Am I missing something here? Meghan Markle

[Whitehorseinthehill]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7679223/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-not-spending-Christmas-Sandringham.html

Sorry for the Meghan Markle thread and DM link, but I have found this really amusing today.

Story out today saying Harry and Meghan apparently aren't spending Xmas with the Queen this year. Lots of comments below blaming Meghan, saying she's isolating Harry from his family, saying the Queen must be really upset. Everyone at work was chatting about it today saying similar.

Am I missing something? I mean we don't even know if it's true. But even if it is, aren't they entitled to spend Xmas as they please? She has her own mother she may want to see.

Ok I get that it's the Queen and it's the usual tradition but is it really a big deal?

[Bluerussian]

Oh blimey, that's a blast from the past; I remember her doing washing up liquid adverts on television.

[BertrandRussell]

:) it’s such a nice memory. She was lovely- she walked up and down with my screaming baby while I had some food, then came back periodically through the flight to give me a break. I remember her telling me to go to the loo before I took the baby back....

[The80sweregreat]

She sounds lovely Bertrand! Wow. A kind heart.
She was in 'international velvet' and so beautiful in that. A natural actress.

[Bluerussian]

Nanette Newman was married to Brian Forbes and they had two daughters, Emma and Sarah; Sarah married the much older John Standing but have been happy. She's very clever,.

[MissEliza]

Aah Nanette Newman! Glad to hear she was lovely in real life.

[BertrandRussell]

This was in 1996. I wonder if she was a grandmother then. Depressingly, I was older than her daughters- didn’t realise that til now!

[DonKeyshot]

Left to my own devices I rarely read "the trashy tabloids", but it appears they are essential reading if one wishes to keep up with various debates on this site, SarahNade,

It would indeed be "commonsense" for Ms Markle to marry "a US congressman or insider" if she wished to build a role for herself supporting her chosen husband's career.

If, however, she wished to be centre stage, so to speak, and having no experience of government, she may choose to emulate the present POTUS in which case her current husband may have to renounce his place in the order of succession before becoming a citizen of the U.S.A.

What interesting times we live in ...

[BertrandRussell]

Essential reading especially for Team anti Meghan

[phoenixrosehere]

It would indeed be "commonsense" for Ms Markle to marry "a US congressman or insider" if she wished to build a role for herself supporting her chosen husband's career.

As the saying goes, “Common sense isn’t common.”

People seem to need any reason no matter how small to criticise her. Pretend that she was anonymous on AiBU and put up wanting to visit her mum for Christmas instead of her in-laws this time, and her mother being overseas, same people would be telling her to go for it and not to make a tradition of sorts because it could become an issue.

[popthepopcorn]

Is it just me or have the RF become much more prominent lately? There seem to be so many of these threads these days, coverage in the media etc. I can't remember it being like this since Lady Di was alike

[MarieIVanArkleStinks]

Not her again.

What I want to know is, why aren't people focusing less on Markle and more on Elizabeth Windsor's odious second son? What's she done that's even in the same league as the kind of things he's accused of (and at the very least, some of the company he keeps)?

A cynical public could be forgiven for assuming MM an excellent way of burying bad news. Going one step further, they might already have observed that the Windsors are cunning media manipulators, and therefore deduced that the strategy of throwing another family member under the bus to detract attention from the 'main event' is cold, calculated and deliberate.

Let's be under no illusion that the Windsors have an inordinate amount of control over what's published about them in the media (and that overseas media obeys no such strictures).

If that really is the case, I'd hardly blame Harry from distancing himself from such a family. So would I.

[QueenOfTheAndals]

@BertrandRussell I was just about to post that myself but you beat me to it!

[LaurieMarlow]

Great find Bertrand

I sincerely hope they quash the campaign of hate being run against her. Tabloid ‘journalism’ is this country is disgraceful.

[BertrandRussell]

Sorry @QueenOfTheAndals- I realise I forgot to add that I stole it from you!

[PortiaCastis]

Good for the Duchess Bertrand I hope people will take note that a lot of that rubbish is lies lies and downright lies. The nasty bitching demonisation of one woman by the media is bound to have repercussions, no ordinary person would tolerate all the bullshit written about them and would have been quick sharp down to the solicitors ages ago so why should Duchess have to put up with the venom.
As I've previously posted 70p per year is taxes doesn't give anyone carte blanche to be an arsehole

[MarziPam]

From the 'essential reading especially for Team anti Meghan' 'The Duchess’s lawyers say the bathtub, the soundproofing, the yoga studio, the guest room and the tennis court simply do not exist'

It does seem risky that the papers would say stuff that is completely made up, however I'd have been interested to also have seen a list of what the refurb did pay for, of course that is conveniently not relevant. Maybe it wasn't a copper bathtub but still a ridiculously expensive one, who knows. It wasn't the items so much as the cost and then the petulance afterwards that people object to.

[BertrandRussell]

“ It wasn't the items so much as the cost and then the petulance afterwards that people object to“
Petulance?

[MarieIVanArkleStinks]

I sincerely hope they quash the campaign of hate being run against her. Tabloid ‘journalism’ is this country is disgraceful.

Ask yourself what's feeding it. What kinds of forces influence what is published about the Windsors? Despite their professed disdain for the press, the press have for the most part been very respectful of their consistent demands for privacy. They also rarely publish anything about them that doesn't show them in a favourable, rosy light. (Compare with overseas press and it gives an indicator - and that's bearing in mind that the UK has more of a name than most places for having an invasive, sarcastic, spiteful press).

No one is apparently putting strictures on them as to what kind of negative spin they are putting on the behaviour of Meghan Markle. This is the case even when they're criticizing her for behaviour her in-laws indulge in as a matter of course.

I find that quite interesting.

[MarziPam]

Yes petulance, or sulking if you prefer?

Harry and Meghan want to be adored, they aren't because they are hypocrites as had been demonstrated ad nauseam on MN.

I agree the Mail should not have said they had a copper bath or an orangery, that is incredibly hurtful .

To sue a paper because they said they had a copper bath and have said other unkind but true things is not helping their public image.

They need to toughen up and rise above it, like everyone else manages to

[BertrandRussell]

“ Yes petulance, or sulking if you prefer?“

I know what it means! What did they say?

[MarziPam]

'I know what it means! What did they say?'

Oh there was a documentary on a couple of weeks ago, did you miss it?

[PortiaCastis]

Breaking the law by publishing private letters and phone hacking means the kerb licking tabloids will get their come uppance, they are not above the law that is why they are being sued

[BertrandRussell]

“ Oh there was a documentary on a couple of weeks ago, did you miss it?”
That was about the bath? I didn’t realise!

[BertrandRussell]

Interesting to have picked out one trivial point, though. Not the many substantive ones.

[minou123]

On Newsnight, tonight BBC2, Andrew is giving an interview about his friendship with Epstein.

Anyone going to watch?