Meghan vs the Queen

All things Rugby

Why did the UK not embrace Meghan?

She is American
24
21%
She had a working-class background
5
4%
Racism
65
56%
She is an actress
14
12%
She was taking Harry a national treasure away
9
8%
 
Total votes: 117

User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 20795
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by CrazyIslander »

It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Punter15
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:29 pm

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Punter15 »

CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
User avatar
terryfinch
Posts: 5603
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by terryfinch »

Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
Certainly seems that the Royal Family have opened up a 3-1 lead. After going down to the early Oprah bombshell, they responded well and the strategy is paying off. Media now picking up on all the obvious lies and inconsistencies in what M&H said, Royal Family staying quite dignified. The ‘Meghan has been a victim her entire life’ hitting home.
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

Rowdy wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:31 pm
Sputnik V wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:09 pm
mdaclarke wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 9:36 pm Seems like my friends are representative of public opinion

https://news.sky.com/story/harry-and-me ... s-12243692

I haven't spoken to a single person who is of the view that Meghan and Harry are in the right and the rest of the Royal Family are in the wrong, and Meghan is perceived particularly poorly.

(Plenty online though)
I've not spoken to many either. Outside of the UK most seem to think they are in the right.

That is a message in itself.
That foreigners are cretins?
How gammon of you. Jonny foreigner and all that
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 9:57 am
Sputnik V wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:09 pm
mdaclarke wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 9:36 pm Seems like my friends are representative of public opinion

https://news.sky.com/story/harry-and-me ... s-12243692

I haven't spoken to a single person who is of the view that Meghan and Harry are in the right and the rest of the Royal Family are in the wrong, and Meghan is perceived particularly poorly.

(Plenty online though)
I've not spoken to many either. Outside of the UK most seem to think they are in the right.

That is a message in itself.
That's quite a sweeping generalisation, but there is the feeling that outside of the UK there has been very little questioning and an eagerness to believe her, even when she is clearly making things up and playing the victim/race card.

Within the UK, I'd say that quite a lot of people are fed up of this all being about her colour or nationality, when the feeling is more that she's just a bit of a bitch.
:lol: seriously?

How can any rational human not look at the Royal family and not believe every single word. Its as clear as day what they think of those who don't look or live like them.

Royal lovers do come across as the worst of bootlicking peasants.
Punter15
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:29 pm

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Punter15 »

Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:49 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 9:57 am
Sputnik V wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:09 pm
mdaclarke wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 9:36 pm Seems like my friends are representative of public opinion

https://news.sky.com/story/harry-and-me ... s-12243692

I haven't spoken to a single person who is of the view that Meghan and Harry are in the right and the rest of the Royal Family are in the wrong, and Meghan is perceived particularly poorly.

(Plenty online though)
I've not spoken to many either. Outside of the UK most seem to think they are in the right.

That is a message in itself.
That's quite a sweeping generalisation, but there is the feeling that outside of the UK there has been very little questioning and an eagerness to believe her, even when she is clearly making things up and playing the victim/race card.

Within the UK, I'd say that quite a lot of people are fed up of this all being about her colour or nationality, when the feeling is more that she's just a bit of a bitch.
:lol: seriously?

How can any rational human not look at the Royal family and not believe every single word. Its as clear as day what they think of those who don't look or live like them.

Royal lovers do come across as the worst of bootlicking peasants.
Well you're hardly rational are you? More a frothing anti Brit who will blindly take any opportunity to twist things to their own narrative, shouting down anyone who doesn't agree, because you have no interest in debate, only ramming your deeply biased opinions down other people's throats.

I'm fairly ambivalent about the Royals, some do good while some are awful, but for anyone who listens to Meghan dispassionately, it's quite clear that she's a self centred entitled manipulator who is milking this for all it's worth.
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 20795
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by CrazyIslander »

terryfinch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:45 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
Certainly seems that the Royal Family have opened up a 3-1 lead. After going down to the early Oprah bombshell, they responded well and the strategy is paying off. Media now picking up on all the obvious lies and inconsistencies in what M&H said, Royal Family staying quite dignified. The ‘Meghan has been a victim her entire life’ hitting home.
What did you expect? The media were always going to pick apart anything she says. Like I said, they turned Diana and Fergie into evil witches but lo and behold we've found out the truth about Charles and Andrew, years later.

Sure, she should've expected scrutiny but there's a point when enough is enough. Wrongly or right, she had enough. The media was relentless though. They kept at her. Where's the story on Prince Andrew?

Who did worse? Meghan or Andrew?
Trostan
Posts: 3325
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Down by the Riverside

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Trostan »

CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:05 pm Harry was wrong to marry Meghan. What drove to that decision? Was he rebelling against the royal family because of what they did to Diana? I think so, I don't blame him for that. As for their decisions it's all being wrong IMO. But only wrong if they're unhappy and spend too many times regretting. The fellow who abdicated seemed to have lived a happy life.
Harry is the son of a Northern Ireland British soldier, James Hewitt. The likeness is irrefutable.
His mother had a affair with Hewitt, because Charles maintained a serial relationship with C'mere and Park your Balls. "There are three of us in this marriage."
Neither his half brother, nor his father speak to him. I wonder why?
His uncle is/was a paedophile and his aunt used to brag about screwing half the Chelsea soccer team when she was pissed.
There's more than that.
Can't blame the two of them wanting out of that soap opera
Last edited by Trostan on Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:59 pm
terryfinch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:45 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
Certainly seems that the Royal Family have opened up a 3-1 lead. After going down to the early Oprah bombshell, they responded well and the strategy is paying off. Media now picking up on all the obvious lies and inconsistencies in what M&H said, Royal Family staying quite dignified. The ‘Meghan has been a victim her entire life’ hitting home.
What did you expect? The media were always going to pick apart anything she says. Like I said, they turned Diana and Fergie into evil witches but lo and behold we've found out the truth about Charles and Andrew, years later.

Sure, she should've expected scrutiny but there's a point when enough is enough. Wrongly or right, she had enough. The media was relentless though. They kept at her. Where's the story on Prince Andrew?

Who did worse? Meghan or Andrew?
They will defend Andrew to the hilt and the rotal fans will lightly condemn and try to move the conversation on.

If the royal family had any credibility they would tell Andrew to fly to the US and answer the FBI
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 20795
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by CrazyIslander »

Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

It will be interesting to see if normally globe-trotting Andrew goes anywhere post covid. Be interesting to see if his frequent trips to the US continue. Failure to do either is a seriously guilty look.

Will there be warrants put out if he goes somewhere else?
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
Anyone who doesn't believe the racism allegations is being dishonest with themselves and need to ask themselves why they are being dishonest with themselves. Is it comforting, does it help them cope better?
User avatar
terryfinch
Posts: 5603
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by terryfinch »

CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
I am honestly starting to think Meghan didn’t realise Harry wasn’t going to be King. She turned up in UK and found he was just a very minor member of the royal family. She realised with horror that her and her children would always be less significant than Kate’s and couldn’t bear it.
Punter15
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:29 pm

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Punter15 »

Said it before, how do you know they weren't checking that Archie wouldn't be another pasty ginger?
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:13 pm Said it before, how do you know they weren't checking that Archie wouldn't be another pasty ginger?
desperate
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

terryfinch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:11 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
I am honestly starting to think Meghan didn’t realise Harry wasn’t going to be King. She turned up in UK and found he was just a very minor member of the royal family. She realised with horror that her and her children would always be less significant than Kate’s and couldn’t bear it.
Desperately stupid
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 20795
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by CrazyIslander »

Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:09 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
Anyone who doesn't believe the racism allegations is being dishonest with themselves and need to ask themselves why they are being dishonest with themselves. Is it comforting, does it help them cope better?
I believe racist is part of it but also class? Even Diana couldn't stand them, didn't she call them Lizards? Basically, they'd insult/bully any outsider.

I actually do like the royal family but this case sort of made me think about what happened to Diana/Fergie. Same playbook, except Harry is on the other side, taking responsibility.
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:15 pm
Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:09 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
Anyone who doesn't believe the racism allegations is being dishonest with themselves and need to ask themselves why they are being dishonest with themselves. Is it comforting, does it help them cope better?
I believe racist is part of it but also class? Even Diana couldn't stand them, didn't she call them Lizards? Basically, they'd insult/bully any outsider.

I actually do like the royal family but this case sort of made me think about what happened to Diana/Fergie. Same playbook, except Harry is on the other side, taking responsibility.
I don't like them anymore, time to get rid. I have less respect for people who make excuses for them. I see them as pathetic and weak.
Punter15
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:29 pm

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Punter15 »

Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:15 pm
terryfinch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:11 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:39 pm It's amazing that in the world today with all the information available that people still think that the Royal family are the victim here. This is a multi billion dollar institution, backed by the government, aristocracy with connections that date back centuries.
Yet people think that poor old Meghan has victimised them.

That's equivalent to have sympathy for cigarette companies when they're being sued by lung cancer victims.
Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
I am honestly starting to think Meghan didn’t realise Harry wasn’t going to be King. She turned up in UK and found he was just a very minor member of the royal family. She realised with horror that her and her children would always be less significant than Kate’s and couldn’t bear it.
Desperately stupid
Not really. Her assertion that Archie was victimised and not given titles and protection due to the colour of his skin, when both Edward's and Anne's children have previously not been given this is evidence of either gross ignorance, or a master bullshitter.

Anyway, you're a cock. See ya.
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:19 pm
Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:15 pm
terryfinch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:11 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 2:34 pm

Not sure that's really accurate. The charge isn't that she has victimised them, it's that she's used and distorted events to create a platform for herself.
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
I am honestly starting to think Meghan didn’t realise Harry wasn’t going to be King. She turned up in UK and found he was just a very minor member of the royal family. She realised with horror that her and her children would always be less significant than Kate’s and couldn’t bear it.
Desperately stupid
Not really. Her assertion that Archie was victimised and not given titles and protection due to the colour of his skin, when both Edward's and Anne's children have previously not been given this is evidence of either gross ignorance, or a master bullshitter.

Anyway, you're a cock. See ya.
play the clip of what exactly she said on the titles again
Meghan told Winfrey that on the contrary, the royal family had actually discussed adopting new rules to bar Archie from ever being a prince. "I think even with that convention I’m talking about, while I was pregnant, they said they want to change the convention for Archie," she said.
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 20795
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by CrazyIslander »

I do believe Constitutional monarchy is the best model for government tbh. Look at the mess Trump made to democracy. I think sharing the power at the top is the way to go. It's actually, better that the royal family have a portion that power and spend it hunting, playing polo etc staying away from politics. Having all the power at the top concentrated in politics, can be dangerous. Imagine Trump controlling both houses of parliament.

My experience is Tonga also has a constitutional monarchy but a smaller version, way way smaller. It has undergone a lot of changes in the last decade to get the right balance. One thing for sure, an elected official having too much can be as bad as a king with too much power.
User avatar
fatcat
Posts: 15218
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by fatcat »

Trostan wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:03 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:05 pm Harry was wrong to marry Meghan. What drove to that decision? Was he rebelling against the royal family because of what they did to Diana? I think so, I don't blame him for that. As for their decisions it's all being wrong IMO. But only wrong if they're unhappy and spend too many times regretting. The fellow who abdicated seemed to have lived a happy life.
Harry is the son of a Northern Ireland British soldier, James Hewitt. The likeness is irrefutable.
His mother had a affair with Hewitt, because Charles maintained a serial relationship with C'mere and Park your Balls. "There are three of us in this marriage."
Neither his half brother, nor his father speak to him. I wonder why?
His uncle is/was a paedophile and his aunt used to brag about screwing half the Chelsea soccer team when she was pissed.
There's more than that.
Can't blame the two of them wanting out of that soap opera
Harry's likeness to his ginger uncle, when he was a lad, is far more convincing than his likeness to Hewitt. Plus Harry was already born before Hewitt even came on the scene. Makes a good salacious bit of gossip though - Meghan would probably approve.
Sputnik V

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Sputnik V »

CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:28 pm I do believe Constitutional monarchy is the best model for government tbh. Look at the mess Trump made to democracy. I think sharing the power at the top is the way to go. It's actually, better that the royal family have a portion that power and spend it hunting, playing polo etc staying away from politics. Having all the power at the top concentrated in politics, can be dangerous. Imagine Trump controlling both houses of parliament.

My experience is Tonga also has a constitutional monarchy but a smaller version, way way smaller. It has undergone a lot of changes in the last decade to get the right balance. One thing for sure, an elected official having too much can be as bad as a king with too much power.
it's a childish cosplay game. Grown ups don't respect the monarchy
Mick Mannock
Posts: 26307
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Mick Mannock »

Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:30 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:28 pm I do believe Constitutional monarchy is the best model for government tbh. Look at the mess Trump made to democracy. I think sharing the power at the top is the way to go. It's actually, better that the royal family have a portion that power and spend it hunting, playing polo etc staying away from politics. Having all the power at the top concentrated in politics, can be dangerous. Imagine Trump controlling both houses of parliament.

My experience is Tonga also has a constitutional monarchy but a smaller version, way way smaller. It has undergone a lot of changes in the last decade to get the right balance. One thing for sure, an elected official having too much can be as bad as a king with too much power.
it's a childish cosplay game. Grown ups don't respect the monarchy
In your opinion boy
Punter15
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:29 pm

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Punter15 »

Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:22 pm
Punter15 wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:19 pm
Sputnik V wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:15 pm
terryfinch wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:11 pm
CrazyIslander wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:06 pm
I would've believed you but for what happened to Diana. That was exactly the same as this. They attacked her whilst hiding Charles'infidelity. Then she became and victim, which endeared her to the public. They attacked her for using that to gain a platform. She was literally hounded to death. Yet Charles is allowed to have it all.

Repeat, Meghan. At least, Harry is willing to stand up for her.
I am honestly starting to think Meghan didn’t realise Harry wasn’t going to be King. She turned up in UK and found he was just a very minor member of the royal family. She realised with horror that her and her children would always be less significant than Kate’s and couldn’t bear it.
Desperately stupid
Not really. Her assertion that Archie was victimised and not given titles and protection due to the colour of his skin, when both Edward's and Anne's children have previously not been given this is evidence of either gross ignorance, or a master bullshitter.

Anyway, you're a cock. See ya.
play the clip of what exactly she said on the titles again
Meghan told Winfrey that on the contrary, the royal family had actually discussed adopting new rules to bar Archie from ever being a prince. "I think even with that convention I’m talking about, while I was pregnant, they said they want to change the convention for Archie," she said.
Must be right then, because there’s absolutely no chance whatsoever that she’s making any of that up.

Can’t be arsed with you anymore. I really don’t care and you clearly have a fist up your hole about the lizard people. Hardly the satellite of love are you?
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 20795
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by CrazyIslander »

Are you saying there wasn't any conversations about changing the rules for Archie? I'm sure it would've been discussed, perhaps informally. Perhaps, some palace aides dropped some hints about it to her.
Its possible, Camilla won't assume the title of Queen. Prince Edward is an earl nit a duke, so these things can be changed and are discussed.
User avatar
fatcat
Posts: 15218
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by fatcat »

Have Harry and Meghan said why they did the interview and what they wanted to achieve through it?
User avatar
RodneyRegis
Posts: 16140
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by RodneyRegis »

Sputnik V wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:27 am https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-13372026

The pre-1997 vets never got an equal pension.

About 25,000 Gurkhas who retired before 1997 still get only about a third of the amount of pension received by their British and Commonwealth former comrades, despite winning the right to live in Britain.

"The quality of life for many of these people is terrible," Mr Rai said. "Many cannot speak English and because they are old and frail they often find it difficult to get out and mix with the community."

Much of Mr Rai's concern about the "massive influx" of Gurkha veterans and their families into the Aldershot area is echoed by Gerald Howarth, the MP who represents the local authority, Rushmoor, where many have settled.

Mr Howe said that GJC figures showed that 3,000 retired Gurkhas and 5,000 of their dependants had come to the UK as a result of Ms Lumley's campaign.

He said that giving retired Gurkhas better pensions "was not an option" because the British defence ministry "had fought tooth and nail" not to allow this in several court cases over the past decade.
The gurkhas are great, but they are by definition mercenaries. They got paid for their service, and given pensions. That was the deal they signed up to. I really don't understand why they should have been extended the right to settle. It was made out like they were doing us a favour.
Punter15
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:29 pm

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Punter15 »

fatcat wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:35 pm Have Harry and Meghan said why they did the interview and what they wanted to achieve through it?
Image
Trostan
Posts: 3325
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Down by the Riverside

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Trostan »

If Harry is Hewitt's son and Charles didn't adopt him, it seems to me that Harry is not in the royal lineage.
Wonder if that little conundrum will ever raise its head.
User avatar
BlackMac
Posts: 7226
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Middle of the Lothians

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by BlackMac »

So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
User avatar
BlackMac
Posts: 7226
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Middle of the Lothians

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by BlackMac »

Trostan wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:08 pm If Harry is Hewitt's son and Charles didn't adopt him, it seems to me that Harry is not in the royal lineage.
Wonder if that little conundrum will ever raise its head.

I think it has been firmly established that the Hewitt connection is an urban myth and Diana hadn't even met him till Harry was two years old.
User avatar
Duff Paddy
Posts: 40038
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Duff Paddy »

BlackMac wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:09 pm So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
She should have fit right in so
User avatar
BlackMac
Posts: 7226
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Middle of the Lothians

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by BlackMac »

RodneyRegis wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:48 pm
Sputnik V wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:27 am https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-13372026

The pre-1997 vets never got an equal pension.

About 25,000 Gurkhas who retired before 1997 still get only about a third of the amount of pension received by their British and Commonwealth former comrades, despite winning the right to live in Britain.

"The quality of life for many of these people is terrible," Mr Rai said. "Many cannot speak English and because they are old and frail they often find it difficult to get out and mix with the community."

Much of Mr Rai's concern about the "massive influx" of Gurkha veterans and their families into the Aldershot area is echoed by Gerald Howarth, the MP who represents the local authority, Rushmoor, where many have settled.

Mr Howe said that GJC figures showed that 3,000 retired Gurkhas and 5,000 of their dependants had come to the UK as a result of Ms Lumley's campaign.

He said that giving retired Gurkhas better pensions "was not an option" because the British defence ministry "had fought tooth and nail" not to allow this in several court cases over the past decade.
The gurkhas are great, but they are by definition mercenaries. They got paid for their service, and given pensions. That was the deal they signed up to. I really don't understand why they should have been extended the right to settle. It was made out like they were doing us a favour.
I believe Lumley has admitted that her campaign was misguided and she did not understand the situation.
User avatar
booji boy
Posts: 9629
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 9:12 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by booji boy »

BlackMac wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:09 pm So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
:thumbup: And Harry is the dumb plum enabling her.

When it all turns to shit, as it inevitably will, what will that dim ginga have left to crawl back to?
Varsity Way
Posts: 1339
Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 3:50 pm

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Varsity Way »

BlackMac wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:09 pm So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
Yes. She has played on the ignorance of the US audience as to titles issue etc and has played the race card. She is nasty. But she will soon be forgotten.
User avatar
Duff Paddy
Posts: 40038
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Duff Paddy »

booji boy wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:15 pm
BlackMac wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:09 pm So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
:thumbup: And Harry is the dumb plum enabling her.

When it all turns to shit, as it inevitably will, what will that dim ginga have left to crawl back to?
Eh, his vast fortune?
User avatar
Duff Paddy
Posts: 40038
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Duff Paddy »

Varsity Way wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:16 pm
BlackMac wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:09 pm So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
Yes. She has played on the ignorance of the US audience as to titles issue etc and has played the race card. She is nasty. But she will soon be forgotten.
Unlikely.


fudge me she’s really got under you lads skin
User avatar
booji boy
Posts: 9629
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 9:12 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by booji boy »

Duff Paddy wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:16 pm
booji boy wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:15 pm
BlackMac wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:09 pm So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
:thumbup: And Harry is the dumb plum enabling her.

When it all turns to shit, as it inevitably will, what will that dim ginga have left to crawl back to?
Eh, his vast fortune?
I thought he was pleading poverty after daddy cut him off?
User avatar
Duff Paddy
Posts: 40038
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Meghan vs the Queen

Post by Duff Paddy »

booji boy wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:17 pm
Duff Paddy wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:16 pm
booji boy wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:15 pm
BlackMac wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:09 pm So, since the interview the following has been easily established.

Despite her passport getting confiscated, Meghan took 13 private, non royal associated trips after she got engaged to Harry.

They clearly did not get married prior to the official wedding as such a ceremony would have been illegal under English law.

Meghan was told that it was not the done thing to get mental health help, despite Harry, William and Kate having openly disclosed their own mental health struggles and the help they had received.

Approximately 40% of the media headlines displayed during the interview, and often the most appalling, were actually US and other foreign media but continually attributed to the UK press.

There are even more inconsistencies but add just the above to her previous lies that have been exposed in relation to things like her father refusing to pay her college fees, and we have a picture of a lying, manipulative individual blatantly prepared to lie and twist almost any situation to her own advantage.
:thumbup: And Harry is the dumb plum enabling her.

When it all turns to shit, as it inevitably will, what will that dim ginga have left to crawl back to?
Eh, his vast fortune?
I thought he was pleading poverty after daddy cut him off?
Relative poverty. He’s hardly likely to be down to shopping in Lidl. His security costs would run to mega figures to be fair. The Netflix deal was just the start, she will make them a lot more than that.
Post Reply