William Torpedoes Meghan and Harry’s Plan to Keep Their Kids Royal

One friend of Prince William’s told The Daily Beast: “William obviously isn’t going to hire Archie and Lilibet. This is just trolling on the part of Harry and Meghan. It’s actually hilarious that no one even noticed it for ten days, until the Mail did it.

“The idea that somehow having a vestigial HRH as a baby later entitles you to be a working royal is beyond parody, even for them.

“Harry and Meghan were asked by the queen to stop using their HRHs, and agreed. Obviously, any reasonable person would understand that would mean your kids don’t use them either.

“The simple fact is that Meghan has gone back on the deal by using her HRH. It’s a straightforward betrayal of the deal, and if she now intends to start parading the kids as HRHs to aggrandize herself, it just adds to the case to remove them, legally, altogether.”

Another friend of the family also told The Daily Beast that they believed the HRHs would ultimately be officially removed.

The second friend said: “An HRH is a funny thing. It’s often referred to as a title, but it’s actually technically a ‘style,’ i.e., a way of addressing someone. It’s a courtesy. It denotes no official role and it bestows no formal rank in the British system, in the way being a duke or duchess does.

“An HRH is bestowed by letters patent—which is basically a fancy way of saying it is a legally binding royal decree—and by precedent an HRH can be taken away by royal decree also. Look at Diana and Fergie. The HRHs weren’t removed ‘because they got divorced,’ the rules were quietly changed to remove HRHs from royal exes. There is a difference.”

The friend added: “They have asked the Sussexes politely to stop using the style, to no avail, so I imagine William will simply issue new letters patent to formally remove the entire family’s right to use HRH when he becomes king.

“It will likely be presented as part of a wider tidying up exercise to reduce, more broadly, the number of HRHs in circulation. He could, for example, say that only working royals are entitled to use HRH, which seems sensible if you are trying to modernize, or specify that only children of the monarch are HRH, not the grandchildren, which would have the added advantage of making things clearer for their own kids’ families in due course.”

Norman Baker, a former government minister who has written extensively on royal and constitutional matters, previously told the Daily Beast: “As the bestowing of an HRH is in the gift of the monarch, the monarch could remove the HRH title. It would basically be the equivalent to an executive order in the U.S.”

Baker called for the Sussexes to be stripped of the honorifics at the time they quit the working family and has told the Daily Beast it was “a mistake” to not deal with the matter conclusively then.

A former courtier who retains good links with the palace told the Daily Beast: “The bottom line is that Harry and Meghan are abusing the fact that the queen trusted them to adhere to the deal made at the Sandringham Summit, and that won’t be allowed to stand, especially as we all know this is really about her ability to flog tat on Instagram.

“Charles may not want this fight, but William despises Harry and Meghan at this stage, and when he is king his fury will rain down on them.”

Meghan and Harry promised the late Queen Elizabeth they would stop using the HRH titles when they left the royal family in 2020, but Meghan has reneged on that promise, using the title privately and allowing others to address her by it.

A Meghan source previously told The Daily Beast: “Harry and Meghan retain their HRH titles; however, by agreement, they do not use them for commercial purposes. While they do not publicly use ‘HRH,’ this was a personal gift, and their titles remain.”

However, royal sources have told the Daily Beast that the deal that settled the terms of Meghan and Harry’s exit from the ranks of working royalty “made it clear they had agreed not to use the HRH titles at all, ever, in any capacity.”

The Royal Family have become the Kardashians of the UK. Let bygones be bygones, bring them back into the fold. it's not like Harry or Meghan murdered their first born. Whatever happened to blood is thicker than weather? Talk about thin skin egos. Gosh the Royals and their fans are petty.

Uh, the actual working royals aren't the Kardashians of this story...they're not the ones who flounced off to California to fail as media moguls.

They didn't want to be working royals...why the fuck would their kids have titles? They're American kids. We don't have titles.

Meghan just wants them for her eventual "payday" of trying to create her own Kardashian style media franchise when the kids are older. Her two pillow babies are her retirement fund.

Except of course, she's a fuckin' idiot who can't get anything off the ground because she's a talent free twat.

The Royal family will be so thinned out with a bore for a king when William comes along. Will anyone care anymore? Does anyone care about his kids once they aren’t kids anymore?

Play stupid games, lose out of stupid prizes.

Elizabeth II was about as boring as humanly possible and was a paragon as Head of State. The US is currently enjoying a very unboring Head of State . I know which I'd prefer.

At this point, I wonder why they don't just do it: quietly issue some letter on a Friday afternoon when Israel has attacked someone and just get it over with. Even if Haz does get a divorce and return to the fold in some way, his days as an HRH are already over.

[quote]Baker called for the Sussexes to be stripped of the honorifics at the time they quit the working family and has told the Daily Beast it was “a mistake” to not deal with the matter conclusively then.

Absolutely it was a mistake not to deal with it at the time. They should have been stripped bare. The Sussexes took advantage of the Queen's benevolence and age.

[quote]bring them back into the fold.

You're a loon.

Charles doesn't want the grief, quite reasonably. William should do it between Charles 's death and the funeral, so Harry will throw a massive strop and doesn't come - 2 birds.

Maybe I’m missing some nuance of this because I’m not British, but she can call herself whatever the fuck she wants. Just like she I can.

I can see how it might be annoying if they were to use HRH at publicized events they were being paid for, but I can’t see posting a letter where someone else (mistakenly?) uses HRH as a big deal. And who cares what she uses in private correspondence. Is she even doing that? I saw one example and I think it was a note to someone’s mom. Seemed like it might have been done tongue-in-cheek (that might be giving Meghan too much credit).

At this point, if I were Meghan and Harry, I’d be getting HRH license plates. I don’t like them, but if I had to pick a side I’d go with the word salad self-sabotager and her low I.Q. flunky over the self important lazy pants twins.

Fuck William. Is the prick going to formally censure Queen Latifah and Prince’s estate?

William hasn't actually done anything yet and might never, R11. This is gossip and speculation. Your fury seems a bit strange.

Meghan “I’m A Commoner Now” Sussex

R11 might be the stupidest person ever to post on these threads.

Archie and Lilbet are not referred to as HRH and never will be. This whole passport fracas was Harry's attempt to have them documented with the HRH title (as well as the surname Spencer, apparently) on their passports so that he could then claim they are legally HRH - as if titles such as HRH appear on passports.

R11, you're not only missing nuance but the entire point. In official contexts, HRH is only applied to working royals who are representing the monarch. Meghan can call herself what she wants, but she will never be a real HRH - just as Queen Latifah isn't a real queen. This is in fact the whole reason why Harry wanted his kids to have HRH recorded on their passports, so that, if they wish, they could go to the UK when adults and be working royals. The fact he could even imagine something so implausible just goes to show what a complete idiot he is.

But in what “official context” has HRH been used to refer to Meghan or Harry, R15?

Another hilarious Daily Beast article that fantasises deliriously about what William will supposedly do. Archie and Lilibet are not and never will be HRH. There's a difference with Harry and Meghan, who were formerly HRH in an official capacity but are no longer. By continuing to use HRH they would have been falsely giving the impression that they were still conducting official royal engagements on behalf of the monarch. Archie and Lilibet have never performed official royal engagements on behalf of the monarch as HRH and never will.

R16, Harry was always HRH and performed official royal engagements. Meghan also performed a few official royal engagements along with Harry, e.g. a few royal trips abroad, appearing at various commemorations, representing the monarch at charity events. In those official contexts, they were HRH. When they withdrew from living in the UK full-time Harry had some bizarre idea that they could be half-in, half-out of the royal family, and they would still be able to appear at various events and take part in certain activities that were completely unrelated to the royal family as HRH, so, of course this had to be stopped as it would give the false impression that they were representing the monarch, i.e. the British head of state, i.e. Britain.

Team William!

[quote] William hasn't actually done anything yet and might never, [R11]. This is gossip and speculation. Your fury seems a bit strange.

You have a point, R12. I read the linked article too quickly and linked the “understands” explanation to the hypotheses about what William might do, but it was actually related to something from M&H’s camp.

I don’t like William (or Kate), though. I used to think they really made the best of their circumstances and respected their ability to be self-controlled and follow the rules imposed by their roles. But I believe Harry’s claims that they sabotaged him via the press for years. And it went too far. Vicious and petty at the same time. M&H are unsympathetic and unlikable, but kicking an ugly dog is still kicking a dog.

Once Meghan divorces Harry…will William accept him back into the UK and Royal life? Or he does he despise him too much?

What had to be stopped after Meghan and Harry left R18? I think I understand what you are saying about HRH=acting officially on behalf of the BRF, and that’s probably a big part of why this seems so petty to me. As a non-Brit, I don’t make that as connection. So appreciate that context. But when did they ever do that? When did they show up at an event that as advertised them as HRH?

They wouldn’t be invited anywhere if it wasn’t for their connections.

They’re not invited anywhere now. People actively avoid them.

But they can’t see that they are the problem.

It's the least those racists owe ME, for all the pain and suffering I have endured at their hands. And My Children deserve nothing less!

In the very off chance that something happens to Bill and Cathy's kids, who would be next in line if Harry & Meghan aren't "royal"?

[quote]I believe Harry’s claims that they sabotaged him via the press for years

Nobody needs to "sabotage" Harry, he does that just fine by himself.

Team Bill and Cathy

This title-stripping fantasy will provides years upon years of DataLounge and DailyMail masturbatory fuel, until Will actually accedes and decides not to rock the boat.

^provide

If William does this once he is king, it will be a bad public relations move for him and the Royal Family. It will be seen as petty, vindictive, and cruel to his nephew and his niece. Far better to ignore the antics and actions of the parents. Take the high road there. And he should welcome his niece and nephew when the time comes. They'll never be "working royals," and that will be their choice. The two are Americans, and will be thoroughly American when they are adults. As such, they should reject any foreign titles.

The precedent for this speculation was the Danish Royal Family, where -- while she still reigned -- Margarethe stripped the titles of prince and princess from the children of her second son. Her actions angered her son. But again, if William does this once he is king, it will backfire on him and the Crown, because his niece and nephew have mixed heritage. To do this would give substance to the charge that he and his family are racist.

R6 it was a different world seventy years ago. Elizabeth had the full weight, history and gravitas of the royal family behind her. The royal family enjoyed a much different level of acceptance and respect and she reigned over a large portion of the world. She could be as boring as she wanted to be.

But you can’t have a waning institution, riddled with 40 years worth of scandal, that fewer and fewer people actually support or care about WITH a boring leader even fewer people care about.

Charlotte is the only hope to save the Monarchy.

Meghan and her Handbag are loathed in the UK. Do you honestly think that it would be a PR disaster for the titles to be stripped from two American kids that no one in the UK ever sees? Sure, Jan. As for them being mixed race, those kids look white as snow. You need to find another tact. The racism angle is tired and played out.

R33 No matter who is King or Queen, The British Royal family will never be boring to a good part of the general public. Especially to Americans.

[quote]But you can’t have a waning institution, riddled with 40 years worth of scandal, that fewer and fewer people actually support or care about WITH a boring leader

Uh... what would a non boring King be like? What should William be doing to appear less boring and be more entertaining?

The fact that Harry's wife still uses the titles and, according to the article, expects people to call her HRH in private is hysterical! I have never seen anyone have such an utter lack of self-insight to such comedic effect.

I doubt William and Catherine give the two losers much thought. I suspect the two losers will try to engage and enrage, as is Harry's wife's ploy by using the HRH and naming the child Lillibet. Harry's wife knows without a connection, even if just fake news articles, to the House of Windsor they are nothing. Harry's interviewing are attempts to keep the corpse of who they were alive.

^^^I meant engage and enrage the Royal Family in order to possibly provoke a response that will keep the whole ugly business the two losers have created in the public eye.

[quote] Meghan and her Handbag are loathed in the UK. Do you honestly think that it would be a PR disaster for the titles to be stripped from two American kids that no one in the UK ever sees? Sure, Jan. As for them being mixed race, those kids look white as snow. You need to find another tact. The racism angle is tired and played out.

R32, I agree with everything you write, but it does not matter. There will be cries of racism, if William as king does it.

[quote]As for them being mixed race, those kids look white as snow. You need to find another tact. The racism angle is tired and played out.

They're old enough for Meghan to start spray-tanning them now.

Of course I agree with R32!

I meant to direct my reply to R35

My bad

[quote] I wonder why they don't just do it: quietly issue some letter on a Friday afternoon when Israel has attacked someone and just get it over with?

If you think that Harry and Meghan would ever let something like this be "quietly issued," you are sadly mistaken.

They would be sure to blast it all over the news and the tabloids, and make sure that the entire world knows what a monster King Charles is for doing this.

Harry and Meghan will never go quietly.

In 20 years, it'll read "George Torpedoes Louis' Plan...."

Laugh now. Cry later.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

R32, Harry and Meghan have already effectively been "stripped" of their HRH: they still formally have the style, but they can never use it. This has is not related to what the Danish Queen did.

This story is supposedly about WIlliam torpedoing Harry's plans to make his kids HRH so they can be working royals one day. Harry thought that if he managed to get HRH written onto their UK passports (Archie already had a UK passport, he was trying to get him a second UK passport at age 5 or 6) then that would mean that they are "legally" HRH. Aside from the fact that this is not how to become HRH and it's not how to make a passport application, William can't dictate to the Passport Office what names it can issue passports under - although in the original Guardian article it was supposedly Charles who did this, even though he can't either. Harry was just being an idiot again and abusing the passport application system.

R33, we in the UK like our royal family to be "boring".

All of this silliness over titles. Move on with your lives - both sides. Jesus Christ - petty, childlike behavior from them all.

I feel like Harry has this axe to grind about how he's been overlooked and treated his whole life - and it's been magnified since leaving the UK. It's like he's stuck on trying to change them and they never will.

It's all the family he has, so I know it has to burn - but you've got your own family now. Sometimes it's best to go no contact than to try and change family or in this case, a deeply ingrained institution that bends for no one.

You've made a break Harry - just make it a clean one and develop your identity outside of being a royal. That's what people are wanting you to do anyway. Let their antics show how petty and un-family like that world really is.

He can't make a clean break. He's neither smart enough, strong enough, or rich enough. She doesn't want a break, clean or dirty. Without them she's nothing. Less than, actually: she's a laughingstock now.

The RF can do whatever they want. They agreed not to use the titles. She has and he's tried to do so with the kids' passports. My guess is that when William takes over, Harry is history.

Fuck around and find out, Megz.

[quote]All of this silliness over titles. Move on with your lives - both sides.

"Move on with your lives" is exactly what the Royal family has done. Harry has not.

R35, you mean tack, not tact. Tack, as in a course of action.

So Prince Archie, raised in the US grows up, gets married and eventually has a boy, would that kid be a prince too? Or several kids, all princes and princesses? Where does it stop?

R51 Apparently it can stop whenever the the ruling monarch wants it to stop. An example would be Prince Edward's children. When Prince Edward got married, Buckingham Palace announced what future titles would be for any children.

A future King should lead by example. Being a petty bitch to your own brother over a book or a little spat is not that.

[quote]A future King should lead by example.

And that is in fact what Charles is doing.

By not giving in to Harry's nonsense.

^ William

[quote]I feel like Harry has this axe to grind about how he's been overlooked and treated his whole life - and it's been magnified since leaving the UK. It's like he's stuck on trying to change them and they never will.

Can you blame him? The one woman who cared for him and loved him unconditionally was not only treated horribly by his fathers side but was tragically killed at such a young age. Not to mention his fathers whore goes on to become Queen. That would fuck anybody up.

William should really take a step back, see how Harry has been wounded in this whole situation, and deal accordingly. Diana would be FUCKING PISSED at how this is all going down. She always led by class as an example.

Oh, the melodrama of poor, poor Harry Sussex and his sad life of wealth and privilege...WON'T SOMEONE LOVE AND VALUE HIM FOR WHAT HE IS WORTH?!?!?

Haha. The Twerkles' shiny new crap PR is doing just great!

William was also "wounded" by the same situation as Harry and. you don't see him spending his time whining, moaning, trashing his family and sitting back twiddling this thumbs while his wife spreads vicious lies about his family.

[quote]William was also "wounded" by the same situation as Harry and. you don't see him spending his time whining, moaning, trashing his family and sitting back twiddling this thumbs while his wife spreads vicious lies about his family.

What lies? That they're racist? That old bitch used to sport around her blood diamonds like it was cute. I've no doubt that royal family had racist attitudes. Wasn't Phillip a nazi sympathizer as well?

And no, I'm not a Meghan stan. She wouldn't have given two shits had she been treated like she was white. Self-promoting asshole. But two things can be true.

Harry's a dope who's being used, but neither side is perfect by any means.

[quote]What lies? That they're racist?

Racist this, racist that.

Hon, it's the year 2025, that shit doesn't fly anymore.

Meghan presented as white for years before she started spray-tanning.

Okkkay r61. We get who you are

I’m still wondering why Megs didn’t name her daughter after her own mother, whose heritage was such a source of pride

[quote] So Prince Archie, raised in the US grows up, gets married and eventually has a boy, would that kid be a prince too? Or several kids, all princes and princesses?

No. Archie and Lilibet are HRH Prince Archie and HRH Princess Lilibet solely because they are grandchildren of the monarch in the male line.

Archie's children will never be grandchildren of a monarch, so they will not have royal titles or the HRH designation.

[quote] Wasn't Phillip a nazi sympathizer as well?

No, and you're an asshole for falsely suggesting as much.

He fought the Nazis with distinction in WW2, and was a decorated navyman.

And today, this headline appears in The Daily Beast:

"Harry and Meghan’s Abrasive Management Style Back in the Spotlight as They Ax Their Communications Heads"

And:

"The couple sacked communications chiefs Charlie Gipson and Kyle Boulia, reportedly blaming them for failing to turn around routinely negative media coverage of the pair."

"The couple have now hired a PR firm to manage their affairs. One of the new team’s first moves was to release last week’s twerking video."

Sounds promising!

Passport? What's a passport?

- Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

You all missed the obvious flag that this article is just manufactured nonsense.

Its the sixth word in the first sentence of the article for godssakes!

'exiled'

Prince harry has never been exiled! he and his wife simply stomped off to America in a temper tantrum. (Although I believe they planned to leave the first night she seduced him - what a putz he is!).

R69 The word "exiled" is used correctly there.

One of its meanings : "the state or a period of voluntary absence from one's country or home" - Merriam-Webster

regardless, he's still a stone-cold putz

What I just cant wrap my head around is why a thirsty bitch like Meghan ,who craves fame the way mosquitoes crave blood, threw away with both hands the opportunity to be bigger than any celebrity alive . She could have been as beloved as Diana had she played her cards right . Why did she throw it away ?

She's stupid. She hasn't been successful at even one thing she's attempted in her life.

[quote]She could have been as beloved as Diana had she played her cards right . Why did she throw it away ?

She didn't throw it away.

Scorpion and turtle.

Because she truly doesn't care about othe people. Diana was one of the few public figures who willingly hugged an AIDS patient without gloves when people thought it was contagious by touch.

OP's is a non-story.

Willie is so stupid: Harry and I requested those letters stand for the title “Hot Royal Ho”!

So, r70, whenever I'm on holiday abroad I'm in "exile". Yeah, I'm sure that's how the DB was using it.

What do “working royals” actually “work” at? Christening ships or visiting nursery schools?

That term is just comical.

Represent the head of state of the United Kingdom in various capacities, r79. We're happy for them to christen ships and visit nursery schools, support charities, advance causes. It's good for the country, it's unifying and it's a far nicer thing to define us than political strife.

It's bizarre that He arry has spent four decades at the heart of an institution the role and function of which he still doesn't understand. The half in half out idea, the deranged legal cases over security, the HRH business and all the pettiness over precedence, uniforms, medals, frogging and what have you all demonstrate his total ignorance of everything.

R72 Because she had to work!

I don’t think she realized the duties and work of the royals. She only did a few engagements while she was there.

She also went through a shit ton of money while she was there.

Lily Diana would’ve sufficed. Their usual tactic is stepping right up to the line and maintaining plausible deniability. Lilibet was over the line so they had to make up that fiction that the queen okayed it.

I don’t see that, R83. Meghan makes bad choices and seems very ineffectual. Maybe she doesn’t focus on the right tasks and maybe she does a lot of make-work nonsense rather than seeing priorities through, but I don’t think she lacks a work ethic. Her execution may be poor, but she doesn’t seem to avoid work.

Harry resents not getting the same perks as William. It's like what Charles said about Andrew: he wants to be me.

Oh look, another Meghan thread.

Too many Meghan threads. Muriel should force them to stick to one. When the soap fangurls tried this they ended up banned for a few years. The discourse is similar. Anyone who doesn't hate Meghan enough is subjected to girlish namecalling.

And they only come here to take advantage of the anonymity. Theyd be banned at other sites. Very few of them are gay.

The first 3 words should have happened after date #1.

He also just stripped one of Camilla's grandson's of his silly title due to the boy bullying Prince George at an event at Windsor Castle. It was said that Camilla was incensed when she found out and attempted to get Charles to intervene, but was rebuffed.

Camilla, Charles, William = Kardashians season 1.

[quote] He also just stripped one of Camilla's grandson's of his silly title due to the boy bullying Prince George at an event at Windsor Castle. It was said that Camilla was incensed when she found out and attempted to get Charles to intervene, but was rebuffed.

How can William "strip one of Camilla's grandsons of his silly title," when William isn't even the King yet?

William is nothing. He has no authority yet.

[quote] Too many Meghan threads.

The ones that are incredibly stupid, like “Wouldn't it be better for the British Royal Family's to mend the relationship with Harry & Meghan?” should be deleted.

I go for all of them deleted.

This thread and the one about Meghan twerking/birthing are worthwhile because they cover distinct, notable events in the Meghan saga.

Choose one. And ban the childish straight girls.

Camilla's grandson has a title?

Why not block the threads you don't like?

R90 do you enjoy being an idiot? Please post a link to the non-story of William (who isn’t allowed) to strip one of Camilla’s grandsons of his title (which doesn’t exist as neither of her children and none of her grandchildren are titled).

Why do you Americans bother making this shit up when it’s so easy to shoot you down?

[quote] Camilla's grandson has a title?

Well, apparently he did have a title. Now he has nothing, and William has decreed that he will no longer be invited to any Royal events or gatherings. Camilla had better wake up to one fact. Charles won't be around that much longer and once he's gong she will be sent packing, along with her trashy family.

Tick, tick, tick

Go easy on Americans, they get all their Royal up[dates when they are checking out their groceries and reading the headlines on the covers of the gossip mags. They also think The Crown is a definitive documentary of the Royals.

What was his apparent title R101, and which of her grandsons was it?

Go easy on r103. Exploiting an American website.

By whom, R106? A bunch of clueless Americans such as yourself?

Stick to disbanding the monarchy that your compatriots installed last November.

I agree with r85. She knows how to hustle. When she finally “made it”, got the continuing character role on a series, she was constantly promoting herself. The department store modeling commercials, the Malta trip, the blog, SOHO House, the celeb chef boyfriend, the GQ clip, the mercy trips to Africa and India, the UN gig. I’m sure there was more. Bower’s book said she never turned down an opportunity to promote the show when asked by the producers.

It must’ve been exhausting so when she managed to meet Harry, she thought she could relax. She had a staff to do all the organizing and all she had to do is show up. And she’s continued in that vein today. Now she can dictate where she wants to focus and her staff scrambles to arrange it.

A lot of the BRF stans on DL will never understand that the majority of us see no good on any side of this. The majority of us don't really care about this celebrity family because all of them, on all sides and through several generations, are amoral famewhores only in it for themselves.

No one looks good in this situation. The Kardashian comparisons are very apt. The BRF is a reality show, at best. Most of us just check out permanently. They're no different than the housewives or the latest season of Survivor. They're still there but only their most fixated fans actually still GAF.

R98, you do know it’s well established that the blocking feature doesn’t work, right?

[quote] In official contexts, HRH is only applied to working royals who are representing the monarch

Is that true? Aren’t Andrew’s daughters still HRH?

R108 Do you work for her? And, are you shitting us?

Her staff can scramble to arrange it? Hard to do when they keep quitting.

If you want to stan for her you have to be plausible. You’re not.

Andrew's daughters are HRH and they always will be. Sorry for the Sussex haters, but Harry and his family are all HRH's as well. I will not pick a side here because man, this is exhausting, but they are what they are, and the King or William can move to strip them of the style at any time. Right now and into the future it will look petty and mean. There are a few HRH's who live around the world with little fuss. This isn't a Duchess of Windsor situation where Wallis was actively denied the HRH. (One of the few, very few, unkind acts that the gallant and valorous King George VI ever did.)

[quote] Whitehall, 11th December, 1917. The KING has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, bearing date the 30th ultimo, to define the styles and titles to be borne henceforth by members of the Royal Family. It is declared by the Letters Patent that the children of any Sovereign of the United Kingdom and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour; that save as aforesaid the titles of Royal Highness, Highness or Serene Highness, and the titular dignity of Prince and Princess shall cease except those titles already granted and remaining unrevoked; and that the grandchildren of the sons of any such Sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have the style and title enjoyed by the children of Dukes.

[quote] The one woman who cared for him and loved him unconditionally was not only treated horribly by his fathers side but was tragically killed at such a young age. Not to mention his fathers whore goes on to become Queen. That would fuck anybody up.

That’s the view of a Diana stan. If Harry doesn’t have a more nuanced understanding of his parents’ relationship as an adult, that’s on him.

[quote] A lot of the RATIONAL PEOPLE on DL will never understand that the majority of STUPID AMERICANS see no good on any side of this. The majority of STUPID AMERKICANs don't UNDERSTAND A CEREMONIAL HEAD OF STATE BECAUISE WE DON'T HAVE ONE, AND, FOR THAT REASON, AS WELL AS MANY OTHERS, HAVE ONE OF THE MOST FRIGHTENTING AND DYSFUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENTS IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD AT THE MOMENT. OUR PRESIDENT AND HIS FAMILY ARE amoral famewhores only in it for themselves.

I DON'T look good in this situation. Comparisons OF ME TO A MORON are very apt. THE US PRESIDENCY is a reality show, at best. Most of us WISH WE COULD just check out permanently. They're no different than the housewives or the latest season of Survivor. They're still there but ALL OF US, UNFORTUNATELY, HAVE TO GAF.

I corrected a few inadvertent errors on your part. You're welcome.

[quote]Can you blame him? The one woman who cared for him and loved him unconditionally was not only treated horribly by his fathers side but was tragically killed at such a young age. Not to mention his fathers whore goes on to become Queen. That would fuck anybody up. William should really take a step back, see how Harry has been wounded in this whole situation, and deal accordingly. Diana would be FUCKING PISSED at how this is all going down. She always led by class as an example.

Please. I know you an American over 50 whose most prized possession is his complete collection of People magazines, but virtually nobody in the UK has that vision of Diana in 2025. What Diana might do is probably the last thing the future head of state should do.

Despite some good qualities Diana was an unstable famewhore who was on the brink of exhausting the public's patience when she got killed and immediately assumed sainthood, I would imagine Diana did some good things in bringing up her children but she also used them emotionally and was the party principally responsible for making her mental problems and family difficulties a topic of relentless public conversation that her children had to endure. Diana, through her genetics and bad parenting, is the main reason Harry is the mess he is. You will notice William has a much more balanced and normal view of his mother and manages to function a bit better in life.

R112, not a stan. My post was incomplete. She now sits there as CEO or whatever and expects her staff to do the hustling. But she’s a micro manager who doesn’t listen to advice, thus the revolving door communications staff.

I always wondered if that Castle episode gave her the idea to marry a royal:

She wants you all to stop lying about her and “tell the truth.”

She, OTOH, feels no obligation to promise she’ll do the same.

The grandson was a page of honour at the coronation. That’s all there was to it. It’s not a “title”.

William seems like a cunt.

Dimbo at r113, Harry and Meghan and the kids may formally be HRH, but they will never be able to use the titles or be referred to with those titles in any context where those titles can be used, i.e. as working royals representing the monarch. And they agreed to that, after the late Queen told them that's how things were going to be.

Andrew also can never use them HRH anymore, just like Harry and Meghan can't. Andrew's daughters have the right to use it but they don't, even though they do a lot of charity and similar work, because they are not performing official royal duties.

Edward's kids are also formally princess and prince and they have the right to be HRH, but these titles are never used for them.

There is never, ever going to be a situation where Harry, Meghan or their kids will be able to use the HRH.

Do you even know what HRH means and the occasions on which it can be used?

R109, a lot of irrelevant people like you will never understand that no one gives a shit what you think. Your opinion is completely irrelevant.

[quote] William seems like a cunt.

You have much to offer! Please post again!

How does William seem like a cunt? Because he threw Harry onto a dog bowl? I imagine he didn't even know the dog bowl was there. I mean who wouldn't want to knock Harry down? Just on that BBC interview you want to throw a cream pie in his face.

[quote]Camilla had better wake up to one fact. Charles won't be around that much longer and once he's gong she will be sent packing

Rumor has it she's building a luxury stable in an undisclosed location.

The truth is Harry's kids (regardless of who he married) were never going to be working royals.

The plan had always been that after Queen Elizabeth II's death, Charles was going to slim down the monarchy to just himself, Camilla, William, Catherine, Harry and his wife. Harry knew this, even talked about it in Spare. William's children were only granted HRH status because the late Queen issued new letters patent granting them HRH status since they were children of the direct heir (currently HRHs are restricted to the monarch's children and grandchildren). Before Meghan came on the scene, Charles was planning on issuing new Letter Patent that restricted HRH status just to the monarch's children and any children of the first in line to the throne. Harry was on record (again before Meghan) of being fine with this because he wanted any children he did have to be free to lead their own lives.

The only reason Charles didn't follow through on this plan was because Meghan and Harry screamed racism in that Oprah interview.

William is likely going to be the one who removes the Sussexes' and Andrew's HRH when he becomes King. If he becomes King within the next 5 or so years, I think he'll make Beatrice and Eugene working royals to keep their HRH and to support him while his kids are still too young to take on royal duties. But it's clear based on the rumours being leaked from the Palace, William wants only working royals to have HRH status.

This is all speculation that you posted.

R104 I believe the gossip sites were floating a story about Camilla supposedly wanting some ceremonial title for her grandson, Freddy; but as the story continues, Prince William supposedly secured it for his own son, Prince George. In short, no existing title was taken away from Freddy, because he has none.

Below is an example of a report about this alleged incident on youtube. Be forewarned: It comes off as Click Bait, and after 9 boring minutes of old video clips and photos rehashing Camilla's place in the royal family and what she'd like to have for her grandchildren, the supposed prestigious title that she wanted for Freddy that Prince George received instead is never provided.

R127 Beatrice and Eugenie will never be working royals. That ship has sailed.

William the Bald is such a bully.

Kate won't make it to fifty.

[quote] Dimbo at [R113], Harry and Meghan and the kids may formally be HRH, but they will never be able to use the titles or be referred to with those titles in any context where those titles can be used, i.e. as working royals representing the monarch.

R113 here. True, they are "formally" HRH and you're right, they'll never be working royals but the whole point IS the formality when you're dealing with royal families. Let whomever and whenever go through the channels to remove the HRH but that doesn't mean that now, for the moment, they bear those styles. It's the law. I'm no expert, but it will take any number of acts or letters patent to follow the formality of deciding who is and who isn't HRH.

Many of Queen Victoria's and King Edward VII's children did not "carry out" royal duties but they were no less members of the Royal Family. The Dutch differentiate this too, between members of the Family and the House.

^^ D'oh! "they bear those styles" should be "that they don't bear those styles."

As he was born, Harry is a royal prince of England. And is a royal Duke. His wife is not a princess, but by marriage could be styled as Princess Henry. No matter, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is what they were going by, but left “the firm,” the country, duty and the family. Harry was not to use HRH, which he is, in business, yet it seems he hasn’t adhered to that.

It must be difficult for a father to disinherit a child. King Charles, at this time, probably won’t, for Harry is son of a Kingm, no matter a great disappointment to the family. But a new King, William V, can issue letters patient that any son or relative of a Monarch not working with the family should not parade around as officially an HRH. And certainly the issue of such a man as Harry is proving to be, should not be styled HRH, and this “let them decide to use HRH or not when they are older ” is just malarky.

I am not a fan of Harry now. Still, I would kill to have him want to wrap his arms and legs around me for a night, feel his back and ass, know where he is hairy and not, hear him gurgle in his sleep, just feel his body all over. His stupidity wouldn’t get in my way,

Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you'd hate yourself in the morning.

In America, Prince Harry and Meghan are on the same level as Prince Frederic von Anhalt and Zsa Zsa Gabor.

There is a thread every day on here about the royals so I hardly think they're going away.

Surprisingly, we haven't had a Trouping the Colour thread this year. Royal Ascot started today.

Try “Trooping”, R140.

Thanks, r141.

Meghan wishes she was as popular as Zsa Zsa !

R129 is another idiot who has no idea what he's talking about.

[quote] r136 Harry is son of a King, no matter a great disappointment to the family

A “disappointment”??

Well, the world loves him for standing up to that family and marrying a person of color… even leaving his homeland to keep her and their little babes safe.

The world loves a lover!

[quote]William is likely going to be the one who removes the Sussexes' and Andrew's HRH when he becomes King.

R127, Andrew, Harry and Meghan have already had their HRHs effectively removed. There is no reason for William to do anything else.

[quote] Andrew, Harry and Meghan have already had their HRHs effectively removed. There is no reason for William to do anything else.

There is a reason. Now it is only “effectively”. It needs to move from that to actually removed. They must officially not be HRH, for the reasons already stated.

There's no way on this earth that William will start his reign with a bitch move like removing the titles of his nephew and neice. The optics would be ghastly. William would look like a malicious bully.

Meghan fans will consider it a bitch move. Normal, rational people will correctly see it as necessary and imperative for the sake of the monarchy.

R149 Polls have shown the majority of people in the UK think H&M's titles should be removed. The press plays it that the King doesn't want to "poke the bear" and antagonize Harry butttttt I think it also has to do with Andrew. If they strip H&M of their titles, they cannot justify not doing the same to Andrew. I think William would be more open to doing it to Andrew as well (he allegedly hates his Uncle) but Charles won't.

Prince George - ugly. Has William's scowl and camel teeth combined with Kate's deep set eyes and eyebags.

Prince Louis - autistic. Seven years old and doesn't have a clue how to behave in public.

Kate Middleton - raddled beyond her years thanks to William banning her from having any cosmetic procedures, even filler and Botox. Looks ten years older than all her friends of the same age.

R151 - bitter ugly queen who makes himself feel better by taking potshots at children. Possibly also the Spectrum Troll.

There is no need whatsoever to remove anymore titles from anyone. People who bang on about this are just troublemakers trying to stir the pot. They also misunderstand the royal family.

R150, which polls are you referring to? A self-selecting online poll or polls done by accredited companies according to regulations and standards?

R151, can you now analyse Archie's and Lili's face and behaviour?

From your posts, it's obvious that you hate yourself deeply, poor thing.

R151's meanness is intense and bizarre.

R151 is Meghan at home ignoring her kids, and using Harry's balls as a paperweight.

r151, do people look daisy fresh after many rounds of chemo?

R153 You tell us

People in Sussex want them pulled. They do nothing for them

Tina Brown said in a recent interview that Charles is much sicker than it appears and she predicts William will be king within 2 years. She was pretty careful in how she shared this info but it was clear she had good sources for the info.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]Most say strip Harry and Meghan of their HRH titles after interview

It has to be done. The lunatic Meghan stans can wail and gnash their teeth as much as they like when it happens.

Harry fucking HATES Meghan now.

Well he puts on a good show if so whenever they’re together in photos. I don’t think he’s very good at covering up his feelings, unlike her, so I’d say he’s still in. I think he likes being ordered around, it’s what he was used to in the army and his home life.

I'd say R151 was mean but I've read really mean shit about Meghan and Harry's kids too. Turnabout is fair play. I'd agree on Kate though. She's looked haggard for years. Too much sun, cigs and anorexia.

What have you read about their kids? One sensible thing The pair has done is keep them out it the public eye.

And, of course, mocking one child because another child has been mocked does make you an enormously filthy creep.

[QUOTE]but I've read really mean shit about Meghan and Harry's kids

I'm not aware of any "mean shit" that has been said about the Sussex children by anyone. We haven't even suggested they inherited Harry's dull intellect. We've only expressed concern ( particularly for Lilibet) that they're being raised by a malignant Narcissist mother and and a complicit, compliant father.

Odd that calling out the Sussexes repeated, contemptible *behavior* is "mean shit" to you. It sounds like something a butthurt Trump says. "TACO?! That's nasty!!!!"

I read comments about them R166, not from tabloids but from vicious fraus on-line, you filthy cunt. I just said turn about is fair play, I'm not mocking them but don't be surprised if others aren't as nice.

The fucking butt-hurt royal stans and harry/meghan haters are deranged. I normally avoid these threads due to the insane "klan grannies" to bring out the old term.

R167 butt-hurt royalstan and deranged tabloid reading Sussex hater.

The only reason anyone would be interested in Harry and Meghan is royalism (of the most subject and misguided kind).

No one should be interested in any of them R170. It's weird that a bunch of fraus and old queens give a shit about any of them. They are all quite boring, stupid and useless.

Why the old crones set up shop here is odd when there are likely dozens of subs on reddit they could go to and sharpen their claws and fangs on the "sussexes" while licking royal ass.

^^^^oh, and I left off unattractive along with boring and useless.

But the only reason to be kind to Harry and Meghan is a desire to lick royal ass.

Isn't it easier to just not pay attention to any of them R173? I was happily ignorant of them until a few new threads popped up here. I'd successfully purged the grannies into my blocked list but a few must have created new accounts.

The same can be said about all of them but no one is talking about being kind. Just stop reading tabloid shit. If no one buys the made up drama, it stops.

Maybe it's because some people here use more than one account, R174?

Nobody has to pay attention to any of what's written here, but if one posts under multiple accounts on one thread, they should mix up the language a bit - variety makes them less identifiable.

The bottom line here is that you "just" don't want people talking about them. It won't happen, so rather than trying to tell DL what they should focus on, how about taking your own advice? Don't want to read it? Then don't.

Please note I've managed - unlike you - to dispute what you've written without resorting to calling you a filthy cunt, boring, or useless. You're certainly not talking about being kind, are you?

Tell me about it **wink, wink".

No one ever mentioned kindness either.

[QUOTE] I'd agree on Kate though. She's looked haggard for years. Too much sun, cigs and anorexia.

Exactly. All the Grannies are saying chemo is to blame for her appearance but she was ageing badly before she had that.

Lili has Harry's red hair and Diana's big blue eyes. Much cuter than her Cambridge cousins.

R169 sounds deeply disturbed and unmoored. At least his hair-trigger emotionalism is amusing.

How do you know r178?

Lili's face is always hidden, r179. The general public has no idea what she looks like and, much to Meghan's chagrin, the general public couldn't care less.

Charles has blue eyes, perhaps Lili's blue eyes, although they are never seen by the general public, come from her paternal grandfather. Her Uncle William has blue eyes too.

Lili certainly seems to have taken nothing from her maternal grandmother.

^ Que? Tell us more more about your idiot genetics!!!

This is hilarious

R183, the idiot at r178 is the one who thinks blue eyes are significant. Obviously genetics mean shit as to what kind of person you are. Just look at the difference between William and Harry.

Has anyone but their parents or caregivers ever seen the actual color of the Sussex children's eyes to attest to color? Haven't their "official" portraits been done in black and white and taken from behind at a careful distance? How do some posters still feel clairvoyant enough to go on about the blue eye color of unseen children?

Even worse, posters like r186 herald blue eyes in a child with black genetics as something special, as though the usual brown eyes among their African ancestors are inferior. God, the Sussex stan messaging is so messed up and borders on self-hateful.

They’re confused by now, R188. Not the sharpest knives in the drawer to start with, but when the Harkles shift course, they don’t know what to do.

They're assuming that they're blue because didn't Markle saying something about her blue blue eyes?

R190, Meghan said that Lilibet had blue eyes. They released a color photograph of her taken around the time of her first birthday but her eyes are narrowed.

I'm canceling the monarchy in my will, you miserable little shits!

I used to find Harry very cute but he has turned into such a repulsive human being(maybe he always was) I couldn't even bear shaking his hand. Much like Jon Hamm who I used to find enormously handsome. Now he's as attractive as a petri dish.

All the criticism of Her Late Majesty and King Charles for not removing the HRH from the Harkles is a little misplaced, I think.

At the time Harry and Meghan headed off into the Californian sunset, it was probably already very clear to the Royal Family that they were going to claim to be victims. The Palace’s whole strategy since then has been to refuse to be provoked into the type of battles the Harkles have wanted. They simply ignored them as much as possible and did nothing. That left the Harkles essentially hurling insults at a brick wall, and their claims became more and more extreme/ludicrous in their attempt to gain public sympathy, and it backfired completely. People are now think they are either liars or simply tedious.

There's a psychological term for it, r194. Gray rocking -- essentially putting up a wall.

[QUOTE]Gray rocking, or the grey rock method, is a tactic some people use to deal with abusive or manipulative behavior. It involves becoming as uninteresting and unengaged as possible so that the other person loses interest.

[QUOTE]The idea behind the technique is that abusive people, especially those with narcissistic tendencies, enjoy getting a reaction from their victims. Refusing to give them this reaction makes interactions less rewarding.

[quote] What I just cant wrap my head around is why a thirsty bitch like Meghan ,who craves fame the way mosquitoes crave blood, threw away with both hands the opportunity to be bigger than any celebrity alive . She could have been as beloved as Diana had she played her cards right . Why did she throw it away ?

Being a Royal is (frequently boring) work. Meghan is a grifter and a hustler, but she has no capacity for the kind of work which makes up the royal rota. She didn’t want to spend her days highlighting very unglamorous charities, or visiting factories, or meeting the Undersecretary of Economic Affairs of the Bolivian Embassy to discuss worker’s rights. She wanted the authority and respect, but she also wanted buckets of cash and days in the company of celebs, not boring proles.

In this respect, she was entirely different from Diana who, for all her faults, had real compassion and a generosity that meant that she used her charisma to benefit people who society would much rather overlook.

Meghan got a very rude awakening finding out what royal life was actually like. She is a very stupid person. A hustler yes but a very stupid one. She can't even feign compassion except for very brief spurts like the actress she attempted to be. Until everyone realized how third rate she was and then she had no choice but to continue her career as a succubus.

R196 Diana had been raised to respect noblesse oblige. Meghan may as well have been raised by wolves.

[quote]What I just cant wrap my head around is why a thirsty bitch like Meghan ,who craves fame the way mosquitoes crave blood, threw away with both hands the opportunity to be bigger than any celebrity alive .

Hasn't it been well established that she found being number two, the B team, unbearable? Her fantasy was that William, Kate, Harry and she would be a fantastic four, all equals. Tricking Harry to move to California allowed her to be queen of her new tiny realm.

I'll modify that to be the D team, after Queen Elizabeth, Charles and Camilla, and William and Kate.

That’s the Z team, in toto.

She left because she couldn't cut it as a Royal, let alone a working Royal.

Royal life, noblesse obligé authenticity, sartorial presence, being accountable on the world stage, is completely beyond her capacity. QEll certainly knew within 5 minutes, Anne on sight, William going so far as to take Harry aside to advise his brother to think hard.

I guess 'grass is always greener' reeled Harry in some bad.

I’d say she made up her mind when she first visited the Cambridges’ magnificent “apartment” - more like a three storey house - in Kensington Palace and compared it to Harry’s tiny one bedroom Nottingham Cottage around the corner.

Which the Cambridges themselves had occupied upon William's return from his air ambulance posting in Wales. They even lived there with infant George for a while.

She, too, could have had a magnificent home there. The Sussexes were slated to get the "apartment" next to theirs at KP. However, after Meghan's staff bullying and her antics on the Australian tour, that plan was put aside.

Poor boo boos squeezing into a 2 bed1300sf "tiny." house. It was almost torture.

Is it 1300 sq ft? The photos make it look tiny.

So Meghan when asked if she could change anything she said she would have others(of course not her, she personally doesn't need to change anything about what she's done) speak the truth. Why didn't that woman immediately shoot back then why all the NDAs for your employes? Unless that's a lie. She herself brags she didn't sign an NDA with the royal family. And how enforceable is an NDA anyway? What can they do to you if you say that they're a pair of emotionally abusive shits who treat people like crap? That would get you in trouble in a court of law?

Nott Cottage: Two BR, 1,324 square feet (123 m2). It has two floors. Adelaide Cottage, where the Wales now live: Four BR at ~ 1,870 square feet (174 m2), according to historical documents.

The space in the Wales' KP apartment isn't exclusively living space. There are public meeting rooms and offices, as well.

Will and Kate are not living in a 1,870 sq ft house. JFC.

I think R203 has a point about the apartment Harry and Meghan originally lived in. Meghan was a 40-ish “star” who had already lived in decent homes. She didn’t expect to marry a prince and end up living in a dumpy apartment. And that other house they moved into wasn’t great either. That’s probably on her, though. She might have had other options but didn’t have enough experience or taste to pick a place with better bones and then she made it worse with trendy renos.

The AI must have failed with the Adelaide Cottage size. I didn't pull it out of my ass.

Nottingham Cottage was also the site of Harry’s proposal to Meghan while they were roasting a chicken - although Meghan is allegedly a vegetarian - and the site of a fight between the brothers where William hurled Harry into a dog bowl and broke his favorite necklace.

All according to “Spare” - authored by HRH The Duke of $u$$ex with the invaluable assistance of HRH The Duchess of $u$$ex.

R209 Adelaide Cottage is not some huge mansion - check it out on Google Earth. It’s a four bedroom house in Windsor Great Park - one bedroom for each of the kids and one for mum and dad, but any staff, such as the nanny Maria, live nearby in other houses.

The Waleses apparently took it because they wanted somewhere countryside adjacent (although Berkshire borders on suburbia), near to the Queen who had moved to Windsor full time, near to the Middletons and to some good day schools for the children.

As they already owned/had access to 1A Kensington Palace, Anmer Hall a large house in Norfolk and another place whose name escapes me in Wales, buying and/or renovating a fourth house for the Waleses during a financial and housing crisis wouldn’t have been a good look, hence “simple”, unrenovated, “only” four bedrooms Adelaide Cottage, easily reached by helicopter from one of their other houses.

Anyway it’s academic as William has since inherited the Duchy of Cornwall and is one of the largest landowners in the country, and sooner rather than later, I suspect, will be able to move the family into Windsor Castle just up the road with plenty of room for family, pets and retinue.

This isn't a straight site

It’s not 1,870 square feet, R212.

Markle was not a "Star"; she was 6th on the call sheet, let go/on her last Suits season, and lived in a small dump in Toronto, not a "decent" house. She never owned any property, always depended on men and has less than zero business knowledge and sense. Although her awesome dropshipping and affiliate links business will be booming any minute, I'm sure.

R109 You - like the majority of the people you’ve polled - “don’t care” about Harry and Meghan.

And yet, to tell us how much you despise their family, you post here, calling them famewhores and likening them to the Kardashians.

Now we know how much you don’t care.

Meghan was still living with Cory when she met Harry

R215, her rental in Toronto was not a dump. It looked like a long term Air BnB. Her role in Suits was over because the actor who played her husband wanted to leave (he was marrying $$$). There’s plenty to criticize without being inaccurate.

[quote]The friend added: “They have asked the Sussexes politely to stop using the style, to no avail, so I imagine William will simply issue new letters patent to formally remove the entire family’s right to use HRH when he becomes king.

William as king won't even have to issue formal Letters Patent to achieve this, as monarch he can simply state his wishes that the Sussexes no longer use HRH, and that's the end of it. The monarch has full control of use of those honorifics, they don't need to issue warrants or LPs, although in a high-profile situation such as this they might find it advisable.

Camilla's children and grandchildren have never had titles of any kind.

Adelaide Cottage is not that large.

R219 A Royal Warrant has nothing to do with titles or styles. They're awarded to businesses.

The Royal Warrant is what they put out on both sides of delivery vans.

[quote] Meghan was a 40-ish “star” who had already lived in decent homes. She didn’t expect to marry a prince and end up living in a dumpy apartment

Nottingham Cottage, their first home, is a rose-covered little house in the grounds of Kensington Palace and was designed by the architect of St Paul’s cathedral. It was also previously the home of Lady Jane Fellowes (sister of Princess Diana) and was the first London home of William & Kate.

When they threw a fit and decided that they didn’t want to stay in Central London, The Queen offered them a home at Frogmore cottage and £2.4 million was spent on it in an attempt to please them.

What homes did Meghan ever have that were better than these?

It’s worth remembering that, to people who spend their lives living in palaces, smaller homes can seem much more attractive. William and Kate loved life at Nottingham Cottage, and lived at a fairly basic property on Anglesey when William was in the air ambulance service. And Her Late Majesty herself spent her first married years living in naval housing on Malta, which was a period she remembered very fondly, when she had more freedom than at any other point in her life. In offering her grandchildren a chance to live outside the confines of grand stately homes filled with staff, she probably felt she was offering them a bit of freedom too.

And even if Meghan and Harry decided that they actually wanted grandeur rather than intimacy, they just had to bide their time: the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester had agreed to vacate their huge apartment in Kensington in 2019 to allow it to be renovated and passed on to a growing part of the family, and it was widely expected that Harry and Meghan would take up residence there.

That’s why I don’t think William and Kate are interested in moving into Windsor Castle.

Didn’t Meghan express the desire to love into Windsor Castle itself, which HM gave a firm no to?

I'm sure W&K use Windsor Castle for all sorts of things- meetings, dinners, wardrobe storage, etc. They just don't sleep and eat there.

Isn't there a kerfuffle about Royal Lodge, Andrew's residence? The King is trying to get him out of there so the house can be renovated, presumable for W&K. I suspect Andrew is only going to go out feet first though.

MOVE into... grrrr

[QUOTE]When they threw a fit and decided that they didn’t want to stay in Central London

I thought they very much wanted to live in central London, but their cumulative bad behavior made living at KP, next to the Cambridges and bullied staff, untenable. Can you imagine living next to Meghan and her machinations? Frogmore Cottage is definitely a downgrade from a three story KP apartment.