Harry and Meghan discussion thread

[mazkhan]

I really think once the Queen dies , the UK should become a Republic and the monarchy disbanded from state life alongside receiving state money.

Because this current set of royals after the Queen are not fit for purpose don't see why we should pay for them , Queen is fantastic and has carried herself well over the years but it should stop with her .

 

[CricketCartoons]

It is understandable that Meghan doesn't care about the family, but sad to see harry causing sorrow, not just embarrassment, to his family, which includes a loving grandma who didn't deserve this. He is going to regret this later. Feel only for him, as meghan will be fine and knows what she is doing.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

I am a bit surprised at this, Cap. Comparing our Prince to a dog?

Clearly he is very deeply in love with her, but it looks like an equal partnership to me.

It's obvious that ginger boy is in "love" with her; but the real question is: is she in in love with him?

Love, in my experience, requires a lot of sacrifice and swallowing situations which you normally never would.

All the PR and marketing by "media" (whose only interest is to milk the story btw) is meaningless.
We are all adults and ideally we should be able to see through it.

The reality is 'prince' has lost his status, income and is on the very edge of losing his family. What has Meg lost?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

She was an exceptionally good working member of the Royal family (as long as it lasted) and people especially of colour did look at her with awe. I still remember her Australian tour where she announced her pregnancy, she was glowing but after that everything went downgrade. I think the Palace did wanted to “tone her down” so that focus doesn’t shift from it’s main members.

Also while she was pregnant (and her hormones were out of her control), she comes to know that the baby will not be having security and Title, how can she stay calm knowing that her kid will be unprotected from the vicious UK tabloid? And on top of that there is racist talks too which is insulting to anyone. I am not surprised that she had a mental health issue because of this. And the saddest part is that no one supported her even after asking for help.

Just because she chose to marry a Royal doesn’t mean she should be denied of any help when needed. Be it mental health or anything.

Why did people of colour "look at her with awe"? Were they awe struck because they believed she had achieved the ultimate and married into a British royal family? That is quite instructive in itself, and suggests a deep underlying inferiority complex.

If Meghan herself had held this belief she would have accepted secondary status and been glad of the privilege. But actually, it seems she did not accept it, and instead was happy to rip the royal prince out of the monarchy and march him back to America where he could do Oprah interviews and sign up to Netflix shows. She is made for life, don't think she did too badly out of it at all.

On the wider topic, I would suggest that it is high time for the monarchy to be downgraded to Netflix status itself. It can still survive like other monarchies around the world, as a matter of curiosity for the wider public, but we need to get rid of any privileges and honorary lands and titles. It is no longer appropriate in the modern era in it's current form.

 

[Firebat]

Meghan Markle lodged formal complaint with ITV about Piers Morgan's comments

The Duchess of Sussex formally complained to ITV about Piers Morgan's comments on Good Morning Britain following her and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, HELLO! understands.

It was confirmed that Piers had quit the ITV breakfast show on Tuesday.

His departure came after it was revealed he is being investigated by TV watchdog Ofcom after the organisation received more than 41,000 complaints about his remarks on Monday's show.

According to PA, it's understood that Meghan's concern was not about the personal attacks on the validity of her racism allegation made against the royal family, nor her claims she was not supported by the institution when experiencing suicidal thoughts.

The complaint is understood to focus on how Piers' comments may affect the issue of mental health generally and those attempting to deal with their own problems.

Piers was also criticised by mental health charity Mind, who said in a tweet it was "disappointed and concerned" by his comments.

The organisation added: "It’s vital that, when people reach out for support or share their experiences of ill mental health, they are treated with dignity, respect and empathy."

During the interview with Oprah which aired on CBS in the US on Sunday night, Meghan revealed she had suicidal thoughts while she was pregnant with her son Archie.

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...han-markle-formal-complaint-itv-piers-morgan/

 

[dildilpak]

Because the Queen is still very popular.

Because we would have to elect an executive President and work out what powers they are to have.

It’s a difficult thing to turn our backs on a thousand years.

The queen is popular, yes. But is Charles equally popular? Even if UK keeps him on as head of the state, i can definitely see the commonwealth breaking away from the Brits- already the monarchy is facing lots of opposition in Australia & the Carribean.

Also the point is - should a Monarchy steeped in traditions of colonialism, slavery, racial discrimination have any relevance in the today’s woke world?

 

[Saj]

Samantha Markle has questioned how her half-sister Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, can say she "doesn't really know" her, and accused her of "treating people like dishrags".

The 56 year old has insisted "the truth was totally ignored and omitted" in Meghan's tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey this week, and fired back at her half-sibling after she said she "didn't really know" her.

When asked about Samantha's "tell-all book", 'The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister', Meghan said: "I think it would be very hard to tell all when you don't know me.

"This is a very different situation than my dad, right. When you talk about betrayal, betrayal comes from someone that you have a relationship with.

"I don't feel comfortable talking about people that I really don't know."

But Samantha has now told Inside Edition: "I don't know how she can say I don't know her and she was an only child.

"We've got photographs over a lifespan of us together. So how can she not know me?"

Meghan also claimed Samantha only changed her name back to Markle when she started seeing Harry.

She said: "She changed her last name back to Markle ... only when I started dating Harry. So I think that says enough.

"I last time I saw her must have been at least 18/ 19 years ago, and before that 10 years before that."

But Samantha - who has the same father as Meghan, Thomas Markle - said: "I was a Markle before she was.

"I thought that was kind of weird that she would say I only changed my name back when she met Harry. Markle has always been my name."

She also added: "Depression is not an excuse for treating people like dishrags and disposing of them."

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...-half-sister-meghan/ar-BB1eoouh?ocid=msedgntp

 

[KingKhanWC]

Straight out of Lollywood or Bollywood this.

I liked Gary Linekars response, no need to take sides here.

Both parties are pathetic. Meghan must have been a fool to think the Royals arent racist, they didnt want her to marry Henry for this reason, which she knew. Its fairly obvious she is acting, not a very good actresses but better than Henry who was struggling with some of his pre arranged comments.

The Royals on the other hand are protecting a peado prince in one of the most high profile and serious cases we have ever seen. Andrews mother, father, brothers and all other family members speak to him, yet Charles wont speak to his own son for marrying a woman of colour.

In 2021 these folk should be banished from their royalty, take all their assests and sell them. Or better still give them back to the nations which they were looted from.

 

[dildilpak]

Straight out of Lollywood or Bollywood this.

I liked Gary Linekars response, no need to take sides here.

Both parties are pathetic. Meghan must have been a fool to think the Royals arent racist, they didnt want her to marry Henry for this reason, which she knew. Its fairly obvious she is acting, not a very good actresses but better than Henry who was struggling with some of his pre arranged comments.

The Royals on the other hand are protecting a peado prince in one of the most high profile and serious cases we have ever seen. Andrews mother, father, brothers and all other family members speak to him, yet Charles wont speak to his own son for marrying a woman of colour.

In 2021 these folk should be banished from their royalty, take all their assests and sell them. Or better still give them back to the nations which they were looted from.

For once i agree with you. There is no reason to completely disbelieve Meghan - she was considered an outsider & must have faced racial bias & hostility within the family & obviously the media. But definitely some exaggeration there as well. The whole family is full of drama, no wonder the Crown is one of the most watched shows!

 

[KingKhanWC]

For once i agree with you. There is no reason to completely disbelieve Meghan - she was considered an outsider & must have faced racial bias & hostility within the family & obviously the media. But definitely some exaggeration there as well. The whole family is full of drama, no wonder the Crown is one of the most watched shows!

Is it any good, never seen it?

The other issue I have with her is now starting another type of BLM movement aimed at the Royals. BLM marches and protests have achieved pretty much nothing apart from statues being destroyed. You cant change history or change peoples views on race. The Royals will never change, all this is doing is causing more divide between people.

 

[dildilpak]

Is it any good, never seen it?

The other issue I have with her is now starting another type of BLM movement aimed at the Royals. BLM marches and protests have achieved pretty much nothing apart from statues being destroyed. You cant change history or change peoples views on race. The Royals will never change, all this is doing is causing more divide between people.

I havent watched it either, my wife loves the show though.

But i disagree somewhat with your comments on the BLM. We know that the present generation Royal family is racist, but they wont be around forever. Its a generational thing- younger people are more woke & will support Meghan. Who knows what shape the monarchy will take when William takes it over one day.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I havent watched it either, my wife loves the show though.

But i disagree somewhat with your comments on the BLM. We know that the present generation Royal family is racist, but they wont be around forever. Its a generational thing- younger people are more woke & will support Meghan. Who knows what shape the monarchy will take when William takes it over one day.

It doesnt sound like something Id take time to watch.

BLM and its supporters can rant, cry at the Royal Family but it wont make a difference now or in 100 years. If anything it will give them more support, many blacks still love the Royal Family in the UK. The only way the Royals will be gone if there is another world war.

Btw Queen Victoria wasnt racist, she showed this in many ways. A true Queen not like what is to come.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

It doesnt sound like something Id take time to watch.

BLM and its supporters can rant, cry at the Royal Family but it wont make a difference now or in 100 years. If anything it will give them more support, many blacks still love the Royal Family in the UK. The only way the Royals will be gone if there is another world war.

Btw Queen Victoria wasnt racist, she showed this in many ways. A true Queen not like what is to come.

I thought the same. Stayed over at my in-laws one night and watched episode 1 with them. I was hooked lol.

Genuinley quite a gripping show at times, you learn quite a bit about their etiquette and protocols. Seems a really poor quality of life they have to be honest. I'd give it a couple of episodes a watch see how you feel.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I thought the same. Stayed over at my in-laws one night and watched episode 1 with them. I was hooked lol.

Genuinley quite a gripping show at times, you learn quite a bit about their etiquette and protocols. Seems a really poor quality of life they have to be honest. I'd give it a couple of episodes a watch see how you feel.

Youve nearly sold it to me. Is it true accurate based or does it have some made up story lines?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Youve nearly sold it to me. Is it true accurate based or does it have some made up story lines?

I think its reasonably accurate, of course there is some "assumptions" made but generally the story follows real life very well. Nobody really knows the conversations between the Queen & Churchill/Thatcher etc so its hard to say how accurate they are.

By the end, I admired the queen, felt a bit sorry for Philip, thought Charles was an idiot while still at times being well intentioned ( apart from Diana) and the rest quite vile. Sort of how I feel about them in real life haaha

 

[Technics 1210]

It's satisfying to read many comments on news sites against this fake woman Meg.

Oprah is worse, if she really cared about Meg and her life then she would've asked questions about her father.

The entire interview was a stunt, I hope Harry loses his title and Archie written out of any will by the royals.

As for Harry, this guy wanted to be financially independent but weeps because he's financially cut off and has to go pay for his own security.

Good riddance to the both of them.

 

[dildilpak]

It's satisfying to read many comments on news sites against this fake woman Meg.

Oprah is worse, if she really cared about Meg and her life then she would've asked questions about her father.

The entire interview was a stunt, I hope Harry loses his title and Archie written out of any will by the royals.

As for Harry, this guy wanted to be financially independent but weeps because he's financially cut off and has to go pay for his own security.

Good riddance to the both of them.

Let me guess - you are reading Daily mail?

 

[Robert]

The queen is popular, yes. But is Charles equally popular? Even if UK keeps him on as head of the state, i can definitely see the commonwealth breaking away from the Brits- already the monarchy is facing lots of opposition in Australia & the Carribean.

Also the point is - should a Monarchy steeped in traditions of colonialism, slavery, racial discrimination have any relevance in the today’s woke world?

That’s not a point. You might as well say Parliament had no place because it allowed those things once.

If Australia etc. want to be republics good for them. The Commonwealth of Nations will still be there.

This is about what the Britons want. Charles will be King in a few years. There may be a republic after that but I cannot see it happening. More likely that the Royal family will be scaled down but I cannot see that either. This government is very good at getting people to blame foreigners rather than look inside for solutions.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I havent watched it either, my wife loves the show though.

But i disagree somewhat with your comments on the BLM. We know that the present generation Royal family is racist, but they wont be around forever. Its a generational thing- younger people are more woke & will support Meghan. Who knows what shape the monarchy will take when William takes it over one day.

The whole concept of royalty is that a family bloodline is superior to the rest of the common people. If the family themselves don't believe it and start moving with the times, then why would we need such a concept as a royal family anyway?

 

[Robert]

Is it any good, never seen it?

The other issue I have with her is now starting another type of BLM movement aimed at the Royals. BLM marches and protests have achieved pretty much nothing apart from statues being destroyed. You cant change history or change peoples views on race. The Royals will never change, all this is doing is causing more divide between people.

I didn’t think I would like The Crown but was hooked after one episode.

You haven’t noticed the many more black actors and mixed race couples on the TV adverts since last summer?

Of course you can’t change history, but you can reveal parts of it that were deliberately hidden by white supremacists.

I find it extraordinary that you don’t back BLM. You rail against Islamophobia, but when another group which has been discriminated against sticks up for itself you say it is pointless because people’s views don’t change.

 

[Robert]

The whole concept of royalty is that a family bloodline is superior to the rest of the common people. If the family themselves don't believe it and start moving with the times, then why would we need such a concept as a royal family anyway?

Actually the concept of royalty in the U.K. is constitutional. The idea of God on Earth went out when Charles II lost his head.

 

[Varun]

So when did everybody realize that the British royal family is racist?

1) When they colonized the world?
2) When they supported the slave trade?
3) When they were rude to Meghan Markle?

 

[MenInG]

The executive director of an industry body for the UK press has resigned after a row over its reaction to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's comments about racism in the media.

Ian Murray said he would step down from his role at the Society of Editors so it could "rebuild its reputation".

Prince Harry said some British tabloids were "racist" and "bigoted".

The Society of Editors initially denied that and said such an "attack" was "not acceptable" without providing evidence.

Announcing his resignation on Wednesday, Mr Murray said: "Since the statement was issued the SoE has been heavily criticised.

"While I do not agree that the society's statement was in any way intended to defend racism, I accept it could have been much clearer in its condemnation of bigotry and has clearly caused upset.

"As executive director I lead the society and as such must take the blame and so I have decided it is best for the board and membership that I step aside so that the organisation can start to rebuild its reputation."

He added that the original statement was "not intended to gloss over the fact the media industry in the UK does have work to do on inclusivity and diversity".

It comes after ITV presenter Charlene White pulled out as host of an awards ceremony staged by the Society of Editors - the British Press Awards - saying the organisation should find "someone whose views align with yours" to replace her.

In the duke and duchess' recent interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Harry was asked if the couple left the UK because of racism.

He said that was a "large part" of why he and his wife had left the UK.

The duke recalled a conversation he had at a charity fundraiser in which he was told that the UK is "very bigoted", and he said he replied: "The UK is not bigoted, the UK press is bigoted, specifically the tabloids."

He added: "But unfortunately if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society."

The Society of Editors, which represents almost 400 members of the media, put out a robust defence in response.

"The UK media is not bigoted and will not be swayed from its vital role holding the rich and powerful to account following the attack on the press by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex," it said.

After criticism, however, it put out a further statement on Wednesday to say its initial comments "did not reflect what we all know: that there is a lot of work to be done in the media to improve diversity and inclusion".

The editors of the Guardian and HuffPost UK had both said they did not agree with the society's position.

Alison Gow, president of the Society of Editors, said: "I would like to thank Ian for his tireless work on behalf of the society; he has led campaigns for journalists' rights and freedoms and worked hard behind the scenes when it appeared legislation might threaten those.

"The society is committed to representing all journalists and upholding journalism; I am clear on what our mission must be, and we will strive as an organisation to listen and hear everyone's views, and be strong advocates and allies for all those we represent."

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56355274

 

[CricketCartoons]

I didn’t think I would like The Crown but was hooked after one episode.

You haven’t noticed the many more black actors and mixed race couples on the TV adverts since last summer?

Of course you can’t change history, but you can reveal parts of it that were deliberately hidden by white supremacists.

I find it extraordinary that you don’t back BLM. You rail against Islamophobia, but when another group which has been discriminated against sticks up for itself you say it is pointless because people’s views don’t change.

World has always been divided between the haves and the have nots. The whites were living in dark ages, but with they focused on science and used it to become powerful. What was stopping africans or indians from doing the same? After getting a decent life thanks to white inventions, they are crying that they were discriminated against? What would be the conditions of blacks had they stayed in africa with no contact with whites and the modern technology, including internet did not reach them? Would they be better or worse?

 

[Technics 1210]

Let me guess - you are reading Daily mail?

The Times & The Telegraph

 

[Robert]

So when did everybody realize that the British royal family is racist?

1) When they colonized the world?
2) When they supported the slave trade?
3) When they were rude to Meghan Markle?

Ok, the living Royal Family did not colonised the world or support the slave trade. You are talking about long dead ancestors. The Empire was gone when the current Queen was a young woman.

By the sound of it maybe one or two individuals committed micro aggressions to Duchess Megan so
let us not generalise.

 

[King-Misbah]

Megan Markle is only after publicity, why air dirty laundry? Harry is probably realising the mistake that he made to marry her.

 

[Adil_94]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] to say that simply marrying someone who is of a different background or race to you can magically stop you from being prejudiced or racist is very ill-informed. Sure it can mean you are less likely to be bigoted towards other groups but its not always the case. There is the case of lot of older right wing white men who marry East asian women because they are seen as more submissive and agreeable than White women.

Theres white girls who fetishise having a mixed black baby but then when the baby comes out too dark they have an issue.

Its like the i have a black friend i cant be racist argument when people have racist or prejudiced opinions.

Also people can dislike different ethnicities and groups i.e people who may like black people but dislike Desis.

 

[Adil_94]

I think its only my parents gen who still love the Royals.

Amongst Gen Zs and Millenials they see the Royals as an outdated and archaic concept. Idk if their status will be abolished but it will be greatly diminished in the next 20-30 years esp after the Queen dies as she is seen by a lot of people like their Grandma and the link to a bygone era.

None of the subsequent royals will ever achiever her level of popularity or adoration amongst the British public.

 

[Robert]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] to say that simply marrying someone who is of a different background or race to you can magically stop you from being prejudiced or racist is very ill-informed. Sure it can mean you are less likely to be bigoted towards other groups but its not always the case. There is the case of lot of older right wing white men who marry East asian women because they are seen as more submissive and agreeable than White women.

Theres white girls who fetishise having a mixed black baby but then when the baby comes out too dark they have an issue.

Its like the i have a black friend i cant be racist argument when people have racist or prejudiced opinions.

Also people can dislike different ethnicities and groups i.e people who may like black people but dislike Desis.

We are discussing one married couple, not unnamed “older right wing white men who marry East asian women because they are seen as more submissive”. Prince Harry is not older and Duchess Meghan is not East Asian or submissive. So let us stick to the point.

There is no “magic” involved but deep conversation with an intelligent and educated woman and Prince Harry cannot fail to be better informed of the black historical perspective.

 

[Technics 1210]

Megan doesn't even look black! There is no historical perspective.

I ask again, what has Meg done for the black community apart from the odd speech here and there?

She is playing the game big time.

Harry - what a dissapointment! Fell for an actress!

 

[Technics 1210]

I think its only my parents gen who still love the Royals.

Amongst Gen Zs and Millenials they see the Royals as an outdated and archaic concept. Idk if their status will be abolished but it will be greatly diminished in the next 20-30 years esp after the Queen dies as she is seen by a lot of people like their Grandma and the link to a bygone era.

None of the subsequent royals will ever achiever her level of popularity or adoration amongst the British public.

It's not about love. No one, and I mean no one, is living in this dream of British imperialism. We all know it's dead. Though India can't get over British rule.

I've been hearing and seeing the Queen since I gained awareness on this planet. Diana was special, as was her wedding, as was Prince William. Queen has been a figure head IMO. 65+ years isn't a joke. Many of us don't even live this long.

I don't see the Royals as out-dated. The Royals are part of British history and they bestow rights on British citizens beyond the ignorant claims of many.

Everyone is rooting for William. Harry was always suspected as an illegitimate child; hence his rebellion traits. Sure there are bad apple like Andrew, and even links with Jack the Ripper, but which family doesn't have secrets?

God save the Queen! This is what you naturalised British citizens must swear and oath alligence to - the Queen and country - before you recieve your British Passport. You are a british citizen by order of the State - the Queen.

 

[Robert]

It's not about love. No one, and I mean no one, is living in this dream of British imperialism. We all know it's dead. Though India can't get over British rule.

I've been hearing and seeing the Queen since I gained awareness on this planet. Diana was special, as was her wedding, as was Prince William. Queen has been a figure head IMO. 65+ years isn't a joke. Many of us don't even live this long.

I don't see the Royals as out-dated. The Royals are part of British history and they bestow rights on British citizens beyond the ignorant claims of many.

Everyone is rooting for William. Harry was always suspected as an illegitimate child; hence his rebellion traits. Sure there are bad apple like Andrew, and even links with Jack the Ripper, but which family doesn't have secrets?

God save the Queen! This is what you naturalised British citizens must swear and oath alligence to - the Queen and country - before you recieve your British Passport. You are a british citizen by order of the State - the Queen.

I think a lot of English exceptionalists are. Dreaming of Empire 2.0. Ain't going to happen.

Second son syndrome. The first son is trained to be King from day one. The second son is the playboy. Some of the worst Kings were second sons - Richard Lionheart, Henry VIII.

 

[Robert]

Actually the concept of royalty in the U.K. is constitutional. The idea of God on Earth went out when Charles II lost his head.

Derrrr. Charles I, obvo.

 

[Adil_94]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] to stick with your point that simply marrying Meghan has cured Harry of any racist beliefs or prejudices he had previously is ignorant. People can compartmentalise prejudice. Harry has form for dressing like a Nazi anr then saying P**i . He may have learnt somewhat but he may still think that comments like that are just "banter" like a lot of people who make bigoted comments but dress it up as jokes. Also Meghan isnt really just black shes mixed with white black native american. N she could pass more as latina to me than black until i saw her Mother.

Theres people who say might be cool with black people but then hate Jews.

Thomas Jefferson had children with a slave n was in a relationship with her. He still was racist.

 

[Adil_94]

[MENTION=149166]Technics 1210[/MENTION]

Most younger people dont see the Royal Family as this great symbol of Britishness as the older gen did. At best people are ambivalent at worst negative on them.

This whole Prince Andrew scandal and now this scandal has diminished the Royals further. Most younger people are on the side of Harry and Meghan and dont have the loyalty to the idea of the Crown anymore.

People are becoming more aware of social injustices racism things like mental health and this idea of the Crown being this beacon of calm in all weathers has been exposed as b.s with all what goes on behind closed doors.

The whole British stiff upper lip mentality is being increasingly seen as outdated.

They will survive only because people arent that against them to want to oust them.

Also as someone who is born here im not naturalised people dont move here cos of the royals but the economic opportunities n relative freedom of liberal democracy.

Certainly not to fawn over the Royals. Whos lives most people who live their day to day can never aspire to.

Older gens have that subservient attitude to the crown. Younger gens dont really thanks to globalisation.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

It's not about love. No one, and I mean no one, is living in this dream of British imperialism. We all know it's dead. Though India can't get over British rule.

I've been hearing and seeing the Queen since I gained awareness on this planet. Diana was special, as was her wedding, as was Prince William. Queen has been a figure head IMO. 65+ years isn't a joke. Many of us don't even live this long.

I don't see the Royals as out-dated. The Royals are part of British history and they bestow rights on British citizens beyond the ignorant claims of many.

Everyone is rooting for William. Harry was always suspected as an illegitimate child; hence his rebellion traits. Sure there are bad apple like Andrew, and even links with Jack the Ripper, but which family doesn't have secrets?

God save the Queen! This is what you naturalised British citizens must swear and oath alligence to - the Queen and country - before you recieve your British Passport. You are a british citizen by order of the State - the Queen.

The royals don't bestow any rights, they are a figurehead. Do you actually think they sit down and discuss state matters with politicians in the 21st century?

What they are good for is selling Britain abroad, especially to saps in the USA who are fascinated by the idea of royalty. I suppose that would include Meghan, although she quickly decided the view was better from the other side of the pond.

 

[Technics 1210]

The royals don't bestow any rights, they are a figurehead. Do you actually think they sit down and discuss state matters with politicians in the 21st century?

What they are good for is selling Britain abroad, especially to saps in the USA who are fascinated by the idea of royalty. I suppose that would include Meghan, although she quickly decided the view was better from the other side of the pond.

As far as British politics, yes. Royal assent. The laws of this land and parliament are not law unless there is royal assent.

 

[Technics 1210]

I think a lot of English exceptionalists are. Dreaming of Empire 2.0. Ain't going to happen.

Second son syndrome. The first son is trained to be King from day one. The second son is the playboy. Some of the worst Kings were second sons - Richard Lionheart, Henry VIII.

You are thinking from a Brexit mindset. As far as you are concern Brexiteers are rebels and racists. Don't confuse nationalism with imperialism.

The Royal family is a strand of British identity.

 

[Technics 1210]

[MENTION=149166]Technics 1210[/MENTION]

Most younger people dont see the Royal Family as this great symbol of Britishness as the older gen did. At best people are ambivalent at worst negative on them.

This whole Prince Andrew scandal and now this scandal has diminished the Royals further. Most younger people are on the side of Harry and Meghan and dont have the loyalty to the idea of the Crown anymore.

People are becoming more aware of social injustices racism things like mental health and this idea of the Crown being this beacon of calm in all weathers has been exposed as b.s with all what goes on behind closed doors.

The whole British stiff upper lip mentality is being increasingly seen as outdated.

They will survive only because people arent that against them to want to oust them.

Also as someone who is born here im not naturalised people dont move here cos of the royals but the economic opportunities n relative freedom of liberal democracy.

Certainly not to fawn over the Royals. Whos lives most people who live their day to day can never aspire to.

Older gens have that subservient attitude to the crown. Younger gens dont really thanks to globalisation.

Most younger people have no sense of identity these days. The generation of today are still figuring out if they are male or female, poor Meg doesn't know if she's black or white, but will play either card when it suits her or a situation.

Tradition whether it be through culture or society is invaluable these days.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

As far as British politics, yes. Royal assent. The laws of this land and parliament are not law unless there is royal assent.

The Royals are told what to assent to, they don't actually have any say in it. You do understand the concept of figurehead I take it? The Queen is 'officially' the head of state, in reality she is not much more than a human version of a Kuwait airlines badge on a football shirt. Good for PR and generating brand value for the UK abroad.

 

[Technics 1210]

The Royals are told what to assent to, they don't actually have any say in it. You do understand the concept of figurehead I take it? The Queen is 'officially' the head of state, in reality she is not much more than a human version of a Kuwait airlines badge on a football shirt. Good for PR and generating brand value for the UK abroad.

You are wrong.

There is a reason why the Royals are exempt from the Freedom of Information act; It's not becuase they are told what to do.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You are wrong.

There is a reason why the Royals are exempt from the Freedom of Information act; It's not becuase they are told what to do.

When was the last time the Queen vetoed a bill being passed through parliament?

 

[IMMY69]

Queen Anne in 1708

Never happened since and will not happen again due to democracy

 

[JaDed]

So when did everybody realize that the British royal family is racist?

1) When they colonized the world?
2) When they supported the slave trade?
3) When they were rude to Meghan Markle?

) Good one

 

[MenInG]

Prince William has said his family is not racist and he has not yet spoken to his brother since Harry and Meghan's explosive interview.

No I haven't spoken to him yet but I will do"We are very much not a racist family," he said after a question from Sky News.

And when asked if he had spoken to his brother yet, the Duke of Cambridge replied: "No, I haven't spoken to him yet but I will do."

The Sussexes made a series of shocking claims about their time as working royals during the two-hour interview with Oprah Winfey which was broadcast in the UK on Monday night.

These included claims of racism in the palace and that the couple felt unsupported by the Royal Family.

Buckingham Palace issued a rare statement in response promising to "address" the "concerning" allegations, in particular claims another royal had raised "concerns" with Harry about Archie's skin colour before he was born.

Prince William, who spoke during a visit with the Duchess of Cambridge to a school in Stratford, east London, is the first royal to comment publicly about the allegations.

The Sussexes also made comments about William and Kate during the Winfrey chat, which was watched on ITV by more than 11 million viewers.

Prince Harry told Oprah his brother and father are "trapped" as royals while Meghan spoke about reports she had made Kate cry ahead of the royal wedding.

Meghan said the "reverse" happened and that it was Kate who made her cry.

She told Winfrey she did not want to be "disparaging to anyone" and claimed Kate "owned it" and apologised with flowers and a note "to take accountability".

Prince Harry also referenced reports that his relationship with his brother is strained.

"The relationship is space at the moment. And time heals all things, hopefully," he told Winfrey.

Prince Charles remained silent at his first public engagements since the Oprah revelations on Tuesday.

During the interview Harry said he felt "really let down" as he revealed his father stopped taking his calls around the time the couple moved to Canada.

"I feel really let down because he's been through something similar, he knows what pain feels like, [and] Archie's his grandson," he said.

"But at the same time - I will always love him - but there's a lot of hurt that's happened and I will continue to make it one of my priorities to try and heal that relationship."

There has been much speculation about which member of the royal family the couple were accusing of making comments about Archie's skin tone.

During the interview the couple would not be drawn on who had deeply offended them, but later asked Winfrey to clarify it wasn't the Queen or Prince Phillip.

Meanwhile, Jacob Rees-Mogg read out the national anthem when pressed to allow MPs to debate the role of the monarchy.

Conservative MP Sir David Amess said he would make the point that "it is never wise for a family dispute to be aired in public".

To which the Commons leader said any debate to praise the Queen would take up several hours of parliamentary time, before launching into his spoken word rendition of the anthem.


https://news.sky.com/story/prince-w...snt-spoken-to-harry-yet-but-plans-to-12242614

 

[JaDed]

If BLM movement is genuine they need to cancel Royals.. lets see if they can

 

[Robert]

The Royals are told what to assent to, they don't actually have any say in it.

HM The Queen must be the most experienced statesperson in the world, and gives advice to the PM. Her role is "to be consulted, to encourage, and to warn".

All that pomp and ceremony impresses people, even the likes of Trump, and can be considered an expression of British soft power.

 

[Robert]

If BLM movement is genuine they need to cancel Royals.. lets see if they can

Come again? All they want is to be treated equally to whites by the police, courts, doctors and other such establishment figures.

 

[guna]

Come again? All they want is to be treated equally to whites by the police, courts, doctors and other such establishment figures.

They want to be treated equally. But if the Royals are racist, they need to be cancelled too.

 

[Stewie]

So when did everybody realize that the British royal family is racist?

1) When they colonized the world?
2) When they supported the slave trade?
3) When they were rude to Meghan Markle?

haha.

LMAO


You win the internet for today, sir!

 

[Stewie]

If BLM movement is genuine they need to cancel Royals.. lets see if they can

BLM started primarily from the US and I can tell you we couldnt care less about the British royals. Its not that we are not canceling them, we just never "had" them to even consider canceling.

They can go on continue doing whatever it is that they do over there in the UK, we do not have any dog in the fight. I think only when it comes to Meghan, some people may have opinions, some borne of prejudice that they favor the royal family, but then again its not out of any reverence for the royal family, its out of malice towards meghan or good old fashioned racism.

 

[JaDed]

Come again? All they want is to be treated equally to whites by the police, courts, doctors and other such establishment figures.

Monarchy itself is an unequal concept, you are saying they want to be treated equally by Royals??

IF BLM are for equality British monarchy should be their first target

 

[JaDed]

BLM started primarily from the US and I can tell you we couldnt care less about the British royals. Its not that we are not canceling them, we just never "had" them to even consider canceling.

They can go on continue doing whatever it is that they do over there in the UK, we do not have any dog in the fight. I think only when it comes to Meghan, some people may have opinions, some borne of prejudice that they favor the royal family, but then again its not out of any reverence for the royal family, its out of malice towards meghan or good old fashioned racism.

I meant the BLM movement in UK..ofcourse Americans should just ignore

 

[KingKhanWC]

I didn’t think I would like The Crown but was hooked after one episode.

You haven’t noticed the many more black actors and mixed race couples on the TV adverts since last summer?

Of course you can’t change history, but you can reveal parts of it that were deliberately hidden by white supremacists.

I find it extraordinary that you don’t back BLM. You rail against Islamophobia, but when another group which has been discriminated against sticks up for itself you say it is pointless because people’s views don’t change.

I stand up for fair treatment of blacks or any people of colour in any part of the worlds society. I dont support BLM which is a created movement to help Biden to become President. Reason why BLM has pretty much gone mute now.

Royal Family wont even marry outside their 'caste', let alone marry people of colour. Many people still belive Diana was killed because she was about to marry a Pakistani or Arab.

If the Royals want to show the world they see all people equal, they can start with giving back some of the stolen goods they have but they refuse to do so.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

HM The Queen must be the most experienced statesperson in the world, and gives advice to the PM. Her role is "to be consulted, to encourage, and to warn".

All that pomp and ceremony impresses people, even the likes of Trump, and can be considered an expression of British soft power.

Yes, I already said that the royal family pomp and ceremony impresses many gormless Americans in an earlier post, it is a form of soft power if you like. But paying lip service to the Queen is not the same as her having any actual clout in modern politics.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

BLM started primarily from the US and I can tell you we couldnt care less about the British royals. Its not that we are not canceling them, we just never "had" them to even consider canceling.

They can go on continue doing whatever it is that they do over there in the UK, we do not have any dog in the fight. I think only when it comes to Meghan, some people may have opinions, some borne of prejudice that they favor the royal family, but then again its not out of any reverence for the royal family, its out of malice towards meghan or good old fashioned racism.

Meghan herself favoured the royal family, she didn't marry into it by stumbling across Prince Harry from 4000 miles away.

 

[Major]

british pakistanis having issues with a royal family existing and commentating

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

british pakistanis having issues with a royal family existing and commentating

Actually British Pakistanis are as free to support or not support the royal family as any other British ethnic.

This is not India or Pakistan where British raj is still stamped into the colonised mindset.

 

[Technics 1210]

When was the last time the Queen vetoed a bill being passed through parliament?

Not in my life time.

However the point is the head of state has power but chooses not to exert it due to impartiality and neutrality.

The Queen can dissolve Parliament when ever she likes - essentially sack the PM and his government. Every UK Passport is issued is in her name and she can revoke the passport anytime she wants. Her head is legal tender. She is commander in chief of the British military etc. HMRC works for her. And yes, she can refuse to sign a royal assent if she wants to.

The head of state has a lot of power - this is the point. We only get to see the 'cerimonial' side of it.

 

[IMMY69]

The Queen can no longer dissolve Parliament.
This right was abrogated in 2011

 

[IMMY69]

As touched upon here, the monarchy brings in tourism and is a Fanta tool when it comes to diplomacy etc however it is a constitutional monarchy which means the legal powers rest with Parliament. The queen is merely the figure head

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The Palace are handing claims that Meghan bullied royal staff to a third party law firm rather than handling it in house which is a surprise move. This could open up a can of worms with royal insiders claiming there is plenty of dirt on Meghan which she left out of her interview with Wnfrah.

 

[Technics 1210]

Anyone expecting a fair interview with Meg needs a refund.

Oprah herself plays the black victim card (despite being a billionaire in the country she disses). Boo hoo. Now she interviewed Meg who pretends to be black when she wants sympathy, you got the perfect recipe for bias nonsense.

Why didn't Oprah question Meg about her father? Or her mother? Simply because the plan was not to reveal the truth about blacks in USA, but to smear the Royal family for the dollars.

There's a reason Meg was represented by one person, at her own Royal wedding - her mother - sitting on her own. Meg's liar, a snake, and evil human being, and is playing the game. Remember, her wedding was actually 3 days prior to the main event.

Meg and Harry ratings have plummeted since the interview. Meg has done more damage to the black community since BLM claimed to be a peaceful movement.

 

[Saj]

Buckingham Palace has hired an outside law firm to conduct an independent inquiry into bullying claims made against the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle.

Last week, in the lead up to Meghan and Harry’s eagerly anticipated Oprah interview, Palace sources were quoted as saying that the Palace was “prepared to retaliate with fresh disclosures about the couple’s behaviour if the monarchy is attacked”.

That retaliation has now arrived as The Sunday Times reports that, in a surprise move, the Palace will be bringing in a third-party law firm to conduct an investigation into the bullying claims.

Jason Knauf, who at the time was the Sussexes’ communications secretary, made the complaint against the duchess in 2018, alleging that she drove two personal assistant out and undermined the confidence of a third.

A royal source told The Sunday Times: “The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.” Another Palace source said: “There’s a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn’t been told.”

Responding to the allegations earlier this month, Meghan’s spokesperson said: “The duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma.”

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...kle-bullying-claims/ar-BB1ezuLj?ocid=msedgntp

 

[Stewie]

Buckingham Palace has hired an outside law firm to conduct an independent inquiry into bullying claims made against the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle.

Last week, in the lead up to Meghan and Harry’s eagerly anticipated Oprah interview, Palace sources were quoted as saying that the Palace was “prepared to retaliate with fresh disclosures about the couple’s behaviour if the monarchy is attacked”.

That retaliation has now arrived as The Sunday Times reports that, in a surprise move, the Palace will be bringing in a third-party law firm to conduct an investigation into the bullying claims.

Jason Knauf, who at the time was the Sussexes’ communications secretary, made the complaint against the duchess in 2018, alleging that she drove two personal assistant out and undermined the confidence of a third.

A royal source told The Sunday Times: “The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.” Another Palace source said: “There’s a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn’t been told.”

Responding to the allegations earlier this month, Meghan’s spokesperson said: “The duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma.”

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...kle-bullying-claims/ar-BB1ezuLj?ocid=msedgntp

Damage control mode on.

But ultimately the result will be a nothing except people will forget about it and stop talking. This is all about for the optics now!

 

[dildilpak]

Buckingham Palace has hired an outside law firm to conduct an independent inquiry into bullying claims made against the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle.

Last week, in the lead up to Meghan and Harry’s eagerly anticipated Oprah interview, Palace sources were quoted as saying that the Palace was “prepared to retaliate with fresh disclosures about the couple’s behaviour if the monarchy is attacked”.

That retaliation has now arrived as The Sunday Times reports that, in a surprise move, the Palace will be bringing in a third-party law firm to conduct an investigation into the bullying claims.

Jason Knauf, who at the time was the Sussexes’ communications secretary, made the complaint against the duchess in 2018, alleging that she drove two personal assistant out and undermined the confidence of a third.

A royal source told The Sunday Times: “The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.” Another Palace source said: “There’s a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn’t been told.”

Responding to the allegations earlier this month, Meghan’s spokesperson said: “The duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma.”

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...kle-bullying-claims/ar-BB1ezuLj?ocid=msedgntp

Hope they get a third party investigator for the much graver allegations against the Queen’s favorite son Andrew as well. Double standards by the royals?

 

[Technics 1210]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56400070

US chat show The Talk has been taken off air for two days following a row between Sharon Osbourne and one of her co-hosts about Piers Morgan.



What a tradegy. Cancel culture is on the rise! There is no such thing as 'free press/speech/opinion' anymore in the West. If you don't share the opinions, you're out. The audacity to point fingers at nations in the East. Pathetic!

Funny thing is ITV had to edit the interview due to lies and inaccurate claims by Meg.

Good news though is Piers is being offered millions to host another show.

 

[Firebat]

Harry and Meghan interview: Duke of Sussex 'has spoken to Charles and William since Oprah programme' - but talks 'not productive', says TV host

The Duke of Sussex has spoken to his father, the Prince of Wales, and his brother, the Duke of Cambridge, following the explosive interview he and wife Meghan gave to Oprah Winfrey, according to a US TV host.

Gayle King, an anchor for This Morning on CBS - the same network which broadcast the programme - said she had since called the US-based royal couple to "see how they were feeling".

Unfortunately, she said, talks between Prince Harry and his family back in the UK were "not productive".

Speaking on Tuesday, just over a week since the interview aired, King said: "I'm not trying to break news, but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling.

"And it's true Harry has talked to his brother and he has talked to his father, too.

"The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive - but they are glad that they have at least started a conversation.

"And I think what is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately, but yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still."

"No one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet," King claimed.

King was likely referring to the backlash the couple - especially Meghan - have faced since the interview aired, with a subsequent poll suggesting public opinion of them in the UK had dropped to an all-time low.

It comes after the Sussexes told Winfrey that an unnamed royal had raised concerns about what colour the skin of their son Archie would be.

The former Suits actor also revealed she was denied help while feeling suicidal by parts of royal institution, which resulted in many viewers speaking out in support of her willingness to talk publicly about mental health.

Later it was confirmed that the royal person who allegedly raised concerns about Archie's skin was not the Queen, nor the Duke of Edinburgh, who today returned to Windsor Castle after spending a month in hospital.

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-h...h-interview-but-talks-not-productive-12247881

 

[sweep_shot]

Piers Morgan's Meghan comments break Ofcom complaints record

Piers Morgan's comments about the Duchess of Sussex on Good Morning Britain have attracted a record number of complaints to TV regulator Ofcom.

Some 57,000 complaints have been made about the show's coverage of the Oprah Winfrey interview on 8 and 9 March.

On 9 March, Morgan said he "didn't believe" a word Meghan had said. He left the ITV programme later that day.

The total of 57,121 complaints is 12,600 more than those made over a race row on Celebrity Big Brother in 2007.

The duchess herself is among those who have complained to the watchdog.

Morgan responded on Twitter: "Only 57,000? I've had more people than that come up & congratulate me in the street for what I said. The vast majority of Britons are right behind me."

Ofcom, which has regulated British TV since 2003, has already launched an investigation into Good Morning Britain. On Wednesday, a spokeswoman said the investigation was ongoing.

A further 4,398 complaints have been made about the Oprah interview itself, which was broadcast on ITV on 8 March. Some objected to the duke and duchess' claims about the Royal Family, some about the timing given the Duke of Edinburgh's ill health, and some about the use of allegedly misleading press headlines in the programme.

Ofcom said: "We're assessing the complaints against our broadcasting rules, before deciding whether or not to investigate." The regulator did not say which aspect of the interview had attracted the complaints.

In the in-depth interview, Meghan told Oprah her mental health became so bad she "didn't want to be alive any more", that she did not receive the help she asked for from Buckingham Palace, and that an unnamed member of the Royal Family had queried "how dark" their son Archie's skin might be.

The day after its UK broadcast, Morgan said he did not believe her, adding that "the fact that she's fired up this onslaught against our Royal Family I think is contemptible".

He briefly walked off the programme after clashing with weather presenter Alex Beresford, and he was criticised by mental health charity Mind.

Morgan later conceded that it was "not for me to question if she felt suicidal", but has defended his "right to be allowed to have an opinion".

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56427214.

 

[Usman]

Harry and Meghan interview: Duke of Sussex 'has spoken to Charles and William since Oprah programme' - but talks 'not productive', says TV host

The Duke of Sussex has spoken to his father, the Prince of Wales, and his brother, the Duke of Cambridge, following the explosive interview he and wife Meghan gave to Oprah Winfrey, according to a US TV host.

Gayle King, an anchor for This Morning on CBS - the same network which broadcast the programme - said she had since called the US-based royal couple to "see how they were feeling".

Unfortunately, she said, talks between Prince Harry and his family back in the UK were "not productive".

Speaking on Tuesday, just over a week since the interview aired, King said: "I'm not trying to break news, but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling.

"And it's true Harry has talked to his brother and he has talked to his father, too.

"The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive - but they are glad that they have at least started a conversation.

"And I think what is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately, but yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still."

"No one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet," King claimed.

King was likely referring to the backlash the couple - especially Meghan - have faced since the interview aired, with a subsequent poll suggesting public opinion of them in the UK had dropped to an all-time low.

It comes after the Sussexes told Winfrey that an unnamed royal had raised concerns about what colour the skin of their son Archie would be.

The former Suits actor also revealed she was denied help while feeling suicidal by parts of royal institution, which resulted in many viewers speaking out in support of her willingness to talk publicly about mental health.

Later it was confirmed that the royal person who allegedly raised concerns about Archie's skin was not the Queen, nor the Duke of Edinburgh, who today returned to Windsor Castle after spending a month in hospital.

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-h...h-interview-but-talks-not-productive-12247881

Wow the audacity of Harry and Meghan knows no bounds. Lots of people took them seriously when Meghan talked about issues of race and mental health. But why are Meghan and Harry now briefing journalists on private conversations with William and Charles which have nothing to do with the serious issues they say they suffered from? They are beggining to sound like cry babies who are seeking attention because they aren't getting what they want.

Did William and Charles have those conversations with the intention that Meghan and Harry make them public? That too with disparaging remarks about how the conversations were "not prodùctive"? I think the answer to those questions is no and so what right do these attention seekers have to make those conversations public? Do they think this running commentary is going to help the family heal? From this latest development, I don't think Meghan and Harry have any intention to heal at all. They are just spiteful.

Wasn't Meghan the one who sued the tabloid press for making personal conversations she had with her father public? Harry and Meghan say they want a private life, but what they actually mean is that they want to air their dirty laundry in public but only the bits of it that are favourable to them.

If they carry on this way, nobody will ever speak about the race and suicide issues and instead the focus will be on other pointless developments in the on going family spat. These people are, in my opinion, just not very nice people.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

lol at the Saas Bahu Drama.. the Royal family should be irrelevant now in the modern times.
Not sure why everyone is fixated on them. May be useful to promote tourism for UK.

Prince Andrew can be made the mascot.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

So when did everybody realize that the British royal family is racist?

1) When they colonized the world?
2) When they supported the slave trade?
3) When they were rude to Meghan Markle?

ha ha.. This is the best comment I have read on this situation. Post this on twitter it may go viral.

 

[Savak]

Whether you are from the royal family or a poverty stricken family, you should never air your private conversations in public. I am beginning to lose patience with these 2 now.

 

[sweep_shot]

Duchess of Sussex: Private investigator unlawfully accessed private information

A US private investigator has told BBC News he was paid by the Sun newspaper to obtain personal information about the Duchess of Sussex in the early days of her relationship with Prince Harry.

But Daniel Hanks says he unlawfully accessed detailed information including Meghan's social security number.

The Sun's publisher said it requested legitimate research and instructed Mr Hanks he must act lawfully.

Meghan and Harry said it was a "moment of reflection" for the media industry.

BBC News has seen the so-called "comprehensive report on Meghan and her family" which the investigator, also known as Danno Hanks, passed to the Sun.

It included her phone number, addresses and social security number as well as information on her family members. His report also included information on her ex-husband and a former boyfriend.

In the US, licensed private investigators are allowed full access to databases of personal information for some permitted reasons such as court reports. But accessing this additional level of detail for journalistic purposes is unlawful.

Mr Hanks said: "Pretty much everything I found out they could find out themselves using legal means - with the exception of the social security numbers.

"When you have that information… it's the key to the kingdom."

While there is no evidence it happened in this instance, social security numbers in particular could potentially be used to further other intrusive investigations.

A spokesman for Harry and Meghan said: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex feel that today is an important moment of reflection for the media industry and society at large, as this investigative report shows that the predatory practices of days past are still ongoing, reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships.

"They are grateful to those working in media who stand for upholding the values of journalism, which are needed now more than ever before."

The duke and duchess have had a fraught relationship with the UK's tabloid press. During the couple's recent interview with Oprah Winfrey, they said this had created a "toxic environment" of "control and fear" and was largely to blame for them leaving the UK.

Prince Harry is currently suing the publisher of the Sun, and the former publisher of the Daily Mirror, over allegations of phone hacking before 2011.

Several stories appeared in the Sun, and other newspapers, at the beginning of the couple's relationship. They included an article claiming Prince Harry had "bombarded" his future wife with text messages and another detailing a weekend they spent together at Meghan's home in Toronto.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56444635.

 

[Saj]

The Duke of Cambridge is said to have been angry after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex defended their use of the phrase “Sussex Royal” in a statement in 2020.

Shortly before the Sussexes met with the royal family to discuss their departure from their senior roles, they launched a website titled “Sussex Royal” detailing their planned ventures moving forward.

However, the Queen later said they could no longer use the word “royal” in their ventures if they were not working members of the royal family.

The Sussexes responded to this with a statement that remains live on their sussexroyal.com website:

“While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘Royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.”

This, according to a new report in The Sunday Times, is what is said to have riled Prince William.

“The content and that it’s still online is staggering”, a senior royal source told the publication.

“That was it for William, he felt they’d blindsided the Queen in such an insulting and disrespectful way,” they added.

The publication also reported that, in the immediate aftermath of the bombshell Oprah interview, in which the Sussexes alleged that a member of the royal family had made a racist remark about the colour of their son, Archie’s, skin, Prince William was “reeling”.

“His head is all over the place on it,” a source close to the duke told the publication.

Four days after the interview, when asked about the accusations of racism, Prince William said: “We’re very much not a racist family” and said that he planned to speak to his brother soon.

The brothers have since spoken, according to a friend of the Sussexes.

CBS News presenter Gayle King said she was told about the conversation when she called Meghan and Harry after the revealing interview.

However, King said that talks were “unproductive” and that nobody from the Royal Family has yet spoken to the Duchess of Sussex.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...sponse-to-the-queen/ar-BB1eO1Yq?ocid=msedgntp

 

[Firebat]

Meghan's Mail on Sunday statement on hold

The Mail on Sunday has been given time to seek permission to appeal a ruling that it publish a front-page statement about the Duchess of Sussex winning her copyright claim against the newspaper.

Meghan sued for a copyright breach over the publication of a letter to her father and won most of her claim.

A High Court judge then ruled the MoS must print on its front page and page three that it infringed her copyright.

The statement is on hold after its publisher sought permission to appeal.

Meghan, 39, brought the legal action against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) - the publisher of both the MoS and MailOnline.

It was over a handwritten letter to her father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018, parts of which were later published in news articles.

Last month, the duchess won her privacy claim and most of her copyright claim. The judge ruled the letter was "personal and private" and Meghan had a "reasonable expectation that the contents of the letter would remain private".

Lord Justice Warby subsequently said the MoS must print a single statement on the front page, referring readers to a further statement on page three.

MailOnline must also publish the statement "for a period of one week".

On Monday, Lord Justice Warby said ANL had applied for permission to appeal.

The judge refused ANL permission, but granted a "stay" of the order "only until the matter has been decided by the Court of Appeal".

He said the stay would expire on 6 April, to give ANL time to apply directly to the Court of Appeal.

Meghan welcomed her High Court privacy victory last month.

After the Mail On Sunday was ordered to print the statements earlier this month, a spokesman for the newspaper said: "We will be applying to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal, including in relation to aspects of the judgment today."

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56485477

 

[Robert]

Prince Harry has got a job as “impact officer” at an American mental health firm.

Guess that’s some sort of PR / inspirational speaking role?

 

[dildilpak]

Prince Harry has got a job as “impact officer” at an American mental health firm.

Guess that’s some sort of PR / inspirational speaking role?

Good for him - its atleast an honest living unlike the rest of the royal family which lives off taxpayers.

 

[Robert]

Good for him - its atleast an honest living unlike the rest of the royal family which lives off taxpayers.

Well you could argue that all public employees “live off taxpayers”.