Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1621622624626627732

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    It's like someone leaving a job but getting a redundancy payment for three years salary (Harry was getting a million a year pocket money). They get a lump sum payment (3 million) but won't be getting a salary anymore.

    This can be spun to be that the person has been "cut off financially" which would be a truthful statement because the salary stops. Leaving out or minimising the lump sum being the spin.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    The Agreement had included security for the year. The Queen had agreed to that. And there was a letter to Ravec about it from the Queen. Presumably the Queen would have covered that if she was informed that they wouldn't. Harry in his book says that he was refused access to her when he had spoken to her and she invited him to stay as she had a free week from engagements. Harry was told later by her Private Sec. that she wasn't free.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,175 ✭✭✭Be right back




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Piers seems to have a personal vendetta against Harry and Meaghan - obviously he didn’t like Meaghans ghosting of him in the early days but it’s taken on another level of bitterness these days- makes him look quite dim and childish in my view considering he’s doing this for a living



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Piers is up to his neck in it. Harry has called him out in court for lying to the Leveson Enquiry (along with a few other senior people). What happened was Meghan met Piers for a drink when she was in London and got on well with him and he liked her. Then she obviously told Harry that she met him and Harry gave her the low down on what he was really like and she had nothing to do with him again. Here is James O'Brien's take on how has happened in the last few days and why the press have been hounding H&M for the last couple of years.

    https://x.com/DrDobberstein/status/1736150134549827858?s=20



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 968 ✭✭✭Str8outtaWuhan


    Him and Clarkson are they not in Camilla's social circle from back in the day?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Clarkson certainly is - wasn’t he at some knees up with Camila in the last year?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    I reckon it was the whole ITV Good Morning debacle which really fuelled Morgans contempt and desire for going in studs showing on the Sussexes. He can grandstand about protecting freedom of speech and protecting the monarchy but for me its a mix of Morgans initial narcissistic injury, Meghans leaning on ITV to have him cancelled for the crime of not believing someone and a current professional media troll smarting for a fight and raising his profile (i.e. ratings baby! Money baby!). Like watching egotistical blackholes colliding. You stand back and watch them collectively implode.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Yet you believed Morgan who was the originator of the '17 lies' commentary. https://www.irishmirror.ie/tv/meghan-markles-17-lies-exaggerations-23861447

    Interesting to note the similar style of reasoning from him in his denials after the court case that he ''didn't hack anyone'' or he didn't ''ask anyone to hack'' when the judgement was that he knew about it.

    So, for instance, when he accused Meghan of lying to Oprah about the private wedding ceremony, he claimed that it wasn't a legal service where Meghan never claimed it was a legal ceremony in the first place.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    ITV had no option but to fire him. He walked off the show. Meghan rightly made a complaint because of the effect it would have on people who might not reach out for help when they are mentally struggling. Just so you know, Ofcom had 40,000 complaints about it and the Mental Charity also complained.

    So, in short Meghan contacting ITV wasn't the reason he lost his job (though in fairness, he did benefit greatly because Murdock took him on with a £50m 3 year deal to slag her off and try and prevent Harry pursing his newspaper empire in the courts).



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    ...then he was cleared by Ofcom 🤷‍♂️ This is the guy Jeremy Clarkson punched lest we forget. Morgan is clearly a monarchist so when an interview is deemed to be attacking it then obviously someone of that particular make up isn't exactly going to be quiet about it. As you say he's done pretty well financially from the aftermath and perhaps beyond all the bluster that was the point.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Clarkson punched Piers Morgan because he published some unflattering photos of him. I don't see much of a connection to claiming that someone was lying when they said they were suicidal. Meghan complained (along with 57,000 other people) about what Morgan said because it might deter people from seeking help if they needed it. Its the only time that she has written to complain about what someone said about her. Ofcom ruled on a freedom of expression, but also told ITV that they should have had a warning about it and offered counselling numbers. Clearly, Morgan wasn't going to apologise and ITV couldn't trust him to behave,so they had to fire him, not just because Meghan complained, but 57,000 people found what he said offensive.

    Morgan is not a royalist - he is what we call in this country, a me feiner and doing what he can to keep himself out of jail for lying to the Leveson Enquiry. If he was a royalist, he wouldn't be slagging Harry off, because no matter what he says, Harry will always be a grandson and son of the UK's reigning monarch. Attacking Harry is attacking the monarchy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    “Attacking Harry is attacking the monarchy? “

    Really? So that goes for Prince Andrew then I assume. Very strange position to take there I must say.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    The difference is that hung around with a couple of sex predators who were convicted of crimes and bought his way out of facing a trial in the US. Harry married a biracial woman who did absolutely nothing to harm anyone

    What crime would you charge Harry & Meghan of in a court of law? How much do you think the Royal Family would pay to get him off?



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Actually, here is a link to Piers Morgan talking about Meghan Markle prior to turning against her. His last quote is where he said that as soon as Meghan got together with Harry, Harry was not going to allow her to have a friendship with any media person.

    https://x.com/DrDobberstein/status/1736364606925197416?s=20



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    She did nothing to harm anyone?

    They'd stepped away, found freedom, were signing deals left and right. Do you think going on telly and inferring that an unnamed in law was racist to her unborn child was harmful to the reputation of The Queen, Duke of Edinburgh, Charles, Camilla, Kate, William? i.e. the "senior" royals.

    Yeah I get it. They have their mental health too but screw them because they're the bad guys, who cares about them etc. but it is far to say that by virtue of participating in that interview that it was harmful so to say Meghan didn't harm anyone is false.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    I watched the Andrew documentary on Virgin last Monday. He also was a media and public darling until his relevance dwindled and ugly character traits were no longer protected. He came across, to put it bluntly, as a dick albeit an aimless and relatively poor one in comparison to the senior members.

    I am sure those in the family felt the same about him. An embarrassment. I'd say the men and women in grey suits convened and took his interview with Maitlis into account and decided that this idiot was going to talk himself into jail if the Giuffre case ever went to trial. It was made to go away by having his mother write a cheque and so we never got to see an ultra privileged and arrogant Prince face any justice.

    Post edited by valoren on


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    YOU SAID “attacking Harry is attacking the monarchy” - so don’t lecture me thanks- especially when making such a universal statement like that 🤪



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    No, he wasn't getting a million a year 'pocket money'. He was shopping in TK Max and Meghan was buying furniture from Ikea with her credit card. Harry even had holes in his shoes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Now you’re just being idiotic with that post - don’t masquerade as a serious poster and then post that bullsh1t



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    She just recounted a story where some senior royals expressed ''concern'' about the colour of the baby. My reading of it is that the Royal Family were very concerned about the reaction of the racist British press if the child turned out to be a bit dark. Lets not forget some of the press comments made about Meghan ''thickening the royal blood'' - Rachel Johnson, the former PM's sister. And then the person who worked for the BBC depicting the child as being a chimp when he was born. Its hardly a stretch of the imagination that the royals might express 'concern' about this happening when you see what exactly happened when he was born (white).



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Thats nonsence. The Royal Family haven't suffered because of the interview. If anything the UK press used it to attack her further. I don't see any of the Royal Family's subjects turning against them - if anything they are even more supportive of them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    The multi millionaire shopping in TK Maxx. It's a victim playing narrative. How else was he getting funded as a then working royal? Duchy income. Check the Duchy accounts which should be a starting point for verifying this. 🤷‍♂️



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    Well the Queen died while members of her family were suspected of racism. Nice of Harry to debunk that months after she died while doing promo to make money. Only someone gullible bought into his gaslighting that it was the press. He could have clarified this press campaign in all that time between March 2021 and Sept 2022 but didn't. And these two are fighting misinformation. You couldn't make it up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,026 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

    Did Harry forget he inherited millions from his mother?

    Holes in his stories more like.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Your gutter press posted photos of him leaving TK Max. How did you miss that? The allowance he got from his father was only for formal clothes. There are photos of Harry with holes in his shoes. Do a search for them.

    As for his inheritance from his mother - as far as I recall, he wasn't in control of it. The way the RF works is that the seniors control all the money and the rest are dependent on them so that way they are kept in control. Thats how they hoped to control Harry by cutting him off of all funds. Another example, Charles evicting Harry from the house which was a gift from the Queen and which he leased (and is presumably still empty now, not earning anything).



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    No, its just a fact. There are photos of him coming out of TK Max by your sainted British gutter press.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Harry was a family member as well, don't forget. From what I recall, Meghan didn't accuse anyone of racism. She said that ''2 senior members of the RF had expressed ''concern'' about the colour of the baby. Some people interpreted that as normal - people often wonder if a child will have red hair, etc. etc. It was the British tabloids that interpreted it as racist. My interpretation was fear by senior royals as to the furore from the British Press if the child was a little dark skinned. The RF were afraid of the press.

    Bearing in mind that Charles & William had refused Meghan help, why should he have gone out of his way to help them when they were in a spot of trouble?



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,899 ✭✭✭suvigirl


    of course he is in control of his inheritance! Diana left him at least 13 million, which he received at 30.

    it's not known I believe, how much the queen mother left him, but I reckon it wasn't a one for all gift voucher.

    Of course, poor Harry doesn't get pocket money from daddy anymore, but his current worth is estimated at approx 60 million, so he really should buy himself some new shoes.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,477 ✭✭✭valoren


    I've been pretty open about my derision and contempt for the gutter press and their tactics but now they're sainted by me. Ok. 🤷‍♂️



Advertisement