The Royal Family

[Parafox]

4 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Not commented on this yet because yesterday the whole internet was utterly toxic on the issue.

 

The British Press are a ****ing disgrace. We've known this for decades but still haven't been able to do anything about it. Their relentless negative and derogatory coverage of not only the Royals but vulnerable people and minority groups continues to be utterly disgusting. This needed to be stopped 20 years ago.

 

But the whole interview just feels really, really unsavoury to me. Making very vague claims on the biggest platform, without the right of reply, or context, about your own family just seems utterly devoid of class. It's also a bit tone deaf to be claiming you're a victim, during a global pandemic when millions of people have lost their lives, loved ones, jobs and freedom, from the lawn of your rented mansion in LA. 

 

They're also playing on people's ignorances about royal protocol and history. 

 

For me, while their claims are concerning, I'm not impressed with their behaviour. 

I absolutely and totally agree with what you have said here. Good post. Sums up what so many are thinking, I believe. I can't comment on the Harry/Meghan relationship but I do wonder if he is not the one pulling the strings in this. It crossed my mind that there could be some kind of Oedipus complex at work with Meghan taking the role of his mum. (Not saying he fancied his mum but maybe MM fills a void in his life where he becomes the child and she is the mother)

[Jattdogg]

Piers Morgan has 0 business being on anyone's tele.  

[Jon the Hat]

Piers leaves of his own accord imo.  He planned that and will show up somewhere very soon.

[StanSP]

Piers Morgan had got away with far too much up to now, anyway. The stuff that happened this morning was just the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. In fact GMB should have got rid ages ago, but I guess he was getting them plenty of views & ratings etc

 

Begs the question where he goes next, though. That GB News channel?

[Jattdogg]

4 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Piers Morgan had got away with far too much up to now, anyway. The stuff that happened this morning was just the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. In fact GMB should have got rid ages ago, but I guess he was getting them plenty of views & ratings etc

 

Begs the question where he goes next, though. That GB News channel?

Hopefully he retires and keeps his mouth shut..best option

[tom27111]

9 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Piers Morgan had got away with far too much up to now, anyway. The stuff that happened this morning was just the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. In fact GMB should have got rid ages ago, but I guess he was getting them plenty of views & ratings etc

 

Begs the question where he goes next, though. That GB News channel?

Sky News or Talk Radio?

 

Back with Rupurt Murdoch. They suit each other.

[Jattdogg]

3 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

Sky News or Talk Radio?

 

Back with Rupurt Murdoch. They suit each other.

Maybe he can join fox news usa and coanchor with sean hannity.

[String fellow]

2 hours ago, Jattdogg said:

FWIW and what's most important here is given the chance,    I would shag either kate or megan or both at the same time if they insisted.  These are sacrifices that i am willing to make for the betterment  of the monarchy.

 

Yes the kids might have a bit of beige in them from me but hey dont we all love a friday night curry?

 

Kate, Megan....if you're reading please give me a call.

 

 

Sincerely, 

 

Jattdogg 

 

Ps! If any ladies (or gents) feel the same about harry and william then sacrifices can be made by you.

 

Whilst on this subject, what about Beatrice and Eugenie?

[Scotch]

47 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

Not sure that Oprah could really be classed as a friend.

 

Met them once before she was invited to their wedding, which seems a bit odd to me.

 

But then again, so does being estranged from the most of your family.

 

I'm sure she's lovely though 

I haven't spoke to my dad in 22 year. Never had a conversation with my half brother and couldn't even tell you the names of my half sisters. 

 

That's the modern family and pretending that every family has a mum a dad, 2.4 children and a golden retriever is exactly the sort of BS outdated way of thinking thats made the likes of the royals so far out of touch from the country that they head. 

 

[Christoph]

Most people are saying he's going to GB News which is supposed to be some new news channel in the vein of Fox News. Sounds about right for a cretin like him.

[FoxesDeb]

50 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

I wasn't their rented house, or Oprah for starters, it was someone Oprah knew who offered the use.

 

You say about right to reply, this was there reply after years and years of negative press coverage where they had no reply. The family will have a chance to respond, in fact they have. In the interview they were nothing but complimentary about the Queen, and Harry spoke about how things were getting better with his Dad. I think whoever they were talking about having asked the question about the baby will know they've done wrong now, I'm assuming it's Charles it seems a lot of this stuff centres around him, and thats why they wouldn't go further about into it, but also why they weren't concerned about bringing it up as it won't cause any more damage.

 

I don't think they've played on people ignorance of protocol. As pointed out above the title thing wasn't about Archie getting one now, it was about that option being removed when Charles becomes king.

I think Charles has always said he wants to make the monarchy smaller when he becomes King though, I don't think it's personal to Meghan (or Archie)

[Jimothy]

8 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

I think Charles has always said he wants to make the monarchy smaller when he becomes King though, I don't think it's personal to Meghan (or Archie)

There's making it smaller, and there's this. It's his son and Grandson, it's essentially one or two people max having the titles Prince or Princess. 

 

Also if that is the case, either Harry and Meghan are hiding that they were told that, or Chatles wasn't clear.

[SecretPro]

3 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

There's making it smaller, and there's this. It's his son and Grandson, it's essentially one or two people max having the titles Prince or Princess. 

 

Also if that is the case, either Harry and Meghan are hiding that they were told that, or Chatles wasn't clear.

Step-son. Lets be honest. 

[Scotch]

1 minute ago, Facecloth said:

There's making it smaller, and there's this. It's his son and Grandson, it's essentially one or two people max having the titles Prince or Princess. 

 

Also if that is the case, either Harry and Meghan are hiding that they were told that, or Chatles wasn't clear.

None of the communication within that family seems clear. They still write letters to each other FFS but information seems to be passed through officials with no explanation or context and it all seems from the outside looking in, cold and emotionless. 

 

I'm sure if that was always what Chuck had wanted, sitting down and explaining to to them whilst garenteeing the appropriate protection would have saved alot of the drama. 

[Scotch]

1 minute ago, SecretPro said:

Step-son. Lets be honest. 

*Ginger step son....

[tom27111]

3 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

There's making it smaller, and there's this. It's his son and Grandson, it's essentially one or two people max having the titles Prince or Princess. 

 

Also if that is the case, either Harry and Meghan are hiding that they were told that, or Chatles wasn't clear.

 

Or, there's using it to your advantage in an interview to make it appear you've been discriminated against?

 

We'll never know the truth.

 

Harry and Meghan will say what they can to make them look favourable, as long as it doesn't specifically name names so legal action can't be taken. (Which means their claims are absolutely worthless).

 

The Royal's will deal with things internally and won't air their dirty laundry in public.

 

The less we hear about it, the better.

[SecretPro]

Where's Jeremy Kyle when you need him?

Edited 9 March 2021 by SecretPro

[Heathrow fox]

32 minutes ago, String fellow said:

Whilst on this subject, what about Beatrice and Eugenie?

I think Zara has turned into a beautiful woman and seems half normal.

[Fox42]

So I’m seeing “Oh Gary” trending on Twitter at the moment. My initial thought was correct...

 

 

[FoxesDeb]

23 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

There's making it smaller, and there's this. It's his son and Grandson, it's essentially one or two people max having the titles Prince or Princess. 

 

Also if that is the case, either Harry and Meghan are hiding that they were told that, or Chatles wasn't clear.

But he already has a HRH son and heir, and 3 other grandchildren with HRH titles. It has to start somewhere surely? Personally I see no reason for anyone other than those directly in line to the throne to have a royal title. By directly I mean the heir, his heir, and the heirs below them, as we have now with Charles, William and George. 

 

Neither part of your second paragraph would be a surprise to anyone I wouldn't think 

 

 

Edited 9 March 2021 by FoxesDeb
Added clarity

[Jimothy]

2 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

But he already has a HRH son and heir, and 3 other grandchildren with HRH titles. It has to start somewhere surely? Personally I see no reason for anyone other than those directly in line to the throne to have a royal title. 

 

Neither part of your second paragraph would be a surprise to anyone I wouldn't think 

I think direct descendents of the Monarch and their children are fair enough to be given titles, not too much to expect is it? I mean William gets to be king by being first born, and Harry's lad can't even be called a Prince.

[Spudulike]

Sometimes you need the Aussie to say how it is. 

 

https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6237867416001

 

[FoxesDeb]

4 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

I think direct descendents of the Monarch and their children are fair enough to be given titles, not too much to expect is it? I mean William gets to be king by being first born, and Harry's lad can't even be called a Prince.

If you're a grandchild born to the monarch's daughter rather than son you already don't automatically get an HRH title, so no, I don't see why a protocol that has existed for years should now be disregarded. 

[WigstonWanderer]

I do find it amusing that apparently left leaning people here are desperately defending the rights of the spawn of entitled rich people to be granted the title of “Prince” 

Edited 10 March 2021 by WigstonWanderer

[Jimothy]

2 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

If you're a grandchild born to the monarch's daughter rather than son you already don't automatically get an HRH title, so no, I don't see why a protocol that has existed for years should now be disregarded. 

Well first of all these aren't born to a daughter they are born to a son, so no change. Also they recently changed the line of succession to put it in birth order rather than a man usurping the female, so they can change, so neither of your points stand up.

 

The two daughters of the second son of the Queen both got the choice to be called Princesses, but the children of the second child of the next Monarch won't get that option. Is that fair?