Prince Harry to marry girlfriend Meghan Markle next year

[Blackleaf]

'I never played naked pool or dressed up like Hitler': Meghan's father Thomas Markle takes swipe at 'snotty' Harry, says his daughter 'let him down but he still loves' her - and insists the British public are NOT racist ​

Mr Markle says that he's apologised '100 times' for doing a deal with a paparazzi photographer before the Royal Wedding in 2018 and urged the couple to see him and let him meet his grandson Archie now they only live '70 miles away' from his Mexico home in Los Angeles. He also denied the Royal Family - or Britain - is racist, saying if it is true a royal asked about how 'dark' Archie's skin would be, it was probably just a 'dumb question', and calling Meghan and Harry's claims 'bulls**t'. Mr Markle, who has watched the entire two-hour CBS interview, said he was 'upset' when he saw his youngest daughter tell Oprah that royal life was so stressful she was suicidal and 'couldn't be left alone' - but then questioned Harry's care for her and said Meghan's husband had 'obviously not supported her that well'. Mr Markle spoke to Good Morning Britain in the UK after watching the Oprah interview with his daughter and her husband, which was watched by 11.4million in Britain last night and tens of millions more when it was shown by CBS in the US on Sunday. In it Meghan said she cannot fathom hurting her son Archie in the way her own father 'betrayed' her, admitting she 'found it hard to reconcile' with Thomas. She said: 'I look at Archie, I think about this child, and I genuinely can't imagine doing anything to intentionally cause pain to my child'. Mr Markle said that while he did let her down, she had 'let me down too' by cutting him off after heart surgery almost three years ago. He said: 'The bottom line is she didn't lose me, she made a statement saying she lost me, she didn't lose me, I would've always been there for her, I'm there for her now if she wants me'. He added: 'We all make mistakes - but I've never played naked pool or dressed like Hitler like Harry did'.

 

[Blackleaf]

No, Harry, the British press is not bigoted

Harry and Meghan’s hatred of the tabloids is underpinned by a nasty strain of elitism.

BRENDAN O'NEILL​

EDITOR​

9th March 2021​

Spiked

Harry and Meghan didn’t only ‘trash the monarchy’ in their two-hour self-pity-fest with Oprah Winfrey. They also trashed the British people. They trashed you and me. They depicted us as witless slaves to a tabloid agenda. The apparently all-powerful redtops are poisoning public life with bigotry, they claimed, and it’s infecting the minds of the masses. It was classic elitism. A duke and duchess looking down their powdered noses at the guff-believing rabble.

Harry and Meghan are obsessed with the press. They seem to view the tabloids in particular as the source of every ill. Sounding like a Corbynista who’s taken one too many media-studies classes, Harry told Oprah that ‘the UK press is bigoted, specifically the tabloids’. And that bigotry, he said, drips down into the presumably empty heads of the public. Yes, Harry challenged the idea that Britain as a country is bigoted, but where there is bigotry it’s been nurtured by those nasty low-rent newspapers, he said. ‘If the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased, then that filters out to the rest of society’, His Royal Highness decreed.
Meghan took it even further. The tabloids, she said, have been ‘inciting so much racism’. They were ‘bringing out a part of people that was racist’. That is, the lowlife press have been tapping into something that already exists in their lowlife readers: ingrained racial animus. The royal pair painted an image of Brits – especially the working-class ones who are more likely to read the tabloids – as a latent hateful mob, liable to have their inner prejudices ‘brought out’ by the trashy papers they read; susceptible to having bigotry ‘filtered’ into their minds. They should write this up as a column for Novara Media.

The Sussexes’ tabloidphobia is revealing. First, of course, it speaks volumes about their colossal sense of entitlement. It confirms their belief, staggering in its monarchical arrogance, that they should receive glowing media coverage only – fawning reportage on their feminism, columns congratulating them for occasionally taking time out from their private-jet lifestyle to talk about climate change. And secondly – and more importantly – it exposes the extent to which Harry and Meghan perfectly embody the elitist prejudices of the new woke establishment.

In certain circles in the UK, hating the tabloids is code for hating the lower orders. Raging against the redtops has become a PC, underhand way of gnashing one’s teeth over the insufficiently educated throng, over the Brexity, oikish masses. You see this veiled snobbery everywhere. In the left’s belief that the reason they keep losing elections is because the gutter press has made millions of people stupid and racist. In the Remainer elites’ certainty that the little people’s brains were filled with ‘Europhobic’ drivel by the likes of the Sun and the Star. In Stop Funding Hate’s painfully middle-class crusade to deprive the tabloid press of advertising and funding in order that it might stop polluting the plebs’ minds with bigotry and spite.

And now we see it in Harry and Meghan’s claim that the tabloids ‘brought out’ people’s hibernating prejudices. What Harry and Meghan said to Oprah about tabloid hate filtering down into society at large can be heard at pretty much any dinner party in the leafy bits of Britain. This is the prejudice that passes the dinner-party test – the idea that millions of people are so fickle, so lacking in the moral sentience enjoyed by us, that they can be corrupted beyond repair by what they read in their daily paper.

What’s more, it’s all bunkum. It is simply untrue to say the tabloid press unleashed racial hatred against Meghan Markle. The people who are trying to turn the Meghan saga into hard proof that Britain is a racist hellhole wheel out the same tiny handful of tired examples of press prejudice again and again. None of them holds any water. They point to a 2016 Mail piece saying Meghan was ‘(almost) straight outta Compton’, because her mother lived in nearby Crenshaw. This was an attempt to associate Meghan with gangs and crime, they claim. Rubbish. It was an entirely normal piece of journalism commenting on the different social backgrounds of Harry and Meghan. Or they refer to a piece written by Rachel Johnson in which she said Meghan would bring some much-needed ‘rich and exotic DNA’ to the pasty Windsors. That was a throwaway line in a super pro-Meghan piece.

It is testament to how hollow the claims of press racism are when you consider that some people even tried to turn Sarah Vine’s use of the word ‘niggling’ – she said she had a ‘niggling worry’ about Harry and Meghan’s engagement photo – into proof of anti-Meghan racism. Niggling is not a racist word, you wombats. It means a slight but persistent annoyance. Use it in a sentence? Okay. I am niggled by your ceaseless attempts to depict the British media and British people as racist.

That accusations of racism continue to be made even in the absence of evidence confirms what is really going on here. The r-word has been folded into the new elites’ self-conscious distancing of themselves from those people, from the rabble, from the allegedly racist masses. In the new clerisy, among the self-styled possessors of correct thought, branding the public as racist has become an acceptable way of distinguishing oneself from the mob. The trouble is, you can’t use words like mob anymore, or underclass, or scum. So new ways must be developed to allow the elites to express their presumed moral authority over the great unwashed. Now they laud it over the little people through coded assaults on tabloid culture, through handwringing over media-filtered bigotry, through casual, unsubstantiated accusations of racism.

One of the main reasons the normally royal-sceptical chattering classes have warmed to Harry and Meghan is because of the couple’s hostility to the press. These two royals and the modern cultural elites are united in their loathing of the mass press and their fear of the impact it is having on the less well-educated. This is the new elitism. Someone should remind these people that press freedom in this country was won precisely by ‘low-rent’ newspapers that dared to diss royals and question authority. Newspapers edited by the likes of the heroic 18th-century radical John Wilkes. To those of us who believe in press freedom, it’s pretty shocking to see two royals openly sneering at the free press and being cheered for doing so by supposed liberals. The press and its readers must be defended against these bigots who pose as anti-bigots.

No, Harry, the British press is not bigoted

Harry and Meghan’s hatred of the tabloids is underpinned by a nasty strain of elitism.

www.spiked-online.com

 

[JLM]

No, Harry, the British press is not bigoted

Harry and Meghan’s hatred of the tabloids is underpinned by a nasty strain of elitism.

View attachment 6766

BRENDAN O'NEILL​

EDITOR​

9th March 2021​

Spiked

Harry and Meghan didn’t only ‘trash the monarchy’ in their two-hour self-pity-fest with Oprah Winfrey. They also trashed the British people. They trashed you and me. They depicted us as witless slaves to a tabloid agenda. The apparently all-powerful redtops are poisoning public life with bigotry, they claimed, and it’s infecting the minds of the masses. It was classic elitism. A duke and duchess looking down their powdered noses at the guff-believing rabble.

Harry and Meghan are obsessed with the press. They seem to view the tabloids in particular as the source of every ill. Sounding like a Corbynista who’s taken one too many media-studies classes, Harry told Oprah that ‘the UK press is bigoted, specifically the tabloids’. And that bigotry, he said, drips down into the presumably empty heads of the public. Yes, Harry challenged the idea that Britain as a country is bigoted, but where there is bigotry it’s been nurtured by those nasty low-rent newspapers, he said. ‘If the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased, then that filters out to the rest of society’, His Royal Highness decreed.
Meghan took it even further. The tabloids, she said, have been ‘inciting so much racism’. They were ‘bringing out a part of people that was racist’. That is, the lowlife press have been tapping into something that already exists in their lowlife readers: ingrained racial animus. The royal pair painted an image of Brits – especially the working-class ones who are more likely to read the tabloids – as a latent hateful mob, liable to have their inner prejudices ‘brought out’ by the trashy papers they read; susceptible to having bigotry ‘filtered’ into their minds. They should write this up as a column for Novara Media.

The Sussexes’ tabloidphobia is revealing. First, of course, it speaks volumes about their colossal sense of entitlement. It confirms their belief, staggering in its monarchical arrogance, that they should receive glowing media coverage only – fawning reportage on their feminism, columns congratulating them for occasionally taking time out from their private-jet lifestyle to talk about climate change. And secondly – and more importantly – it exposes the extent to which Harry and Meghan perfectly embody the elitist prejudices of the new woke establishment.

In certain circles in the UK, hating the tabloids is code for hating the lower orders. Raging against the redtops has become a PC, underhand way of gnashing one’s teeth over the insufficiently educated throng, over the Brexity, oikish masses. You see this veiled snobbery everywhere. In the left’s belief that the reason they keep losing elections is because the gutter press has made millions of people stupid and racist. In the Remainer elites’ certainty that the little people’s brains were filled with ‘Europhobic’ drivel by the likes of the Sun and the Star. In Stop Funding Hate’s painfully middle-class crusade to deprive the tabloid press of advertising and funding in order that it might stop polluting the plebs’ minds with bigotry and spite.

And now we see it in Harry and Meghan’s claim that the tabloids ‘brought out’ people’s hibernating prejudices. What Harry and Meghan said to Oprah about tabloid hate filtering down into society at large can be heard at pretty much any dinner party in the leafy bits of Britain. This is the prejudice that passes the dinner-party test – the idea that millions of people are so fickle, so lacking in the moral sentience enjoyed by us, that they can be corrupted beyond repair by what they read in their daily paper.

What’s more, it’s all bunkum. It is simply untrue to say the tabloid press unleashed racial hatred against Meghan Markle. The people who are trying to turn the Meghan saga into hard proof that Britain is a racist hellhole wheel out the same tiny handful of tired examples of press prejudice again and again. None of them holds any water. They point to a 2016 Mail piece saying Meghan was ‘(almost) straight outta Compton’, because her mother lived in nearby Crenshaw. This was an attempt to associate Meghan with gangs and crime, they claim. Rubbish. It was an entirely normal piece of journalism commenting on the different social backgrounds of Harry and Meghan. Or they refer to a piece written by Rachel Johnson in which she said Meghan would bring some much-needed ‘rich and exotic DNA’ to the pasty Windsors. That was a throwaway line in a super pro-Meghan piece.

It is testament to how hollow the claims of press racism are when you consider that some people even tried to turn Sarah Vine’s use of the word ‘niggling’ – she said she had a ‘niggling worry’ about Harry and Meghan’s engagement photo – into proof of anti-Meghan racism. Niggling is not a racist word, you wombats. It means a slight but persistent annoyance. Use it in a sentence? Okay. I am niggled by your ceaseless attempts to depict the British media and British people as racist.

That accusations of racism continue to be made even in the absence of evidence confirms what is really going on here. The r-word has been folded into the new elites’ self-conscious distancing of themselves from those people, from the rabble, from the allegedly racist masses. In the new clerisy, among the self-styled possessors of correct thought, branding the public as racist has become an acceptable way of distinguishing oneself from the mob. The trouble is, you can’t use words like mob anymore, or underclass, or scum. So new ways must be developed to allow the elites to express their presumed moral authority over the great unwashed. Now they laud it over the little people through coded assaults on tabloid culture, through handwringing over media-filtered bigotry, through casual, unsubstantiated accusations of racism.

One of the main reasons the normally royal-sceptical chattering classes have warmed to Harry and Meghan is because of the couple’s hostility to the press. These two royals and the modern cultural elites are united in their loathing of the mass press and their fear of the impact it is having on the less well-educated. This is the new elitism. Someone should remind these people that press freedom in this country was won precisely by ‘low-rent’ newspapers that dared to diss royals and question authority. Newspapers edited by the likes of the heroic 18th-century radical John Wilkes. To those of us who believe in press freedom, it’s pretty shocking to see two royals openly sneering at the free press and being cheered for doing so by supposed liberals. The press and its readers must be defended against these bigots who pose as anti-bigots.

No, Harry, the British press is not bigoted

Harry and Meghan’s hatred of the tabloids is underpinned by a nasty strain of elitism.

www.spiked-online.com

In defense of Harry, he seems to be set apart from the Royal parasites and is the only one who decided he didn't want to be a drag. I think Meghan just decided she's had enough of the media harassment, as it was likely plain to her she was heading down a similar path to Diana. The Royal Family has likely outlived its usefulness. Charles has to be about as useful as a "chocolate teapot"!

 

[Blackleaf]

In defense of Harry, he seems to be set apart from the Royal parasites and is the only one who decided he didn't want to be a drag. I think Meghan just decided she's had enough of the media harassment, as it was likely plain to her she was heading down a similar path to Diana. The Royal Family has likely outlived its usefulness. Charles has to be about as useful as a "chocolate teapot"!

The British people expect the royals to do their royal duties. Harry and Meghan have failed on that regard. They wanted to shun the royal and their royal duties but still want all the privileges of royalty. Well the British people are not standing for it, the media aren't standing for it and the Royal Family isn't standing for it. They're not going to get all the privileges of royalty. They're just going to be an ordinary couple from now on, stripped of their titles (no longer a duke and duchess) and trying to make ends meet. We might see Harry working in a McDonald's soon wondering how he and his wife managed to fuck their lives up completely.

As for Meghan, she's the typical high-and-mighty, better-than-you, lofty sort so typical of American actresses these days. She thought she could enter the British Royal Family and "wokify" it to her liking. Well she failed miserably on that regard and now she's reaping the consequences.

 

[JLM]

The British people expect the royals to do their royal duties. Harry and Meghan have failed on that regard. They wanted to shun the royal and their royal duties but still want all the privileges of royalty. Well the British people are not standing for it, the media aren't standing for it and the Royal Family isn't standing for it. They're not going to get all the privileges of royalty. They're just going to be an ordinary couple from now on, stripped of their titles (no longer a duke and duchess) and trying to make ends meet. We might see Harry working in a McDonald's soon wondering how he and his wife managed to fuck their lives up completely.

As for Meghan, she's the typical high-and-mighty, better-than-you, lofty sort so typical of American actresses these days. She thought she could enter the British Royal Family and "wokify" it to her liking. Well she failed miserably on that regard and now she's reaping the consequences.

"but still want all the privileges of royalty" - Apparently not!

 

[Blackleaf]

"but still want all the privileges of royalty" - Apparently not!

They were saying they wanted to be financially independent and then went on Oprah to complain that the Royal Family has cut off their security and that they now have to pay for it themselves.

What a couple of hypocrites.

 

[Blackleaf]

​

Biden Backs Me Me Me Meghan America Reacts “The End Of The Monarchy” Hook Line & Stinker ​

Britain should sue the USA for defamation and libel.

 

[Blackleaf]

All Harry and Meghan are doing is STRENGTHENING support for the Royal Family...

Britain stands by the Queen: 36% of Britons have sympathy for Her Majesty in wake of Harry and Meghan interview compared to 22% for couple, YouGov poll reveals​

The British public is split on whether the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were treated fairly or unfairly by the royal family, a snap YouGov poll has found

 

[Blackleaf]

Archie: Why is Meghan and Harry's son not a prince?​

BBC News
9 March 2021

In her interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan Duchess of Sussex said that when she was pregnant, there were conversations about her future child's status, including what title he or she should receive.

"They were saying they didn't want him to be a prince or princess, not knowing what the gender would be, which would be different from protocol," she said.

What does royal protocol say?​

The rules about who gets to be a prince and also be referred to as His Royal Highness (HRH) come from a letter patent issued by King George V in November 1917.

Letters patent are legal instruments which may take the form of an open letter from the monarch. They may be used for royal declarations or the granting of titles such as peerages.

In the 1917 letter, George V declared that the great-grandchildren of the monarch would no longer be princes or princesses, except for the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales.

In our current situation, that means that Prince George, the eldest son of Prince William, automatically became a prince, but not Archie, even though they are both great-grandsons of the Queen.

Under this protocol, Prince George's siblings - Charlotte and Louis - would not have received the title either.

But in December 2012, the Queen also issued a letter patent which said that all of Prince William's children would be entitled to be princes or princesses and get the HRH title.

Also, being a prince or princess only goes through the male line, which means that the children of Princess Anne did not get those titles despite being the Queen's grandchildren.

What about Archie's title?​

According to the 1917 letter, Archie is entitled to become a prince - but not yet.

The children of Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, would have to wait until Prince Charles, the heir to the throne, became king, at which point they would be the grandchildren of the monarch and hence entitled to be princes or princesses.

That is why Prince Andrew's daughters - Beatrice and Eugenie - were princesses from birth, for example.

The Duchess of Sussex was clearly aware of the protocol.

She referred in the interview to a "George V or George VI convention" that would mean her son Archie would become a prince "when Harry's dad becomes king".

But she went on to say that she had been told when she was pregnant that "they want to change the convention for Archie" so he would not become a prince.

She did not give any more details about this and Buckingham Palace has not commented on her claims.

"I saw that Meghan mentioned that there were plans to narrow eligibility and I imagine that this is a reference to the Prince of Wales's stated view that the size of the royal family needs to be reduced," said Bob Morris from the Constitution Unit at UCL.

"However, he has not so far as I know given details of how it should be accomplished."

Archie: Why is Meghan and Harry's son not a prince?

The Duchess of Sussex sees a royal title for her son as important. What are the rules around this?

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[harrylee]

But....Is Harry really royalty?

 

[spaminator]

'I WAS A MARKLE BEFORE SHE WAS': Meghan's half-sister responds to interview remarks
Author of the article:WENN - World Entertainment News Network
Publishing date:Mar 09, 2021 • 16 hours ago • 2 minute read • comment bubble7 Comments
This photo illustration shows people wearing face masks, watch a televised conversation between Britain's Prince Harry with his wife Meghan Markle and US host Oprah Winfrey, in Arlington, Virginia March 7, 2021.
This photo illustration shows people wearing face masks, watch a televised conversation between Britain's Prince Harry with his wife Meghan Markle and US host Oprah Winfrey, in Arlington, Virginia March 7, 2021. PHOTO BY OLIVIER DOULIERY /AFP via Getty Images
Article content
Meghan, Duchess Of Sussex’s estranged half-sister has challenged the former actress over claims they were never close.

During her TV interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired in America on Sunday night, Meghan poked fun at the tell-all book her father’s other daughter, Samantha Markle, wrote about the sisters’ relationship – because they never really had one.


“I think it would be hard to tell all when you don’t know me,” the Duchess told Oprah when asked about Samantha’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1. “I grew up as an only child … The last time I saw her (Samantha) must have been at least 18, 19 years ago, and before then, 10 years before that.”

Meghan went on to claim Samantha only changed her last name back to Markle when she started dating Prince Harry, adding, “I think that says enough.”


A day after the explosive interview aired in the U.S., Samantha spoke to Inside Edition, stating, “I don’t know how she can say I don’t know her and she was an only child. We’ve got photographs over a lifespan of us together. So how can she not know me?”

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Samantha showed off photographs of her and young Meghan throughout the years, including one she insists was taken 13 years ago at her college graduation in 2008. She also maintained that she changed her name back to Markle many years ago and it had nothing to do with her sister.

“I was a Markle before she was,” she said. “I thought that was kind of weird that she would say I only changed my name back when she met Harry. Markle has always been my name.”

During her interview with Oprah, Meghan also confirmed she and her father, Thomas Markle, had become estranged after he lied to her about talking to the media about his daughter and handing over a letter she wrote to him just before her royal wedding.


He will appear on U.K. show Good Morning Britain on Tuesday to respond to his daughter’s chat with Oprah.

The show’s co-host, Piers Morgan, confirmed the news in a tweet on Monday, which read: “UPDATE: Meghan Markle trashed her dad on US TV today. On tomorrow’s @GMB, Thomas Markle will give his first exclusive interview in response (sic).”

'I WAS A MARKLE BEFORE SHE WAS': Meghan's half-sister responds to interview remarks

Meghan, Duchess Of Sussex’s estranged half-sister has challenged the former actress over claims they were never close.

torontosun.com

 

[Blackleaf]

'I WAS A MARKLE BEFORE SHE WAS': Meghan's half-sister responds to interview remarks
Author of the article:WENN - World Entertainment News Network
Publishing date:Mar 09, 2021 • 16 hours ago • 2 minute read • comment bubble7 Comments
This photo illustration shows people wearing face masks, watch a televised conversation between Britain's Prince Harry with his wife Meghan Markle and US host Oprah Winfrey, in Arlington, Virginia March 7, 2021.
This photo illustration shows people wearing face masks, watch a televised conversation between Britain's Prince Harry with his wife Meghan Markle and US host Oprah Winfrey, in Arlington, Virginia March 7, 2021. PHOTO BY OLIVIER DOULIERY /AFP via Getty Images
Article content
Meghan, Duchess Of Sussex’s estranged half-sister has challenged the former actress over claims they were never close.

During her TV interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired in America on Sunday night, Meghan poked fun at the tell-all book her father’s other daughter, Samantha Markle, wrote about the sisters’ relationship – because they never really had one.


“I think it would be hard to tell all when you don’t know me,” the Duchess told Oprah when asked about Samantha’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1. “I grew up as an only child … The last time I saw her (Samantha) must have been at least 18, 19 years ago, and before then, 10 years before that.”

Meghan went on to claim Samantha only changed her last name back to Markle when she started dating Prince Harry, adding, “I think that says enough.”


A day after the explosive interview aired in the U.S., Samantha spoke to Inside Edition, stating, “I don’t know how she can say I don’t know her and she was an only child. We’ve got photographs over a lifespan of us together. So how can she not know me?”

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Samantha showed off photographs of her and young Meghan throughout the years, including one she insists was taken 13 years ago at her college graduation in 2008. She also maintained that she changed her name back to Markle many years ago and it had nothing to do with her sister.

“I was a Markle before she was,” she said. “I thought that was kind of weird that she would say I only changed my name back when she met Harry. Markle has always been my name.”

During her interview with Oprah, Meghan also confirmed she and her father, Thomas Markle, had become estranged after he lied to her about talking to the media about his daughter and handing over a letter she wrote to him just before her royal wedding.


He will appear on U.K. show Good Morning Britain on Tuesday to respond to his daughter’s chat with Oprah.

The show’s co-host, Piers Morgan, confirmed the news in a tweet on Monday, which read: “UPDATE: Meghan Markle trashed her dad on US TV today. On tomorrow’s @GMB, Thomas Markle will give his first exclusive interview in response (sic).”

'I WAS A MARKLE BEFORE SHE WAS': Meghan's half-sister responds to interview remarks

Meghan, Duchess Of Sussex’s estranged half-sister has challenged the former actress over claims they were never close.

torontosun.com

Meghan's estranged brother warned Harry not to marry her.

Harry should have listened to him.

It's funny how a lot of Meghan's family don't even speak to her. Her mother was her only family member at the wedding.

 

[Blackleaf]

Spilling the beans to Oprah just isn’t cricket

Harry and Meghan, this is not how Brits thrash out their family differences.

EMILY HILL​

9th March 2021​

Spiked

It was left to a rogue clergyman in the Church of England to defend Britain’s honour yesterday: ‘Harry and Meghan did NOT secretly marry three days before the royal wedding. Friends of the couple admit “secret marriage” was actually “a private exchange of vows”, as vicar asks “are rest of claims BS too?”’ (Daily Mail, 8 March.)

It’s quite clear now what the Queen must do to clear this all up. Summon them home and force the whole lot of them to thrash it out face to face, with lie-detector tests, on Jeremy Kyle. This is how we resolve internecine family warfare in our green and pleasant land.

Making malicious, wholly unsubstantiated smears that seep into us like a stain, on Oprah, just isn’t cricket.

I hate to sound like a stone-cold psycho but I never go on a date without googling the name of the man brave enough to ask me out. And, like almost everything Meghan and Harry said on ITV last night, the claim that Meghan knew nothing about the prince before she met him can be contradicted by the 2020 biography of the couple, Finding Freedom – which, as the Mail on Sunday tried to argue at the trial it wasn’t granted, was fact-checked by their most senior royal aide to ‘make sure’ authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand ‘got nothing wrong’.

Scobie and Durand are careful not to say she actually googled him: ‘What Meghan may have seen online could have easily convinced her to call the whole thing off.’ But she did have some knowledge of what was coming. When she told her ‘London-based agent Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne’ that she’d been set up on a blind date with Harry, this happened: ‘“This could be crazy’, Gina said, trying to impress upon the American the insane and unique culture of tabloid coverage in the UK that came with dating a royal. “You will be the most wanted woman.”’

Meghan wasn’t thinking that far ahead of herself, though, particularly since the woman who had set her up with the prince said, ‘Let’s just get you in a room together and see what happens’.

The day after her date with Prince Harry, the biography states, ‘Meghan called one of her girlfriends. “Do I sound crazy when I say this could have legs?”, she asked.’

Obviously, no girlfriend in her right mind would think you sound crazy when you say ‘this could have legs’ after a single encounter with a balding, ginger bozo with access to the Queen’s tiara collection.

Anyone who has worked as a journalist will have stared open-mouthed at Oprah’s conversation with Meghan. The billionaire didn’t ask the millionaire any of the questions a journalist would ask. For instance, Oprah questioned whether Meghan had made Kate cry in a set-to about bridesmaids’ dresses. But she did not ask Harry if he had shouted at the member of staff in charge of the Queen’s tiaras. ‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets’ was the line that was reported. So if they want to destroy the British press by saying everything we print is bunkum, Oprah ought to have given Harry the chance to state that he never said this.

But it’s obvious from Finding Freedom that the Sussexes are only doing this because what Meghan wanted was not got for her by our queen, so instead she has turned to the Queen of television in order to ride roughshod over us all in America.

Here’s page 262: ‘The senior courtiers who Diana used to refer to as “men in grey suits” were concerned that the global interest in and popularity of the Sussexes needed to be reined in. In the short period of time since their fairytale wedding, Harry and Meghan were already propelling the monarchy to new heights around the world. The Sussexes had made the monarchy more relatable to those who had never before felt a connection. However, there were concerns that the couple should be brought into the fold; otherwise, if left as they were, the establishment fears their popularity might eclipse that of the royal family itself.’

‘To palace officials wondering how to handle the couple there was another figure who looms large when you think of young women using a royal platform for global charitable crusading: Harry’s own mother’, political editor Tim Shipman wrote in The Sunday Times, quoting a source as saying, ‘The danger to them is that Meghan is going to be bigger than Diana’.

Well, she’s bigger than Diana now. But Princess Di didn’t want to destroy Britain. When she spoke to Martin Bashir none of us came away with the impression she hated us, the common people of this country. ‘I’d like to be a queen of people’s hearts, in people’s hearts’, she said, when asked. After last night, it seems pretty clear that the people Harry and Meghan truly despise are the readers of tabloid newspapers and people who express the wrong opinion about them on social media.

Even the most damaging allegations are hard to compute. Take Meghan’s statement that she approached HR when feeling suicidal rather than a doctor. She said she did this because as an actress she was in a union, which is a bit odd considering she has previously admitted to ‘“pretending” to be in an actor’s union to get a part early in her career’, while laughing:

‘I was Taft-Harteleyed, which is I pretended I was union… and you have to… it was the pilot called “Century City” with Héctor Elizondo. And I got there, and they’re like – so you’re union? And I’m like of course I’m union, I mean yeah absolutely. And then I wasn’t. To this day those casting directors will never hire me. I was such a fraud.’

But it’s the accusation of racism – which Oprah never pressed them to detail because they feared it would be ‘damaging’ to one particular individual in the royal family – that damaged the entire royal family, irreparably, because no one ever believes anything until it has been officially denied, and that denial must be forthcoming.

The Queen and Prince Philip have been ruled out as the culprits – by Oprah. We could all – I fear – imagine Philip saying something ghastly considering that he’s made endless remarks over the years that would have him cancelled today. (Including ‘Still throwing spears?’ to an Aboriginal Australian; ‘The Philippines must be half-empty as you’re all here running the NHS’ upon meeting a Filipino nurse at Luton and Dunstable hospital; ‘British women can’t cook’; and ‘How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the test?’ to a Scottish driving instructor.) But it wasn’t Prince Philip. So I do wish someone would point out that the only other member of the royal family on video using racist epithets is Prince Harry.

When Meghan Markle first came on the scene I did fear she’d interfere with my militant republicanism. But I would never have believed she would end up turning me into an ardent monarchist. We’re all waiting on a statement from the palace. The best statement they can make is to make no statement at all. Much as they might want us not to believe Meghan and Harry’s smears, all we can do is agitate for proper football matches to return so that we can show them that we bloody well don’t. Oh this summer our Elizabeth’s in for one hell of an overdue roar of ‘God Save the Queen’.

Emily Hill is author of the short-story collection, Bad Romance, and publishes at Substack: https://emilyhill.substack.com/

Spilling the beans to Oprah just isn’t cricket

Harry and Meghan, this is not how Brits thrash out their family differences.

www.spiked-online.com

 

[Blackleaf]

Breaking News:

Piers Morgan, a critic of Harry and Meghan, has quit as host of ITV's Good Morning Britain.

Weather presenter Alex Beresford accused Morgan of "trashing" Meghan Markle, leading to Morgan storming off set live on this morning's show.

Morgan has now quit the show.

 

[Blackleaf]

​

Australia Get It “Fake Woman & Fake Wedding ” Pass Us The “Chuck Bucket ” ​

Alan Jones is amazing!

 

[spaminator]

Meghan's father says Royal Family isn't racist, daughter 'let me down'
Author of the article:Reuters
Reuters
Publishing date:Mar 09, 2021 • 5 hours ago • 2 minute read • comment bubble32 Comments
Thomas Markle speaks to Good Morning Britain on March 9, 2021.
Thomas Markle speaks to Good Morning Britain on March 9, 2021. PHOTO BY @GMB /Twitter
Article content
LONDON — Meghan’s father Thomas Markle said on Tuesday that he did not think the British royal family was racist, and hoped that an alleged remark from a family member about the darkness of the skin of Meghan’s son was just a “dumb question.”

Meghan said that her son Archie, now aged one, had been denied the title of prince because there were concerns within the royal family about “about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.”


“I have great respect for the royals, and I don’t think the British Royal Family are racist at all. I don’t think the British are racist, I think Los Angeles is racist, California is a racist, but I don’t think the Brits are,” Markle told ITV.

“The thing about what colour will the baby be or how dark will the baby be; I’m guessing and hoping it’s just a dumb question from somebody … It could be somebody asked a stupid question. Rather than being a total racist.”


Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
“This whole thing about colour and how dark the baby is is bullshit,” Markle said. He thought that the comment should be investigated.

Markle and his daughter have been estranged since her marriage to Prince Harry in 2018. Markle, a former lighting director for U.S. TV soaps and sitcoms, pulled out of the wedding days beforehand after undergoing heart surgery.


Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
He said his daughter had let him down while he was ill.

“I also feel that she let me down,” Markle said. “I was in a hospital bed the last time we talked and we I never heard from them again – they didn’t care if I died.”


Asked about the interview Meghan and Harry gave to Oprah Winfrey, Markle said “they went way over the top,” and should have waited, considering that Queen Elizabeth’s husband Prince Philip was in hospital.

“They should have waited considering the queen’s age and Philip’s age,” he said.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1369206469367840768

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1369205861697064962

Meghan's father says Royal Family isn't racist, daughter 'let me down'

Thomas Markle said he hoped that an alleged remark about the darkness of the skin of Meghan's son was just a "dumb question."

torontosun.com

 

[Blackleaf]

​

Queen Responds To ‘LIARS’ Harry & Meghan Her Majesty Official Response Finally Released​

The first statement from Buckingham Palace: the Queen calls Harry and Meghan liars

 

[spaminator]

Piers Morgan to leave ITV's Good Morning Britain, ITV confirms
Author of the article:Reuters
Reuters
Paul Sandle
Publishing date:Mar 09, 2021 • 3 hours ago • 3 minute read • comment bubble29 Comments
Piers Morgan at the British Academy Britannia Awards in Beverly Hills October 25, 2019.
Piers Morgan at the British Academy Britannia Awards in Beverly Hills October 25, 2019. PHOTO BY MARIO ANZUONI /REUTERS
Article content
LONDON — Presenter Piers Morgan is to leave ITV’s ‘Good Morning Britain’, Deadline Hollywood reported on Tuesday.

ITV confirmed in a statement that Morgan was leaving the program.


“Following discussions with ITV, Piers Morgan has decided now is the time to leave ‘Good Morning Britain’,” the statement said. “ITV has accepted this decision and has nothing further to add.”

Britain’s media regulator launched a probe into Monday’s episode of ‘Good Morning Britain’ after receiving complaints about comments made by Morgan in the wake of Prince Harry and his wife Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey.

Morgan’s criticism of Meghan had become more vociferous in the wake of the interview.


Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
“We have launched an investigation into Monday’s episode of Good Morning Britain under our harm and offense rules,” regulator Ofcom said in a statement.

It said that as of 1400 GMT on Tuesday it had received 41,015 complaints about comments made by Morgan on the breakfast show, which he anchors and is broadcast by ITV.

Morgan, a former CNN presenter, has long criticized the couple, saying they have damaged the royal family and sought publicity on their own terms without accepting the responsibility and scrutiny that come with the job.


Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
ITV broadcast Oprah Winfrey’s interview with Meghan and Harry on Monday evening in which they revealed the depth of her unhappiness within the royal family.

It attracted more than half of the audience watching live TV at that time, with a peak of 12.4 million viewers, ITV said.

ITV Chief Executive Carolyn McCall told reporters she had not spoken to Morgan, but that Kevin Lygo, managing director media and entertainment, had.

“I know Kevin Lygo is speaking to him on a regular basis and has done so in the last couple of days,” she said.


Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Morgan has cast doubt on Meghan’s comments in the interview. When his co-presenter noted that Meghan had said she’d been driven to the verge of taking her own life, Morgan replied: “She says that, yes.”

McCall, who was presenting ITV’s full-year results, said Morgan had “qualified” his earlier comments.

Morgan said on Tuesday: “I still have serious concerns about the veracity of a lot of what she said, but let me just state for the record about my position on mental illness and on suicide.

“They should be taken extremely seriously and if someone is feeling that way they should get the treatment and help that they need every time, and if they belong to an institution like the royal family and they go and seek that help they should absolutely be given it,” he said.


McCall said Morgan was a freelance presenter and ITV had no control over his Twitter account, which has 7.7 million followers.

“He’s got personal profile on Twitter, it’s his personal account,” she said. “If it was about our shows, that would be different.”

She said she personally believed Meghan, and ITV was committed to supporting mental health. “ITV has many voices and we try and represent many voices on ITV every day,” she said. “It’s not about one opinion.”

ITV reportedly paid 1 million pounds to broadcast the interview, which was shown in the United States on Sunday.

McCall said ITV always followed the big news events and said there had been strong demand for ad slots, adding that the broadcaster would re-use the content in other programs to maximize the value of the rights.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1369352625955741699

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1369213156392906762

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1369237468025913346

Piers Morgan to leave ITV's Good Morning Britain, ITV confirms

A senior executive at British broadcaster ITV has spoken to presenter Piers Morgan about his criticism of Meghan.

torontosun.com

 

[spaminator]

Queen: 'The whole family is saddened' by Harry and Meghan's experiences
Author of the article:Reuters
Reuters
Publishing date:Mar 09, 2021 • 3 hours ago • 5 minute read • comment bubble48 Comments
In this file photo Queen Elizabeth II and her husband Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh arrive on the fourth day of the annual Royal Ascot horse racing event near at Ascot, west of London, on June 20, 2014.
In this file photo Queen Elizabeth II and her husband Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh arrive on the fourth day of the annual Royal Ascot horse racing event near at Ascot, west of London, on June 20, 2014. PHOTO BY CARL COURT /AFP via Getty Images
Article content
LONDON — Queen Elizabeth said on Tuesday the British royals were saddened by the challenging experiences of her grandson Prince Harry and his wife Meghan and promised to privately address revelations about a racist remark about their son.

Meghan and Harry’s tell-all TV interview with Oprah Winfrey aired on U.S. television on Sunday has plunged the monarchy into its biggest crisis since the 1997 death of Harry’s mother Diana.


In the two-hour show, Meghan accused Britain’s Royal Family of raising concerns about how dark their son Archie’s skin might be and ignoring her pleas for help while she felt suicidal.

Harry also said his father, heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles, had let him down and that he had felt trapped in his royal life.

“The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan,” Buckingham Palace said in a statement issued on behalf of Elizabeth.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
“The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.”

The Palace considered that this was a family matter, a royal source said, adding the royals should be given the opportunity to discuss the issues raised privately as a family.

The interview was watched by 12.4 million viewers in Britain and 17.1 million in the United States, triggering a crisis to which the monarchy had to respond, media said.

It has proved divisive among the British public, with some believing it showed how outdated and intolerant the institution was, while others decried it as a self-serving assault that neither Elizabeth nor her family deserved.

“It could hardly be more damaging to the Foyal Family, not least because there is little it can do to defend itself,” The Times said in a lead article under the title “Royal Attack.”

“The key to the monarchy’s survival over the centuries has been its ability to adapt to the needs of the times. It needs to adapt again,” The Times said.

Earlier on Tuesday, Charles made no comment when asked by a reporter what he thought of the interview while visiting a COVID-19 vaccine pop-up clinic in London.


A royal source had said Elizabeth, 94, who has been on the throne for 69 years, wanted to take some time before the Palace issued a response, saying it needed careful consideration.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
A former senior royal aide said it was likely that the three most senior royals – the queen, Charles and Prince William, second in line to the throne and Harry’s elder brother, would have held meetings with their private secretaries and communications chiefs to decide on their response.

“This is pretty important and they’ve got to judge it right,” said the former aide, adding the queen would have had the final say.

TABLOID TORTURE?

In the interview, nearly three years since her wedding in Windsor Castle, Meghan gained sympathy in the United States by casting some unidentified members of the Royal Family as uncaring, mendacious or guilty of racist remarks.

Meghan and Harry have also had a torrid relationship with the British press, successfully taking papers to court on occasions, and have repeatedly questioned what they say is reporting tainted by racist overtones.


Harry said in the interview he did not know where to turn when faced with such troubling media coverage and felt hurt when his family failed to call out racist reporting.

He said the Royal Family had an unhealthy silent agreement with the British tabloids and that the family was paranoid about the media turning on them.

“There is a level of control by fear that has existed for generations,” Harry said.

For the monarchy, which traces its history through 1,000 years of British and English history to William the Conqueror, Meghan’s bombshell has been compared to the crises over the death of Diana and the 1936 abdication of Edward VIII.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson watched the interview, his spokesman said, but would not be making further comment on it.

MORE ON THIS TOPIC

Piers Morgan at the British Academy Britannia Awards in Beverly Hills October 25, 2019.
Piers Morgan to leave ITV's Good Morning Britain, ITV confirms
Queen Elizabeth, accompanied by Prime Minister Theresa May meets PM Justin Trudeau ahead of the National Commemorative Event commemorating the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion on June 5, 2019 in Portsmouth, England.
Now not time to talk about breaking with monarchy, Trudeau says
Thomas Markle speaks to Good Morning Britain on March 9, 2021.
Meghan's father says Royal Family isn't racist, daughter 'let me down'

Johnson said on Monday he had the highest admiration for the queen but that he did not want to speak about the interview. New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said her nation was unlikely to stop having the queen as head of state soon.

‘TRAPPED’

Opponents of the monarchy said the allegations made by Meghan and Harry showed how rotten the institution was and that the Palace’s public relations machine had created a distorted image of the royals.

“Now people are getting a much clearer picture of what the monarchy is really like. And it doesn’t look good,” said Graham Smith, head of Republic, a campaign group which seeks to abolish the monarchy.

Royal supporters cast Meghan, 39, an American former actor, as a publicity seeker with an eye on Hollywood stardom.

A YouGov poll found a majority of young people thought the royals’ treatment of the couple was unfair, while half of older people said the opposite.

The gravity of the claims has raised questions about how the British monarchy, which survived centuries of revolution that toppled their cousins across Europe, could function in a meritocratic world.

Meghan, whose mother is Black and father is white, said her son Archie, who turns two in May, had been denied the title of prince because there were concerns within the Royal Family “about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.”

She declined to say who had voiced such concerns, as did Harry. Winfrey later told CBS that Harry had said it was not the queen or her 99-year-old husband Philip, who has been in hospital for three weeks while the crisis unfolds.

Meghan’s estranged father Thomas Markle, who she has not spoken to since her wedding, said he did not think the British Royal Family was racist.

Queen: 'The whole family is saddened' by Harry and Meghan's experiences

LONDON — Queen Elizabeth said on Tuesday the British royals were saddened by the challenging experiences of her grandson Prince Harry and his wife Meghan and…

torontosun.com

 

[spaminator]

Now not time to talk about breaking with monarchy, Trudeau says
Author of the article:Canadian Press
Canadian Press
Publishing date:Mar 09, 2021 • 2 hours ago • 2 minute read • comment bubble6 Comments
Queen Elizabeth, accompanied by Prime Minister Theresa May meets PM Justin Trudeau ahead of the National Commemorative Event commemorating the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion on June 5, 2019 in Portsmouth, England.
Queen Elizabeth, accompanied by Prime Minister Theresa May meets PM Justin Trudeau ahead of the National Commemorative Event commemorating the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion on June 5, 2019 in Portsmouth, England. PHOTO BY JACK HILL - WPA POOL /Getty Images
Article content
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Tuesday he’s not eager for a debate over the future of the monarchy in the wake of allegations of racism at Buckingham Palace.

Accusations from Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, that racism was the driving force behind their exit from royal duties and departure from Britain have set off a heated debate within the Commonwealth about future ties to the Queen.


“If people want to later talk about constitutional change and shifting our system of government, that’s fine, and they can have those conversations,” Trudeau told reporters Tuesday,

“But right now, I’m not having those conversations. I’m focused on getting us through this pandemic and bringing our economy roaring back.”

Trudeau said Canada still has work to do to eliminate discrimination and systemic racism in its institutions, but that’s doesn’t mean casting them aside and starting from scratch.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content

Both the NDP and Bloc Quebecois leaders say the allegations are further proof the monarchy is no longer relevant to everyday Canadians and should be abolished.

“I don’t see that the benefit of the monarchy in Canadians’ lives,” Singh said.,

“Now, even more so, with concerns about racism in the institution that were raised and pressures that were placed on Meghan Markle, just again highlight that exists at that institution and that is also horrible.”

In an interview with Oprah Winfrey that aired Sunday, the couple alleged that questions about what skin colour their children would have and a failure by the “institution” to push back against racist coverage in the British press ultimately led them to conclude they had to make a break.

For a time, the duo lived in Canada but when it became clear no security was going to be offered to keep them safe and the borders were about to slam shut around the world due to the pandemic, they decided to move to the United States.

The Liberals are still working on replacing the Queen’s representative in Canada, the governor general, after Julie Payette resigned earlier this year following revelations of a toxic workplace at Rideau Hall.

Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic Leblanc said while he’d hoped to have nailed down a process for choosing a successor to Payette a couple of weeks ago, the final pieces are now being put into place and should be unveiled imminently.

He too refused to comment on the situation now faced by the Queen, also saying he hadn’t watched the interview.

Now not time to talk about breaking with monarchy, Trudeau says

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Tuesday he’s not eager for a debate over the future of the monarchy in the wake of allegations of racism at…

torontosun.com