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
1678679681683684732

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,978 ✭✭✭wyrn


    I've also been wondering about the Palace PR lately. I don't know if they have a new crowd in to do PR or if they've decided to go in a new direction for media protocol. I'm just surprised by how messy things have been lately. So much gossip and speculation that they don't seem to be squashing. It also doesn't seem to be just rumours that Harry & Meghan superfans might spread - there was videos of some guards on horses in the Mall, and people speculating if Charles had died because they were carrying a black flag.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,340 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com




  • Registered Users Posts: 6,978 ✭✭✭wyrn


    Everyone but I suppose there is an extra layer for the British public & the folks of York as he's, whatever the term is, a representation / figurehead for them. He has no shame.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,340 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    Well I would have thought only the British public would be sickened by him, why would anyone else care about a member of the British Royal Family.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,698 ✭✭✭maebee


    As a lifelong Irish Republican, and by extension an anti-monarchist, I really couldn't care less if the British monarchy falls apart next week (which it seems to be doing). How the British people adore and pay for them is beyond me. Un-elected elites, imo. I'm just fascinated in the story that a two-bit American actress can ensnare a (dopey) member of the British Royal family and make him turn against his family, like she has done with hers.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 32,776 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    Prince Andrew front and centre again... vomit.



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,776 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    The mirror and the British press in general is such a sewer. Sounds like they got a call from the palace.




  • Registered Users Posts: 40,099 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Are you new to this thread?

    We have many Irish Royalists on here that care deeply about the Royal Family.

    Fair play to him is what I say.



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


    So, in your world, the 'two bit actress' is entirely suited to the 'dopey' member of the British Royal Family!

    Meghan hasn't turned against her black mother and seems to be very close to her, why have you dismissed the black woman as a major part of her family.

    Would you turn against your family if they sold pictures and photos to the press when they were explicitly asked not to by the family she was marrying into. Would you still trust this part of the family who continually attack you in the British media for money? What about Meghan's half sister, who wrote a book about her called ''Princess Pushy''? Would you still want to have anything to do with her if you were the subject of that book?

    Respect is a two-way thing. Yet you only see fault in the 'two-bit' actress and the 'dope'!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    Try applying your rationale to, let’s say, Harry fictional book, Spare, and compare it to Samantha’s book. Same as, same as.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,876 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    The events of the last number of months are certainly supporting King Charles’ wish for a slimmed down monarchy 😀- just not sure if he quite thought this one through.

    With Harry out of the picture and hence his family, and with Kate and William with less kids than the Queen, Andrew off the pitch except for family events, Anne getting on in years, the “future” will be Will Kate and clan with some supporting roles for Ed and Sophie until they decide to bow out.

    Future doesn’t look at all bright for the RF - I reckon some of the big houses and estates will have to be handed over to the state - absolute waste of money trying to keep them in their current state.

    A lot less charities supported too simply because not enough royals to go around. Up to the British public if they want rid of the RF but I reckon it’s safe enough for now but they’re going to appear very grey and ordinary in years to come similar to some of the European royal families.

    The next generation heir needs to marry young and have a great big Catholic sized family 😀



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


    Judicial review decision expected today about Harrys security i.e. did the Home Office/Ravec in deciding that “effective” security was sufficient for H&M make their decision in a lawful manner? It is at a ridiculous stage now where even if the Judge rules in Harrys favour then decisions made about his security gets kicked back to the Home Office/Ravec (the ones who decide on Royal security and who have made it clear Harry won't be getting tax payer funded security) who will then have to go about making the exact same decision to give the effective security he is getting currently but make that exact same decision in a lawful way per the judicial review expected today.



  • Registered Users Posts: 327 ✭✭backwards_man


    According to the Telegraph Harry has lost his case.

    Prince Harry to discover outcome of legal challenge over UK security - latest updates (telegraph.co.uk)


    11:07AM

    Ravec’s actions justified in 2020

    The court concluded that there was no unlawfulness in reaching the decision of 28 February 2020.

    The judge found that any departure from policy was justified and that the decision was not irrational or marred by procedural unfairness.

    11:02AM

    Prince Harry loses legal challenge over UK security - latest updates

    The Duke of Sussex has lost a legal challenge against the Home Office over his right to automatic police protection in the UK



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    Does anyone know if, as a consequence of this judgement, Harry's lust for IPP is not going to be satisfied either?



  • Registered Users Posts: 727 ✭✭✭Carol25


    So a lifelong Irish Republican is singing off the same hymn sheet as the Unionist, Tory boy Royalist line re Meghan and Harry. I have to hand it to the British press, they’re good at their brainwashing - seems very easy to achieve also if a self proclaimed Irish Republican is rowing in with that crowd. Meghan bad, brainwashed simple Harry. Let’s avoid looking at or criticising the Epstein associate, the mistress who destroyed Diana or the missing Kate Middleton and William’s utterly bizarre behaviour. It’s amazing the house of cards is literally tumbling down and people are still criticising the couple who are no longer working Royals in LA.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,099 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Mental really what is happening over there when you think about.

    The Home Office happy with a court ruling that diminishes the welfare and security of the Kings son.

    Can the damage done by Tory Britain ever be reversed?

    It's bizarro world.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    The redacted (for security reasons) judgment. It'll make interesting reading, as nearly everything of substance will be there, including the who said or wrote what to whom and when.

    Just heard on the news that (inevitably, I guess) Harry will appeal the judgment



  • Registered Users Posts: 327 ✭✭backwards_man


    The ruling today made a judgement on whether or not Ravec used unlawful decision making, not that the decision itself was incorrect. Not really sure what he was hoping to achieve with the case to be honest. Maybe if he had won today, he would have made a fresh case to Ravec to review his protection - to which they could give the same decision. But if that decision then went in his favour and he got protection back while in the UK maybe he could have argued to a US court to get IPP status or it would have been automatically granted under part b) of the below, which is US law but presumably similar is in place for the UK. It seems far fetched but he has money to burn and time on his hands so maybe this gives him purpose.

    Definition: Internationally protected person from 18 USC § 1116(b)(4) | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,230 ✭✭✭alan partridge aha


    Is he not tired of all these court cases.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    Many thanks indeed. Reading the attachment, it doesn't look like Harry could put a tick in any of the boxes. Not that it would stop him trying. He might adopt - or be told to adopt - Meghan's Dad's solution of "draw your own box".



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    Sharing a view about Harry and Meghan, whether opinion is positive, negative or gram neutral, is not dependent on colour, class, beliefs, faith, medical condition, ideology and so on. So why is it necessary to pigeonhole everyone? Someone from the Planert Zog might land in the Phoenix Park later today - weather permitting - given that they won't fit into any category, I wonder whether the alien would be pro- or anti- H&M?



  • Registered Users Posts: 727 ✭✭✭Carol25


    Except the anti Meghan and Harry side seem to be made up of middle aged white men predominantly which is creepy and some middle aged white women to a lesser extent like Angela Levin who’s employed by Camilla & Co. Seems like that particular grouping have an unconscious bias after all.

    The latest in that demographic made up complete nonsense about Meghan in an interview which he seems to have forgotten is on video for all to see and proves his ‘story’/attack to be completely false.

    https://x.com/kaindeb/status/1761324546559213718?s=46&t=UBltmPp8odCuau2P8oItgQ



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


    Have you read both? I have not, so I can't compare though the obvious comparison is that Harry's bio is about himself. Samantha's is about someone else, so really you can't compare.

    Have you actually read 'Spare' or have you read the spin put on what he said in the British media?

    How would you compare King Charles saying that his mother was very cold and remote? Imagine the future king saying that QEII was not a good mother!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    I'm impressed that you have done a demographic study. Unconscious bias, eh?

    You need to watch the full interview with Valentine Low. Watch it and see for yourself that excerpt has been taken completely out of context in the X post. Deliberately, some would say.




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    I'm trying to make the point that each of them has arguably penned a "tell-all" expose trashing some of their family purely for financial gain. So they're behaving similarly. Harry's "embellished" book, Spare, trashes his family repeatedly. I haven't read Samantha's book, but she's trashing family members, too. Join the dots - they are playing the same game.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,876 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    His angry man act is part of his brand these days - he wouldn’t be without the odd lawsuit or two- what else would he be doing with his time all day in a big mansion with no ribbons to cut 😀



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


    And New York up their security when visiting as a response to last year's chase through NYPD which was investigated and reported on.

    Don't suppose anyone will be writing anything about this in the British press.

    It has emerged in the judgement that the NYPD found that the chase in May really did happen, and has concluded that the behavior of the paparazzi chasing Harry and Meghan was not just “reckless” but also “persistently dangerous.” In what is likely to be a sweet vindication for Harry and Meghan, a senior officer at the NYPD has said the city not only holds enough evidence to arrest two people for reckless endangerment, but has also upgraded its security protocol for visits by Prince Harry and Meghan following the incident last May.


    In a letter to the Metropolitan Police in London dated Dec. 6 2023, the NYPD’s Chief of Intelligence discussed “certain changes to the security posture that will be afforded to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex” following a “thorough review” of the incident. The intelligence chief wrote:


    “We found the following: reckless disregard of vehicle and traffic laws and persistently dangerous and unacceptable behavior on the part of the paparazzi during the night in question. “The individuals operated vehicles, scooters, and bicycles in a manner that forced the security team, which included an NYPD Lead Car, to take evasive actions on several occasions and a circuitous route to avoid being struck by pursuing vehicles or trapped on side blocks.

    A few people here should be embarrassed by what they posted about this incident.

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-actually-were-dangerously-chased-in-manhattan-nypd-says



  • Registered Users Posts: 29,073 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    ultimately she didn't do what you claim she did.

    harry chose to leave the UK due to the racist daily mail, racist sun, racist daily express ETC and their behaviour.

    having a wife and child made that more important to happen so as to protect them from the loons.

    he was left with no option but to expose the truth about his family and their behaviour afterwords so as to clear up all the vial things that had been said about him by the racist british tabloid press.

    as an actual real life long irish republican, i can say that you aren't an irish republican in any way, given you believe claims from the british tabloids who hate anything that doesn't conform to their bigoted outlook.

    that is something real irish republicans do not do given how the british tabloids behaved in relation to the irish in the past.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



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


    So you have read neither of the two books and get your opinion from what you picked up from the British tabloids.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭Karppi


    There are enough reviews in a variety of publications to persuade me that a key aspect of both books was an exposé of their family dynamics ie a public trashing of family members. My point, which you continue to swerve to avoid, is that Harry and Samantha both trashed family members for financial gain. Both of them have demonstrated that unpleasant character trait.



Advertisement