# Harry quits the royal family



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Does anyone care, I do feel for the Queen though.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51040751


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Yes I do. They said they are stepping back , I dont know if that means quitting. I dont blame them 
They're a lovely couple and have a beautiful baby and I enjoy seeing their photographs.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

actually im quite sad
I feel for Meghan, shes going to get the backlash from this
and i feel for Harry, I think the whole paparazzi witch hunt of meghan, uptil now let alone whats coming, is reminding him of what happened to his mum and how young he was then
I will never forget seeing that forlorn child walking behind his mothers coffin, and he can only see, in his minds eye, Archie doing the same thing
when one adds the death of his mother, the acceptance of his stepmother, whom as a child im sure he blamed for his parents splitting ( as would any child) the knowing the failures and indescretions of both parents and seeing it splashed across newspapers and tv stations, the indescretions of people trusted by his parents and the outer family, plus the terms he served in Afghanistan and seeing other family members being castigated, bearing in mind hes said to be quiet close to Fergie and his cousins, add up to him needing help for, as an armchair psychologist, I believe
cptsd
As he comes across as one of the more down to earth members of the royal family and one whom I believed married for love, rather than marrying a brood mare, to continue the lineage
i wish him and his family nothing but good
Fergie paid off her debts and became self sufficient, by crossing the water, and, i have no doubt, these two will do the same


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Apparently they didnt consult the family which must be hurtful to them.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Good luck to them.

Harry’s way down the pecking order and there’s no need imo for him to sacrifice his future happiness by staying on the front line.

I hope they get some respite from the Press/media attention and can get on with their lives.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

If they feel they must step out of 'Royal Life' and live privately, then that's their decision.

However, as the British Taxpayer has already footed the £2.5,000,000 bill for the renovation of Frogmore Cottage for them, they cannot expect more.

If they are renouncing Royal Life, then they must forego all of the trappings and luxuries that come with it.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

I find it exceedingly hard to believe that a move like this, with the logistics involved, happened without the queen's knowledge. I'm pretty sure this is more press spinning something in to a drama that's not. 

I say good for them. Aren't you Brits always bitching about how the royals live off the taxpayer's dime? So Megan and Harry are going to try not to. Surely that's a good thing isn't it? 

I completely empathize with the change having children brings within you. I was willing to put up with our family's toxic dysfunction when it was just me suffering, but seeing my kids dragged in to the mess awakened a courage I didn't know I had. And yes, I did cut ties with certain family members, and lost relationships with others who felt they had to choose sides. 
No, this is not to say I think the royal family has been toxic (though probably is dysfunctional in many ways), but I understand how having a child can completely change what you're willing to sacrifice.


----------



## Dave S (May 31, 2010)

Well good luck to them both. Not a fan and not unexpected but Queen and Charles should have been consulted first.
Is it possible she will now meet her father and reconcile.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Dave S said:


> Is it possible she will now meet her father and reconcile.


Why? 
Why would quitting the royal family make any difference there? He sounds like a horrible human being. 
Why would she or should she reconcile with her father?


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Being 6th in line to the throne, I believe he can now chose what he wants
Anyone thinking his father, grandmother, brother etc knew nothing
Is a fool


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> Aren't you Brits always bitching about how the royals live off the taxpayer's dime? So Megan and Harry are going to try not to. Surely that's a good thing isn't it?


I have always been very pro-Royal and have the utmost respect for the Queen. I have never begrudged a single penny of Taxpayers money for her.

If Megan and Harry wish to opt out and make their own way in the World, then good luck to them truly, but they have to become financially independent and quickly.

They have said they intend to do that "through their various Charities". How that works I don't know but, as non Royals, they have to realise their Charities will not receive the same support. Sad but true.

I find it worrying that they have made the decision to take up residence in Canada on the back of a six week, luxury break in Canada.


----------



## 3dogs2cats (Aug 15, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> I find it exceedingly hard to believe that a move like this, with the logistics involved, happened without the queen's knowledge. I'm pretty sure this is more press spinning something in to a drama that's not.
> 
> *I say good for them. Aren't you Brits always bitching about how the royals live off the taxpayer's dime? So Megan and Harry are going to try not to. Surely that's a good thing isn't it? *


Yes it is a good thing.

He will always be the Queen`s grandson, then (presumably) the King`s son, the King`s brother then eventually the King`s uncle so there will be a certain amount of interest in him, that should be enough for him to earn a living in the lifestyle he is accustomed to.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Rafa said:


> If Megan and Harry wish to opt out and make their own way in the World, then good luck to them truly, but they have to become financially independent and quickly.
> 
> They have said they intend to do that "through their various Charities". How that works I don't know but, as non Royals, they have to realise their Charities will not receive the same support. Sad but true.


In this day and age of so many people who make millions for just being famous, I don't think they will have too much trouble making good enough living for them to be comfortable to the standard they're used to. 
I'm trying very hard not to sound resentful, because for us mere plebs who can't just turn up at a function and charge a fee, it would not be as simple, but hey, if they can do it, more power to them I say!


----------



## Jaf (Apr 17, 2014)

Personally I would like the royal family to be scaled down as has happened with other families. I don’t understand what they are upset about, they want the palaces and servants and bowing but don’t want to be photographed when they’re at work? Harry should lose titles, houses, income if he’s resigning. It’s not like he’ll starve, his mates will put him up. Oh and pay back the millions spent renovating his house.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Their message


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

What the Palace said


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Vancouver Island is rather nice, don't blame them for wanting to live there


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Rafa said:


> If they feel they must step out of 'Royal Life' and live privately, then that's their decision.
> 
> However, as the British Taxpayer has already footed the £2.5,000,000 bill for the renovation of Frogmore Cottage for them, they cannot expect more.
> 
> *If they are renouncing Royal Life, then they must forego all of the trappings and luxuries that come with it.*


Exactly! "We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen" … so are they scaling down their duties gradually then? If they are their are their benefits being scaled down accordingly? Or stopped completely if they are stopping their work.

Very bad etiquette not informing their family … or even the public regarding how they will stop receiving the £££'s they receive from us.

Can't have your cake & eat it …. so good riddance


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

There is precedent of course - and I don't mean the legacy of Diana - Edward 7th also abdicated his role in the royal family for a woman (who also happened to be American).

If Harry and Megan think that abdicating their position as a royal will improve peoples opinion of Megan I suspect that they will be sorely mistaken. Look what happened to Wallis Simpson.

Personally, I think they are being very naive. I'm not sure if there is a half- way stage to being a royal, which is what they are after. I don't think they have taken advice (or at least have not listened to it). A quieter, more family based role would have been achieved more successfully without the fanfare. Princess Anne did it. She remained a working royal whilst quietly going through a divorce and a remarriage and she kept her children out of the limelight.

Of course it's lovely to have a place to go where no one knows you - which is what they achieved with their break in Canada. That's what most of us mere mortals call a holiday. Then we go back to work.

J


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Harry is no longer ''the spare'' I guess as the ''heir'', William, has produced three children who are next in line. With Edward, his brother George had been raised as the spare and was not really suited to the job. Apparently the Queen Mother never forgave him and Wallis.

ETA: Makes mental note to look at DM.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

DM are calling it ''Megxit'' (predictably enough).


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

That's OK they can so what they like, to be honest I won't miss her at all, I think Harry will be missed as he was very popular with the public. 

I hope we will not be picking up the tab for their security, his got enough money to pay for their own.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Personally I don't care what they do or where they do it! They seem to be expecting some sort of part-time royal role so that they can keep their tax payer funded property, travel costs and security paid for. No - you quit your job you lose your titles and any funding


----------



## Linda Weasel (Mar 5, 2014)

Everybody is saying he should have discussed it with the Queen and whoever, first.

Maybe, had he done so, there would have been so much ‘pressure’ or manipulation brought to bear that he knew either he’d crumble or it would be made impossible somehow.

So the announcement made it fait accompli: ‘Too late, Granny, I’ve said it now’.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Meh...I think we have bigger things to worry about that what the royals are up to tbh.
I don't believe that they didn't discuss any of this with their own families before making the decision, but it makes a better story so lets run with it 

Personally I don't blame them for wanting to take a step down, and I say good luck to them!


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

StormyThai said:


> Meh...I think we have bigger things to worry about that what the royals are up to tbh.
> I don't believe that they didn't discuss any of this with their own families before making the decision, but it makes a better story so lets run with it
> 
> Personally I don't blame them for wanting to take a step down, and I say good luck to them!


 It's a good way to start streamlining the royal family, so that's a positive. But no, they can't 'have their cake and eat it' so they will have to forego many of their present privileges; at least, I hope so.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Dave S said:


> Is it possible she will now meet her father and reconcile.


No - I rather doubt it. Even before he started gabbing to the press, staging pictures etc, he had already been sidelined. I understood that he has still never met Harry (whether this is true or not, who knows). But if he had been invited to meet his future son-in-law, at least Harry could have got someone in the know to advise him as to how he should/should not behave as the father of a future member of the royal family. He really seemed to have no idea how every little thing he did would be greedily gleaned by the media and published for all to see. I find it very odd that Harry did not ask to meet his future father-in-law. He may or may not be a jerk, but it's not as tho' he's a serial killer.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

I wish them luck and hope they very soon get to their hoped for position of paid-for work. I expect they have been making plans.

The pic of the Queen and the next 3 kings seems to be a fairly clear "we have all we need" message so if they can go off and do good/be happy another way, good for them_. _I hope the court case succeeds too, and that somehow the UK press is held accountable for the anti-American, racist coverage that has been there from the start of their public relationship.


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

It’s not that uncommon. My husband hasn’t met most of my estranged family either, including my mother. I don’t speak to her, I don’t actually know whether she’s still alive, I wouldn’t introduce my husband to her. She’s not a serial killer either so far as I know.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Apparently, they had mentioned their thoughts to the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William, but they alone took the decision to make a public announcement without consulting anyone else.

They intend to keep Frogmore House as their home when they're in this Country, and will keep their bodyguards/security, financed by the Taxpayer. They also expect to receive an income from Prince Charles.

I assume they will continue to 'commute' between North America and England via private jet.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Jonescat said:


> racist coverage


Nothing to do with her colour. When she first came on the scene, she was popular (and mixed-race), people thought she would be a welcome addition to the royal family. I actually could not believe the headlines when they got engaged and then married.

Meghan mania in Manchester!
Markle sparkle lights up Liverpool!
Dazzling Duchess delights in £8000 Valentino gown! And so on and so forth . . . read all about it.

As she is still the same colour/race now as she ever was, her dwindling popularity is obviously nothing whatsoever to do with that. When she was popular, she was mixed race and still is . .. I have to say her writing inane comments on bananas startled me somewhat.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Calvine said:


> I have to say her writing inane comments on bananas startled me somewhat.


Uh... what? Am I misreading again?


----------



## Elles (Aug 15, 2011)

She wrote messages in felt tip on bananas that were in food packages for prostitutes, made up by a group that were working on helping women get out of addiction and off the streets. Of course people who think prostitution is glamorous legitimate work that women choose to do, thought the messages such as ‘You are special’ were empowering. Sometimes I really hate SjWs. Of course young women and girls love standing on street corners, earning money for heroin and the pimps who beat them. I couldn’t believe it when I saw women defending it as ‘sex work’, saying many women who choose it will feel empowered by the messages. Yeah right. :Muted

She was copying what a school in the states did for the kids apparently. I doubt she knows how ‘You are special’ written on a banana could be taken. Not sure it means the same thing in the states as it can here, but someone could take it as an insult when they’re already as low as they can go. Personally I think it was well meaning, but foolish.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I wish them both all the happiness in the world. Well done to them for doing what they think will be best for them.*


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> what? Am I misreading again?


I don't know. Are you?


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Just read that M has gone back to Canada to pick up Archie who is still there with the nanny. Not sure if this is true, obviously.

ETA: If they left the baby behind, it rather looks as tho' they were not planning to stay long in UK?


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Calvine said:


> Just read that M has gone back to Canada to pick up Archie who is still there with the nanny. Not sure if this is true, obviously.
> 
> ETA: If they left the baby behind, it rather looks as tho' they were not planning to stay long in UK?


Perhaps they are just forgetful?


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

MilleD said:


> Perhaps they are just forgetful?


Could well be!

I once left my eight week old outside the Co-op in Solihull and didn't realise I'd done so until my OH asked me where the baby was.

If he hadn't asked my son could be still there some 50 years later ........... now that's a thought!


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

MilleD said:


> Perhaps they are just forgetful?


Hahahaha! Made me laugh. You mean like when Cameron left his young daughter in the pub?


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Seriously, what with this and the Andrew business, I do feel sorry for the Queen. It's no wonder the poor old girl is shrinking - she's not much taller than Prince George now, and he's only ??six??..I reckon this time next year it's her they will have standing on a pile of phone directories.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

JANICE199 said:


> *I wish them both all the happiness in the world. Well done to them for doing what they think will be best for them.*


Me too. I wish them every happiness. Vile comments about them on twitter. The daily mail has it in for them now because they are suing them about meghans fathers letters.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> The daily mail has it in for them now


 The DM is absolutely salivating with the excitement of it all. No mention of Trump, Brexit or anything else that used to fill their pages. But originally DM adored them both, remember, even told their readers where to buy clothes like ''the dazzling duchess''. Whatever happened?


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

Who cares? As long as they pay their own way then let them do whatever they want.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

So is it really about stepping back tho or more like an opportunity just to make more money?


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

Calvine said:


> The DM is absolutely salivating with the excitement of it all. No mention of Trump, Brexit or anything else that used to fill their pages. But originally DM adored them both, remember, even told their readers where to buy clothes like ''the dazzling duchess''. Whatever happened?


That's how they work, isn't it? Build you up and then slash you to pieces for eternity.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Cleo38 said:


> So is it really about stepping back tho or more like an opportunity just to make more money?


I really think it is stepping back . They have both been through a lot of changes and had tremendous scrutiny . Meghan had the choice but Harry never did.
Also , Meghan also may be suffering from depression after the birth of Archie.

None of us ordinary folk have had to put up with the press , the constant harassment etc . maybe they went to Canada for a break and she just couldnt face coming back ?

The press have always picked on various members of the Royal Family , Princess Pushy , Prince Edward for years . They were sneery about Kates family back ground , her mother was a trolly dolly!
Unfortunately for Meghan , there is a lot in her background they can pick on and the DM just love to stir things up. They tried to do positive things like climate change etc but it went against them .

Piers Morgan is being vile and apparently they were friends and she asked for advice about how to handle the press , she dropped him and he is furious about it saying she is a social climber etc , maybe she just realised what a dick he is !
the Royal Family the money
We dont have a large income , we have enough to get by but i dont begrudge the Royal Family the money , Im glad Im not one of them, though.

ETA I dont think Harry should be criticised for trying to keep his wife happy. Charles made Dianas life a misery ,


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Rafa said:


> If they feel they must step out of 'Royal Life' and live privately, then that's their decision.
> 
> However, as the British Taxpayer has already footed the £2.5,000,000 bill for the renovation of Frogmore Cottage for them, they cannot expect more.
> 
> If they are renouncing Royal Life, then they must forego all of the trappings and luxuries that come with it.


*I have seen so many posts about this on social media, so i decided to find out about it. I'm glad i did as it's quite interesting. The renovations of Frogmore cottage didn't cost the taxpayer anymore money. As i have understood it, ( put in my own words). The queen gets a grant and the renovations came from that grant. Now had the renovations not taken place, the queen would have still got the grant. So the taxpayer was/isn't worse off. *


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

SM is a total nightmare for people finding something that reinforces their prejudices and repeating it as the truth.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

kimthecat said:


> I really think it is stepping back . They have both been through a lot of changes and had tremendous scrutiny . Meghan had the choice but Harry never did.
> Also , Meghan also may be suffering from depression after the birth of Archie.
> 
> None of us ordinary folk have had to put up with the press , the constant harassment etc . maybe they went to Canada for a break and she just couldnt face coming back ?
> ...


Sorry but these people live an incredibly privileged life style, much more so than anyone can imagine so a bit of media intrusion/criticism is part of the job.

I honesty thought having someone like MM come in to the RF might make changes & could be a good thing. Obviously because of the history of class, etc then there was always going to be some who would not welcome an 'outsider/commoner' to be part of the monarchy but just bloody get on with it … I have to take sh*t with my job as everyone does.

Lack of respect to their family on a personal level (as well as business level … as I suppose the Queen is their boss! ) is terrible. As tax payers we could be made aware of how they will be stepping down & what £££'s they will not be receiving … but obviously us peasants don't really matter & as long as they get to do what they want then we should all be supportive. It wouldn't happen at my work if I suddenly announced I would be working PT then they would immediately be clarifying what my role would be & adjusting my pay immediately ….


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I think this all her doing and I don't think their marriage will last for very long.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Cleo38 said:


> Sorry but these people live an incredibly privileged life style, much more so than anyone can imagine so a bit of media intrusion/criticism is part of the job.
> .


Agree about lack of respect for the Queen. 
For famous people , Royal or otherwise , its more than a bit of intrusion. photographers are paid a load of money to get photos of them , kate was photographed on a private holiday in France sunbathing topless which were published. Its constant. 
Remember the News of the world hacking stars moblie phones etc.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Cleo38 said:


> Sorry but these people live an incredibly privileged life style, much more so than anyone can imagine so a bit of media intrusion/criticism is part of the job.
> 
> I honesty thought having someone like MM come in to the RF might make changes & could be a good thing. Obviously because of the history of class, etc then there was always going to be some who would not welcome an 'outsider/commoner' to be part of the monarchy but just bloody get on with it … I have to take sh*t with my job as everyone does.
> 
> Lack of respect to their family on a personal level (as well as business level … as I suppose the Queen is their boss! ) is terrible. As tax payers we could be made aware of how they will be stepping down & what £££'s they will not be receiving … but obviously us peasants don't really matter & as long as they get to do what they want then we should all be supportive. It wouldn't happen at my work if I suddenly announced I would be working PT then they would immediately be clarifying what why my role & adjusting my pay immediately ….


*Us ordinary people can only imagine what life is like being a royal. To be born into it must be unbearable at times. I don't think Megan could have even began to realise how it would be. I for one, do not begrudge the couple a penny, and as long as they are happy, i'm happy for them.*


----------



## Pawscrossed (Jul 2, 2013)

They are born into a business as well as family. They get to live in Kensington Palace and receive money from the Duchy of Cornwall and don't have to work. Five percent of their income is from our tax (on their own website) but that doesn't account for security or travel which are paid for from the public purse too If they are to give up being part of a family business then the public funded grace and favour that goes with it must surely end.... then the public have less interest, so does the media and they can live this life whatever that might be. It is then absolutely none of our business but they can't have both in my opinion.

I don't doubt that they've been treated badly by the media, but is that arguably more than anyone else famous who may well work a lot harder.. anyway, but not having a plan in place leaves their news open wide for a drubbing by the gutter press laying on more pain. What they missed is a watertight and justified plan that took into account the cause and effect which I would imagine was the view of the senior royals, who despite their utter lack of relatability, do understand the concept of being born into a business and how it operates. 

It feels like they're somewhat naive in thinking most folk would accept the news without a proper plan or any idea of what financial independence really mean. It reminds me a bit of the wonderful, late Sue Townsend's 'Queen and I' when they all move to council estate to get with the plebs.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Happy Paws2 said:


> I think this all her doing and I don't think their marriage will last for very long.


People are saying she is a social climber and loves the limelight so why would she do this ? maybe she doesnt like having a paedo in the family !


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Billbailey said:


> uild you up and then slash you to pieces for eternity.


 Kate got a hard time before she and Wills married, but the whole family seems back in favour (as far as one can see) for the time being.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

JANICE199 said:


> *Us ordinary people can only imagine what life is like being a royal. To be born into it must be unbearable at times. I don't think Megan could have even began to realise how it would be. I for one, do not begrudge the couple a penny, and as long as they are happy, i'm happy for them.*


Well I do begrudge them every single penny they take from us. Some people in this country suffer terribly from poverty; the stress of not being able to cope financially, instability & worry of not having a place to live, not enough money for food & clothing, etc so I do not feel an ounce of sympathy for these over privileged whingers.

Tbh I am sick of multi millionaires whining how tough they have it or telling us paupers how to live whilst they swan off on their private jets cgoing from one 'much needed' holiday to another …… sorry, rant over!


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Pawscrossed said:


> They are born into a business as well as family. They get to live in Kensington Palace and receive money from the Duchy of Cornwall and don't have to work.


Um , I dont know for all Royals but Harry was in the army and William a helicopter pilot. William had to give it up to take on more Royal duties. If they do take paying jobs they would be criticised for taking jobs away from ordinary people.
It varies the amount of Royal duties they have to do , I expect there is a list somewhere,



> It feels like they're somewhat naive in thinking most folk would accept the news without a proper plan or any idea of what financial independence really mean. It reminds me a bit of the wonderful, late Sue Townsend's 'Queen and I' when they all move to council estate to get with the plebs.


I saw that film, it was funny :Hilarious


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> it went against them .


I think people thought they were hypocrites as their ''carbon footprint'' was far larger than most . . . their use of private jets etc.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> Well I do begrudge them every single penny they take from us. Some people in this country suffer terribly from poverty; the stress of not being able to cope financially, instability & worry of not having a place to live, not enough money for food & clothing, etc so I do not feel an ounce of sympathy for these over privileged whingers.
> 
> Tbh I am sick of multi millionaires whining how tough they have it or telling us paupers how to live whilst they swan off on their private jets cgoing from one 'much needed' holiday to another …… sorry, rant over!


 I remember they made the mistake of saying how hard they found things when they were actually in one of the very poor parts of Africa where life is really hard - which did not go down too well.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Cleo38 said:


> Well I do begrudge them every single penny they take from us. Some people in this country suffer terribly from poverty; the stress of not being able to cope financially, instability & worry of not having a place to live, not enough money for food & clothing, etc so I do not feel an ounce of sympathy for these over privileged whingers.


Im sure , but being rich doesnt mean you dont suffer from depression , anxiety etc or neglect from you family . How many rich kids kill themselves or end up on drugs. 
Poverty in this country is shocking , rich people and companies like Amazon avoiding paying tax , must be billions that must be lost. 
The government is responsible for lack of housing and poverty etc and the country votes for the government , the Royals aren't to blame.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Cleo38 said:


> Well I do begrudge them every single penny they take from us. Some people in this country suffer terribly from poverty; the stress of not being able to cope financially, instability & worry of not having a place to live, not enough money for food & clothing, etc so I do not feel an ounce of sympathy for these over privileged whingers.
> 
> Tbh I am sick of multi millionaires whining how tough they have it or telling us paupers how to live whilst they swan off on their private jets cgoing from one 'much needed' holiday to another …… sorry, rant over!


*What people think they cost us, and what is the truth are 2 different stories. I can understand fully why they have decided to do their own thing. And good luck to them.*


----------



## Bisbow (Feb 20, 2012)

Happy Paws2 said:


> I think this all her doing and I don't think their marriage will last for very long.


I agree, I thought right from the start it was not a marriage made in heaven and was doomed before they even wed

I would love to be wrong for the baby's sake. they both know about broken marriages and the problems caused


----------



## Pawscrossed (Jul 2, 2013)

kimthecat said:


> Um , I dont know for all Royals but Harry was in the army and William a helicopter pilot. William had to give it up to take on more Royal duties. If they do take paying jobs they would be criticised for taking jobs away from ordinary people.
> It varies the amount of Royal duties they have to do , I expect there is a list somewhere,
> 
> I saw that film, it was funny :Hilarious


I was commenting on the future plans not the past ones. If they are intending to step down from Royal duties why should they be subbed by the Duchy and the state for 100% of their income - 'expenses' if you like? If they claim this _and_ work whilst not doing any Royal 'work', yes they are taking jobs from others...people whose taxes pay for 5% of this 'expenses'. Financially independent means, at least in my world, earning enough money for rent, food and the means to live without borrowing from my parents and paying taxes. Perhaps they did watch the Queen and I, and thought it was a documentary.

This is why this plan is woollier than a Balmoral sheep.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Calvine said:


> I think people thought they were hypocrites as their ''carbon footprint'' was far larger than most . . . their use of private jets etc.


Yes , that's right and they have a point but how many other climate changers travel by plane etc . They used Elton Johns private jet to go to France ! I think . Unless you are Greta Thunbeg and get lifts in yachts , most people will have to travel in planes , they wouldnt have the time to travel by other means . 
The Hollywood stars are hypocrites too.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

I think they must have been planning this for some time - they didn't just go to Canada for Christmas and think, ''This is nice, let's stay''.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> The Hollywood stars are hypocrites too.


 Ricky Gervais made a point of telling them so last week!


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

Calvine said:


> The DM is absolutely salivating with the excitement of it all. No mention of Trump, Brexit or anything else that used to fill their pages. But originally DM adored them both, remember, even told their readers where to buy clothes like ''the dazzling duchess''. Whatever happened?


The DM wants to sell more papers, that's what happened... 



Cleo38 said:


> Sorry but these people live an incredibly privileged life style, much more so than anyone can imagine so a bit of media intrusion/criticism is part of the job.


Problem is, it's not a 'bit' of intrusion any more, is it? It's full on 24/7 with ultra long range lenses and a battery of technical accessories. Whether you love or loathe them, that's not a very nice situation to be in. Unfortunately for them, I don't see the press respecting their desire to step back a bit from the public eye. Too much profit in it.

And no matter what they do, they can't win - someone will find a reasons to criticise them for it. Just do royal duties, and they are jobless leeches. GET a job and cut back on the royal duties, and they're letting the public down whilst taking jobs from other people. Take the baby out with you and someone will complain a baby shouldn't be used as an accessory. Leave the baby at home and someone else will complain a baby needs it's parents. Stay at home with the baby and yet more will complain how having a baby shouldn't keep them from working like regular people have to do... Harry has grown up with it, so at least he's used to it, but it must have been a huge shock Meghan, and very stressful after the inital novelty has worn off.

Interestingly, if it were anyone other than the Royal Family (or anyone else well off), I suspect there would be a lot more sympathy about the level of bullying and harrassment (as that is what a lot of it amounts to these days) they are on the receiving end of. Yes, they should expect to be in the public eye, but no-one deserves to live totaly in the public eye with no respite. It's also interesting to note that up until this point, Harry has been regarded as one of the most down to earth royals, and more liked than many because of it. Make of that what you will.

No-one is perfect, and no-one chooses the family they are born into. I'm GLAD I wasn't born into a rich family, to be honest. I wouldn't be able to cope with having to look over my shoulder all the time. I ended up suffering from hypervigilance once, and it is horrible. No way could I live my entire life like that...


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Calvine said:


> Ricky Gervais made a point of telling them so last week!


:Hilarious They didnt take any notice, though!


----------



## Pawscrossed (Jul 2, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *What people think they cost us, and what is the truth are 2 different stories. I can understand fully why they have decided to do their own thing. And good luck to them.*


It's stated on their own website. 95% of their income is from the Duchy of Cornwall (aka Prince Charles) which earns it's income from, amongst other things, renting to landowners in the South West - and 5% from public taxes (the amount that we pay for their security and travel isn't listed).


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

It's very sad - when Harry was single he was so popular (as far as I could see) but now not so.


----------



## Pawscrossed (Jul 2, 2013)

Calvine said:


> Ricky Gervais made a point of telling them so last week!


Prince Ricky, the new Duke of Sussex. I'd pay him my taxes for that speech alone.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Pawscrossed said:


> It's stated on their own website. 95% of their income is from the Duchy of Cornwall (aka Prince Charles) which earns it's income from, amongst other things, renting to landowners in the South West - and 5% from public taxes (the amount that we pay for their security and travel isn't listed).


*And have you seen the work Prince Charles does? People say the royals are lazy, in my opinion nothing could be further from the truth.*


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *Us ordinary people can only imagine what life is like being a royal. To be born into it must be unbearable at times. I don't think Megan could have even began to realise how it would be. I for one, do not begrudge the couple a penny, and as long as they are happy, i'm happy for them.*


I agree.

I do wonder though, if this could have been handled differently to avoid this current backlash they are getting?

Gently retreating from the frontline without a big announcement might have been better?

Maybe they wanted to do it that way but were told no by the Queen and/or Charles, and felt they had to do it this way in order to create a fait accomplis to enable their "escape"?

I hope it all calms down and they become "yesterday's news" soon so they can get on with their lives happily.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Lurcherlad said:


> I agree.
> 
> I do wonder though, if this could have been handled differently to avoid this current backlash they are getting?
> 
> ...


*One of the things i find most heartbreaking is, no matter what they say or do will never be right. At times like this my heart goes out to Harry. It's well known how the death of his mother has had a huge impact on him. I honestly believe, he just wants a better life for his wife and child. What a cruel world we live in.:Bawling*


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

The problem is that even if harry leaves the firm , he will still be in danger from fanatics . he was born into this role , it wasnt his choice so he should still be protected.


----------



## Gallifreyangirl (Feb 11, 2015)

I wish Harry and Meghan well in Canada. But do think they should be getting a lot less of the Duchy of Cornwall and taxpayers money.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

An interesting article from Unherd.

https://unherd.com/2020/01/harry-an...inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3

*Harry and Meghan's embarrassing predicament*

The world is bound to lose interest once the Sussexes step back from the Royal Family


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

Calvine said:


> I think they must have been planning this for some time - they didn't just go to Canada for Christmas and think, ''This is nice, let's stay''.


I say that all the time (in my dreams)


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *One of the things i find most heartbreaking is, no matter what they say or do will never be right. At times like this my heart goes out to Harry. It's well known how the death of his mother has had a huge impact on him. I honestly believe, he just wants a better life for his wife and child. What a cruel world we live in.:Bawling*


An awful lot of people go through terrible times and one could say, they do at least have the means to step back. Many people have to keep going in dire circumstances and less empathy. Grief isn't measurable and cares nothing about status. His brother went through the same loss but has no choice...

They should've been more clear over what they wanted, maybe they were and it wasn't acceptable, but a statement of clarification may have lent more kindness and empathy, since they are in the public eye and we pay for them. They've left gaps which people are bound to fill with hyperbole or questions which do need answers. I suspect the reason is that many, me included, begrudge the *prospect* of paying them when they aren't *possibly* going to be Royals. We just don't know. I know many more in need of that bit of money, me for a start! If I knew more I would be more convivial also. I have a right to know. If Virgin Media charge me for a service I don't use, I want to know where my money is going. Ditto my tax.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

@MollySmith perhaps it helped William that he had a purpose. i.e to be King one day . Harry was called the spare and rumours about who was his real father hasn't helped. Grief can affect members of the same family in different ways .


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> @MollySmith perhaps it helped William that he had a purpose. i.e to be King one day . Harry was called the spare and rumours about who was his real father hasn't helped. Grief can affect members of the same family in different ways .


I don't that grief does affect people in different ways in the same family, we've all got an concept of how that feels I'm sure.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Calvine said:


> I remember they made the mistake of saying how hard they found things when they were actually in one of the very poor parts of Africa where life is really hard - which did not go down too well.


Wow, just shows how out of touch they really are. I know they like to make out they are 'one of us' but they aren't & it's patronising.

Instead of whining why don't they just get on with their charitable works they seem so keen to tell us they love doing. Personally I think people like this love to court the media then bleat on how awful it is when things don't go exactly how they would like. Other Royal & high profile celebs (as these two seem to want to become) can maintain privacy so it it can be done … but then suppose for some people they really don't want so much media coverage but some just say they don't


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> Wow, just shows how out of touch they really are. I know they like to make out they are 'one of us' but they aren't & it's patronising.
> 
> Instead of whining why don't they just get on with their charitable works they seem so keen to tell us they love doing. Personally I think people like this love to court the media then bleat on how awful it is when things don't go exactly how they would like. Other Royal & high profile celebs (as these two seem to want to become) can maintain privacy so it it can be done … but then suppose for some people they really don't want so much media coverage but some just say they don't


@Jamesgoeswalkies made the point that Princess Anne gets on with it and I think that her children tend to too. I don't know, I have no truck with them at all, any of them really but they seem more gracious and she's been the spare, never to be Queen. It must be different to be born into something you have no control over, but constantly being at odds like that sort of comment about tough lives in countries stricken with poverty, the announcement of the pregnancy on Baby Loss Awareness Day, attempting to be climate 'friendly' whilst jetting off to Elton's pad on his private jet... they aren't alone in this actions of course, lord knows they've all shoved their feet in it at some point but still...

I'm a little baffled as to why they had to announce it, it simply draws more attention. As if they think it noteworthy and they are important enough to for anyone to care that much. But charity works clearly need publicity to get funds. Edit to say what is the difference between senior and 'junior' royal?!

As you say, they can't possibly ever be like us, that's impossible so they need to stop trying. All of them! You only have to look at his arse of an uncle to realise how tenuous their grip on real life actually is. Guilty or not, his concept of bad behaviour was unspeakable.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *I have seen so many posts about this on social media, so i decided to find out about it. I'm glad i did as it's quite interesting. The renovations of Frogmore cottage didn't cost the taxpayer anymore money. As i have understood it, ( put in my own words). The queen gets a grant and the renovations came from that grant. Now had the renovations not taken place, the queen would have still got the grant. So the taxpayer was/isn't worse off. *


It is called the Sovereign Grant and it's funded by tax, replacing the Civil List. The grant is still used on upkeep if it's not spent on a specific palace so we'd still pay it for something. Like Andrew's XXX channels perhaps. I which case I don't mind some gilt plated toilet seats so much but I'll still ask why.
https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle...taxpayer-sovereign-grant-total-paid-uk-499687


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

I think they are old enough and well off enough without public funding to live their life as they choose.

None of us like to do what our dear family wants us to do and what suits them.
He married who he likes, he will not likely be a monarch so let them be.

Court life might not suit them and I understand.

There are enough Royals and actually we do not really need them...

I understand also that they may not want their children to be brought up as “Royals”.

Prince Andrew for example?

Harry is a son of Diana, victim of the press.

That in itself should be enough to understand why he wants his family out of that environment.

If she was a social climber she would have complied.

She is a celebrity herself, well known actress and well off too.
Though talking about her hardships while surrounded by the poor African kids... it jarred.

Still... golden cage is still a cage and freedom is worth it.


----------



## Jaf (Apr 17, 2014)

I think there’s a lot that jars about what they’ve said and done. To complain that people don’t ask her how she is...would you really believe that’s true? If so after someone has bowed to you why don’t you ask them how they are? They’ll probably return the question. Though since your staff are paid badly I’d expect they’re pretty fed up.

I think they realised that Charles won’t pay for the extravagant things they want so they’ve fluffed off in a huff.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *And have you seen the work Prince Charles does? People say the royals are lazy, in my opinion nothing could be further from the truth.*


And Princess Anne too - she knows what's expected of her and gets on with it and supports her mother.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I think Harry missed his Mother and was looking for a strong woman to look after him, well she's done that, since she arrived he seems to have fell out with William and Kate and now taken him away from his family, I hope Harry doesn't live to regret it.


----------



## Bisbow (Feb 20, 2012)

Happy Paws2 said:


> I think Harry missed his Mother and was looking for a strong woman to look after him, well she's done that, since she arrived he seems to have fell out with William and Kate and now taken him away from his family, I hope Harry doesn't live to regret it.


I am afraid I agree with every word you wrote and I fear he will end up being badly hurt
I do so hope I am wrong


----------



## margy (Dec 9, 2018)

I have my doubts on how long this marriage will last. Rumour has it William warned Harry not to marry in haste to a woman he barely knew. Apparently Diana told William to wait until he was sure before marrying, no doubt drawing on her own experience of marriage to Charles. Kate waited eight years for William and I remember her nickname at the time was waitykaty.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

MollySmith said:


> I'm a little baffled as to why they had to announce it, it simply draws more attention.


Yes, this confuses me, too. Reminds me of people who start whole new threads on Forums and Facebook to tell you they are leaving a group ... I can never understand why. Oh wait a moment, it's for attention .......

If Megan believes that she is so targeted by the media and hates the attention (or the attention on their son) and I am sure she does feel targeted, then why does she not simply stand back and let Harry do the public duties whilst she carries on with her family and less high profile charities. The press have always been very supportive of Harry and he has done a great job with the Invictus Games. Over the years and through charity work I have met both Princess Anne and the Queen - and neither brought their husbands to the events (in fact Princess Annes husband had a career as a Naval Officer so was always working elsewhere) so why should both Megan and Harry step down because Megan feels over exposed by the press?

I do agree that Harry was the one who was very affected by his mothers death - it must have been so very traumatic for him - I hope this hasn't made him vulnerable.

J


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Happy Paws2 said:


> I think Harry missed his Mother and was looking for a strong woman to look after him, well she's done that, since she arrived he seems to have fell out with William and Kate and now taken him away from his family, I hope Harry doesn't live to regret it.


Sometimes if your spouse doesn't fit in with your family and is unhappy you need to make a choice,leaving your family of origin behind to take care of your own as your priority.

Many families , Royals or not, are not happy with the choice of a spouse and in such a case you would expect your husband or wife to stand by you. 
Then take a step back and put a bit of distance so your family of origin has to recognise that you are a unit and they can accept or reject but both of you.

Foreign spouses are often in that situation.

Prince Charles married whom the family wanted and where it left him and Diana!

Harry does not want that either.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Maybe Harry just needed the right, strong woman to support him in his desire/need to withdraw from the life that gave him (and his mother) so much misery?

Even with all the trappings of wealth and privilege I wouldn’t trade my humble, happy life for his.

He’s a human being first, a Royal second. 

I suspect the “firm” weren’t going to let them go easy so maybe they decided to jump off the cliff and hope for the best?

I don’t begrudge paying for their security as that’s a necessity from his birth - he didn’t ask to be born into the Royal family after all.

My taxes are spent on a number of things that peeve me, but hey ho! 

Good luck to them!


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

It could be one of the reasons he insisted on having a full Army life. He got out of the bubble, was surrounded by friends and support and was able to be a bit more of his own man. All speculation, obviously.


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

wow...just trying to find some actual news on DM online and its virtually impossible! The whole thing is story after story about the ginger and his missus!:Wideyed
With that level of stalking and obsession the front page looks like a serial killers bedroom wall!:Hilarious


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

catz4m8z said:


> wow...just trying to find some actual news on DM online and its virtually impossible! The whole thing is story after story about the ginger and his missus!:Wideyed
> With that level of stalking and obsession the front page looks like a serial killers bedroom wall!:Hilarious


That doesnt surprise me. They dont like being sued. They're going in for the kill. They did this to the RSPCA and now foxhunts are on the rise and foxhunters are killiing foxes with impunity.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

kimthecat said:


> That doesnt surprise me. They dont like being sued. They're going in for the kill. They did this to the RSPCA and now foxhunts are on the rise and foxhunters are killiing foxes with impunity.


No comparison. The RSPCA, or the pompous pratts that run/ran deserved it. Harry certainly doesn't, not sure about her, mind....................


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

rona said:


> No comparison. The RSPCA, or the pompous pratts that run/ran deserved it. Harry certainly doesn't, not sure about her, mind....................


Actually the hunters and the editors of the DM are the pompous pratts. Whatever you think of the RSPCA , the foxes and other animals that get in their way, don't deserve to be ripped apart thanks to the Mail.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

Ironic given the Queen has only just stopped wearing fur and the Royals still have a Boxing Day hunt


----------



## stuaz (Sep 22, 2012)

Personally I don't really care what Harry and Meghan choose to do but I must admit I do find the apparent hatred that is expressed towards Meghan quite fascinating. 

It's got to the point now where I think Harry could go out and commit a crime and some people would be like " oh it's that Meghan again... she's changed him!". People don't really want to accept that the choices they are could all his doing or a joint idea. He has a wife now and a kid, maybe he is wanting to settle down, so it's not surprising they are wanting to walk there own path.

I think it's fine to have a level of outrage over potential tax payers money being spent on security when they aren't doing royal duties etc but let's not pretend we all have an insight into there marriage based on a couple photos or interviews we may have seen.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

stuaz said:


> Personally I don't really care what Harry and Meghan choose to do but I must admit I do find the apparent hatred that is expressed towards Meghan quite fascinating.
> 
> It's got to the point now where I think Harry could go out and commit a crime and some people would be like " oh it's that Meghan again... she's changed him!". People don't really want to accept that the choices they are could all his doing or a joint idea. He has a wife now and a kid, maybe he is wanting to settle down, so it's not surprising they are wanting to walk there own path.
> 
> I think it's fine to have a level of outrage over potential tax payers money being spent on security when they aren't doing royal duties etc but let's not pretend we all have an insight into there marriage based on a couple photos or interviews we may have seen.


I agree, it's fascinating and rather horrible given that nobody commenting in the main, knows her. I hope, despite my outrage at tax  that they remain happily married as an up yours, speaking as someone whose family didn't speak to me for three years because they didn't like the age gap between my husband and I. We are 25 years married next year!


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

dont they lose their protection if they give up the HRH?
or will they still get it cos Harry was born a prince?


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

MollySmith said:


> Ironic given the Queen has only just stopped wearing fur and the Royals still have a Boxing Day hunt


Do they still hunt foxes.?  l though they shot pheasant on Boxing day. Dont like shooting either but at least the pheasants get eaten.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

stuaz said:


> Personally I don't really care what Harry and Meghan choose to do but I must admit I do find the apparent hatred that is expressed towards Meghan quite fascinating.
> 
> It's got to the point now where I think Harry could go out and commit a crime and some people would be like " oh it's that Meghan again... she's changed him!". People don't really want to accept that the choices they are could all his doing or a joint idea. He has a wife now and a kid, maybe he is wanting to settle down, so it's not surprising they are wanting to walk there own path.


LOL when OH and I put up healthy boundaries and walked away from toxic people in the family, I was blamed. I had changed him, I had poisoned his brain, I was purposefully keeping him and our kids away from his family - I was the evil witch....
On my side of the family, I too was blamed. To this day my mom thinks OH walks on water but me... not so much.

Of course it is possible that I am just an evil witch :Bag


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> Do they still hunt foxes.?  l though they shot pheasant on Boxing day. Dont like shooting either but at least the pheasants get eaten.


They do shoot and that is hunting in my opinion. I thought it was highly ironic and in a dark humoured way, amusing, comparing them to being hunted. That all said, I don't follow any of them to know who goes to the hunts.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

MollySmith said:


> They do shoot and that is hunting in my opinion. I thought it was highly ironic and in a dark humoured way, amusing, comparing them to being hunted. That all said, I don't follow any of them to know who goes to the hunts.


Oh I see. Good point but as far as I know .Meghan doesn't hunt or shoot but I think Kate shoots.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

kimthecat said:


> Do they still hunt foxes.?  l though they shot pheasant on Boxing day. Dont like shooting either but at least the pheasants get eaten.


They don't normally, they have drag/trail hunts, however, the boxing day hunts are not normally hunts anyway, they are a parade and ride out, they don't even meet until late morning and by the time they've had their tipple and parade, there's not much light left in the day to hunt.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

stuaz said:


> I think it's fine to have a level of outrage


 I think the ''outrage'' is mainly because_ (if you can believe what you read)_ they announced their intentions on social media before they informed the Queen. I wouldn't know if this is true, but if it is, then I think it was a shoddy way to treat her. They must have known for ages that it was a possibility - it's not the sort of thing they would decide in a couple of days -and she should have been the first to know.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

It is predicted that they will earn more than they did as ''royals''.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> I think Kate shoots


 Yes: I've seen pictures of her holding things that she's murdered!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Meghan is really annoying me, she has ran back to Canada leaving Harry to take all the fall out of their decision. There is a meeting tomorrow with the Queen, Charles, William and Harry, she should be there at Harry side to support him as it's as much her decision as Harry's, more hers I think. 

I really feel for William, he was so close to Harry until she arrived on the scene, now looks as if his lost his brother.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I saw this, this morning. I must say it comes as no surprise to me. Fair play to him for doing what he thinks is best for his wife and baby.*

*https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...Q8PS-ELekca-nwtUyetxAh08hHmfQHu7uV07-kCciiMY4*


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

rona said:


> They don't normally, they have drag/trail hunts, however, the boxing day hunts are not normally hunts anyway, they are a parade and ride out, they don't even meet until late morning and by the time they've had their tipple and parade, there's not much light left in the day to hunt.


''
If only they would stick to that, Its definitely on the increase , i should start another thread as Ive taken this thread OT.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I saw this, this morning. I must say it comes as no surprise to me. Fair play to him for doing what he thinks is best for his wife and baby.*
> 
> *https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...Q8PS-ELekca-nwtUyetxAh08hHmfQHu7uV07-kCciiMY4*


Reading the end of that article, I think he needs mental help, running away to another country isn't the answer.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Happy Paws2 said:


> Reading the end of that article, I think he needs mental help, running away to another country isn't the answer.


*I don't think he is running away as such, just trying to do what he thinks is the best and safest thing for his family. As regards his mental health, i don't believe he has ever comes to terms with the loss of his mother.*


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I don't think he is running away as such, just trying to do what he thinks is the best and safest thing for his family. As regards his mental health, i don't believe he has ever comes to terms with the loss of his mother.*


I agree the loss of his Mother then letting walk behind the coffin to the Abbey will have scared him for life. I don't think running away from his family will help either.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Happy Paws2 said:


> she has ran back to Canada leaving Harry to take all the fall out of their decision


I bet he'll be off back there too as soon as the meeting with the Queen is over, tho' supposedly he has engagements later this week. Watch this space, eh . . . . ? She had left the baby behind anyway, so am guessing this was always her intention before they came back from Canada.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

It looks like prince charles wont be there. he's popped over to Oman for a funeral.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

kimthecat said:


> It looks like prince charles wont be there. he's popped over to Oman for a funeral.


He's gone for the funeral of the Sultan of Oman who died on Friday.

https://news.sky.com/story/the-sult...id-al-said-has-died-state-media-says-11905873

*Sultan of Oman remembered as a 'good friend' by the Queen*


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Looks like the press wont leave her alone.

Jonathan Swain
@SwainITV
·
11hEn route to Vancouver Island with Simon on camera as #MeghanMarkle is back here. With the 10 hour flight behind us now a short hop across the water from Vancouver to the capital of British Columbia, Victoria.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

kimthecat said:


> It looks like prince charles wont be there. he's popped over to Oman for a funeral.


Prince Charles will be back tomorrow for their meeting.


----------



## margy (Dec 9, 2018)

Happy Paws2 said:


> Prince Charles will be back tomorrow for their meeting.


I'd love to be a fly on the wall!


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

FFS it’s the lead story on BBC News. There are still fires in Australia, Iran... Brexit... Trump and our planet’s climate is in crisis.. and this is lead news? It’s all hyperbole and speculation. It’s news but not big news surely.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

MollySmith said:


> FFS it's the lead story on BBC News. There are still fires in Australia, Iran... Brexit... Trump and our planet's climate is in crisis.. and this is lead news? It's all hyperbole and speculation. It's news but not big news surely.


Yes it's driving me mad as well, it's not news anymore, there are so many more important things going on, it shouldn't be the lead news story.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

MollySmith said:


> It's news but not big news surely.


 I know: it's hardly the ''constitutional crisis'' which Edward and Wallis caused. It's not as tho' it's Charles or William - Harry is sixth in line. But it did manage to knock Donald Trump and Brexit off most of the front pages for a while, which is quite a feat in itself.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

Calvine said:


> I know: it's hardly the ''constitutional crisis'' which Edward and Wallis caused. It's not as tho' it's Charles or William - Harry is sixth in line. But it did manage to knock Donald Trump and Brexit off most of the front pages for a while, which is quite a feat in itself.


I almost miss Brexit.... actually here's a conspiracy theory. If they eek the news out until 31st, and it ends up with a huge DM story like... Meghan and Me, bonded by bad families by Liz of London... leaving the EU might be relegated to a footnote. Bury the bad news (depending on ones point of view) with a Royal Crisis. It's all very good timing.

Speaking of which, fake news alert
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...bbish-offensive-and-potentially-harmful-story


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

margy said:


> 'd love to be a fly on the wall!


Haha! Me, I would love to hear Prince Philip's opinion of the whole business. I bet the air is so blue that the Queen has to have him locked in a cellar where he can't be heard.:Smuggrin Apparently he won't be at the meeting - no surprises there.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Seems like common sense has prevailed (as I suspected it would ) and the Royal Family is going to cope ....

On BBC site

“The Queen has agreed a "period of transition" in which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will spend time in Canada and the UK.

She said that "My family and I are entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan's desire to create a new life as a young family," she said.

"Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family."

Doesn’t stop the media trying to continue hyping up the drama ... itv showing a program tonight on the “crisis” :Bored


----------



## FeelTheBern (Jan 13, 2016)

The question is, when in Canada, will they keep supporting the British motor industry by buying The Best 4x4xFar? The Windsors are loyal Land Rover customers. Will they end up buying some massive American SUV thing with a 7 litre engine? Who knows? Who, apart from me and the people at Land Rover, actually cares?


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)




----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

FeelTheBern said:


> The question is, when in Canada, will they keep supporting the British motor industry by buying The Best 4x4xFar? The Windsors are loyal Land Rover customers. Will they end up buying some massive American SUV thing with a 7 litre engine? Who knows? Who, apart from me and the people at Land Rover, actually cares?


They will make their ''carbon footprints'' even larger by commuting regularly from Canada to UK . . .


----------



## FeelTheBern (Jan 13, 2016)

Calvine said:


> They will make their ''carbon footprints'' even larger by commuting regularly from Canada to UK . . .


Quite...I can't help but think there's quite a bit of irony amongst many of these supposedly environmental types.


----------



## Valanita (Apr 13, 2010)

I hope we won't still be supporting them when they opt out.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Valanita said:


> I hope we won't still be supporting them when they opt out.


Me too; but don't hold your breath.


----------



## Summercat (Oct 8, 2017)

It seems more about marketing their brand freely and selling themselves for public events and speaking without objection, than anything else.
They were not even part of the Royal Family very long as a couple, now it is off to make money from the association.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

I always said it would be a press witchhunt like Diana v Fergie was
Not as pretty, not as poised, not such a personable person ( although she comes across as a little more approachable than duchess of Cambridge, but that may be a 'position' thing) a bit of a rebel who has been in the public eye for a while, from an acrimoniously split family etc
As it turns out Fergie and Andrews children have arrived into adulthood as, seemingly, poised and balanced adults, with charm and persona, who have ridden the waves of both parents indiscretions, without being drawn in nor repeating them
Hopefully Archie, and any others that follow, will grow up the same, knowing they have a loving extended family to turn to, whilst making his/their own way in the world, on their own two feet
Good luck to them, they seem far happier as a family unit than the Cambridge's, but again 'position dictates how the first in line should present to the public


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

FeelTheBern said:


> Quite...I can't help but think there's quite a bit of irony amongst many of these supposedly environmental types.


Agree, it makes it hard for any of us who really do try to be reasonable and sensible about climate change to be taken seriously.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

It could be worse, I'm sure this story is playing on Harry's mind and causing sleepless nights.
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co....stershires-biggest-princess-diana-fan-3736895


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

I hope this plays in the UK, it's hilarious


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

O2.0 said:


> I hope this plays in the UK, it's hilarious


No, can't get it run


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

Whilst I maintain that rather than try to disappear, Harry should carry on, whilst Megan takes a step back (yes, to protect the media invasion). I do have a modicum of sympathy for them - the Daily Mail is relentless - and yes, in hindsight it may have been prudent for Harry and Megan not to sue them for publishing the private letter to her father - but the Mail is suggesting they will bring her father forward as defence witness in court - for any of us with colourful family histories can you imagine what that might be like - in fact Merkle senior was on TV this morning wittering away with his 'I just want her to contact me' (he's all about ME ME ME). And the Mail is rubbing their hands in glee ££££££££. Nasty paper.

J


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Summercat said:


> now it is off to make money from the association.


 Yes: all a bit tawdry, isn't it.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> I hope this plays in the UK, it's hilarious


''Video unavailable'' unfortunately.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

Happy Paws2 said:


> No, can't get it run


Try Youtube.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

MollySmith said:


> Agree, it makes it hard for any of us who really do try to be reasonable and sensible about climate change to be taken seriously.


''Celebs'' clearly think they can buy their membership of the climate change club. . . . and then continue to jump aboard their private planes; saying which, some of the genuine ones are donating heftily to help the Australian fire disaster.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Jamesgoeswalkies said:


> the Daily Mail is relentless


 If this country were in the throes of WW3 with enemy troops marching down the road, they would still have the Sussex story on the front page . . . it's like a soap opera you can tune into each day. Someone told me that on one day they had* 22 *Sussex articles, tho' not sure if that is a slight exaggeration as I didn't bother to count. If this had happened at the same time as the GE, I bet the Sussexes would still be front page.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Its not over yet. her dad is apparently coming over to the UK to testify on behalf of the Daily mail in the court case. .


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> Its not over yet. her dad is apparently coming over to the UK to testify on behalf of the Daily mail in the court case. .


 I bet they are paying him megabucks to do so!


----------



## Tiggers (May 27, 2014)

I'm sick of hearing about them to be honest. If they wish to fade into oblivion, then good luck to them. That said, the British taxpayers should not continue to fund their lifestyle. I'd sooner learn of the antics of Mr and Mrs Smith from the local council estate


----------



## Jaf (Apr 17, 2014)

Since there’s now a vacancy I’d like to apply. I’ve thought long and hard about and I think it could work. I’m disabled so that’d be another “tick” for the royals. I’d need a speech maker (I could just nod) but I can shake hands. I don’t care about social media or the newspapers so would ignore the lot.

Harry and Meghan would be welcome to stay at Frogmore cottage with me when they’re in the uk. Since it was 5 houses knocked into 1 there should be space!!!


----------



## Jaf (Apr 17, 2014)

I changed my mind...give the job to John, the lorry driver who dragged a woman from a burning car. Seems like such an amazing man deserves to be a prince.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

so maybe all the haters will shut up now
no HRH,
no public funds
andrepaying the money for frogmore house
perhaps all the haters and the paps will leave them alone now
theyre going with nothing other than what theyve been left, or have earmed

they can go with their heads held high
and the majority of the GBP, who've had their say, have been proven wrong


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

mrs phas said:


> so maybe all the haters will shut up now
> no HRH,
> no public funds
> andrepaying the money for frogmore house
> ...


It's not about being a 'hater' but more about understanding how public money is going to be used … surely that's to be expected?! These are very privileged people who made an announcement concerning themselves & their needs without giving any answers regarding the £££'s they receive. IMO this shows a complete lack of understanding towards the public & just how out of touch they really are


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

I still say they made the public announcement to make sure they would be “allowed” to go.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

mrs phas said:


> so maybe all the haters will shut up now
> no HRH,
> no public funds
> andrepaying the money for frogmore house
> ...


I've just been reading this on Sky News and I was amazed. Good for them.

I do hope it all works out well for them and their marriage survives and thrives, unfortunately Meghan has a reputation for cutting and running when she doesn't like something, but maybe she really has found her forever prince


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

mrs phas said:


> so maybe all the haters will shut up now
> no HRH,
> no public funds
> andrepaying the money for frogmore house
> ...


It isn't about being a hater, but being realistic. I don't know them so it's impossible to hate. Critiquing something doesn't mean hating.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Cleo38 said:


> It's not about being a 'hater' but more about understanding how public money is going to be used … surely that's to be expected?! These are very privileged people who made an announcement concerning themselves & their needs without giving any answers regarding the £££'s they receive. IMO this shows a complete lack of understanding towards the public & just how out of touch they really are


theyve given the answers
but
in their own time
as theyve done with everything else
cant believe theyve done everything you all asked for ( not you personally)
and still youre all not happy:Banghead:Banghead
instead of jumping on the waggon without knowing the song
you all couldve waited for them to release the correct words


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

MollySmith said:


> It isn't about being a hater, but being realistic. I don't know them so it's impossible to hate. Critiquing something doesn't mean hating.


As i dont know you, or anyone else on this thread 
even if i did ( know anyone personally), hate, as far as i am concerned, is a pointless emotion, I remove a person from my life a long time before i reach that stage
so wasnt pointing the finger at anyone in particular, just haters in general


----------



## Summercat (Oct 8, 2017)

I am a bit cynical. Of course there is a spin put on to make things more palatable to the tax payer. But the question of who will pay for their considerable security was left vague.
I doubt they are riding off into the sunset to live a private life. It is more likely gearing up for a life, where they will make money from public appearances, speaking etc.
The security cost is likely to be huge.
Book to come as well I expect, if anyone wants to place bets.
Maybe multiple self help and cooking books, as well as a life story.
They have been working on their 'brand' and still have the name Sussex. All about the marketing now.
Meghan as herself, a little known actress, would have limited appeal, so she will strike while the gold mine is hot.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

I dont know them of course.

They have enough already to live in luxury.

I can imagine they actually want to have some time off the limelight and cut down on being on display to be able to do want they enjoy doing.
Without courtiers, advisers and so on...
Have family time like ordinary people.

They will not be monarchs so why not?

I just think being Royals can be cumbersome and overwhelming for someone from outside.


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

Summercat said:


> Meghan as herself, a little known actress, would have limited appeal, so she will strike while the gold mine is hot.


Little known actress? You know she earned around 40k per episode from Suits, right? Her net worth was about 5 million before she even married Harry.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

mrs phas said:


> theyve given the answers
> but
> in their own time
> as theyve done with everything else
> ...


The privilege of the mega rich tho …. deciding how they will change their job, step back from duties yet no mention of £££'s initially.

As I said in an earlier post am sure all of us who are in paid employment who announced that we would be reducing our workload would be immediately booked in with HR & an agreement made regarding our salary. There would be no "in our own time"


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

MollySmith said:


> It isn't about being a hater, but being realistic. I don't know them so it's impossible to hate.


Agree totally. I am not sufficiently interested in them (or any of the royals) to hate them, though I admit to having respect for the Queen still strutting her stuff at 93! It sidelined Brexit and Trump for a week or so at least, so that was something.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

shadowmare said:


> Little known actress?


 I never heard of her before she met Harry; her rating back home was probably higher I'm guessing.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Calvine said:


> I never heard of her before she met Harry; her rating back home was probably higher I'm guessing.


Neither had I, but I guess we are both the types that don't believe that fame or wealth make you special or even interesting


----------



## Summercat (Oct 8, 2017)

shadowmare said:


> Little known actress? You know she earned around 40k per episode from Suits, right? Her net worth was about 5 million before she even married Harry.


Did you know who she was before she started dated Harry? The four or five million she had, if she had it cash in hand, not spent before the marriage, would likely not cover their security costs now for a year.

Suits was I think run by a cable network in the US and not exactly the best TV had to offer, not the worst but not prime time.
I think her dating/marrying Harry probably increased the profile of the show to everyone's on the shows benefit.
So yes, I would say a little known actress (before she claimed not to know who Harry was and began dating him.)

I doubt many would be buying into her 'brand' if she was still an actress on Suits and not having married into the Royal Family.
Keeping some sort of tie and connection is relevant to their future income from the tie.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Summercat said:


> before she claimed not to know who Harry was


 Yeah, right! As if.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Am confused … if they have so much of their onw money then why 'pledge' to pay the money back for Frogmore Cottage? Why not pay it immediately? And no mention of security costs


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Calvine said:


> I never heard of her before she met Harry; her rating back home was probably higher I'm guessing.


I never heard of her either.


----------



## white_shadow (Dec 3, 2008)

..








*www.msn.com*​.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Summercat said:


> Suits was I think run by a cable network in the US and not exactly the best TV had to offer, not the worst but not prime time.
> I think her dating/marrying Harry probably increased the profile of the show to everyone's on the shows benefit.
> So yes, I would say a little known actress (before she claimed not to know who Harry was and began dating him.)


:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious
Sorry but this is hilarious 
Whilst the wedding did boost the popularity (if Iron man wed into the royals the same would happen), to say that Suits isn't prime time is ridiculous...it has been running since 2011 and has been nominated for many awards...you don't get to 10 seasons when you aren't a popular program...Markle has acted in 3 or 4 films (earning over $100,000 in each) and has appeared on other tv shows but her most recent and longest success was Suits (which is available on several players for people to watch outside the states).

Just because you hadn't heard of her doesn't mean that she was an accomplished and well known as an actress.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

StormyThai said:


> :Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious:Hilarious
> Sorry but this is hilarious
> Whilst the wedding did boost the popularity (if Iron man wed into the royals the same would happen), to say that Suits isn't prime time is ridiculous...it has been running since 2011 and has been nominated for many awards...you don't get to 10 seasons when you aren't a popular program...Markle has acted in 3 or 4 films (earning over $100,000 in each) and has appeared on other tv shows but her most recent and longest success was Suits (which is available on several players for people to watch outside the states).
> 
> Just because you hadn't heard of her doesn't mean that she was an accomplished and well known as an actress.


Never heard or seen Suits, I rarely watch American programmes don't like them and I hadn't heard of her until just before they got engaged.


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

I'm beginning to think that Piers Morgan needs therapy.


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

cheekyscrip said:


> I dont know them of course.
> 
> They have enough already to live in luxury.
> 
> ...


It's not like she didn't know what she was getting herself into though.

Well, I wish them the best of luck and I hope all works out for them.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

mrs phas said:


> As i dont know you, or anyone else on this thread
> even if i did ( know anyone personally), hate, as far as i am concerned, is a pointless emotion, I remove a person from my life a long time before i reach that stage
> so wasnt pointing the finger at anyone in particular, just haters in general


thank you, I agree.



Calvine said:


> Agree totally. I am not sufficiently interested in them (or any of the royals) to hate them, though I admit to having respect for the Queen still strutting her stuff at 93! It sidelined Brexit and Trump for a week or so at least, so that was something.


very true!


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

This is doing the rounds after John Simpkin shared with the observations that the writer is one of the most credible journalists he has met.

It made me reflect that, love or loath them, somewhere in the middle, we've all been a swayed by media and the storytellers. Do read the link before replying, or the my post makes no sense
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ce-harry-meghan-markle?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

I'm not following - why does it matter if Meghan Markle is a "nobody" or a well-known actress? 
I don't watch TV that much, I'm often completely out of the loop with popular actors and actresses. I rarely recognize any of the people on the magazine covers in the supermarket check-out line (tabloids). What does knowing who someone is have to do with anything? 

As far as I can tell Meghan Markle is a human being. As a fellow mom I can very much empathize with motherhood completely changing you and making you re evaluate how you live and how you want to protect your children. She's a mom who's being attacked for frankly some rather odd and irrelevant reasons. And even on this thread it's her being scrutinized more than Harry. 

Absolutely address the money they're using. Absolutely address how they're going to pay for security, housing, traveling back and forth... But as far as I know, no one on this thread knows her personally. The comments about her as a wife to Harry, about her as a daughter, about her as a person - why? There is no need other than just plain meanness.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

MollySmith said:


> This is doing the rounds after John Simpkin shared with the observations that the writer is one of the most credible journalists he has met.
> 
> It made me reflect that, love or loath them, somewhere in the middle, we've all been a swayed by media and the storytellers. Do read the link before replying, or the my post makes no sense
> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ce-harry-meghan-markle?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Reading it now and already nodding my head. 
I really do feel for Meghan. I don't think she fully knew what she was marrying in to. I don't think anyone does to be fair. But I can see being a mom prompting her to draw a very clear line in the sand. 
I wish her and her new little family well.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Billbailey said:


> I'm beginning to think that Piers Morgan needs therapy.


He's such an ass. 
Does he not realize that when he says things like Meghan Markle *made* Harry ditch his family that it's insulting to Harry as much if more so than Meghan? Does he not thing Harry has any backbone? Or any say in his marriage? Does he really think Harry is just an easily manipulated push-over? 
I don't. I think in a respectful relationship, couples make decisions together, support each other, and respect each other's feelings on matters. I have no reason to believe Harry and Meghan aren't in a respectful relationship. 
I have plenty of reason to believe Piers Morgan has no idea what that is, so of course he would be confused by couples making decisions together enguin


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10156606141806813


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

MollySmith said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ce-harry-meghan-markle?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


It doesn't make nice reading - and it certainly does shine a light on why the press is trying to manipulate us against Megan Markle.

_QUOTE "The third level is the storytellers. Almost everything we think we know about this couple is filtered through journalists.

But trust in this third dimension is further compromised by the fact that none of the major players filtering this story for our consumption is exactly a disinterested bystander. *All three of the major newspaper groups most obsessed with Harry and Meghan are themselves being sued by the couple for assorted breaches of privacy and copyright.* There is, to any reasonable eyes, a glaring conflict of interest that, for the most part, goes undeclared.

For some years now - largely unreported - two chancery court judges have been dealing with literally hundreds of cases of phone hacking against MGN Ltd and News Group, the owners, respectively, of the Daily Mirror and the Sun (as well as the defunct News of the World)."
_
Which certainly goes some way towards why Piers Morgan is trying to keep it all front page news - lest we talk abut the real scandal - phone hacking/breaches of privacy and the like (and not just the royals of course) which (allegedly - just in case he wants to sue me) also includes his involvement when in charge of the Mirror.

I would still have preferred Megan and Harry to stay and for Megan to take a step back but to be honest the more I read the more sympathy I have for them.

J
_
_


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

ForestWomble said:


> It's not like she didn't know what she was getting herself into though.


True; unlike Diana who was about ?? 20 when she met Charles, M was late thirties and already been married/divorced, so hardly a shrinking violet. I do think that both she and her father should have been told exactly what to expect (Harry could have helped in that respect) . . . but Markel sr. has still not even met Harry (allegedly) nor his grandson for that matter.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> m not following - why does it matter if Meghan Markle is a "nobody" or a well-known actress?


I think this started when it was suggested that M, as a not-very-famous actress, and the two of them without their HRHs, would not be such ''crowdpullers'' in their future lives as . . . . whatever they plan to do or be. Maybe they chose Canada (supposedly) as that is where she is more of a ''celeb''.


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

They may well have chosen Canada because it's like America but with no Trump.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Billbailey said:


> They may well have chosen Canada because it's like America but with no Trump.


Yes. It is said that she won't go to America until DT is no longer President: she may have a long wait methinks.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> I'm not following - why does it matter if Meghan Markle is a "nobody" or a well-known actress?
> I don't watch TV that much, I'm often completely out of the loop with popular actors and actresses. I rarely recognize any of the people on the magazine covers in the supermarket check-out line (tabloids). What does knowing who someone is have to do with anything?
> 
> As far as I can tell Meghan Markle is a human being. As a fellow mom I can very much empathize with motherhood completely changing you and making you re evaluate how you live and how you want to protect your children. She's a mom who's being attacked for frankly some rather odd and irrelevant reasons. And even on this thread it's her being scrutinized more than Harry.
> ...


Agreed! It's ALWAYS the woman who is made the scapegoat, the one to ruin things, the one to come between families, to manipulate the 'poor, easily led' men, etc 

The media initially tried to play her & Kate off against each other, again as they always do with women & as they did with Diana & Fergie. It's so weird that this still goes on & people still repeat the same old misogynist BS. People seem to think 'poor old Harry' when in reality he is much more to blame for this situation as he understands protocol & has received tax payers money his while life so should have been a lot clearer in his intentions. Regarding MM I don't honestly think anything can prepare you for the media scrutiny & regardless of how rich or famous you are family members selling personal letters & running to the media every few weeks must be so hurtful & shows such a breach of trust that am not sure you could ever really get over.

Having said that do I feel sorry for them? Not really. I think they've handled this badly & I think they relied too much on what they thought was public support. They should have sorted this out privately, I don't understand the need for releasing statements with no plan behind them, IMO it shows arrogance & lack of judgement.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> Reading it now and already nodding my head.
> I really do feel for Meghan. I don't think she fully knew what she was marrying in to. I don't think anyone does to be fair. But I can see being a mom prompting her to draw a very clear line in the sand.
> I wish her and her new little family well.


It's very telling. I absolutely agree she's a human being with feelings. Anyone regardless of being a mother or parent has the right to draw lines and have an urge to protect. I'm fortunate to know several famous women who are not mothers but have experienced trolling on a very frightening level, I've had it to much lesser scale but it was still public and made me very fearful for privacy. If one is the having to conform to Royal protocol then it must be harder still.

I wonder if dropping HRH does then allow them more legal rights to sue the likes of Piers Morgan.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Daddy dearest has been talking to the press again.. I think it will a first of many pop ups now about him in the media. Seems than happy to discuss the couple which he barely knows!


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Just caught a bit of the speech he made on the news . Did anyone else see it? I feel sad he is leaving and feel it puts an extra burden on William.
I dont think the press will ever leave them alone.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

lullabydream said:


> Daddy dearest has been talking to the press again.. I think it will a first of many pop ups now about him in the media.


I've read from two sources that Markle sr. is doing/has done a 90-minute documentary for channel 5 which will air soon. This really has turned into the soap which keeps on giving, hasn't it!


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> Did anyone else see it?


Missed that.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

lullabydream said:


> Daddy dearest has been talking to the press again.. I think it will a first of many pop ups now about him in the media. Seems than happy to discuss the couple which he barely knows!


And the half sister was on tv the other morning ..... she's a total b*tch from what I see and always manages to get some digs in.

I'm not surprised Meghan wants nothing to do with that side of the family tbh.


----------



## Summercat (Oct 8, 2017)

Follow the money, as they have retained the branding they wanted with Sussex Royal.

I wonder at those commenting, that a mid thirty's woman, who was a middle of the road actress, and hence had some experience of public life, is along the same lines of initial naivety as an 18 year old Diana... Really? 
I am sure, Megan would have been better prepared than Diana, and had help, especially after the experiences of Diana. Harry would surely have been able to give insight himself.
The dating period would have given her a fairly good idea of media exposure.

And do people really think a cable network show is along the same lines of wealth generating as the Royal Family and puts you in the same category of income?

And thinking that money never crossed their mind, in this one foot in and one foot out plan, with keeping the connection, not being bound but having the freedom to make cash off the connection?
Sounds a good deal.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Summercat said:


> better prepared than Diana


 She really was the proverbial ''lamb to the slaughter'', wasn't she. I'm sure I read that she only met Charles alone about a dozen times before she was married off to a man who had no intention of giving up his mistress; but she never lost her popularity, even after the divorce.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Calvine said:


> She really was the proverbial ''lamb to the slaughter'', wasn't she. I'm sure I read that she only met Charles alone about a dozen times before she was married off to a man who had no intention of giving up his mistress; but she never lost her popularity, even after the divorce.


Diana's death was and still is a great loss to our country, she was treated very bad by Charles and the family and I still think her death was suspicious and no one will ever change my mind.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

I think that some in this thread need to grasp "There but for the grace of god I go" For want of a better phrase, due to not being religious!

I find it quite sad that all these little digs are being made about a person that not one of you have met or are even close to knowing...Even down to belittling an acting career ( because being worth at least £5m is just pocket change ) 
The press really have done a good job 

I honestly don't blame Harry for wanting to support his wife to get away from this attitude...


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

StormyThai said:


> I think that some in this thread need to grasp "There but for the grace of god I go" For want of a better phrase, due to not being religious!
> 
> I find it quite sad that all these little digs are being made about a person that not one of you have met or are even close to knowing...Even down to belittling an acting career ( because being worth at least £5m is just pocket change )
> The press really have done a good job
> ...


I'm just finding everything a bit surreal in UK at the moment. A woman with an established career marries into the royal family giving up her career and she's being dragged through mud, constantly compared to another woman, called gold digger, her character is being discussed by people who never met her and her nasty "family" members get cash from UK press who are salivating at the idea of selling all this trash "news". 
For 11 years in UK I constantly saw people moaning about how useless the royals are and how they shouldn't exist. Now two of them decide to step down and getting shit for that too. 
She has her own money and a definite chance to get back to her career one day, he's served in the army for a decade and been in Afghanistan... but they're selfish because they don't want to perform in front of the public anymore? 
If we were talking of any average Joe trying to leave his life year career and getting hounded by the press and his community, we'd think people are nuts. But it's ok because he's a prince? He didn't choose to be a prince. He was born into it. He wants to quit and people are literally giving him abuse for wanting to get away from the pressure of being a performing monkey in a circus. 
UK public: The Royals are self entitled, spoiled, good for nothing rich people who live off tax payers money. We should abolish the monarchy.
Harry: I don't want to be a royal anymore. I'm stepping down and will live my life the way I want to and have a right as any other human being.
UK public: how dare you? You have a duty of doing your royal job (whatever the f that actually is). Besides, you've just spent a lot of tax payers money on the house that you had to get as a royal.
Harry: I will pay back the money over time. 
UK public: Why over time? Why not right now?

Reminder: they don't owe any apologies or explanations to the public. None. Zero. Nada. They are adults who have the right to decide how they want to live their lives. This is not the Torries. They didn't get put in the royal family by a referendum or general elections. The boy was born into a family. The woman fell in love and wanted to marry a man from a rich family. To say that she "knew what she's going into" is just absurd. She knew they're royals so she should put up with all the trash spoken about her by the public and the British media? What the actual f...? I can't believe that people actually think that somehow she should have to put up with it all as if the public is entitled to dragging her through mud.


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

Hmm.... not sure lumping together over 66 million people is really helping your argument. When it comes to opinions, the Brits are no more an homogenous mass than any other nation.

And as far as I can tell, most Brits don't really give that much of a crap about it. How much of a crap each one actually gives is a matter for them, obviously.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

StormyThai said:


> I think that some in this thread need to grasp "There but for the grace of god I go" For want of a better phrase, due to not being religious!
> 
> I find it quite sad that all these little digs are being made about a person that not one of you have met or are even close to knowing...Even down to belittling an acting career ( because being worth at least £5m is just pocket change )
> The press really have done a good job
> ...


Lead news on the BBC again last night. It really isn't newsworthy IMO.


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

I think it's the media. They are using it as a distraction to all the other things going on, like the phone-hacking inquiry and all the various lawsuits. It wouldn't surprise me if Government had had a word with the BBC as well to keep it going so they can sneak out a few things without anyone noticing. Plus the child abuse scandal in Manchester involving some high-up police officers and councillors is not getting much attention.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Billbailey said:


> most Brits don't really give that much of a crap about it.


You couldn't tell by the media coverage....


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

MollySmith said:


> Lead news on the BBC again last night. It really isn't newsworthy IMO.


I think it is . It's his statement of his resignation and its good to hear it from the horses mouth.
On the other hand I havent seen anything , or much , on the news on either channel ,BBC or ITV ,about The Russian government resigning recently and in France , the doctors are resigning and the firemen demonstrating.

ETA , I think harry must have felt lonely in his position of being a royal even though he had a busy life and I hope he finds contentment in being loved by his wife and child and loving them back.


----------



## Billbailey (Dec 22, 2019)

O2.0 said:


> You couldn't tell by the media coverage....


Which is part of my point. Our media are doing this whether we want them to not. Long gone are the days where the media did we want. They lead opinion now, they don't inform it.

Our MSM no more reflects us than Fox News reflects the opinions of every American.


----------



## CollieSlave (May 5, 2016)

Happy Paws2 said:


> Diana's death was and still is a great loss to our country, she was treated very bad by Charles and the family and I still think her death was suspicious and no one will ever change my mind.


I'm inclined to agree that her death was suspicious. Suppose she had married Dodi al Fayed. His father is evidently a dodgy character having been repeatedly refused British citizenship. Now, what would be the situation in years to come? Prince William heir to the throne, or even king, with a dubious step father who was refused British citizenship but, in these circumstances, al Fayed would be in a position of significance. Surely this would be intolerable to The Establishment! Diana dies, so this disturbing scenario could not, now, come about. There we are then!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

CollieSlave said:


> I'm inclined to agree that her death was suspicious. Suppose she had married Dodi al Fayed. His father is evidently a dodgy character having been repeatedly refused British citizenship. Now, what would be the situation in years to come? Prince William heir to the throne, or even king, with a dubious step father who was refused British citizenship but, in these circumstances, al Fayed would be in a position of significance. Surely this would be intolerable to The Establishment! Diana dies, so this disturbing scenario could not, now, come about. There we are then!


That's just what OH and I have said right from the start, the whole accident didn't ring true someone high up behind it.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Billbailey said:


> Our media are doing this whether we want them to not.


 I do wonder if the Canadian/American press/media with be more restrained . . . or if the story of ''the actress and the runaway prince'' will be too juicy to resist. Scandal and gossip sells many papers, hence why the Sun is at #1 and Daily Mail at #2 with regard to circulation (or certainly were quite recently). Not sure who actually buys newspapers these days when you can get the usual salacious ''information'' online.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Calvine said:


> I do wonder if the Canadian/American press/media with be more restrained . . . or if the story of ''the actress and the runaway prince'' will be too juicy to resist. Scandal and gossip sells many papers, hence why the Sun is at #1 and Daily Mail at #2 with regard to circulation (or certainly were quite recently). Not sure who actually buys newspapers these days when you can get the usual salacious ''information'' online.


 I think the British press will follow them to Canada and hound them there.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> I think it is . It's his statement of his resignation and its good to hear it from the horses mouth.
> On the other hand I havent seen anything , or much , on the news on either channel ,BBC or ITV ,about The Russian government resigning recently and in France , the doctors are resigning and the firemen demonstrating.
> 
> ETA , I think harry must have felt lonely in his position of being a royal even though he had a busy life and I hope he finds contentment in being loved by his wife and child and loving them back.


The news at ten only had the statement at the end, presumably too late to cover it all, the rest was a rehash of the night before.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Billbailey said:


> Which is part of my point. Our media are doing this whether we want them to not. Long gone are the days where the media did we want. They lead opinion now, they don't inform it.
> 
> Our MSM no more reflects us than Fox News reflects the opinions of every American.


Media has a huge responsibility, for sure. But someone is buying those tabloid magazines or they wouldn't be selling them. Someone is watching Piers Morgan rant on GMB or he wouldn't be on there.

Most of us are good at surrounding ourselves with like-minded or at least equally open minded people. And social media algorithms are good at making sure we see what we mostly agree with, but the sad truth is, while Fox News doesn't represent the opinions of every American, it represents enough of them to stay on the air. 
I don't think the UK is that much different. Nothing brings folks together better than collective hate, and MM is an easy target


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

We never watch Piers Morgan or any programmes like his and I can't remember the last time we brought any papers or magazines.


----------



## Jaf (Apr 17, 2014)

I think hate is too strong a word. I don’t generally read about celebs but when they do something hypocritical or wildly insensitive it does irritate me. Harry and Meghan banging on about climate change or sobbing about how unhappy they are was deeply irritating given the time and place. It seems that Harry and Meghan have understood that they should make changes and have done so. I hope that the rest of the royals do so too.

I remain to be convinced that the changes mean anything, they certainly haven’t improved their carbon footprint despite being so concerned about it that they’re only having 1 or 2 babies (!). They will continue to be some of the most privileged people on the planet.

I am more concerned about Andrew being back in with the royals! There he was at church with the Queen. What’s changed? Has he found some morals? Is it ok to hate him?


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Jaf said:


> Is it ok to hate him?


I don't know, I'm so confused. I think I might need to make a t-chart with Meghan on one side and Andrew on the other to see which one I'm supposed to hate. I mean, Meghan makes babies which is obviously a crazy rude thing to do what with so much overpopulation, but on the other side, Andrew is having sex with babes, who may be 'babies' which may lead to more babies.

Hard to say really...


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Jaf said:


> I remain to be convinced that the changes mean anything, *they certainly haven't improved their carbon footprint despite being so concerned* about it that they're only having 1 or 2 babies (!). They will continue to be some of the most privileged people on the planet.
> 
> I am more concerned about Andrew being back in with the royals! There he was at church with the Queen. What's changed? Has he found some morals? Is it ok to hate him?


Ahh but very privileged people have a right to tell us lesser privileged people how to live our lives as they know best ,.... & they are so important that they need to keep travelling the world in their private jets to tell other less privileged people the same …. but they probably plant a few trees so that's ok 

Bet Andrew can;t believe his luck with this latest announcement taking the heat off him!!


----------



## stuaz (Sep 22, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> I don't know, I'm so confused. I think I might need to make a t-chart with Meghan on one side and Andrew on the other to see which one I'm supposed to hate. I mean, Meghan makes babies which is obviously a crazy rude thing to do what with so much overpopulation, but on the other side, Andrew is having sex with babes, who may be 'babies' which may lead to more babies.
> 
> Hard to say really...


Don't forget Meghan is also contributing to murder and droughts because she eats avocados.... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lling-human-rights-abuses-drought-murder.html

And if that's not bad enough she even makes Kate cry!
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7...n-cry-princess-charlotte-royal-wedding-dress/

That's got to make her worse than Andrew!

*sigh*


----------



## Jaf (Apr 17, 2014)

Are you really saying that I was comparing Andrew to Meghan?! If guilty the man is a rapist, at very best he’s a nasty tom.

What I said was I am worried that the royals have him back in the fold again. It looks as though all is forgiven.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Jaf said:


> I am more concerned about Andrew being back in with the royals! There he was at church with the Queen. What's changed? Has he found some morals? Is it ok to hate him?


of course, hes never been 'out' with them
they are his family
and 
until charged AND found guilty of anything other than, in their case, inbred stupidity
any *decent *family do not abandon a member
castigate? yes
punish? yes
but cast them ( in this case him) out?
no.

as for if is it ok to hate him
well thats up to you,
Personally, i dont waste my energy on hating anyone, especially someone I only have tabloid knowledge of, I hsve much more important things, and people, to worry about in RL


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Jaf said:


> New Are you really saying that I was comparing Andrew to Meghan?!


No, not at all. I was trying to insert a little sarcastic humor in to the whole discussion, that's all.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

O2.0 said:


> You couldn't tell by the media coverage....


Sadly, a large proportion of the British public do seem to thrive on "celebrity" gossip and more so on their misery (and cellulite photos ), judging by the number of gossip mags and trashy newspapers on sale here


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Lurcherlad said:


> Sadly, a large proportion of the British public do seem to thrive on "celebrity" gossip and more so on their misery (and cellulite photos ), judging by the number of gossip mags and trashy newspapers on sale here


Well , I dont read the gossip mags unless they are in the doctors waiting room and I don't follow the reality programmes However , Im dying to know if Brad and Jen are getting back together.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

kimthecat said:


> Im dying to know if Brad and Jen are getting back together.


Are they?


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Lurcherlad said:


> Sadly, a large proportion of the British public do seem to thrive on "celebrity" gossip and more so on their misery (and cellulite photos ), judging by the number of gossip mags and trashy newspapers on sale here


hence an 11 page thread :Hilarious


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

lullabydream said:


> Are they?


I dont know . They seems very friendly when their paths cross. I hope they do .


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Jaf said:


> What I said was I am worried that the royals have him back in the fold again. It looks as though all is forgiven.


It was always suggested that Andrew was the Queen's favourite son I seem to recall.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> I think the British press will follow them to Canada and hound them there.


Yes, likely end up with Canadian _and_ UK press following them. Maybe escaping was not such a bright idea . . . oh, the irony.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Since Diana the British press on the whole have stopped hunting the Royals for photos, it's the foreign press that won't left them alone.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Short but interesting opinion piece in CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/11/opinions/prince-harry-meghan-markle-blame-drexler/index.html

"They ran her out of town and now they're mad she's leaving."


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

O2.0 said:


> Short but interesting opinion piece in CNN:
> https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/11/opinions/prince-harry-meghan-markle-blame-drexler/index.html
> 
> "They ran her out of town and now they're mad she's leaving."


Not accurate tho really … the Daily Mail might take this stance but I don't think they are representative of the country. Whilst I agree that MM seems to be getting more stick than Harry ( as I agreed in an earlier post) I don't think people are mad they are leaving …. more like questioning the finances surrounding it as this hasn't been made clear.

In the article: "Why not view the couple's attempt to (at least in part) go it on their own, and define themselves as people outside of the monarchy as bold, and brave? Who says they can't have a "normal" marriage?"

Bold & brave? Maybe if they truly are being financially independent. Outside the monarchy? Surely they will be becoming more financially independent by using their status & connections? Whilst they can't help that & will always be part of a very privileged family it has obviously been very beneficial to them in making relationships with very influential people to help them & give them opportunities … they are hardly going to struggle like most other families would

I honestly think people would have been more sympathetic if more consideration had been applied by their announcement & how they went about it.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Cleo38 said:


> I honestly think people would have been more sympathetic if more consideration had been applied by their announcement & how they went about it.


Perhaps, but then again, give some of the comments I've read, perhaps not. 
We'll never know though at this point.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Happy Paws2 said:


> New Since Diana the British press on the whole have stopped hunting the Royals for photos


I remember that after her death, there was a meeting between Buckingham Palace and Fleet St. at which it was agreed that the boys should not be pursued as she was, and left to grow up in peace. I think the press adhered to this; I don't recall seeing photos of William at university, tho' there were several of his (now) wife.


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

Calvine said:


> I do wonder if the Canadian/American press/media with be more restrained . . . or if the story of ''the actress and the runaway prince'' will be too juicy to resist. Scandal and gossip sells many papers, hence why the Sun is at #1 and Daily Mail at #2 with regard to circulation (or certainly were quite recently). Not sure who actually buys newspapers these days when you can get the usual salacious ''information'' online.


It's not exactly 'news' they print, though, is it? Pretty much all this stuff is just outlandish gossip and wildly speculative opinion dressed up as 'news' because it sells papers (and online subscriptions to them these days).

As to why it sells, well, in Roman times the expression to describe it was 'panem et circenses' - bread and circuses. If your population is well fed and has time on its hands, you need to keep them entertained (otherwise they might start getting interested in things you really don't want them noticing  ). In Rome, the games were the main entertainment - but over the years they became increasingly outlandish, with skill becoming secondary to crowd pleasing spectacle as sponsors of the games vied to out-do each other (plus gain a positive public following and distract from any less desirable aspects of themselves). Nothing has really changed, except these days the end results usually arn't fatal. Not that death needs to get in the way of a good gossip, of course - The Mirror ran Diana stories for years.

Unfortunately, I don't see the press leaving Harry and Meghan alone. There's a reason traditional fairytale stories usually end at the 'happy ever after' point, as when you reach that point the interesting bits are mainly over. So as there's a lot more profit in hinting at trouble in paradise and/or being critical of their every move, that's the tack I fully expeect the tabloids to take, epecially as they have gone off the script the media barons would have preferred.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

Nothing will give the press more fun than reporting how badly things are going for them, and if their son is drunk at a party in due course, you can guarantee it will because of thisrather than becuase he is 16. In my world, people are saying " good luck to them". People are mad at Andrew, mad at William, bored with Charles and now tending to republicanism - that pic on the Queen's desk showed a pretty dismal future set of kings. 

Just for the record MM was working with the UN and World Vision before she met Harry. He commented he had to "up his game" when he met her.

oh - and I liked and watched Suits off and on although I struggled with understanding American law.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Jonescat said:


> Nothing will give the press more fun than reporting how badly things are going for them, and if their son is drunk at a party in due course, you can guarantee it will because of thisrather than becuase he is 16. In my world, people are saying " good luck to them". People are mad at Andrew, mad at William, bored with Charles and now tending to republicanism - that pic on the Queen's desk showed a pretty dismal future set of kings.
> 
> Just for the record MM was working with the UN and World Vision before she met Harry. He commented he had to "up his game" when he met her.
> 
> oh - and I liked and watched Suits off and on although I struggled with understanding American law.


Why are people mad at William? I loved Suits . I understand American law because I watched L.A law and The Good Wife


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

They believe the story about the affair.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

They have started already
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51197099


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Jonescat said:


> They believe the story about the affair.


What affair?


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Happy Paws2 said:


> They have started already
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51197099


I'm not sure why they thought it was only the British press that wanted photos. The paparazzi from various countries are notorious for their antics and don't care who they upset. Remember the topless photos of the duchess of Cambridge when they were on holiday miles away from anywhere.
Diana was mainly pursued and hounded by paps whenever she was out of the country.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Jonescat said:


> They believe the story about the affair.


Im not sure what you mean. There were rumours that William had an affair but it wasnt widely discussed.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> Im not sure what you mean. There were rumours that William had an affair but it wasnt widely discussed.


Must live under a stone, I hadn't heard a thing about that


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Siskin said:


> *Must live under a stone,* I hadn't heard a thing about that


Same as here, I've never heard anything like that about William.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Siskin said:


> Must live under a stone, I hadn't heard a thing about that


Me neither, tho' I heard/read that Kate had had a ''falling out'' with one of her 'set' and the reason why was apparently 'hush hush'. Maybe that was it.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Calvine said:


> Me neither, tho' I heard/read that Kate had had a ''falling out'' with one of her 'set' and the reason why was apparently 'hush hush'. Maybe that was it.


I had heard about that, but nothing more then that. How odd.


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

Siskin said:


> Must live under a stone, I hadn't heard a thing about that





Happy Paws2 said:


> Same as here, I've never heard anything like that about William.





Calvine said:


> Me neither, tho' I heard/read that Kate had had a ''falling out'' with one of her 'set' and the reason why was apparently 'hush hush'. Maybe that was it.


Me neither.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

It's easily read if you Google "William affair".


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Siskin said:


> Must live under a stone, I hadn't heard a thing about that


It was mentioned on twitter. I dont think its true


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

Siskin said:


> Must live under a stone, I hadn't heard a thing about that


Good gracious me! Here am I living in deepest darkest Attila the Hunland and I heard that William allegedly had an affair with one of Kate's best friends who live down the road from them!


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Magyarmum said:


> Good gracious me! Here am I living in deepest darkest Attila the Hunland and I heard that William allegedly had an affair with one of Kate's best friends who live down the road from them!


Ahhh, but oi be livin' in the deepest darkest West Country, and if I'm not there it's even darker and deeper in Suffolk which is the ends of the earth as far as the Internet is concerned. Anyway my stones bigger then your stone:Hilarious


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

Siskin said:


> Ahhh, but oi be livin' in the deepest darkest West Country, and if I'm not there it's even darker and deeper in Suffolk which is the ends of the earth as far as the Internet is concerned. Anyway my stones bigger then your stone:Hilarious


:Bawling:Bawling:Bawling

I'll tell my mum your'e being horrid to me an she'll cum round n sort ya out ......... see?:Finger


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Magyarmum said:


> :Bawling:Bawling:Bawling
> 
> I'll tell my mum your'e being horrid to me an she'll cum round n sort ya out ......... see?:Finger


I'll tell me dad and he's bigger then your dad:Shifty


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Jonescat said:


> It's easily read if you Google "William affair".


 If you'd never heard rumours you would not take the time to do that . . . like I would not google ''Jonescat affair''.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> It was mentioned on twitter. I dont think its true


 Well, if it's gossip we're after (maybe) I've also heard/seen it suggested that her ex-HRH Duchess of Sussex had been married_ twice_ before and had the first marriage annulled - tho' it did strike me that this was something that really could not be concealed (especially by someone marrying into RF).


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Sorry if this has already been posted, but I just read that the C5 documentary with her adorable father is tonight at 9? Not checked tho'.


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Calvine said:


> Sorry if this has already been posted, but I just read that the C5 documentary with her adorable father is tonight at 9? Not checked tho'.


Giving him airtime is beyond indecent IMO. 
I can't even imagine. He sold private correspondence to tabloids. What kind of parent does that?!


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

O2.0 said:


> Giving him airtime is beyond indecent IMO.
> I can't even imagine. He sold private correspondence to tabloids. What kind of parent does that?!


 I wonder how much he is being paid this time?


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

O2.0 said:


> Giving him airtime is beyond indecent IMO.
> I can't even imagine. He sold private correspondence to tabloids. What kind of parent does that?!


Oh believe me I know from my own experience some parents do behave like that.

My father used to open my letters and search through my cupboards if given the chance, even though I was an adult and mother to two teenage sons. He'd show them to his closest friends and several times I had to retrieve jewellery and clothes he removed and given to various people on the basis that I hadn't worn them for quite some time!

When I tackled him as to why he meddled in my private business, I was told because I was divorced, I obviously wasn't capable of making the right decisions and therefore he had to make them for me


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Magyarmum said:


> Oh believe me I know from my own experience some parents do behave like that.
> 
> My father used to open my letters and search through my cupboards if given the chance, even though I was an adult and mother to two teenage sons. He'd show them to his closest friends and several times I had to retrieve jewellery and clothes he removed and given to various people on the basis that I hadn't worn them for quite some time!
> 
> When I tackled him as to why he meddled in my private business, I was told because I was divorced, I obviously wasn't capable of making the right decisions and therefore he had to make them for me


Unbelievable!


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Magyarmum said:


> Oh believe me I know from my own experience some parents do behave like that.
> 
> My father used to open my letters and search through my cupboards if given the chance, even though I was an adult and mother to two teenage sons. He'd show them to his closest friends and several times I had to retrieve jewellery and clothes he removed and given to various people on the basis that I hadn't worn them for quite some time!
> 
> When I tackled him as to why he meddled in my private business, I was told because I was divorced, I obviously wasn't capable of making the right decisions and therefore he had to make them for me


Can't 'like' your post, but yes, I know there are ******* parents like that out there sadly.

But giving someone like that a platform to speak about their child is as abhorrent as his behavior. 
He has shown himself to be a cruel man, out to make a buck at the expense of any sort of relationship with his daughter or grandchild, to give him airtime and an audience is so wrong. And that people will watch it. We've really fallen far as a society in this area. It's sad to me


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

Calvine said:


> If you'd never heard rumours you would not take the time to do that . . . like I would not google ''Jonescat affair''.


I am glad to hear it  Goodness knows what I have been up to  But I didn't really want to repeat it all and was just saying how to find out if people wanted to. I was told it rather than reading it - proper old fashioned gossip - but still gossip about people I don't know. My general point was about support of the royal family and what influences it amongst people I know.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Did anyone watch the programme ?


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

kimthecat said:


> Did anyone watch the programme ?


If they did
Will they admit to doing so?


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

mrs phas said:


> If they did
> Will they admit to doing so?


:Hilarious I would have watched it but there was a lot of other programmes on tonight that we wanted to watch.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

kimthecat said:


> Did anyone watch the programme ?


No, got better things to do.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Jonescat said:


> Goodness knows what I have been up to


 I hate to think . . . one hears things, of course!:Cat


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

*The Daily Mash*

*Daily Mail renames itself the Daily F**k You Meghan We Hate You*
23rd January 2020








*THE Daily Mail has renamed itself the Daily F**k You Meghan We Hate You in recognition of its core focus as a publication. *

The newspaper has made Meghan-hatred its primary source of news, and is even prepared to stop supporting Brexit if Meghan decides she is in favour of it.

News editor Carolyn Ryan said: "Over the last week we've noticed other, less patriotic publications moving away from abusing Meghan. Not us. Our loathing will never fade.

"Our new name, written on the masthead in the same gothic font, affirms our commitment to filling the first 17 pages of our publication with vicious, vitriolic hatred every single day.

"Today alone there's our usual six pages of Thomas Markle bile, Amanda Platell telling Meghan she should feed herself to sharks, and a Photoshopped picture essay showing Kate healing the sick and Meghan causing crops to wither in her wake.

"On other pages we've got 'Did Meghan cause the Wuhan coronavirus?', 'Polar blast hitting UK from Canada where that vile bitch lives' and 'Man United lose two-nil, thanks to f**king Meghan'."

Daily Mail reader Susan Traherne said: "I hope they still find room for their inexplicable smear campaign against Phillip Schofield. I'm emotionally invested in that now."


----------



## O2.0 (May 23, 2018)

Meanwhile in Canada, the biggest scandal they can come up with is Justin Trudeau buying donuts from a local shop. :Hilarious:Hilarious

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/22/politics/justin-trudeau-doughnut-shop-prices/index.html


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

O2.0 said:


> Meanwhile in Canada, the biggest scandal they can come up with is Justin Trudeau buying donuts from a local shop. :Hilarious:Hilarious
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/22/politics/justin-trudeau-doughnut-shop-prices/index.html


I know, it even eclipsed the Trump Impeachment on CNN. And horror of horror he paid $200 for them when he could have got them for $10 for a dozen! 

Such a scandal and just shows you how well the filthy rich live!


----------

