Is it okay to put family first? (Response to royal family stuff)

[snappy]

As mentioned before in this thread, if people want to discuss Andrew and the Epstein case, feel free to open a thread about it.
But as also mentioned before, Andrew's case is dormant till new information comes forward.

Right. Repeatedly bringing Andrew up here is a fun deflection for some here. Maybe Oprah can do a hard hitting expose with him.

 

[redrosesix]

Maybe he might like to come visit the United States... I know there are several prosecturors who would love to speak with him regarding the Epstein case... he did say he was willing to cooperate, so why the shyness?



Not really....
I think these two enable eachother and have an 'understanding'. I think they also look the other way so that each can pursue what they want to do... she cheats... he cheats...no problems.

She is no shining example of honesty. Lets not forget her history with fraud, and selling access to Andrew for money...

You can deny all you want about Andrew's history... there are plenty of photos showing his association with Epstein... and also of him and those underage girls he says he never ever met....

But real crimes are no fun...much more important things to discuss.... so back to bashing on Meghan....
.

I think Andrew should testify, and I think the Queen removing him from royal duties leaves the door wide open for him to do so. Personally, I think this is a situation where we can ask what a regular person would do...I don't know anyone who wouldn't have run away from that scene as quickly as possible. He knows things, and it's very possible he could know enough to put some people in prison, but we don't know if he belongs there too. I do think everyone is entitled to a fair trial but a few of those involved have tried to make public excuses which for me actually made them look worse.

Same with H and M. I don't know anyone who has a perfect extended family and if you include the inlaws, we probably have a couple of people we would rather avoid. Lots of people are estranged from their families, and it is sad because most often the reason they are no longer speaking to each other generally seems petty or at least minimal when someone gets sick or dies. But we don't tear people apart in public, so there is a chance for reconciliation. It seems like H and M have made that impossible -- if you go by the polls, a majority of Americans think the RF is a bastion of institutional racism and a majority of Brits will never accept Harry back. I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating -- there is no way you can paint the entire RF with the same brush even if one person said something truly out of line, and there is no way you can characterize the entire British public as racist. As for the British tabloids, we all know now that was a bit of deception on Oprah's part.

Someone mentioned about the body language experts and what they would think of the interview. Here's one that is very thorough:

and another that is in 3 parts, but I haven't watched all of them yet:

 

[ronandannette]

I think Andrew should testify, and I think the Queen removing him from royal duties leaves the door wide open for him to do so. Personally, I think this is a situation where we can ask what a regular person would do...I don't know anyone who wouldn't have run away from that scene as quickly as possible. He knows things, and it's very possible he could know enough to put some people in prison, but we don't know if he belongs there too. I do think everyone is entitled to a fair trial but a few of those involved have tried to make public excuses which for me actually made them look worse.

Same with H and M. I don't know anyone who has a perfect extended family and if you include the inlaws, we probably have a couple of people we would rather avoid. Lots of people are estranged from their families, and it is sad because most often the reason they are no longer speaking to each other generally seems petty or at least minimal when someone gets sick or dies. But we don't tear people apart in public, so there is a chance for reconciliation. It seems like H and M have made that impossible -- if you go by the polls, a majority of Americans think the RF is a bastion of institutional racism and a majority of Brits will never accept Harry back. I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating -- there is no way you can paint the entire RF with the same brush even if one person said something truly out of line, and there is no way you can characterize the entire British public as racist. As for the British tabloids, we all know now that was a bit of deception on Oprah's part.

Someone mentioned about the body language experts and what they would think of the interview. Here's one that is very thorough:

Sorry - this video is almost 2 hours long and I’ll never get through it. Could you please just summarize the gist?

 

[TippyThomas]

Sorry - this video is almost 2 hours long and I’ll never get through it. Could you please just summarize the gist?

Meghan bad.

 

[redrosesix]

Sorry - this video is almost 2 hours long and I’ll never get through it. Could you please just summarize the gist?

Just watch about the last 10 minutes then, because they pick up on something that nobody has mentioned and all 4 agree on it -- they show a clip, then analyze it, then show the clip again. Meghan makes it clear that if all of this goes sideways, it's Harry's fault.

Their experience is as interrogators, and they thought that Oprah didn't ask questions to get at the truth where they would have. They found that both were deceptive on several points, but they sometimes differed on what that meant. They repeatedly showed how the two were working together and were very synchronized, pointing to the fact that Harry has even adopted her style of talking. They think that Harry is angry at his father, that Charles was the one that said something about babies and that Harry actually won't try to reconcile with his father (where he says that is "one of his priorities" he's actually showing that he isn't going to do it).

 

[redrosesix]

This is an accurate observation. From a dressmaking standpoint they are very different gowns. (And Kate's is by FAR the better-made and better-fitted, which is only logical given their financial circumstances at the time.)

FWIW, replicas of royal wedding gowns are such hot items in the bridal marketplace that a pattern is usually being drafted even before the ceremony begins. Manufacturers put designers and patternmakers on standby and they watch TV and sketch in real time, and buy enlarged photos taken as soon as the bride is photographed leaving for the ceremony. Large stores in major markets usually get the sample gown in less than a week. Meghan Markle's gown, because of the lack of embroidered layers, was even faster; the first high-quality copy was completed about 48 hours from the moment she was first seen in it. (By high-quality I mean cut with the same seam lines, and made of comparable fabric. The Chinese mass-market factories are faster yet; often shipping knockoffs in less than a day, but they usually are made out of polyester taffeta or costume satin with no proper linings, and bear only a general resemblance to the genuine article.)

This is so interesting.

It seems like here most of the bridal salons have a lot of versions of the same style, that Say Yes to the Dress look, sleeveless beaded gown. They aren't carrying the styles worn by the royal brides like they sort of did when I was getting married -- when there was pretty much any style you can imagine. We don't all look the same so I don't really get it -- we can't all look good in the same gown. I've been shopping with a couple of brides who eventually gave up and bought a dress in another city or had one made. I found the same issue with prom dresses (almost all of them were made from chiffon), and we bought my daughter's in Orlando at Dillards. It was nothing like anything we could buy here and it was a fraction of the price.

We could easily do an ongoing thread on royal fashion and everything related to it...including hats and wedding gowns.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Prince-Harry-speak-time-Oprah-interview.html

Prince William and Charles 'speak to Harry for the first time since Oprah interview' - but talks were 'unproductive': Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King reveals on US morning TV show that couple told her about discussions

• Prince Harry spoke to brother William and father Charles over the weekend, Gayle King reveals on CBS
• But presenter, who attended Meghan's baby shower in 2019, claims conversations were 'not productive'
• She says Sussexes want 'royals to intervene' over 'false stories' in British Press which have 'a racial slant'
• Ms King gives no examples of stories - and it comes after Mail complains to CBS for doctoring headlines

 

[snappy]

Just watch about the last 10 minutes then, because they pick up on something that nobody has mentioned and all 4 agree on it -- they show a clip, then analyze it, then show the clip again. Meghan makes it clear that if all of this goes sideways, it's Harry's fault.

Their experience is as interrogators, and they thought that Oprah didn't ask questions to get at the truth where they would have. They found that both were deceptive on several points, but they sometimes differed on what that meant. They repeatedly showed how the two were working together and were very synchronized, pointing to the fact that Harry has even adopted her style of talking. They think that Harry is angry at his father, that Charles was the one that said something about babies and that Harry actually won't try to reconcile with his father (where he says that is "one of his priorities" he's actually showing that he isn't going to do it).

I think the body language video is quite well done. I think the way they showed a short clip from the video, then discussed it, then showed the clip again in some cases was an effective way for the viewer to judge their comments. The video may be long, but shorter than I think the interview was, and thankfully no commercials, lol. The four guys who comment are interesting, two with many years with military interrogations, so they aren’t celebrity commentators wannabes. This is not their first rodeo. I actually found the comments from the Brit, Mark Bowden, the most interesting as he has more context apparently, and his comments are a bit less clinical. Thanks for mentioning the last 10 minutes as I watched it through to the 52 minute mark, and I may fast forward to the last 10 minutes.

One of the men commented on the rapport building, like “two friends bonding” between Oprah and Meghan throughout, and the resulting what another called the “symbiotic’ relationship between the two.

There was a lot of analysis of M’s repeated quick eye blinks, breaking eye contact, tilting her head, smirking, and back me up glance to Harry when he joined them. They were general disbelief that M didn’t google Harry or the RF before getting involved. There were also observations about how the chair Harry was sitting in, kind of small for his large frame, long legs, looked uncomfortable, kept shifting in it. Also, how his exasperation about giving up the revenue from Charles was expressed.

One of the speakers said that when M speaks about Meg in the third person (after Oprah brought up the comments on social media about Megxit was to build their brand) indicated she was disassociating herself from the fallout.

A whole lot more there. Who knows, studying body language is not a perfect science, but it appears not all the the body language people are placing H&M in a positive light.

 

[redrosesix]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Prince-Harry-speak-time-Oprah-interview.html

Prince William and Charles 'speak to Harry for the first time since Oprah interview' - but talks were 'unproductive': Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King reveals on US morning TV show that couple told her about discussions

• Prince Harry spoke to brother William and father Charles over the weekend, Gayle King reveals on CBS
• But presenter, who attended Meghan's baby shower in 2019, claims conversations were 'not productive'
• She says Sussexes want 'royals to intervene' over 'false stories' in British Press which have 'a racial slant'
• Ms King gives no examples of stories - and it comes after Mail complains to CBS for doctoring headlines

ok then...so much for wanting privacy. No wonder they left Canada because they didn't get this kind of coverage here.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

^ So many questions about this. What has Gayle King so motivated to get so involved with this whole thing? Why is she “tatttling” about these supposed “private affairs” so much? Is she trying to stir the pot? And if so, on whose behalf?

 

[lovesmurfs]

Isn't his nickname for his wife 'cabbage'?

A French term of endearment is "mon petit chou," which translates as "my little cabbage."

 

[snappy]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Prince-Harry-speak-time-Oprah-interview.html

Prince William and Charles 'speak to Harry for the first time since Oprah interview' - but talks were 'unproductive': Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King reveals on US morning TV show that couple told her about discussions

• Prince Harry spoke to brother William and father Charles over the weekend, Gayle King reveals on CBS
• But presenter, who attended Meghan's baby shower in 2019, claims conversations were 'not productive'
• She says Sussexes want 'royals to intervene' over 'false stories' in British Press which have 'a racial slant'
• Ms King gives no examples of stories - and it comes after Mail complains to CBS for doctoring headlines

So happy to hear MM has a mouthpiece to disclose all future conversations between the Royals. Isn’t that special?

 

[mamamia2005]

Prince William and Prince Harry 'speak for first time since Oprah interview' | Daily Mail Online

EDIT: Sorry, didn't see that link had already been posted!

 

[snappy]

^ So many questions about this. What has Gayle King so motivated to get so involved with this whole thing? Why is she “tatttling” about these supposed “private affairs” so much? Is she trying to stir the pot? And if so, on whose behalf?

I wonder. I think William and Charles should be cautious with any further conversations/communications. Sounds like M is watching, always watching. We have not heard the last from her or Gayle King. No need for an Oprah sequel. We can have daily updates so no one misses a thing. Apparently, privacy is over rated.

 

[mamamia2005]

I'm almost annoyed at myself for even reading the daily mail article, but they are like an itch I have to keep on scratching!
And hey, it's interesting discussing it with everyone on this thread!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

So happy to hear MM has a mouthpiece to disclose all future conversations between the Royals. Isn’t that special?

ITV royal correspondent Chris Ship added: 'Clearly, Gayle King would not have shared these comments with millions of viewers without Meghan's permission, so this marks a significant new approach.

'Private family dissuasions will now be made public if Meghan wants it out there. She has plenty of people who can do it for her.'

And Daily Mail diary editor Richard Eden tweeted: 'This is extraordinary. Are we going to have a running commentary for years to come from Harry and Meghan's friends on their relations with the Royal Family? If so, the royals will be wary of speaking to them.'

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It comes as Buckingham Palace instructed an external law firm to assist with its investigation into bullying allegations made against the Duchess.

Royal aides announced earlier this month that past and present employees of Meghan and Harry would be invited to speak in confidence about their experiences, after it was alleged she drove out two personal assistants and staff were 'humiliated' on several occasions.

Now it is understood an outside legal company will help Buckingham Palace's human resources team as it examines the circumstance of the allegations, first reported by the Times newspaper.

According to other reports, the Sussexes are not expected to be asked to contribute to the review, but the duchess has written to the palace asking for any documents, emails or texts relating to the allegations against her.

Lawyers for the duchess have denied the bullying allegations. Harry was also accused of bullying, with the Times reporting earlier this month that a member of staff told a colleague the couple were 'outrageous bullies'.

 

[snappy]

Prince Philip, 99, leaves hospital two weeks after heart surgery | Daily Mail Online

Wonder if he'll say, "so darling Lizzie, how's everything been. Have I missed anything?"

the queen can just tell him to just watch Gayle King on CBS this morning to catch up. Full disclosure: I had to google Gayle King as I had no clue who she was or what the name of her show was. If M needs more info on royal decorum, I highly recommend google. Google is your friend.

 

[mom2rtk]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Prince-Harry-speak-time-Oprah-interview.html

Prince William and Charles 'speak to Harry for the first time since Oprah interview' - but talks were 'unproductive': Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King reveals on US morning TV show that couple told her about discussions

• Prince Harry spoke to brother William and father Charles over the weekend, Gayle King reveals on CBS
• But presenter, who attended Meghan's baby shower in 2019, claims conversations were 'not productive'
• She says Sussexes want 'royals to intervene' over 'false stories' in British Press which have 'a racial slant'
• Ms King gives no examples of stories - and it comes after Mail complains to CBS for doctoring headlines

No chance they ever have an honest conversation with Harry or Meghan ever again.

 

[snappy]

I'm almost annoyed at myself for even reading the daily mail article, but they are like an itch I have to keep on scratching!
And hey, it's interesting discussing it with everyone on this thread!

I haven‘t read it but did they happen to mention a viper in our midst?

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I haven‘t read it but did they happen to mention a viper in our midst?

If they didn’t know it before, I’m sure they do now! (As sad as it is.)