Omid Scobie's new book

[boxedandribboned]

Heads up, Omid is back on the PR trail...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/harry-meghan-author-omid-scobie-31362434

BTW, can anyone explain why he's Harper's Royal reporter when he only seems to have access to or report on Harry and Meghan? It's a bit strange.

I would say that most people if pressed would say SF is a Klingon and an embarrassment to herself. As for her living with Andrew all these years 🙄

SF and PA are grifters, everyone knows that Roussette, you are preaching to the converted.

They monetise their royal connections , they use their titles to elevate themselves, they accept favours from dodgy oligarchs and from rich people they hardly know, they benefit from tax funded security by living on the Royal estate, their kids are monetising and benefiting from their Princess titles.

No one is saying anything different to you Rousette, the consensus on that is overwhelming, you really can let it go !

I remember SF’s book and interview which were nowhere near as vitriolic as things that H and M have said .
Yes , SF knows which side her bread is buttered on . Yes , she should have had her title removed. Yes, Andrew is an odious, arrogant oaf . No one is arguing anything different .
The issue I have with H and M is the drip, drip of nasty comments , lies ( Omid Scobie , near catastrophic car chase for example) and accusations . Harry has made racist comments , was deeply unpleasant about a former teacher and discussed his first sexual encounter without letting the woman know beforehand. Nice. Meghan saying she “ never signed anything” Harry hinting there is more to come etc etc . Being particularly nasty about W and C . Pap walks ( hike on Coronation Day )
etc etc

Meghan saying she “never signed anything”

If memory serves she also said it around August 1922 - in other words at the same time the Queen was obviously fading and less than a month before her death

So if it's true that the RF didn't want her at Balmoral for the end, is it really any wonder?

This is so revealing .

Supporters of the Windsors downplay the crimes of those still on the ‘royal’ gravy train and try to imply that Harry is worse !

Why? Becasue he spoke his truth .
Crime of the century .

Meanwhile pedophiles are protected by the Windsors .

The Windsors and their supporters are stuck in 1950s ‘ shut up about uncle sex offender and don’t dare disgrace the family ‘
Mafia vibes too

But it’s this thinking which will be the end of them so keep it up I suppose

Hmm... she wrote a book, or was it two, absolutely laying into the Institution, the Monarchy, it was very scathing. But as far as I can see she didn't make it personal. If I worked for the NHS (which I did) I wouldn't mind if someone criticised it because all institutions have flaws in their operation. However if someone started to make personal criticisms of some my beloved colleagues that would be different.

So be a pedophile but don’t make personal comments .
Got it .

@derxa you are quite correct . Unless I have had a memory lapse ( a bit like M M) it was critical of the “ men in suits” rather than individual members of the RF.

This was the closing section of The Cut interview with Meghan that was published on 29 August 2022. Just over a week later, on 8 September, Harry and Meghan wonder why Meghan might not be a welcome addition around the Queen’s deathbed….

Who is a paedophile ?

@Mylovelygreendress

Are you serious ?

Epstein was literally on the throne feted and given access even to Elizabeth’s highland bothy
You can draw your own conclusions re Andrew ( nothing to see here no doubt )

Mountbatten !

Peter Ball protected by Charles even after Ball had accepted a caution

Neither Epstein nor Ball were members of the RF .
To the best of my knowledge Mountbatten was never charged not found guilty of anything .
Andrew has never been charged not found guilty .
So I repeat- who is a paedophile ? Serious allegation.

Mountbatten has been named in a court case which is starting soon

If you think all is well as the ‘royals’ haven’t been convicted ( yet) or that they just protect and consort with pedophiles - I have no words .

Neither Epstein nor Ball were members of the RF

Talk about stating the bleedin' obvious!

You are known by the company you keep

I have no words .

Makes a change !

So Mountbatten has been named . Never charged or found guilty ?

I am not defending these people but you making sweeping statements does nothing for your credibility.

So Mountbatten has been named . Never charged or found guilty ?

Of course not! It was a very different time. Back in the day of Mountbatten he was revered and looked up to. It's only now that people's eyes are open about the RF and the company they kept that some poor bloke is trying to tell his story.

The RF are protected. They can do what they want or they used to be able to. But times they are a'changing... quite rightly too.

My point remains .

@Novella4 said someone was a paedophile . I asked who . She backtracked . That’s it .

Much as I would live to continue this , I am off to meet friends.

None of these posters have clearly ever heard of Operations Fairbank, Fernbridge, Midland, and the discredited allegations involved in those. They utterly discount the possibility that an allegation of misconduct is not the same as proven misconduct. Investigation? Proof? Due process? Pfft.

I have never accused another poster of calling someone else racist when they haven't done so or implied so. Neither has @Roussette Which is what this was about- you're now sticking your oar in after I've been told not to! Ironic indeed.

I have, and will continue, to call out actual racism, usually by reporting it and having it removed. Thats something I am very aware that I do, and very proud that I do too.

Some oars are more welcome than others, it seems!

had to look up the meaning of the word 'meta' in this context, still don't really get it

Thanks once again, Serenster; I remembered Meghan's "not signing anything" quote, but not where it was from ... nor, for that matter, that it was published mere days from the Queen's death

So it would seem that the only defence for Harry and Meghan's behavior is 'But Sarah', 'But Andrew' and now 'But Mountbatten'?

I think this means that even their own supporters agree that by abandoning their royal roles and leaving for America - only to parade around as the 'Duke and Duchess' makes them look pretty hypocritical.

Absolultely do not agree on that! Why would you say that? Like it or not, they are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Same as Sarah is the Duchess of York. She uses her title shamelessly. If H&M want to use theirs, good on them!

I’m still flummoxed by the post that said PA wasn’t convicted as if he’d been investigated, indicted and prosecuted but escaped conviction.

By the FBI. For something that allegedly happened in London, and wasn’t a crime there.

HMQ gave them the Ducal titles upon their marriage because they had insisted they wanted to devoted themselves to royal service - they were given the choice and that was their decision. The titles were part of that.

Later, they decided they didn't like the royal life after all, and they left. At that point, anyone with any dignity and self-respect would have stopped using the titles, which went along with a set of roles and responsibilities that they had rejected. Calling yourself Duke or Duchess in America is just daft anyway.