Ham pr disasters 64! …….Prince Charming…Prince Charming…..ridicule is nothing to be scared of ! …..

[jeffgoldblum]

A lack of humour and self reflection is not helping.

Oh and thanks for new thread @jeffgoldblum

And a man who doesn't give AF about the truth, and stated so at the start of the book.

And then proved it in his testimony in the ANL case.

Not going to to lie, am not a fan of this type of “reporting”. I’d much rather we stick to dissecting what comes out of the HaM camp PR-wise.. just to clarify, that’s not a dig at you. I just don’t like the large market out there for salacious shit. My preference is exploring what they say themselves. Or good, thorough, investigative journalism (which seems to be rather lacking regarding HaM - most MSM journalists are pissing me off with how utterly useless they are at pulling apart many different fragments of the HaM story).

The young children are growing up and soon won’t be quite so cute or pliant

Me too.

Or good, thorough, investigative journalism (which seems to be rather lacking regarding HaM - most MSM journalists are pissing me off with how utterly useless they are at pulling apart many different fragments of the HaM story).

Good quality investigative journalism seems to have disappeared from MSM much more generally

So true, it’s bloody depressing.

Well, a lot to catch up on, compadres! Keep going, Jeff, you're doing grand!

And if she was vetted, and they knew stuff, and he still insisted on marrying her?

What exactly would she have had to have done that was so wrong that the UK HoS could veto her marriage to a man in his 30s?

Which of those things she was alleged to have done could the RF cite legally (and morally, where third parties were involved) as grounds for a veto? Even if any of them were badbadbad, as opposed to youthful dodgy - well, QE2, head of the CofE, forgiveness and all that...

And trying to stop a grown man from marrying the woman he had settled on is too close to coersive control.

I don't see what the RF could have done except buy her off, and I don't think that would have been much of a long-term strategy.

Urrgghhh Harry looks like he's a dirty old perv in that pic .

The fact that the MSM are being so useless in reporting on HAM issues means we have to go to other sources for info, however dodgy they are.

I would love just one newspaper to ask the questions:

1. Have the Met asked MM to provide the name of the Met officer who showed her the letter and provided the "keep quiet" advice in 2019

1. If not, why not

1. If so, what was her response

But no, instead we get meta-reporting on how the situation is being reported.

And this serious stuff. It is no longer about lip gloss and tights.

Typo edits

There's been so much water under the Sussex bridge over the years - remember Meghan at the launch of the TV show had a party for the Tiglets - the young teens she had cultivated for 10 years. You forget so much of it. Getting money out of teenagers 🙄

Absolutely re what most of us want the media to ask - really simple, obvious flipping questions!

🤣

Many thanks everyone for your thanks !!( is that a thing?) , I missed the last of the previous thread…I see we had incomers …without wishing to sound trite …..I’m really proud of the way everyone ignored or carried on ! …❤️

I have a little acrylic silhouette that I keep on top of the wall mounted case for the tower of London poppy that our daughter gave us. It is there all of the time, it is there because I choose to remember my Father who wore that uniform and helmet. It is there year round because I want to honour him year round.

Or slap a bystander across the face, hard, for no reason, with his bodyguards protecting him from any negative reaction from the victim.

The few ‘fans’ were probably all staged, just like his and M’s ‘keynote addresses’ in privately hired hotel reception rooms and the Nottingham mini-crowd were staged. He called the dissolute Sun to come and photograph him today, after all. He always has to ruin everything.

I notice he wasn’t wearing his knighthood cross round his neck like he usually does, the one from QEII for services to the monarchy. He loves wearing that birthday bling from ‘his grandmother’. I hope he chose not to wear it, but it’s more likely he’s lost it while pissed.

All the Windsor men age like milk 🤢

I'm not so sure about this.

Abortion was legal and widely available in the US at the time these supposed events took place. IMHO M would have chosen to terminate a pregnancy, she had her life plan, and an early marriage and a baby were not part of those plans.

As far as a 'sealed annulment' I've never heard of an annulment or a divorce being 'sealed', they're public records. Sometimes the financial and child arrangements aren't public records, but the final decree is. But I suppose it could be a possibility. Annulment is pretty specific as to the grounds; lack of consent, duress, prohibited marriage (bigamy, incest), or an underage marriage. M was 18 but I suppose her groom may not have been. This is all supposing it's true, which I doubt. Saying it was 'sealed' in the article would 'explain' why there was no record if someone went 'snooping' for it.

And the allegation that this child was never 'official', ie registered at birth is pretty suspect to me, too. It's pretty hard to do anything without a birth certificate in the US. And birth certificates are done in the hospital here. The nurse fills it out and the parent signs it. The hospital sends it off to the registrar. If this putative child exists and was born in a hospital, the birth would have been registered. And I highly doubt that an 18 year old primigravida in the US would give birth at home, especially back in the '90s. Home births are pretty rare in the US as it is. I put the 'not registered' in the same category as the 'sealed annulment'. A good reason why a 'snoop' wouldn't find anything.

On a scale of 1 - 10 with 1 being 'no way' and 10 being 'absolutely true', I'd give this a 3.

I think they should have insisted that there was a path to becoming a full time working Royal which included the honeymoon period 12-18 months getting to know each other away from the press and enjoying the start of the marriage (precedent - QEII in Malta, Kate in Anglesey)

So just a few of the main big Royal annual events during that time.

Then after 12 months - a few smaller patronages introduced.

Then after the first 18 months the decision whether to commit to full time royal duties or go the Zara Mike / Beatrice Edo / Eugenie Jack route and make commercial choices.

That 18 months gives a new royal spouse the chance to experience the annual cycle - you will always be at the Cenotaph in Nov, always at the Trooping of the Colours, always available for Royal Ascot etc etc

No accepting freebies from companies trying to buy exposure, no talking politics, walking the very fine line between celebrity and public servant. Etc etc.

I think they’d got complacent with how drama free Kate and her family were and assumed that they’d cracked the new spouse system.

@Starryfifty just saw your question about security on your last thread. I was just refering to the private security they pay for, I don't think they have police protection!

Should be *referring above sorry!

So they have an arrangement with The Sun. Can we assume that he was paid for the tip off at the rememberance service? And surely when out to lunch a couple weeks ago? It's really pathetic and seems to be their main source of income.

Imagine making rememberance about yourselves, and both profiting and self agrandizing from it, with the Chris Baron Smith account calling him the people's prince. H seems to think he is the only person on Earth who is capable of shaking hands. It's truly mystifying.

People talk to each other at the parade. The camaraderie is a very big part of being there. Had he gone and not mixed with people he’d have been criticised just as he’s being criticised now for mixing.

Some of the comments we’ve seen here regarding him yesterday have really scraped the bottom of the barrel and have been a perfect example of a race to the bottom.