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..

@PicsInRed

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.

That would certainly add to the nonsense.

Golly, isn't it incredible how many dozens of Mumsnetters have identical stories about having a "best friend who works at Buckingham Palace/in Hollywood who used to work with Meghan" and found her to be a total bitch - stories they choose to share only with Mumsnet, even though the tabloids would pay a pretty penny for them. And by weird coincidence they're nearly all brand new usernames who have never posted outside of Meghan bashing threads...

You've missed out the 'friend' of Oprah and meghan's nanny. That's been on MN too!

@ohforarainyday

Golly, isn't it incredible how many dozens of Mumsnetters have identical stories about having a "best friend who works at Buckingham Palace/in Hollywood who used to work with Meghan" and found her to be a total bitch - stories they choose to share only with Mumsnet, even though the tabloids would pay a pretty penny for them. And by weird coincidence they're nearly all brand new usernames who have never posted outside of Meghan bashing threads...

Who do you mean? Presumably not @tootiredx1000 as they do post elsewhere, I might have missed someone though.

@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.

Shock horror Megahan uses her own name and title!,

No different to HRH The Duchess of York 'budgie' books

Cacacoisfarraige - very good point, could have rampaged a while long with their innuendo that they have secrets up their sleeves and going to bring the RF down etc..... It's all out in the open now, they've played their Ace and it's not turned out how they expected, what with facts getting in the way.

The RF will move on without them and a new Paul Burrell is born ie the stories become older and older and less and less relevant until fade away......both Harry and PB trading on stories of time in the RF.

A children’s book? How very original

@ohforarainyday

Golly, isn't it incredible how many dozens of Mumsnetters have identical stories about having a "best friend who works at Buckingham Palace/in Hollywood who used to work with Meghan" and found her to be a total bitch - stories they choose to share only with Mumsnet, even though the tabloids would pay a pretty penny for them. And by weird coincidence they're nearly all brand new usernames who have never posted outside of Meghan bashing threads...

Feel free to report me - Mumsnet can see I'm a long term user. Here since 2009! So whatevs. I name change a lot.

My friend is in the media, but not the kind of media where she has any interest or need to sell anything to tabloid fodder. Her telling me was very much an amusing aside. I was more gobsmacked that Meghan would be so blatantly irked and attack someone via SMS. But that's her way! Instead of a nice phone call saying, would you mind saying something nice in my defence etc. She's all about the attack it seems. Bizarre way to treat people you consider close.

Just gone back to look at what you wrote @tootiredx1000 and it's gone!

A children’s book? How very original

Everyone and their brother brings out childrens books. Fergie brought out about 80! A couple were about weight loss and 'finding herself' and even travel around the US books.

Not sure why Meghan should get flack for bringing out one book.

And yet the post from @Mummy194 remains on this thread, a far more offensive and provocative post. Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the wee donkey!

@ajandjjmum

Just gone back to look at what you wrote *@tootiredx1000* and it's gone!

That will be because it was unsubstantiated tittle tattle. A friend of a friend told me Princess Anne kicks kittens - insider knowledge, don't you know

Bizarre, I guess that's the proof in the pudding rainy was after then... M not very nice to staff, who knew?

Oh and this one....
"Dining with the Duchess : Making Everyday Meals a Special Occasion"

🤣

All the Budgie books were written by' HRH Duchess of York.'

@tootiredx1000 most of the posters on here add to the conversation in a constructive way. We may not often/always agree but respect each other and one another’s differences in opinion. Unfortunately there are some that use the reporting and deleting of posts to steer the narrative or when a certain post doesn’t tally with their opinion and this is a shame. Genuinely offensive posts should absolutely be deleted, yours was not one of these. I honestly don’t know what is going on at the moment! I obviously don’t understand the talk guidelines very well because I can’t make sense of some of the decisions.

[quote MummyJ12]@tootiredx1000 most of the posters on here add to the conversation in a constructive way. We may not often/always agree but respect each other and one another’s differences in opinion. Unfortunately there are some that use the reporting and deleting of posts to steer the narrative or when a certain post doesn’t tally with their opinion and this is a shame. Genuinely offensive posts should absolutely be deleted, yours was not one of these. I honestly don’t know what is going on at the moment! I obviously don’t understand the talk guidelines very well because I can’t make sense of some of the decisions.[/quote]
@MummyJ12 agree!! Very baffling and irritating.

@Marmaladeagain

Bizarre, I guess that's the proof in the pudding rainy was after then... M not very nice to staff, who knew?

But my best mate is great pals with one of her staff and says she is lovely. So who to believe, eh? I suppose it depends what you consider 'proof'.

Apparently there may be a few issues with Meghan's new book. It is very,
very similar to another book called " The Boy on the Bench" which is a story about a young boy and his father. More legal drama in the future pehaps ?

Meg sent a rude text furious about the fact she wasn't being publicly backed up about the Oprah interview and the minions on here clearly don't want people to know about that.

Why are you calling people minions? A healthy dose of scepticism is understandable given we've had a 'friend' of Oprah, a friend of Meghan's nanny, and about 48 people who work in BP.

I'm just surprised that a person in your friend or friend of a friend's position was so indiscreet as to share a text from Meghan. And asked the friend or friend of a friend to write a reply.

[quote tootiredx1000]@HeadNorth have complained! What is Mumsnet if not unsubstantiated tittle tattle?!?! It didn't break any rules from what I can see. If every post required substantiation then most of the site would need to be deleted. Meg sent a rude text furious about the fact she wasn't being publicly backed up about the Oprah interview and the minions on here clearly don't want people to know about that. Fact remains that a lot of people in the UK thought that their decision to do the interview and slag off the monarchy was poorly thought through and thus I imagine her entourage person wouldn't want to touch any of that publicly with a BARGEPOLE. Restraint, I believe it's called. [/quote]
You see, I just don't believe you, random Meghan hating poster on the internet. You could be a hairy handed trucker called big Davy, for all we know.