Queen and Meghan and harry

[Pixxie7]

Apparently the queen is considering taking legal action to stop the verbal attacks on the royal family.

I don’t think Charlotte and Louis need any individual security at all and I don’t know why pays their fees. Is it the tax payer or is it personal money? They can get jobs anyway. They’re not needed to glad hand, especially if they don’t do it right and start whingeing.

The Archbishop of Canterbury stated that Harry and Meg did NOT get married in their back yard (not licensed for weddings) and without a registrar or witnesses, why are posters implying they did ?

What they said was that they repeated their vows to each other privately, before the wedding. A lot of people do that and it means a great deal to them, they consider themselves to be married even though not legally so.

*Did you watch the Oprah interview?

If smirking was an Olympic sport it would have been a gold.*

I've watched it at least twice and saw no smirking. It was actually quite a serious interview.

@Plumtree391

What they said was that they repeated their vows to each other privately, before the wedding. A lot of people do that and it means a great deal to them, they consider themselves to be married even though not legally so.

I appreciate that's what happened, but Meghan was either clumsy in expressing it or misrepresenting what happened in the Oprah interview.

Unfortunately, it was so easily contradicted in its detail that it was used to attack her wider credibility. If she'd said, ' As far as we're concerned, we got married three days before ... ' that would have been so much more understandable.

Yes. Maybe it should have stayed private, writing it down makes it seem a bit soppy........

Well, Americans do tend to be more emotionally open than we in the UK.

Daphne that's at very good point re Andrew and his impenetrable arrogance. I mean to agree to that interview and how it went!to think he can wriggle out of this and try and tell the British public he was doing work for us by chatting to important and interesting people

Off with his head.

Re Harry.. The lack of empathy astonishes me, the rf removed any tights over him when he was made to walk behind his tragically killed mother's coffin.

@Whinginadeville

You cannot go round accusing posters of being 'bots'.

Just because there are people on here who don't dislike M&H like you do and have a different opinion, doesn't mean they are 'bots'.

All it means is... there happens to be posters on here who don't agree with you.
That... you have to accept and stop throwing 'bot' accusations at them. MNHQ don't take too kindly to that by the way, just so you know.

To the posters who talk about us paying for the royals - genuine question here - are their allowances and costs etc more than what we earn from them?

Because regardless of your views of the specific family members - they do work. And our country benefits?!

To the posters who talk about us paying for the royals - genuine question here - are their allowances and costs etc more than what we earn from them?

Personally I doubt it but genuinely I think it is completely unquantifiable. We don't know, and it will be shrouded in secrecy.

Whinginadeville I completely and utterly agree with you. It is not even subtle is it!

I don't even know how much money, say, Prince Andrew has in the UK or is sitting on in other accounts / assets overseas and offshore, so I couldn't really assess his net value tbh.

Ditto the Queen and Prince Charles. Their 'private wealth' isn't money they've privately earned, it's come to them via 'the country' that they 'rule', or investments arising out of that. So how do you quantify that? How do separate out the crown from the monarchy from the royal family from 'the country'? It's nicely obfuscated.

Meghan is hoping to come to the UK apparently, that should be interesting. I sincerely hope they stay precisely where they are and out of harm's way.

@stepupandbecounted

Meghan is hoping to come to the UK apparently, that should be interesting. I sincerely hope they stay precisely where they are and out of harm's way.

Let's hope there's a state banquet for the occasion. With Camilla Tominey as guest of honour!

[quote Roussette]@Whinginadeville

You cannot go round accusing posters of being 'bots'.

Just because there are people on here who don't dislike M&H like you do and have a different opinion, doesn't mean they are 'bots'.

All it means is... there happens to be posters on here who don't agree with you.
That... you have to accept and stop throwing 'bot' accusations at them. MNHQ don't take too kindly to that by the way, just so you know.[/quote]
just report, its on par with troll hunting. sad that people can't believe that not everyone see's things their way.

I can write the tabloid stories now.

First, they'll take about 10,000 long lens photos. Finally they'll get the money shot - one of Meghan adjusting her face, like we all bloody do every few minutes of our lives.

Headlines: 'Meghan gives the Queen side-eye'. 'Meghan Markle throws shade on her sister-in-law Kate'. 'Meghan appears to stifle a YAWN as pensioner pours heart out at charity event.' As nauseam.

If that's you're concern you might want to focus your ire on the Prince using the public purse to fund his lifestyle with trafficked victims of sexual abuse and any legal fall out that may arise from those poor choices. People can manage to have independent thoughts on more than one person at a time, just because someone thinks Ian Brady was a vile person doesn't mean that are justifying Fred West.

Maybe have a thread about PA with no references to H&M and another thread doing the opposite.

Best she doesn't scratch her ear otherwise it will be seen as signalling to the Russians or some such ridiculous made up shite!

Well she's already fuelling human rights abuses by eating avocados @Port1aCastis...

I get what you're saying, @ancientgran, but what many posters are saying is that they are related. The royal family has the clout to set elements of the press on, say, Meghan Markle, to distract attention from Favourite Son (or whatever he is).

I'm no fan of MM - I've criticised her on here a lot for her missteps - but the orchestrated press games are all getting extremely crass and unacceptable now that Andrew's in the deep shit over something very, very serious and horrible indeed.

People aren't stupid.

The Queen, once seen as an unequivocally admirable woman, is now the one mis-stepping up at Balmoral.

@ancientgran

In this thread we have a Sun article suggesting legal action against M&H for un specified criminal / mean statements that they have made or might make in the future. We have no idea.

The thread has evolved to state that not only have they / will they make criminal / mean statements about the Q (Camilla has hurt feelings too now), but we now have to focus on the cost of the wedding. It is not unreasonable to state that we the public have funded weddings for individuals who have subsequently divorced or committed adultery. We are also funding the legal defence of individual accused of child rape. It is entirely on topic to state that we have lots of bonkers costs associated with the royal family.

We have also had it stated that M&H have demanded a state banquet and they told their special friend Camilla Tominey all about it. People have then speculated that presumably she will want a tiara for the occasion. That is not unreasobale.

We have now been told that Meghan wants to come back to the UK - not sure which special friend in the british media she told. Will there be another state banquet? Who knows? I expect there will be tiaras.

No one has to like anyone in the news but I cannot bring myself to get annoyed about crimes / hurt feelings regarding words that no one can point out to me.

I also cannot bring myself to be enraged about one royal wedding but have amnesia about all the other bullshit we fund for the RF

And frankly I think it is funny that I am also supposed to get angry about a state banquet that Meghan told her special friend Camilla Tominey about.

The queen must be so TIRED by now. Decades upon decades of trying to keep her shitshow of a family on the straight and narrow, burdened by this Victorian notion of "duty". I bed the old lass just wants to quietly bow out and leave them all to it.

If that's you're concern you might want to focus your ire on the Prince using the public purse to fund his lifestyle with trafficked victims of sexual abuse and any legal fall out that may arise from those poor choices

It depends on what's important to you, of course

And if that's you're [sic] concern maybe you'd like to follow the links I posted upthread to the two current threads on precisely that matter one of which I started.