Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

It was “, 'a bit naughty' to imply Archie 'couldn't be a prince because of the possible colour of his skin' when it was due to strict rules,...”

802 replies

RickiTarr · 09/03/2021 02:42

Hugo Vickers made me laugh with his phrasing. So British to say “a bit naughty”. Grin

Also, seriously high lights how many people don’t understand the rules or can’t explain the rules well, and no American has a hope of grasping our quaint & complicated rules and institutions, really.

Sorry, it’s the Daily Fail, but funny.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9340545/Why-Meghan-Markle-bit-naughty-referring-Archies-skin-colour-prince-discussion.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Frequency · 13/03/2021 14:13

Why shouldn't Harry and Archie be entitled to protection paid for by the public?

They didn't chose to be in a position where they needed it. They didn't chose to be Royal or to be paraded in front of the world's press as a newborn or as small child at their mother's funeral. Why should they have to chose to continue in a job which makes them miserable in order to have protection they need for something which is out of their control.

Binglebong · 13/03/2021 14:13

Fair enough, apologies for being think. My brain only works sort of monday to Friday!

Paquerette · 13/03/2021 14:15

@MrsTabithaTwitchit

One persons refusing to take calls is another saying that there is no point having the same argument over and over . If Harry just kept ringing and asking for money and PC felt that ‘no is a complete sentence ‘ as MN says, then maybe he was just saying that there was nothing more to be said. I suspect people have rarely said no to Harry and he doesn’t take it easily.

My guess is that the skin colour comment was said in the context of; life in the royal family is hard, whoever you marry they will get a lot of attention , and a biracial wife and children may get even more, it’s not right it’s not pleasant but it will happen . How will you and your future wife cope , is she up for this level of attention/harassment . Harry should have been rehearsing and openly discussing these matters with any future wife , you can’t just pretend that it’s all going to be fine.

I agree.

Also Harry, who has publicly said a few racist remarks, trying to shame a family member who has said one remark in private, is ridiculous. More hypocrisy again. It's definitely something that should have been dealt with privately at the time. If H&M are expecting a remark from a few years ago to be investigated then Harry needs to explain and apologise publicly for his previous racist remarks.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 13/03/2021 14:17

It is consistent that Charles wants to be accountable to the public

I'm lost at quite where to start with that, but would suggest some wider reading; just a enquiry into Duchy arrangements would be fruitful, or perhaps look into what was said following the official criticism he received after the appalling Peter Ball incidents

Oh, and I found the "gong" HMQ gave Andrew after his departure as Trade Envoy; it was the Royal Victorian Order, which is the highest award for "personal service to the Queen" Hmm

Further info about his "accomplishments" here (It refers in part to The Crown, which is of course fiction, but also includes factual reports over the years): www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2020/11/prince-andrew-the-crown-true-life

Sprining · 13/03/2021 14:20

The chart above is the cost to the taxpayer if having a monarchy. It is ridiculous

Frequency · 13/03/2021 14:23

If the cost of the Royal Family is too much for the public to shoulder then maybe we should abolish them?

Whenever the above is suggested posters crow about how they bring in more revenue than they use via tourism etc. If this is true then we cannot simply abandon the cost of them once they've used up their value and can be no longer paraded to the media without their consent.

Sprining · 13/03/2021 14:26

I think the queen gets 20 million from the privy purse as her personal to what you’re ant from us. This is not for her so called ‘state’ duties and palace maintenance which we pay for separately
Surely she does t need 20 million as pin money and could spare a million for Harry’s security when he moved?

Sprining · 13/03/2021 14:26

That’s 20 million a year

Sprining · 13/03/2021 14:28

If she is such a loving grand mum, surely she would spend to see Harry and archie safe?
Instead it was some random person whom they barely know who had a generous heart to pay for their security when they moved.

Why on earth would have they feel any loyalty for this stingy family who value money over their grandson and great grandson’s security?

Roussette · 13/03/2021 14:29

Andrew's Wiki page is an absolute eye opener.

Especially the headings...

Corruption and Kazaksthan
Arms Sales
and
Questionable language.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 13/03/2021 14:39

The chart above is the cost to the taxpayer if having a monarchy. It is ridiculous

It is indeed ridiculous, though for me it's more about having to pay for something we have absolutely no say in, and for a family who treat us as fools

And it's actually even worse than you perhaps think, since the crafty deal done to ensure the Sovereign Grant can only go up and never down. At the time, the recent colossal increase was excused by "Buck House repairs" with an assurance it would go back down afterwards ... only now it seems it won't

stairway · 13/03/2021 15:16

I don’t think there is any evidence to suggest that Meghan and Harry are suffering too much. They are currently living in a mansion in one of the most expensive parts of the world. Suspect Charles knows them well and the more he gives the more they will demand.

Sprining · 13/03/2021 16:37

M&H are at least earning their own money.

The only ones demanding more are the Royal family from the taxpayers

Krispyk · 13/03/2021 17:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Krispyk · 13/03/2021 17:00

@Roussette

Thank you Cokie3

I agree. I am wary sticking my neck out with this sort of statement because i get trolled but... to me... it seems a massive coincidence that on this corner of the internet there are all these people who know people work work at BP, know individual members of the RF, know friends who nanny for M&H.
If they were legit would they be expressing personal opinions to their friends? Doubtful, as I said with the nanny we had for a short time.
It just seems bizarre to me.

I never see it anywhere else but on these threads.

Amazing how incredulous you two are when it comes to other's experiences and lives but you are utterly convinced about the wishy-washy, vague insinuations that there isn't any evidence for, made by two minor royals.

Fascinating

Krispyk · 13/03/2021 17:03

@Roussette

And this is not a very good look for William-we-are-not-a-racist family quote.

Just try and begin to imagine if that was Harry sat there?? Him being married to Meghan... they would be slaughtered in the press.

Before anyone questions the photo. Yes it is legitimate.

Did you miss the photos of Harry dressed up as a Nazi?
Roussette · 13/03/2021 17:04

Glad you find it fascinating! 👍🏼

(when you see countless posters who 'know someone' it makes you somewhat cynical)

Krispyk · 13/03/2021 17:09

@Roussette

Glad you find it fascinating! 👍🏼

(when you see countless posters who 'know someone' it makes you somewhat cynical)

Strange that you don't have the same 'cynicism' about the vague accusations that were made by two people who wanted a quiet, simple life away from the press intrusion then use the same platform to complain about their tough life?

Hardly 'countless' ...on this thread there is one person.

You don't strike me as simple so I am sure you can understand why your contradiction is amusing?

Impatiens · 13/03/2021 17:11

Did you miss the photos of Harry dressed up as a Nazi?

Harry's forgotten all about them as well - easily done I expect Hmm

Krispyk · 13/03/2021 17:13

@Sprining

M&H are at least earning their own money.

The only ones demanding more are the Royal family from the taxpayers

You either missed the links to the thousands of engagements, patronages, etc that the Royal family undertake Or you're deliberately being obtuse

It's easy to earn a living pedalling nonsense, our tabloids are a testament to that

Roussette · 13/03/2021 17:14

Glad to be both fascinating and amusing!

'Countless' on the threads, not only this one.

Krispyk · 13/03/2021 17:23

@Sprining

The chart above is the cost to the taxpayer if having a monarchy. It is ridiculous
www.sundaypost.com/fp/they-cost-us-a-mint-but-bring-in-much-more/
Samcro · 13/03/2021 17:23

Mn is so odd.
There are threads on mn stating that the brain doesn't fully develope until 25. So we must make allowances.
Yet when it comes to harry, something he did at 20 must mean he is a racist still.

Krispyk · 13/03/2021 17:23

@Roussette

Glad to be both fascinating and amusing!

'Countless' on the threads, not only this one.

I can see why you've fallen for the sob story
Swipe left for the next trending thread