Ah well - if there were things in the press, they must have been correct, no?
As @Golden Key has pointed out, there may be some cross-Pond cultural differences - and, of course, there are at least two sides to every story. I doubt we shall ever know the truth of it.
Well, we would be closer to knowing the other side of it if there had actually been an investigation at the time ...
When eventually there is a funeral for Prince Philip, there may well be a guard of honour of Royal Marines. Harry won't be there wearing a uniform as Captain-General. That will nodoubt hurt. Will he be there at all, I wonder?
I'm sure Harry can find something he thinks is respectable to wear. Lots of other people won't be wearing captain general uniform at their grandparents funeral.
Philip in this hypothetical situation won't notice. Elizabeth chose it so can't complain (or could fix it).
And if it's reversed I'm sure Philip can work something out.
When eventually there is a funeral for Prince Philip, there may well be a guard of honour of Royal Marines. Harry won't be there wearing a uniform as Captain-General. That will nodoubt hurt.
@MaryLouise thanks for the reminder of Edward Bruce. In Scotland anyway it is only Robert who is usually called 'the Bruce' and that confused me somewhat.
Like most rulers at that time Robert was not quite a candidate for sainthood, even although he is a great hero for many Scots.
The family came from Normandy (Briquebec near Cherbourg) gathering land in England and then the debatable lands in Scotland before Robert eventually became King of Scots.
Just reading some young black women discussing Meghan, and no doubt in their mind that racism has been a factor. They cite the angry black woman as a common trope for white people. I don't really know, but as well as the trifecta of racism, misogyny and right wing nationalism, one might add anti-Americanism.
The 'uppity' trope definitely has precedent. It would fit very easily in the narrative.
On the other hand she could be really toxic that also has plenty of precedent.
Or anything in the middle.
Practically given the mail bump holding difference, and the favourable comment from her co stars, and that a lot of the things Harry is being blamed for are royal decisions (with some justification, royal patronage is after all royal patronage) etc... the actual evidence looks to be in her favour.
The media also can construct stuff. Famous example, "Meghan's flowers make Princess Charlotte ill", or, "Meghan wears wrong tights in front of Queen", or, "Meghan closes car door, shock", etc.
I was referring directly to Chris's story under irregular verbs. the two daily mail stories about pregnant ladies with hands on their bumps.
(but your other examples are just as good.,)
Traditionally we work 9 to 5 or in 8 hour shifts, early, late, night with 12 hours for a long day. If she expected people to get up 3 hours early and then work a full shift I imagine they’d have been very pissed off.
Practically, 5am is too early to start if you commute by tube or train, it's as the tube or commuter trains start up on many routes. 6am would be as early as an early start would expect. (4am to 6am or 7am is often when cleaning shifts come in.)
And I wouldn't underrate how difficult it must be for an independent, sensible, intelligent person like Meghan to join the Royal family so close to the top of the tree. The culture of 'Royaldom' is so weird, even now, it's hard to see how anyone could reasonably get on with it, unless they'd been brought up to it.
It strikes me as though it's quite a lot like joining the Army. It's not just a job - it's a whole lifestyle, culture, and massive set of expectations rolled in to one. In that analogy, the Duchess of Sussex is a wet-behind-the-ears lieutenant, and one of the features of junior officers in the Army is that they don't get to rearrange Army culture and traditions for their convenience.
And I wouldn't underrate how difficult it must be for an independent, sensible, intelligent person like Meghan to join the Royal family so close to the top of the tree. The culture of 'Royaldom' is so weird, even now, it's hard to see how anyone could reasonably get on with it, unless they'd been brought up to it.
It strikes me as though it's quite a lot like joining the Army. It's not just a job - it's a whole lifestyle, culture, and massive set of expectations rolled in to one. In that analogy, the Duchess of Sussex is a wet-behind-the-ears lieutenant, and one of the features of junior officers in the Army is that they don't get to rearrange Army culture and traditions for their convenience.
It's a good job that her husband was able to warn her all about the potential difficulties in marrying him.
Traditionally we work 9 to 5 or in 8 hour shifts, early, late, night with 12 hours for a long day. If she expected people to get up 3 hours early and then work a full shift I imagine they’d have been very pissed off.
That I could easily see as being a no fault conflict of interest.
A normal person or company would just hire someone who could come in early (and there are people) and come to some other arrangement.
But it's a royal appointment, doing XYZ is their job you can't just have someone from the agency doing it. And no I can't change my hours to night shift that's ridiculous, and ...
And even just doing it herself probably isn't an option in some cases.
I watched the Commonwealth Day celebration on TV this evening. Good to see the Royals celebrating the fantastic work done by young people round the world.
Not at all "Me, me me!"
That's a really good analogy. I was thinking about the qualities needed by the spouse of a royal. It is as you say not just a job. I think that some of the possible partners for both William and Harry have been deterred by what would be expected of them.
In fairness I think there was a hope / expectation that William and Harry would 'modernise' the monarchy; I can imagine Harry feeling like a vicar whose elderly church wants him to attract the young people and then bitterly opposes every change he proposes to do so ...
In fairness I think there was a hope / expectation that William and Harry would 'modernise' the monarchy; I can imagine Harry feeling like a vicar whose elderly church wants him to attract the young people and then bitterly opposes every change he proposes to do so ...
Modernising the monarchy should be left to those in the Royal family, not anyone who has deserted it.
So the royal family decided that because Archie might be too dark skinned he was not going to have security protection. And refused Meghan help when the lying tabloid press drove her nearly to suicide. And Charles stops taking his son's calls.
The royal family is a royally screwed up bunch of bad. They need to be done.
So the royal family decided that because Archie might be too dark skinned he was not going to have security protection. And refused Meghan help when the lying tabloid press drove her nearly to suicide. And Charles stops taking his son's calls.
The royal family is a royally screwed up bunch of bad. They need to be done.
Achie does not look to be dark skinned and neither does his mother. The protection story is lying nonsense
Based on what do you say that? Heartfelt support for the royal family? There's no reason to make it up. Meghan and Harry come across as genuine.
The fact that Harry won't say who said what about Archie's potential skin colour more likely means that it's much worse than what Meghan knows. “The most unprotected person in the world is the Black woman" (Malcom X). Though the black members of my family are male, I've an understanding of what it's about. Not sure you do.
Meghan is mixed race. Mother and father. It doesn't matter what you perceive, this is about how she has lived and her husband with her also.
Based on what do you say that? Heartfelt support for the royal family? There's no reason to make it up. Meghan and Harry come across as genuine.
The fact that Harry won't say who said what about Archie's potential skin colour more likely means that it's much worse than what Meghan knows. “The most unprotected person in the world is the Black woman" (Malcom X). Though the black members of my family are male, I've an understanding of what it's about. Not sure you do.
Meghan is mixed race. Mother and father. It doesn't matter what you perceive, this is about how she has lived and her husband with her also.
I don't believe anything they say. They tells lies to justify their behaviour.
So did the Archbishop of Canterbury really perform a fake wedding in front of the TV cameras? After marrying Harry and Meghan for real in a private ceremony three days before?
Yes, but in terms of a society where people are often judged according to their pigmentation and that of their parents and ancestors, she is mixed-race. That we wish society were organized otherwise doesn't change the relevance of those racial categories when analyzing how people are treated.
So did the Archbishop of Canterbury really perform a fake wedding in front of the TV cameras? After marrying Harry and Meghan for real in a private ceremony three days before?
From watching the show, I suspect the legal wedding was the wedding at St George's Windsor. The private ceremony was simply done as a symbolic act for the couple.
I'm still processing some details. IMVHO, this was well done. Quiet, low-key style. No yelling. No sleaze. M & H protected people. It was never "you know what NAME said?". They care about the royal family. To me, they seemed to be telling the truth as they know it, and they deeply wish things had gone differently.
Overall synopsis, off the top of my head: They care about the family, and didn't want to leave. M tried really, really hard to do the duties The Firm expected of her. The constant pressure from the tabloids and disinformation put forth by The Firm was horrendous. She was told there would be no security provided for her son. She and H argued for it. No good.
M was so overwhelmed for so long that she became suicidal. She tried repeatedly to get help from The Firm to get the help she needed. No good. She got the nerve up to tell H. (She was reluctant, because of all the previous loss in his life.) Still wasn't possible to get help, and they still had to do their public duties and keep up a facade. For H, it was his mom's situation all over again.
They didn't blindside the Queen. H had several conversations with her, over a period of time. When they moved to Canada, they were surprised at the loss of security protection. It was especially bad, because that was made public--which made their little family sitting ducks. So they moved to the US.
They hadn't been seeking to make money (Netflix, etc.). But H wanted desperately to be able to protect his family. His money had been cut off, except for a legacy from his mom. So they started working.
They want to heal family relationships. Sometime in the Canada saga, H's dad stopped calling him. They're talking again. Things are still difficult. But H cares deeply about his dad and his brother. He thinks everyone in The Firm is trapped (and that he had been, too), and that
there's a culture of "this is the way things are".
The media commenting about the show (not involved with it) are billing it as a "tell-all interview". IMHO, it really isn't, unless someone wasn't aware of the various situations at all.
Harry didn't want history to repeat itself, so he did something about it.
Re princedom, Archie would only have been a prince if the queen had issued special letters patent - rather than it being the default position for a great grandchild of the monarch. It was done for William’s children, though I suspect that is about the direct line of succession. (Yes I know institutional racism is a thing, but that decision was made before Harry’s marriage.)
It is clear that provision of security for the family is independent of what Archie’s title is. Normally, royal security is provided by the British police - the U.K. tax payer doesn’t normally pay for round the clock security for private citizens in another country. Harry & Meghan are multi-millionaires (with, apparently, the kind of friends who can just give them a house and a security detail). Is it a reasonable expectation that the U.K. should have continued to pay these bills ?
Re mental health provision - I find this surprising given that Harry was provided with counselling growing up and that Prince William has mental health as an ongoing cause. However, I note she was asking to “go somewhere”. This maybe a cultural difference in how mental health care is delivered in the U.K., but you wouldn’t normally be admitted to a mental health facility unless there was an immediate and imminent safety risk. Most people with suicidal thoughts are treated as outpatients. I also find it weird that you would try to get this done via the HR department rather than asking a doctor for a referral.
I think the fact that there was a family argument in the run up to a wedding is trivial.
What I think has been horrific is the treatment of Meghan in the press.
So did the Archbishop of Canterbury really perform a fake wedding in front of the TV cameras? After marrying Harry and Meghan for real in a private ceremony three days before?
If the private ceremony was literally just them and the Archbishop, then no, that would not be a legal wedding, due to the absence of witnesses.
ETA: another possible cross-Pond cultural difference.
So did the Archbishop of Canterbury really perform a fake wedding in front of the TV cameras? After marrying Harry and Meghan for real in a private ceremony three days before?
If the private ceremony was literally just them and the Archbishop, then no, that would not be a legal wedding, due to the absence of witnesses.
And by the sound of it the ceremony was outside and not in premises authorised for weddings by the CofE. In any case, had this been the "real" wedding the marriage certificate would show that and it would have been all over the press within days.
Hopefully this one more nail in the coffin of this ridiculous institution.
I can't honestly think of one thing I'd save about them.
I quite like the UK paying for Australia's Head of State most of the time, a Head of State that ensures that there is not a rival locus of power with a potential mandate nationally. I would definitely like to save that, and I regard Britain paying most of the bill as an especially delicious feature.
Lillee's pounding down like a machine.
Thommo's making divots in the green.
et seq.
Harry didn't want history to repeat itself, so he did something about it.
He did exactly the same as Diana. A pointless TV interview the only purpose being huge publicity. Courting publicity then saying they hate it - hmmmm, just like his Mum.
But they can’t possibly pretend they want a quiet life. They have enough money for the quietest life imaginable.
Hopefully this one more nail in the coffin of this ridiculous institution.
I can't honestly think of one thing I'd save about them.
Being saved from becoming a republic? I have no love of the monarchy - it’s at the root of our hopelessly unequal class ridden society. But the thought of having an elected president is worse, looking at the government we have elected.
There seem to be no good choices for us. Stuck with an outdated monarchy and stuck with a population which courts, almost asks for, inequality (by eschewing the taxes which would bring equality).
Ah well, the US has a new soap opera in Harry and Meghan, so all is well. 🙄
I'm still processing some details. IMVHO, this was well done. Quiet, low-key style. No yelling. No sleaze. M & H protected people. It was never "you know what NAME said?". They care about the royal family. To me, they seemed to be telling the truth as they know it, and they deeply wish things had gone differently.
Overall synopsis, off the top of my head: They care about the family, and didn't want to leave. M tried really, really hard to do the duties The Firm expected of her. The constant pressure from the tabloids and disinformation put forth by The Firm was horrendous. She was told there would be no security provided for her son. She and H argued for it. No good.
M was so overwhelmed for so long that she became suicidal. She tried repeatedly to get help from The Firm to get the help she needed. No good. She got the nerve up to tell H. (She was reluctant, because of all the previous loss in his life.) Still wasn't possible to get help, and they still had to do their public duties and keep up a facade. For H, it was his mom's situation all over again.
They didn't blindside the Queen. H had several conversations with her, over a period of time. When they moved to Canada, they were surprised at the loss of security protection. It was especially bad, because that was made public--which made their little family sitting ducks. So they moved to the US.
They hadn't been seeking to make money (Netflix, etc.). But H wanted desperately to be able to protect his family. His money had been cut off, except for a legacy from his mom. So they started working.
They want to heal family relationships. Sometime in the Canada saga, H's dad stopped calling him. They're talking again. Things are still difficult. But H cares deeply about his dad and his brother. He thinks everyone in The Firm is trapped (and that he had been, too), and that
there's a culture of "this is the way things are".
The media commenting about the show (not involved with it) are billing it as a "tell-all interview". IMHO, it really isn't, unless someone wasn't aware of the various situations at all.
Harry didn't want history to repeat itself, so he did something about it.
There are two sides to every story, and the Sussex's should not have told theirs to Oprah or any other media outlet. The only possible justification for doing that interview was to make it the very last time they speak publicly about such matters. If this possibility eventuates, I'm ok with it. But I expect this to become another stupid celebrity sideshow, and that the Sussex's are feeding the beast.
I fully expect Prince Harry to be a contestant on some Bear Grylls reality show at some point.
By attacking the monarch, they attack a vital part of my country's system of Govt, and one that the British people pay for. That never gets old.
I'm still processing some details. IMVHO, this was well done. Quiet, low-key style. No yelling. No sleaze. M & H protected people. It was never "you know what NAME said?". They care about the royal family. To me, they seemed to be telling the truth as they know it, and they deeply wish things had gone differently.
Overall synopsis, off the top of my head: They care about the family, and didn't want to leave. M tried really, really hard to do the duties The Firm expected of her. The constant pressure from the tabloids and disinformation put forth by The Firm was horrendous. She was told there would be no security provided for her son. She and H argued for it. No good.
M was so overwhelmed for so long that she became suicidal. She tried repeatedly to get help from The Firm to get the help she needed. No good. She got the nerve up to tell H. (She was reluctant, because of all the previous loss in his life.) Still wasn't possible to get help, and they still had to do their public duties and keep up a facade. For H, it was his mom's situation all over again.
They didn't blindside the Queen. H had several conversations with her, over a period of time. When they moved to Canada, they were surprised at the loss of security protection. It was especially bad, because that was made public--which made their little family sitting ducks. So they moved to the US.
They hadn't been seeking to make money (Netflix, etc.). But H wanted desperately to be able to protect his family. His money had been cut off, except for a legacy from his mom. So they started working.
They want to heal family relationships. Sometime in the Canada saga, H's dad stopped calling him. They're talking again. Things are still difficult. But H cares deeply about his dad and his brother. He thinks everyone in The Firm is trapped (and that he had been, too), and that
there's a culture of "this is the way things are".
The media commenting about the show (not involved with it) are billing it as a "tell-all interview". IMHO, it really isn't, unless someone wasn't aware of the various situations at all.
Harry didn't want history to repeat itself, so he did something about it.
There are two sides to every story, and the Sussex's should not have told theirs to Oprah or any other media outlet. The only possible justification for doing that interview was to make it the very last time they speak publicly about such matters. If this possibility eventuates, I'm ok with it. But I expect this to become another stupid celebrity sideshow, and that the Sussex's are feeding the beast.
I fully expect Prince Harry to be a contestant on some Bear Grylls reality show at some point.
By attacking the monarch, they attack a vital part of my country's system of Govt, and one that the British people pay for. That never gets old.
I'm still processing some details. IMVHO, this was well done. Quiet, low-key style. No yelling. No sleaze. M & H protected people. It was never "you know what NAME said?". They care about the royal family. To me, they seemed to be telling the truth as they know it, and they deeply wish things had gone differently.
Overall synopsis, off the top of my head: They care about the family, and didn't want to leave. M tried really, really hard to do the duties The Firm expected of her. The constant pressure from the tabloids and disinformation put forth by The Firm was horrendous. She was told there would be no security provided for her son. She and H argued for it. No good.
M was so overwhelmed for so long that she became suicidal. She tried repeatedly to get help from The Firm to get the help she needed. No good. She got the nerve up to tell H. (She was reluctant, because of all the previous loss in his life.) Still wasn't possible to get help, and they still had to do their public duties and keep up a facade. For H, it was his mom's situation all over again.
They didn't blindside the Queen. H had several conversations with her, over a period of time. When they moved to Canada, they were surprised at the loss of security protection. It was especially bad, because that was made public--which made their little family sitting ducks. So they moved to the US.
They hadn't been seeking to make money (Netflix, etc.). But H wanted desperately to be able to protect his family. His money had been cut off, except for a legacy from his mom. So they started working.
They want to heal family relationships. Sometime in the Canada saga, H's dad stopped calling him. They're talking again. Things are still difficult. But H cares deeply about his dad and his brother. He thinks everyone in The Firm is trapped (and that he had been, too), and that
there's a culture of "this is the way things are".
The media commenting about the show (not involved with it) are billing it as a "tell-all interview". IMHO, it really isn't, unless someone wasn't aware of the various situations at all.
Harry didn't want history to repeat itself, so he did something about it.
There are two sides to every story, and the Sussex's should not have told theirs to Oprah or any other media outlet. The only possible justification for doing that interview was to make it the very last time they speak publicly about such matters. If this possibility eventuates, I'm ok with it. But I expect this to become another stupid celebrity sideshow, and that the Sussex's are feeding the beast.
I fully expect Prince Harry to be a contestant on some Bear Grylls reality show at some point.
By attacking the monarch, they attack a vital part of my country's system of Govt, and one that the British people pay for. That never gets old.
I'm quite happy to see it being attacked and got rid of so I stop paying for it. I'm fed up with the sycophantic "Oh the Queen is wonderful won't hear a word said against her" bullshit that our country is infected with.
They're as entitled to tell their story as anyone else is, to anyone who wants to listen.
...except they *didn't* "attack the monarch". H loves his grandmother very much. M gets along well with her, and the Queen did various things to make her welcome--like inviting her to share a lap blanket.
Respectfully, I think some people are assuming things that weren't said in the interview. That's understandable, since I'm guessing a lot of non-US folks haven't seen it yet. But it's probably available online, or will be.
It looks like you can see it at the network's site, CBS.com. It will probably be on YouTube, and elsewhere.
This wasn't remotely a "celebrity sideshow". Might be worth checking out.
Doing the interview in the first place was entirely counter productive if they want a quiet life in the US or if they want to leave controversy behind them.
I read this thread and see far more interest from people outwith Britain than I see or hear here, other than on the front pages of the tabloids Most of us really aren't that bothered, far more concerned by the Royal Assent stories a few weeks back.
And when I do bother to look, I read things like:
Meghan added that she hadn't done any research on the family before joining - and insisted she had never looked up her husband online while they were dating.
from the BBC link Doublethink gave above. I end up thinking: so I am expected to have sympathy with a woman who is saying that all those events where she first met Prince Harry, involved in fundraising events, she didn't bother to research the other headline guests? That looks extremely unprofessional and unlike everything we've been told about Meghan's work ethic. Also mind-blowingly stupid that she didn't make the slightest effort to find out anything about the family and situation she was hoping to marry into.
Doing the interview in the first place was entirely counter productive if they want a quiet life in the US or if they want to leave controversy behind them.
I think there's quite a distinction between how the tabloid press in the UK operates and how celebrities are treated in places like LA FWIW.
I read this thread and see far more interest from people outwith Britain than I see or hear here, other than on the front pages of the tabloids Most of us really aren't that bothered, far more concerned by the Royal Assent stories a few weeks back.
And when I do bother to look, I read things like:
Meghan added that she hadn't done any research on the family before joining - and insisted she had never looked up her husband online while they were dating.
from the BBC link Doublethink gave above. I end up thinking: so I am expected to have sympathy with a woman who is saying that all those events where she first met Prince Harry, involved in fundraising events, she didn't bother to research the other headline guests? That looks extremely unprofessional and unlike everything we've been told about Meghan's work ethic. Also mind-blowingly stupid that she didn't make the slightest effort to find out anything about the family and situation she was hoping to marry into.
I could see a good argument for someone, particularly someone who has been in the public eye themselves, being inclined to believe that anything publicly available was likely to be incomplete or misleading, and possibly made up outright, and that it was better to trust their own judgement and experience.
Being saved from becoming a republic? I have no love of the monarchy - it’s at the root of our hopelessly unequal class ridden society. But the thought of having an elected president is worse, looking at the government we have elected.
Lots of countries manage with an elected figurehead head of state. With that added bonus that power and wealth and influence doesn't cleave to them generation after generation, and if they fuck up, we can get rid of them.
There are almost no situations in which an elected political figure is worse than an unelected one. I for one welcome Lady McLadyFace as the first president of the British Republic.
Comments
Ouch!
Well, we would be closer to knowing the other side of it if there had actually been an investigation at the time ...
Philip in this hypothetical situation won't notice. Elizabeth chose it so can't complain (or could fix it).
And if it's reversed I'm sure Philip can work something out.
Like most rulers at that time Robert was not quite a candidate for sainthood, even although he is a great hero for many Scots.
The family came from Normandy (Briquebec near Cherbourg) gathering land in England and then the debatable lands in Scotland before Robert eventually became King of Scots.
On the other hand she could be really toxic that also has plenty of precedent.
Or anything in the middle.
Practically given the mail bump holding difference, and the favourable comment from her co stars, and that a lot of the things Harry is being blamed for are royal decisions (with some justification, royal patronage is after all royal patronage) etc... the actual evidence looks to be in her favour.
I was referring directly to Chris's story under irregular verbs. the two daily mail stories about pregnant ladies with hands on their bumps.
(but your other examples are just as good.,)
It strikes me as though it's quite a lot like joining the Army. It's not just a job - it's a whole lifestyle, culture, and massive set of expectations rolled in to one. In that analogy, the Duchess of Sussex is a wet-behind-the-ears lieutenant, and one of the features of junior officers in the Army is that they don't get to rearrange Army culture and traditions for their convenience.
It's a good job that her husband was able to warn her all about the potential difficulties in marrying him.
That I could easily see as being a no fault conflict of interest.
A normal person or company would just hire someone who could come in early (and there are people) and come to some other arrangement.
But it's a royal appointment, doing XYZ is their job you can't just have someone from the agency doing it. And no I can't change my hours to night shift that's ridiculous, and ...
And even just doing it herself probably isn't an option in some cases.
Not at all "Me, me me!"
Modernising the monarchy should be left to those in the Royal family, not anyone who has deserted it.
The royal family is a royally screwed up bunch of bad. They need to be done.
Achie does not look to be dark skinned and neither does his mother. The protection story is lying nonsense
The fact that Harry won't say who said what about Archie's potential skin colour more likely means that it's much worse than what Meghan knows. “The most unprotected person in the world is the Black woman" (Malcom X). Though the black members of my family are male, I've an understanding of what it's about. Not sure you do.
Meghan is mixed race. Mother and father. It doesn't matter what you perceive, this is about how she has lived and her husband with her also.
Just human race.
Yes, but in terms of a society where people are often judged according to their pigmentation and that of their parents and ancestors, she is mixed-race. That we wish society were organized otherwise doesn't change the relevance of those racial categories when analyzing how people are treated.
From watching the show, I suspect the legal wedding was the wedding at St George's Windsor. The private ceremony was simply done as a symbolic act for the couple.
I'm still processing some details. IMVHO, this was well done. Quiet, low-key style. No yelling. No sleaze. M & H protected people. It was never "you know what NAME said?". They care about the royal family. To me, they seemed to be telling the truth as they know it, and they deeply wish things had gone differently.
Overall synopsis, off the top of my head: They care about the family, and didn't want to leave. M tried really, really hard to do the duties The Firm expected of her. The constant pressure from the tabloids and disinformation put forth by The Firm was horrendous. She was told there would be no security provided for her son. She and H argued for it. No good.
M was so overwhelmed for so long that she became suicidal. She tried repeatedly to get help from The Firm to get the help she needed. No good. She got the nerve up to tell H. (She was reluctant, because of all the previous loss in his life.) Still wasn't possible to get help, and they still had to do their public duties and keep up a facade. For H, it was his mom's situation all over again.
They didn't blindside the Queen. H had several conversations with her, over a period of time. When they moved to Canada, they were surprised at the loss of security protection. It was especially bad, because that was made public--which made their little family sitting ducks. So they moved to the US.
They hadn't been seeking to make money (Netflix, etc.). But H wanted desperately to be able to protect his family. His money had been cut off, except for a legacy from his mom. So they started working.
They want to heal family relationships. Sometime in the Canada saga, H's dad stopped calling him. They're talking again. Things are still difficult. But H cares deeply about his dad and his brother. He thinks everyone in The Firm is trapped (and that he had been, too), and that
there's a culture of "this is the way things are".
The media commenting about the show (not involved with it) are billing it as a "tell-all interview". IMHO, it really isn't, unless someone wasn't aware of the various situations at all.
Harry didn't want history to repeat itself, so he did something about it.
Re princedom, Archie would only have been a prince if the queen had issued special letters patent - rather than it being the default position for a great grandchild of the monarch. It was done for William’s children, though I suspect that is about the direct line of succession. (Yes I know institutional racism is a thing, but that decision was made before Harry’s marriage.)
It is clear that provision of security for the family is independent of what Archie’s title is. Normally, royal security is provided by the British police - the U.K. tax payer doesn’t normally pay for round the clock security for private citizens in another country. Harry & Meghan are multi-millionaires (with, apparently, the kind of friends who can just give them a house and a security detail). Is it a reasonable expectation that the U.K. should have continued to pay these bills ?
Re mental health provision - I find this surprising given that Harry was provided with counselling growing up and that Prince William has mental health as an ongoing cause. However, I note she was asking to “go somewhere”. This maybe a cultural difference in how mental health care is delivered in the U.K., but you wouldn’t normally be admitted to a mental health facility unless there was an immediate and imminent safety risk. Most people with suicidal thoughts are treated as outpatients. I also find it weird that you would try to get this done via the HR department rather than asking a doctor for a referral.
I think the fact that there was a family argument in the run up to a wedding is trivial.
What I think has been horrific is the treatment of Meghan in the press.
I can't honestly think of one thing I'd save about them.
If the private ceremony was literally just them and the Archbishop, then no, that would not be a legal wedding, due to the absence of witnesses.
ETA: another possible cross-Pond cultural difference.
And by the sound of it the ceremony was outside and not in premises authorised for weddings by the CofE. In any case, had this been the "real" wedding the marriage certificate would show that and it would have been all over the press within days.
I quite like the UK paying for Australia's Head of State most of the time, a Head of State that ensures that there is not a rival locus of power with a potential mandate nationally. I would definitely like to save that, and I regard Britain paying most of the bill as an especially delicious feature.
Lillee's pounding down like a machine.
Thommo's making divots in the green.
et seq.
He did exactly the same as Diana. A pointless TV interview the only purpose being huge publicity. Courting publicity then saying they hate it - hmmmm, just like his Mum.
But they can’t possibly pretend they want a quiet life. They have enough money for the quietest life imaginable.
Racism at the Palace? No news there!
Being saved from becoming a republic? I have no love of the monarchy - it’s at the root of our hopelessly unequal class ridden society. But the thought of having an elected president is worse, looking at the government we have elected.
There seem to be no good choices for us. Stuck with an outdated monarchy and stuck with a population which courts, almost asks for, inequality (by eschewing the taxes which would bring equality).
Ah well, the US has a new soap opera in Harry and Meghan, so all is well. 🙄
There are two sides to every story, and the Sussex's should not have told theirs to Oprah or any other media outlet. The only possible justification for doing that interview was to make it the very last time they speak publicly about such matters. If this possibility eventuates, I'm ok with it. But I expect this to become another stupid celebrity sideshow, and that the Sussex's are feeding the beast.
I fully expect Prince Harry to be a contestant on some Bear Grylls reality show at some point.
By attacking the monarch, they attack a vital part of my country's system of Govt, and one that the British people pay for. That never gets old.
Ditto.
👏 well said.
I'm quite happy to see it being attacked and got rid of so I stop paying for it. I'm fed up with the sycophantic "Oh the Queen is wonderful won't hear a word said against her" bullshit that our country is infected with.
They're as entitled to tell their story as anyone else is, to anyone who wants to listen.
Respectfully, I think some people are assuming things that weren't said in the interview. That's understandable, since I'm guessing a lot of non-US folks haven't seen it yet. But it's probably available online, or will be.
It looks like you can see it at the network's site, CBS.com. It will probably be on YouTube, and elsewhere.
This wasn't remotely a "celebrity sideshow". Might be worth checking out.
FWIW, YMMV, etc.
He’s learned nothing from his mother’s mistakes.
And when I do bother to look, I read things like: from the BBC link Doublethink gave above. I end up thinking: so I am expected to have sympathy with a woman who is saying that all those events where she first met Prince Harry, involved in fundraising events, she didn't bother to research the other headline guests? That looks extremely unprofessional and unlike everything we've been told about Meghan's work ethic. Also mind-blowingly stupid that she didn't make the slightest effort to find out anything about the family and situation she was hoping to marry into.
I think there's quite a distinction between how the tabloid press in the UK operates and how celebrities are treated in places like LA FWIW.
I could see a good argument for someone, particularly someone who has been in the public eye themselves, being inclined to believe that anything publicly available was likely to be incomplete or misleading, and possibly made up outright, and that it was better to trust their own judgement and experience.
Lots of countries manage with an elected figurehead head of state. With that added bonus that power and wealth and influence doesn't cleave to them generation after generation, and if they fuck up, we can get rid of them.
There are almost no situations in which an elected political figure is worse than an unelected one. I for one welcome Lady McLadyFace as the first president of the British Republic.