Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Telegraph UK Opinion Piece: "It's Time To Bring Prince Harry Home"

These days, even Tories like myself are finding it hard to defend the hereditary principle. Personally, I have no taste for republicanism, something which is due to my incapacity for envy. That emotion or weakness is quite absent from my makeup.

In the face of other peoples’ good fortune, I am as inert as a deaf person at a recital. But a Starmer government will find the fact that the Royal Family has more money and more privilege than the rest of us interesting.

I increasingly feel that the future of the Royal Family may depend on its ability to cheer the public and what it lacks now is the requisite joyfulness.

The King and the Princess of Wales are effectively hors de combat, poor Camilla is 76, life bears heavily on William, and no one fancies a Pizza Express.

The Windsors are in grave need of some pizazz. Readers may succumb to the screaming abdabs, but the royal left standing who has most star power is Harry. It is easy to blame him and his puerile book for the continuing rift with his father and brother, but some courtiers of my acquaintance hold William equally liable.

Recently, I spoke to a former palace official who used to work for both princes before the good times stopped rolling. “There is a public misconception about William and Harry,” he told me. “It is William who was often the difficult one, and it is William who is preventing his father from having a proper reconciliation with Harry.” He continued, “This isn’t helpful at a point in time when the country would be buoyed up by seeing them together again, as would the King.”

It wasn’t helpful last week when the only family member to greet Harry with warmth was Earl Spencer. When it comes to his brother, William’s disgruntlement can at times seem mildly pathological.

I do not think there is any superior rationality in being discontented with one’s relatives. Take myself. My mother once sold disobliging stories about me to the tabloids, but after an impulse to do her bodily harm, I forgave her.

Yet where William is concerned, Byronic unhappiness has taken hold. I realise Harry has at times taken joy out of William’s life, and that he and Meghan can be a cause of irritation. It remains tempting to call the pair one trick phoneys. But isn’t that what most royalling is all about? Phoney good will and faked enjoyment? Moreover, the Sussexes have youth and glamour, and the young regard them as a religion with no dilution of agnosticism.

To many, Charles and William’s continued coldness towards Harry is beginning to look inhuman. It is important to remember that the Royal Family is a microcosm for every family in Britain, and that a divided family, like a divided political party, has an intrinsic weakness.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 176May 28, 2024 6:59 PM

Affection of parents for children, and of children for parents and siblings is capable of being one of the greatest sources of stability, as well as happiness. This is taken for granted in almost all literature before the present age. Hecuba cares more for her children than for Priam. MacDuff cares more for his children than for his wife. In the Old Testament, men are passionately concerned to leave fraternally inclined descendants.

It is a pity, of course, that Harry has wagged his fingers at the media. I remember one occasion when a spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex accused the press of causing ‘irreversible damage to families”, and journalists were advised to engage in “reflection.” At the time, I reflected. I tossed and turned and delved into the pockets of my soul and came out with this: in the history of the Sussexes’ gall, this took the first prize.

But most of the royals I have known have not been plaster saints. (William, in the past, has also castigated the media.) Many of them are sanctimonious, hypocritical and clueless. Besides, things change. Whether we like it or not, the Sussexes’ Nigerian tour has been a triumph and I cannot help but feel that a visible reconciliation between William and Harry would strengthen the unity of the House of Windsor and reassure the public of its commitment.

The legacy of the Royal Family is deeply intertwined with personal relationships. Entente would not only honour the past but also pave the way for a consolidated future, ensuring that the family’s values and traditions are preserved for generations.

Harry and Meghan, moreover, are now reaching another tricky crossroad. Where now for two people who have absolutely no talent? The only thing they have is their titles, which is why Harry recently said he would like to “step into a royal role” while his father is recovering from cancer. He knows that there is only one job in which a moronic egomaniac will feel at home, and that is shaking hands with adoring people in the rain.

By nature, I think the King would be reunion friendly. According to royal sources, he comprehends that reconciliation is the best solution for both of them and that everyone likes an MGM happy ending that would jerk tears from Caligula’s eyes.

As for being unkind about the family; isn’t it time to see that as water under Tower Bridge, as the late Queen might have done? The wisest of birds, she fought for reconciliation all her life, ignoring her husband’s flirtations and her childrens’ Addams Family peccadilloes.

I thought I’d never say this, but it may be time to bring Harry home on probation, and for William to clasp his prodigal brother to his bosom, even if he has been a bit of an asp.

by Anonymousreply 1May 15, 2024 2:38 AM

Who is this blowhard?

by Anonymousreply 2May 15, 2024 2:41 AM

[quote]The Windsors are in grave need of some pizazz.

Call in Liza!

by Anonymousreply 3May 15, 2024 2:42 AM

[quote]I thought I’d never say this, but it may be time to bring Harry home on probation,

And what do we do with the Halfrican wife?

by Anonymousreply 4May 15, 2024 2:52 AM

Tina Brown of the BBC said the same thing.

It seems like the British media want/need Harry and Meghan, because Charles and William are boring.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 5May 15, 2024 5:18 AM

About the author of the piece, Petronella Wyatt:

In 1996, when interviewing the proposed Labour Minister for Women Janet Anderson, Anderson joked that "under Labour, women will become more promiscuous", which Wyatt reported as policy.[9] Denis Healey regretted at the close of an interview with Wyatt that there was no time left for "rumpy pumpy".[3]

Personal life edit Between 2000 and 2004, Wyatt had an affair with the then editor of The Spectator and Conservative MP Boris Johnson.[10] Johnson had promised to leave his wife, and the affair had resulted in a terminated pregnancy and a miscarriage.[11] When her mother found out about the affair, she discussed it with the press.[5][10] Johnson was fired from his shadow cabinet post by party leader Michael Howard for lying about the affair, after he had initially categorically denied it.

by Anonymousreply 6May 15, 2024 12:41 PM

[quote]Moreover, the Sussexes have youth and glamour, and the young regard them as a religion with no dilution of agnosticism.

Meghan is actually older than both William and Kate and Harry - is what - 2 years younger than William? And what young people are we talking about? Gen Z? They give two shits about Harry and Meghan?

by Anonymousreply 7May 15, 2024 12:59 PM

I suddenly had a vision. I am seated at a dining table with this Petronella person and several others. We are sharing a meal at a fine restaurant of the type frequented by people who drop the phrase “courtiers of my acquaintance.”

I have just come to, having discovered that my face had fallen into my soup. Miraculously, because this is a dream, I am able to cleanse my face of the soup without anyone noticing and as I pass the napkin over my lips I whisper to the dignitary seated to my left, “Has she stopped yet?”

Oh, the depth of the misery he was able to load into his sotto voce reply, “No. And she never will. We are in Hell.”

by Anonymousreply 8May 15, 2024 1:12 PM

Just like 'creators' need content for their vapid tiktoks, writers will push out vapid opinion pieces with catchy click-bait headings. And newspapers will publish.

by Anonymousreply 9May 15, 2024 1:30 PM

[quote]When it comes to his brother, William’s disgruntlement can at times seem mildly pathological.

Wills is a brat no doubt, but his disgruntlement is real and justified, given his equally spoiled brother called his wife and their father racist in public, and wrote tell-all stories about their sibling and other family issues making them all look like prats (of which Harry is the worst).

Royals are supposed to be boring, the monarch is the Head of State not a supermodel. The need for glamour is overstated.

by Anonymousreply 10May 15, 2024 2:33 PM

[quote]The need for glamour is overstated.

I share this opinion for the most part, especially when you think of how intentionally boring the reign of QEll was, yet she is beloved. But I wonder if the dullness was embraced by the public because she represented peace and security after the war in addition to Edward's abdication. But that was a long time ago. And while the King can get away with being dull, if the BRF symbolically represents the British family, there should be some excitement and unpredictability and a touch of scandal. I don't think it's necessarily more glamour the BRF needs, Princess Kate can provide that with her model looks, figure and fashions, but maybe a little more forgiveness? (I realize this is what the author of the above piece is recommending.)

William closing the barn door after the horses have escaped is a mistake I think. As a future KIng and Defender of the Faith he could forgive and reconcile, setting an example for his subjects. Who wants a pissy, thin-skinned Monarch? It really would make him look like the better man.

by Anonymousreply 11May 15, 2024 4:54 PM

He is a traitor to his family for the purpose of cash, he is in thrall to a cunt who loathes everything his family stands for, and he is a self-serving self-victimizing cretin devoid of responsibility, intelligence, decency and a moral compass.

There is only one reason in history for any monarch to "bring" such a creature home.

And it is not to make nice, soothe the ridiculous neediness of the populace for soap opera pleasure, or to give him a job.

Christ. The Telegraph is dead and/or written by a different batch of cunts.

by Anonymousreply 12May 15, 2024 4:58 PM

[QUOTE]I have no taste for republicanism, something which is due to my incapacity for envy

What a nitwit thing to say. The American founding fathers must have been pea green!

That's as far as I got. I'm sure it gets better.🙄

by Anonymousreply 13May 15, 2024 5:07 PM

Yes. Bring him home.

Some family problems simply must be resolved at home.

Even if woefully belated in their timing.

by Anonymousreply 14May 15, 2024 5:14 PM

“ He knows that there is only one job in which a moronic egomaniac will feel at home, and that is shaking hands with adoring people in the rain”

I mean, how could Harry refuse such a generous offer?

by Anonymousreply 15May 15, 2024 5:29 PM

[QUOTE] “This isn’t helpful at a point in time when the country would be buoyed up by seeing them together again

This courtier sounds like he is out of touch. My understanding from reading royal threads here is that, for the most part, the British don't really care one way or another about the royal family. They're just part of the background. And the general public when polled have a very unfavorable opinion about Harry. The only other royals below Harry are his wife and Prince Andrew. I'm sure some grannies will be buoyed by a Sussex appearance.

I'm sure Harry will feel welcome after reading this piece and seeing the author thinks he's a "moronic egomaniac."

by Anonymousreply 16May 15, 2024 5:35 PM

Oh good lord, there is nothing glamorous about Harry and Meghan. They constantly look slovenly and she, especially, never wears anything that is pressed and well-fit to her figure.

by Anonymousreply 17May 15, 2024 7:00 PM

Fuck off Telegraph, we don’t want them back.

by Anonymousreply 18May 15, 2024 7:10 PM

Read between the lines. Petronella Wyatt doesn’t actually want Harry back.

But she is telling Charles and William that they should be emitting magnanimity, warmth, dignity, and take family embarrassments on the chin like the late Queen did. Because that’s why people liked the Queen; she had a cheating husband, loser kids and a whore sister, but she accepted them as everyone has to do their shitty family members, and didn’t sulk about it.

By appearing as diffident as William is, and by publicly and passive-aggressively snubbing his wayward son as Charles does, they’re losing the glow and the glamourparticular to monarchy.

Wyatt is telling Charles and William in so many words that they are appearing dull and pointless. Whether that’s true or not is beside the point.

by Anonymousreply 19May 15, 2024 7:26 PM

Harry and Meghan will only get nastier towards the Windsors if they are accepted back into the fold.

by Anonymousreply 20May 16, 2024 1:01 PM

It’s time to bring


by Anonymousreply 21May 16, 2024 1:15 PM

I have no opinion on the opinion - I avoid the BRF discussions......

But I suspect this sentiment (from her, Tina Brown and others) parallels the "It was more interesting with Trump" discussions in the US - journalists and other movers/shakers who want to be in the middle of whatever excitement. It's clearly more dull in the arena of public opinion when the main antagonists/punching bags disappear.

Also, this Citronella woman.....one wonders about her judgement after reading that she fucked Boris Johnson.......

by Anonymousreply 22May 16, 2024 1:23 PM

Bring him home? He wasn't banished or exiled. He CHOSE to leave. To wanted to continue as part-time royals based in Canada and the crown said 'no', it's all in in or completely out. If he called the King and said 'I want back in' I highly doubt the King would refuse.

by Anonymousreply 23May 16, 2024 2:06 PM

[quote]Yet where William is concerned, Byronic unhappiness has taken hold.

Hey? When was I unhappy?

by Anonymousreply 24May 16, 2024 3:17 PM

[quote]The Windsors are in grave need of some pizazz.

You ain't seen nothing yet.

by Anonymousreply 25May 16, 2024 3:18 PM

To a certain extent, she's right. It's better for them to demonstrate forgiveness, even if they have to swallow their pride. And it really did look bad when no one from his father's family was at St. Paul's for the Invictus anniversary. Edward or Sophie could have gone. They might even have sent Beatrice or Eugenie.

But I'd like to know how their Nigeria visit was a "complete success." For whom? For British trade or industry. I find it galling that the two and their kids live in the USA and continue to use those titles.

Wyatt is correct that the two have no talent. They are, as she puts it, "one trick phoneys." They want the odd appearance every now and again. They want to be the center of attention.

Wyatt and Brown forget how boring the BRF can be and often was. And should be.

And do the couple wish to return? I cannot picture her doing Garden parties or opening anything, except if it puts cash in their pockets.

by Anonymousreply 26May 16, 2024 5:11 PM

[quote]The King and the Princess of Wales

Queen. She's the Queen. Deal with it.

by Anonymousreply 27May 16, 2024 5:20 PM

With all the uncertainty with Charles and Kate it would be nice to see the brothers reconcile. With everything going on right now it just seems foolish to hold grudges.

by Anonymousreply 28May 16, 2024 5:37 PM

A big funeral makeup hug would be incredible for the papers though, so maybe they could wait a bit.

by Anonymousreply 29May 16, 2024 5:44 PM

It's not the absence of Harry that makes the monarchy appear dull, it's Kate. William and Kate poll quite well and that sentiment does not seem to be fading. The public seems to agree with William's complete disinvolvement with his brother. All of this talk will go away once Kate returns to the scene. There will be days and weeks' worth of content for the press to feast upon. If she shows up at the Trooping these press vultures will need their vapors.

by Anonymousreply 30May 16, 2024 5:50 PM

R27 Kate is the Princess of Wales. The author is referring to the King and the Princess of Wales being somewhat indisposed for the time being.

by Anonymousreply 31May 16, 2024 5:53 PM

Harry is out for good, that's the reality. The media can debate and push a 'reconciliation' until they are blue in the face, but there's no way Charles and William (particularly the latter) are ever going to let him back in the fold. He's crossed too many of their lines. The "prime directive" of the British Royal Family is what happens behind closed doors, stays behind closed doors. Since the Oprah interview, Harry continually airs "dirty laundry" (granted his reliability is highly questionable).

In terms of the UK public, Harry & Meghan poll at the bottom of the popularity chart next to Andrew, even among Gen Z, H&M's popularity has waned. The British public don't want them back. The media is in the business of making money and getting views/clicks. The H&M drama still sells mostly from "hate watching." Added to that with Kate out of the picture at the moment, and the King just returning to public engagements, the royal family is feeling (at least from a media POV) glamour-less. William, Charles and Camilla are really the only senior royals who get most of the media attention and the media doesn't like old, and they don't like white men. This changes nothing, however, Harry is out for good.

by Anonymousreply 32May 16, 2024 6:03 PM

The royals don't "bring people home." Harry, the wayward lying grifter must show he wants to come home. Harry doesn't want to come home. Harry wants people to beg him. Charles is not going to do that. And William will never do that. Harry hurt too many people. Charles is too busy and sentimental. William is a brick wall. Harry is out.

It took Sarah, Duchess of York more than 25 years to walk the long path with the royal family to church this past Christmas Day. And Sarah has been doing good, charitable work forever. Whatever anyone thinks of Sarah, she never spoke badly about the royal family. And basically Sara is a good person. She quietly supported the family and remained friends with the queen for years and years. She paid her dues and was finally redeemed.

Harry had done nothing of the sort. And Markle will never give in and walk steps behind Will and Kate. Markle is not the star of the show, and she will never accept that fact. Plus, she's a fucking lying grifter, along with her husband.

by Anonymousreply 33May 16, 2024 8:07 PM

Harry does not get "brought" anywhere. He goes where he pleases.

by Anonymousreply 34May 16, 2024 8:09 PM

Harry goes where Markle tells him he needs to go.

by Anonymousreply 35May 16, 2024 8:27 PM

[quote] Prince Harry & Meghan Markle's Nigeria Trip Allegedly Made King Charles & Prince William 'Furious'

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's visit to Nigeria has allegedly left King Charles III and Prince William "absolutely furious."

The couple's tour of the African nation seemingly mirrored official royal visits, raising eyebrows among royal experts. Meghan's wardrobe choices also subtly referenced the couple's ties to the royal family.

According to royal expert Tom Quinn, Harry and Meghan's recent visit to Nigeria has been interpreted by some as a "bold statement that they refuse to accept they are no longer working royals."

Speaking to The Mirror, Quinn suggested that Harry and Meghan's 72-hour trip left the King and the Prince of Wales feeling "absolutely furious" as it sent a clear message to the royal family that they are still very much engaged in royal duties.

Quinn noted that the visit encompassed all the elements typical of official royal engagements, stating: "Everything you might expect from an official royal visit was there – the receptions, the visits to schools and charities, to wounded soldiers and the disabled."

"Meghan and Harry's speeches and their whole attitude have been designed to give the impression that they are still fully paid-up royals and William and his father King Charles don't like it one bit," he added.

Quinn noted that the Duke and Duchess have "gone rogue," and their actions might be perceived as an attempt to "pull a fast one."

He explained that it seems the couple is saying, "We don't need your permission to be working royals—we will do it on our own terms whenever and wherever we like."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 36May 16, 2024 8:45 PM

LOL! The Nigerian trip was a big fuck you to the Palace. It was Harry and Meghan accepting an invitation and saying we don't need approval from you to do WTF we want! It reminded the public of how popular Harry is, made Charles and William look bad, and spawned articles like Camilla's Close friend blaming William for the estrangement between Charles and Harry. Getting too caught up in the Meghan/Harry drama misses the larger picture of all the scrambling and back stabbing going on among members of the Royal Fam. This is better than a fucking soap opera. And then you had pictures of Camilla visiting with that Rose Hanbury the reported mistress of William.

by Anonymousreply 37May 16, 2024 9:08 PM

[quote]He explained that it seems the couple is saying, "We don't need your permission to be working royals—we will do it on our own terms whenever and wherever we like."

Time for Charles to 'de-Royal-ize' Harry once and for all.

Take away the tiles, and state it openly and repeatedly until even every backwater country and territory knows that they a frauds.

by Anonymousreply 38May 16, 2024 10:01 PM

^^ take away the titles ...

by Anonymousreply 39May 16, 2024 10:02 PM

R11 you lost me at “Princess Kate”.

by Anonymousreply 40May 16, 2024 10:11 PM

Harry will always be a prince because his father is the King. He is a Prince of the Blood. He will be one when his brother is King. So he may not always be the Duke of Sussex, but he will always be Prince Harry.

by Anonymousreply 41May 16, 2024 10:12 PM

Looking at video and photos of King Charles and Camilla at the Garden PArty I cannot help but think,Camilla looks like she farts. Big loud wet ones. Charles farts too, but in his passive agressive way his farts are sneaky, quiet, and smell horrible.

by Anonymousreply 42May 16, 2024 10:15 PM

Link please, R37 to pictures of “Camilla visiting with that Rose Hanbury” - you presumably are referring to the Marchioness of Cholmondeley but those are very big words, aren’t they?

It’s possible that you’re referring to Camilla and the Marchioness attending the Badminton Horse Trials on the same day. Along with a couple of thousand other people.

by Anonymousreply 43May 16, 2024 10:22 PM

[quote]Kate is the Princess of Wales. The author is referring to the King and the Princess of Wales being somewhat indisposed for the time being.

Oops. I wish you could delete comments.

by Anonymousreply 44May 16, 2024 10:23 PM

I wish op was a person I could have a coffee with in real life because the way they write and the observations made are fascinating. I am also very curious about Tories in general because it’s quite different than conservative parties in other nations. I enjoyed reading the ops posts.

by Anonymousreply 45May 16, 2024 10:53 PM

[quote]one wonders about her judgement after reading that she fucked Boris Johnson.

Johnson has found many women to sleep with him. Go figure.

by Anonymousreply 46May 16, 2024 11:07 PM

[QUOTE]Quinn suggested that Harry and Meghan's 72-hour trip left the King and the Prince of Wales feeling "absolutely furious"

Oh, look. A previously unknown pundit has an opinion.

by Anonymousreply 47May 17, 2024 1:03 AM

[QUOTE]LOL! The Nigerian trip was a big fuck you to the Palace. It was Harry and Meghan accepting an invitation

An invitation from whom, dear? The actual Nigerian government or its members who engaged in tribal genocide and currently favors execution for faggots?

by Anonymousreply 48May 17, 2024 1:22 AM

[quote] Speaking to The Mirror, Quinn suggested that Harry and Meghan's 72-hour trip left the King and the Prince of Wales feeling "absolutely furious" as it sent a clear message to the royal family that they are still very much engaged in royal duties.

[quote] Quinn noted that the visit encompassed all the elements typical of official royal engagements, stating: "Everything you might expect from an official royal visit was there – the receptions, the visits to schools and charities, to wounded soldiers and the disabled."

[quote] He explained that it seems the couple is saying, "We don't need your permission to be working royals—we will do it on our own terms whenever and wherever we like."

They're probably doing this for one of two reasons:

1. To show Charles that they are fully capable of representing the British Royal Family as they did in the past, without any drama. So let them back in. Or,

2. To show Charles and William that they don't need their permission, and they could be creating a whole new identity for future "Spares."

Meaning, they are showing the world that the spare is perfectly capable of doing exactly what the Heir would normally do, and that you don't have to be the King or the future King to do the job.

It's a very interesting new niche they've created for themselves.

Almost like usurping power away from the throne, and creating an alternate Kingship.

And there's no better time to do it, than when King Charles and Kate are currently incapacitated.

Very interesting.

by Anonymousreply 49May 17, 2024 1:33 AM


by Anonymousreply 50May 17, 2024 1:35 AM

It's not only Charles and Will.

Camilla and Kate wouldn't let Harry and Markle back in.

by Anonymousreply 51May 17, 2024 2:51 AM

Harry and Meghan weren't invited by the head of the Nigerian government, but by its highest ranking military officer. While they can go on as many visits as they want, they don't represent anyone other than themselves, so what exactly are they accomplishing for the host country?

by Anonymousreply 52May 17, 2024 3:00 AM

R52. Nigeria wants to host the Invictus Games in 2029. And Harry is so hard up for approval that he will consider any country.

However, Nigeria will not host ever. It is a dangerous country, and and it would be a security and logistic nightmare shuttling wounded military personnel in and out of a third-world country without proper accommodations to carry out such a thing.

by Anonymousreply 53May 17, 2024 3:49 AM

Petrified Whynot let Boris Johnson stick his pimp-chimney up her mile-wide fuck-hole.

It must have been like flicking a baked bean into the Albert Hall.

She is a disgusting smear of shit and I hope she dies in a fire.

I hate her with the passion of ten thousand rotating black holes, none of which are as cavernous as her cat food can.

by Anonymousreply 54May 17, 2024 5:20 AM

[quote] you presumably are referring to the Marchioness of Cholmondeley but those are very big words, aren’t they?

Oh, [italic]how[/italic] devastating can you [italic]get,[/italic] Blanche.

You must have harrumphed so hard while you typed that that you positively startled your miniature poodle.

by Anonymousreply 55May 17, 2024 5:43 AM

[quote] And Markle will never give in and walk steps behind Will and Kate. Markle is not the star of the show, and she will never accept that fact

She always did walk steps behind them? This is a weird argument to me.

by Anonymousreply 56May 17, 2024 6:43 AM

Meghan knew perfectly well that Harry was "the Spare" when she met him. I don't buy for one second her claim that she barely knew who he was. And if she didn't know much about the RF she certainly had every opportunity to find out when they were dating. So she knew he would always be second to William. Always. And eventually he would be a few steps behind George, Charlotte, and Louis. William is the future king of England. Barring some terrible catastrophe, Harry will never move up in precedence. So when t he family processions happen, Harry's place will be behind William and William's family. What foolish Meghan doesn't see is the very long line behind Harry. But the fact is she can't accept that Harry's role is proscribed and will never change if he is a working Royal.

What I think has to happen is that Charles and William are going to have to re consider the half in, half out rule that Phillip was determined to enforce. Allow all of them, Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, etc. to make appearances on behalf of the Royals from time to time. Now I understand that in the case of patronages, and on going relationships with institutions and organizations the senior royals would be preeminent. Sadly, The Queen, Elizabeth was willing to give Meghan and Harry some classy patronages which they then turned their backs on. Now, Edward and Sophie are doing those, and William and Catherine have taken some on.

If Charles was wise he and William would sit down with the Staff that really plans all these things out, and figure out a way to use the part timers, and maybe consider including Harry in that group. I get it. The rest of the family is still upset because Harry betrayed confidences. That is a large part of the current estrangement. Harry related private conversations in public. So the trust level among his cousins and his aunts and uncles has been strained. They don't feel they can trust him and who can blame them. I think that more than anything is the stumbling block to normalizing relationships.

by Anonymousreply 57May 17, 2024 10:04 AM

Are we still pretending that 42 year-olds take five months off for surgery and “preventive” chemo? Meghan is probably going nuts knowing that she might have had a few decades of being perceived as almost the queen of England.

But it won’t work now. Even if H&M could work their way back with the family, i think the public would resent Megan for being around if Kate wasn’t. Almost like Camilla.

If Kate doesn’t recover they will just be boring for a while and the roles (or at least public perception of such) will shrink. And it seems unlikely that the next generation be will recoup that, or want to.

by Anonymousreply 58May 17, 2024 10:32 AM

[quote]Almost like usurping power away from the throne, and creating an alternate Kingship.

Are you on crack?

Did the Windsors "create an alternate kingship"?

by Anonymousreply 59May 17, 2024 11:12 AM

R59 exactly. They thought they could set up their alternative to George VI, but the Windsors failed. Now, I'm not talking about the treasonous behavior during WW II. Because back then there was a real threat of them working with the Germans to set up an alternative. But later, in the 50's and 60's, they just became a very pathetic couple with their liveried servants and their own crest, and they hired themselves out to almost anyone for personal appearances, dinners, etc. They were wannabe influencers and taste makers before it became popular. They would have flourished in these modern times. The thing is, George VI parked his brother in the Bahamas to keep him out of t rouble during the war and maybe it is worth exploring to consider parking Harry somewhere, giving him an allowance and an operating budget, and ignoring him. Unfortunately, colonialism is passe and there a re limits to where they could send them. Limited options.

by Anonymousreply 60May 17, 2024 11:24 AM

[QUOTE] “preventive” chemo?

What's preventive when there's been a cancer diagnosis? Or are you suggesting the scenario has been faked?

by Anonymousreply 61May 17, 2024 11:55 AM

"Preventative chemo" is not a medical term. But it could have been intended to describe a situation in which a person's cancer is mostly excised by surgery and then they take a course of chemo to catch any malignant cells dispatched during surgery.

by Anonymousreply 62May 17, 2024 11:59 AM

The D & D of Windsor had a crest? That's hilarious. If only they had issued statements about world events as the Harkles do, always underneath the HM squiggle wearing a crown.

I've never understood why David was allowed to have Windsor for his "dukedom". Wallis was just the excuse to get rid of a lazy, fascist king who identified strongly with Germany and thought highly of Hitler, thought the trains should run on time, referred to "slip-shod democracies" derisively, yet didn’t go through his red boxes thoroughly - or discreetly. This all came out in declassified documents in the mid 90s.

Continuing to associate him so closely with the Royal Family's adopted name of Windsor = not smart.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 63May 17, 2024 12:54 PM

My mother is doing preventive chemo right now for Breast cancer. She was in t he early stage, almost stage 2 but not quite, and they excised the tumor without giving her a full mastectomy. By some miracle her cancer was not near her lymph nodes. But the Oncologist wants her to do this for several months. Catherine is either affected by the chemo in ways that really make it difficult for her to assume public duties, or she is such sicker than they said. Side effects can really fuck you up and the other thing is you tire easily.

by Anonymousreply 64May 17, 2024 12:59 PM

It would be nice if a bad reaction to chemo is the real story. She had difficulties with nausea during her pregnancies, so maybe she is susceptible.

by Anonymousreply 65May 17, 2024 1:26 PM

She had major abdominal surgery, which takes months from which to recover. Add to that the rigors of chemotherapy and she has probably been having a hell of a time.

by Anonymousreply 66May 17, 2024 1:28 PM

The BRF had thousands of rules and “ways of doing things”, enforced by the staff that must’ve infuriated Meghan who was finding these things out after marrying hapless Harry. Yes, a longer relationship/engagement would’ve made the situation clear as it did for Kate but M was in a rush to seal the deal. I don’t think she wants to go back to that existence even part time. Or if that somehow came about, she’d perceive that the other side had “caved” and would be even more imperious. No, the only way I see of Charles and William relenting is if the marriage breaks down and they pack Harry off to Africa, so he’s in but not fully. The kids are the sticking point in this scenario.

by Anonymousreply 67May 17, 2024 2:11 PM

Meghan might have known Harry was the spare, but she clearly didn't know what that meant. She was shocked when she saw Harry's tiny cottage! She was stunned when she saw the priceless art on the walls of William and Kate's domicile! She couldn't believe the contrast in resource allocation between the brothers. She viewed Frogmore Cottage as a sop, even after improvements. And let's not forget the lack of appreciation and praise for her American 'let's kick some butt!' managerial style. Meghan will never return to the Royal family and lesser wattage.

by Anonymousreply 68May 17, 2024 2:36 PM

R68 when you're getting almost no wattage at all, "very little wattage" looks like a spotlight.

by Anonymousreply 69May 17, 2024 3:06 PM

[quote] She had major abdominal surgery, which takes months from which to recover. Add to that the rigors of chemotherapy and she has probably been having a hell of a time.

And don't forget her eating disorder.

That probably makes her recovery difficult.

by Anonymousreply 70May 17, 2024 4:40 PM

Ever since the green velvet jacket, William has seemed like a supervillain, he should just roll with it and go full kingly madness.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 71May 17, 2024 5:12 PM

Nice try, R70, but someone who has the musculature she does most likely does not have an eating disorder. Let me guess, are you one of the Sussex bovines? Not everyone that passes up the trough now and then has an eating disorder. Moo moo, buckaroo.

by Anonymousreply 72May 17, 2024 9:00 PM

[quote] "It's Time To Bring Prince Harry Home"

Yes, preferably in a pine box.

by Anonymousreply 73May 17, 2024 10:44 PM

It's creepy how Harry put the pregnancy stick (covered with urine) next to his box of Diana's hair. Then there was little Archie in front of Grandma Diana's glamour photo. Doria is allowed to mingle with Kris Jenner (Lucifer's own apprentice), Charles' cancer news gets him an unwanted visit from Harry - which Harry uses as material for an interview aired worldwide - and Tom Sr can't get a look-in.

The Harkles are freaks.

by Anonymousreply 74May 18, 2024 8:08 AM

For what? He didn't even pretend to do anything for the people who pay him all his life. I don't wish him any harm but he wanted to get out so badly, now out it is. He can meet his family whenever he wants. What should he want to move to England for?

by Anonymousreply 75May 18, 2024 9:35 AM

He misses the cuisine.

by Anonymousreply 76May 18, 2024 11:59 AM

If Harry is to come back, MI-6 will first have to solve the Meghan issue

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 77May 18, 2024 12:13 PM

Prince Harry IS the new James Bond! Meagan can play the archvillain, Blowell.

by Anonymousreply 78May 18, 2024 12:16 PM

QE2 graciously managed not being the flashiest member of the BRF because she knew she was the Monarch and that she literally bowed to no one. Charles, by Diana, and William, by Harry, appear to be less accepting of seeming dull by comparison. Or maybe they just don’t have the abilities to manage the family “scoundrels” the way Elizabeth did (excepting Andrew…she whiffed on him). In any case, I find it all quite entertaining. Unlike the horrible politicians with true power, the current BRF are a gossipy distraction. That being said, if I paid for their lifestyle, I’d likely feel differently.

Also, I don’t think Kate, (or Catherine, Princess of Wales, as the crankiest among you insist she be called), is gravely ill. I do think that she’s recovering from major surgery, and receiving ongoing treatment, likely aggressive given her young age. She’s simply saving whatever energy remains for her husband and young family, rather than spending hours on her feet, shaking hands in the rain. Five months is not a long time to treat and recover from a major health event. I expect she’ll come back only when she has a clean bill of health and can manage her work, and it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s not for another five months.

by Anonymousreply 79May 18, 2024 1:04 PM

William seems to have inherited Diana’s tendency to ice out anyone who crosses her.

by Anonymousreply 80May 18, 2024 1:13 PM

It seems like the majority accepts the story that Kate is ill, but not that ill. I don’t understand that.

If that’s the case, why did the press do such a 180 and why is any speculation or implied criticism of her now equivalent to invoking Voldemort?

It was accepted that the abdominal surgery actually occurred and that’s a tough recovery. Yet not too long after that the tabloids started asking questions aggressively. But now that it’s cancer treatment no questions can be asked and she is in complete seclusion.

I’m not criticizing her, I suspect she has been ill for much longer than since January and toughed it out. And this isn’t about privacy, it’s not that she should be issuing updates or giving details. It’s just odd to drop off the face of the earth. It makes sense for the press to leave it alone and play pretend to avoid harassing a very sick woman and creating a maudlin vigil-like atmosphere. But it doesn’t make sense for the press to be walking on eggshells if she’s not that sick. If she wasn’t in danger, wouldn't we be reading articles about women who survived cancer while raising three kids as single mothers and working full time? But it seems like the general public believes the story and that confuses me. I feel like it’s one thing to for the press to back off even though they know the truth because the platform makes it inappropriate. It’s just common decency. But Joe public doesn’t need to self-edit, so they must believe she’s Ok? Or do people know but feel an obligation even as private citizens to go along with it?

Am I an outlier for being curious about how this is being presented?

by Anonymousreply 81May 18, 2024 1:36 PM

R70, Kate may never have had an eating disorder. Remember that the original abdominal surgery, which was clearly major judging by the announcement that was made before the cancer was found, had nothing to do with cancer. None of us can think of a gynaecological surgery that would put anyone out of action from January till after Easter. So the most likely thing is that she had Crohn's or some other very nasty bowel disease for a long time. Those make it hard to absorb nutrients and could easily have made her that underweight: and we all noticed that she was much thinner again in the last 6-12 months before the operation.

It's possible she ALSO had an eating disorder, but in the absence of clear evidence for that, and a lot of evidence for a physical disorder, you'd have to give her the benefit of the doubt. She clearly didn't have an eating disorder in her teens and early 20s, which is when that would most often strike.

by Anonymousreply 82May 18, 2024 1:56 PM

You know, I'm not a woman but I know some.......LOL! It seems like they have new techniques for surgery in order to make it less invasive. So if Katherine had a complete hysterectomy or even a partial, (removal of the uterus but keeping the ovaries) recovery from that ought to not take 5-6 months. However, if she had to have surgery for a GI problem involving her intestines or her stomach that is a very serious and very involved surgery and it would take months and months ro recover. Add to that she is getting Chemo? That is serious no matter what the cause. IMO it has to be one of those two things. And if she is tking Chemo then she is probably exhausted easily. So I agree with R79, she should not exhaust herself with Royal duties that are physically demanding.

by Anonymousreply 83May 18, 2024 2:49 PM

[quote] William seems to have inherited Diana’s tendency to ice out anyone who crosses her.

William was born on June 21.

Diana was born on July 1.

They're both born under the Cancer sign. Maybe that's one of their traits.

by Anonymousreply 84May 18, 2024 3:57 PM

OK. Here's something you can do. Amazon Prime is offering King Lear starring Anthony Hopkins, Emma Thompson, Emma Watson, Jim Broadbent and Florence Pugh. brilliantly rendered. And if you use the subtitles you'll have the advantage of reading and listening to Shakespeare and well able to understand it. To be honest, Succession may have been "based on" King Lear, but honestly Charles is King Lear. William and Edward are favored with his generosity, HArry is not.

And to the person who thinks Diana was a grudge holder, and Charles isn't, I fear you're mistaken. Elizabeth always had to remonstrate with Charles about his gurdges and Anne is sort of the policeman because Charles trusts her the most and she will admonish him whenever she can. And Petulant William is a grudge holder like his father. Charles comes across in his public/official duties as warm and thoughtful and intelligent, with a wonderful sense of humor. Witty. But it takes very little to see his temper explode. Things we never got to see in the past, we can now enjoy due to technological advances.

Charles is an emotionally damaged man, who, even when he was Prince of Wales and heir to the throne, was extremely jealous of the attention his wife won, and extremely resentful and jealous of the kind of relationship his brother Andrew had with their mother. He was so estranged from Phillip, he needed his Uncle Dickie Mountbatten to act as his surrogate father. Which the meddlesome Dickie was happy to do.

I have no horse in this race. As someone up thread said, the soap opera drama and speculation about the Royals is a wonderful distraction compared with the shit show of every day life. I am not invested in any one particular personality, but I do try to watch the whole of it and some times that renders me critical of some development over another.

by Anonymousreply 85May 18, 2024 4:03 PM

The difference, R85, is that in King Lear the two favoured children lied their asses off about their deep affection for their father, while the exiled child was the one who loved him most, and who continued to look out for him from exile. That ain't Harry. Whether William has deep affection for Charles who knows, but he has a deep respect for The Firm and has obviously been a key player on its management team since the days of QEII. There is certainly no evidence he has even considered disloyalty to the monarch (or to his father as a separate concept), whereas Harry has been repeatedly disloyal to his family in invading their privacy and criticising them as individuals, and he has also had a solid hack at the foundations of the monarchy. In both these ways, he is Regan and Goneril, not Cordelia.

Charles probably would have been jealous of the public's love affair with Diana anyway--who wouldn't in his place?--but the fact was that she deliberately upstaged him from the start. She also showed him none of the respect in public that Kate shows William. Kate is who people want to see, because she's got the glamorous frocks, hats and jewels, but she always hangs back a little behind William when they are on Royal duties. When she and William are out with the kids (also an attraction for the public), wherever possible they frame the kids, each holding a hand, or else George stands with William and Charlotte with Kate, whereas Diana made a regular point of being photographed alone with her kids, partly to convey the idea that Charles had abandoned all three of them.

Diana was smart enough never to deliberately put the Queen in the shade, but it was always her practice to cover the opposite side of the street from Charles in a walkabout, thus he regularly got moans while she got cheers. Any good partner, whether Royal or not, would have addressed that by doing what Kate does, and indeed what Philip always did in his young and dashing days: you walk near and a little behind them so that whatever reaction you get, they get too. In all these ways, Diana was much more like Meghan than Kate. The big difference between Diana and Meghan (apart from the obvious sartorial one) was that when Diana did do good works, she did them with convincing sincerity, whereas Meghan can't walk downstairs sincerely.

I also have sympathy for Charles being resentful of the Queen's relationship with Andrew. Charles was virtually brought up by the QM because his own parents were off touring the Commonwealth for most of his childhood, then they sent him to boarding school. He was hankering for a bit of maternal affection all his childhood. By the time Andrew was born the Queen was used to the job and had covered the Commonwealth a few times, and had time to enjoy him and Edward. As for Philip, he thought Charles was "unmasculine", and was always trying to "toughen him up" to avoid an unspecified disaster--and you all know very well what that was. Not a great upbringing for anyone, let alone a future king. Very different from the home life of our dear Georgie.

by Anonymousreply 86May 18, 2024 5:26 PM

Maybe if both sides were able to bury the hatchet but at this point it seems impossible to do so.

by Anonymousreply 87May 18, 2024 5:42 PM

R81, I think the 180 is due to cancer diagnosis. It’s almost as if it was “all in good fun” (it wasn’t, it was at best weird and at worst disturbing) to speculate where the Princess was and what was happening, because the Palace explicitly said cancer wasn’t the reason for the surgery. However, once it became known cancer was involved, everyone kept a respectful distance, as they did with Charles from the start.

Cancer isn’t always deadly, but it is serious, and its course is unknown, even when everything appears to be going well. Even if she isn’t gravely ill, speculation by the press about her outcome, even positively, is gross. Letting the Princess and her family deal with it, with some measure of privacy, is appropriate

by Anonymousreply 88May 18, 2024 6:13 PM

Rita hates MM too!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 89May 20, 2024 6:25 PM

Well, a rainy Garden Party @ the Palace.... featuring William, of course, but also Beatrice, Eugenie, and... Zara and Mike Tindal.

by Anonymousreply 90May 21, 2024 10:21 PM

[quote] Well, a rainy Garden Party @ the Palace.... featuring William, of course, but also Beatrice, Eugenie, and... Zara and Mike Tindal.

Sounds fun.


Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 91May 22, 2024 1:01 AM

Our own Little Princess Beatrice has grown into a woman of distinction right in front of our eyes!

by Anonymousreply 92May 22, 2024 2:15 AM

Love Bea. She's so cool.

by Anonymousreply 93May 22, 2024 3:46 AM

It seems the cousins a re rallying for appearances sake. William was host, but the rest had to show their faces. Zara and her smashed face hubby who desperately wants to be more famous, seem much more willing to participate in Royal events, ever since Harry left. Most people feel very kindly towards Beatrice and Eugenie.

by Anonymousreply 94May 22, 2024 1:03 PM

[quote] Most people feel very kindly towards Beatrice and Eugenie

I've noticed that. An enormous change from several years ago.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 95May 22, 2024 1:22 PM

Beatrice hasn't looked back since she met Edo. He either has innate style and advises her himself, or he told her he wasn't going out with her looking like an unmade bed and insisted she get a good stylist. As DL pointed out when Eugenie married, it can't have been good for Bea's confidence to be the last one with a decent beau to show off, and since she married the boost to her confidence has further improved her ability to be a reliable working Royal.

My jury is still out on Eugenie.

by Anonymousreply 96May 22, 2024 1:28 PM

[Quote] "It's Time To Bring Prince Harry Home"

Erm, doesn’t he have the right to live wherever he wants?

by Anonymousreply 97May 22, 2024 1:30 PM

R95 I've always been a huge fan of The Windsors. I especially enjoy Beatrice, Eugenie and Sarah. And Charles. Good lord they cast the perfect guy as Charles. Oh, and Princess Anne. Great comedy series. It's all comedy isn't it!

by Anonymousreply 98May 22, 2024 2:37 PM

If Meghan and Harry did go, she'd probably haul out her old moon bump to make sure she got all the attention.

by Anonymousreply 99May 23, 2024 2:19 AM

[quote]And to the person who thinks Diana was a grudge holder, and Charles isn't, I fear you're mistaken.

Diana was indeed a grudge holder. She wouldn't speak to close friends or family members for months at a time if she felt they had crossed her. When she died she currently had not been speaking to her mother, Fergie, and (I think) one of her sisters.

Classic BPD.

by Anonymousreply 100May 23, 2024 2:29 AM

That must have made it so much harder for those women to deal with her death, r100.

by Anonymousreply 101May 23, 2024 1:13 PM

Diana was prone to mood swings and could be hyper sensitive. She reacted to real and imagined slights. With her it wasn't so much a grudge as a pout that lasted weeks or months. But she could be coaxed out of it. She'd make peace with the person, but in her passive-aggressive way, she'd remind them of the past transgressions when something else went wrong.

But Charles holds grudges. The never forgive/never forget kind of grudges. He was in his 40's publicly criticizing his parents for being absent, distant, cold, unloving. He justified replacing his father with Dickie Mountbatten in that way. And he always set his grandmother at odds with his mother. He is intractable about Camilla. Camilla is his crutch, has been for years. He won't turn on her because he is so dependent on her. And he won't let anyone else slight her and get away with it.

William is very much like him. William will cut you off if you betray him or do anything to embarrass or upset his personal version of himself . He admits to no wrongdoing, because he "makes an effort" and he will catalogue all the things he has done on behalf of all the efforts he has made. He doesn't forgive. Which is why since he understands his Papa, he has made his peace with him and has reached out to get along with Camilla. He knows all he has to do is make the best of things and wait.

He is very dependent on Catherine. Whether or not he has ever had affairs he is emotionally very dependent on her. She calms his explosive temper and reasons with him, guides him and supports him. She was probably more pissed off at Harry for talking about William than anything else he may have said. Harry is his mother through and through. He can be insensitive, he can say things and do things that are unacceptable or inappropriate and then double back say "Sorree!" and expect you to forgive him,, or overlook his shortcomings. He can rationalize and justify and excuse what he's done just as his mother used to because he things someone or something else is responsible.

by Anonymousreply 102May 23, 2024 9:16 PM

R102 here. I've been fascinated by and an observer of the RF for years. I've read books about them, etc. All I wrote is my own theories based on observations. Obviously I don't know first hand. But I guess what I think is just as legit as any of the fake experts we read about in the tabloids. The thing is I don't really take sides. I'm not on any team. I kind of step back and observe the whole gang and watch things as they unfold. I have to be honest. The only one who truly elicits feelings from me is Andrew. I cannot stand him. He contributes nothing to human society. He is vile. I think I have a pretty good reading on the Tindals. The Rugby Man is going to put his foot in it, so to speak, eventually. Let's just say he enjoys going to the Garden parties.

by Anonymousreply 103May 23, 2024 9:21 PM

r102 r103 There is a theory that one's observations of others are simply indicative one's self.

by Anonymousreply 104May 24, 2024 1:08 AM

Here’s what is the basic problem with both Charles and William: the role of the King of England is inherently an emasculating role. Once upon a time it meant you were the most powerful person in the country, now it just means you are a ceremonial figurehead who doesn’t have control over your own life. Can’t choose who to marry, can’t choose what you want to do. You’re trotted out like a show pony to cut ribbons and shmooze the press as needed.

This is what makes them petulant petty little tyrants in terms of the things they can control: who they take as mistresses, the abusive way they treat their underlings and/or the family members below them in the pecking order. William is even more petty than Charles about it — didn’t even bother to learn Welsh even though he’s the Prince of Wales, doesn’t watch the BAFTAS nominated films although he’s the head of the BAFTAS, etc.

Harry is a real man who has served his country, chosen the wife he loved even though she was “inappropriate”, and continues to do good charitable work and international outreach even though the royal family spat in his face for it since it highlights how lazy and selfish his father and brother are. He is Diana’s living legacy and he is a secure, powerful, self-actualized man. Charles and William (especially William) hate him for it. They will never reconcile but honestly Harry is better off without them.

by Anonymousreply 105May 24, 2024 1:36 AM

[quote] Here’s what is the basic problem with both Charles and William: the role of the King of England is inherently an emasculating role. Once upon a time it meant you were the most powerful person in the country, now it just means you are a ceremonial figurehead who doesn’t have control over your own life. Can’t choose who to marry,

Wait, what? Charles and William did not choose their current wives? Explain that.

by Anonymousreply 106May 24, 2024 1:42 AM

WW x1000 for R105!

by Anonymousreply 107May 24, 2024 1:59 AM

I assume that R105 is a parody post.

by Anonymousreply 108May 24, 2024 2:13 AM

[quote] He is Diana’s living legacy and he is a secure, powerful, self-actualized man.

But not too secure and self-actualized to avoid publicly talking shit about his family, smear his family by insinuating bigotry and, cash-in on all of that.

If he were a truly self-actualized man, he'd declare himself not a Prince of the blood and renounce the Sussex name.

Go ahead, Harry, do it. Show us how "self-actualized" you are. That's right, you can't because you know who nobody would give an At's Rass about you or Markle without your blood connection to King Charles and Prince William.

by Anonymousreply 109May 24, 2024 2:20 AM

R106 perhaps I didn’t word myself clearly enough there? OBVIOUSLY Charles always wanted to marry Camilla. That was my point. He was not allowed to do so when he was young bc he was required to produce heirs and was not allowed to do so with a divorced woman. Diana was selected for him and he went along with it. He wanted to be with Camilla the whole time. This is part of why he never formed a strong bond with his children.

William is a little different because I don’t think he was denied the ability to marry a person he truly wanted — I don’t think he’s ever had a great love of his life. But Kate was also selected for him as an appropriate (and conveniently very rich heiress, whom the public loves) wife. He does not love her and the coldness between them has only grown more apparent over the years. I don’t think he loves his mistress Rose Chomdemondewhatever either, but she is more deferent to him and so he keeps on with her.

They both resent Harry for actually getting to marry a woman he loves (in Charles’s case, without having to had wait for decades first).

by Anonymousreply 110May 24, 2024 3:06 AM

R109 you think Harry gives a shit whether he’s Charles’s blood relation or not? This is a man he barely has any relationship with anyway. The questions over his paternity were part of the leverage he used to get out of royal obligation.

Royal family members cannot have a DNA test (or any major medical treatment or test) without the Crown’s knowledge and consent. That was true when Liz II was in charge and it’s true now. Harry has no legal means within British law to force Charles to have one and Charles doesn’t want one any more than Liz did. Part of that is because changing the line of succession (regardless of DNA) requires every country in the Commonwealth to vote on it (due to a rule they passed after the Wallis Simpson/Albert abdication debacle) and they do not want to open that can of worms.

by Anonymousreply 111May 24, 2024 3:13 AM

R111 And before any nitpickers try to pick apart “major medical treatment/test” there, I mean under the auspices of the UK legal and medical system. Obviously, Harry has the ability to get some kinds of treatment elsewhere now that he couldn’t get before. But again, he has no means of compelling Charles to have a DNA test.

by Anonymousreply 112May 24, 2024 3:25 AM

Ah, another thread descended into koo-koo territory. Stay classy, DL.

by Anonymousreply 113May 24, 2024 10:55 AM

R110-r111-r112 goooodbye

by Anonymousreply 114May 24, 2024 11:54 AM

[quote]Charles always wanted to marry Camilla. That was my point. He was not allowed to do so when he was young bc he was required to produce heirs and was not allowed to do so with a divorced woman.

Untrue. Camilla was unmarried and available when Charles dated her. The RF was not keen on the match because she was "experienced", but if he had been committed they could have got round that with a long engagement (say, two years) that demonstrated their mutual devotion to the public and the Church, and put it beyond doubt that any subsequent heirs were his. The problem was that he was NOT committed. He went off on tour leaving her with no certainty about where the relationship was going, and being a woman of some spirit (and older than him) she flipped him the bird and married Andrew P-B, who was the most desirable man in their circle. I was around at the time and never saw anything to suggest she ever considered leaving her husband for Charles in the period before he married Diana. At the date of his wedding to Diana, Camilla had a seven-year-old and a three-year-old. So there was never a question of his marrying a divorced woman before he married Diana.

After Camilla's wedding, the issue was not raised again until Charles himself was divorced and by that time the Queen considered anyone who wasn't Diana a pleasant change. (Until she met Meghan, we presume.)

by Anonymousreply 115May 24, 2024 2:36 PM

They want to bring them home so they can run negative pieces and kick them in the knees over and over again. They've already done that to death and it's probably looking getting less and less traction.

So who do they go for to tear down a few pegs? There's no one knew and they don't want to go after the future Queen. The kids are still off limits for now.

The British Press is disgusting and once they get a target in their sites, they don't let go - Diana, Fergie, Harry. Some how only these 3 people have sinned or had bad behavior.

They just want someone to criticize and kick around. The British psyche LOVES to take people down - they fucking enjoy it. Harry's escape is not just understandable - it's wise and mentally healthy. Fuck them.

by Anonymousreply 116May 24, 2024 3:01 PM

Agreed, R115. Also, the Parker-Bowles marriage probably would not have ended (maybe ever) had Camilla and Charles' affair not been made public. Andrew was said not to care about their relationship as he had side pieces of his own, but the public outing forced the dissolution. Even then, Camilla continued relationship with Charles rested not on her undying devotion to him but her need for someone to pay her outstanding bills as no other suitors were lining up after all the commotion in the press. Camilla seems to be more of an emotional caretaker than ardent lover. Charles, too, was seemingly no hurry to be married again but his circles kind of pushed the matter vis-a-vis events like the Grosvenor wedding. The "love story" of Charles and Camilla was a story concocted by their people to make their relationship palatable to the general public.

To the Sussex nutter, Charles and William married who they wanted. Particularly William. Listen to about five minutes of those cell phone calls that they captured and it is clear William was besotted. To your point about the British press, Harry has made a fool of himself on several continents at this point. What did he escape to? South Park devoting a whole episode to his vacuousness? Frankly, I think the British press has been quite lax about Harry's lack of action with the African Parks. Can you explain what Harry is doing to prevent his organization from their ongoing rape and murdering of the Baka?

by Anonymousreply 117May 24, 2024 3:46 PM

Poor, jealous R117.

So far up the British Royal Family's arse, she can't even see the light of day.

No one cares what you think, dear.

Now back to the BRF troll farm with you.

by Anonymousreply 118May 24, 2024 3:55 PM

They're supposed to take them back and all is forgiven? These two are shits and the Royal family has to go through this again? Whoever says but they are family! doesn't seem to know any families where betrayals are never forgiven or forgotten and family members never speak to one another ever again.

I can imagine William never wanting to see him again and with good reason. What will he say? 'How's your todger? Don't get it caught in the freezer!'

by Anonymousreply 119May 24, 2024 4:05 PM

I thought Charles was forced, not that he "ran off". He was commissioned by the Navy to a two year tour of duty, and promoted, because his uncle Dickie, who was conspiring behind his back along with Phillip, Granny and the Queen, to shorten his training period and get him out of the way so they could get Parker Bowles and Camilla married. Everything I've read confirms it. And Camilla herself was sort of ambivalent. Back then she was young and while she was very fond of Charles, she thought marrying Parker Bowles was a good thing even t hough he was a pig. She wasn't ready back then to commit to the strictures of being a Princess-Queen in Waiting.

by Anonymousreply 120May 24, 2024 4:48 PM

And wasn’t Mountbatten still trying to marry off one of his daughters to Charles?

by Anonymousreply 121May 24, 2024 6:10 PM

Harry is a petulant, vindictive, depressing, entitled, lying, grifting brat who never grew up and doesn't realize he's just a moron who thinks he's important.

Same with his wife.

by Anonymousreply 122May 24, 2024 8:45 PM

R113, cuckoo.

by Anonymousreply 123May 25, 2024 12:39 PM

[quote]I thought Charles was forced, not that he "ran off".

Yeah, well, stop watching The Crown.

If Charles had been determined to marry her, he'd just have chucked one of his famous wobblies and demanded they all work out how. Uncle Dickie was always conniving something or other. It didn't mean you had to go along with it. He wanted Charles to marry his ?niece, Amanda Knatchbull, but she DID tell Charles she wasn't interested.

Nobody beyond her loyal circle has, or had, the slightest clue how the young Camilla felt about becoming Princess of Wales, for the simple reason that he never offered it.

by Anonymousreply 124May 25, 2024 12:46 PM

Would Charles really have married his second cousin? That was definitely not considered ok in the 1970s and 1980s. And we're also supposed to believe that her sister-in-law was having an affair with Philip. It's all nonsense

by Anonymousreply 125May 25, 2024 1:09 PM

[quote]Telegraph UK Opinion Piece: "It's Time To Bring Prince Harry Home"

Yes! In a box!

by Anonymousreply 126May 25, 2024 1:14 PM

This Petronella creature is a pretentious fool.

by Anonymousreply 127May 25, 2024 2:45 PM

[quote] Prince William 'Fears' Harry & Meghan Could Become 'Public Face Of Royal Family' Amid Health Crisis

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's recent visit to Nigeria has reportedly raised concerns among royal experts about the couple overshadowing senior royals, particularly Prince William and Kate Middleton.

The Sussexes were warmly received by the African nation and engaged in some activities typically seen during official royal tours. Now, according to a report, the special treatment Harry and Meghan received in Nigeria has deeply "upset" the royal family.

Senior Royals Fear Harry And Meghan Would Be Seen As 'The Public Face Of The Royal Family' Prince Harry & Meghan Markle MEGA According to royal expert Tom Quinn, "The senior royals, especially William and Kate, are terrified of one thing above all others: that Harry and Meghan will continue to organize trips across the world until they are seen as the public face of the royal family."

In a chat with The Mirror, Quinn noted: "The fear is made worse because William knows that with his wife stricken with cancer, he cannot compete, and he can't stop the Meghan and Harry rollercoaster."

He continued: "William is absolutely furious and determined to prevent this from happening again in the future. Charles is said to be angrier than anyone has ever seen him."

While speaking with the news outlet, Quinn further noted that the royal family is especially "upset" with how Nigerians treated the Sussexes.

He said, "What's really upset the applecart is the fact that the Nigerians treated Meghan and Harry as if they too thought this was an official tour — all the signs were there as the couple were greeted with dances, receptions, visits to schools and charities."

"Everything you might expect from an official royal visit was there — the receptions, the visits to schools and charities, to wounded soldiers and the disabled," the royal expert continued.

"Meghan and Harry's speeches and their whole attitude have been designed to give the impression that they are still fully paid-up royals and William and his father King Charles don't like it one bit," Quinn concluded.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 128May 25, 2024 9:31 PM

Tom Quinn is another bullshitter, r128. Just so you know, no one in the UK takes these kinds of articles seriously. That article is about as serious as the drivel by Petrinella Wyatt, i.e. not at all serious.

by Anonymousreply 129May 25, 2024 9:55 PM

[quote] The senior royals, especially William and Kate, are terrified of one thing above all others: that Harry and Meghan will continue to organize trips across the world until they are seen as the public face of the royal family.

Revenge is sweet.

by Anonymousreply 130May 25, 2024 11:57 PM

They're Walmart royalty.

by Anonymousreply 131May 25, 2024 11:59 PM

[QUOTE]Harry and Meghan will continue to organize trips across the world until they are seen as the public face of the royal family.

Let's hope they hire a better advance team so the official greeting party doesn't have a fugitive from the law (for stealing $20M) on it.

If the Palace has any major concern about the Sussexes, it's about them associating with unsavory people as they did in Nigeria. Yes, Andrew has also hung out with a few himself, but the Palace could at least exercise some control over him. The Sussexes already have two brushes with Russian oligarchs. One generously let them stay at his Vancouver Island mansion, the other sold them Palacio Montecito.

Meghan is thirsty and Harry is the dullest knife if the drawer. It's a good combo to exploit.

by Anonymousreply 132May 26, 2024 12:10 AM

William isn't "terrified" of Harry outshining him in anything, especially that joke of a trip to Nigeria. The Nigerian First Lady's criticism of Meghan was hilarious. Meghan doesn’t have the first clue about how to behave as a guest in someone else's country. Oh, I forgot, she is Nigerian so it is her country, who cares what the people actually living there think.

Harry and Meghan will never be seen as the public face of the royal family, because they do not represent the royal family, they do not represent the King and they do not represent the British state. They don't even live in Britain and Meghan is not British. Royal trips abroad are diplomatic events and the visiting royals represent the British state. Harry and Meghan were on a private visit to Nigeria, as the British ambassador made very clear.

It's a good job that they no longer represent the British state as they would be damaging Britain's relations with other countries, given how the wife of the Nigerian president criticised Meghan's demeanour in her country.

by Anonymousreply 133May 26, 2024 10:01 AM

I'mma quote a famous U.S. President: "It's better to have them inside the tent pissin' out, than outside the tent pissin' in."

by Anonymousreply 134May 26, 2024 2:20 PM

To consider "bringing Prince Harry home," is absurd on it's face. Harry cannot be controlled. This is the one consistent thread running through his entire life. If the brought him home to become an official working member of the RF, what makes anyone think the RF strictures that could not contain him before, would be able to contain him now? It's laughable on its face. The Media might love to see him come back because they'd have a field day writing shit about the family and who's hating on whom, but in fact it would be a total disaster, especially since Harry has enjoyed a lot of freedom these past few years. The Palace staffers would have a fucking nervous breakdown.

by Anonymousreply 135May 26, 2024 2:24 PM

[quote] The Palace staffers would have a fucking nervous breakdown.

Heaven forbid the control freaks lose control.

That's really what this is about: power and control.

And the BRF "minders" don't like Harry and Meghan because they outsmart and outplay the "Men in Gray Suits."

Fuck them!

Go, Harry!

by Anonymousreply 136May 26, 2024 4:36 PM

I'll have whatever drugs R136 is having.

by Anonymousreply 137May 26, 2024 4:41 PM

Harry & Meghan are childish and resentful. Basically low-functioning human beings with, for now, financial resources to be unrepentant contrarians. They think they have all the answers, and demonstrate a disregard for advice from professionals in all matters. We shall see how long this dog and pony show is able to continue; my guess, even their low-functioning followers will grow tired of this talentless pair through time.

by Anonymousreply 138May 26, 2024 4:47 PM

Anyone who writes "gray suits" has no idea what they're rabbiting on about.

by Anonymousreply 139May 26, 2024 5:29 PM

Is he being held hostage? Is Scotland Yard arranging a rescue?

by Anonymousreply 140May 26, 2024 5:47 PM

HArry is older now with two kids and he understands $$$. So if they want him back they need to control his $$ and make sure he tows the line to get it.

by Anonymousreply 141May 26, 2024 7:32 PM

People don't seem to realize:Meghan has drawn a line in the sand, so to speak. She refuses to go to the UK for any reason except a fuenral.And her kids don't go to the UK either. Period. She has made it abundantly clear she will never live in the UK or even visit. Period. I see all the talk about Charles, William, Camilla, HArry, etc. but the fact is Harry will never willingly leave his wife. She might leave him, but he won't leave her. And if she refuses to even visit much less live in the UK then he isn't coming back, except for a visit. Period.

by Anonymousreply 142May 26, 2024 7:36 PM

[QUOTE]HArry is older now with two kids and he understands $$$.

I think Harry's problem is he doesn't understand money.

by Anonymousreply 143May 26, 2024 7:43 PM

Meghan didn't go to the UK for the Queen's funeral, r142 - she was already there for some Invictus stuff. I bet if she and Harry had been in the US when the Queen died, Harry would have returned for the funeral but she wouldn't have. She would only go to the UK for the one vehicle Harry has left for self-promotion (which she now seems to think she is part of too), namely Invictus.

Moreover, no one cares about Meghan in the UK and we don't care if she never steps foot here again.

by Anonymousreply 144May 26, 2024 7:50 PM

Markle will have to bite the bullet and attend King Charles funeral for 3 reasons:

1. Relevance

2. Relevance

3. Relevance

That's their only card left in the deck.

Then, they're all out of moves when the Big Kahuna, King William takes the throne.

by Anonymousreply 145May 26, 2024 9:32 PM

^ She needs to bite the bullet sooner if she really wants cash or some other compensation for her victimization at the RF's filthy hands! BOOM!

by Anonymousreply 146May 26, 2024 11:58 PM

Both Harry and Meghan frequently look like they need to take showers. Harry is seen needing a beard and neck trim while wearing wrinkled clothing. He has the Friar Tuck look. Meghan was marching in front of veterans wearing short shorts. She repeatedly dresses inappropriately for events and is either culturally unaware or doesn’t care. She’s a bully. Clothes are unpressed. Dresses are dragging on the ground. It’s been reported that her inappropriate clothing in Nigeria cost $120,000.

Harry can’t rub two brain cells together. He doesn’t read. He has no intellectual curiosity, He’s basically stupid. Harry is immature and is massively unaware of his privilege. He’s mentally ill and has a drug problem.

Meghan also appears mentally disordered. She tells Harry she’s in touch with his deceased mother and that Princess Diana approves of their actions. Despite her education all she can come up with is word salad. Meghan is narcissistic.

Both of them repeatedly lie in public and appear delusional. They are untrustworthy.

They talk of being parents yet leave their children frequently for concerts, premiers, other events and for pseudo royal visits.

There is nothing glamorous about those two.

by Anonymousreply 147May 27, 2024 2:30 AM

Premiere ^

by Anonymousreply 148May 27, 2024 4:56 AM

I want Meghan to make a guest appearance on the new Deal or No Deal.

by Anonymousreply 149May 27, 2024 5:00 AM

Apparently on Deal Or No Deal, some of the suitcase models get quite a bit of attention interacting with the host and contestants. I bet Meghan was never one of those women, which is why she hated doing it. The guy who hosted it doesn't even remember her.

by Anonymousreply 150May 28, 2024 12:31 PM

[Quote] given how the wife of the Nigerian president criticised Meghan's demeanour in her country.

Didn’t realize some African wife gets to decide who can represent the monarchy and who can’t.

Using your logic the Queen also was disqualified, considering that she wasn’t uniformly well-received.

by Anonymousreply 151May 28, 2024 12:38 PM

[Quote] Charles is a petulant, vindictive, depressing, entitled, lying, grifting brat who never grew up and doesn't realize he's just a moron who thinks he's important.


by Anonymousreply 152May 28, 2024 12:40 PM

She was justly criticised for using some weird identity issue to suck up to Nigerians. As her father is neglected by her.

by Anonymousreply 153May 28, 2024 12:42 PM

What are you talking about, r151? Meghan and Harry are not working royals. The only royals who can be deemed to be representing the royal family when abroad are the King and those representing the King in an official capacity on an official visit abroad (e.g. William, Edward). In this case, they are also representing the British state, as the King is the head of state. Thankfully Meghan does not represent the royal family, i.e. the King, i.e. the British state, when abroad, as she would be damaging Britain's bilateral relations.

by Anonymousreply 154May 28, 2024 1:15 PM

Get your story straight, r154. First it’s “they can’t represent the monarchy because reasons,” then it’s “what are you talking about they’re not working royals.”

Choose a lane and stick with it. You’re all over the road.

by Anonymousreply 155May 28, 2024 1:19 PM

You know within the former Commonwealth countries, and in other developing nations the Crown, and the RF are very unwelcome. So even though Meghan and HArry are not working Royals, he is still Prince Harry, the son of Charles III. Charles wants everyone to be friends but there are a lot of countries where The Crown is very much resented.

by Anonymousreply 156May 28, 2024 1:21 PM

They don't represent the British monarchy for a whole bunch of reasons, r155. Are you seriously suggesting that Meghan and Harry represent the British monarchy? Do you even comprehend what that means? To represent the British monarchy means to represent the monarch, who is the head of state. Therefore, it means to represent the British state in an official capacity, particularly when abroad. Meghan and Harry do not represent the British monarch and they certainly don't represent the British state and the British people.

by Anonymousreply 157May 28, 2024 1:22 PM

R157, to represent the monarchy means to represent the British monarch, i.e. the British state when abroad. Meghan and Harry do not represent the British state, which is why the Nigerian First Lady was happy to publicly chide Meghan. She would never have chided a working royal who was on an official visit to Nigeria as the representative of the King in that way, as that would be undermining Nigeria's diplomatic relations with the UK. It's also why British royals representing the monarch, i.e. the state, on official visits abroad are respectful, so as not to harm diplomatic relations. Meghan was disrespectful but that didn't harm UK-Nigerian relations because she doesn't represent Britain in any way at all.

Sure, there are many countries around the world that have issues with the UK, just as there are many countries around the world where the people hate the US. But the governments still try to maintain good diplomatic relations. This is actually why it's a good thing to have an apolitical head of state because they are above politics.

Meghan and Harry's visit to Nigeria was a private visit, as the British ambassador made clear.

by Anonymousreply 158May 28, 2024 1:29 PM

R152, Charles is important in as far as he is the head of state of the United Kingdom and therefore represents the British state. The Crown is the symbol of the British state. Do you comprehend what that means? I realise it's a bit complicated for you.

by Anonymousreply 159May 28, 2024 1:30 PM

R157 just doubles down on the doubletalk.

Notice he doesn’t address the forked tongue nature of his arguments.

by Anonymousreply 160May 28, 2024 1:32 PM


by Anonymousreply 161May 28, 2024 1:35 PM

If Harry needs to return as a working royal, he needs to subject himself to the Grey Men. And he won't do that, until the money runs out.

by Anonymousreply 162May 28, 2024 1:38 PM

R157 just doubles down on proving to us that he has no fucking clue what he is babbling on about.

by Anonymousreply 163May 28, 2024 1:39 PM

Harry can never return as a working royal, r162. Even if he returned to live in the UK there is absolutely no way he would ever be able to act in any official capacity ever again.

by Anonymousreply 164May 28, 2024 1:41 PM

They're both so annoying, yet fascinatingly so. Can't wait to see them turn on each other. Will either of them get to be interviewed by Oprah about the other?

by Anonymousreply 165May 28, 2024 1:45 PM

Little sweetheart at R136 thinks Meghan being stuck behind a column and Harry behind Anne's hat-feather happened by chance.

And we only wear grey suits if the Royals want us to.

by Anonymousreply 166May 28, 2024 1:48 PM

[quote]She refuses to go to the UK for any reason except a fuenral.

If (God forbid) Kate dies, Meghan will be back there like a shot, making a play for William. We'd need a lot of popcorn here at the DL to watch that one play out.

by Anonymousreply 167May 28, 2024 1:53 PM

We will only see Mrs. Harry Mountbatten-Windsor of Montecito, California, USA back in the UK for ceremonies of the utmost importance to his father. And that will probably be only his father's funeral.

Although the pair feeds into each other's narcissism and twist stories to highlight their self-importance, I truly believe they love each other. And I bet they are good parents to their children. The presence of her mother may also keep their children grounded.

Her satirical curtsy in the documentary, I believe, was one of the biggest insults to the family in which her husband was born and raised. She clearly has no idea or clue what his family takes with the utmost gravity. Contrast Princess Anne's deep curtsy as her mother's coffin was carried into Holyrood Palace with the exaggerated and mocking flourish done by Meghan for the camera.

by Anonymousreply 168May 28, 2024 2:11 PM

If they “ feed into each other's narcissism and twist stories to highlight their self-importance” can they truly love?

I always feel like Harry is a dullard and Meg constantly has to prod him forward. It must be exhausting.

by Anonymousreply 169May 28, 2024 2:28 PM

Narcissists are never good parents. At best, they hand their children off to others who are less damaging. Doria disappeared for an entire decade during Meghan's formative years, I wouldn't bet she cares at all about those kids.

by Anonymousreply 170May 28, 2024 3:27 PM

Good parents spend time with their kids. Those two are constantly on trips or staging photo ops. They probably spend an hour a week with them, just like they do with their foundation.

by Anonymousreply 171May 28, 2024 4:10 PM

[quote] Harry can never return as a working royal, R162. Even if he returned to live in the UK there is absolutely no way he would ever be able to act in any official capacity ever again.

Well listen to high and mighty Miss R164 who thinks that anyone gives a flying fuck what she thinks, or that she has any authority.

You're a nobody. A loser.

And just because you THINK something, doesn't make it true.

Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has them.

Now sit down, and shut the fuck up.

by Anonymousreply 172May 28, 2024 5:29 PM

R172 = mentally ill American. Especially if he thinks Harry has any role to play in British public life.

Yeah, it is up to me and people like me - British citizens, that is. And we don't want him, even if he were to venture back.

by Anonymousreply 173May 28, 2024 5:33 PM

R173, just a minor point I’d like to clear up. You said British citizen. I thought inhabitants of the UK were British “subjects”. Is that not used any more?

by Anonymousreply 174May 28, 2024 5:51 PM

You thought wrong, r174, which is no surprise.

by Anonymousreply 175May 28, 2024 6:41 PM

R172 — Why don’t YOU shut the fuck up? This whole thread is about opinions and conjecture— and you pick on one person with your silly and obnoxious hissy fit?

Go change your tampon and chill, MISSY.

by Anonymousreply 176May 28, 2024 6:59 PM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!