Harry and Meghan News thread

[Viviennemary]

I thought we could have a thread for latest news. MN did say they didn't mind one or two threads. And no rules except stick to MN guidelines. It's Meghans birthday today I just read. And the Queen has wished her a very happy birthday on the royal Instagram page according to that popular Oracle the DM.

No I don't think Blid Gossip is allowed. Only main stream media.

In that case , my apologies.

Can anyone say what the rumour is? Even in a roundabout way?

[Quote removed by MNHQ as the original post has been withdrawn]

That thread is still running....or a version of it. Dreadful.

Comparing her situation to Meghan's is really a stretch, though, and actually offensive to the poor poster in question.

Meghan is a graduate of Northwestern University and of course has the wit to know Harry wouldn't be 'running any family business.' And as for the rest of the points, I don't even know where to start.

To say she didn't have any agency or choices though is not correct.

Best to look it up

I am actually quite upset by that comparison. I wish I hadn't seen it or posted.

I dont know what to look for if I dont know what it's about ☹ sorry to be a pain but can you give me a steer?

Three moves - Blind Gossip, I think Wolfgirrl

@ EthelMayFergus that’s the one!

@Onprozacandmyhighhorse

Can I just point out that we are in the UK therefore Charles does not receive billions of dollars from anyone. Our currency is the pound.

You say Tomato, I say Tomato.

Talk about splitting hairs!

@OVienna I am sorry I have upset you. I only read the start of the thread, so perhaps it has progressed in a way I wasn't aware of.
I will ask for my post to be deleted.

[quote BalloonSlayer]@OVienna I am sorry I have upset you. I only read the start of the thread, so perhaps it has progressed in a way I wasn't aware of.
I will ask for my post to be deleted.[/quote]
You don't need to do that. I am sorry if I overreacted.

@BalloonSlayer Find the thread and see what you think, maybe you will feel differently. Apologies for losing it. Probably best not to discuss that poster here though.

No you were quite right. I could have used a hypothetical example.

@Bemorechicken you said:

To put it in monetary terms -
In 2019, the Prince of Wales website stated that he received $28.7 million from the Duchy of Cornwall, $2.6 million in Sovereign Grant and $784.1million in Government Departments.

Let's read that again -Prince Charles -nearly a Billion from THE GOVERNMENT -Taxes -us.

but gave no sources for this. I can't find the Prince of Wales accounts for the 2019 financial year actually. His accounts for the financial year ended 31 March 2019 have been published however, and show that he received:

Duchy of Cornwall - £21.627m (£21.730m the year before)
Sovereign Grant - £1.994m (1,201m the year before)
Government: £600,000 (£557,000 the year before)

Without you linking to your source it's difficult to see why you claim that he received £784million in government funds - are you sure you didn't just misread the zeros?

@Bemorechicken - It's not splitting hairs.

Also, the funding Prince Charles receives from the government is to fund military staff seconded to his office (equerries, I guess - they are normally from the military?) and some costs of official overseas visits, which he is asked to undertake on behalf of the government, so they pay for some of it. So no, our taxes are not paying for Prince Charles' daughters-in-laws' clothes.

Why are we not allowed to talk about the blind gossip site?

Why are we not allowed to talk about the blind gossip site?

Because it's too speculative. MNHQ delete stuff that is only circulating about among the bottom-feeders elsewhere on the internet. So even if you think something is accurate, you need to wait until it is reported somewhere more reputable before bringing it to any MN thread

@WinnieTheW0rm

Why are we not allowed to talk about the blind gossip site?

Because it's too speculative. MNHQ delete stuff that is only circulating about among the bottom-feeders elsewhere on the internet. So even if you think something is accurate, you need to wait until it is reported somewhere more reputable before bringing it to any MN thread

Oh is that why? That’s a bit harsh on BG, who have an uncanny hit rate, although probably fair enough re most of the blind sites.

I hope my toe hasn’t gone over the line there, then.

But Blind gossip has been proved correct on so many things so I don’t agree that it’s speculative

If they (BG) posted that MM was pregnant or some other good news we would be allowed to post mentioning it here would we not?

In the Duchy of Cornwall, monies collected via (Bona Vacantia) are distributed to charities

This is true in theory, but I'd be interested to see them prove it

Given types such as Armand Hammer, Cem Uzan and John Latsis who Charles is prepared to associate with for the sake of money - all of them as straight as sidewinders on speed - I wouldn't want to assume his financial integrity stands any higher than theirs

I getting quite hard work to keep up with specific rules for specific boards, TBH.

I didn’t post on the feminism boards for a while, and when I wandered back over there, it was all “No you can’t say that. Or that, and especially not the G word”. I couldn’t initially work out which word was the G word.

Now I’ve missed something similar here I think.

all of them as straight as sidewinders on speed

Great expression!

I must admit I don’t really know who he is, but doesn’t John Lastis also host PC on his yacht? Or lend him his yacht? So if JL is in anyway disreputable or shady, PC is involving himself more than is necessary to solicit charity donations? Maybe that’s how the lines get blurred - in the schmoozing.