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

Graces7

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.“”

Thank you for this.

Although I am English I never followed the family much in recent years.

But have had a row with someone close to me as she is not English and does not see that what happens in a family should stay in a family. Not be aired as Meghan has chosen to do in the most blatant way. Chosen total disrespect and indiscretion. Causing a lot of distress to many there.

All families have troubles and disputes. Within the family. Private. That this is the Royal Family makes it more vital that that should be respected.

It comes across as quite vindictive and immature. NB I have not caught up with the thread andd have no intention of following it like that.

She chose this knowing the upset it would cause. As they were leaving anyway why not just quietly do that. She has her husband and child(ren) and a secure future.

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

Thank you for this.

Although I am English I never followed the family much in recent years.

But have had a row with someone close to me as she is not English and does not see that what happens in a family should stay in a family. Not be aired as Meghan has chosen to do in the most blatant way. Chosen total disrespect and indiscretion. Causing a lot of distress to many there.

All families have troubles and disputes. Within the family. Private. That this is the Royal Family makes it more vital that that should be respected.

It comes across as quite vindictive and immature. NB I have not caught up with the thread andd have no intention of following it like that.

She chose this knowing the upset it would cause. As they were leaving anyway why not just quietly do that. She has her husband and child(ren) and a secure future.

My thinking on the driving license was that her US one would have to be exchanged for a UK one and her name would have to be updated on her passport. Just two examples of the “Firm” taking care of the practicalities.

retro:electro

Seems like a lot of what they said is unravelling.. oh dear.

I have gone overseas with an Irish 'VIP' (no other details) and brought foreign VIPs to the airport.
All passports and luggage are sent before the arrival of the VIP, and their travel partners. Check in, passports checks etc are all done before arrival.
VIPs are brought directly to the airplane, no security, no queues.
Their private secretaries/personal assistants take care of all details of travel. That is why they don't have their own passports.

walshb

bubblypop wrote: »

I have gone overseas with an Irish 'VIP' (no other details) and brought foreign VIPs to the airport.
All passports and luggage are sent before the arrival of the VIP, and their travel partners. Check in, passports checks etc are all done before arrival.
VIPs are brought directly to the airplane, no security, no queues.
Their private secretaries/personal assistants take care of all details of travel. That is why they don't have their own passports.

Exactly..

And she is not even a VIP

She and RF are above that. In the every day sense!!!

BettyS

retro:electro wrote: »

Seems like a lot of what they said is unravelling.. oh dear.

Mud sticks. People want to push an agenda. And even if contrary evidence arises, people will only remember the initial scandal

anewme

BettyS wrote: »

Mud sticks. People want to push an agenda. And even if contrary evidence arises, people will only remember the initial scandal

The issue is, anything coming via The Daily Mail will not be accepted, given that they have demonstrated a clear vendetta against the couple

Their continued attempts to double down and trash them while at the same time championing Piers Morgan is only reinforcing that.

BettyS

anewme wrote: »

The issue is, anything coming via The Daily Mail will not be accepted, given that they have demonstrated a clear vendetta against the couple

Their continued attempts to double down and trash them while at the same time championing Piers Morgan is only reinforcing that.

But what is the Daily Mail produced irrefutable evidence. Would they still not be accepted?

retro:electro

anewme wrote: »

The issue is, anything coming via The Daily Mail will not be accepted, given that they have demonstrated a clear vendetta against the couple

Their continued attempts to double down and trash them while at the same time championing Piers Morgan is only reinforcing that.

You won’t accept anything that refutes what they have to say, no matter where it comes from. You also seem to be utterly obsessed with Piers Morgan. I don’t think you can even go a few posts without bringing him up.

BettyS

Jesus, they are now worth £100 million. That is a fortune. I wonder what they will do with the money?

BettyS

BettyS wrote: »

But what is the Daily Mail produced irrefutable evidence. Would they still not be accepted?

Just a few observations from all media, not just the Mail
1 The secret wedding, did it happen or not?
2 When was the subject of children’s colour brought up? Before the wedding or during the pregnancy.?
3 When did Meghan become aware that her and Harry’s children were not entitled to titles and thereby security?
4 The handing over of passport and driving license. Normal procedure for Royals?
5 Her relationship with her own family.

Lots of questions that could/should have been delved into further by the interviewer.

BettyS

Deleted User wrote: »

Just a few observations from all media, not just the Mail
1 The secret wedding, did it happen or not?
2 When was the subject of children’s colour brought up? Before the wedding or during the pregnancy.?
3 When did Meghan become aware that her and Harry’s children were not entitled to titles and thereby security?
4 The handing over of passport and driving license. Normal procedure for Royals?
5 Her relationship with her own family.

Lots of questions that could/should have been delved into further by the interviewer.

And was it actually a direct family member that made the racist comment?

anewme

retro:electro wrote: »

You won’t accept anything that refutes what they have to say, no matter where it comes from. You also seem to be utterly obsessed with Piers Morgan. I don’t think you can even go a few posts without bringing him up.

I'm using Piers Morgan as he is the Puppetmaster behind the daily mail the 'newspaper" used here as a source of articles.

Central to this didcussion, are the claims made by Piers Morgan and the British Tabloids, and in particular the Daily Mail.

The way Piers Morgan has used his influence is pivotal to the story.

So, he is a key player in this issue and as such warrants the airtime allocated to him.

You seem not to like him being brought up, as he is a key defence for the couple, unless of course, you believe and the Daily Mail do not have a case to answer here and were balanced in their 'journalism.'

BettyS

anewme wrote: »

I'm using Piers Morgan as he is the Puppetmaster behind the daily mail the 'newspaper" used here as a source of articles.

Central to this didcussion, are the claims made by Piers Morgan and the British Tabloids, and in particular the Daily Mail.

The way Piers Morgan has used his influence is pivotal to the story.

So, he is a key player in this issue and as such warrants the airtime allocated to him.

You seem not to like him being brought up, as he is a key defence for the couple, unless of course, you believe and the Daily Mail do not have a case to answer here and were balanced in their 'journalism.'

And what about when Oprah used non-British articles and doctored British articles to make the point that the British press is racist?

Is this the balanced journalism that we should aspire to?

retro:electro

anewme wrote: »

I'm using Piers Morgan as he is the Puppetmaster behind the daily mail the 'newspaper" used here as a source of articles.

Central to this didcussion, are the claims made by Piers Morgan and the British Tabloids, and in particular the Daily Mail.

The way Piers Morgan has used his influence is pivotal to the story.

So, he is a key player in this issue and as such warrants the airtime allocated to him.

You seem not to like him being brought up, as he is a key defence for the couple, unless of course, you believe and the Daily Mail do not have a case to answer here and were balanced in their 'journalism.'

He didn’t write the article. You managed to get his full name there into your first three sentences. It’s kind of ironic that you’re discussing his obsession with Meghan but don’t seem to be able to go a few posts without mentioning him yourself.

Ms2011

I didn't take the passport thing as a dig at the royal family more her trying to set the scene of how she was starting to lose her sense of self.
It can't be easy going 30 odd years doing as you please then having to consult with someone to leave your home.
And yes I know those less sympathetic will say that's what she signed up for etc. but that doesn't make it any less difficult, I think what the average person understands of living in the royal family doesn't even come close to actually living in the royal family.

retro:electro

Also The Daily Mail has already been sued by Meghan so you best believe that article was put to their legal team before going to print.

BettyS

Ms2011 wrote: »

I didn't take the passport thing as a dig at the royal family more her trying to set the scene of how she was starting to lose her sense of self.
It can't be easy going 30 odd years doing as you please then having to consult with someone to leave your home.
And yes I know those less sympathetic will say that's what she signed up for etc. but that doesn't make it any less difficult, I think what the average person understands of living in the royal family doesn't even come close to actually living in the royal family.

But on the flip side, a royal family member will get insane privilege, fawning and healthcare. No way would Philip have got the healthcare that he got, even with the best VHI package, were it not for station. They never have to worry about the bills. They never have to worry about a precarious work situation. They get to meet amazing people. They get to see places many of us won’t. Yes, it’s tough. But it has its immense rewards

BettyS

retro:electro wrote: »

Also The Daily Mail has already been sued by Meghan so you best believe that article was put to their legal team before going to print.

And they made a formal complaint to Ofcom about anewme’s pal. They are not afraid to speak out!

retro:electro

BettyS wrote: »

But on the flip side, a royal family member will get insane privilege, fawning and healthcare. No way would Philip have got the healthcare that he got, even with the best VHI package, were it not for station. They never have to worry about the bills. They never have to worry about a precarious work situation. They get to meet amazing people. They get to see places many of us won’t. Yes, it’s tough. But it has its immense rewards

I’d say it’s rare enough that 99 year olds get heart surgery

BettyS

retro:electro wrote: »

I’d say it’s rare enough that 99 year olds get heart surgery

And by the top heart centre in the UK!

How many of us will go on the waiting list for God knows how long when we fall sick

Ms2011

BettyS wrote: »

But on the flip side, a royal family member will get insane privilege, fawning and healthcare. No way would Philip have got the healthcare that he got, even with the best VHI package, were it not for station. They never have to worry about the bills. They never have to worry about a precarious work situation. They get to meet amazing people. They get to see places many of us won’t. Yes, it’s tough. But it has its immense rewards

I suppose that's where the gilded cage analogy comes from.

Ms2011

retro:electro wrote: »

I’d say it’s rare enough that 99 year olds get heart surgery

BettyS wrote: »

And by the top heart centre in the UK!

How many of us will go on the waiting list for God knows how long when we fall sick

Which makes Meghan's claims (if true) about being refused mental health treatment all the more damaging.

retro:electro

Ms2011 wrote: »

Which makes Meghan's claims (if true) about being refused mental health treatment all the more damaging.

And confusing.

anewme

retro:electro wrote: »

He didn’t write the article. You managed to get his full name there into your first three sentences. It’s kind of ironic that you’re discussing his obsession with Meghan but don’t seem to be able to go a few posts without mentioning him yourself.

He may not have written that article, but no doubt a supporter or colleague did.

It was a response to you claiming I had an obsession with him, so of course I’m going to use his name.

Lot of gaslighting here.

People using the Daily Mail as a source of fact but not wanting to accept that source as flawed and biased.

And not liking it being pointed out either.

BettyS

Ms2011 wrote: »

I suppose that's where the gilded cage analogy comes from.

But it is hard for people who are struggling with their mortgage repayments on the PUP, or with young loved-ones on long waiting lists, or with people with loved-ones in hospital, and no hope of seeing them with COVID, or with people who have not had the money to go on a holiday for several years to feel their pain? Yes, everything has a cost.

But it is like that ghastly show where the rich and poor people swap lives for a week or two. For the rich people, it is a novelty to live quaintly for the time. For the poor people, it is a stark reminder of an aspirational life that they will never have.

Money buys freedom. I cannot jack in my job, because I have family to support and a house to pay for. I find my job very stressful. Many of us are just living in the cage

BettyS

Ms2011 wrote: »

Which makes Meghan's claims (if true) about being refused mental health treatment all the more damaging.

If it is true, it is horrific. However, we need evidence before we can condemn the others for this. I can make any allegations I want against a person. But it needs to be substantiated

BettyS

anewme wrote: »

He may not have written that article, but no doubt a supporter or colleague did.

It was a response to you claiming I had an obsession with him, so of course I’m going to use his name.

Lot of gaslighting here.

People using the Daily Mail as a source of fact but not wanting to accept that source as flawed and biased.

And not liking it being pointed out either.

And people using the Oprah interview as a source of fact, when several claims have been proved to be blatantly untrue

retro:electro

anewme wrote: »

He may not have written that article, but no doubt a supporter or colleague did.

It was a response to you claiming I had an obsession with him, so of course I’m going to use his name.

Lot of gaslighting here.

People using the Daily Mail as a source of fact but not wanting to accept that source as flawed and biased.

And not liking it being pointed out either.

You are showing bias yourself by not reading it or accepting any rebuttals because of not liking someone who they employ. Your posts smack of hypocrisy.

Ms2011

retro:electro wrote: »

And confusing.

Indeed