Harry and Meghan
Discussion
Gullwings said:
Having read most of this thread it's clear how effective the media have been in manipulating the population.
Anyway, this interview just confirms what the royals (and more importantly the people who surround them) are: fundamentally racist, outdated and shameless really.
No real surprises there
Let’s not forget the son who was mates with a convicted pedo. Nothing can possibly top that. Anyway, this interview just confirms what the royals (and more importantly the people who surround them) are: fundamentally racist, outdated and shameless really.
No real surprises there
Whole institution needs burning to the ground (metaphorically).
PeteinSQ said:
On the issue of if Archie should/should not be a prince. How is it that Eugenie is a princess? She was definitely born post 1917.
Because they are grand children of the reigning sovereign through the male line?Archie is a great grand child.
The same situation applied to Princess Anne's children. They weren't entitled to be Prince or Princess.
JagLover said:
PeteinSQ said:
On the issue of if Archie should/should not be a prince. How is it that Eugenie is a princess? She was definitely born post 1917.
Because they are grand children of the reigning sovereign through the male line?Archie is a great grand child.
The same situation applied to Princess Anne's children. They weren't entitled to be Prince or Princess.
Edward's kids weren't entitled either.
So Meghan has claimed she and Harry got married in private 3 days before the royal wedding, just the two of them and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Not sure that can be true. You must have witnesses and the banns need to be read in advance and Include a date and location.
Plus you can’t be married in what is to all intents and purposes appears to be a legal ceremony if already married.
What if someone had wanted to raise a legal objection?
I’m beginning to think both of them live in cloud cuckoo land and have made their own alternative reality which they actually believe.
Plus you can’t be married in what is to all intents and purposes appears to be a legal ceremony if already married.
What if someone had wanted to raise a legal objection?
I’m beginning to think both of them live in cloud cuckoo land and have made their own alternative reality which they actually believe.
rover 623gsi said:
So Meghan has claimed she and Harry got married in private 3 days before the royal wedding, just the two of them and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Not sure that can be true. You must have witnesses and the banns need to be read in advance and Include a date and location.
Plus you can’t be married in what is to all intents and purposes appears to be a legal ceremony if already married.
What if someone had wanted to raise a legal objection?
I’m beginning to think both of them live in cloud cuckoo land and have made their own alternative reality which they actually believe.
You honestly thought the most powerful family in the world couldn’t find two witnesses and get old Archo of Canters round to do it?Plus you can’t be married in what is to all intents and purposes appears to be a legal ceremony if already married.
What if someone had wanted to raise a legal objection?
I’m beginning to think both of them live in cloud cuckoo land and have made their own alternative reality which they actually believe.
I bet it’s true. What a pointless lie to make up otherwise.
JagLover said:
PeteinSQ said:
On the issue of if Archie should/should not be a prince. How is it that Eugenie is a princess? She was definitely born post 1917.
Because they are grand children of the reigning sovereign through the male line?Archie is a great grand child.
The same situation applied to Princess Anne's children. They weren't entitled to be Prince or Princess.
As above do Andrews daughters show perhaps there is some discretion?
Can’t see Phillip being the decision maker. More likely Charles.
Will likely watch it tonight as well it’s lockdown and why not.
Points so far
1. She confirms she had no real idea of the requirement and duty if you marry a prince.
2. Archie not given a title - he been but they have elected not to use it and have always said so.
3. Megan talks about what colour the baby would be. However it was a conservation between (likely Prince Phillip) and Harry she wasn’t present.
4. Harry correct her on point 3.
5. R4 already this morning have identified inconsistencies and “muddled” answers ie different between the two.
6. Appears a portion of it is simply normal family arguments - which is frankly not relevant.
7. Very sad to hear about the relationship between Charles and him has totally broken down to not speaking to each other and also the same with William.
8. Great to hear they both have high respect with the Queen and she has spent more time with Archie than any other due to them living in Frogmore house and her in Windsor Castle.
9. The bullying accusations were not covered.
10. The mental health and suicidal issues her father has stated he suffered were not covered.
11. Re her Mental health which is sad. But why didn’t she or if not her Harry take her for counselling (surely they didn’t wait for Queenie to open the purse to pay for it?).
12. Opera is not an interrogator that is evident.
Points so far
1. She confirms she had no real idea of the requirement and duty if you marry a prince.
2. Archie not given a title - he been but they have elected not to use it and have always said so.
3. Megan talks about what colour the baby would be. However it was a conservation between (likely Prince Phillip) and Harry she wasn’t present.
4. Harry correct her on point 3.
5. R4 already this morning have identified inconsistencies and “muddled” answers ie different between the two.
6. Appears a portion of it is simply normal family arguments - which is frankly not relevant.
7. Very sad to hear about the relationship between Charles and him has totally broken down to not speaking to each other and also the same with William.
8. Great to hear they both have high respect with the Queen and she has spent more time with Archie than any other due to them living in Frogmore house and her in Windsor Castle.
9. The bullying accusations were not covered.
10. The mental health and suicidal issues her father has stated he suffered were not covered.
11. Re her Mental health which is sad. But why didn’t she or if not her Harry take her for counselling (surely they didn’t wait for Queenie to open the purse to pay for it?).
12. Opera is not an interrogator that is evident.
So are they going to reveal more revelations during a Netflix series or something? I mean that interview is a pretty explosive first episode, the writing staff have set the bar high in terms of expectations.
I don’t know how they’re going to work the whole “the media hate us” / “all we want is our privacy” with using the media to, you know, make money and “tell their story”, completely uncritically and unwaveringly. The media will want their pound of flesh as payment, so it seems there will be pressure for more and more revelations, drip fed. Do they think that the media is just going to be glowingly deferent to them in perpetuity, just because they exist?
I tend to think that this will blow over the same as Prince Philip’s gaffes do. The people that care really hard about it, who are prepared to accept what they’ve heard on the show as gospel uncritically, have no power to do anything but moan about it on Twitter, and the rest of the country, the world, is happy for the Monarchy to carry on doing what it does.
I expect the only fallout from this, if you want to call it that, is that Wills and Kate will go on a PR tour in due course and Kate especially will be at pains to say and show (and be shown) how she has freedom and independence, and that things are nowhere near as bad as it’s been claimed.
I get the vibe from H&M that they want all the trappings of royalty, with none of the commitment. They both knew surely what they were signing up to. It was their choice to break away, and if what they’re saying is true - it sounds like it was the right move - but they don’t have to live (or try to) like royals. If all they need or want is each other, then any standard of living is good enough, isn’t it? They could live like regular upper middle class people quite comfortably, but I get the sense that this isn’t enough, for some reason.
I don’t know how they’re going to work the whole “the media hate us” / “all we want is our privacy” with using the media to, you know, make money and “tell their story”, completely uncritically and unwaveringly. The media will want their pound of flesh as payment, so it seems there will be pressure for more and more revelations, drip fed. Do they think that the media is just going to be glowingly deferent to them in perpetuity, just because they exist?
I tend to think that this will blow over the same as Prince Philip’s gaffes do. The people that care really hard about it, who are prepared to accept what they’ve heard on the show as gospel uncritically, have no power to do anything but moan about it on Twitter, and the rest of the country, the world, is happy for the Monarchy to carry on doing what it does.
I expect the only fallout from this, if you want to call it that, is that Wills and Kate will go on a PR tour in due course and Kate especially will be at pains to say and show (and be shown) how she has freedom and independence, and that things are nowhere near as bad as it’s been claimed.
I get the vibe from H&M that they want all the trappings of royalty, with none of the commitment. They both knew surely what they were signing up to. It was their choice to break away, and if what they’re saying is true - it sounds like it was the right move - but they don’t have to live (or try to) like royals. If all they need or want is each other, then any standard of living is good enough, isn’t it? They could live like regular upper middle class people quite comfortably, but I get the sense that this isn’t enough, for some reason.
Edited by Durzel on Monday 8th March 07:50
272BHP said:
Gullwings said:
Anyway, this interview just confirms what the royals (and more importantly the people who surround them) are: fundamentally racist, outdated and shameless really.
No it doesn't. But shameless is a certainly a good word to use for this if directed at Harry and Meghan. CaptainSlow said:
JagLover said:
PeteinSQ said:
On the issue of if Archie should/should not be a prince. How is it that Eugenie is a princess? She was definitely born post 1917.
Because they are grand children of the reigning sovereign through the male line?Archie is a great grand child.
The same situation applied to Princess Anne's children. They weren't entitled to be Prince or Princess.
Edward's kids weren't entitled either.
https://www.heraldica.org/topics/britain/prince_hi...
heraldica said:
other grandsons of the sovereign (in male line) were Prince from George I, H from Charles II, RH after 1830 (formalized in 1864 and 1917) other granddaughters of the sovereign (in male line) were Princess and H under George I and from George III, RH after 1830 (formalized in 1864 and 1917)
Now when it comes to the great grandchildren of the reigning sovereignheraldica said:
great-grandchildren of the sovereign who were children of the eldest son of any Prince of Wales were "Prince/ss" and "Royal Highness" (formal grant in 1898; restricted to the eldest living son of the eldest son of the, rather than any, Prince of Wales in 1917; extended again to the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales in 2012)
Hence why Prince William's children are Prince and PrincessCaptainSlow said:
PeteinSQ said:
On the issue of if Archie should/should not be a prince. How is it that Eugenie is a princess? She was definitely born post 1917.
A well known exception to the rule because Andrew threw a hissy fit and he's his mum's favourite. In hindsight a mistake by her Maj. 
ks. Eugene is the grandchild of the Queen the same as Harry...Edited by Vanden Saab on Monday 8th March 07:59
Don’t get fooled in to believing grifter and drifters hype. She was a z list actor, once or twice previously married and whose father lives in a trailer park in Mexico. She invited celebs she had never met to her wedding while excluding pretty much all of her close family and Harry’s childhood friends. During her short time as a Royal 7 members of her close personal staff resigned.
She creates drama and then plays the victim.
The palace knew all of her backstory but still welcomed her with open arms and it still wasn’t enough.
She creates drama and then plays the victim.
The palace knew all of her backstory but still welcomed her with open arms and it still wasn’t enough.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff