To be shocked at some RF members turning their back?

[fiheka]

It has been reported that some Royal Family members literally turned their back on Prince Harry at Prince Philip's funeral and refused to even acknowledge him.
I have had extended family members behave badly and are in no hurry to be friendly. But I think this is appalling behaviour. I would never do that and especially not at a funeral.
It reminds me of that video being shared where William and Kate totally snub and ignore Harry and Meghan.
It is just so rude and awful.

I found it highly amusing that she apparently thought the wedding rehearsal was the real ceremony. I’d have rolled my eyes at anyone who came out with that kind of nonsense.

@MintyMabel. If things are widely reported from various sources, is it not, on the balance of probabilities likely that that is what occurred? It does not show a lack of critical thinking on anyone’s part. There is a difference between critical thinking and refusing to believe that something is probably true just because we don’t want it to be.
Another problem with the wedding in the garden story was that many people had been asking if they could have private weddings in their gardens to avoid Covid regulations. This put members of the clergy in a difficult position because clearly this is not legally allowed as things stand in the UK (Covid or no Covid). Meghan may well have meant that they had a private exchange of vows but that is not what she actually said. She categorically said “we got married” and some people will take that at face value and wonder why they cannot so the same. Also she said they called the Archbishop of Canterbury so they could do this which is plainly bollocks. He cannot just turn up at the drop of a hat. A member of the Cof E said that it was most likely a rehearsal for the wedding.

Everyone knows why the change to the. Commonwealth service happened at the last minute.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting lalalala 😂 isn’t the answer

Equally, repeating that the change was made does nothing to support your assertions that it was due to the Sussexes throwing a strop. Apart from anything else, that story makes no sense. It was their last appearance. By that point they had already said they were leaving, and done so in a way that was allegedly unexpected. They had nothing to gain and everything to lose by behaving badly. On the other hand, the rest of the family had absolutely nothing to gain by acquiescing. If they refused to pander and he didn’t turn up, or threw a strop, caused a scene, drop a story about how terrible it was and how he behaved badly and it would simply strengthen the support they already had in the media. So, unless you can explain how they would gain by letting him have his way, or point to a verifiable source for your story, you can’t keep claiming it is absolute fact.

If things are widely reported from various sources, is it not, on the balance of probabilities likely that that is what occurred?

These are not widely reported from various sources. They are widely reported by various outlets, but have the same (non) source. “A palace insider” or “sources close to..” Several lazy reporters regurgitating the same story doesn’t make it any more true.

It does not show a lack of critical thinking on anyone’s part. There is a difference between critical thinking and refusing to believe that something is probably true just because we don’t want it to be.

Believing a story despite there being no actual evidence of it simply because you want it to be true is the definition of a lack of critical thinking.

Another problem with the wedding in the garden story was that many people had been asking if they could have private weddings in their gardens to avoid Covid regulations. This put members of the clergy in a difficult position because clearly this is not legally allowed as things stand in the UK

Riiight, so now it’s because of Covid that it was a problem. It is untrue that you can’t have a wedding at home, there are ways to do it. For a start, you can do it in Scotland with no (non Covid) restrictions. But I would have thought clergy would be able to answer a question really simply. But hey, it’s another stick to beat her with. Presumably if it hadn’t been for this Covid issue, you’d be ok that she said it.

I found it highly amusing that she apparently thought the wedding rehearsal was the real ceremony. I’d have rolled my eyes at anyone who came out with that kind of nonsense.

But you understood she was talking about the rehearsal. You didn’t for one minute think she was saying there was an earlier wedding.

The uniform thing was because Andrew wanted to wear a uniform at Philips funeral and the armed forces formally objected.

Can you think of lots of other reasons for W&K not being part of the procession, other than H&M complaining?

There could be a number of reasons for it. Perhaps there was a credible security threat. Perhaps there was a lack of protection available. Perhaps the Cambridges requested it for their own reasons. Perhaps a senior Royal stepped in and changed if for their own reasons. But, given they have not done anything Harry has asked for since they day he left, it makes no sense they would have done this.

You cannot have a wedding in a garden with only three people. You need at least five because of the need for witnesses. A member of the clergy asked the Palace of Westminster for clarification about what happened because he had parishioners asking why they could not get married in the garden. Here is a link

expressdigest.com/vicar-says-church-told-him-meghan-and-harrys-garden-wedding-was-conversation-with-archbishop/

The interview came out whilst Covid regulations were in force and people were seeking ways to get married. That is the relevance of the Covid situation. What happens in Scotland is not relevant because last time I looked Kensington Palace was in England. I am not beating her with a stick, I am simply pointing out that what she said was misleading at best.

A member of the clergy asked the Palace of Westminster for clarification about what happened because he had parishioners asking why they could not get married in the garden. Here is a link

Where does it say they had been asked about garden wedding because she said this? He says he had had been inundated during lockdown, was this after the interview? That’s not clear.

What happens in Scotland is not relevant because last time I looked Kensington Palace was in England

If you were talking about England, why state it is a U.K. thing? Last I looked, England isn’t U.K, your comment about how you can’t have a garden wedding in the U.K. was misleading at best.

But you understood she was talking about the rehearsal. You didn’t for one minute think she was saying there was an earlier wedding.
She categorically said”we got married”. Some people will take this at face value and clearly did if they were contacting the church to see if they could do the same. If she had said “we exchanged vows” there would have not been any ambiguity. Why is this difficult to accept?

Indeed.

A private exchange of vows and everyone would have understood.

We got married just us three? Whole other baw game.

Yes the clergyman was asked after the interview. Here is a link to the DM article in the same thing, purely to show the date

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9363159/Vicar-says-Church-told-Meghan-Harrys-garden-wedding-conversation-Archbishop.html

Ok you can get married outdoors in Scotland but you still need witnesses and Harry and Meghan said there were just the three of them (M,H and Welby). It is obviously still irrelevant what happens in a Scotland in this case because they were in England where it is not legal.

@SheldonesqueTheBstard

Indeed.

A private exchange of vows and everyone would have understood.

We got married just us three? Whole other baw game.

@ChiefInspectorParker Obviously none of us knows what is true. But it was reported that Andrew wanted to wear an Admirals uniform and the Navy objected because they did not want him to wear a Navy uniform at all. They felt it brought the Navy into disrepute.
At the same time there was the lesser issue of Harry and if he should wear a uniform. My understanding is that he is not entitled to wear a uniform for his old ceremonial rank, but he can wear one that reflects his serving rank when he was in the forces.
The Queen threw up her hands and basically said none of you are wearing a uniform. And I don't blame her.

It is obviously still irrelevant what happens in a Scotland in this case because they were in England where it is not legal.

So why mention the U.K.?

TQ takes the commonwealth very seriously as she does her faith and position as head of the church. She wouldn’t want tantrums at the ceremony.

She also values tradition and protocol. If he was causing trouble the more likely solution is to have told him not to participate.

Yes the clergyman was asked after the interview. Here is a link to the DM article in the same thing, purely to show the date

At no point in this report, is there any suggestion that he was asked about holding garden weddings on the basis that Meghan had said she had one. There is no suggestion the number of requests increased, nor that anyone had told him they were angry she had one and they had been turned down. He had had requests “during lockdown” “during Covid” but nothing that links her words to anyone, let alone lots of people saying “she did so we should” That suggestion has been made up so you can claim it was bad that she said it because of that.

Well. They did go on Oprah. Could they not have spoken to the individuals they took issue with?

@MintyMabel. I am trying to have a reasonable discussion. There is no need to be so unpleasant. I mentioned the UK in error and I have said that it is legal in Scotland so stop going on about it. I am not making things up to make her look bad. I am simply pointing out that saying “ we got married” would be interpreted by a reasonable person as meaning what it says on the tin. You are trying to twist things to suit what you want to believe. Kindly stop.

I see, so only believe something if someone is telling you themselves. Don't apply scepticism that people may have an agenda when telling their "truth" (incorrect statements on royal protocol and how they were used "against" them). Don't bring own supposition, as said, on the balance of probabilities when weighed against easily checkable facts etc

Only words spoken by someone that you can physically see can be true. Makes everything anyone ever said in the entire world true then, if they said it out loud that is, which is an impossibility. We'd have empty prisons for sure, but truth is truth, apparently.

Only believe words of two known liars, harsh word, but that's the "truth" of it. If people lie, then can't be surprised to call them liars.

Harry's visible petulant behaviour at both ceremonies was about his place in the line of succession - that's clear, as is proven by his upset that he doesn't get to "change" the RF to suit him and his ideas of half-in/half-out.

He wasn't nervous - he felt entitled, what Harry wants, Harry gets. A grown man with no shame crying victimhood because his dad won't fund his fantasy lifestyle of being a big shot in Hollywood.

I think they all act pretty entitled. But only some get blamed.

With the Trust fund thing, it reminds me of Fergie. She was cut off with a settlement but not a large one. So she had to work. And then she was criticised for the kind of work an ex-Royal can get.
Harry and Meghan have to work and are doing the kind of work they can get.

@MintyMabel

It is obviously still irrelevant what happens in a Scotland in this case because they were in England where it is not legal.

So why mention the U.K.?

TQ takes the commonwealth very seriously as she does her faith and position as head of the church. She wouldn’t want tantrums at the ceremony.

She also values tradition and protocol. If he was causing trouble the more likely solution is to have told him not to participate.

Yes the clergyman was asked after the interview. Here is a link to the DM article in the same thing, purely to show the date

At no point in this report, is there any suggestion that he was asked about holding garden weddings on the basis that Meghan had said she had one. There is no suggestion the number of requests increased, nor that anyone had told him they were angry she had one and they had been turned down. He had had requests “during lockdown” “during Covid” but nothing that links her words to anyone, let alone lots of people saying “she did so we should” That suggestion has been made up so you can claim it was bad that she said it because of that.

Meghan wasn't married 3 days before 'the spectacle'. She's offended the British public, the Queen and the Archbishop of Canterbury. I seriously don't understand her thinking.