Harry (formerly known as Prince) and Megan
 

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have arrived at the Invictus Games in the Netherlands, after stopping off to visit the Queen on their way.

It is the first time Prince Harry and Meghan have appeared in Europe in public together since stepping back as senior royals in 2020.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61122854

I've got no problem with the Invictus Games, good thing and something 'our harry' can be commended for seeing as he founded the games.

However, the couple still being named as 'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex' royally (sic) pees me off, as does this:

Needs to make his mind up if he's part of the 'Family' or just another American celebrity on the circuit.

Opinions may vary, and I'm sure others think he (and her) are absolutely brilliant :erm:

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

The legal action is to allow him to pay for the security himself…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60438739

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity...thing-to-know/

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Well the BBC should explain things better then . . . and IMO, he's in more danger from her than anyone with a weapon :D

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

It’s a common problem on the BBC website out of hours and on bank holidays. Junior reporters and disinterested second-line news editors get the crappy shifts. They’re not the best at what they do in the first place, and couple that with their understandable desire not to be in the office on the weekend and this is what you end up with.

That article is written by someone who has no specialism in royal reporting and no evidence of having been assigned to follow any of the other stories that have been referenced. In fact a good chunk of it is simply hyperlinks to other BBC news stories which the hack in question clearly hasn’t bothered to read properly. Plus there’s that ever-present ‘here’s what we want you to think’ sidebar the BBC always shoves right into the middle of the copy, here written by a member of their foreign reporting staff who thinks she’s spotted her chance to show how great she is at writing royal puff pieces (she isn’t).

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

That is who they are (still) so not sure why it would bother anyone. :confused:

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I hate it that they are dragging the good name of my county through the dirt. Those titles should be removed from them.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

:tu:

---------- Post added at 09:00 ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 ----------

No they are not. They haven't robbed,murdered or cheated anyone unlike some members of the family.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I like Harry and Megan, i have no time for Charles and his bit on the side, William and Kate are utterly cringeworthy.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

They lie about everything and I don't like that, so in that respect they are dragging their family and by extension the country through the gutter, I'm no particular fan of their family btw but the lies seem to come from a very dark place, I suspect he's a very unhappy boy

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Um ... what :confused:

---------- Post added at 19:54 ---------- Previous post was at 19:53 ----------

How exactly are they doing that ?

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

You do like it or something?

By lying, classics like the Arch Bishop of Canterbury marrying them in secret, Archie not being allowed to be a prince 'coz he's black, that kind of nonsense

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

You need to stop reading the crappy newspapers that love to write any rubbish about them just to make cash.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I haven't read a newspaper or anything else that isn't in very large print for a couple of years. Are you saying they were married in secret after all and Archie really isn't allowed to be a Prince because he's black?

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Do I like what :confused:

I cannot make any sense of your babbling nonsense atm.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

No I'm saying stop reading crappy news outlets.

---------- Post added at 08:36 ---------- Previous post was at 08:35 ----------

:tu:

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

You mean the interview with Oprah was completely faked and nobody noticed or complained?:shocked:
:rolleyes:

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

How about saying it to someone who actually does then, they're full of it, "my family cut me off when we announced we were leaving", turns out his dad gave him 7 million quid was another classic

---------- Post added at 14:42 ---------- Previous post was at 14:40 ----------

Oh yes it's all there in thar awful interview, wonder if Operah still talks to them after that car crash.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I still don't understand all the shock & horror about the remark about what colour the baby would be.

If two people of different colours have a child together, it's perfectly natural to wonder what colour it will be- there's nothing racist about it.

In my opinion it's no different to if two black people had a baby and people wondering if the child will look more like their mother or their father.

If two white people had a baby, it's only natural to wonder if the child will have its mother or fathers eye colour, hair colour etc.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

And some of us don't care.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

It's part of the widespread relentless anti-white racism, so people SHOULD care.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Is it? I thought it was the media trying to drive an imaginary wedge between Harry and his brother and rest of the family. If any of you knew me you would know that I've been shouting about racism ALL my life. What I don't care about anymore is the false narrative set up to indicate racism in the Royal Family.Some of the media headlines and articles about Harry and Meghan have been truly horrendous and I just don't read any of their crap anymore.It's the media that have set up this situation.Now Harry is becoming a media darling again until the said media want to sell news during a slump in sales. That's why I have ceased to care what the newspapers report because they are no longer bastions of any kind of truth.

Anyway just what is anti-white racism?

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

"anti-white racism" is the latest "woke" or "politically correct" and "critical race theory" - a meaningless statement used to provoke reactions…

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

The media? Not when we're talking about things said by THEM in a TV interview.:rolleyes:

The relentless implication by THEM is that everybody was racist towards her. The implication being that the comment about the potential colour of their baby was inherently racist. Why else mention it in the first place?
So there are no meetings with FORCED attendance about "white privilege"? No annual White Privilege conferences occurring for more than 20 years? No enforced meetings(eg Seattle council) where white people are expected to have to give up jobs, friends, property etc, and even put themselves in physical and emotional danger.

Not to mention the TV presenter who talked about non-melanated(ie white) people being annihilated(his words). When it was pointed out that included Jews, he had to apologise to them, but not to the rest of us. He is of course, still in his job. Those are the sort of things being discussed by people in private.
Try Googling "White Privilege". Only 2 BILLION references. Hardly a figment of the imagination.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I refuse to be provoked in that case.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Any supposed negativity from the press has arisen from HER actions, not the other way around. Her actions have hardly been the sort to win people around, apart that is from the woke crowd. Eg The Oprah interview, which seems to have been planned long BEFORE they left. How many celebs did she invite to the wedding that actually knew her? EG Meeting Oprah only once before.

She desperately wants to build a platform for HERSELF(ie not including Harry). How many people would be aware of her, if it wasn't for the marriage?

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Remember Diana? She became a target when she married Charles.It's about selling newspapers and nothing else.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I think it's a critical description of quotas or targets that companies and large organisations sometimes set on things like the composition of the board of directors, senior management team, etc.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

In the same way that this thread has been created to provoke reactions? Daily Mail reader click bait ..

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

ooooh look, I'm now a troll?

They're an 'odd couple', not even half as popular as Oscar & Felix were, no matter how much they (she) plays the media for attention.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

No more so than many threads created on the forum. ;)

I recall this one for instance, where some member asked about closing accounts.
Clearly done to provoke reactions when they actually had no intention of closing theirs :angel:

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Good to see that my posted opinion on an ex prince and his dysfunctional media starlet wife has, in 3 pages, descended into the usual tripe regarding wokeism, racism and trolling.

Free speech seems so costly nowadays doesn't it :D

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Prince and Princess of Sussex is Sussex in America by any chance.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sussex,_New_Jersey :D

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

South Park has gone and done it, with tonight's episode titled 'The World-Wide Privacy Tour' on the comedy channel at 10pm. Laying right into them both calling the couple the 'Dumb prince and his stupid wife'.

It's brutal, but so funny and have to say spot on.

Worth a mention anyway. :)

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Saw clip of it, even the U.S is growing tired of them.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

And the UK grows tired of all the Royal Family. Time they got proper jobs.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

The UK grows tired of spoilt bratt and his puppet master, not "all" of the family.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I agree

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

:tu:

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I suppose you could also say there are those who have been convinced that feeling marginalised in our community is worth promoting. I think any group that makes these sort of unfounded statements should really be ridiculed.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

If you’re thinking that he’s saying what you think he’s saying, then I suggest you need to open your eyes and your mind to what you think he’s saying…

btw, you were responding to a ten month old post… ;)

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I do not feel marginalised by anyone but the present Tory government.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

South Park is still amazing when they have a target in their crosshairs and know what they want to say. They can still do pretty brutal satire in a way few television shows seem to do now.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I have never watched South Park, but I've seen a clip of this, quite funny and pretty spot on.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

'Meghan 'has been upset and overwhelmed by her depiction on South Park for days' after irreverent US cartoon described Duchess as 'sorority girl, actress, influencer, victim' in scathing episode' - Daily Mail

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ys-source.html

So good to hear. But she's already looking into see if she can sue South Park. No surprise there. They can certainly dish it out but they can't take it themselves. What a pair of saddos.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I wonder if the DMs sources are in their own tiny heads.

I don't know either of these people none of us do, just what the media are telling us to think.

However as mentioned all the Royal Family are a tremendous waste of our time and money. They all need to be down the food banks helpling out, along with the tabloid scribes who waste their time making things up, and people that waste their time reading /obsessing about it.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

The "source", as is often the case, is another publication. They are just reporting on an article in the US version of "The Spectator". If it's incorrect, then it's "The Spectator" that has got in wrong.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Good reporters/media validate sources, not just cut/paste…

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

How many publications are there around the world? Hundreds? Are they each expected to validate sources? Just because people disagree with a particular source, doesn't automatically mean the story isn't true.
This story does seem odd in that they would unlikely to get anywhere with such a case.Hasn't stopped them before though.


Be wary of what "approved" publications are NOT reporting or at the very least not giving the full picture. Eg Giving the impression that X is a unique UK problem, when it's a lot wider, ie EU and beyond.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Chris has worked in the profession and could probably contribute to the source validation point from a newspaper's perspective.

With diminished budgets and the need to publish quickly, I imagine more short cuts are taken these days than 30 years ago, for example, when the Internet was in its infancy,

I'm not sure what an approved publication is.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

What would you like me to build with your straw man?

We're not talking about "hundreds of publications", we are specifically discussing the Daily Mail (which has nearly 6000 employees), the biggest selling (not free) newspaper in the UK.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

You're a funny man. I fear you've been reading too much of The Big Book Of Conservative Scare Stories by 30p Lee, but I suppose you've got to get your material frome somewhere.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Tbf to 30p Lee his dinner did cost him 30p, okay the ingredients cost £54 but he clained £53.70 back on expenses for it

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

She's denied they're suing South Park.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64730600

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

You mean people were getting outraged about something that didn't actually happen?

Snowflakes... ;)

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

The papers of all colours really don't like young Harry do they? Particularly since he's taken them to court over phone hacking. Strange....

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Does anyone actually like the annoying whinger. ;)

Apparently even the US has grown tired of him and his boss. :sleep:

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

We want our privaceh!

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1686090803

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

I have a great deal of sympathy for his situation. I loathed my father’s next wife with a passion when I was a teenager because whenever we went on holidays etc with his new family everyone assumed she was my mother and that enraged me. And that isn’t a fraction of everything else Harry has been through (I actually lived with my actual, wonderful mum until I got married, and she only passed away last year).

*However* … he has also had every advantage in life, the opportunity to become his own man in the army, a brother and cousins who understand where he’s coming from and unlimited access to whatever counselling or mental health support he could ever have needed. He has agency, and he is using it, for certain against the advice of many members of his family, to pursue this present action and also in his choices of behaviour, how and when he speaks and what he writes.

We are all the product of our past, but our past continues to be written with every single passing day. It isn’t just one arbitrary period of our lives, no matter how traumatic.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Harry has had his hand held all his life, special treatment because of who he is, now he’s found last two days questioning, distressing, what a shame.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Don't think he had his hand held in Afghanistan.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Yeah, he did, even there.

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Nice of the BBC to give the Prince the recognition he deserves by sending their Royal correspondent. It was apparent from the hyperbole throughout and being extremely light on actual detail. Good to know he had a well tailored suit though.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65838056

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

Harry just doesn't know how to keep his mouth shut when it comes to private family business.

Maybe he thinks that this is the way to do things after his mother did the Panorama interview??

Now saying that his father won't speak to him, that he wants reconciliation as he doesn't know how much time he has left (I assume this is in connection with his cancer diagnosis) and, because he lost his case to obtain taxpayer funded security, that he cannot ever bring his wife & children to the UK.

Maybe paying for it out of his personal wealth so that his father can see his grandchildren would help??

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/pri...es-2025-05-02/

Re: Harry (formerly known as prince) and Megan
 

You missed out the important bit that 'HE' has 'forgiven them'.. Goes to show just how deluded he is.

Re: Harry (formerly known as Prince) and Megan
 

Spoiled Brat, under the thumb.