‘Cruel’ Prince Harry Betrayed Dying Queen Elizabeth, Friend Says

Post the article

MeAgain will soon be calling a press conference to demand her privacy at this difficult time.

Prime time must be off. How many BRF threads just this morning…

[quote] Prime time must be off. How many BRF threads just this morning…

Did you look at the date and time of when the article was published? It was this morning. Was OP suppose to wait some unknown appropriate of time before posting this news?

Wow, Harry is a selfish, entitled asshole.

R3 what is primetime?

They are thousands of miles away and the British press still can't stop writing about them. Which is very telling. How long are they going to play the Queen Elizabeth card? The broad is dead, let her rest. Harry and Meghan hurt the Queen, bullshit. That woman was tough as nails.

didn't the Queen do a completely coherent tv statement the day before she died?

R6: That's when Harry is making an ass of himself and Meghan is speed-dialing trying to get invited to H-wood parties where she is persona non grata.

Harry and Meghan made the Queen's last years a living hell if her friends who saw the effects of H&M's actions on the Queen - as opposed to DL posters who did not - are to be believed.

R8: No, she touched hands with Ms Truss, the UK's shortest-termed PM, the day before she died.

[quote]They are thousands of miles away and the British press still can't stop writing about them. Which is very telling.

The Harkles & their drama is nothing if not gold-star clickbait, however, it's probably also now that the Funeral/Coronation is over, the knives are coming out from people connected/adjacent to the BRF who've kept their mouths shut for months & now want to unleash on them.

Daily Beast seems like it gets involved in top notch journalism, especially having a "Royalist Correspondent"!

That "news story" is fucking hilarious trite, reckon Tom Sykes was a few pints in when that was written.

More knives, please. Harold and Sparkles insisted on conducting their interview of lies with Oprah while Prince Philip was dying in the hospital. They thought he was kidding about being so sick, and complained about the suggestion to wait. Nice way to treat your "granny," Harold. MORE KNIVES OUT

Do you actually believe what you're saying, I'm assuming your an actual adult?!

I can't read the fucking article. No access

I give Meghan a pass because she doesn't even care for her own relatives, so expecting her to care about Harry's is asking a lot.

But him? Fuck that little shitweasel. You don't do that to little old ladies who had given you everything in life, doted on you, and were near death. Just Harry is garbage.

Andrew and his rape and pedophilia ways put that old lady 6 feet deep faster than anything else

Can someone post the gd article so i can read it, ffs

They are matched in shitweasle territory. She was a cunt to staff, relatives, kids, elders, everyone. Manners and politeness are not too much to ask.

A friend of the late Queen Elizabeth has dismissed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s reported decision to stop spilling royal secrets, saying the couple should have held their peace in the last months of the queen’s life when it was clear the queen was dying and was in great physical pain. The friend’s furious response came after a story in British tabloid The Sun claimed that Harry and Meghan will stop making content slamming the royal family, with an anonymous source saying: “That period of their life is over as there is nothing left to say.” The bereaved friend’s outraged reaction represents a rare insight into the closely guarded and highly secretive circumstances surrounding the death of Elizabeth, who died in Scotland in September 2022 as a result, The Daily Beast understands, of bone cancer. The friend of the late queen’s told The Daily Beast: “For the last years of her life, certainly from when her husband died [in April 2021], the queen was in a lot of pain. In the final months, of course, it got very much worse; by the time of the Platinum Jubilee (June 2022), she couldn’t see very much, she couldn’t hear very much, and she was easily confused. She barely moved from her apartments in Windsor Castle. Appearing on the balcony at the jubilee required a titanic effort.

“That was the time for Harry and Meghan to bite their tongue. Instead they produced this unending stream of incredibly hurtful films and interviews attacking her life’s work. For Harry to announce he was writing a memoir when his grandmother was not just recently widowed but actually dying herself, as he must have known she was—well, the cruelty of it takes the breath away.

“The idea that they are now going to take a vow of silence after all the damage they have done, even if it was true, which I very much doubt, will do nothing to assuage the anger and disgust some of her friends feel about what they did to the queen in her final years.” …

… Although the palace refused to comment at the time, and her death certificate simply cited “old age,” her friend Gyles Brandreth subsequently reported that the queen had been suffering from bone marrow cancer at the time of her death. The bereaved friend told The Daily Beast they did not know the exact type of bone cancer with which the queen was afflicted, but said they saw no reason why Brandreth should be incorrect. Bone cancer can cause severe, chronic pain and can make it difficult to move around, which would mesh with the palace’s default description of her health in the months before her death that she was suffering “episodic mobility problems.” However, sources have told The Daily Beast that she also found it increasingly difficult to focus or concentrate on complex matters for more than a few minutes, and that the ongoing pain of her condition was partly responsible for her withdrawal from many aspects of public life. Although she was never photographed in a wheelchair, she used one regularly to get around the palace, a source previously told The Daily Beast. Harry seemed to hint at a clear knowledge of his grandmother’s vulnerability when he told the Today show’s Hoda Kotb in an April 2022 interview, that he had visited her with Meghan and controversially said, “I’m just making sure she’s, you know, protected, and got the right people around her.” The remark irritated other members of the family who felt Harry and Meghan’s actions, including their Oprah Winfrey interview, had in fact been a major cause of unhappiness and stress for the queen.

The anger expressed by the friend in the new remarks mirrors, to some extent, a highly critical assessment of Harry’s behavior given by King Charles’ best friend, Lord Nicholas Soames, in an extraordinary interview with the London Times in the days before the coronation, that was to some extent buried by the mountain of coronation coverage.

Soames excoriated Harry for “hurtful” behavior of “the cruelest” kind toward his father, saying that publishing a memoir and giving interviews attacking the family had deeply wounded and upset the king.

Advertisement Soames said: “In respect of Prince Harry… I can’t put myself in the position where my own son, if he did something like that to me, it would just be the cruelest.” Later in the interview, asked how Queen Camilla felt about Harry, Soames dodged the question saying he hadn’t discussed it with her, returning instead to how Harry’s public attacks on the family had affected Charles, saying, “Of course it was hurtful, you could see it, written all over his face. Put oneself in his position. It was just painful beyond words.”

“This stuff was shoved in her face on an almost weekly basis. It had an impact.” — Friend of late queen.

The new claim by the bereaved friend also meshes with a report in January in the Daily Telegraph which said that Harry and Meghan’s “ambushing” of the family, “had an impact” on the queen’s health and that the prospect of the book “was playing on her mind in her last months.”

One source, described as a “friend of the late queen” told the Telegraph: “This stuff was shoved in her face on an almost weekly basis. It had an impact. She had lost Prince Philip, and then the constant ambushing of the Royal family by a much-loved grandson did take its toll. At that stage in your life and your reign, you just don’t need that on top of everything else.” Advertisement Next week, Harry’s readiness to either continue or desist from attacking his family may be tested when he becomes the first senior member of the royal family to testify in court in well over a hundred years. Harry alleges that he was subject to illegal surveillance by Mirror Group Newspapers and has claimed, in a separate suit, that he was excluded from family discussions about the issue because he was seen as a “hothead.”

He also publicly revealed that his brother was secretly paid a large cash settlement by News Group Newspapers, the Rupert Murdoch-owned publisher of The Sun, to boost his own case.

The offices of the king and Prince Harry did not respond to requests for comment

I despise it when people mistreat olds. I hope it comes back around on Just Harry, sooner rather than later. POS!

R15 gives insane, ignorant sm-conniving narcissists such as Markle "a pass"?

Fuck that shit.

Misandry, anyone?

r9 I have long thought Harry and Meghan are morally guilty of elder abuse of his grandparents They were effectively trying to publicly blackmail them, upping and upping the stress and threats to try and get the family to give in to them. If that happened in an ordinary family it would more easily be clear out for what it is- abuse ,without the unhelpful addition of an army of fans ,sugars and people treating Harry and Meghan as agenda forwarding tools/avatars , blurring and complicating the obvious. They abused his elderly grandparents.

Harry is a douchebag. He's inconsiderate, ungrateful, entitled, arrogant with no self-awareness.

^^ Markle is no different. A match made in hell that won't last.

If true. that old hunch-backed gnome got exactly what she deserved. She was a nasty bitch who raised and surrounded herself with equally nasty people. Everything was all about her and protecting her legacy. Her sister and uncle among others be damned. What a top shelf cunt!

r28 Please tell me what she did to her sister. She never stopped her marrying Peter Townsend if that's the angle your going for.

They are despicable people who have proven they have nothing to contribute other than their greed and need for worshipful "fans."

I seldom wish ill for others, but I won't weep at their coming tragedies.

[quote] I seldom wish ill for others, but I won't weep at their coming tragedies.

To be fair, I doubt many people will waste much time sobbing over your’s either.

Thank you for posting the article

Bullshit

Her rapist son cauused her more damage and heartache than Harry

^Gotta be a sussex Stupud. Stolid, off topic, not very bright, and completely confused when some truth rolls by.

This reminds me a a recent Spectator article where a friend of the Queen who attended a drinks and dinner get together early in the summer at Balmoral was interviewed. The person reported the HM called Meghan "evil" during cocktail time. People's 'eyebrows shot to the ceiling' because it was so out of character for her (now, learning that she had lost a lot of hearing, she must have said it very loudly, lol).

She must have been at wits end to say something like that. I wondered also how much of her assessment came from the independent investigation she commissioned to investigate the DoS's bullying of staff. What was reported publicly was bad enough, imagine all of the content with staff spilling their guts to investigators... She chose not to reveal the contents. Probably because they were so damaging AND demonstrated that HR or whomever failed to protect the staff from bullying until Jason Knauf and William stepped in. And then, of course, if heavily negative about Markle, the stans would cry racism, etc. It was a no win either way.

Knowing the type of person Meghan is and being subjected to defamatory accusations while her husband lay dying and then later as she was wracked with pain and dying herself must have been beyond stressful. Remember, she was famously avoidance of conflict. Constantly being subjected to the Sussexes' special brand of ccrueltyand neediness is beyond the pale...

^As tl;dr as that was, I forgot to mention that this new information about her cognitive decline and Harry's likely awareness that she was dying casts a sinister tone to his last face to face meeting with her "to check in and make sure she's surrounded by the right people."

If Harry didn't know, then Meghan would have told him that addled old people can be very sentimental and vulnerable and sometimes generous. It would not surprise me one bit if Harry had gone into that meeting expecting to come out with the promise of cash.

He attempted to exploit his dying granny who was in excruciating pain. No wonder courtiers didn't want him alone with her.

It was incredibly cruel of him to name his daughter Lilibet

From article:

[quote]the couple should have held their peace in the last months of the queen’s life when it was clear the queen was dying and was in great physical pain.

This is the thing about royalty: they expect everyone else’s life to grind to a standstill for endless ass kissing. Because someone’s sick or dying doesn’t mean others have to upend their lives and feelings indefinitely. And if Big Liz was distressed by her grandchild, she could have picked up the fucking phone and discussed it with him.

[quote]she couldn’t see very much, she couldn’t hear very much, and she was easily confused. She barely moved from her apartments in Windsor Castle.

Which brings up: was it her grandson’s life that upset her, or those close to her running to her with gossip? If she couldn’t see or hear and was confused, what did it matter how others lived? Sounds like it was the tattletales who injured her, if she even was.

I'm deadly curious to know the other shenanigans these two got up to behind closed doors. I'm sure there are several other stories of their awfulness that have not come out as the royal family would rather news of these two die away, even if such stories would further ruin Harry and Meghan's reputations.

Time to buy another award!!

[QUOTE]Because someone’s sick or dying doesn’t mean others have to upend their lives and feelings indefinitely.

You may not be aware of this, but death is finite, inevitably so.

Old stuff that essentially is a pile of speculative bullshit that doesn’t matter anyway.

[quote] Harry and Meghan made the Queen's last years a living hell

Yes because they stepped away from the royal duties bullshit, and explained that bigotry was part of the reason why.

Clearly much worse than cheating on your wife, and the mother of the future king of England, with a (also married) bearded hag, then proclaiming you want to be a tampon inserted into her pussy.

R43 Is it bigotry if you merely think someone is a desperate, untalented climber who craves attention the way a normal human craves oxygen?

What bigotry? Even Harry walked it back to "unconscious bias" on the part of the RF, and the Sussexes made it known how much they loved Lady Susan Hussey.

He stepped away from royal duties to go live in a nation that's decended into the passive acceptance and, in some cases, promotion of actively racist policies and personal behavior.

They certainly put their bodies where there minds aren't.

The Harolds didn't "step away from royal duties." Let's be honest, the "granny" who Harry thought "said nothing" in fact mapped out a perfect plan whereby they were forced to leave while believing it was their decision. Now, 3 years later, Sparkles is reigniting her BLOG for lack of other ideas, and Harold is about to be grilled by a hostile lawyer in an English court. Not exactly a bed of roses.

Link please, R43, to where Charles said that he wanted to be a tampon inserted into anybody’s pussy.

While you’re talking about “RIDIC”.

[quote] What bigotry?

It’s so easy to rattle their cages by holding up a mirror to them. They immediately melt down.

[quote] if you merely think someone is a desperate, untalented climber who craves attention the way a normal human craves oxygen?

Do pay attention — we’re not talking about Kate here.

Harry’s a despicable ginger prick and the wife is a soulless grifter. They are both beyond contempt.

And, drop dead R49

Speaking of untalented climber, Sparkles couldn't have made a bigger bag fumble. It's what she will forever be remembered for. Onwards to your blog, Sparkles, named after Harold's nanny.

My parents are both dead. I regularly take to lunch the old dolls who were my mom’s close friends. All in their 90s and with all their marbles but physically very frail. For most, the only time they get out is when I puck them up for lunch. Most have kids who live out of state and others have kids who are just assholes.

I get that the kids (well, 60 year olds) who live out of state have their own lives to live and can’t return to take care of their mom. But the ones who are assholes, each is a succubus, blaming their parents for all their woes, demanding money and never lifting a damned finger to help. Weirdly, the moms of the users are constantly courting these assholes, hoping to win them over.

So totally get what’s happening here. I used to be amused by H/M’s buffoonery, but this story makes me ill and rings so true. What a couple of assholes. Hope everyone spills the beans on them now.

Apparently the old cunt did not like Chelsea Davies either. I bet her old ass rued the day she pressured harry to end that relationship. Her meddling has resulted in the unhappiness of many family members. But hey, she peeped Megan was a evil because she is evil. I am sure she hated the fact that unlike all the other family members that licked her ass crack that low born American bitch would not yield. Oh, I am sure naming that brat Lilibet was pure spite.

Well, of course Meghan didn't like Chelsey.

R53 according to Harry she didn’t like Chelsey. Consider the source. What grandmother gives a damn who their grandson is dating?

Love you R52 for being nice to the ladies.

r43 Again they asked half in half out- it's a rewriting of history to say they fled royal life because of their suffering and moral outrage at how they were treated . Their whole narrative relies on brushing that half in half out fact under the carpet.

Simple gainsaying by bigoted Brits doesn’t make it so, cuntingangel. She had the nerve to be American and half-black so the British vomit press had it out for her Day 1, and the vomit British public was eating it up Day 1 too. When they packed it in as having had enough, THAT got bootstrapped into “she’s selfish and dishonest.”

Like you, it’s so boring. So small.

It's amazing how they've never been challenged on their sob story about how they were "forced" out of royal life

"cuntingangel" Ooh, clever!

This reminds me a a recent Spectator article where a friend of the Queen who attended a drinks and dinner get together early in the summer at Balmoral was interviewed. The person reported the HM called Meghan "evil" during cocktail time. People's 'eyebrows shot to the ceiling' because it was so out of character for her (now, learning that she had brain fog, confused thoughts and declining cognitive function she must have been talking gibberish lol).

See R46, it goes both ways

Sorry meant R35

Sad story and all too believable. RIP QEII.

R57. Half in/half out doesn't work. The queen said NO as did Charles and William. No one brushed in under the carpet. The Markles are pissed they didn't get their own way. No means no.

Actually, r61, if you had knowledge or experience with the elderly with declining cognitive functions, heavily emotional issues and experiences can be readily remembered and can become fixations even decades after they occured. My Alzheimer's mother remembered grudges she had in the 70s. No, not her 70s, the 1970s. Three decades later, I'd hear about these awful women whose names I remembered because she complained about them so much during my childhood. She still carried them around.

What does occur during cognitive decline is a loosening of inner restraints and internal censorship. Hence saying something so out of character.

r64 I know half in half out doesn't work but their narrative from Oprah interview onwards has been rewritten as if they flees injustice and trauma, fled for their wellbeing to escape a form of royal hell. The truth is the Disneyfication fairytale of their story was an attempt to rebrand their narrative as victims of the royal institution when in truth they didn't flee they still wanted an in. A childish tantrum about how awful it is they like most people had a job with less rewarding boring points. Their whole narrative and aims are one massive contradiction.

Gingers have no soul.

[quote] lol

LoL! :)

[quote] heavily emotional issues and experiences can be readily remembered and can become fixations even decades after they occured

How about heavy colds?

Please, the H&M duo were having private discussions with media groups very early on and already were planning their exit by the time she got pregnant.

Like the outdated idiocy that King Charles broke up his marriage. Diana began having affairs first and neither of them were right. She actually never wanted a divorce, but her own public maneuvering set it in motion.

The Queen may not have had cognitive decline. By the time we're talking about, if the reports are true, she'd have been on very heavy painkillers. Add that to being in her 90s and having declining sight and hearing, and occasional confusion would have been an almost certain result.

Hear hear, R70, and I'd like to add to that that the Queen was TEN when her dickhead uncle abdicated. She had absolutely zero to do with it. It was her mother who wanted to carry on the vendetta after QEII was queen, and QEII did always blame her uncle's actions for her father's early death, because of the enormous stresses being king put him under.

Please stop watching The Crown if you can't learn the difference between fiction and reality.

[quote]R31: To be fair, I doubt many people will waste much time sobbing over your’s either.

Oh, dear, x 3: Misplaced cliche; fundamental English error; illogical attempt at parallel rejoinder.

Always good to see low intelligence matched with poor communication skills. And such a sad, sloppy impulse we see as the fool pees down its leg.

Or as she'd say, "it's."

R70, wasn't Charles cheating on Diana with Camilla from the get-go of their relationship and marriage.

Can someone please explain the English loathing and reflexive denigration of gingers? Where the hell does this come from and why? It seems gingers do not have an easy life amongst the English.

R70, the Harkles weren't planning a full exit from the get-go, they were planning their grifting, merching and half-in, half-out scenario. Because they weren't allowed it, they pulled the full exit with one year's trial.

^^Laughing at your premise that the Harolds ever had a choice, and that the "one year's trial" wasn't code for "bye bye now." The Windsors held all the cards and chose the least harrowing scenario, calculating that the lies and trash talk were preferable to accommodating vipers in the house.

The two in California are a couple of clunks who deserve each other.

If you look at pictures and film footage of Queen Elizabeth from a year before her death, then of her appearance on the balcony of Buckingham Palace until her last appearance with Liz Truss, even the lay man can tell some disease had afflicted her.

We now know it was a form of bone marrow cancer. My mother suffered and died from a form of bone marrow disease. It was physically painful.

In her position, Elizabeth II wanted to make sure there was a seamless transition to the next reign. There was turmoil instead in her final year. Any parent wants peace in his or her family. Elizabeth II was no doubt like any parent. She was also in a unique position, and she wanted to make sure the Crown continued.

This dimwit and his wife put their own interests ahead of attending to a dying matriarch.

To be sure the British tabloids used racist tropes in covering Meghan Markle. That was wrong. More power to her and her husband in going after them.

His (and her) grievances against his family were and are petty and vindictive.

The comment about their child's skin color was not jaw-dropping and deserving of condemnation. It was eye-rolling. That's it.

His lists of grievances and slights in his book are petty and self-serving.

The two of them worried a sick and dying old lady.

They ought to be ashamed of themselves. And they deserve each other.

Harry will never live this down. Long after the social climbing narcissist dumps him, Harry will have to live with the aftermath of what he did to his grandparents, the rest of his family and the people of his former country. The British public blame the actress more than they blame Harry but they still blame him strongly enough to give him shit about it for the rest of his life. He totally deserves it too. The actress will spiral down into ever less lucrative gigs on "reality tv" programs and become a Housewife/Kartrashian/WAG level of celebrity.

So that's nice.

At least the Kartrashians are billionaires with no end in sight for revenue streams.

Do you admire them in some way, R78?

Good heavens.

Put down the drink or pipe, r79. OK, good. Go back and re-read r78. Did you notice I used "Kartrashian" and qualified the sentence up front with "At least?" What does that tell you?

Let me spell it out. I contrasted the Sussexes likely dwindling financial outlook to the KarTRASHians completely rosey future. To be clear, the use of the word trash conveys the opposite of admiration.

r58 Your post is one massive exercise in gainsaying and deflection. Facts are facts-they asked for half in half out.

[quote] Can someone please explain the English loathing and reflexive denigration of gingers? Where the hell does this come from and why? It seems gingers do not have an easy life amongst the English.

Maybe because a lot of gingers are known to be Irish.

Elder abuse

People here need to learn to go into settings and turn off the javascript so they can read articles that are paywalled.

Is that what you did, R80?

I thought you put your emphasis on the fact that they were "at least" preferable to the Duke and Duchess of Overseas because they had more money coming in than the Sussex grifters.

Perhaps I phrased the question poorly. Do you prefer the KarTRASHians to the Duke and Duchess of Overseas? Are they better because their grift is better?

How do we measure the comparative awfulness of House Sussex to House Kardashian?

R85- you seem like self-performance & unmitigated attention, right?

R86, I'm not even sure what that question means or if it actually is a complete question.

Do you have a clarification?

How many racist articles were there about Markle? I've only heard about the "straight outta Compton" (written by a US journalist) and the "exotic DNA" ones, which were certainly atrocious but what else was written about her that was racist? And sexist: What was written about her that was sexist?

Harold said that the word 'Megxit is sexist. I think he was just jelly his name wasn't involved.

[quote]wasn't Charles cheating on Diana with Camilla from the get-go of their relationship and marriage.

There is no evidence for this. He said publicly, during the War of the Waleses, that he remained faithful to Diana until it was clear to him that his marriage had irrevocably broken down (by which he may well have meant that she had a boyfriend). The Parker Bowleses continued to be part of his social circle, as they always had been, but there is no evidence of cheating in the early years. One of her children was only two years old when he married Diana.

It bears mentioning that Camilla’s first husband Andrew Parker Bowles had fucked an awful lot of woman whilst married to her, something not uncommon or even remarkable in their world.

Not to throw this too far OT, I'm curious what the attitude in their social set towards women who have affairs. OK as long as it's discreet and not the gardener or stable boy?

Attitude? It is expected at a certain level of the gentry as long as they don't scare the horses. There are exceptions, as when the Duke of Argyle, husband of Margaret Campbell, the Duchess, was looking to divorce his wife, he went through her desk and found Polaroids of his wife, wearing nothing but her signature three-strand pearl necklace and fellating someone other than her husband. The someone may have been Douglas Fairbanks or the UK's Defense Minister (and Churchill's son-in-law) but whilst the act is shown, the man's head was not. At the time, per Margaret, the only Polaroid camera in the UK was one lent to the Defense Ministry. Margaret got around: she screwed everyone from David Niven when she was 15 to publisher Max Aitkin and Prince Aly Khan while she was married to one of her two husbands. Her story is the basis for "A Very British Scandal" starring Clare Foy that came out a year or two ago. She was also the step-mother of Lord Colin Campbell who was briefly married to DL fave Lady Colin Campbell.

And if your wife is fucking the King or King-to-be, all the better - it's considered an honor, not reason for a divorce. Just ask Mr Simpson.

[quote] He said publicly, during the War of the Waleses, that he remained faithful to Diana until it was clear to him that his marriage had irrevocably broken down

Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he? What a crock of shit.

[quote] ...what the attitude in their social set towards women who have affairs.

There is a tale about when Diana was having an affair with the married Oliver Hoare, an art dealer who was friends with both Charles and Diana. (I don't know if the Wales were separated or divorced by this time.) When informed of the affair, supposedly, Charles remarked "Whatever do they have to talk about?"

Thanks, r93.

They could have called it Hexit.

Queen Elizabeth's departure was Exit

By this time, everyone knows Harry, Meghan and Andrew are losers. The most interesting thing about this article is it let slip the Queen’s cognitive decline and confusion. Sounds like a regency could have been put into place, but perhaps Charles knew the end was near and it was kinder to let nature take its course.

I’m not sure what it says about the attitude to affairs in general, but the Parker-Bowleses seem to have remained on excellent terms. Andrew Parker Bowles attended the Coronation and was seated beside his two children, across from Charles and Camilla.

I still can't believe they had the balls to name their child the Queen's nickname. It just seems so short sighted because your child will be stuck with that name for years unless they change it.

The choice of Lilibet was cynical, grasping and cruel, especially since they never consulted The Queen, despite claiming that they did. What kind of sick fucks weaponize a child's name?

"The Stuarts. The Tudors. The Windsors. Soon they will all quake in the shadow of the Parker-Bowleses."

r102 very true. It's one thing to name a business, or a boat, or even a pet. But to name your own child for some kind of reprisal is just sick. Somebody who truly loves their child would not do something like that.

Camilla is taking lessons from DL fave, Lady Livia Augusta.

The only difference in attitude towards men and women having affairs is that the family must already be in place. You can't have women going round having affairs while still having children who are heirs to a lot of property, or worse, a title. It has to be clear (to everyone) that all children of an aristocratic marriage belong to the husband. Otherwise you get rumours like those which have circled around Harry for much of his life.

That's why I think if Charles and Camilla had been a committed love match in the first instance and he had put his foot down, the authorities could have got round it by having her be clearly with only him, and seen with him constantly, for two or three years between engagement and marriage. The concern with marrying an "experienced" girl was that she could have a first baby that might have been someone else's, which would have been a catastrophe in Charles's case. Everyone knew William and Kate were sleeping together years before they married, but because she made it so clear she had eyes only for him, nobody ever worried about George's provenance.

The real problem was most likely that Camilla wasn't that committed when they were first together. All the evidence suggests Andrew Parker Bowles was a much bigger prize if you weren't seriously interested in becoming queen, which it's pretty clear she wasn't and still isn't. She may well have grown to love Charles more subsequently, but we've heard very little about her being brokenhearted when they first parted, and everything suggests she's jolly thrilled not to have had Diana's life.

The sewage squad whining about the BRF not acknowledging the birthday of Dimbo's daughter.

It seems rather petty not to acknowledge the birthdays of small children, who are Charles' grandchildren, after all. They have nothing to do with a falling out between their parents and their father's family.

This clearly demonstrates the irreparable rift between the two sides.

Then again, we simply do not know what goes on behind closed doors. Did Charles reach out to them to wish his granddaughter a happy birthday? Did William do the same?

This may also indicate Charles' desire for a slimmed down monarchy. After all, Mr. and Mrs. Harry Mountbatten-Windsor of Montecito, CA, USA undertake no public duties befitting their titles. Why should they or their children get public accolades? They do not even reside in the land from which those titles spring!

Let's see if there is a public acknowledgement of the birth of Eugenie's second child this summer to gauge why there was no acknowledgment of Lilibet's birthday.

One of these clunks has cut her family apart from her mother off. Together, they've now cut off her husband's family. Their accusations that there was no support for her in learning the ways of Royalty ring hollow at times. The late Queen supposedly suggested she turn to Sophie for guidance...a wise choice considering she was a commoner marrying a monarch's younger son...like Ms Markle did. Meghan turned her down, saying that all she needed was her husband. It was a good suggestion considering Sophie was raked through the coals early in her marriage for serious missteps and telling tales out of school.

The two clunks feed each other's sense of entitlement and grievances.

In the long view for the monarchy, good riddance...they are gone. There is only so much traction a middle-aged couple can get from childhood trauma, petty grievances, an extravagant wedding, and a less than a two year turn at public duties.

After his suit against the tabloids, what will this self-entitled couple do for the rest of their lives?

Sue his own family?

Harold is already suing his own family, for free security on the grounds if his specialness and cheapness. Other than that Brits cannot personally sue the Monarch (or the heirs too, I believe).

[quote]Mr. and Mrs. Harry Mountbatten-Windsor of Montecito, CA, USA

Do you have this saved to your clipboard?

R110...lol

Whenever I start to write it here, the words pop up as soon as I type the first two or three letters. The same with the racist, sexist, irresponsible imbecile I don't like to name!!

It's just me being snarky and engaging in pointless bitchery.

According to the link, the Royals have not necessarily ignored the kid's birthday, though they'd be entirely within their rights if they did. They have barely sighted her her entire life on account of her parents' removing themselves to another country before her birth. What the spokesperson says is that they never acknowledge the birthdays of non-working Royals on social media, doubtless for the very good reason that it would be invasion of privacy to do so. Normal people don't like stuff about their kids being published by others.

The fact that Meghan believes nothing exists if it doesn't happen on social media is purely evidence of her fatuous philosophy. Charles probably did send private greetings: even if he didn't GAF his office would be onto the need to make no missteps around Harry.

r109 - No, he didn't sue his family. He sued the government which foots security. In other words, he initially asked the tax payers to foot the bill until the tabs caught wind. Then his lawyers amended the court filing to say that Harry would pay for the Metropolitan police guards. As though that made it better to divert public resources

Could somebody please translate R107's post? I don't' speak Klan Granny.

It’s customary for the Royals to release a picture alongside birthday messages on social media, which may explain the lack of public birthday greetings. Since Harry and Meghan have consciously uncoupled from their families, it is unlikely that The King has any recent pictures of the children he has barely met.

And I imagine many in the RF would believe that one of the very few benefits of Harry’s cri de coeur in Spare is that they no longer have to pretend to be in good terms with the California royals.

Isn't it only customary for Royals to release pictures of their OWN children, though? I've never heard of any of them sending someone else a greeting with a picture of that person's kid. That would be weird.

r108 Birthday acknowledgements can be private and not for public view. Just because they haven't tweeted a Birthday message doesn't mean they haven't privately sent her a card or present.

[quote] Then again, we simply do not know what goes on behind closed doors. Did Charles reach out to them to wish his granddaughter a happy birthday? Did William do the same?

R117, true. I did acknowledge that, SurvivingAngel.

Can I take this opportunity to state publicly that I love your posts!

I kind of can’t stand the type of people who have to make big posts on social media at loved ones’ birthdays. It’s too often showy and insincere—why not simply do it privately and sincerely?

r118 Awe Bless you Bonnie Prince Charlie and thanks. You are a great poster on these threads too. My post was more a big exclamation mark at the mentality of the Sugars that these kind of things are only real and only matter if they are public! If they really believe that they are very emotionally limited.

R113 Harold did sue his "family," that's one of the incredible aspects to his asshattery. The King is the Head of State and tbe BRF is part of the government.

His family weren't the respondents in the courtroom and the monies would not have come out of their pockets.

[quote]R102 The choice of Lilibet was cynical, grasping and cruel

CRUEL? It’s not like they named her Lil’ Big Liz.

[quote]What kind of sick fucks weaponize a child's name?

You?

Naming the child after her Granny's private nickname is just another instance of tying themselves to the BRF while claiming they want to be free of them.

Poor Oprah, I didn't watch her show but thought she was once an experienced journalist? Or was that a reporter?

Of the many inconsistencies she never questioned in their "interview" she failed to ask why they wanted to be part-time Royals?

R114 Considering that you didn’t make it through high school I’m amazed that you can speak English.

The royal family social media accounts acknowledge the birthdays of the children of the heir, as they will grow up to be heir/king and working royals too if they so wish. When the Queen was still alive, the royal family social media accounts did not commemorate the birthdays of all her 8 grandchildren and dozen great-grandchildren.

I'm really sorry to read HM was in pain those last months and had lost sight/hearing, if true.

I hope Charles’s birthday gift to Lilibet (and Archie) is a nice deposit in a trust fund for her future that her parents can’t touch.

Yes, R129. Sounds good.

Interviewing the Harkles had nothing to do with 'journalsim" but an ego-stroke for Oprah via a giant ratings grab.

[quote]I hope Charles’s birthday gift to Lilibet (and Archie) is a nice deposit in a trust fund for her future that her parents can’t touch.

Little Big Widow Lilibet?

r123 seems to have missed the point but I guess it gave them a thrill to be obnoxious

Lilibet's a crabfest otherwise?

MeAgain said she wanted privacy.

So no one gives a fuck about her kid’s birthday party.

The cunt’s unhappy when her family gets papped. And the cunt is unhappy when they DON’T get papped. What an insufferable little ghoul.

Is narcissistic sociopathy a genetically inheritable trait? Asking for two very young friends.

Harry's wife is such trash, weaponizing the children is totally within character. She's already done it a few times, including naming her daughter with the Queen's nickname.

Yes, she lived in absolute luxury, but QEII did live a life of duty. I don't envy her dealing with that endless stream of red boxes, nor facing up to what arseclowns Andrew and Harry were/are in her last few years. The Oprah interview going ahead despite Philip enduring what would be his final illness shows Markle and Dimbo as being cold-blooded and ruthless in their thirst for the spotlight.