It’s interesting how positive headlines about Harry coming in from the cold are being used to mask negative ones about Sarah Ferguson

[Inotherwordspleasebetrue]

This is blatant speculation but I’m beginning to think that Harry was right all along and that the Buckingham Palace press machine uses stories about the lower ranking royals royals to protect the core of the monarchy.

So, on this occasion, to distract from damaging stories about Sarah Ferguson’s e-mails and back-tracking with Epstein, especially given the Yorks recent prominent appearance at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral, my theory is that the Palace has given a tacit nod to a story about Harry coming back in from the cold, knowing that any story about Harry or Meghan will immediately hit the top slot and overshadow anything else?

Buckingham Palace must think people are very dim, or rely on the fact that they swallow this propaganda whole without questioning it?

Of course this time Harry will be happy because the headlines are favourable to him. And on a human level everyone loves a story about a reconciliation between father and son. But generally I think the British public are being played by all of this spin to cover up the type of story about financial murkiness that Andrew Lownie uncovered and wrote about in his latest book?

All of which leads me to wondering why the Royal Family and the men in grey suits are once again protecting Andrew and Sarah? Is it simply because Andrew is the King’s brother, and therefore close to the Crown, or is it because Andrew’s financial dealings are not much different to what most of them do in the RF, but just a bit more blatant and extreme?

Who knows what the truth is any more?

Plenty of QE2’s other grandchildren managed it without anything terrible happening. What gossip are you imagining from a smaller family wedding?

Princess Anne had a small second marriage in Scotland - I don't think there would have been gossip, although maybe disappointment from some.

I think their wedding is an interesting conundrum.

There were suggestions from many Sr Royals that it should be at a more modest scale. But that was clearly rejected by the demanding, grandiose and aspirational couple.

However I thought the ‘spectacle’ was actually spectacular and showed off the UK to a global audience. I was a ‘fan’ at the time and really believed this marriage would bring some more energy, diversity and modernity to the RF.

But it also shows what happens when you ignore red flags, walk on eggshells and indulge a tantruming and difficult character. They are never satisfied. They flounced off, scorched earth style and threw grenades from across the pond for 5 looong years.

Clealy BP had the measure of her early doors and if they had stood their ground against all of their demands then maybe MM would have flounced earlier without PH?

Princess Anne isn't biracial, ajandjjmum, and if H&M had enoyed a much more modest wedding - even if they'd said it was absolutely what they wanted - there's no doubt at all some would have insisted it was the result of racism

Clealy BP had the measure of her early doors and if they had stood their ground against all of their demands then maybe MM would have flounced earlier without PH?

Edited to add I'd have been amazed if she had, @DelightedDelicious
From a profile-enhancing POV Harry was the best chance she was ever likely to have and I don't imagine she'd have passed that up once he was sufficiently on the hook to support her wish to return to LA

Oh, is she pregnant, has there been a massive falling out with the then Prince of Wales,is someone going to object-I don’t know. And he wasn’t just the Queen’s grandson, was he? He was the future King’s son and 3rd in line to the throne. It would hardly have gone unnoticed!

Princess Anne had a small second wedding in Scotland precisely because it was her second wedding. At the time anything bigger would have been condsidered most unsuitable!

William and Catherine seem to be the only two who are squeaky clean.

Harry and Meghan have accepted plenty from some shady characters too, the free house in Vancouver, owned by an oligarch with strong ties to Putin, a massive mansion, paid security and use of private jets from Tyler Perry, who is finally being outed as a sexual predator, after years of rumours. Oprah Winfrey, who has associations with some vile people, Weinstein, Diddy, that sexual cult leader from S.America. Rumours there are lots of things to come out about her.

It was very rude. I'm interested in the Royal family but not a royalist. Even so, it felt like a slap in the face to hear that the wedding was for show when M had been so warmly welcomed.

I still think that one of the most charming moments of any Royal Wedding was when the then PofW met Meghan halfway down the aisle. If whoever thought of that had the handling of the RF’s PR they’d have had a much smoother last few years!

I've not read the whole thread, but Harry was absolutely right when he said that BP co-operate with certain stories and give journalists info on or off the record in order to bury bad news. When something negative about one family member comes up they "sacrifice" another, less important, member to distract/bury the bad news. This has been the way for DECADES.

And let’s not forget the two very corrupt regimes they smoozed and took freebies from people who had US warrants out for their arrests.

So those claiming, oh Harry and Meghan, lipstick etc, are forgetting some very dodgy deals and extremely dodgy people, they have been associated with too.

It was also Meghan's second wedding.

Meghan was the one who wanted to walk down the aisle alone, to make a point. A compromise was reached, with Carles meeting her half way. M's PR instincts may have been good then but they're a mess now.

If there was proper transparency, the Royal family would be toast.

I do remember that comment! But I think that was a tabloid interpretation of off-the-cuff comments by one of the Queen’s representatives at the time, who had to apologise , for saying publically, what was obviously being said in private.

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1992/03/21/Queens-spokesman-apologizes-for-attack-on-Fergie/3931701154000/

Interestingly, the article also says that Fergie got a $12 million divorce settlement from Andrew, which was a lot of money at the time, plus £500,000 a year from the RF which was conditional on her not selling family secrets. So we now know why she kept close by! But why on earth couldn’t she live off that amount of money? OK so she couldn’t keep up with flash billionaires but she could have lived a very nice life with those resources! The mind boggles as to what she was spending it on! Lownie’s book certainly has the right title!

He was actually 6th in line, so of no constitutional significance. I don’t remember anyone thinking Zara or Eugenie were pregnant because they had smaller weddings, or that they must have fallen out with their fathers, that’s a weird assumption. The only vague controversy at Eugenie’s iirc was firstly that she had to move the date because of Harry + Meghan, and then Meghan announcing her pregnancy.

6th in line, not third.

A small wedding would have been considered suitable both for his place in the family and for the fact that it was her second wedding.

Despite claiming they wanted a small one, they asked for Westminster Abbey or St Paul's.

Her behaviour in more recent times is reprehensible but on reflection, SF was treated appallingly.

Fergie's behaviour was reprehensible almost from the get-go.

I'm not convinced she was treated appallingly. E2 seems to have paid off a fair amount of her earlier debts until she realised she was being taken for a mug and said no more.

She was allowed to milk her connections and title until her hands fell off and when they regrew milked on.

She's had unlimited access to the kind of properties most of us can only dream of and she's never given up her toehold in 30 room RL.

Not a bad return for a six year stint at what they'd all have you believe is a coal face.

Oh yes

So agree

She is absolutely shameless

Squeaky clean? I don't it their skeletons are just hidden

I don't think there's any correlation between the Harry leaks/stories and the news regarding Fergie's emails with Epstein, but I do think there's a link between Ghalaine's recent testimony and the sudden release of the Mandellson emails and then Fergie's

Plus, the sudden story of Fergie being a frenemy of Ghislaine and her having her sights on Epstein as told by Ghislaine. I think Maxwell is behind all of this and is now going to take others down with her. Maybe this is just the start

Those that breathed a sigh of relief at Epstein's death may be sweating a little now

I think it’s both! So Andrew and Fergie have for sure both been caught up in a political battle in the US to expose Trump for who he is. And this time, it’s Fergie’s turn to suffer the consequences.

So yes, the e-mails being released by the The U.S. House Oversight Committee that they received from the Justice Department on the sex trafficking investigations into Epstein are therefore causing a huge stir. And Ghislaine’s latest testimony, given presumably to try and reduce her sentence, is very pertinent. I agree that Epstein’s hideous legacy is once again causing disquiet among powerful people.

However, what I am referring to is how Buckingham Palace have been handling the fall out.

I think they know by now that public interest in Harry and Meghan’s activities are intense and how Harry has the ability to attract headlines and press attention whatever he does. Many seem to love to hate him! Even more than Andrew! You only have to look at the number of threads on this site devoted to each. There are lots about Andrew but even more about H&M with more posters contributing to the latter, on a more regular basis.

And the UK had the State visit from Trump to manage with a huge trade deal at stake which Mandelsohn’s sacking threatened to disrupt.

So what better to release stories about the reconciliation meeting between Harry and Charles and create some positive deadlines, or at least some controversy, to fill the airwaves prior to Trump’s visit, and divert attention away from the connections that Epstein had with Mandelsohn, Andrew, Fergie and ultimately, Trump, I mean, it was the elephant in the room during the entire state visit. And yet I have to hand it to the Palace, they got away with a triumph!

In all of the papers and on-line news sites during this period you could see one story about Trump, Epstein and Andrew, being replaced by one about Harry and his father, rinse and repeat, Maybe the timing of Harry’s visit was a complete coincidence, but the Palace certainly used it to full effect.

You only have to look at the posters who continually bitch about H&M suddenly quiet and nothing to add to threads about Fergie. Suddenly they dont feel the need to make any comments...looks like they just like to troll 2 people only

This is what confuses me. The argument for why royal weddings are such a good thing is that they bring in money to the country in terms of tourism. But then, when it’s Harry and Megan‘s wedding being discussed the argument switched to ‘It costs us. Which one is it?

I long thought she only received £500,000 pounds in the divorce settlement and thought that was very unfair. So I had a certain sympathy for her. But reading now that she got £12 million plus £500,000 a year I’ve done a complete 180. WTH? She couldn’t manage on that?