News on Meghan and Harry

[Viviennemary]

Since they are in the news more or less daily why not a thread on this. Latest I've read over the last few days is that Meghan is going to produce a film from a book. And later this month she is teaming up with Michelle Obama for project on gender equality. Both sound interesting projects.

Please not let's put Boris and Trump in the same category as MM and Amber Heard. That's just ridiculous.

They are celebrities / a wife of a member of the RF and their actions affect no one. Unlike the other two whose actions affect everybody. Without criticism of politicians/politics there is no balance and no objectivity. In other words... a dictatorship.

It's almost as though the decision to bring the case was made in a vacuum and that it wasn't made clear to them that the earlier People article would be integral. Their legal team should have explained it.

@Roussette

Please not let's put Boris and Trump in the same category as MM and Amber Heard. That's just ridiculous.

They are celebrities / a wife of a member of the RF and their actions affect no one. Unlike the other two whose actions affect everybody. Without criticism of politicians/politics there is no balance and no objectivity. In other words... a dictatorship.

They are in the same category because we are either censored so we can’t say what we want or else we are not censored and we can. They are also in the same category as all being born in America etc. There are lots of categories in which they all belong and it’s not a dictatorship for that to happen. It’s not to do with their actions at this point but rather to do with the actions and comments of Mumsnetters and why what is classed as being in the spirit of the site is not universal.

@mrscampbellblackagain

I don't see how the 'friends' will remain anonymous - too many people now know their names surely? I think I said before but complainants in rape trials against celebs have been named on twitter, can't see how these women will get better treatment.

If they aren’t named then there is the potential for speculation to mount and belief or blame to be put on individuals that had nothing to do with it. That also isn’t fair.

People like to speculate about Boris' and his children and it's allowed to stand. How does that affect us and how he chooses to run this country?

I don't get it. You really think mm is in the same league as the pm ?
One runs the country and the other is a duchess..

@Samcro

I don't get it. You really think mm is in the same league as the pm ? One runs the country and the other is a duchess..

I’m going to assume that you aren’t being deliberately obtuse since you seem to be completely misunderstanding what I am writing tonight but as I said it’s to do with the actions and comments of Mumsnetters and why what is classed as being in the spirit of the site is not universal and it has absolutely nothing whatsoever about what perceived league anyone is in. It’s to do with MNHQ removing comments such as how the legal process in Meghan’s case works as not being in the spirit of the site but ones saying Amber was abusive to Johnny and deserved what she got in retaliation are acceptable to stay.

Don't agree.

Criticism, or should I say critique of the likes of Johnson and Trump is par for the course. They are elected officials who are in charge of politicies that affect millions.

So I say... Trump has decided to pull out of the Iran deal, and he's deluded because he is threatening peace in the ME, thereby aggravating global risks which will affect everyone in the western world
Or
Meghan Markle is deluded because she is talks of 5 friends who she won't name who has backed her in her case against AN.

Bit different I think.

Criticism of political ideas is necessary and allowable in a free society. Criticism of MM is allowable but doesn't affect us as private citizens so a fine line should be trod for fear it ends up as bullying.

This is not directed at you personally. It is a general comment.

People like to speculate about Boris' and his children and it's allowed to stand. How does that affect us and how he chooses to run this country?

I haven't said it does. However, it is ummm very unusual to have a PM in this position. One who doesn't acknowledge all his children so it is natural to speculate about this, even though, to you, it might be wrong. He's changed the norm that we're used to.

@Roussette

Don't agree.

Criticism, or should I say critique of the likes of Johnson and Trump is par for the course. They are elected officials who are in charge of politicies that affect millions.

So I say... Trump has decided to pull out of the Iran deal, and he's deluded because he is threatening peace in the ME, thereby aggravating global risks which will affect everyone in the western world
Or
Meghan Markle is deluded because she is talks of 5 friends who she won't name who has backed her in her case against AN.

Bit different I think.

Criticism of political ideas is necessary and allowable in a free society. Criticism of MM is allowable but doesn't affect us as private citizens so a fine line should be trod for fear it ends up as bullying.

This is not directed at you personally. It is a general comment.

My comments aren’t about their politics though, which is why Amber Heard is also included as she is not a politician. It’s about what is allowed to stand on their site as being acceptable and it seems comments on Boris being fat etc are fine even though that isn’t a political criticism but a personal insult whereas a factual comment about how the legal system works and will work for Meghan’s case isn’t in the spirit of the site. That isn’t consistent and that is my point.

I think MM has far worse levelled at her than the equivalent of Boris being fat. Far far worse. Her character has been besmirched relentlessly for more than a year, admittedly not so much personal comments about her appearance, although there have been some, but worse AFAIC on every aspect of her character, she has been torn to shreds on here, over a very long period of time.
There were ones I reported that were beyond awful, I could not believe I was on a parenting site and reading it, and some have stood as posts and not been deleted.
I don't agree with posts saying personal comments about Boris, absolutely not, I'm more interested in what he's doing as PM.

And I didn't see the overnight deleted comments so have no idea about those.
I just mean that likening Boris/Trump to MM is madness.

Amber Heard I have not read that thread. So I'm sorry I can't put it in the context of what we're talking about.

One runs the country and the other is a duchess. We can vote the PM out but unfortunately the latter we are stuck with and financially responsible for, for the rest of her life, as long as she uses her title, despite the fact she lived here for about five minutes.

I am sure there are 5 friends. What I find hard to believe is that they all spontaneously and without Meghan's permission, decided to contact People magazine to tell them how wonderful she is.

How financially responsible are we for Meghan now?

I thought they were paying for their own security. Charles can do with his money as he wants. What else?

I;m interested in this because I don't know,and thought they were self funding.

Andrew is still subsidised by the Queen to the tune of £250,000 per year and he is disgraced.

I do not think criticism has to be personal but it’s legitimate to look at actions and consequences. The RF are integral to this nation. They are not above criticism. Indeed quite often they reflect on it and slowly change.

Meghan has baked her friends. In papers submitted to the court. Until such time as the case comes to court, she wants their privacy respected. Personally I think that’s a bit late after she briefed them on what to say about her relationship with her father.

Over the years the RF has received significant funding from the state. Until around 10 years ago, the Queen didn’t pay tax. Of course it’s our business but not to be overly intrusive or abusive.

As I said before, it’s not an apology she wants. No one spends £££ thousands for this. She wants financial damages to give to charity. For AN it’s better to defend this vigorously. MM has already disclosed she thinks her wedding was worth about £1 bn to the country. Everything seems to have money attached. Beatrice and Eugenie work. Meghan took up Royal duties and that meant no paid work. She had a pop at her cousins in the court papers. It simply doesn’t sound harmonious and Harry has huge financial advantages due to the financial position of the RF and tax since income tax was introduced!

baked!!! Named her friends.

Prince Charles only paid income tax from 1993 on his surplus, after expenses, on his Duchy of Cornwall income. The Duchy pays no corporation tax. Every bit of profit goes to him. Most corporations pay corporation tax but as it’s not a corporation it doesn’t. He takes all its surplus as income which since he is over 70 he had a pretty good run of paying no tax at all!

I agree Boris and Trump can be voted out if people are not happy with their behaviour or performance. With Meghan and Harry there is no such option. Meghan lists her occupation as Princess of the United Kingdom. I wonder if that will continue to be the case now. Or has she in effect resigned from the job. I don't mean the status I mean the occupation.

Wondering if H has only 2 polo shirt ?
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8513577/No-sweat-Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-step-appointment-scorching-Beverly-Hills.html

I don't think the mail will let up on the five.
What a tricky situation they now find themselves in.

"All five of the women now face the prospect of being hauled to the High Court in London next year to testify in the explosive privacy trial. They will be asked to confirm on oath that the Duchess had no prior knowledge that they were going to speak to People."

EXCLUSIVE: Meghan and Harry step out for appointment in Beverly Hills
mol.im/a/8513577

Rousette I do understand what you are saying about the impact world leaders have on all of us vs what a celebrity can influence. They absolutely need to be held to account and criticised. I don't care too much if people want to speculate about Boris and the children situation on a public forum (although it is rather ironic he's a parent being criticised on a parenting forum and my point was that they are still personal insults being allowed to stand).

I think where we differ is I still see celebrities and members of the royal family accountable for their actions and behaviour, even if they are not influencing policy and directly affecting our day to day lives.

Most of them want to us to spend our money on them, or their charitable causes, or they want to protect their reputations and assets. I think the public have a right to know, and question, something if actions and behaviours suggest they are not who they say they are. I personally want to know when someone in the public eye is being dishonest for their own personal gain. Many celebrities are eventually exposed for this kind of thing, and as long as it's truth I think that's fair. I don't think injunctions should be granted when rich, famous people are discovered to have had affairs for example.

I know you and a few others don't feel that H&M have done anything wrong but many posters do, and specifically with the court case and legal papers submitted thus far, feel that something is not adding up with the whole situation on Meghan's side. She is currently in a transition period from being a working member of the royal family. I don't think it's right to have these discussions censored because other people disagree or think it's unfair. And I think this is true for any member of the royal family but at the moment this is the only court case I am aware of and also follows a quick succession of various actions by both H&M
which again, many posters find questionable. I saw all the posts last night and they were all discussing the court case. I did not see a single personal insult.

Obviously it goes without saying that nasty, racist, spiteful comments towards anyone should be deleted. I'm talking general criticism that is being heavily censored when it comes to H&M.

LOL cross post Oldbutstillgotit
Hopefully it is two, and he doesn't wash his only shirt in the sink every night ready for the next day!
Maybe their his luggage got lost rushing from Canada to LA via the UK.

@Roussette don't play dumb. Ultimately every penny paid for their upkeep and security comes from the British public purse, in some shape or other.

I also wanted to say that don’t forget elements of this case have already been struck out by the judge. He thought the submissions were irrelevant. Of course Meghan has the best QC but the struck out elements looked to be included because Meghan insisted. I would think she was advised what makes a good case in the English courts, but irrelevant claims were included and they were dismissed unless she came up with a more convincing argument. However that could be difficult.

Miss Eliza no need to be rude. I asked a question. I thought they took on the security themselves. And I thought they were self funding now, albeit Charles might be funding them to some extent, or the Queen as she does to all her GC. Not sure what 'some shape or other means' if they are funding themselves. Me asking a question like that doesn't warrant being told I'm 'playing dumb.'

Blossom great post, and lots I agree with, and some I don't! But found it interesting and I get it.