|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:19:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:22:49 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:24:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:38:17 GMT
Sandra Smith 1 month ago The Palace spokesman said that the Queen did not agree to ‘Invisiblet’ being named Lilibet. If anything he would have asked if he could name ‘the invisible child’ after her and she would have naturally thought it would be Elizabeth and obviously Diana. This is another sticking it to the Queen as she made it clear that when Prince Philip died,she didn’t want that name to continue.
114
chookfeather chookfeather 1 month ago Their statement claiming her permission was carefully worded. They “informed” Her Majesty and I agree they did not get her permission. So wrong of him
20
betmo betmo 4 weeks ago i agree...it's disgusting
9
missJolie85 missJolie85 4 weeks ago (edited) I mean you dont really have to join in and call the child invisblet or what not, like she has any choice in her name or if she is seen in public or not. It's very mean girlish. I mean seriously, behave better then Meghan, don't stoop to that level.
5
cactus gamer 218 cactus gamer 218 2 weeks ago Harry is just as disturbed as Meghan. There is no excuse for any of them. Harry understood, stop making excuses for him.
7
Nicki Millennium Nicki Millennium 2 weeks ago (edited) It's a given that she didn't agree to the name. It was a personal nickname from her father. I can't even picture her allowing the Cambridges (or anyone) to use it much less Harry and Meghan. Personally, I think it's odd if not a little creepy to give their child someone else's super-personal nickname. Even I would never name my child my mother's childhood nickname (Jekkie) because, that's something special between her, her parents and her siblings. It just goes to show how lacking in boundaries and common sense these two are. And I agree that this was a "nananana boo boo, you can't tell me what to do" situation.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:39:44 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1ayo4nChSEJ Gibbs 1 month ago (edited) Harry was always unlikeable. Even as a schoolboy, if you weren't in his inner circle you'd be ignored (if you were lucky) or be the recipient of boorish goading remarks if he was in a bad mood. More often than not there was an air of barely suppressed rage. In his personal relationships he was unpredictable - the screaming matches between Harry and Chelsy Davey were legendary and are well documented. Harry and Meghan are bullies and, like all bullies thry need to be faced down. Harry going after Camilla? Absolutely. Harry's emotional development is stuck as a bereaved 12 year old. He cannot bear to face the fact that his mother was a real woman, with faults as well as virtues, and anyone and anything that might be construed as meaning his mother was less than perfect he will pursue and attack remorselessly. Harry knows no boundaries - partly his mother's fault - and short of a miracle he won't change. Yes, Meghan brought about a change in Harry, but it wasn't a fundamental one: all she did was plot a way out of the family that he already wanted, and encourage and enable him to take off the mask of "Happy-go-lucky Harry" to show the world the "real" Harry. Well, we see you Harry, the "man you have become", and the reality isn't pretty. I think you're spot on about the titles, and about the catastrophic miscalculation about ignoring Camilla and the Cambridges. Camilla will be Queen, Charles loves her and he listens to her: she has had Meghan taped from Day One and all Meghan and Harry have done for three years is underline how right she was, and Charles will have noticed that.32 Penny Lane Penny Lane 1 month ago To save the royal family and Harry, their titles should be stripped. Meghan’s intentions were not honest from the beginning.63 Brenda Van Fleet Brenda Van Fleet 7 days ago If the queen takes away the title Meg will be gone before they blink. All she wanted was a title…she did not want the responsibility that goes with it. She knew what she was doing. Harry was fooled.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:41:04 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1ayo4nChSEBeatriz 1 month ago There will never be a true reconciliation between William and Harry. Not possible, Who could ever trust a traitor again? 21 Liz Bohan Liz Bohan 1 month ago Sadly I agree. William can NEVER trust Harry again! 3 The Royal Recollections The Royal Recollections 1 month ago You cannot unite with a traitor! Even if he apologizes, their relationship will never revert to the way it was. Sad, but very true!! 114 ? ? 1 month ago 😭really want the brothers to be as good as before, together with Kate … those days were gone 3 jo Theakston jo Theakston 1 month ago It might go back to what it was, Harry has to get rid of his narcissistic wife first. She is going to be a nightmare to get away from. I am sure Wills will be there for him. She a horrible person. 3 Best girl Best girl 1 month ago Harry has shown just how much corrosive envy he has carried inside , for most of his life . 6 Hedda Szczepanski Hedda Szczepanski 1 month ago @jo Theakston I really don’t think so. He is a traitor and shouldn’t be allowed back 3 cactus gamer 218 cactus gamer 218 2 weeks ago If Henry was stupid enough to sell out his family for some smelly ars, than he'll do it again.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:46:41 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1ayo4nChSEPuff Piece Puff Piece 1 month ago I think denying the titles of the children is more of a necessity than anything. They have no connection to the tradition and could grow up to be a second pair of loose and dangerous d list celebrity canons. Another reason is that having an established royal family in the US is unconstitutional (when they insist on wading into politics) and this makes the children’s safety an issue. There’s lots of crazies out there80 chookfeather chookfeather 1 month ago But the children do have titles..by virtue of Harry’s Dukedom. They just choose not to use them for fear of bullying at school. Like they won’t be home schooled. MM didn’t like her son being referred to as Earl of Dumbarton. I’m sure the people of Dumbarton are over joyed to know what Meghan thinks of Dumbarton.
3 Puff Piece Puff Piece 1 month ago @chookfeather They haven’t been made Prince and Princess like the Cambridge children which is what I meant.1 Lucy Patrick Lucy Patrick 1 month ago They would have got them once Prince Charles becomes king.Hedda Szczepanski Hedda Szczepanski 1 month ago There are no real children1 missJolie85 missJolie85 3 weeks ago (edited) @puff Piece To be be honest, why would they that? Especially Harry who is talking so much about not having a choice being born into this "institution". Princess Anne didn't want her children to have titles, while Andrew insisted his children did get titles. If you prefer them to have the privacy and a "normal life" you never had, then you dont wine about them not having titles. Again look at Anne. The hypocrisy of it all is annoying. 3 Glen Glen 11 days ago @missjolie85 anne's children would not have royal titles. Andrews girls have titles by right of being the grand daughters of the queen, nothing to do iwth him.1 missJolie85 missJolie85 11 days ago (edited) @glen Then you should do some research in this matter. Anne is not a street child the Queen found on street, it’s her daughter - Princess royal. Her children are also the Queens grandchildren, one of whom is her oldest grandchild. I dont understand your Ludacris argument at all. At that time there were no talk about slimming down the royals as there are now, and Anne’s children would have had titles if she hadn’t insisted they didn’t. Same with Prince Edward, who became an Earl as well when he married Sophie in 1999, and the couple agreed with the Queen that their offspring would be styled as children of an Earl rather than a Prince. The children were also given HRH titles at birth which they could choose to use when they turned 18, but so far, Louise has chosen not to do so. Even if she does sometimes represent the Queen at events, such as Buckingham Palace garden parties. Prince Andrew's daughters do use their titles, which is less typical for royals who are not working members of the royal family. Thats because Prince Andrew since birth made sure they were seen as princesses and titled as such. It’s all about the parents attitude here.
You dont even seem to know who Princess Anne is, or Phillip and Zara, which is Anne’s wish all along, that they are, for the most part, private citizens. These two claim to want privacy, yet they are showing up everywhere and are butt hurt their children didn’t get the title of Prince/Princess.
1 Ma Bear Ma Bear 8 days ago @chookfeather Wrong the children don't have titles at this stage.Sylvia Mcgeary Sylvia Mcgeary 4 days ago @puff Piece that's because they aren't a Prince and Princess. Once Prince Charles becomes king then they are a Prince and Princess.Sylvia Mcgeary Sylvia Mcgeary 4 days ago @glen Princess Anne is her daughter so her children are the Queens grand children just like Andrew who pushed for them to be Princess.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 14:51:47 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1ayo4nChSEAdmin edit: Will leave discussions what what is and not right royal behaviour for other threads. Heated enough topic. Lynn Baldwin 1 month ago Just because you’re born Royal doesn’t mean you have the “right stuff” to make it as a Royal. Harry is a petty, lazy vindictive man with very bad taste in women who just happened to be born Royal. His only outstanding quality was his “common touch” and ability to shine on walkabouts: a quality he shared with his late mother. Unfortunately, he also inherited many bad qualities from her side of the family. To put it mildly, they are not a nice family!
Harry’s title removal is a complicated dilemma. Neither of the Sussex’s behave in a manner befitting the crown and I can understand the temptation to remove the title. However, the current crop of working royals are outstandingly good at their jobs and Harry and Meghan were clearly not up to the task of being senior working royals. They simply were incompetent. Leaving in a huff, thinking they were going to launch Royal Family USA in the world’s proudest republic painfully illustrates the Sussex’s delusions of grandeur. They have not had a shining moment since leaving the protective fold of the monarchy; everything they do is like a rebrand of Keystone Cops… Royal Style! I don’t understand this idea of tarring and feathering exemplary Royal Family members on account of Harry and Meghan’s behaviour; expecting the good Royals to “control” Harry and Meghan is not feasible! They both will continue to behave disgracefully titled or not!
Since 2020 they have shown their true colours and are capable of nothing save for trouble. They are public cry babies! The Royal Family has given them a very long rope; they have taken the bait brilliantly and are doing a phenomenal job of hanging themselves.
Poor Harry is in very rough shape; he needs an intervention. I see divorce in their future and yes Meghan will try milk that title for all it’s worth! But she’s already cooked her goose; she can’t even do a 5 min puff pr without making a complete arse of herself. Nobody wants anything to do with her and it will only get worse without Haz by her side! I see a run down trailer with a beat up mailbox embossed with “Duchess of Sussex” in her future!
I don’t think removing their titles is worth the bother as they are doing an amazing job of ruining their lives all by their lonesome!34 Hedda Szczepanski Hedda Szczepanski 1 month ago Lynne, very well put. I agree with that 100% 3 Sally Robertson Sally Robertson 3 weeks ago Well said ! 2 Tom Taylor Tom Taylor 1 month ago Harry and Megan have no consequences!!! Had Megan been held accountable for her behavior and bullying this wouldn’t be happening!!! What is this woman ? She is such a curse !!!
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 15:14:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 15:15:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 15:15:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 15:17:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 1, 2022 15:17:55 GMT
|
|
sanka
Count/Countess
Posts: 269
|
Post by sanka on Sept 2, 2022 7:18:42 GMT
^ After years of hearing that James Hewitt is H's father it gets monotonous.
It is clear that H takes after the Spencers and some of the photos of H when he was young you can really see PC in eyes and top part of his face.
I agree the titles should be removed however this requires Parliament to remove the titles. That won't happen while the UK Parliament is focussing on a new PM etc.
The downside with the removal of the titles is that H is a Prince by birth and would remain as Prince Henry of Wales. Which would mean MM would then be Princess Henry of Wales. I think she would milk that for all it is worth but disregard the Henry of Wales for the correct title and just use Princess .... (I can't say it). It is how the media and many people seem to refer to Diana as Princess Diana when in fact she was Princess Diana but Diana, Princess of Wales (if I have mixed it up someone can correct me).
It is a complete mess and I wonder if the Palace is just letting them continue with enough rope. It looks like the public is seeing through all the fabrication/lies/mistruths/their version of the truth/embellishment. For instance, I find it hilarious that a Press Pack of 40 in the UK would be hounding Archie getting dropped at school. When they were living in the UK Archie was less than 1 years old and unless I have missed something in the Commonwealth you certainly don't start school when you are that young not even kindy.
|
|
|
Post by mrsmarple on Sept 2, 2022 7:25:33 GMT
Look at young photos of Prince Philip. Harry looks exactly like him.
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Sept 2, 2022 10:28:10 GMT
I think the "HRH" should be lifted, but not the peerages; second, this is why royal wives should not mess around since I am certain that if Diana had conceived Harry out of wedlock with another man, she would NEVER have survived it. The palace would have used that against her and would NEVER have supported Harry as their own. As for the rest of this, it really is time to stop letting royals get away with all of their antics. If I had had HM's authority, I would have taken even courtesy titles from Diana and Fergie after the divorce and same with Snowdon; they all knew what the duties were and Snowdon should not have retained his peerage after the divorce. He should have lost it for walking out on his marriage and the duties and for tormenting Margaret like he did. Fergie and Diana should have been left with only the Mountbatten-Windsor surname, no other way about it. Harry should lose his "HRH" and be told to live like a dippy aristocrat if that is how he wants to behave and as for messing with politics, that is dangerous. Meg should be stripped of everything and told that it shouldn't matter since she loves Harry so much. At least take her titles even if a new Letters Patent has to be written.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 2, 2022 14:41:38 GMT
Calls for stripping/removing any titles is going to open up a whole slew of trouble that will effect more so-called royals other than Harry. Thoughts about that in other threads, etc, but it is a matter of be careful of what you ask for, you just may get it? I have no issue with complete non-royals losing their titles. Again, in their threads as will leave this thread for title removal talk. (Admin edit) Their antics are getting more and more ridiculous as they are engaging in a sort of warfare against the Monarchy and it's head, the Queen. What they seem to be engaging in now seems to be passive/aggressive bull-sh#ting and nit-picking. Petty, manipulative and childish stuff. I say to Harry and Meghan - put up or shut up. If you have anything important to relate about what is TRULY going on in the family, then be open about it. Once and for all, just be HONEST. A lot of us figured things out years ago, and have had it with the long drawn out melodrama. The issue is that the Queen has no control over her family and the outsiders who were allowed in and helped make a farce out of her and her reign. And yes, she. former PMs, Parliament and others are/were very well-informed about what has been going down over the years, but she is such a passive figure that to date nothing has been done.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 2, 2022 14:44:11 GMT
Look at young photos of Prince Philip. Harry looks exactly like him. Yes, I agree.
|
|
|
Post by kueifei on Sept 4, 2022 22:26:28 GMT
Calls for stripping/removing any titles is going to open up a whole slew of trouble that will effect more so-called royals other than Harry. Thoughts about that in other threads, etc, but it is a matter of be careful of what you ask for, you just may get it? I have no issue with complete non-royals losing their titles. Again, in their threads as will leave this thread for title removal talk. (Admin edit) Their antics are getting more and more ridiculous as they are engaging in a sort of warfare against the Monarchy and it's head, the Queen. What they seem to be engaging in now seems to be passive/aggressive bull-sh#ting and nit-picking. Petty, manipulative and childish stuff. I say to Harry and Meghan - put up or shut up. If you have anything important to relate about what is TRULY going on in the family, then be open about it. Once and for all, just be HONEST. A lot of us figured things out years ago, and have had it with the long drawn out melodrama. The issue is that the Queen has no control over her family and the outsiders who were allowed in and helped make a farce out of her and her reign. And yes, she. former PMs, Parliament and others are/were very well-informed about what has been going down over the years, but she is such a passive figure that to date nothing has been done. If Charles, when King, strips them of their "HRH" and Parliament were to vote to remove their titles due to a lack of service, that would solve a lot of problems. Losing the "HRH" reduces their marketability and the loss of their peerages would mean that they would lose social cachet. It's not like either are interesting in and of themselves and it is clear that neither did a good job. Harry isn't owed anything anymore and it would put the Cambs on notice about not doing their jobs. A loss of titles is extreme, but it is clear that both are out of control and blew a dozen new chances and the new precedent would enable Charles to remove the titles of the Yorkies and then of course, others who are not pulling their weight. It would incentivize any new consorts (of what is left of the monarchical way of life) to remember why they are supposed to be working and contributing.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 4, 2022 22:38:36 GMT
Calls for stripping/removing any titles is going to open up a whole slew of trouble that will effect more so-called royals other than Harry. Thoughts about that in other threads, etc, but it is a matter of be careful of what you ask for, you just may get it? I have no issue with complete non-royals losing their titles. Again, in their threads as will leave this thread for title removal talk. (Admin edit) Their antics are getting more and more ridiculous as they are engaging in a sort of warfare against the Monarchy and it's head, the Queen. What they seem to be engaging in now seems to be passive/aggressive bull-sh#ting and nit-picking. Petty, manipulative and childish stuff. I say to Harry and Meghan - put up or shut up. If you have anything important to relate about what is TRULY going on in the family, then be open about it. Once and for all, just be HONEST. A lot of us figured things out years ago, and have had it with the long drawn out melodrama. The issue is that the Queen has no control over her family and the outsiders who were allowed in and helped make a farce out of her and her reign. And yes, she. former PMs, Parliament and others are/were very well-informed about what has been going down over the years, but she is such a passive figure that to date nothing has been done. If Charles, when King, strips them of their "HRH" and Parliament were to vote to remove their titles due to a lack of service, that would solve a lot of problems. Losing the "HRH" reduces their marketability and the loss of their peerages would mean that they would lose social cachet. It's not like either are interesting in and of themselves and it is clear that neither did a good job. Harry isn't owed anything anymore and it would put the Cambs on notice about not doing their jobs. A loss of titles is extreme, but it is clear that both are out of control and blew a dozen new chances and the new precedent would enable Charles to remove the titles of the Yorkies and then of course, others who are not pulling their weight. It would incentivize any new consorts (of what is left of the monarchical way of life) to remember why they are supposed to be working and contributing. It's going to open up a whole sh#tload of problems, and could result in both of Charles' sons being stripped for numerous reasons. The Queen's passive nature ultimately allowed it to come down to this.
|
|