MEGXIT - Prince Harry, Meghan move to Canada 🇨🇦
- Thread starter spaminator
- Start date
Re: megxit
The liberals and Remoaners have blamed Brexit for a lot of things. Now they are even blaming it for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moving to Canada...
Megxit was not driven by racism
Why are liberals so determined to turn the princess into a victim?
Tom Slater
Deputy Editor
10th January 2020
Spiked
First they said Brexit was caused by racism. Now they’re saying Megxit was caused by racism.
By ‘they’, I mean the liberal-left commentariat, the people who hate Brexit, hate ordinary people, and have for some reason grown to love our departing royals, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
This past 24 hours they have closed ranks around the couple – who announced yesterday that they plan to keep their royal titles (and most of their royal income) but leave behind their royal duties – like some woke version of the Queen’s Guard.
They have chastised anyone outraged by the staggering entitlement shown by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have essentially said that they want the status but none of the responsibilities of monarchy. They insist that the poor couple have been driven out by racism.
British author Afua Hirsch, writing in the New York Times, decries the ‘racist treatment of Meghan’ in the press. She says it is hardly a surprise that Markle has walked away from a nation with a prime minister ‘whose track record includes overtly racist statements’ and a ‘Brexit project linked to native nationalism’.
Of course, Boris Johnson has no such track record and the only people linking Brexit to native nationalism are elitist upper-crust Remainers like Hirsch. But no matter. Why let reality spoil the narrative?
These claims made about the ‘racist’ treatment of Meghan at the hands of the British press are incredibly thin. The same non-examples are just recycled over and over again. You’ve probably seen them quoted (out of context) a thousand times.
There’s that Mail piece from 2016, when Harry and Meghan were first dating, that said she was ‘(almost) straight outta Compton’ – at the time Markle’s mother lived in nearby Crenshaw, LA. Hirsch says this was an attempt to link Meghan with ‘racialised forms of crime’, ie gangs.
That’s one hell of a reach. The piece was clearly just playing on the difference in Harry and Meghan’s social backgrounds. If Harry had been dating a white working-class woman from Moss Side, I dare say the Mail would have done something similarly silly.
Another favourite is that weird throwaway line Rachel Johnson wrote, in a laudatory piece on Markle, about the mixed-race American actress bringing some ‘rich and exotic DNA’ to the pale Windsor bloodline. That’s more cringey than racist.
Several pieces have even cited a single phrase in a Sarah Vine column – she said she had a ‘niggling worry’ about the royal couple’s engagement photo – as a bigoted dog whistle. Which is, quite frankly, mental. Such is the lack of actual examples of the press being racist about Meghan.
The only leg this argument has left to stand on is that the sheer volume of criticism sent Meghan’s way was disproportionate. Racism is the only explanation for it. It’s an argument that has the advantage of being based purely on unverifiable speculation and imputing motives. But it’s also, obviously, bollocks.
When the couple first got together the coverage was pretty much gushing across the board. It was only when Meghan and Harry started on their various virtue-signalling crusades – like jetting around to lecture on climate change – that people’s backs went up.
That the couple had already been beefing with the press probably didn’t help either. In 2016, way before Meghan became such a key figure in our culture wars, Harry issued a remarkable statement rebuking journalists for the ‘racial undertones’ of their pieces.
That these privileged royals, kept in the lap of luxury at taxpayers’ expense, began to develop a deep-seated victim complex only deepened the resentment towards them. Last year, Meghan told ITV that public life was a ‘struggle’, and that she was shocked that ‘not many people have asked if I’m okay’. Poor princess.
This picture of privilege is who the liberal-left has spent the best part of three years defending. Even supposed republicans have – after a bit of anti-royal throat-clearing – defended Harry and Meghan to the hilt and helped construct this absurd narrative that they are the victims of establishment racism.
But this says far more about the prejudices of liberal-left commentators than it does about the tabloid press. That they routinely situate Meghan’s supposed mistreatment in Brexit Britain is no coincidence. They think of Britain as a foul place, full of foul people, brainwashed by foul newspapers to hate the wonderful Duchess of Sussex and the obviously brilliant European Union.
What the liberal elite’s severe case of Meghan-mania has shown us is that, for all their posturing against right-wingers, monarchy and the old aristocracy, they’re completely comfortable with the plebs being led and instructed and hectored by our betters.
They would just rather it was woke people doing it, like Harry and Meghan.
Tom Slater is deputy editor at spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater_
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/01/10/megxit-was-not-driven-by-racism/
The liberals and Remoaners have blamed Brexit for a lot of things. Now they are even blaming it for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moving to Canada...
Megxit was not driven by racism
Why are liberals so determined to turn the princess into a victim?
Tom Slater
Deputy Editor
10th January 2020
Spiked
First they said Brexit was caused by racism. Now they’re saying Megxit was caused by racism.
By ‘they’, I mean the liberal-left commentariat, the people who hate Brexit, hate ordinary people, and have for some reason grown to love our departing royals, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
This past 24 hours they have closed ranks around the couple – who announced yesterday that they plan to keep their royal titles (and most of their royal income) but leave behind their royal duties – like some woke version of the Queen’s Guard.
They have chastised anyone outraged by the staggering entitlement shown by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have essentially said that they want the status but none of the responsibilities of monarchy. They insist that the poor couple have been driven out by racism.
British author Afua Hirsch, writing in the New York Times, decries the ‘racist treatment of Meghan’ in the press. She says it is hardly a surprise that Markle has walked away from a nation with a prime minister ‘whose track record includes overtly racist statements’ and a ‘Brexit project linked to native nationalism’.
Of course, Boris Johnson has no such track record and the only people linking Brexit to native nationalism are elitist upper-crust Remainers like Hirsch. But no matter. Why let reality spoil the narrative?
These claims made about the ‘racist’ treatment of Meghan at the hands of the British press are incredibly thin. The same non-examples are just recycled over and over again. You’ve probably seen them quoted (out of context) a thousand times.
There’s that Mail piece from 2016, when Harry and Meghan were first dating, that said she was ‘(almost) straight outta Compton’ – at the time Markle’s mother lived in nearby Crenshaw, LA. Hirsch says this was an attempt to link Meghan with ‘racialised forms of crime’, ie gangs.
That’s one hell of a reach. The piece was clearly just playing on the difference in Harry and Meghan’s social backgrounds. If Harry had been dating a white working-class woman from Moss Side, I dare say the Mail would have done something similarly silly.
Another favourite is that weird throwaway line Rachel Johnson wrote, in a laudatory piece on Markle, about the mixed-race American actress bringing some ‘rich and exotic DNA’ to the pale Windsor bloodline. That’s more cringey than racist.
Several pieces have even cited a single phrase in a Sarah Vine column – she said she had a ‘niggling worry’ about the royal couple’s engagement photo – as a bigoted dog whistle. Which is, quite frankly, mental. Such is the lack of actual examples of the press being racist about Meghan.
The only leg this argument has left to stand on is that the sheer volume of criticism sent Meghan’s way was disproportionate. Racism is the only explanation for it. It’s an argument that has the advantage of being based purely on unverifiable speculation and imputing motives. But it’s also, obviously, bollocks.
When the couple first got together the coverage was pretty much gushing across the board. It was only when Meghan and Harry started on their various virtue-signalling crusades – like jetting around to lecture on climate change – that people’s backs went up.
That the couple had already been beefing with the press probably didn’t help either. In 2016, way before Meghan became such a key figure in our culture wars, Harry issued a remarkable statement rebuking journalists for the ‘racial undertones’ of their pieces.
That these privileged royals, kept in the lap of luxury at taxpayers’ expense, began to develop a deep-seated victim complex only deepened the resentment towards them. Last year, Meghan told ITV that public life was a ‘struggle’, and that she was shocked that ‘not many people have asked if I’m okay’. Poor princess.
This picture of privilege is who the liberal-left has spent the best part of three years defending. Even supposed republicans have – after a bit of anti-royal throat-clearing – defended Harry and Meghan to the hilt and helped construct this absurd narrative that they are the victims of establishment racism.
But this says far more about the prejudices of liberal-left commentators than it does about the tabloid press. That they routinely situate Meghan’s supposed mistreatment in Brexit Britain is no coincidence. They think of Britain as a foul place, full of foul people, brainwashed by foul newspapers to hate the wonderful Duchess of Sussex and the obviously brilliant European Union.
What the liberal elite’s severe case of Meghan-mania has shown us is that, for all their posturing against right-wingers, monarchy and the old aristocracy, they’re completely comfortable with the plebs being led and instructed and hectored by our betters.
They would just rather it was woke people doing it, like Harry and Meghan.
Tom Slater is deputy editor at spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater_
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/01/10/megxit-was-not-driven-by-racism/
Re: megxit
Father's Rights Group Predicted What Meghan Markle Just Did to Prince Harry
https://pjmedia.com/trending/father...-what-meghan-markle-just-did-to-prince-harry/
Interesting. I guess Markle is just another gold-digger.
Father's Rights Group Predicted What Meghan Markle Just Did to Prince Harry
https://pjmedia.com/trending/father...-what-meghan-markle-just-did-to-prince-harry/
Interesting. I guess Markle is just another gold-digger.
Re: megxit
RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Her Majesty deserves better than this and you don't have to be an ardent royalist to be thoroughly disgusted
By RICHARD LITTLEJOHN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
9 January 2020
Talk about history repeating itself. It’s 28 years since Lady Di broke up with Prince Charles and announced she intended to carry on being an independent member of the Royal Family.
I can remember writing at the time that it was a bit like Bianca Jagger, after getting divorced from Mick, insisting she would continue to be an independent member of the Rolling Stones.
Diana owed everything to the fact that she had married into the House of Windsor. Without the royal seal of approval, she was just another Sloane Ranger.
The Queen deserves to be treated better by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, writes Richard Littlejohn
Same goes for Meghan Markle — shorn of her royal connections, she’d be just another obscure actress. Be honest, hands up if you’d ever heard of her before she got her hooks into Harry?
Me, neither. Apparently, her big break was holding the briefcase on the U.S. version of Deal Or No Deal.
She was also in something called Suits, which peaked at two million viewers on an American cable channel — just over 0.6 per cent of the available audience.
So she wasn’t even a household name in her homeland. In Britain, Suits went out on Dave — best known for showing endless repeats of Top Gear.
It is her relationship with the Prince which propelled her to international celebrity, not her unremarkable TV career.
As they embark on their adventure as ‘independent’ members of the Royal Family, the couple may well discover, like Harry’s mum Diana, that things don’t always work out as well as envisaged
Diana owed everything to the fact that she had married into the House of Windsor. Without the royal seal of approval, she was just another Sloane Ranger. The pair are pictured on a tour in Canada in 1991
The British people, with characteristic generosity, embraced Meghan. Her fairytale wedding at Windsor captivated the nation.
With Harry’s irrepressible Jack The Lad image and Meghan’s mixed-race heritage, the couple were hailed as heralding a new era for the royals. Until now, that is.
By renouncing most of their royal responsibilities, while clinging limpet-like to their titles and related privileges, they have forfeited any claim to such admiration as they once enjoyed.
They now intend to remain ‘independent’ members of the House of Windsor, while developing their own ‘brand’ and dividing their time between Britain and North America.
Missing you already. The plain fact is that without the royal connection they wouldn’t have a brand to develop.
Why would the world be in the slightest bit interested in a minor aristocrat and a game-show hostess turned bit-part actress?
At the very least, this was an appalling display of bad manners. It really was an egregious example of lèse-majesté — the French expression taken from Middle English, meaning ‘to insult the monarch’
Even before this week’s grandiose, self-serving announcement, most people were sick to the back teeth of their ‘woke’ grandstanding, whining self-pity, eco-hypocrisy and ocean-going freeloading, especially at the expense of the British taxpayer.
Now, they are determined to milk their royal association for every last penny they can extract, while shunning the duties which go with it.
They even plan to carry on using as their UK base Frogmore Cottage, which was renovated at a cost of £2.4 million and rising from the public purse.
It has been suggested that if they intend to keep Frogmore as their private residence they should reimburse the Exchequer the fortune lavished upon it.
Be honest, hands up if you’d ever heard of her before she got her hooks into Harry? Me, neither. Apparently, her big break was holding the briefcase on the U.S. version of Deal Or No Deal
Truth is, they almost certainly can’t afford to. And without the patronage of others, they definitely couldn’t sustain the A-list, jet-set lifestyle to which they obviously believe they are entitled.
Harry is a 35-year-old man who is still financially dependent on his dad. Meghan isn’t worth anything like the kind of money you’d expect a so-called ‘Hollywood star’ to make.
Even at the height of her role in Suits, she was reported to be paid a salary equivalent to around £350,000 a year, at current rates of exchange.
A handsome sum, admittedly, but chicken feed compared to the £1 million plus an episode the biggest stars of American TV can command.
Maybe Meghan believes that now she has the cachet of a royal title, the likes of Netflix and Amazon will be queueing up to shower her with riches, should she choose to return to acting.
Who cares? There are others better qualified than me to speculate about the motivation behind this week’s parting of the ways between the Sussexes and the rest of the family.
I’m not bothered about the reputational damage or the constitutional implications — of which there are none, from what I can gather. No, what concerns me on a human level is the abominable manner in which the Queen has been treated by her grandson and his wife.
They didn’t even consult her before putting out their statement this week.
The first she knew about it was when the story broke on television.
It is being reported that, in advance of a planned meeting at Sandringham, Her Maj had specifically asked Harry not to make any premature announcement about his future plans, but he decided to openly defy her.
At the very least, this was an appalling display of bad manners. It really was an egregious example of lèse-majesté — the French expression taken from Middle English, meaning ‘to insult the monarch’.
You don’t have to be an ardent royalist — and no one has ever accused me of that — to be thoroughly disgusted at such selfish, thoughtless behaviour.
Leave aside the fact that she’s Queen. This was no way to treat an old lady. Those of us fortunate enough still to have a mum, or grandmother, in her 90s can readily understand how distressing she will have found it.
Elizabeth II is a 93-year-old woman with a sick husband of 98. She’s had a rough few months, not just with Philip in hospital, but having to cope with her favourite son, Andrew, becoming embroiled in an international sex trafficking scandal with a weapons-grade, convicted paedophile.
The last thing she needed was yet another family furore landing in her lap. She has always indulged her grandsons, particularly in the wake of their mother’s untimely death. She deserves better than this.
The Queen has been the glue that has held both her family and this country together, in good times and bad.
While the nation — or at least the political class — has been tearing itself apart over Brexit for the past three-and-a-half years, she has provided much needed stability.
The thought of a partisan president — someone like that gurning gargoyle John Bercow, heaven forfend — lording it over us all is too horrible to contemplate.
As I said, I’ve never been a royalist, but as the years have passed my admiration for the Queen has grown.
Those of us fortunate enough still to have a mum, or grandmother, in her 90s can readily understand how distressing she will have found it. Elizabeth II is a 93-year-old woman with a sick husband of 98
Churchill once said of democracy: it’s the worst way to run a country, except for all the others. You could say the same about the British monarchy.
I can recall dear old Jack Tinker, late of this parish, remarking that there would only ever be a republican revolution in this country if Her Maj said it was OK.
The Queen is part of that stoical World War II, make-good-and-mend, generation, who — again in the words of Winston Churchill — KBO (Keep Buggering On).
What a contrast to the self-centred snowflakery of her grandson Harry and his Hollywood wife, with their endless moaning about ‘mental health issues’ and bottomless sense of entitlement.
As they embark on their adventure as ‘independent’ members of the Royal Family, the couple may well discover, like Harry’s mum Diana, that things don’t always work out as well as envisaged.
Still, when the invitations dry up and they are reduced to travelling economy — not on Elton’s private jet — Meghan can always go back to holding a briefcase on a revival of Deal Or No Deal.
And Harry could take on the Noel Edmonds role. After all, he’s got the beard for it.
They could call the show: Royal Or Not Royal.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...-LITTLEJOHN-Majesty-deserves-better-this.html
RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Her Majesty deserves better than this and you don't have to be an ardent royalist to be thoroughly disgusted
By RICHARD LITTLEJOHN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
9 January 2020
Talk about history repeating itself. It’s 28 years since Lady Di broke up with Prince Charles and announced she intended to carry on being an independent member of the Royal Family.
I can remember writing at the time that it was a bit like Bianca Jagger, after getting divorced from Mick, insisting she would continue to be an independent member of the Rolling Stones.
Diana owed everything to the fact that she had married into the House of Windsor. Without the royal seal of approval, she was just another Sloane Ranger.
The Queen deserves to be treated better by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, writes Richard Littlejohn
Same goes for Meghan Markle — shorn of her royal connections, she’d be just another obscure actress. Be honest, hands up if you’d ever heard of her before she got her hooks into Harry?
Me, neither. Apparently, her big break was holding the briefcase on the U.S. version of Deal Or No Deal.
She was also in something called Suits, which peaked at two million viewers on an American cable channel — just over 0.6 per cent of the available audience.
So she wasn’t even a household name in her homeland. In Britain, Suits went out on Dave — best known for showing endless repeats of Top Gear.
It is her relationship with the Prince which propelled her to international celebrity, not her unremarkable TV career.
As they embark on their adventure as ‘independent’ members of the Royal Family, the couple may well discover, like Harry’s mum Diana, that things don’t always work out as well as envisaged
Diana owed everything to the fact that she had married into the House of Windsor. Without the royal seal of approval, she was just another Sloane Ranger. The pair are pictured on a tour in Canada in 1991
The British people, with characteristic generosity, embraced Meghan. Her fairytale wedding at Windsor captivated the nation.
With Harry’s irrepressible Jack The Lad image and Meghan’s mixed-race heritage, the couple were hailed as heralding a new era for the royals. Until now, that is.
By renouncing most of their royal responsibilities, while clinging limpet-like to their titles and related privileges, they have forfeited any claim to such admiration as they once enjoyed.
They now intend to remain ‘independent’ members of the House of Windsor, while developing their own ‘brand’ and dividing their time between Britain and North America.
Missing you already. The plain fact is that without the royal connection they wouldn’t have a brand to develop.
Why would the world be in the slightest bit interested in a minor aristocrat and a game-show hostess turned bit-part actress?
At the very least, this was an appalling display of bad manners. It really was an egregious example of lèse-majesté — the French expression taken from Middle English, meaning ‘to insult the monarch’
Even before this week’s grandiose, self-serving announcement, most people were sick to the back teeth of their ‘woke’ grandstanding, whining self-pity, eco-hypocrisy and ocean-going freeloading, especially at the expense of the British taxpayer.
Now, they are determined to milk their royal association for every last penny they can extract, while shunning the duties which go with it.
They even plan to carry on using as their UK base Frogmore Cottage, which was renovated at a cost of £2.4 million and rising from the public purse.
It has been suggested that if they intend to keep Frogmore as their private residence they should reimburse the Exchequer the fortune lavished upon it.
Be honest, hands up if you’d ever heard of her before she got her hooks into Harry? Me, neither. Apparently, her big break was holding the briefcase on the U.S. version of Deal Or No Deal
Truth is, they almost certainly can’t afford to. And without the patronage of others, they definitely couldn’t sustain the A-list, jet-set lifestyle to which they obviously believe they are entitled.
Harry is a 35-year-old man who is still financially dependent on his dad. Meghan isn’t worth anything like the kind of money you’d expect a so-called ‘Hollywood star’ to make.
Even at the height of her role in Suits, she was reported to be paid a salary equivalent to around £350,000 a year, at current rates of exchange.
A handsome sum, admittedly, but chicken feed compared to the £1 million plus an episode the biggest stars of American TV can command.
Maybe Meghan believes that now she has the cachet of a royal title, the likes of Netflix and Amazon will be queueing up to shower her with riches, should she choose to return to acting.
Who cares? There are others better qualified than me to speculate about the motivation behind this week’s parting of the ways between the Sussexes and the rest of the family.
I’m not bothered about the reputational damage or the constitutional implications — of which there are none, from what I can gather. No, what concerns me on a human level is the abominable manner in which the Queen has been treated by her grandson and his wife.
They didn’t even consult her before putting out their statement this week.
The first she knew about it was when the story broke on television.
It is being reported that, in advance of a planned meeting at Sandringham, Her Maj had specifically asked Harry not to make any premature announcement about his future plans, but he decided to openly defy her.
At the very least, this was an appalling display of bad manners. It really was an egregious example of lèse-majesté — the French expression taken from Middle English, meaning ‘to insult the monarch’.
You don’t have to be an ardent royalist — and no one has ever accused me of that — to be thoroughly disgusted at such selfish, thoughtless behaviour.
Leave aside the fact that she’s Queen. This was no way to treat an old lady. Those of us fortunate enough still to have a mum, or grandmother, in her 90s can readily understand how distressing she will have found it.
Elizabeth II is a 93-year-old woman with a sick husband of 98. She’s had a rough few months, not just with Philip in hospital, but having to cope with her favourite son, Andrew, becoming embroiled in an international sex trafficking scandal with a weapons-grade, convicted paedophile.
The last thing she needed was yet another family furore landing in her lap. She has always indulged her grandsons, particularly in the wake of their mother’s untimely death. She deserves better than this.
The Queen has been the glue that has held both her family and this country together, in good times and bad.
While the nation — or at least the political class — has been tearing itself apart over Brexit for the past three-and-a-half years, she has provided much needed stability.
The thought of a partisan president — someone like that gurning gargoyle John Bercow, heaven forfend — lording it over us all is too horrible to contemplate.
As I said, I’ve never been a royalist, but as the years have passed my admiration for the Queen has grown.
Those of us fortunate enough still to have a mum, or grandmother, in her 90s can readily understand how distressing she will have found it. Elizabeth II is a 93-year-old woman with a sick husband of 98
Churchill once said of democracy: it’s the worst way to run a country, except for all the others. You could say the same about the British monarchy.
I can recall dear old Jack Tinker, late of this parish, remarking that there would only ever be a republican revolution in this country if Her Maj said it was OK.
The Queen is part of that stoical World War II, make-good-and-mend, generation, who — again in the words of Winston Churchill — KBO (Keep Buggering On).
What a contrast to the self-centred snowflakery of her grandson Harry and his Hollywood wife, with their endless moaning about ‘mental health issues’ and bottomless sense of entitlement.
As they embark on their adventure as ‘independent’ members of the Royal Family, the couple may well discover, like Harry’s mum Diana, that things don’t always work out as well as envisaged.
Still, when the invitations dry up and they are reduced to travelling economy — not on Elton’s private jet — Meghan can always go back to holding a briefcase on a revival of Deal Or No Deal.
And Harry could take on the Noel Edmonds role. After all, he’s got the beard for it.
They could call the show: Royal Or Not Royal.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...-LITTLEJOHN-Majesty-deserves-better-this.html
My daughter went there on a class trip in Kindergarten, she called it Castle Oma. My mom was called Oma. Wonderful memory.
Re: megxit
The Queen will hold Meghan and Harry family summit at Sandringham on Monday
https://ca.hellomagazine.com/royalt...lo_daily&sfi=4c68c4e9bd3f963fbfe158170142f11f
If Megan was troubled by the UK press coverage of her............. she has not seen anything yet.
Now she has most of the developed world examining her .
She is definitely the dominant force in that relationship.........placing Harry in a really tough position.......
It would not be surprising to see her want a divorce ......at some point........As she seem to want to run away when things get rough .......or not to her wishes. Why would she leave the baby inCDA unless she knew and planned she would be back shortly.......when the proverbial shit hit the fan. By not granting the queens request to wait with the announcement until there was a plan in place.......shows her immature and disrespectful nature. Harry gets left behind to deal with the fallout.....and now the plan.......while she remains secluded in CDA. She should have known what she was getting into by marrying into the Royal family.............but seems to want her cake and eat it too.
The Queen will hold Meghan and Harry family summit at Sandringham on Monday
https://ca.hellomagazine.com/royalt...lo_daily&sfi=4c68c4e9bd3f963fbfe158170142f11f
If Megan was troubled by the UK press coverage of her............. she has not seen anything yet.
Now she has most of the developed world examining her .
She is definitely the dominant force in that relationship.........placing Harry in a really tough position.......
It would not be surprising to see her want a divorce ......at some point........As she seem to want to run away when things get rough .......or not to her wishes. Why would she leave the baby inCDA unless she knew and planned she would be back shortly.......when the proverbial shit hit the fan. By not granting the queens request to wait with the announcement until there was a plan in place.......shows her immature and disrespectful nature. Harry gets left behind to deal with the fallout.....and now the plan.......while she remains secluded in CDA. She should have known what she was getting into by marrying into the Royal family.............but seems to want her cake and eat it too.
THEY COULD LOCK RED CHINESE AGENTS LIKE YOU IN THE DUNGEON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Earn money that way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Charge people to come down and see the Soviet ASSHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One more thing.............................
WE COULD SAVE MONEY by appointing Harry as Governor General!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why bother with some jumped up commoner representing the Queen.............................
when we could have a real royal do the job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE COULD SAVE MONEY by appointing Harry as Governor General!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why bother with some jumped up commoner representing the Queen.............................
when we could have a real royal do the job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: megxit
The press was gushing about her initially, but then she started all the PC woke nonsense, brainwashing Harry into it, too, and then it went right off her.
And now here they are saying they want to leave their (well, Harry's) family behind and go and live in Canada - to as good as quit the Royal Family but still have all the trappings of royalty, like Frogmore House and continued funding by Charles. It's a joke and it's hardly going to make the press go easier on them.
It's just a shame they can't be more like Wills and Kate. Wills is a nice guy and doesn't get caught up in controversies like his brother has over the years (such as the 2005 fancy dress party when he dressed up as a Nazi and the Las Vegas pool party with scantily clad girls). Kate is a classy woman and, unlike Meghan, has never complained about being followed by the media. Both just get on with their Royal duties and don't put a foot wrong. They'll make a great king and queen. They and their children are the future of the monarchy.
The press was gushing about her initially, but then she started all the PC woke nonsense, brainwashing Harry into it, too, and then it went right off her.
And now here they are saying they want to leave their (well, Harry's) family behind and go and live in Canada - to as good as quit the Royal Family but still have all the trappings of royalty, like Frogmore House and continued funding by Charles. It's a joke and it's hardly going to make the press go easier on them.
It's just a shame they can't be more like Wills and Kate. Wills is a nice guy and doesn't get caught up in controversies like his brother has over the years (such as the 2005 fancy dress party when he dressed up as a Nazi and the Las Vegas pool party with scantily clad girls). Kate is a classy woman and, unlike Meghan, has never complained about being followed by the media. Both just get on with their Royal duties and don't put a foot wrong. They'll make a great king and queen. They and their children are the future of the monarchy.
Re: megxit
Yes.Will and Kate seem to do everything right........and effortlessly. Both are very classy sophisticated people......and seem to be doing a great job raising their kids. ...........
IMHO....... if they want financial independence........then they should be cut of all the money they are getting from Charles and their other source. Stripping them of the HRH title might be an option too.........as they can't use that status in their earning ability.
I agree. From what I can tell.....Most of this falls on Megahan.........but Harry is complicit too. Personally I don't think that relationship will last.
Yes.Will and Kate seem to do everything right........and effortlessly. Both are very classy sophisticated people......and seem to be doing a great job raising their kids. ...........
IMHO....... if they want financial independence........then they should be cut of all the money they are getting from Charles and their other source. Stripping them of the HRH title might be an option too.........as they can't use that status in their earning ability.
Best thing would be t send them right back to England. At least until weenie agrees t pick up the tab for their bodyguards.
