As ever, WLM, PR disasters continued

[AtIusvue]

Online, people are pointing out that a very expensive cashmere jumper that Meg wore on suits, also made its way to her wardrobe

It’s been nothing but PR disasters of late.

What I have noticed which is curious - is that the UK tabloids are not running with P6 story about the dress. Just like they avoided talking about the NY car chase. They only reported on the media frenzy. But, we know Harry sent out some sort of memo not to publish photos etc. None of the UK press did. Now Meg has acknowledged the stolen dress story and released an official refute ….and none of the UK press are even reporting on that?

That’s weird. They will literally print any old Meg story to get clicks…..but not this one???

The articles on this issue are mainly American.

Those poor people paid £200 to hear the same old script, ROFL at the Hilton, Toronto. He had nothing to say about the housing crisis in Canada other than the insightful ‘ I don’t like living in a city’. No wonder he needs Meghan, the puppet master with him 24/7. He really is as thick as mince.

I think we can infer from that that he still considers himself a working royal and not a private citizen.

I’d like to know who the idiot was who booked him in the first place. That’s someone who is in the wrong job. Who on earth sits down to book speakers for a real estate event and thinks, ‘I know! Prince Harry knows all about this game, let’s get him in!’

What Harry knows about property would fit in your ear. It’s like going to a talk about astro-physics that turns out to be given by someone who once watched a Brian Cox programme halfway through and announces they don’t like science at the start of their speech.

Maybe he’s been watching too many episodes of Modern Family and sees himself as a bit of a Phil Dunphy (who would have been excellent at this gig, despite being a fictional character).

He doesn’t get it, does he?

If Vancouver Island wasnt remote enough - why the hell did he buy in Montecito?

Guess we know who actually wanted that move and that house.

He doesn't allow his dog to be photographed? Yet he allows his children to be used to promote his wife's runny spread?

@CurlewKate you don't think H&M will lose their titles because of your own dislike of William, you constantly call him weak. If it's true William was the driver behind Andrew's loss of titles, then really, all bets are off. I can definitely see changes afoot! IMO it will be a loss of HRH, Archie & Lilibet will lose Prince/cess and go back to Lord & Lady and Harry's Dukedom will be only for his lifetime.

I can see how republicans might be scared of a slimmed down monarchy. They can never offer any positive, different (to every other shitty republic) future model or any costings for an elected head of state. Their movement relies on complaining about the RF and hoping this cultivates support. It focuses entirely on the negative. And goodness knows the RF has supplied plenty of ammunition! If they reform from within in a meaningful way, then they have a better chance of withstanding the future slings and arrows. It’s clear that the constant attacks on William and Catherine are fueled by fear they may actually make changes that allow the RF to, how shall I put it, not only survive but to thrive (thanks, Meghan).

@Indianrollerbird I don’t think either France or Ireland,for example, could be described as “shitty republics! And my desire for a republic rather than a monarchy is based largely on the fact that I think people shouldn’t be ruled by someone simply there by accident of birth. We should be citizens not subjects. And no, I don’t know exactly how it would work. But it works well in many other countries-why not here? I do value your apparent ability to read my mind, by the way. Could you tell me where I put a pair of small diamond earrings when I took them out last Saturday night?

I don’t think W will single them out , I think the York sisters will also lose their titles so it will only be the Monarch ( W) and his DC and then only George’s DC will be HRH .
It won’t actually be that difficult ; Anne wisely chose not to give her DC titles and Edward’s don’t use their Prince/ Princess titles and show no inclination to.
Prince Richard ( DoG) Prince Michael , Prince Edward ( DoK) and Princess Alexandra are all very elderly so titles will die naturally.

Has anyone watched the Christmas WLM ? I haven’t but read a bit and am wondering if she ever calls Harry by his name ??

Everyone is where they are by accident of birth. Including the big money men who end up having the resources and connections to become heads of state, and/or are the drivers behind getting their puppet of choice into the top spot. I think I would rather have a benevolent royal in a fairly harmless role, than yet another elected psychopath on a 5 year mission to ensure their security and speaking gigs keep rolling on for the remainder of their days. We are perfectly free citizens in the UK, the RF aren’t “subjecting” us. Being a “subject” is state of mind that seems to rile republicans.

Mostly I have to read your mind because you don’t bother answering direct questions. No doubt for complicated reasons of your own.

I couldn’t say where you left your earrings. Here’s a tip, I keep a little jewellery dish in every room, so there’s somewhere safe to discard them.

It’s reductive and dehumanising. I bet she wouldn’t tolerate being referred to as ‘M’.

@CurlewKate I don't think H&M will lose their titles in their lifetime as I said above , but for your house , I might venture a fiver. (amount owing to me not being a betting woman rather than a comment on your house) 😂

Re the earrings , I lost a pair of earrings once for months. Inexplicably they turned up in a side pocket of my wash bag - I hadn't been away and strong drink had not been taken. In my case though, they were cubic zirconia so I suspect they weren't on St Anthony's priority list.

It reminds of Augusta Elton calling her husband ‘Mr E’ in Emma 🤣

She never does, and it is protocol to refer to him by his title when speaking to the media about him. She likes people to use her courtesy title but discards his.

I agree that Charles doesn’t seem to have much of a backbone and can be weak willed, but I really don’t think that’s the case with William.

He’s the one who has completely shut Harry out and has shown zero interest in reconciliation. There was also plenty of talk that he was the driving force behind stripping Andrew of his titles and pushing him out of Royal Lodge. Apparently William had to pressure Charles into taking action and was described as being “ruthless” for it.

I wonder how much he was paid for that drivel . Vancouver Island wasn’t remote enough so he moved to Montecito??
He really does still see himself as a working Royal doesn’t he ?

@IndianrollerbirdIf you ask me a direct question before 10.00 I guarantee to answer it.

I asked you one a few days ago. Can’t remember if it was this thread or another. You had commented that taking the Sussex titles would be a mistake for the RF because it would generate bad press. I asked you why you, a republican, would care that the RF was receiving bad press on this particular matter. So, why do you care?

I think there may be a huge restructure, my prediction going forward will be only working royals with any form of title

I'm not sure it will be quite as swingeing as this - after all they move in circles where many others have titles.

I do think there will be changes to make it much clearer who is or is not a working royal, e.g. keeping HRH for working royals. Prince/princess possibly the same?

I don't think the Sussexes will lose their titles but will lose HRH, as will the Yorks.

@CurlewKate It was on the Maghan suing thread. You said:

"I just think that they are gong to sink without trace, but if William does anything like taking away their titles they will just get more publicity."

Presumably the Sussexes getting more publicity is a headache for the RF and William in particular. Surely the royals in difficulty/further family squabbles is what the republicans want to see. So my question is, why do you care if they get more publicity?

Ah, right. You’re right, I don’t care. But I am interested in the whole situation, and in why people act as they do. It puzzles me that so many of the posters most supportive of the Wales’s are keen for the Sussexes to lose their titles unilaterally when it seems to me that would not be a good move. I’m not emotionally invested in any of this- I’m just fascinated by it in the same way I’m interested in, say, the manoevres of the Tudor Court.

I think @CurlewKate it’s because H and M are so blatantly monetising their titles and despite the Sandringham agreement, still using HRH . If they are so confident in their own abilities surely they don’t need titles especially in the US .
I also feel the same about the York sisters who shamelessly trade on their HRH.

But the context of the discussion on that thread (mine anyway) was that they would not lose their titles unilaterally. They would lose them along with everyone else, as per @BigWillyLittleTodger 's post above - as part and parcel of a wholesale slimming down/wholesale removal/not granting of new titles. Yet your response on that and this thread is that you bet the Sussexes won't lose their titles.

So if the Sussexes are to lose their titles along with everyone else, what's the problem?

Absolutely. I see no reason why the Sussexes should keep their titles. Ditto the Yorks, who are in my opinion the more egregious because they appear to be monetizing their titles to unsavory foreign powers, not just in an attempt to sell jam. I’m just interested in whether they will, and if not, what will happen next.

No problem at all. I thought I had made that clear! I just don’t think the wholesale clear out will happen.