Harry and Megan dubbed "fucking grifters" Part Deux

[Qbish]

Harry and Meghan slammed by Spotify executive after podcast deal ends | The Independent

The old thread got closed, just as I was trying to quote tweet someone! So I've started this one, because this shitshow is still rumbling on

Yes, I meant that too. And Polo.

Disgraceful to see Charles sobbing with joy at his Ascot winner. He sold some of the horses he inherited. Would have impressed even me had he flogged the lot on the grounds of the inherent cruelty and turned his back entirely.

Willy's against poaching but apparently sees no contradiction in his conservation efforts and his love of stalking and killing large animals and birds bred for sport at royal residences.

I've got to say, as much as I loathe blood sports, there's not really a contradiction between shooting grouse and culling deer, and conserving endangered species.
The grouse are going to die because they're bred for food. It would be like saying anyone supporting the conservation of snow leopards is a hypocrite if they eat chicken.
Deer don't have any natural predators in the wild like they did. So unless we introduce wolves throughout our forests, which isn't going to happen, humans need to keep on top of the population.

I've got to say, as much as I loathe blood sports, there's not really a contradiction between shooting grouse and culling deer, and conserving endangered species.

The grouse are (disgracefully) bred for shooting jollies which leads on to the upkeep of artificially managed habitats.

Deer could be culled humanely. Willy doesn't need to get his gun. He just wants to.

The people who pay £££ to go on deer hunts pay for the gillies who are trained to manage the deer stock, kill the old deer.

@CathyorClaire

I’m in ireland, and in the national park near me deer have to be culled as they start wandering on the roads etc

The most humane way according to the park rangers here is hunting and shooting deer meeting certain criteria. It’s not for sport so I can’t imagine they’d lie.

This is true, it's a bit unsavoury though that people get a rush or pay money to shoot and kill animals ... no matter what 'chosen' route has been decided for them

Once the deer population get out of control they leave the park and are wandering on the roads. There have been a number of fatalities.

And then it's all best left to the gillies, rangers and 'other relevant parties', not the royal family and their chums. It's either professional; or it isn't.

But thats not what I was responding to in your post. You likened the killing of endangered animals to that of grouse and deer.

Willy's against poaching but apparently sees no contradiction in his conservation efforts and his love of stalking and killing large animals

I'm against blood sports and can talk about my feelings about that, but there's is no comparison between trying to save species and killing animals bred for food, no matter if the form of that death is something you dislike. Honestly, if you're eating chicken, you're more likely than not participating in much worse.

This thread has gone off track a bit. How has M & H being called f’ing grifters twisted to William on a shoot.

Doesn't that depend on how good a shot they are? Personally I don't understand how anyone can get pleasure from killing an animal. It turns my stomach. But as long as the person shooting is a good shot, why does it have to be only gillies, etc?
As I understand it, at a lot of these paid shoots, the professional warden aims at the same time, so if an animal is winged, they can be brought down straight away. But it would be naive to think that professionals bring down animals clean every time. And it's not like they just allow anyone to shoot. There are codes of practice as to the capabilities someone has to have before they're allowed to shoot animals.

Because for some people it’s an opportunity to criticise William !

So if you leave it purely to the gillies, and stop the shooting parties, how do the gillies get paid? They need to earn money from some where.

I am not against horse racing in general, I think that’s very narrow-minded, but I am against events like Aintree. The course is too narrow, the jumps are too high, and there are FAR too many horses competing, accidents are basically baked in. They are intentional. Also they don’t even stop the race when there are horses loose???! And the reason is not because horses enjoy racing against a million other horses or jumping too high, it’s purely for the benefit of the bookies.

If animals are hunted for food or culled for population control that’s different. If you want to turn what’s absolutely necessary into a weird sport with a funny dress code, fine. And I’ll admit I don’t know much about the ecological management of water buffalo!!!! but it’s the act of posing next to a carcass like a trophy I find so grotesque. That said he might have just killed it for sport, in which case what an arse.

there's is no comparison between trying to save species and killing animals bred for food,

It's the hypocrisy involved that grates. I find it odd they see no disconnect between yapping about conservation and the environment while blasting animals native to that environment off the face of it.

Grouse are bred for the pleasure of shooting them and maintaining sufficient numbers for sporting purposes involves massive environmental damage.

No justification for either IMO.

https://parkswatchscotland.co.uk/2021/11/22/the-23m-sale-of-the-abergeldie-estate-the-royal-family-should-pay-for-their-environmental-damage/

It really isn't my job to sort out the financial arrangements of the Royal Estates like Balmoral.

If the King were to ask for my advice, which is vanishingly unlikely, I'd suggest he looks at the land management plan that my cousins adopted.

Anyway sorry about the derail. In terms of the premise of the thread, there's an article in today's Sunday Times by Hadley Freeman (who used to write for the Guardian until she was pushed out by the extreme gender ideology crowd, including those in the Guardian's US office) that is worth a look - she's a very talented writer. I'll get the link, bear with ...

"Has anyone ever squandered more goodwill and more quickly than the Duchess of Sussex? It’s hard to remember — now that her UK popularity rating, according to YouGov, is minus 47, her and Prince Harry’s eight-figure deals with Netflix and Spotify are in the bin and she was publicly trashed last week by the chief executive of a Hollywood agency as “not a great audio talent, or necessarily any talent” — but not very long ago most people really, really, really liked Meghan. And it seems to be difficult for her to recall this, given her apparent antipathy to Britain, but people really, really, really liked her here.

"Almost exactly five years ago I was dispatched to Windsor to cover Harry and Meghan's wedding ..."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/meghan-had-an-ocean-of-goodwill-and-drained-it-cqhc6s9zg

It's behind a paywall, AutumnCrow ...

Is the NF deal fully and definitely in the bin as that says?

I thought Harold was still discussing projects (Botswana) with them.

Top tip for reading The Times etc: use Archive.ph (I learned that on MN!)

Here's one I made earlier ...

https://archive.ph/IYtXR

Sorry, MN won't let me link to the archived version.

If you go to Archive.ph and type in the URL, you'll be able to read it in full.

I'm not getting very far in my effort to link to the full version! Sorry.

Meghan had an ocean of goodwill and drained it

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fe94d138-1841-11ee-87bf-4c05f9202e96?shareToken=1ab03d9b904efd6fee94098d32f98034

Here we go

Ouuuchh....
“Meghan is a product of her own era, in that she has the entitlement of a celebrity but the talents of a nobody. Other people with such attributes will go into reality TV, or influencing. The great irony of Meghan’s life is that — against all odds — she found her way to the royals, the perfect pedestal for a narcissist. The great tragedy is she believed she could do better and walked away. The best she can hope for is that her truth blinds her to the reality of how wrong she was.”