Meghan, Harry and Greta-not

[Gob]

"When I joined that family, that was the last time - until we came here - that I saw my passport, my driver's licence, my keys.

"All that gets turned over. I didn't see any of that anymore."

[ex-khobar Andy]

Just to be clear: Meghan Markle says she was suicidal and no-one can deny that.

But there are facts she and he stated which are easily checkable or just plain improbable: the passport thing as Gob pointed out above; the pre-marriage marriage (illegal and it's unlikely that the Archbishop of Canterbury is unfamiliar with the law); the social media whiz with XX million followers who claims that she never looked up Haz on the intertubes; the 'woe is me, they cut off my funding when I stopped doing the job so all I could afford is this lousy little place next door to Oprah' BS; the whole bit about Archie not being a prince because racism; and probably more.

[Scooter]

Travelling internationally is not inconsistent with not having possession and control of her passport. It would mean she would have to get permission to travel out of the country, which is actually true for members of the Royal Family. Plus, including trips she took before her marriage on the above map compounds the dishonesty of its message.

The thing about Archie not being titled as prince - it's true that he would not have been eligible to be styled as such according to the existing letters patent. However, the rules were just amended in 2012 to grant the title of prince or princess to all of Prince William's children (previously, as the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, only his eldest son would have been eligible). So it is entirely credible that there was a discussion about extending the use of the title to Harry's children, at which time it would have been possible that someone raised the question of what shade they would be when they popped out. So there's nothing about her claim in this regard that is verifiably false.

[Gob]

So it is entirely credible that there was a discussion about extending the use of the title to Harry's children, at which time it would have been possible that someone raised the question of what shade they would be when they popped out.

Maybe, if Haz and Megs hadn't played the prima donna roles they are now assuming, Archie would have been given full royal honours.

[Scooter]

Possibly true, but a completely different issue from the attempt to play "gotcha" on this point as a way of discrediting what she claimed.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Travelling internationally is not inconsistent with not having possession and control of her passport. It would mean she would have to get permission to travel out of the country, which is actually true for members of the Royal Family. Plus, including trips she took before her marriage on the above map compounds the dishonesty of its message.

4 of those trips (Botswana twice, Norway and Jamaica) were prior to her marriage. Seven of them were not. The royals travel with a passport, with the exception of the Queen. Heads of State usually do not: I doubt that Trump was asked for his passport when he arrived in Britain during his presidency. As for seeking permission: if the taxpayer is picking up the tab for your security then I think they have a right to know where you are going and the guys with the guns probably would like a little advance warning if you plan to go somewhere exotic or armaments rich.

I'm no royalist. I think Andrew should be packed into a BA flight to NY. If he wants to go first class I'm sure he has some air miles he can redeem. At the same time, I think that Mrs Sacoolas, who killed Harry Dunn in a traffic accident, should waive her disputed diplomatic immunity and go back to Northamptonshire. There was no suggestion of drink or drugs: a tragic accident. Although dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention can carry a prison term, I very much doubt that it would be the result. Possibly a fine; revocation of her UK licence if she had one; and most importantly, she could contribute to the 'lessons learned.'

[Scooter]

Yes, the royals minus the Queen require a passport to travel abroad. No, that does not mean that it is ever in their personal possession or, more to the point, that they are permitted to undertake such travel without permission from the Firm. No passport, no driver's license, no keys = no independent freedom of movement, is the gist of what she was saying.

[Gob]

Things Oprah forgot to ask about...

Prince Harry was forced to issue a grovelling apology in 2005 after wearing a Nazi uniform to a party.

His choice of outfit was condemned as insensitive and tasteless by shocked Holocaust survivors.

And the Queen's grandson wearing an Afrika Korps uniform caused a crisis for the Royal Family.

Former royal press officer Dickie Arbiter urged him to say sorry publicly on radio or television. He told the BBC: 'It is just not good enough to behave like that. We all know history, and at 20 there is no excuse.'

Harry was attending a fancy dress party thrown by Olympic show jumper Richard Meade.

In 2006 Prince Harry was recorded calling an Asian army colleague a 'Paki' - and the footage was published three years later. The prince apologised for any offence caused by the incident.

In 2012 the prince faced fresh accusations of bringing the royal household into global disrepute.

Harry was photographed on a mobile phone in just a necklace with a naked female playmate hiding behind him having played a game of strip pool in his VIP Las Vegas suite. Another showed him giving the same topless woman a naked bear hug, which have since been seen by tens of millions across the world.

As well as the embarrassment, it did raise security fears about how well the prince was protected on his Vegas trip.

[Gob]

Speaking in the interview, she admitted: “I went into it naively because I didn't grow up knowing much about the royal family. I didn't fully understand what the job was.”

Meghan, 39, confessed that she was so naïve that when she first met the Queen at The Royal Lodge in Windsor, she “didn’t know how to curtsy.”

However, on her now-defunct blog The Tig, Meghan previously published a post in 2014 about "grown women's" obsession with royalty.

Meghan also refers to her now sister-in-law Kate as "Princess Kate" and talks about the "pomp and circumstance" surrounding her.

She wrote: "Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power.

"For those of you unfamiliar with the '80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man, and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength. We're definitely not talking about Cinderella here.

"Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy.

“Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate."

The Tig blog post accompanied an interview with Princess Alia Al-Senussi, a descendant of Libyan royalty, and Meghan claimed she had a “pinch-myself-I’m-emailing-with-a-princess” moment during their correspondence.

Meghan’s childhood friend Suzy Ardakani also alleged her pal was interested in the royal family and said the pair would watch Princess Diana's 1981 wedding to Prince Charles.

Suzy’s mum previously told the Mail: “I always loved Diana and I have her biography, which I gave Meghan to read.

“I videoed Diana's wedding back in 1981, and I would watch it with Suzy and Meghan all those years later.

“They would also see items about her on TV.”

Another one of Meghan’s friends, Ninaki Priddy, revealed her and Meghan were photographed outside Buckingham Palace together during a visit to London in 1996.

She claimed: “Meghan was always fascinated by the Royal Family. She wants to be Princess Diana 2.0.”

Meanwhile, biographer Andrew Morton wrote: “Aged 16, she watched the funeral of Diana with her friends, tears coursing down their cheeks at the poignant moment when the cameras zoomed in on the royal coffin.”

[Scooter]

Speaking in the interview, she admitted: “I went into it naively because I didn't grow up knowing much about the royal family. I didn't fully understand what the job was.”

Meghan, 39, confessed that she was so naïve that when she first met the Queen at The Royal Lodge in Windsor, she “didn’t know how to curtsy.”

However, ...

Once again, what follows is an attempt at a "gotcha", intended to construe what she said in the interview as a lie.

Whatever she may have been exposed to as an outsider about the Royal Family, it certainly wasn't going to come anywhere close to preparing her to live within it day by day, or to give her the knowledge and skills to do the "job", as she puts it.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Meghan, 39, confessed that she was so naïve that when she first met the Queen at The Royal Lodge in Windsor, she “didn’t know how to curtsy.”

Then had I been Oprah, I would have said: "Harry, what the actual fuck?" Did she just bump into the queen doing her shopping in the High Street, picking up some sausages for dinner? I could allow for some unpreparedness there. But H was taking her home to meet his granny. Curtseying is not obligatory and foreigners who are not subjects are certainly not expected to do so. And for anyone who prefers to just shake hands, there is no instant "Off with her head!"

So either she “didn’t know how to curtsy” because no-one thought it necessary to warn her because it was not expected, or because it occurred to her at the last second, just before the door opened and Brenda emerged, that she might have to. If she had taken no prior interest in the royals, why would that be?

If Harry was any sort of decent chap with any kind of sensitivity he would have told his affianced "Don't worry, she's a normal human being, you'll find she's quite sweet actually. And if you want to curtsey, it's entirely up to you and I'll get my stepmum / my Auntie Anne / this passing chambermaid to show you how to do it without falling over."

So either Harry was totally out of it and an absolute fuckhead with regards to the feeling/needs of his love, or it's BS. Not sure.

[Guinevere]

A bunch of white men continue to shred a BIPOC woman explaining how she experienced racism/unequal treatment.

Nothing to see here folks, same old same old ....

[MajGenl.Meade]

The usual trashing of white men, as if that made the discussion invalid

Nothing new to see here

[Bicycle Bill]

I'm just wondering why we people here in America are so god-damned concerned over how a bunch of stodgy old Brits seem to be unable to work and play well with each other.  Ain't we got enough other things to worry about?

It's like I read yesterday. Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), who is the chair of the House Oversight and Reform Committee (which oversees, among other things, the U.S. Postal Service) demanded that the USPS release details, including the final contract, all offers submitted, records of negotiations, and evaluation factors relating to a contract it awarded to Oshkosh Corp that could be worth $6 billion to build up to 165,000 next-generation delivery vehicles, claiming that "a thorough review is warranted to ensure the award process is free from undue influence and potential interference."

Sounds like a classic example of micro-management to me — either that or a way of trying to stick it to the Trump appointee (Louis DeJoy) who is still in charge of the USPS.

-"BB"-

[Gob]

Not being so racist as to believe everything someone says due to the colour of their skin...

A vicar says the Archbishop of Canterbury's office has clarified claims by Meghan Markle that she and Prince Harry were married in a seceret ceremony ahead of the big day.

The Duchess of Sussex claimed in her interview with Oprah Winfrey that a secret wedding was held three days before their actual wedding, with just her, Harry and the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby in a garden.

Several people have pointed out that such a wedding would not be legal under English law.

A vicar now says he has contacted the Archbishop of Canterbury's office and was told "no wedding took place".

Meghan told Oprah Winfrey: "You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that."

Harry said it had been just them and Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby present, reports the ChronicleLive.

Rev Mark Edwards, who was flooded with private wedding requests during the Covid lockdown, contacted the Archbishop's office after the claims to "get some clarity" on their policy.

But the vicar at St Matthew’s Church, in Dinnington, and St Cuthbert’s Church, in Brunswick, said he was told by a Lambeth Palace staff member that, “Justin does not do private weddings. Meghan is an American, she does not understand.”

[Big RR]

Gob--do you have any idea why the wedding would have been illegal under British law? I guess it could be die to a lack of witnesses if it were just Megan and Harry at the wedding, but otherwise, I don't understand how it could have been "illegal"; the church might decline to participate (after all, isn't the queen the head of the church, if nothing else?), but illegal, I don't understand.


BB--

sounds like a classic example of micro-management to me — either that or a way of trying to stick it to the Trump appointee (Louis DeJoy) who is still in charge of the USPS.

since when is oversight on the award of a $6 billion contract micromanaging?

[Gob]

Haven't the foggiest mate, will look into it.

[Bicycle Bill]

BB--

sounds like a classic example of micro-management to me — either that or a way of trying to stick it to the Trump appointee (Louis DeJoy) who is still in charge of the USPS.

since when is oversight on the award of a $6 billion contract micromanaging?

Since they've been kicking around the idea of replacing the existing fleet for a couple of years now, the oversight committee should have been in on it from the start instead of coming in now and saying, "Show us everything!"  I suspect that this chairperson is upset because they went hybrid instead of all-electric....
or because it was awarded to a long-standing (century-old) and reputable company like Oshkosh — which also has defense-department ties and is located in Wisconsin (a state that went for Trump in 2016 and was a crucial battle-ground state in 2020) — instead of some company named "Workhorse Group Inc", an Ohio-based firm that has been in existence for less than 25 years.

No matter where they get them from, though, they'd better move quick.  Those old Grumman LLVs — which borrow heavily from the Chevy S-10 pickups of the 1980s and were originally specced to have a 24-year service life, later extended to 30 — first came onto the scene in 1987 and ain't going to last forever.

-"BB"-

[Big RR]

BB--I don't know how the oversight works, but I agree they probably should have been involved from the start (although who knows what was disclosed to them; the current postmaster seems more like a confrontational jerk than someone who wants to work with any oversight). But even if they (and not the USPS) did screw up on the oversight, I still think an expenditure of this magnitude should be vetted. But things should move forward as quickly as practical.

[TPFKA@W]

A bunch of white men continue to shred a BIPOC woman explaining how she experienced racism/unequal treatment.

Nothing to see here folks, same old same old ....

Please don't be blinded by her fitting your ideal. The woman flat out lied about being married ahead of the wedding. Empowered woman, POC, LIAR.

Here is another story about a blue blood marrying an American POC who has a completely different experience.

Rose Hulse

I suspect that Markle is someone who went into the marriage looking for a fight.