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.

Queen Elizabeth's Secret Fear: Meghan Markle Reportedly ‘Engineered’ Romance With Prince Harry

Queen Elizabeth reportedly feared that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s relationship wasn’t rooted in genuine love, according to a royal insider. A new claim alleges the late monarch questioned the sincerity of the former Suits star and privately voiced her concerns to a trusted confidante, who later shared those sentiments with a royal reporter.

The Daily Beast, Royalist, shared excerpts from a discussion Lady Elizabeth Anson, Queen Elizabeth's first cousin, had with longtime royal reporter Sally Bedell Smith.

According to Bedell Smith’s report, just days before Harry and Meghan’s wedding, Anson conveyed the queen’s concerns about the upcoming marriage. She used the word "we" and didn't directly name the monarch.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 63July 8, 2025 1:07 AM

Anson was born in Windsor Castle to the Queen Mother’s sister. She was the queen’s confidante from the time of the monarch’s Golden Jubilee in 2002.

Anson alleged that the royal leader expressed worry about the union. In the post, she wrote, "When we spoke two weeks before the May 19 wedding, Liza had just heard from the Queen. 'The Number One Lady—I call her Jemima—says the jury is out on whether she likes Meghan.'”

“My Jemima is very worried," Anson reportedly told Bedell Smith. She alleged, “Harry is besotted and weak about women. We hope, but don’t quite think she is in love. We think she [Meghan] engineered it all.”

In her Substack, Bedell Smith shared Anson's remarks. “[Harry] said, ‘I am close to my grandmother, and she is content with this.’ When I spoke with the Queen, she said she is not at all content.”

Additionally, royal editor and biographer Ingrid Seward discussed Queen Elizabeth's concerns about Harry and Meghan's wedding in the book My Mother and I. The book detailed the relationship between the monarch and her son, King Charles III.

"The queen never voiced her true opinions except to her close confidants, such as Lady Elizabeth Anson, or Liza as she was known to her friends," Seward wrote in an excerpt published by The Daily Mail. "She told me that the Queen had made only one remark about Meghan and Harry's wedding and that was that Meghan's Givenchy wedding gown was 'too white.'"

Seward noted, “In the monarch’s view, [the dress] was not appropriate for a divorcée remarrying in church.” She added that Queen Elizabeth was reportedly uneasy with “the Disneyesque spectacle of the day itself,” though it remains unclear whether the Queen directly shared that opinion.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left their royal roles behind in early 2020. They celebrated their seventh wedding anniversary in May.

Anson died that same year, followed by Queen Elizabeth in September 2022.

by Anonymousreply 1July 5, 2025 12:17 PM

Some confidant.

by Anonymousreply 2July 5, 2025 12:17 PM

r2 The Queen's dead, these things should now come out for the sake of posterity.

by Anonymousreply 3July 5, 2025 12:21 PM

[quote] Queen Elizabeth reportedly feared that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s relationship wasn’t rooted in genuine love, according to a royal insider.

ABSOLUTE RUBBISH.

If anyone's relationship "wasn't rooted in genuine love," it was CHARLES AND DIANA, who were supposed to be the future King and Queen.

Charles did not love Diana at all, which is why he cheated on her with Camilla during their marriage.

So yeah, it's quite hypocritical of her to criticize Harry's relationship with Meghan, considering her own son's horrible relationship with Diana.

by Anonymousreply 4July 5, 2025 12:30 PM

At least she did it on her own. The Princess of Wales had to rely on her stewardess mom to do her dirty work.

Please.

by Anonymousreply 5July 5, 2025 12:38 PM

The Queen used the adjective “Disneyesque?” Sure, Lady Jan.

by Anonymousreply 6July 5, 2025 12:41 PM

No wonder: she'd grown up since the age of 10 hearing all about the manipulative and monstrous Mrs. Simpson.

by Anonymousreply 7July 5, 2025 12:44 PM

Her dress was "too white." Code for: Meghan is a WHORE!

by Anonymousreply 8July 5, 2025 12:46 PM

HUSSY! The Queen wasn’t vulgar.

by Anonymousreply 9July 5, 2025 12:49 PM

R4 What does any of this have to do with Charles and Diana's marriage?

by Anonymousreply 10July 5, 2025 1:04 PM

Wow, R10.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 11July 5, 2025 1:50 PM

I've been undressed by a future king and I've seen some things that a woman ain't supposed to see. I've been to Buckingham but I've never been to me..

by Anonymousreply 12July 5, 2025 1:56 PM

R4, right, because there's no way she might have learned anything in the decades since.

by Anonymousreply 13July 5, 2025 2:24 PM

Uh, the royals always cheated on one another and got married for looks not love. Give me a break. Her husband was fucking everyone and she knew it.

by Anonymousreply 14July 5, 2025 2:25 PM

Manipulate Harry? Unpossible!

by Anonymousreply 15July 5, 2025 2:30 PM

Assuming the Queen actually said any of this about Markle…all of it is 100% spot-on.

by Anonymousreply 16July 5, 2025 2:38 PM

It’s helpful to the journalist that both the Queen and Elizabeth Anson are dead and cannot refute this story.

by Anonymousreply 17July 5, 2025 2:57 PM

Any way, we all hate Markle.

by Anonymousreply 18July 5, 2025 3:02 PM

Too bad Queenie didn’t have the same concerns about her first son and Diana Spencer.

by Anonymousreply 19July 5, 2025 3:05 PM

There were no such concerns with Diana: The BRF needed an intact hymen attached to a posh naif of legal age. And she was the only one in existence.

by Anonymousreply 20July 5, 2025 4:07 PM

Sorry Queenie -the whole world knew of the ‘’engineering’’. Megs really hoodwinked you and family. Do better next time. Oh yeah-dead.

by Anonymousreply 21July 5, 2025 4:11 PM

It's fascinating that after all these years, they're still pulling out the same nonsense. Harry is exactly where he wants to be, everyone else just needs to move the fuck on. At this point, it's almost psychotic and sad, so very sad.

by Anonymousreply 22July 5, 2025 4:20 PM

Maybe Harry's parents should have raised him with more discernment. Oh wait.

by Anonymousreply 23July 5, 2025 9:09 PM

Diana had no interest in Charles as a man. She just wanted to be queen. She pretended to share all of his interests until they were married. She was quoted as telling a friend that she'd get married in Westminster Abbey or St Paul's or not at all.

He should have proposed to Camilla back in the 70s, but she wasn't a virgin.

Marrying someone so much younger and so soon was a mistake, but he needed a virgin.

It was never going to work.

by Anonymousreply 24July 6, 2025 12:30 PM

I’m sure the Queen did not believe a divorced woman should wear a white wedding dress. Charles and Camilla (who did not wear white) were not even married in a church because they were each divorced. I can believe the Queen considered Megan’s wedding “Disneyesque.” She was a smart lady.

by Anonymousreply 25July 6, 2025 1:20 PM

Dumb comment of the afternoon.

by Anonymousreply 26July 6, 2025 1:29 PM

No shit Meghan engineered the relationship with Harry. He can barely tie his shoelaces. At least, I hope she did. Why would anyone of any substance marry that loser unless they had other designs?

by Anonymousreply 27July 6, 2025 1:45 PM

Ugh, enough of these rich Brit white trash already! All of them. I’m sick of jeering about their old dead queen and their drunken old king and their perpetually martyring “princess” Kate and their blackish grifting relation and mentally retarded ginge prince. Seriously, can’t the western world be rid of this white-trash-with-money family already?

by Anonymousreply 28July 6, 2025 2:05 PM

“Will my grandchild be black??!!”

by Anonymousreply 29July 6, 2025 2:12 PM

The world’s richest welfare family

by Anonymousreply 30July 6, 2025 2:12 PM

R30 Wow did you just come up with that?! That's genius!

by Anonymousreply 31July 6, 2025 2:15 PM

Lilibet's actual "secret fear" was getting anal warts from Phil.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 32July 6, 2025 2:54 PM

Wouldn’t a practical woman who had “engineered” the relationship and was game to be a member of the BRF be exactly what they wanted?

by Anonymousreply 33July 6, 2025 3:10 PM

Yes but only if they paled by comparison …amirite?

by Anonymousreply 34July 6, 2025 3:43 PM

Meghan might not have been in love with Harry? Was just using him for fame and position? I haven't been this stunned since Richard Simmons came out as a fag.

by Anonymousreply 35July 7, 2025 4:04 AM

The whole "racist royal" thing is such BS. If the royals had been so concerned about Archie possibly being dark skin, they wouldn't have let a mixed race woman marry into the royal family in the first place. Let's be real...the only reason Meghan was allowed to marry into the BRF is because she is a woman of color. If she had been white, honey, they would've pushed her off the balcony.

by Anonymousreply 36July 7, 2025 4:09 AM

[quote]Queen Elizabeth's Secret Fear: Meghan Markle Reportedly ‘Engineered’ Romance With Prince Harry

The queen was right.

But the queen should have divulged more to her cousin. All this coy, obtuse, talking in code and nothing revealed until the principals are dead concerning the British royal family leads to all this speculation all the time about everything. Markle is a whore. All she wants is money. Well, fame and adulation too. But mostly money.

by Anonymousreply 37July 7, 2025 5:41 AM

^^And Markle will no doubt get some of Charles' money via Harry when Charles dies. Markle is not going to miss out on that windfall of cash. She will do whatever she must--and that includes hanging on in that ridiculous marriage with Harry until Charles kicks the bucket.

by Anonymousreply 38July 7, 2025 5:45 AM

Hilarious thread.

by Anonymousreply 39July 7, 2025 6:02 AM

[quote]r14 Give me a break. Her husband was fucking everyone and she knew it.

Exactly! And as if that very marriage of Philip to Big Liz wasn't "engineered" to the [italic]nth degree!

by Anonymousreply 40July 7, 2025 6:35 AM

Philip was a prince, r40, not some rando, and the then Princess Elizabeth and her circle were fully aware of what she was doing when the decision for her to marry Philip was made.

Even so, there was in fact lots of resistance to the choice of Philip among parts of the establishment. As it turned out, he was a great consort who supported the Queen in her duties and added some fun to the royal family.

As for Philip supposedly fucking everybody, that's more guesswork than based on credible evidence.

I suspect that Bedell Smith is hugely embellishing, but the idea of Meghan engineering in this case would be that she manipulated a dumb and easily manipulable Harry into thinking she was in love with her just so she could marry a prince, even though she has no respect for what being a prince entails. When reality turned out to be different from her fantasy - because dumb Harry didn't explain things to her properly - she caused havoc.

by Anonymousreply 41July 7, 2025 7:14 AM

that's more guesswork than based on credible evidence.

by Anonymousreply 42July 7, 2025 7:27 AM

If r41 is "more guesswork than based on credible evidence" then this entire thread, including the OP is made-up bullshit.

As for Philip, it's factually true that there lots of resistance to him among parts of the establishment as a potential suitor for Elizabeth, but as it turned out, he was a great consort who supported the Queen in her duties and added some fun to the royal family.

by Anonymousreply 43July 7, 2025 7:52 AM

It’s always entertaining to hear a bunch of Americans who know nothing about the British Royal Family pontificating about the British Royal Family and invariably getting it wrong because, as always, Americans are always right, even when they’re wrong, which is most of the time.

by Anonymousreply 44July 7, 2025 8:26 AM

Oh do eff off R44. As if “knowing” anything about these Nazi-adjacent inbreds living off the backs of the commoners is something to brag about.

by Anonymousreply 45July 7, 2025 11:41 AM

"Engineered" is a funny term from the people who brought us Charles and Diana, the fairytale bride and groom.

This is laughable. Royals and nobility practically invented arranged marriages. The lack of self-awareness from this ridiculous, useless social class never fails to amaze.

by Anonymousreply 46July 7, 2025 11:54 AM

It's always entertaining to see a handful of British Tories interloping on a gay American website to breathlessly post the latest shit droppings from a bunch of irrelevant old Nazis on a forgotten rock off the coast of Northwest Europe.

by Anonymousreply 47July 7, 2025 11:57 AM

The royal family is supported right across that political spectrum in the UK, r47. Even in Canada, liberal politicians such as Trudeau and Carney are huge royal enthusiasts.

You prove r44 right about ignorant pontificating when you waffle nonsense about 'British Tories".

by Anonymousreply 48July 7, 2025 12:05 PM

R46, can you actually quote the bit where anyone in the royal family actually used the term "engineered"?

by Anonymousreply 49July 7, 2025 12:06 PM

Perfectly proving my point R45.

“Eff off”? Too scared to say “fuck off”, are you, precious?

by Anonymousreply 50July 7, 2025 11:52 PM

Isn't there a British site for you straight homophobic women r44? One where you are not biting the hand that feeds you?

by Anonymousreply 51July 7, 2025 11:56 PM

Too funny R47. You assume that I’m British and Tory because you disagree with me - in fact I’m neither.

But of course as you’re a clueless American you assume both.

by Anonymousreply 52July 7, 2025 11:58 PM

I’m neither straight nor a woman, R51, although I do admit the occasional homophobic moment when dealing with silly American cunts like you.

by Anonymousreply 53July 8, 2025 12:05 AM

If it quacks like a straight British old lady...

by Anonymousreply 54July 8, 2025 12:06 AM

So clever, R54!

by Anonymousreply 55July 8, 2025 12:09 AM

And that's without even trying.

by Anonymousreply 56July 8, 2025 12:11 AM

Block the troll. It's easy and so worth it.

by Anonymousreply 57July 8, 2025 12:25 AM

Or let DL do it r57. So many of these threads already have missing posts.

by Anonymousreply 58July 8, 2025 12:29 AM

[quote] Even in Canada, liberal politicians such as Trudeau and Carney are huge royal enthusiasts.

Are you trying to speak for all Canadians by refetencing two politicians?

by Anonymousreply 59July 8, 2025 12:32 AM

I swear none of our rabid royalists are actual gay people who came here organically. All of them are conservative CUNTS just dying to let the mask slip and unleash their homophobia.

by Anonymousreply 60July 8, 2025 12:46 AM

Exactly r60.

by Anonymousreply 61July 8, 2025 12:56 AM

I'm a gay American man who has been discussing various Royals here for many years preceding Meghan's wedding. I originally came to DL from the Atkol (porn) forums, and stayed for the gossip about Old Hollywood and the Royals. Harry and Meghan's wedding brought an influx of posters who ONLY discuss them, and no other topics. But, if the topic of the BRF is so tedious to you, KGT, why are you the most prolific poster on these threads? You keep bumping them to the top of the page, after all, when you could just block them, as I block lots of threads and posters.

by Anonymousreply 62July 8, 2025 1:06 AM

[quote]Even in Canada, liberal politicians such as Trudeau and Carney are huge royal enthusiasts.

can't speak for Carney but Trudeau was definitely not. The events surrounding the coronation were muted at best and when Harry and Meghan moved to Canada (before they left the Royal family definitively), Trudeau made it clear to Buckingham palace that we will not spend any $$ on their security.

by Anonymousreply 63July 8, 2025 1:07 AM
Loading
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!