Omid Scodie says Meghan was wrong about Archie becoming a prince at birth

[artquejtion]

He has publicly stated that Meghan was incorrect about her understanding of the protocol around Archie becoming a Prince.

Considering Omid seems to the M & H unofficial spokesperson, it is more than likely that Meghan now realises this is the case and his skin colour would not have been a deciding factor in it.

it does make you wonder why Harry did not explain it to her ? did he just not have a clue about about Royal protocol and succession, maybe he never needed to understand it. . Or was he so desperate to get her to marry him that he fed her a load of bull, i.e. our kids will be princesses and princes. Did he hope he could convince the queen to change protocol for his family?

Please don't get this thread deleted with comments which MN don't like, I am beginning to suspect there are posters who purposely troll M & H threads to ensure MN will delete them, so there is never a discussion allowed to stand..

Yes, that's interesting JustLyra. I have read (unsubstantiated) that him and Charles really do not get on.

But, as you say, families stick together but I cannot believe they don't realise how hugely unpopular he is. Just that speech about Phillip was enough to re-ignite the dislike of him.
The trouble is... he's been allowed to get away with so much for so long, and now the Epstein tipping point means there is no going back and the RF have to face up to his unpopularity and disdain from the public.

And as for the Queen. She's a wily old bird. She knows that the less that is said, the greater the power over the situation she has. They will continue to work themselves up into a total furious lather over the non event that they've turned into a global sob story... with the help of Omid mouthpiece scobie who is pathetically grateful for every crumb and will be wheeled out laughably like Paul Burrell for years to come. The circus will eventually become so uninteresting to anyone with more than 6 brain cells.

@tootiredx1000

I'm sorry, I don't really understand your post. I don't know about text messages Meghan sent anyone. Where are details of private text messages Meghan has sent her friends?

I've never heard of this.

I think they're happy living their lives.

The circus will eventually become so uninteresting to anyone with more than 6 brain cells.

You seem fascinated with it 🤣

Louise Mensch isn't American. She lives there now because she married an American, but she's British born and Oxford educated. So her take on the titles isn't based on lack of familiarity with Britain. She does assume she knows more than she actually does on some subjects.

Not really. I just came on here because it was on active threads and my friend who works in told me about the text message from Meghan to this member of her entourage. Who is a v v close friend of my friend. And the reason I know about this is because my friend helped this person write a measured response back to Meghan mainly because they were so WTAF!!!!

Given that I have that as a fact, I would strongly refute the suggestion that they're happy. They're paranoid and know they've effed up. You don't send angry text messages to people when you are happy living your lives.

@Cacacoisfarraige I agree they have been called out for saying things which were patently untrue. Do they care? - I suspect not. It got them a whole load of publicity. I do criticise them for making an allegation of racism when they would not name the person. That's rubbish.

I do somewhat feel for Harry - but he did come over as somewhat entitled re the security ( but he is literally titled ) - not eligible but titled.

@Roussette

Yes, that's interesting JustLyra. I have read (unsubstantiated) that him and Charles really do not get on. But, as you say, families stick together but I cannot believe they don't realise how hugely unpopular he is. Just that speech about Phillip was enough to re-ignite the dislike of him. The trouble is... he's been allowed to get away with so much for so long, and now the Epstein tipping point means there is no going back and the RF have to face up to his unpopularity and disdain from the public.

I think they realise he’s so unpopular, hence removing him from royal duties, but do they personally dislike him enough to completely cast him out? I’m not sure

I guess as well there may be an element of “what will he do then?”. Whilst for obvious reasons he’s not likely to head to America, do they want to risk him making a living by selling stories and the likes?

Much safer all round (and this isn’t my opinion of what I’d do - just what I think they’ll do) to park him in a quiet corner, let him live out his days at royal lodge, let the York title merge with the crown on his death, and go down the “least said soonest mended” route with him.

Obviously if he is convicted of anything, or if the FBI push more, they may have to do something else. I just can’t see them wanting to public to know that saying “Hey, we really don’t like him because he’s a disgrace, take his title away” is actually a thing that could be done because that will raise questions of who else we should just get rid of while we’re at it.

I wonder if he came back from the funeral with some new thoughts. If he was my brother/cousin I would have taken him somewhere quiet and had a few words.

They probably woudn't have been nice ones because I was brought up to believe that you keep your dirty linen private (obviously not if someone was a criminal) and don't bitch about family to outsiders (and certainly not say anything behind their back that you wouldn't dare say to their face).

Not really. I just came on here because it was on active threads and my friend who works in told me about the text message from Meghan to this member of her entourage. Who is a v v close friend of my friend. And the reason I know about this is because my friend helped this person write a measured response back to Meghan mainly because they were so WTAF!!!!

Gosh!

Louise Mensch isn't American. She lives there now because she married an American, but she's British born and Oxford educated. So her take on the titles isn't based on lack of familiarity with Britain. She does assume she knows more than she actually does on some subjects

Yes, she was a Conservative MP here. I first heard of her with the phone hacking scandal, she caught my eye when she put Murdoch through the wringer.
She is a bit marmite though

I just can’t see them wanting to public to know that saying “Hey, we really don’t like him because he’s a disgrace, take his title away” is actually a thing that could be done because that will raise questions of who else we should just get rid of while we’re at it

I don't think they would remove his title out of dislike or spite or anything like that. More to be able to say that he is not an HRH any more when the shit might hit the fan in the summer with the Maxwell trial.

@Roussette

I just can’t see them wanting to public to know that saying “Hey, we really don’t like him because he’s a disgrace, take his title away” is actually a thing that could be done because that will raise questions of who else we should just get rid of while we’re at it

I don't think they would remove his title out of dislike or spite or anything like that. More to be able to say that he is not an HRH any more when the shit might hit the fan in the summer with the Maxwell trial.

No, I know that’s why they be doing it. The bigger message would be that it can be done though, and if they want to protect their own positions they have to think of that.

Look at his unpopular Charles was after Diana, and then when he married Camilla. He’d have been in a sticky position if the public knew it actually can be done. Going forward William is going to be thinking “well what if one of my kids gets in the shit, do I want it to be easy to cast them out?”

Plus I also think, given their reluctance to say anything much about anything big publicly they know that from many angles removing his title would be seen as a statement saying “We believe he’s guilty”. Would they then be interfering in the case? Could they be accused of prejudicing a trial by doing something so high profile?

It’s a mega minefield and I just can’t think they’ll cross it.

JustLyra That is all very feasible and probably true. A tricky time coming up for them quite possibly.

Of course, if the trial just happens without reference to Andrew, it will all be a damp squib, but who knows what's happening behind the scenes in NY.

Andrew is pretty certain he won't be implicated but that's what he wants, and I doubt he knows either.

No the palace does not decide on the Baron title. It was BP however, who put out the announcement and said it's Mister, apparently without consulting H&M on the matter.

Archie's birth announcement was done in the usual way of an easel in front of BP.

@Mummy194, both quotes are from you. You refer to BP making an "announcement" about H&M's son. Are you saying that BP announced Archie's title independently of his parents, with no consultation? I am confused but I suspect, not as confused as you are.

@LillianGish I completely agree. I also don’t think it’s as easy to discern the truth. You will have different versions of the truth, but not the absolute truth and there are people who almost relish in the drama. I can see why the royal family usually refuse to say anything when it comes to controversy etc because it’s one of those situations where you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t. There will be people who will now go through word by word analysis of what Harry and Meghan have said and I would hate to be in that position. Sometimes, I do feel curious about what made some people so riled up and just watch the Oprah interview but I don’t think I can watch it.

The fact of the matter is, there was a culture clash and there are also some stifling protocols to abide by. I am not saying all Americans are brash and abrasive but they generally do not have the same understanding of things despite a shared language. I’ve said before and I’d say it again, I don’t think Americans realise that Harry would have been sidelined the further and further he was in the succession line and it’s not personal or who he married, that’s just how it is. He might be the future king’s son, brother or uncle (that’s if the royal family survives that long), and he might have some duties and patronages etc to carry out, but when it comes to where to stand or where to sit or where to even walk, he won’t always be placed directly behind William. I think some members of the royal family might get that but I don’t think Meghan does understand that and perhaps even Harry feels that those sort of things don’t matter. Even the whole going to that Disney thing that people mention, he might just want to go to one place more than another. But what he wants and what he should do aren’t always the same thing.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Harry and Meghan want to be out of the Royal Family. They are still integral members of the family but they might no longer want to fulfil an official role and that's ok too. I think many find it difficult to separate the notions of the royal family as an actual family, albeit a rather wealthy one, and the constitutional role of the Royal Family. But of course people will be quick to say that there is a rift. He just might want to be part of his family but not all that it entails with it.

I do think the mass public have a lot to answer for. The braying to see QE2 when Diana died when she was with her grandsons was a bit too much. I was only a kid but I remember even then thinking about why people didn’t want a grandmother to remain with her grandsons. The tabloids do reflect public sentiment and they also stoke strong emotions as that’s what gets those clicks and what people are happy to read about. I remember the number of people speculating why Harry and William weren’t standing together for Philip’s funeral and I just thought that if I can find the information so easily of why Peter had to be in middle, as the eldest grandchild, then they could too.

Truth be told, I don’t see how the royal family can survive all this and I do think this will eventually lead to a constitutional crisis. Were it not for Harry and Meghan, but added to this Andrew’s shenanigans. I think there will be a lot of debate once QE2 passes. People talk about one day when George becomes king, I really don’t think the monarchy, as a constitutional role, will survive that long.

@ExitChasedByABee
That's a great post.
I would only say on this... 'I do think the mass public have a lot to answer for. The braying to see QE2 when Diana died when she was with her grandsons was a bit too much'
I think the MSM have a lot to answer for. The headlines calling for the Queen to come back were really disgusting. So it wasn't just the public or even mostly the public, in my opinion.

@Andylion

No the palace does not decide on the Baron title. It was BP however, who put out the announcement and said it's Mister, apparently without consulting H&M on the matter.

Archie's birth announcement was done in the usual way of an easel in front of BP.

@Mummy194, both quotes are from you. You refer to BP making an "announcement" about H&M's son. Are you saying that BP announced Archie's title independently of his parents, with no consultation? I am confused but I suspect, not as confused as you are.

His birth announcement being on the easel also has nothing to do with his name announcement so I’m also confused.

As far as I can see his name was first announced on the Sussex Instagram page. So unless the suggestion is that the palace controlled that (and we know H&M both used it) then how does that marry up?

I do think the mass public have a lot to answer for. The braying to see QE2 when Diana died when she was with her grandsons was a bit too much. I was only a kid but I remember even then thinking about why people didn’t want a grandmother to remain with her grandsons. The tabloids do reflect public sentiment and they also stoke strong emotions as that’s what gets those clicks and what people are happy to read about. I remember the number of people speculating why Harry and William weren’t standing together for Philip’s funeral and I just thought that if I can find the information so easily of why Peter had to be in middle, as the eldest grandchild, then they could too.

Those two things have so much in common.

The time the Queen behaved as a Granny, not as a Queen, first and the time Philip’s grandsons were treated as his grandsons and not ranking royals, the media went nuts.

Yet when the royals are cold, officious and stuffy when they should be family the media goes nuts.

I don’t think the tabloids reflect public sentiment. I think they create it.

It was very helpful for them when Diana died that the tide turned on the Queen and the RF and away from the debate about press intrusion and the photographers. Very handy indeed.

@Roussette I agree completely with that. MSM do have a lot to answer for and these days I always wonder about journalistic integrity. MSM stokes those strong emotions and I just wish there was a way to stop that without infringing on free speech.

I don’t think the tabloids reflect public sentiment. I think they create it

MSM stokes those strong emotions and I just wish there was a way to stop that without infringing on free speech

Yes yes yes to both those statements. It's bordering on out of control.

@JustLyra You’re quite right, it seems as though they can’t win either way. It can play havoc with one’s mental health having to manoeuvre all of one’s decisions like a game of chess.

I worded that part wrongly, but I second that view that MSM does create public sentiment. In fact I’d go even further and say that they almost manipulates public sentiment and this thing of of quoting one another creates this veil of integrity. And then once they’ve successfully stoked up strong emotions, they are now “giving what the public wants” or say that’s in the “public’s interest”. The debate about press intrusion and the photographers is actually in the public’s best interests but I don’t see MSM delving too much into that.

Have just seen on social media that Meghan has written a children's book that Penguin are publishing. It's called The Bench and is about 'the special bond between father and son as seen through a mother's eyes'. Author name on the cover is Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex.

@Skiptheheartsandflowers

Have just seen on social media that Meghan has written a children's book that Penguin are publishing. It's called The Bench and is about 'the special bond between father and son as seen through a mother's eyes'. Author name on the cover is Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex.

Shame she doesn't write a book about the special bond between fathers and daughters.

Removing the Sussex and York titles could be done, but I doubt it will. Mostly because Harry and Meghan would then be Prince and Princess Henry, like prime and Princess Michael of Kent.

Precisely. Removing Sussex would make Harry and Meghan "Prince and Princess Harry of Wales" (as they would presumably revert to Harry's pre marriage/dukedom surname styling of "Wales"?).

The American press would immediately do what they did with the existing title (they call her "Duchess Meghan") and dub them Prince Harry and Princess Meghan. If Kate isn't yet Princess of Wales...the American press could even get so confused that they start calling Meghan Princess of Wales. please let this happen 🤣

I almost want petulant courtiers to be this stupid. When they see the age of "Princess Meghan" dawn across the Atlantic, they'll blink ...and then go absoutely mad, and it will have been all their own doing. It'll be brilliant.