Harry and Meghan #84 Haz should've listened to Auntie Anne, kept his balls to stay a man.

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
hehehe said:
It's fine if you personally don't care about slavery, but don't sit here and act like there has been comparable suffering amongst any other demographic in history lasting hundreds of years, with human beings of all ages being tortured, raped, murdered, beaten, dismembered, living in hellish conditions throughout their entire lives, being auctioned in markets, and children being sold straight out of their mother's hands into the same conditions and never seen again. This wasn't just a blip in time - people were born into and died in these conditions over centuries so please don't sit here and dismiss it.

I love how this anti-Meghan/Harry thread is just an excuse for some of you to come in bold with these callous views and to show your hate. I thought these forums had rules about staying on topic too.
Click to expand...
Erm...try Jews? And I don't mean just the WWII. Centuries of opression in many places. Heard of Moses? Jews were slaves in Egypt at the time...we're talking a considerable while back...

And for your info, slavery didn't even start with shipping black people to the colonies (being sold by OTHER black people, by the way). The very first shipment of slaves to American colonies were actually Irish. White.
Slavery was abhorrent, and included all colours...was going on for thousands of years, and unfortunately still is, perhaps people should focus their efforts on eradicating that, because something can be still done about it. You can't do much about events from over 200 years ago, apart from learn from them. And it's on topic, because M makes it part of her politics.
ETA: just noticed several excellent replies pointing out in more detail what I tried to convey above, didn't mean to double up, only just catching up! 😘
 
Last edited:
WadieHaddadsChocolates said:
In a thread about two people who consistently fart out serious and infammatory accusations of racism in an attempt to destroy certain institutions or individuals; have a cult of loons who attack anyone who dares challenge that narrative or dare put forward evidence that Meghan Markle is consistently caught in untruths designed to hurt others' reputations and was often critiqued in Britain not because she was biracial but because she is an unpleasant bullying human being who also does dumb shite in public; who recruited a media billionaire to do a propaganda piece of an interview shown globally in an attempt to stir up more accusations and arguments about race and politics and further their race-based narrative of victimhood etc etc, not to mention the couple's constant need to weigh in on overtly party political topics such as the American election as well as spread stories about one half of them entering US politics, it's inevitable that these historical and political topics come up. They're central to why these two are so contentious. In fact, it would be bizarre NOT to discuss them.

Also the most liked post in this thread is one of those big fat 'political essays', for the record.

I mean, there are types of posts I don't care for either (mostly the ones where people fail to read even the current thread and come in and post a link that's already been posted 172 times previously or ask to have the most basic H and M lore explained to them without contributing anything else), but I scroll past them and I believe there's an ignore function that can be used too if you find a poster particularly hard work

Some of us like to discuss in a bit more depth and breadth, some people just want funny memes, some people want to talk deep conspiracy theory, some want hard news, others want to speculate about the outcome of their legal shite and some people just want to call H and M dumb cunts and make fun of Omid Scobie's stupid plastic face on a regular schedule. Pick your poison, basically, and don't worry about the other stuff is my attitude.
Click to expand...
For those of us less blessed with eloquence: if you don’t like it, leave it on the side of the plate.
 
vretch said:
Well I will still love the Royals. I do think there is a generational gap between HMTQ and say Prince William. And that’s ok, I’m fine with that. I just hope The Queen doesn’t bestow any titles on Harry’s kiddies because then that will be a major headache for Charles to undo. I have a feeling though that they have already been told to wait for Charles and this is why they played this blackmail game to try and force The Queen knowing that Charles may not necessarily give them the titles. There has to be a reason they have been so desperate to get The Queen to bestow those titles now rather than later.
Click to expand...


The possible reason why SHE is in such a hurry (apart from her "I want it all and I want it now" nature) is because she wants the children's Titles in place before she divorces him.
And she's probably had enough of him already.
 
A friend has told me that Lady Cs book on H&M is 99p on Kindle at the moment if anyone is interested.

Chita said:
The possible reason why SHE is in such a hurry (apart from her "I want it all and I want it now" nature) is because she wants the children's Titles in place before she divorces him.
And she's probably had enough of him already.
Click to expand...
I agree, but I also think she has heard Charles plan for streamlining the Monarchy which would likely mean the kids wouldn't be Prince and Princess.
 
Margot1977 said:
Erm...try Jews? And I don't mean just the WWII. Centuries of opression in many places. Heard of Moses? Jews were slaves in Egypt at the time...we're talking a considerable while back...

And for your info, slavery didn't even start with shipping black people to the colonies (being sold by OTHER black people, by the way). The very first shipment of slaves to American colonies were actually Irish. White.
Slavery was abhorrent, and included all colours...was going on for thousands of years, and unfortunately still is, perhaps people should focus their efforts on eradicating that, because something can be still done about it. You can't do much about events from over 200 years ago, apart from learn from them. And it's on topic, because M makes it part of her politics.
Click to expand...

Erm ... Am I in the wrong thread, or even on the wrong forum? I just popped in here for a quick update on the Dopey Duo expecting just that and possibly a giggle or two. I didn't expect a history lesson about the horrors of years ago, that has nothing to do with H&M.

Anyway, so for anyone interested on the upcoming Piers interview about Harry and Meghan, there's only less than eight hours to wait. I'm going to try to get the app or link to work so if it's successful I'll post updates.
 
sweetcorn_returns said:
Excerpt from Meghan and Harry: The Real Story

"Harry had a definite chip on his shoulder and it made him unpopular.’ Harry would later claim that he struggled not only academically, but also with sports. Although he still excelled in them, even rugby was a problem because boys ‘would see me on the rugby field as an opportunity to smash me up.’ This, in truth, was only part of the problem. Harry could be needlessly vitriolic, such as when he was pitted against a Jewish opponent from one of the other top public schools and hurled anti-Semitic abuse at him, a fact I received from a priest who was at school with this boy. Just as how Meghan’s colour was an unseen problem for her, Harry’s royal status - or at least, his perception of it - was shaping up into becoming a problem for him."

Campbell, Lady Colin. Meghan and Harry: The Real Story (p. 44). Dynasty Press. Kindle Edition.
Click to expand...
Is there anything new in the book? It got rather bad reviews I saw for just recycling tabloid stuff. Is that the case or has she included tea we wouldn’t have read in the papers or online?
 
Happy Lady said:
Erm ... Am I in the wrong thread, or even on the wrong forum? I just popped in here for a quick update on the Dopey Duo expecting just that and possibly a giggle or two. I didn't expect a history lesson about the horrors of years ago, that has nothing to do with H&M.

Anyway, so for anyone interested on the upcoming Piers interview about Harry and Meghan, there's only less than eight hours to wait. I'm going to try to get the app or link to work so if it's successful I'll post updates.
Click to expand...
It has got a lot to do with H & M, but feel free to scroll on or ignore me 😘
 
spangly said:
I feel like I'm sold on the surrogacy/ moonbump theories but I'm not too sure about the Archie stand in.
Firstly, I do believe that there is an Archie that is biologically the Harkles. The keeping him hidden thing, I'm still not too sure about. Is it because of potential perceived kidnapping threats? (Seeing as we've been told he doesn't have the same level of protection as Will's and Kate's kids)
Is this why they don't show his face properly?
I believe there is a Harkle child - it would be really crazy to go ahead with the whole pregnancy scam if there wasn't actually going to be a child at the end of it. How long can you pretend with child actors/ dollies/ friend's kids?
Click to expand...
I think he might have inherited a recessive gene or something, or he maybe not as normal looking, or he maybe specially abled kid. They are trying to protect him by getting judged by people.

Penguinandthepinecone said:
Sorry to sort of go off-topic. But I can’t start my own posts ion Tattle yet. Does anyone know how or where I can place a bet on H&M’s baby name? I have a feeling on the name, but it’s not on the bookies list, so how do you get odds and bet on a different name? Is there a website to use? It’s actually my daughter’s name, and I have a bad inclination that they might use it, so I figure I may as well place a bet and at least benefit if they do, plus I’ll be happy if they don’t. It’s quite unusual, it’s highly unlikely they’ll use it, but I’d be gutted if they used it. I have no idea who to ask about betting sites as I never bet on stuff.
Click to expand...
Maybe Kweene Doinna
 
Are titles given in an official royal ceremony like when they knight people? Or does the Queen just sign a paper and that is it?

I actually agree with a law that would require any prince/Princess to live and be educated in the UK. How can you expect to be Prince of somewhere but don’t even know the history, language and culture of the place? Harry’s kids won’t know Buckingham Palace from Westminster.
 
Ndrangheta said:
I hope this is b*llsh1t, but I just read that Alex 'Talent Vacuum' Beresford 'caught the eye of Oprah' and is in talks with major US networks ... hoping to forge a career in the USA. Dear me ... talk about cynical. Again, I'm sure it's just his agent spewing bollocks but you never know.
Click to expand...

All the networks except for Fox (I think) have seen their rankings slide to the gutter after Trump. If they think a weather man from the UK is the remedy well then they might be throwing S*** to the wall and see what sticks.
 
Notanotherjen said:
Are titles given in an official royal ceremony like when they knight people? Or does the Queen just sign a paper and that is it?

I actually agree with a law that would require any prince/Princess to live and be educated in the UK. How can you expect to be Prince of somewhere but don’t even know the history, language and culture of the place? Harry’s kids won’t know Buckingham Palace from Westminster.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe Harry’s kids will ever get titles. Their parents have betrayed the family and the Windsors tend not to ever forget that sort of thing. Add in Charles’ desire for a slimmed down Monarchy, fierce opposing public opinion, the Harkles having left their working royal status and there’s no way they’ll hand over obsolete prince and princess titles to a pair of American kids.

To answer your question though, they pass the Great Seal ie a fancy bit of paper that the Queen signs and seals and then occasionally there is a ceremony but not often. There was one for Prince Phillip but he was suffering awful xenophobic abuse from the court so that was about ending it by giving him a higher rank than everyone else. Usually it’s just the paper bit before someone gets married I think.
 
Mock Turtle said:
I don’t believe Harry’s kids will ever get titles. Their parents have betrayed the family and the Windsors tend not to ever forget that sort of thing. Add in Charles’ desire for a slimmed down Monarchy, fierce opposing public opinion, the Harkles having left their working royal status and there’s no way they’ll hand over obsolete prince and princess titles to a pair of American kids.

To answer your question though, they pass the Great Seal ie a fancy bit of paper that the Queen signs and seals and then occasionally there is a ceremony but not often. There was one for Prince Phillip but he was suffering awful xenophobic abuse from the court so that was about ending it by giving him a higher rank than everyone else. Usually it’s just the paper bit before someone gets married I think.
Click to expand...
I agree, if Harry and his wife were prepared to work like the Count and especially the Countess of Wessex, Prince Charles may have considered having them as part of the core group. But Charles has experience of a difficult woman undermining him and the Monarchy, not to mention Andrews, belief he would be a better King. I don't think that Prince Charles would do that to Prince William and Catherine or the monarchy.
 
Mock Turtle said:
I don’t believe Harry’s kids will ever get titles. Their parents have betrayed the family and the Windsors tend not to ever forget that sort of thing. Add in Charles’ desire for a slimmed down Monarchy, fierce opposing public opinion, the Harkles having left their working royal status and there’s no way they’ll hand over obsolete prince and princess titles to a pair of American kids.

To answer your question though, they pass the Great Seal ie a fancy bit of paper that the Queen signs and seals and then occasionally there is a ceremony but not often. There was one for Prince Phillip but he was suffering awful xenophobic abuse from the court so that was about ending it by giving him a higher rank than everyone else. Usually it’s just the paper bit before someone gets married I think.
Click to expand...
I know you're right about the Windsors in general, and Chuck does want to slim down the monarchy. Problem is, he's as weak as piss, and especially where Haribaldi is concerned. Guilt and all that.

Anyway, I suspect Charles might actually be the saviour they are hoping for. The Queen has balls of steel and William is angry. Charles, sadly, could turn out to be a pushover.

ETA "Andrew believes he'd be a better King" :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::sick: He'd be the worst King in the history of the world, ever. And there have been some doozies. The level fo self-delusion is mind boggling
 
peradetlic said:
Not her as person, but role of "little women", "Stepford wife" stereotype. I would strongly advise my daughter against it, after all hard work she put in her education. I think that's the direction of modernisation of RF. Wives, no matter who husband is, should not have fear of "shadowing" husbands. RF should be able to use diplomacy weapon not only in foreign affairs, but also in domestic.

I'm family oriented, but also I have a carrier that I fight hard for (I work in male dominant field and when I started some 30yrs ago I have to fight tooth and nail for it). Too much stereotyping for my taste.

Also I give her kudos for doing the scripted job right. She seems well prepared about subjects she discuss, but I would like her to take more controversial issues (for example secret family court, overzealous and underzealos social services etc) and to shed light on painful subjects (as Camila and Diana). Also I would like to see her more youthfully clothed, but that's me:)
Click to expand...
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my question. I think I understand you better now - you would like to see Kate challenge the stereotypes of women that are common in our society. I think in her own quietly dignified way she is doing that, and because she has made the effort to develop real expertise in certain fields, she is far more than just a figurehead spouting other people's words. The problem is that the alternative so often looks like Meghan Markle - gobbing off about her feminist credentials, making no effort beyond the trite and superficial and believing that challenging stereotypes means bullying people and dumping on everything that has gone before.
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top