Harry & Meghan - to hope the Royals answer back?

[DontReallyCareBut]

I think the allegations in the Oprah interview are serious enough that protocol should be breached and the Royals should have a voice to give their side too.

Harry is not a known liar. That is something being perpetuated by bottom feeding sites and bigots who mostly started accusing him of this when he married MM.

Why on earth would H write to PC anyway, when Tom Bradby already reported that H was asked to write about the exit strategy and he said he was not comfortable doing that as it may leak. PC insisted, he wrote it down and it was leaked the next day. Dan Wooten to whom it was leaked confirmed that fact.

I agree that today you’re nothing if you’re not a victim. Any reality show contestant, eg on X Factor, has to have a back story and a journey.

I was just reading that palace aides are livid. The lady assigned to Meghan to help her (an Australian woman with three children) is apparently very upset as she did assist her with protocol etc etc. The Queen’s Equerry was Ghanaian so certainly not an old grey white man and he was placed at her disposal.

Harry is not a known liar.

Harry said his child's first word was crocodile if that's not a blatant example of him lying I don't know what is.

What could the royals actually say? I think their hands are tied, to argue points will only bring about more bombshell revelations from Harry and Megan. Must be so frustrating.

redspecial That video - 😲😂

That's right Harry didn't lie - he said in the interview that the conversation about skin colour was right at the beginning when he got together with Meghan - ie exploring what might happen breaking outside of normal upper class girl who's used to royal protocol. As it happened Harry decided Meg was the woman for him and he went on and married her.

Harry didn't say the conversation about the colour of skin was any time other than right at the beginning. He didn't say it was about his "wife" or his "baby" he said it was right at the beginning so a hypothetical baby and hypothetical marriage.

Meghan was the one to conflate every conversation that every happened as happening "in tandem" and led to them running away to Canada.

So yes Harry didn't lie, which is why when someone does actually question a bit deeper I don't think anyone is expecting it actually to be about a baby of his wife. It was a potential discussion around thinking about how sensitive/fragile Harry is and he doesn't cope with people having opinions if he gets serious about a relationship with an American actress of mixed race heritage. The culture clash is the American bit - also that being from the US would likely want to move there sooner rather than later. All sounds like conversations should be explored with a "sensitive" not very bright individual like Harry who doesn't like "no" for an answer. He wants to be old school prince, he didn't like the modern version on offer of a lowly working royal.

It doesn't mean to say the person is racist to point out that some people are racist and it will be an issue that Harry will find himself hurt by racism first hand rather than second hand.

There was an answer back of sorts today from the Cambridge's on BBC news ( Thursday)
Our family is not racist and we haven't spoken to Harry yet.
They are on a Royal engagement today.

Sorry to keep banging on but have we had an explanation about their marriage for them only three days before the big wedding. Was this a lie or did they exchange vows. I do think this needs clarifying. They said they had their own ceremony.

I've just seen footage of Kate and William being questioned by someone about the racism claims whilst on an engagement.

I think Harry has come out of this very badly, but thinking back to the interview, I don't think he lied.

I'd still like to hear from the Archbishop of Canterbury whether he married them 3 days before the wedding we paid for. If that was a lie it was a great big fat one and a targeted insult at the British people.

I'm surprised Wills said 'we're very much not a racist family' - they usually don't say anything but I can imagine it must be so frustrating to not be able to defend yourself and your family when your brother and his wife have done such public mudslinging. Shows how frustrated they are at not being able to clear their name.

It's not rocket science that people will doubt everything you say when it's shown that some of it is untrue. Their more serious claims might well be 100% true but by lying about stupid little things they have made it impossible to tell which parts are them lying and which parts are them being honest

Precisely, and this is why (for once) I admired the palace's choice of words about taking the racism claims "very seriously" but without going further than that except to say "recollections vary"

To be clear, accusations of racism should be taken very seriously - always, no question; however to automatically assume without evidence they're fully accurate seems to me a dangerous road to go down, especially if they're part of a narrative which contains other inaccuracies

If there was only the 2 of them at the first "wedding" then surely it would have just been a blessing, you need witnesses at a wedding and you cannot have 2 marriage certificates. Its pretty ungracious to call the big, taxpayer funded £30m wedding a spectacle for the people. Did they really have 30 hymns.

Stratfordplace great minds think alike! I'd like to know what happened and the absence of a statement is interesting.

If there isn't a public denial by the Archbishop, or by the Sussexes themselves (not some unnamed spokesperson), then anyone watching that interview in future may think that she was telling the truth and not a great big fat lie.

If it wasn't a real wedding they should pay back every penny it cost the taxpayer.

Stratfordplace great minds think alike! I'd like to know what happened and the absence of a statement is interesting.

If there isn't a public denial by the Archbishop, or by the Sussexes themselves (not some unnamed spokesperson), then anyone watching that interview in future may think that she was telling the truth and not a great big fat lie.

If it wasn't a real wedding they should pay back every penny it cost the taxpayer.

On the subject of "the truth" and perceptions around it, there's an excellent piece here by Stephen Glover. Unfortunately he was writing for the Mail, but a stopped clock and all that ...

www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/music/stephen-glover-so-whatever-meghan-markle-now-says-must-be-true/ar-BB1esjq6?ocid=msedgntp

@TonyGates

I think Harry has come out of this very badly, but thinking back to the interview, I don't think he lied.

I'd still like to hear from the Archbishop of Canterbury whether he married them 3 days before the wedding we paid for. If that was a lie it was a great big fat one and a targeted insult at the British people.

If it wasn't a lie, then Archbishop needs to resign.

I had a rehearsal and we practiced the vows. It wasn't a wedding or marriage though.

That was when we said them in front of all our family and friends and signed the register.

It quite simply cannot be true.

@TonyGates Meghan said
‘ “You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that. “But we called the Archbishop and we just said look, this thing is the spectacle for the world’

I find that last sentence about a ‘spectacle for the world’ so massively arrogant !

@TonyGates

Stratfordplace great minds think alike! I'd like to know what happened and the absence of a statement is interesting.

If there isn't a public denial by the Archbishop, or by the Sussexes themselves (not some unnamed spokesperson), then anyone watching that interview in future may think that she was telling the truth and not a great big fat lie.

If it wasn't a real wedding they should pay back every penny it cost the taxpayer.

I’m not sure how often this needs to be said.

It is categorically not possible in England for a marriage to take place anywhere other than a licensed place, and without witnesses.

I’m also sure that it isn’t possible for a C of E minister to bless a marriage which hasn’t taken place.

All that can have happened, if anything is that the couple said their own vows to each other in the presence of the archbishop. There is no reason they couldn’t have prayed together or why he couldn’t say a blessing over them.

That is not a marriage or a marriage blessing.

PinkTonic I’m not sure how many times this needs to be said .....
Yes we are aware of the rules but PH and MM stated they had their own marriage ceremony and “got married” just for them, with the AofC.
Did they or didn’t they.

Is this a lie or did they marry. I think it needs clarifying.

@Stratfordplace

PinkTonic I’m not sure how many times this needs to be said ..... Yes we are aware of the rules but PH and MM stated they had their own marriage ceremony and “got married” just for them, with the AofC. Did they or didn’t they. Is this a lie or did they marry. I think it needs clarifying.

I think the law clarifies. It’s not possible that they got married in the circumstances she claimed.

@Same4Walls

Harry is not a known liar.

Harry said his child's first word was crocodile if that's not a blatant example of him lying I don't know what is.

I thought he said it was ‘hydrate’ in the interview! Or was I mishearing?

I know that it's not legally possible. But in the absence of a denial there is a risk that Meghan's 'truth' becomes 'the truth' in the eyes of many people. Especially outside of the UK.

There is a real risk at the moment that we blur the lines between what an individual says and the truth. I've heard people in the media talk about 'her truth' or 'their truth'. That's different to the truth.

@GoLightlyontheEarth I misheard as 'hydrate' too! Then I remembered I had read somewhere that Archie's favourite expression is 'drive safe' 😂😂😂