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

The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Tom Bower's book on Meghan Markle

1000 replies

SmileyFaces12 · 13/07/2022 10:49

It's out next week, titled 'Revenge'. I've ordered it already!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
50
notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 13:43

Serenster · 20/07/2022 12:02

They never said any of this despise nonsense that is repeated by people who have no argument. This is all lies. They never said they despise the family

The family that Prince Harry said caused him generational pain and suffering, the institution that he said trapped him and still traps his father and brother, the family that he said neglected him and the life that he said was a cross between The Truman Show and a zoo?

Where could people have got the idea that he doesn’t like it, I wonder?

Everyone criticises their family. Aspects that they don't like. Most of these things can be changed. Maybe when Charles takes over he can move on with the times.

Lost of people will tell you how they approve of their nan's old fashion values or bigotry, does not mean they hate them.

Calm down.

But stop putting words in their mouth. They never mentioned hating their family anywhere. They even still talk and interact with them.

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 13:47

Serenster · 20/07/2022 12:10

It's not like he wrote 40 books in 40yrs now did he ?

No, according to Goodreads he’s written 30 books in 40 years. I have no idea what your point is, but if it helps, that’s an error rate of 0.03 😂

Hardly an 'error' in a biography- someone's life, to lie when you have time to research !

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 13:48

38DegreesAndRising · 20/07/2022 12:35

What specific answers are you referring to, that you say I don't like?

I don't think I've seen any answers at all, which was my point, but happy to be corrected.

We gave you several answers. You just don't like the answer.

DaniRabbity · 20/07/2022 13:53

TreePoser · 20/07/2022 12:55

Omg does anybody seriously think there was less hate for Andrew?
Column inches can be love or hate or reporting something new
Lack of column inches can be indifference or a person keeping his head down. Not because he is smart enough but because he's been ordered to.

I've seen maybe two dozen threads about Andrew over the past few years, whereas the year they got married it was more like two dozen Meghan bash threads per week.

The Andrew threads are full of posters defending him and saying all sorts of terrible things about Virginia Giuffre. I've read posts saying the infamous photo was photoshopped, calling VG a slut and a gold digger, posts saying she was only out for money, that she's lying for money, that she's lying for attention, that "girls that age are manipulative" "girls that age know the score", as well as umpteen "innocent until proven guilty."

There's a billion times more hate for Meghan on this forum than for Andrew and the hate started before they were even married.

MaulPerton · 20/07/2022 13:54

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Roussette · 20/07/2022 13:59

FFS money laundering is a criminal offence, you are now calling them criminals???

Ive heard it all now. Very derogatory and nasty

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 14:00

TreePoser · 20/07/2022 12:55

Omg does anybody seriously think there was less hate for Andrew?
Column inches can be love or hate or reporting something new
Lack of column inches can be indifference or a person keeping his head down. Not because he is smart enough but because he's been ordered to.

Keeping his head down?

Now I've heard it all.

H&M did 3 interviews on MH month, bloody 2yrs ago where they talked about their family . They have not lived it down since. A count of an average of 10-90 (at worst) articles per day. Yes, media analysts counted and gave us the stats.

A spattering of a handful of articles when there is a trial or something regarding Andrew. Hell, even the FBI sent a bus around to BP, protesters were staged outside of BP. The media did not report. It was only little mention days later when the public demanded and circulated the news, otherwise we would have been none the wiser. MN struggled for months on end to fill up the PA threads, while we had an overwhelming echo chamber or numbered threads criticising H&M.

Don't make me laugh 😂

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 14:04

@MaulPerton . Actually, I can do it in once sentence: H & M need the titles for money laundering purposes so that they can get rich.

I hope this stays on here, so there is no deniability. (not that the raging haters cares of truth )

Ohnonevermind · 20/07/2022 14:24

some people seem to conveniently forget Harry’s recent interview where he expressed concern about the Queen and the people surrounding her etc. 🤣🤣🤣

He seems to be permanently in court raising his grievances too.

@MaulPerton

i wouldn’t use money laundering, but they want to monetise their titles, turn their connections to royalty into cold hard cash.

in 20 years we will be discussing PH/MM in the same terms that we’re discussing PA and SF as history repeats itself

MaulPerton · 20/07/2022 14:27

Ohnonevermind · 20/07/2022 14:24

some people seem to conveniently forget Harry’s recent interview where he expressed concern about the Queen and the people surrounding her etc. 🤣🤣🤣

He seems to be permanently in court raising his grievances too.

@MaulPerton

i wouldn’t use money laundering, but they want to monetise their titles, turn their connections to royalty into cold hard cash.

in 20 years we will be discussing PH/MM in the same terms that we’re discussing PA and SF as history repeats itself

'Money laundering'?

38DegreesAndRising · 20/07/2022 14:35

Unless investment funds are the proceeds of criminal activities then I don't think what you're describing is money laundering.
However it would be fascinating to lift the cover of these foundations* to see what really goes on. I don't think they are legally obliged to adhere to any accounting transparency rules, more is the shame.
(*all foundations, not just H&M's, but including H&M's, before someone jumps on with some whataboutery)

Samcro · 20/07/2022 14:36

Roussette · 20/07/2022 13:59

FFS money laundering is a criminal offence, you are now calling them criminals???

Ive heard it all now. Very derogatory and nasty

i have reported that post. ffs how low will people go in their hate.

MaulPerton · 20/07/2022 14:48

38DegreesAndRising · 20/07/2022 14:35

Unless investment funds are the proceeds of criminal activities then I don't think what you're describing is money laundering.
However it would be fascinating to lift the cover of these foundations* to see what really goes on. I don't think they are legally obliged to adhere to any accounting transparency rules, more is the shame.
(*all foundations, not just H&M's, but including H&M's, before someone jumps on with some whataboutery)

'Money rinsing'? To describe an activity where taxpayer money is reconstructed into an entity that is both palatable to the taxpayer and yet finds itself in a private bank account rather than disbursed to the taxpayer.

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 15:17

some people seem to conveniently forget Harry’s recent interview where he expressed concern about the Queen and the people surrounding her etc
So now, in order to force the narrative that Harry is constantly moaning about his family, we are going to equate one honest answer to a direct question as constantly 'smearing'. Harry even avoided changed when he saw that it was veering on too many questions regarding his family.

Also, we are not stupid. Talking about fraud, money hiding etc. on H&M threads when it has nothing to do with them is a stealth smear.

When someone talks about say, Prince Philip, why would I go in there and start talking about peados - when that has absolutely nothing to do with him. No link whatsoever.
H&M have absolutely nothing to do with money laundering, fraud or whatever else you are trying to smear them with. Hell, they were never even caught with questionable amounts of large cash in F&M bags.

MaulPerton · 20/07/2022 15:49

H&M have absolutely nothing to do with money laundering, fraud or whatever else you are trying to smear them with. Hell, they were never even caught with questionable amounts of large cash in F&M bags

Yes, they all do it - politicians, royals, and others who have not created a product or are in sports or entertainment. How do you think they get rich? You can either create something to sell to millions, entertain, play sport or siphon off taxpayer money. As far as I can see, these are the only ways, but happy to be enlightened as to others.

The faux outrage regarding the possibility that billionaires who are not entertainers, sportspeople or businesspeople may acquire their billions by cheating the taxpayer is telling. Is it so difficult to face the fact that those who are meant to lead us - politicians, royals, presidents, etc. may also scam us? I am, by the way, only concerned about taxpayer cash. I don't care about billionaires who are rich through other means, e.g., Sunak's father-in-law's Infosys company.

H & M's titles have to be stripped as they do nothing for the UK. The others do, however little that may be, and if we find that they also do nothing, then their titles have to go too.

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 15:59

I am, by the way, only concerned about taxpayer cash.

Better if you stick to that and stop smearing.

Roussette · 20/07/2022 16:08

i wouldn’t use money laundering, but they want to monetise their titles, turn their connections to royalty into cold hard cash

That is what is being levelled at them on here. With no retraction. No apology.

Money laundering carries a hefty prison term.

How does the poster who put this feel about Charles's carrier bags of cash? Or the fact he met ME royals and sheikhs 95 times, no doubt with a pay off.

Or Andrew's £4M backhander from a ME oligarch, nephew of a despotic ruler? Or the rest of his backhanders?

This thread has descended into vitriolic hate about a couple whose worst crime as of now is giving a speech at the UN in memory of a peace leader Nelson Mandela.

Roussette · 20/07/2022 16:10

The others do, however little that may be, and if we find that they also do nothing, then their titles have to go too.

And how do you propose that happens?

Some do little (or nothing in the case of PA and his ex wife).

Royal titles will not be removed for 'doing little'.
It takes an Act of Parliament

wordler · 20/07/2022 16:14

Book has been released already in Australia if anyone is there on this thread. If this thread is still about the book?

MaulPerton · 20/07/2022 16:15

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 15:59

I am, by the way, only concerned about taxpayer cash.

Better if you stick to that and stop smearing.

I did - Taxpayer wedding, taxpayer wardrobe, taxpayer food, taxpayer cars, taxpayer security, taxpayer titles -->> Archewell Foundation.

Roussette · 20/07/2022 16:17

We don't pay for titles through our tax. We don't pay for their security. We paid for their wedding and clothes years ago.

You can't give up can you?

After your latest horrible accusation about them, I can't take anything you say seriously, I honestly can't.

You meant it quite obviously.

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 16:19

I did - Taxpayer wedding, taxpayer wardrobe, taxpayer food, taxpayer cars, taxpayer security, taxpayer titles -->> Archewell Foundation.

Which we got our money back. All those were paid for while they were still employed. Ok @MaulPerton it's quite clear you are desperate, so I will leave you to reach. 😂

Ohnonevermind · 20/07/2022 16:25

The 100m Netflix deal is ‘monetising’ their titles. Spare me the faux outrage 🤣

BadgerB · 20/07/2022 16:55

Given the constant complaints about how much the Royals (all of them) cost tax-payers, maybe we should applaud those who receive carriers bags stuffed with bank notes, or syphon off £££ from their charitable foundations?

Joke (you can never be sure....)

MaulPerton · 20/07/2022 16:58

notanotheroneagain · 20/07/2022 16:19

I did - Taxpayer wedding, taxpayer wardrobe, taxpayer food, taxpayer cars, taxpayer security, taxpayer titles -->> Archewell Foundation.

Which we got our money back. All those were paid for while they were still employed. Ok @MaulPerton it's quite clear you are desperate, so I will leave you to reach. 😂

I am a bit desperate, actually, through feeling crapped on by these people - all of them - over and over again. We all are, while they sail off to their nice lives at our expense. Still, mustn't grumble, eh? Prince Duke of Wessex rules ok! (yes, yes, chldish 😀).

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.