Meghan Markle in Geneva: The Lost Screen Memorial and Her Call to End Online Child Harm

[YourBreezyPanda]

Meghan Markle travelled solo to Geneva, Switzerland on Sunday 17 May for one of her most significant public appearances to date, the inauguration of the Lost Screen Memorial at Place des Nations, on the eve of the 79th World Health Assembly.

Meghan Markle in Geneva: The Lost Screen Memorial and Her Call to End Online Child Harm

Yes and both are currently in the “narcissistic collapse” of their grandiose and delusional personality disorder…..this is where they tear the place down….

Meghan has entered her Col.Kurtz era…

It’s fine. I had family and close friends who lived in the same neighbourhood as she did and frequented the same ‘favourite’ restaurant and knew her long term boyfriend at that time. She wasn’t famous but acted like it. Yeah she was in Suits but if it’s an American tv show being filmed in Toronto it’s because it costs a lot less and isn’t exactly record breaking. Canadians certainly weren’t in awe or felt like they were around someone famous. Far more famous people around living in Toronto at that time. It was an ensemble cast but she wasn’t the star. No one really knew her from anything before and there were far more famous people in Toronto at that time she hung with or were around.

A fascinating mash up of Undine Spragg and Col.Kurtz - it’s a both fascinating and satisfying to witness her demise in this pantomime - all so self inflicted.

Watching thru my fingers.

they’re desperate to get this security detail as it’s a way they can elevate themselves … it’s all smoke and mirrors, except the world sees straight through it! Pseudo charity support to get faces in papers/on tv along with first class travel/accommodation/expenses for clothes and entourage … occasionally they’ll throw a few crumbs from Archewell … as for the flogging of clothing Meghan wears … what a bloody joke! I can’t stand either of them, but I have to say I’m embarrassed for them! Cringe

That’s a point, never crossed my mind, but it’s exactly the kind of d of stunt pulls on SM.

Do you think she feels good leaving those events? Is her delusional self satisfied? I mean she can’t possibly think speaking on a roundabout is even remotely akin to Catherine’s Italy trip? Does she ever feel silly or deflated or defeated? Have any insight into well that was a failure?

and do you think the royal family C&C and W&C talk about her appearances ? Are they behind palace doors saying…what is she doing now? Fearing her next event or speech?

I'm ready for the collapse. I would
be relieved to see it collapse and this aspect of H and M relationship…this faux “service is universal” and royal touring come to an end. I wouldn’t be happy to hear Meghan or
harry had taken an interest in any charity I was involved in. More like…please not those two.

It’s desperate /obvious almost maniacally frightening to see this.

I wouldn’t be happy to hear Meghan or Harry had taken an interest in any charity I was involved in.

I doubt any reputable charity would touch them now.

I think WellChild is the only charity that (so far) hasn't been negatively affected by its association with one or both of them. That's probably because it's (1) fairly small and (2) UK based, so M doesn't get involved.

I don’t think the RF, at this stage, fear anything. They’ve ve played the long game and it must be deliciously satisfying to be sitting back watching them circling the drain all from their very own efforts.

I agree @Twisterr

Self delusion, narcissism. Look how great I am, it’s all about me. Inability to work with others , lack of empathy. Tone deaf. Jealousy of anyone who is doing a better job or being praised. Inability to tolerate anyone else’s way of thinking or working. Inability to take advice. Manic posting on SM .

All while conveying how very chill they are…

Oh blah de blah... They're not living off our tax money, with their many houses lecturing people and heading charities about things they know nothing about. They're also not housing pedophiles that's for sure.

I read that her speech was, at least in part, plagiarized from an article by Dr Dana Suskind a Paediatrician at the University of Chicago. There are several phrases that are identical.

Here is the archived version
archive.is/zL6Pi

Tell that to the taxpayers in Australia who paid the security costs of the faux royal "tour"

They have also incurred large costs to the UK taxpayer - hasn't the Home Office spent £400,000 in legal fees for Harry's failed attempts to win back full time security + the actual costs of security when he comes to the UK

No, they’re the ones being housed by sex offenders instead.

Thank you for the link.

Funny that.

She worked on the show for seven years and would have dealing with a massive amount of people over that time period.

However, it is hard to find accounts about how horrid she was, apart from stories like these - my cousins friend lives in Toronto and ...

I mean - if she was as bad as they suggest, we could expect quite a few verifiable accounts of poor behavior, no?

1,200 United States school districts are suing Meta. They have documented the behavioral issues that appear in the schools as a result of the predatory, addictive social media platforms that Meta own.

Like tobacco companies in the past, Meta design their products to addict, knowing that if they get the young children/teens, they will have almost life long consumers.

It is a subscription model really, the payment being mental health.

It is extremely hard for individuals or families to fight back. After all they drive the algorithms and own the US congress and Presidency.

Young Molly Russell's family attest to the devastation Meta wrought on their family.

Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, protects itself/himself without conscience or a backward glance.

With all that in mind, anything at all that can raise the profile of any aspect of the battle against these companies, is a benefit to us all.

That includes MM - because love her or hate her, she gets the headlines. If she were not there that day, it would have a poorly attended talk without the headlines.

Her posting a photo of her child is not the same as her child being online.

Which was the issue under discussion.

@MarmaladeorJam and when she rolls them out so the back of their heads can be on an advert for her naff jam offerings? Using them to up her profile and make cash. Nothing more. Cynical and hypocritical.

Truth be known, I don't really care about that as every family does things in their own way.

My post is in response to the thread title - her speech in Geneva and the very real issues that social media create for us as parents, and, for us as a society.

Her profile raised that profile.

After all, the social media companies bury this story in algorithms. So how do you get it out there?

With that in mind, if you put someone like MM in front of a mike, people will talk. Some will talk about their dislike of her, some will talk about her fashion/skin/jewelry etc, some about the royals, some about her kids, some about polo, and some about the issue at hand.

But, the point is - people talk.

This thread is an example of that.

She served them well.

On the contrary, she didn’t serve any of those families well, she raised no profile, because the general discussion was around their (H&M) hypocrisy in their very own public SM space, the only purpose it served was to get Meghan’s face out there.

The analogy of SM being the new tobacco is a false flag, addictions that are poles apart, it’s such an ambiguous comparison and there are plenty of scientists and specialists refuting that dramatic comparison with actual facts.

because the general discussion was around their (H&M) hypocrisy in their very own public SM space

The only conversation here - but if you go other places, that is not the case.

The analogy of SM being the new tobacco is a false flag, addictions that are poles apart, it’s such an ambiguous comparison
Alright - a few links to "actual facts"? I mean. I could well be in a bubble and reading conspiracy theories. It is the nature of the beast and so on.

But, off the top of my head, the EU, 1,200 school districts in the US (so far), the American Psychological Association (APA), British Psychological Society (BPS), Dr. Mark Griffiths (Nottingham Trent University), Stamford Uni, NHI, countless internal whistle blowers have all come to same conclusion- social media is addictive and per the whistle blowers - it is designed to be addictive.

They call it "engagement".

Hence the very big lawsuits, and wins, against Meta, Google, TikTok etc by the EU, by Breathnitt Country Schools in Kentucky a few days ago.

and there are plenty of scientists and specialists refuting that dramatic comparison with actual facts.

Would you mind directing me to them? But, in the meantime I cannot help but wonder why Big Tech is settling these cases rather than go to trial? Do you have any insight?

.

There is no conversations anywhere else! No other country is interested .🤷‍♀️