Meghan/Harry
 

Good stuff, eh? Charlie Farley wouldn’t take calls from his son (the one he stiffed because he was busy with Camilla). It looks like the Royals were a bunch of “Stiwny” as some Polish people might understand.

As for Meghan, what did she expect? Hadn’t she been briefed by Harry?

What a larf.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

My opinion is that she's a social climber that will do whatever it takes.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I thought the Washington Post from six years ago summed it up quite neatly...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Breakfast TV is banal at the best of times but it was off the Richter scale this morning. Plenty of things happening in the world that are more important than some publicity hunting Z-lister and the Harry formerly known as prince.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

The Duchess of Netflix and Hazza, should be hauled in to the Tower of London, should they ever return to the UK. I have zero sympathy for her and he’s a stupid fool for marrying this Z-list bint.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

OK,

For a long time, I have felt that Meghan is being treated astonishingly badly by the press. I still feel that. After all, compare her treatment to that of Kate.

That said, if they are going to leave the royal family, they should leave it totally. We shouldn't be subjected to all these stories about how things are run, and they shouldn't be doing interviews about it.

Enough.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Let's face it, the Royals have history of screwing up lives and failed marriages. Its a skill they have.
As for the Royal that worried about the colour of the baby, no prizes for guessing which Duke of a Scottish city that would have been...

The tabloids and people that buy and believe that crap are equally to blame. Victims must be bullied till they break, except this one didn't, she answered back. Remember all the tabloid promises after Diana...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

He does have form. :erm:

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Harry says otherwise

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

So has Kate behaved anywhere near the way Meghan has? Did Kate chase after US interviews?

---------- Post added at 13:50 ---------- Previous post was at 13:46 ----------

Simply asking the question is NOT racist. If you're asking in an advisory capacity, then you will be asking on the basis on what others might say. Enough non-white people went on about supporting her, because she is seen as being non-white. Now that is definitely racist, supporting somebody on the basis of colour.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Is there a linkable source?

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Why did the question need to be asked at all?

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

She didn't, but then she didn't have the press attacking her regularly for the various things her family said or did. That she apparently wasn't speaking to her father should have been a private issue, yet it was front page news for months. That is wrong, and is one reason I am glad she sued the Daily Mail and won.

Don't get me wrong, I think she is probably a diva, and it's entirely possible she is behind this,

Personally, I think Harry has not been a happy member of the family for a long time (possibly since his mother died), and I think he was looking for a way out. Megan is possibly that way out.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

How could it have been a private matter? It would've become self-apparent in time.
Strange that this interview, which was intended to happen long before any of these supposed incidents occurred, breaks privacy in an even bigger way.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I'm talking about the months of headlines a couple of years ago. Note: I don't agree with the interview either. I think it was a mistake, and should not have happened.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Not that I can see the need to ask it, but surely you would ask this of a medical expert and not the couple concerned? :confused:

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I wasnt, I've already said my impression of her

I had no idea she is [supposedly] "coloured", nor do I give a toss (about her at all).

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

:tu:

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I wonder if it was Charles? The Queen has previously said mildly disparaging things about him and obviously doesn't think he'd be a good King as she's hanging on for as long as possible despite her old age.

Harry said in the interview that his 'father'* stopped taking his calls for a time.

* It's widely suspected that James Hewitt is actually his father.

Let's not forget that many people of colour are against mixed marriages too and, the darker a persons skin is often viewed as inferior to those with lighter skin.

I hope that this results in the royal family being severely trimmed down so that we don't have to fund the hangers on. The central royal family aid with tourism and the Queen is an important part of the democratic process too as she is unelected, so doesn't have to pander to the wishes of the electorate and can refuse to sign a bill that would make it become law. She is the final safeguard if an extremist Government was ever voted in.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

http://www.themortonreport.com/celeb...rry-look-like/

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I must admit that I didn't know that she wasn't white until it was pointed out.

It was a daft question anyway, as a white looking woman who has a child to a white man is obviously going to have an even lighter coloured child. I've heard of gene throwbacks where a white couple have had a black baby and vice versa, but this is extremely, extremely rare and in some cases could have been used as an excuse because the woman had had sex outside the marriage.

---------- Post added at 18:01 ---------- Previous post was at 17:50 ----------

Interesting. Can they really tell when a child was conceived so accurately though? It's not always exactly a nine months term that a child is carried.

It may not be Hewitts child, it could be another mans. Perhaps Diana wasn't being truthful about the details of the affair or even had a one night stand before an actual affair started. Alternatively, Harry could indeed be Charles's and just have different looks & personality to his father.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

:D

They're a couple of spoiled brats imo, they have a privileged lifestyle, and will probably make millions by selling themselves to these chat shows with overpaid hosts, they should think themselves damned lucky that they're not one of the thousands of unfortunate people with no jobs, who have been affected terribly this past year due to the pandemic.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

They are also Hypocrites because didn't Harry foolishly wear a Nazi Uniform, whilst attending a party and got snapped by the press when he did so?

Didn't he refer to one of his soldier pals as his "paki friend." ?

Shoe fits, Harry Markle/Meagain...

---------- Post added at 19:14 ---------- Previous post was at 19:11 ----------

:rofl:

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

True, it can vary by a couple of weeks either way (more for a premie), but it’s rarely negative two years... ;)

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I meant that Harry might not have necessarily been conceived during Christmas 1983 when Diana was surrounded by the royal family. It could have happened a few weeks before or after.

Perhaps Charles knows or suspects and this is why he felt able to refuse to take calls from him and finds his behaviour more annoying than if it were his own flesh & blood?

If he isn't the biological son of Charles, Harry has a mother who was only royal by marriage, which was subsequently revoked and his father wasn't anything to do with the royal family, yet he's been given all the privilage of a prince- even more galling for the family that, after doing this for Harry, rightly or wrongly, he has caused embarrassing issues for them.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

If only I could afford to buy outright or pay the mortgage on a $10million home after being financially cut off by my family. He wouldn't know hardship if it came and kicked him in the you know what's.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

It's not all rosy for the royal family though, the Queen finds it hard to pay her fuel bills. Perhaps we should organise a Cableforum funding page, we don't want to reduce her to having to claim Pension Credit:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...e-2088179.html

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Helluva lot of "what ifs" there, Richard - have you thought of taking up writing fiction, or being the Royal Correspondent for the Express or Mail?

Your initial premise was Hewitt was the father, but they didn’t meet until two years after Harry was born (according to multiple sources, including Hewitt)...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

People can lie to suit what they want other people to think, which may or may not be the case, i'm obviously not privvy to that information so can only speculate.

Just to throw something else into the mix, take a look at post #9 and the other link here!

https://www.forumbox.co.uk/forum/thr...-pat/?pageNo=1

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...e-concert.html

I'd put money on Harry not being Charles son, but without a DNA test (which they'd never do), nobody will ever know for sure. I'm surprised the press haven't got someone to surreptitiously obtain the DNA of the men involved- would be a real scoop for them and may allow the palace to rid themselves of Harry, whilst degenerating the reputation of his late mother.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

56% are unsympathetic towards the Markles in a snap YouGov poll tonight.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Exactly, name names or it didn't happen

That's something else that's odd, both her husband and father in law were treated for mental health issues and her brother in law and husband run a charity based on mental health but apparently she was offered no help, doesn't add up for me

It's hilarious when he says he left the country like anyone else would have, man of the people, common touch etc

---------- Post added at 00:54 ---------- Previous post was at 00:52 ----------

But he doesn't have the royal gene of going from teenage heart throb to late middle aged bald man almost overnight

---------- Post added at 00:55 ---------- Previous post was at 00:54 ----------

Surprised it isn't higher tbh

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Surprised the UK media entertain them.

Oh yes. Clickbait. Whip up the public into a frenzy and charge for clicks.

Money for old rope for the media here.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Hardship comes in all sorts of ways.

When you are only a child and you lose your mum and have to cope with it whilst living your life surrounded by the media prying in then I can understand it is hard.


I think Harry could see history beginning to repeat itself with his family being tormented by the press.


He made the decision to protect his family.



At no point did they say they wanted to abandon their royal duties....just take a step back like many other royals do.
Instead they were seen as traitors and the Royal institution decided to take away everything and distance themselves from them.


Harry and Meghan did the right thing. Imagine being tormented by the media since you've been born and the constant abuse.

They decided to step away from that and are now exploring new opportunities. What they decide to do is up to them.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Maybe I should have said he wouldn't know financial hardship.

Anyway, if they truly wanted to step out of the limelight then they could have done so but I don't think either of them could contemplate life without the media circus around them because I feel they're both getting a bit lost in their dillusions of self importance. If you court a life in the media (gutter press??) then don't be surprised if/when it turns on you because at the end of the day you're only there to sell column inches.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

:tu:

---------- Post added at 09:13 ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 ----------

Got a link?

---------- Post added at 09:16 ---------- Previous post was at 09:13 ----------

I do not pay attention to the gutter press because they always have an axe to grind.In fact I don't believe that the British Press/media is to be altogether truthful and neutral and hasn't been for the last 30 years.You need to stop reading the rubbish and speculation they spout or your brain will rot away.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

it's a bit like a modern day Stones Vs The Beatles, Nirvana Vs Pearl Jam, Blur Vs Oasis,

The Racist Vs The Bully

the media is building up the hype for a massive grudge match, let's get ready to rumble, or something

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...fore-seeing-it

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I look forward to this disappearing through lack of interest very quickly, they're not Royal, they no longer (well she never) serve the country. They should be of no interest to the UK.

They are essentially a couple of Beverley Hills B-listers.

There was nothing said in that interview that was in any way controversial, the media can try and spin it but there's nothing there to spin. She's a grifter, and has managed to get a payday for not very much content.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

This.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I am surprised how many people want to pick sides in a family/institutional squabble they know little about. I don't think the interview with Oprah was a good idea as it comes across as playing the celebrity game, if they wanted to be taken more seriously in the U.K they should have done it with a U.K interviewer from BBC or Sky. This was designed for a U.S audience.

That said I also don't give much benefit of the doubt to the institution itself especially when see the stuff around Prince Andrew.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

She should be applauded for being able to achieve such fame and fortune. In football we have the WAGs. A host of z list no marks result from Love Island.

It's a capitalist society. Give people what they want and you'll get coin.

I hope the British press leave them alone. For their, and our, benefit. I suspect however we will get more pointless stories because it sells the rags and saves them from having to do proper journalism.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Snowflake of the Week!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/polit...rtan-ntp-feeds

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Piers getting people talking about Piers. He's a parody of himself, a pantomime villain. Vince McMahon probably writes his storylines.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Good as l bet that dented his mighty ego...:tu:

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I don't particularly agree with Piers muchly, but his response to this is how it should be, towards Meagain, her father says she has ghosted her side of the family, moans constantly about how her life should be private but then goes and gets interviewed by a major Billionaire talk host that is broadcast around the World.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Well if the press are going to intrude on her life in any case and tell lies about her she might as well coin it in while setting the record straight and enjoy a life of luxury.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

What they are actually asking for...

But, newspaper editors who have built a business model on invasive, often made up, stories about celebrities aren’t going to be happy with that, are they?

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

She did engage in royal duties including a tour of Australia so it's incorrect to say she never served the UK.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Yup, facebook is now full of people almost arguing and falling out over which side they support.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

what a sad world we live in.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Anyway this whole spat is just make few quit and get back at the royal family for not allowing them to develop their “Sussex Royal” business brand.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51593708

They didn’t want to be part of the Royal family, but they wanted to trade off the back of it and were quite rightly told to do one..............

Que big family fight, dummies are spat out and here we are.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Lot of assumptions, not backed up by evidence, there...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Piers Morgan gets the boot from itv



https://news.sky.com/story/piers-mor...ments-12241082

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

He went over the line not once but time and time again...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

He's an obnoxious gob shyte, he made the program impossible to watch.
must have been hell working with him.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Just the latest in a long long list of many in his career....

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

He may have already got another job in his sights when he resigned. GB News (Andrew Neill) and News UK (Rupert Murdoch) would doubtless be happy to give him a slot to waffle on about wokery or rant about the royals. I'm sure Nigel Farage quit Reform UK recently for similar reasons.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Personally i hope it's the end of his career and he ends up a road sweeper or toilet cleaner at Glastonbury.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Not often we agree.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

It’s important we hear Piers Morgan's side of the what happened before we jump to conclusions - someone should get his old reporting team at the Mirror to hack his voicemail so we can hear it... ;)

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I'll get the express to make something up:)

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

On The Media Show the other week, the Express said that they are going to change their ways.

Amol Rajan gave some examples that he didn't appear to like and then said "so does this mean that we won't be seeing things like these examples being published again"? The answer was "no".

It should still be on BBC Sounds if anyone wants to listen to it, IIRC it was 3 or 4 weeks ago.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Buck House has commented.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

And? It is blatantly obvious it is an “opinion” piece from my good self.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Much like a corporate response really.

Afterwards it will be something along the lines of 'Important lessons have been learned' blah blah.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

In general terms I think Piers Morgan is a complete dick, but on this subject I’m afraid I’m with the complete dick.

Immediately their friends in the global woke brigade (most of which being multi-millionaires in Beverly Hills) have all rallied around to this “victim”. The woke faction have managed to pin a “racist” badge to it.....job done..........it’s so far removed from racism it’s embarrassing.

Nasal hair! Mine actually, is more of an international issue that them.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Totally agree, the old racist card being pulled out once again.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and acts like a duck - it’s probably a duck...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I bet it's made of copper.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I don't see anything wrong with wondering what the child of two people will look like. I imagine that the families of young couples will wonder who the child will most look like, what colour eyes it will have etc all the time.

If the couple are different colours, this is bound to come into the equation. Of course it does matter in what context this was said, what tone etc.

Often it's not what was said, but what was meant too. An Asian comedian (can't remember which one) once said (when talking seriously) that some lads had racially abused her whilst sitting opposite her on the tube. After they got off, an elderly lady sat next to her said "Take no notice of them love, you can't help being a p**i"! It could be argued that she was being racist too but, despite the clumsiness of an elderly person brought up in a different era, she was actually trying to comfort the comedian.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

a friend of mine (English, white male) married a Chinese lady. I remember when she was pregnant, he told me she was worried what colour the child's skin would be, what shape eyes would be etc, as it could lead to the child being bullied.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

That's what happens when you live near racists.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I don't suppose Morgan is that bothered, he was probably sick of getting up early anyway

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Perfectly understandable, nobody wants their child to have a hard time in life.

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:52 ----------

I think that it was an act of self promotion & a way to get out of any ITV contract to join the new right wing leaning news channel that's due to start.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Nah, he's just an immature has been who can't stand not being loved.

It's rare I agree with Rupert Murdoch who said Morgan's balls were bigger than his brain.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

A minor point of information ... Ofcom rules prevent any UK broadcaster from having a political stance. GBN won’t be right wing because that would be illegal. Piers Morgan might well love to see himself as a sort of British Tucker Carlson but if he wants that, he’s going to have to emigrate and try to get a job on Fox News. Which would be a great outcome for everyone come to think of it.

I think GBN is getting a reputation for being right wing, despite not having launched yet, because it’s being run by Andrew Neil. He certainly has an impressively right-of-centre CV when it comes to print media but let’s not forget he held down a series of influential positions within the BBC for many years so he knows how the broadcast news game is played in this country. He isn’t going to try to emulate Fox or anything close to it. Though the chief benefit to British TV news of Brillo operating in this space is that he doesn’t give metropolitan lefty opinion parrots the easy ride many of his former colleagues often seem to. They’re actually made to defend their positions when they come up against him rather than being allowed to assert their views as self-evident. If that’s what passes for right wing TV journalism then bring it on ...

I’m not convinced Piers Morgan would be a good hire for GBN anyway. I suspect the strategy is to be a serious news provider and a viable competitor to the BBC. Piers Morgan exists just to wind people up.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Piers Morgan would not be a popular choice for FoxNews as he's seen as too anti-gun. He ticks the anti-woke box but not the pro-NRA one.

I very much doubt GBN has the resources to compete with the likes of the BBC on the news front. I think it will have to be more commentary-led.

There is also the forthcoming News UK streaming channel in the pipeline too which could be attractive for Piers Morgan. He would be returning to a past employer.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Don't recall Channel 4 ever being challenged on their apparent left wing stance?

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

They’re very good at sailing close to the wind, that’s for sure ...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Maybe because there isn't one? Just your own bias making everyone else seem 'biased'?

If anything the media in this country is biased towards the status quo, whether that's left or right wing at the time. Probably a self-preservation motivation.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

More fall out from the latest 'woke bomb' . .

Meghan racism row: Society of Editors boss Ian Murray resigns

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56355274

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

I read today that News UK will only be on YouTube for two hours a day, no idea if it's true or not.

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:42 ----------

Apparently, during a BBC News interview with Reeta Chakrabarti, Andrew Neil said that he would be "delighted to speak to Piers Morgan about a new role with GB News".

When she asked him what role he would give him, he said he "wasn't going to use the medium of the BBC to conduct a job offer".

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Suggestion that all this has been orchestrated to take the focus off Prince Andrew:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...box=1615274414

Personally, I think that they left the UK because Andrew kept offering to babysit :D

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Not to much a wake bomb as he said something demonstrably untrue. All anyone had to do was find one racist journalist or headline and they'd proved him wrong which is why it's always dangerous to make statements in absolute terms.

If you can't see the problem then you definitely aren't part of the solution.

It'd be like the society of football fans saying there are no racists football fans. Any group large enough has a minority of racist morons because they are a small proportion of the population as a whole.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

That's not funny

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Or accurate, what ever creepy andy has got up to I doubt it involved pre pubescent children

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Gun for hire is his thing. Or hiring out guns, more likely.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Link

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Written six months ago apparently, but it could have quite easily been a transcript of of the interview.

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

WTF is that inane rambling meant to be, it reads as something aimed at 5 year olds

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

It’s a spoof piece by a satirist, in Private Eye...

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Just like the Oprah interview!

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

aah, now I get it :D

Re: Meghan/Harry
 

Pinched from a meme that's going round facebook. It was a joke, but apologies if you were offended by this.

Re: Meghan/Harry