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..

I assume the relationship was sour for a while as he still hasn’t met the husband (nor the grandchild).

[quote Roussette]@Andylion
*I think my post is perfectly clear. You don't understand the fuss? As if you have never been on a M&H thread."

You're talking about it like it should be normal and we should be morally outraged at her writing a book, when Royals have written hundreds. No, not clear to me at all why it's normal to have this enormous outpouring of disgust and annoyance at one book like she's done some abhorrent act and we should be horrified and writing about it.

Next book might be about a baby rabbit. Shock horror, she had a rabbit when she was 8 and lived with her Father! How dare Meghan write about baby rabbits when it's obvious he bought her that rabbit, and now she's got the nerve to write about a rabbit in a childrens story![/quote]
Rosette, to be fair, I can see how my post might be interpreted that way, I do not think it is normal that anyone would "outraged" at Meghan writing a book. However, you seem surprised that anyone on these threads would be critical, as if you haven't been participating in the Meghan threads.
For the record, I think it's fine that Meghan write a book. Also, I actually googled the book others said she might have plagiarized and I see little similarity. I do think it is hypocritical of her to use the title, (which she is entitled to use), when she appears to have no use for the RF.

Andy I get what you mean... we had a crossed wire or two. But yes, I shouldn't be surprised!

@Lauren15

Apparently the Happy Birthday message from the PoW account features a photo of PC, H and Archie, without M. I don’t think any communication from the RF is done by accident and it sends a message that M is not in favour.

Oh give over. Plenty of photos are shared on birthdays etc without the whole family in

@Lockdownbear

Why didn't she take her beloved fiancé to visit him before any of that happened?

Why did she not postpone her wedding to have him there?

She's hurt him.

Postpone the royal wedding because of one embarrassing game hungry tit of a 'father'? Not likely.

I was really excited about MM coming into the RF at first but have grown to seriously dislike her and Harry. But surely no one can blame her for bombing her dad off? If someone paired on MN talking about his behaviour every single person would tell them to go NC.

The archbishop’s people have come forward and said that (the prior wedding) never happened

I didn't see the archbishop's comments, so please does anyone know whether he commented on what (if anything) did happen 3 days before the wedding?
As in did he mention a "rehearsal", "private vows" or whatever, or was it just left hanging?

@BasiliskStare

Honestly - do people ( UK) think that people are racist re MM I don''t - she was accepted very much onto the RF I am annoyed that she said that thing re racism and they did not name the person . That is a bit shit unless you can name the person .

Some people seem to think there's global racism towards Meghan because a few Twitter trolls spout of some claptrap. I've very rarely seen any racist posts on here re Meghan. I've seen 10 times as many accusing posters who criticise her of being racist - despite race NEVER being brought into those criticisms.

@Roussette

Just seems odd to be annoyed when a sister and df do it then go and do it yourself!!

Like what?
Where and when did Meghan sell a personal and private letter to the DM that her father had written?

Just because she didn't do something identical to what her father did it doesn't mean she hasn't, in principle, down exactly what she sued her father for.

She sold juicy, unfounded and spurious stories to a global audience. You can like MM and admit that it's a case of she can dish it out but she can't take it.

@goldierocks

Postpone a Royal wedding literally a day or two before and all that entails?! As if !"

There is of course a precedent for this happening. On 10th Feb 2005, Clarence House announced that Charles and Camilla would get married on 8th April. Wedding invites were sent, including to other royal families and heads of state.

Pope John-Paul II died on 2nd April. On 4th April, Clarence House announced the wedding would be pushed back to 9th April so that Prince Charles could attend the funeral (representing the Queen). A number of their wedding guests (heads of state) also attended the funeral, so moving the date of the wedding avoided a clash.

It was rearranged at lightening speed, including the military/tv/security arrangements.

Oh COME ON, Thomas Markle hardly warrants the same rearrangements as the actual Pope!

Also Charles and Camilla's wedding wasn't a televised event.

@Marmaladeagain

yes, Meghan’s behaviour - is worse than either her dad or sister. They’re attacking one individual person: her.

Meghan and Harry are dismissing a whole country saying UK is racist, describing the wedding ‘this spectacle’ as if they were forced into inviting all the macrobiotic diet people they didn’t know prior to the wedding - they could easily have had a private wedding and worked within the protocols, didn’t want to do that.

Yes for all they moaned about it being a spectacle they 'had' to have, they sure didn't mind inviting A-Listers they'd never met and buying a £250k wedding dress. Smacks of real embarrassment about wealth that does

@Roussette

I don't think anyone can judge someone who goes NC with their mother/father/parents. Walk a mile in their shoes....

Posting that you should forgive your parents in the Stately Homes thread would involve the internet melting!

Indeed.

And it's also very shortsighted to say "well I could never imagine my wedding without my dad"...bully for you. I imagine your dad isn't a lying manipulative fame seeker eager to make money off your good name. Thomas Markle would sell his granny for a fiver

@JaniieJones

'I don't think anyone can judge someone who goes NC with their mother/father/parents. Walk a mile in their shoes....'

Yes and the same applies to dc. No wonder Prince Charles stopped taking his calls.

Of course it's different with children

But all I’m saying is that you have to realise that life is short and parents aren’t going to be around forever

@MummyJ12 I'm going to be blunt and say you speak from a position of privilege saying that as many people wouldn't give two shits when our parents die - and for good reason, not for you or anyone else to judge

@Puzzledandpissedoff

The archbishop’s people have come forward and said that (the prior wedding) never happened

I didn't see the archbishop's comments, so please does anyone know whether he commented on what (if anything) did happen 3 days before the wedding?
As in did he mention a "rehearsal", "private vows" or whatever, or was it just left hanging?

He didn't want to comment on any private moments he was privy to he simply confirmed the marriage happened on the day we all thought it happened, at Windsor Castle

What is the “other” forum people keep mentioning? Why the secrecy?

People are being called racist if they dislike Meghan. I've seen it many times on Mumsnet. I've it seen elsewhere.

I've literally never seen that on MN.

By contrast, I've seen dozens of threads that were either explicitly racist, used coded racist language, or out and out racist language like using the N word.

What is the “other” forum people keep mentioning? Why the secrecy?

The secrecy is because its name is banned here. Posts containing that name are auto-deleted.

It's a forum started up by posters who had been banned from here, and they're extremely critical towards MN and towards specific people working at MN, so for obvious reasons MNHQ don't want to give them traffic. There was also an issue where the people who started the other forum kept coming here and spamming threads and spamming people's PMs with links to their forum.

ok, thanks rainy - I miss lots as I disappear for six months at a time from posting so always hearing things I don't have a clue about, right back the moldies to the present day - seem to not be around when some of the big things happen that get talked about, so thank you for explaining.

' I imagine your dad isn't a lying manipulative fame seeker eager to make money off your good name. Thomas Markle would sell his granny for a fiver'

Yes and how ironic the Sussexes have followed suit.

(The archbishop) didn't want to comment on any private moments he was privy to he simply confirmed the marriage happened on the day we all thought it happened, at Windsor Castle

Ah - thanks, Frangipani

So we still don't know what, if anything, happened 3 days before the actual wedding

For pp who asked this is what Justin Welby said about the wedding

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/30/archbishop-of-canterbury-harry-and-meghans-legal-wedding-was-on-saturday

@ohforarainyday back when these threads started, there were plenty of people being called racist for disliking Meghan and even for saying they didn’t know she was black. I used to lurk then and was horrified how unpleasant some people were on both sides of the argument. Most of the threads were deleted. But people were definitely accused of racism.

Has anyone seen the photo that has been released of Archie for his birthday? It is a sepia toned image of him with his back to the camera holding a bunch of balloons. It’s a bit of an odd one. If they don’t want to show his face (which is there choice), why bother releasing a photo at all 🤔

Pic is in this article:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57006672

@smilesy

Has anyone seen the photo that has been released of Archie for his birthday? It is a sepia toned image of him with his back to the camera holding a bunch of balloons. It’s a bit of an odd one. If they don’t want to show his face (which is there choice), why bother releasing a photo at all 🤔

The recent photos of Archie are apparently really pictures of the son of one of Megan's friends. Google Brynn Gingras and Gavin. Gavin has dark hair which is probably why the pictures are sepia toned as it would be very obvious that they're not Archie.

It's a pity Archie's pictures have to be limited, because there are people who would like to see him. But there are too many trolls calling him a doll, someone else's baby, photoshopping him and saying all sorts of things about his looks.

Disgusting things to say about a baby.