A positive thread on Harry and Meghan (aka Thread 6)

[Mummy195]

@rousette

I'm sure you won't mind that your excellent link gets 'pinned'.

Some of the things MM did before marrying H.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1282990766097301504.html

How can you know all this is fact though?
How can it not be speculation?
Unless you are a member of the royal family or know Andrew personally?

I thought the thread was about Harry and Meghan?

Yes. Which is why I said this above....
'But this thread is about H&M so I'll shut up now'

But was then questioned on things I'd posted and being a well brung up girl, I replied

There is just not much to report on with regards to PA right now

Understandable in a way; if he opens his mouth a la Maitlis he loses, and I can't quite see he'll want details released, so the only possible route is to hide and keep quiet
You didn't really think "never complain, never explain" was for the public's benefit did you??

I am certainly not going to click on a link and provide click bait for their right wing, fear mongering, Brexit loving, immigrant hating, xenophobic, festering rag ... a tawdry circle jerk of hate

Now come on, be honest - are you trying to say you don't actually like them??

How can you know all this is fact though?
How can it not be speculation?
Unless you are a member of the royal family or know Andrew personally?

How can you know anything about H&M then? Apart from their public statements? I think you post on far more about them than just that. I know you would love to label this speculation so you can take MNHQ to task about this thread.

I have not said I don't read the press? I get my news from all sorts of sources.

Sorry my mistake. You specifically mean the daily mail treat H&M worse than PA and not all press. Even though by your own admission you haven't read the daily mail for a very long time. So I'm confused how you've come to this conclusion.

I agree volume of stories on H&M is higher than PA. And I would also agree if we are to believe what is written about PA that he has done worse (like possibly committed a crime not just questionable behaviour) .

But I would argue that the reason for the higher volume is because H&M have done more to report on. They've released statements, friends have given interviews, attended events, been the subject of many new books, instigated various litigations. This is all newsworthy regardless of what PA has done. I would put money on every news outlet having significantly higher volumes of articles on H&M than PA. This doesn't mean people approve of him or think H&M have done worse.

@Roussette

I really couldn't put never complain, never explain and Prince Andrew in the same sentence together. He whinged about his DDs place in the RF, he whinged about their security detail, he then gave that interview and he is only quiet now because he's quite possibly tied inexorably to a paedophile! Oh... and he's kept his £300,000 tax funded bodyguards despite stepping away from royal duties.

Court documents from Ghislaine being released at the moment, don't see anything on that in the DM, they're too obsessed with sticking the knife in with M&H.

Sorry Rousette, I was responding to your last sentence here about GM and the mail.

Sorry my mistake. You specifically mean the daily mail treat H&M worse than PA and not all press. Even though by your own admission you haven't read the daily mail for a very long time. So I'm confused how you've come to this conclusion

No probs
I just see links come up on my Twitter account. I don't follow the DM, course I don't, but the headlines that pop up from someone I do follow is enough

I do agree with your last para but to add that H&M are clickbait. Not that PA isn't but he has gone quiet lately...

No problem myrtle

Today’s case is about reporting their names at the future full hearing

If so then I've got it wrong - I really thought today was about whether the 5 friends' names could be publicised before the court case

Call me dense, but I'm not sure why they'd be kept confidential during it ... after all it's hardly a mafia muder trial with witness protection needed, and if they're worried about calls from the media they should perhaps have thought of that before blabbing to a magazine

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Today’s case is about reporting their names at the future full hearing

If so then I've got it wrong - I really thought today was about whether the 5 friends' names could be publicised before the court case

Call me dense, but I'm not sure why they'd be kept confidential during it ... after all it's hardly a mafia muder trial with witness protection needed, and if they're worried about calls from the media they should perhaps have thought of that before blabbing to a magazine

My thoughts exactly! Why are they allowed to go to the press and then be protected but others weren't offered the same courtesy?

Yes that’s what was originally reported on 9 July. If was said it was urgent due to imminent reporting of names the following weekend. Now the barristers are saying something different if you read the verbatim reports. Meghan seems to have shifted her position. This might account for the delay in hearing the case.

Can you link to the legal filings?

Please I should have added.

Now the barristers are saying something different if you read the verbatim reports

What, so they're now saying the "names" (god, this sounds like Lloyds!!) shouldn't be released at all, not even during the case itself?

That offends what passes for my logic, but any chance of a link to these reports? I've not seen them and wouldn't know where to look

Today is Charles and Diana's wedding anniversary.

Can we have a commercial break please?

Where was everyone?! I was 9 and watching it at home [on the East Coast of the United States.] Thought she was marvellous.

Looking back - last gasp of the Edwardian era, it feels like. You know? The story I have always wondered about whether it is true or not is the lunch that she supposedly had with her family a few days before where she was saying she was worried about it all. Her family said to her (supposedly): "Too late Dutch, your face is on the tea towels." Duchess was her nickname.

@TheNavigator

Wolgirrl these positive threads started as a counterbalance to the endless Meghan bashing fed by the red tops by some posters. I agree, there really isn't much to write about, but such is the bizarre visceral hatred for H&M, posters do anyway, endlessly and unpleasantly on thread after thread. Thus this wee haven was created for posters who were uncomfortable that there was a place on Mumsnet where a woman has committed no crime was subject to endless, speculative vitriol.

well said.

OVienna I watched it at my grandparents' house. I think because we got a day off school for it, but I don't think my parents got the day off work. My mum may have done and been there too.

I've also heard that tea towel story. No idea if it's true though! I do have a few Charles and Di commemorative bits packed away somewhere - a money box (?) and a pack of playing cards with their faces on the back (??) Should see if any royal history fans want them on Ebay...

I had a day off work and watched it. I remember her crumpled dress vividly. Clearly Kate and Sarah Burton learned that lesson!

i got a day of work and watched it in the pub. remember it as being a nice day(well I was in the pub)

Yes but reasonable criticism of Meghan isn’t tolerated and posts quoting very public info have been deleted as MNHQ do not know what’s published elsewhere and what isn’t! Also it doesn’t matter who publishes something. The law will be used if it’s false. The Telegraph are covering the case today. Why should the press be silenced in this country? Fair enough if it’s total lies but if something isn’t challenged and, heaven forbid, true, then it can be reported. We need a free press to route out wrong-doing. It’s absolutely vital.

Other things I have never understood:

Why couldn't her family have found out about Camilla? I don't think it was any secret at the time. SHE was worried about it. His sister went out with him, there was a connection between her granny and the Queen Mother and Jane Fellows' husband worked for the Queen for years and years, long after the problems emerged. Were they not minded to snoop around AT ALL?

So odd to me.

I am not trying to 'derail' the thread. Apologies. I am genuinely curious about these points and wondered if I'm alone.

Okay but I dont really get it. As there is nothing positive to write about her all you can do is criticise people writing negative things... not really a positive thread is it?

I could understand if you were countering the accusations made against her but you can't really

But I do agree some people go WAY over the top and well into the speculation field.

Sorry this will upset some of you. I'm afraid to say I was yet to be born on Charles and Diana wedding day!

I honestly can't remember where I was when I watched Charles and Diana wed... I just remember her muddling up his names when taking her vows through nervousness, and her dress was very creased! I married my DH a couple of years after with a similar style of dress (that was the fashion!) and mine didn't crease

@TofinoSurf

Sorry this will upset some of you. I'm afraid to say I was yet to be born on Charles and Diana wedding day!