the starting up and running of their own businesses as these had official addresses which were condominiums owned by Epsteins brother. So you might say she was bought again, in adifferent sense.

Some of the images in this article are interesting: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/smiling-prince-andrew-waves-female-18960297

Given Epstein was murdered in jail, I'm not surprised all we have so far is a lot smoke and silence.

anewme

BettyS wrote: »

You stated that you are in the legal profession. Semantics are key? Convicted is a very specific term. If lying or being “mad”, as you put it is a criminal offense, then I will see you all in jail. It is a disingenuous choice of words, anewme

I did not state I was in the Legal profession.

BettyS

anewme wrote: »

I did not state I was in the Legal profession.

Sorry. I was thinking of Stateofyou

ILoveYourVibes

BettyS wrote: »

My objections to the man arise from the Iraq and the hacking scandal.

He has a bad record as long as a very long thing. I don't know HOW he is still around ..but then ...the hacking scandal....might have a little to do with it. I would say he knows a lot.

anewme

walshb wrote: »

Glad you mentioned this..

It’s a nonsense to even compare the two

Being labeled a child rapist is so so far more serious than wondering if an actress that married into the RF, and who is now involved in interviews dissing said family, is being sincere, genuine and in any way afflicted here..

I don’t buy into Harry and Meghan at all here on their take..

This charade is a theatrical tit for tat by two people against the RF

Andrew’s situation is far more serious, hence the indiscriminate labeling him a rapist and paedophile here with not even a charge or case is not remotely comparable to Harry and Meghan.

Calling someone a liar is a slur against their character.

Personally, I would deem it very derogatory.

anewme

BettyS wrote: »

Sorry. I was thinking of Stateofyou

Well then take back all that nonsense please about me being deliberately disingenuous.

walshb

anewme wrote: »

Calling someone a liar is a slur against their character.

Personally, I would deem it very derogatory.

I agree. Calling someone a liar is a serious allegation..

In this case, I cannot see it as remotely comparable to being labeled a child rapist and paedophile..

And anyway: not really sure on the liar angle here..

Simple: Meghan’s suicide claim cannot be proved either way. It’s a state of mind. Only she can ever know..

I have no issue saying that I don’t believe her here. I think she exaggerated here for effect..in this instance I don’t see this the same as calling her a liar.

Anyway, no way to know for certain...

banie01

walshb wrote: »

I agree. Calling someone a liar is a serious allegation..

It is, and in Meghan and Harry's case it is an easily provable claim.

During the Oprah interview, both claimed to have been married in secret 3 days prior to the Windsor spectacle.
In the back garden at Kensington by the Archbishop, just the 3 of them.
A wedding requires a minimum of 5 people.

It may have been a blessing, it may have been a run through it may have been an exchange of vows that was meaningful to them.
It was very much not a wedding though.
Which is completely at odds with the fairy tale love story Robin hood/Maid Marion secret wedding presentation of their anecdote.
The way they told this story, leaves no room for mistake or confusion as the source of the wedding claim.

It's a lie.
A stupidly easily refutable lie.
One that barring exculpatory evidence to refute the need to fulfil the legal requirements of a legal wedding?
Brands them both liars.

An interesting article here. https://www.independent.ie/news/it-was-utter-tripe-caroline-devine-who-lives-in-the-former-home-of-earl-mountbatten-says-meghan-and-harrys-interview-left-a-lot-to-be-desired-40190601.html
“ I would like to point out one unique (point) that no one picked up on,” she said, “and that is where Meghan stated: ‘The Institution took away my passport and my driving license.’ They have diplomatic immunity. They don’t need a passport or a driving licence.”

“They have drivers as security. They don’t even have to go through customs. That is why Meghan was able to bring back a planeload of very expensive gifts from her shower in New York.“”

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

An interesting article here. https://www.independent.ie/news/it-was-utter-tripe-caroline-devine-who-lives-in-the-former-home-of-earl-mountbatten-says-meghan-and-harrys-interview-left-a-lot-to-be-desired-40190601.html
“ I would like to point out one unique (point) that no one picked up on,” she said, “and that is where Meghan stated: ‘The Institution took away my passport and my driving license.’ They have diplomatic immunity. They don’t need a passport or a driving licence.”

“They have drivers as security. They don’t even have to go through customs. That is why Meghan was able to bring back a planeload of very expensive gifts from her shower in New York.“”

Even forgetting the nonsense of that

To even bring up them “taking away” her passport and drivers licence as some sort of injustice..

FFS, you were marrying into the RF. This is how the institution operate...

What did she expect?

Simple: she wanted all the fame and attention of being a royal, but couldn’t be arsed to tow the line. RF members don’t get to pick and choose what parts of this institutions suits them and doesn’t suit them.

An incredible arrogant sense of self entitlement and self importance is all she has displayed.