Omid Scobie Endgame PART 5

[Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar]

A continuing civilised and enjoyable discussion of all things relating to Endgame. Please keep posts on topic - I do not want to have to invoke Ross Gellar again!

Previous thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/4957618-omid-scobie-endgame-part-4?page=1

Frankly BP needs to issue a statement and say what was said by whom, and the context.

I've asked this question before, but how?

Nobody knows when 'the conversation' took place. Not even Harry and Meghan can agree. Was it when they were just dating? Or when she was pregnant? We also don't have a clue who was present. Who can remember what was or was not said in a private conversation by any given member of their extended family, going back the best part of 7 years?

The Queen already issued a statement. She said 'recollections may vary'. That's enough. No way should the royals be issuing statements about private conversations. And even if they did, no doubt in the next book, 'documentary' or interview, one of them would say 'Oh, we didn't mean that conversation. There was another conversation where 'comments' were made'.

Grey rocking is the best policy.

Wasn't he allegedly the one behind the elements of Harry and Meghan's wedding which honoured her black heritage, including inviting the preacher?

That's what was claimed, yes, but it would have been only too easy for his spinners to grab an opportunity to burnish his credentials whether he actually did it ot not

Anyway it's another thing where I doubt we'll ever know

@IcedPurple Yes, it probably is but it will rumble on and on and always leave the smear campaign running. The RF do release statements from time to time and I just wonder if a single simple statement will put an end to it. And if it was Camilla as Tom bower says, is it fair Catherine is dragged into it just because H&M and Omid can do it?

If they have dragged Kate into it unfairly, it doesn't bode well for their relationship with the monarchy after Charles's death 😬

10 more year plus of the ghastly Sussexes is more than I can cope with 😂😂😂

Again though, how can you issue a 'simple statement' about an alleged conversation which may have happened at any point over the course of a few years? And when you don't have a clue who was present?

Obviously yes, the royals do issue statements. But I've never known them to do so about a private family conversation. And I don't think such a statement would put an end to things either. It's a 'he said she said' sort of thing. In any case, I don't think anyone other than the most fervent Sussex squaddies seriously believes Charles or Kate is racist, do they? Why give oxygen to this sort of sleazy mud slinging?

I agree with you that he’s always been progressive- his ‘defender of the faiths’ line was actually incredibly advanced when you think how long ago it was that he said it. However the fact that he has been actively working for multiculturalism since before many of us were born doesn’t mean he’s not at risk of saying the ‘wrong’ thing by today’s standards and raising an eyebrow among the younger generation.

Absolutely yes to the first paragraph of this. Imagine the MN post:
AIBU to not have the energy for BIL's needy new girlfriend?
I am pregnant with DC3 and suffering HE badly as in my first two pregnancies. DS and DD are both under 5 and I am exhausted. DH has a demanding job with unpredictable hours requiring a lot of travel and I am working part time until v close to due date.
BIL has always been v close and we adore him; he's a great uncle. But he's got a new GF from a v different culture to ours (think v touchy feely, heavy on the therapy speak) and he wants me to be a sort of mentor to her as she settles in here. I try to be polite but how do I tell her that I simply don't have the mental space or physical energy for making new friends at the moment?

Hearsay M'Lud !

I watched a documentary about Diana mother's life - it was apparently widely reported that at a gathering after Harry's birth Charles made a comment to his MIL about his slight disappointment Harry was not the daughter he'd wanted - his MIL was well known to have lost a child shortly after birth and been devastated and been under extreme pressure to produce a boy but said what I think many MIL would say back be happy both are well.

Not a tactful remark or considerate of who his audience was but not really meant to cause offense.

I could possibility see some mild speculation about new grandchild happening in similar lines - maybe some gentle ribbing about red hair to Harry and that causing offense and getting worse in retelling.

I think the idea that Meghan would take second place to Kate was completely unacceptable to them.

I get the feeling that Meghan felt she could easily outshine introvert Kate and in so doing upstage her and be the bigger 'star' within the RF. Remember that awkward appearance with the four of them for the Royal Foundation where Kate was pregnant and Meghan was wearing a navy jumpsuit and was acting like she was the star of the show and she was the one with everything to say? I felt she set out her stall with that appearance. And when you're the star and everyone wants to see you and be associated with you then it doesn't matter if the other one will actually be Queen. Who needs to be Queen when you're the star of the RF show?

I think that's what all the Diana comparisons are for - Diana was the star of the RF from the moment she entered it. I think that's what Harry saw when he met Meghan - that 'star' quality that would make her the next Diana.

It must be so galling that Kate is more popular than Meghan, here and in America 😬

I’m not so sure about this. Diana’s “star quality” was that she was seen as the “people’s princess” - relatable and down to Earth but at the same time still quite “regal”. I’m not sure that would be a way to describe Meghan. I don’t think people would have related to Meghan if she had continued in the vein of “I’m the one with all the ideas and the most to say”. That’s definitely not like Diana

It was JJ Anisiobi, on Talk TV on the day after Piers Morgan stated the names from the Dutch publication, who said that his source - someone who works with the Queen and who is friends with Charles - told him that the alleged person is neither Charles nor Catherine. He is absolutely not a fan of Catherine (he thinks she's awful), and he is a big supporter of MM. So he would have no reason to deflect from the accusation in Scobie's book.

JJ said that as soon as the Oprah interview had aired in the UK, the RF were upset and spent a couple of weeks trying to work out what H&M were referring to. They pinpointed who it could be. He thinks Scobie is lying about 2 names in order to move on a story that H&M had no interest in moving on in their own projects.

Tom Bower and Lady C both have good sources, and they have both said at various times that the person in question was Camilla and Anne respectively.

We don't have any idea if there was one, two, three or more people in H&M's grievance book. We know MM conflated matters of security and titles into a skin colour issue, and we don't know what else she has decided to conflate into a racism issue. We have no idea what is in those letters between Charles and MM.

This is the reason why the RF are better off sticking to their NCNE/RMV stance. Until the day that H&M actually state themselves what was said, by whom, to whom, when, why, context, witnesses and follow on treatment (because, imo, actions speak louder than words where throw away comments are concerned), then it remains a matter of no case to answer. And frankly, since these conversations were with Harry, then he's the one that needs to go on record, no more second hand interpretations from Meghan.

I definitely believe that H&M thought that they would have their own court. The glamorous, A-lister court, whilst W&K could pick up the drudge aspects.

It is reported widely that Harry asked for Windsor Castle (from when HMQ died) - a photogenic castley spot convenient for Hollywood people etc. This was given the bum’s rush: he and Meghan were not entitled to this residence.

I also agree that the whole Soho House/Markus Anderson thing needs investigative work. The string pulling that went on is very shady.

I think that's what all the Diana comparisons are for - Diana was the star of the RF from the moment she entered it. I think that's what Harry saw when he met Meghan - that 'star' quality that would make her the next Diana.

But Diana put the work in. I wasn't a great fan of hers, but she did highlight causes that weren't especially fashionable or glamorous. She was at times also an attention seeker who used her star quality for her own ends, but it was the work she put in which won the 'Princess of Hearts' title.

Star quality alone will only take you so far (And won't necessarily last as you move into middle age. Diana didn't live long enough to find out.) It's solid work which will win you long term respect.

But the Sussexes don't want to put the work or the time into anything!

Don't forget too that in 2016 when Meghan met Harry she was almost the age that Diana was when she died and Harry was so besotted with Meghan right from the start that I think he saw her as the fully fledged version of Diana - her charitable credentials, Hollywood gloss and confidence all fully formed.

The British public watched Diana go from 'shy Di' in the early years, gradually finding her feet and her causes and her confidence to the self-assured, glamorous woman she became in her 30s. Meghan was already self-assured, confident and glamorous - so I think to Harry she was already the finished article when they met. Hence the comparisons to his mother (which, funnily enough, no one else sees as Meghan is nothing like Diana!).

I keep seeing the Soho House/Markus Anderson thing mentioned. What is it?

I’m not so sure about this. Diana’s “star quality” was that she was seen as the “people’s princess” - relatable and down to Earth but at the same time still quite “regal”. I’m not sure that would be a way to describe Meghan. I don’t think people would have related to Meghan if she had continued in the vein of “I’m the one with all the ideas and the most to say”. That’s definitely not like Diana

For all Diana's faults, she was authentic. We more or less watched her grow up in front of us (those of us old enough, anyway) from awkward teen to confident woman and fashion icon, and we saw all the pain and joy. She was the first very personable, warm royal; and we saw her do work that nobody else in the RF had done, especially with AIDS patients. That was very real, at the time there was no kudos to be gained from this, her actions could have completely gone the other way, such was the fear at the time. However, she completely changed the narrative.

I don't think MM is authentic. Everything she does is performative. She talks a lot of cliches and soundbites, but I think it is the empty vessel making a lot of noise. I think she's a chameleon who takes on the persona that will secure her what she wants and needs at any given time. She decided (no doubt with the encouragement of her dim husband) to cos-play Diana, the exit years. Trouble is, you can't do that and retain the love and respect of the public who haven't seen you put in all the years of good work. Had they left with less of a flounce, had they not whinged so much, had they just got on with some authentic projects within their stated aim of being philanthropists and engineers of societal change, then I think the goodwill they had at the start of their relationship would have sustained them to being on the way to beloved by the public now. I don't even think Invictus will save them now.

Frankly BP needs to issue a statement and say what was said by whom, and the context. I'm sure it was said as a question many families ask, but maybe wasn't wise for a woman with such a strong desire to take offence

I also disagree with you. They do not need to enter the fray at all, they do not need to dignify it, especially as even Harry and Megan can’t agree on what happened and when.

personally I’d be appalled if I saw a statement from Charles saying, wasn’t me, was my wife and sister.

You’re conflating what you want to happen. With what is likely best for them, and for them, absolutely it is not best to dignify and validate it with a response, and certainly not for Charles to pass the buck onto someone else he loves, if it wasn’t him.

and then where does it stop. Harry and Megan have made hundreds of accusations. Literally. Do they refute each one. Of course not. What happens if they disagree with Charles ‘s statement, they aren’t even agreeing between them, why would they agree with Charles. All out media war?

they have completely played a blinder by not engaging in this, and should continue to not dignify or validate the scummy behaviour.

Just my impression:

MM never was A-List before marrying H, yes, she was in a TV show with a starring role, but never top billing, blockbuster guarantee Movie Star A-List.

The she gets engaged to H and might have thought "Finally, top billing, star of the show". Of course, that wasn't the case due to the hierarchy in the RF and H's apparent failure to brief her accordingly.

The two of them really need to grow up and stop whinging about everything and how "hard done by" they are.

Diana was well-mannered, but Meghan isn't (despite her insistence on teaching Archie that 'salt and pepper are always passed together', LOL).

It is reported widely that Harry asked for Windsor Castle (from when HMQ died)

I find it really hard to believe that he could be so utterly clueless as to do this!

Diana created - pretty much inadvertently - her role. No-one had married in to the RF for ages, except Capt Mark Phillips, and he wasn't taking a role as a working Royal. And with the Queen at the helm, it was a bit like the hey day of Coronation Street - a soap opera continuing drama with strong female characters.

There weren't expectations on what Diana should do, because there hadn't been a "queen in waiting" who hadn't been born to it in decades. She did the obvious duty in producing heirs in short order, adopted a position of wearing British fashion (and no fur) from v early on, but the rest came at her own pace. And by fluke (as I think she commented on little/no guidance) she created her own role. Starting with the typical patronages and duties, but gradually leading to closer associations with specific causes. And (aside from The War Of The Wales) it was never about her - she drew attention to her causes, I don't think she did anything in order to build her own image (other than dressing the part)

The problem I have with the conversation is that it included Harry, who has no problem removing himself from the fall out. From blaming Kate and William for the Nazi uniform to not understanding that P* was a slur. How can Harry be in the room and not be part of the conversation, why did Harry fail to rectify there and then. If there is any truth with ginger and a tan then that’s not much difference to the conversation with Stephen Colbert that he initiated. Had that conversation been had in a dressing room with Harry telling Meghan that Stephen was laughing about the children colouring and Meghan takes offence I can see Harry removing himself. Context we know that Colbert was fine, a third party accusation of a conversation unknown, he is left being slandered on social media or apologising (for Harry) and slightly less slandered. The hardest thing would be proving the truth of the conversation.