The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #281  
Old 11-10-2018, 06:32 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,122
But this is not the Sun that is referred to, its the Times.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 11-10-2018, 06:33 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
The Times referred to Meghan's temper tantrums? I must buy it....
The Times article by Valentine Low quotes the Sun’s Dan Wootton for its source. No need to keep a paid subscription at the Times if they’re going to copy the same rubbish from the Sun.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 11-10-2018, 06:36 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeT View Post
The Times article by Valentine Low quotes the Sun’s Dan Wootton for its source. No need to keep a paid subscription at the Times if they’re going to copy the same rubbish from the Sun.
I rarely buy papers, but yes I would be surprised if they were quoting from a Sun article as the source. Usualy these papers are very much pro Monarchy and not likely to quote the tabloids nor to put forward a story that does not show a royal In a good light...(unless it is undeniably true)
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 11-10-2018, 06:49 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 939
People has the following:
Quote:
The U.K. newspaper The Times confirms that the emerald tiara was among those initially shown to the former actress and adds that Meghan, 37, was asked to pick another because officials at Buckingham Palace “had concerns about its provenance.”
If this is actually what happened where the tiara with emeralds were actually shown, selected by Meghan and then she was told she needed to pick another, I can see why she got upset and Harry got upset on her behalf. I just wonder how upset did one or both get for the Queen to get involved.
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 11-10-2018, 07:04 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
People has the following:
If this is actually what happened where the tiara with emeralds were actually shown, selected by Meghan and then she was told she needed to pick another, I can see why she got upset and Harry got upset on her behalf. I just wonder how upset did one or both get for the Queen to get involved.
If it did happen that the tiara was shown, and then they said no, it was a bad decision on the part of whoever looks after the jewellery. But people do make mistakes at times and it may have been that they checked about the provenance and for some reason after she had made her choice told her that she could not use it. If Meg was annoyed and upset, I could understand that..
but if she did thrown a TANTRUM that's not acceptable. SHe's new to the RF, and tantrums from a newbie don't sound good. if she did indeed get loud about it and Harry also entered a shouting match, I can see the queen being pretty annoyed...
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 11-10-2018, 07:06 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I rarely buy papers, but yes I would be surprised if they were quoting from a Sun article as the source. Usualy these papers are very much pro Monarchy and not likely to quote the tabloids nor to put forward a story that does not show a royal In a good light...(unless it is undeniably true)
I read the article written by Low, it references the Sun throughout: “according to the Sun”, “the article in the Sun”...

The Times used tabloid quotes throughout the article, that tells me all I need to know about ‘quality journalism’, when one can’t write an article without multiple references to tabloids.
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 11-10-2018, 07:28 AM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,347
The Times didn't independently confirm Tiara-gate, just lifted "reporting" from the Sun. That's lazy journalism 101. That's why stories get traction; the so-called legitimate press picks up the story.
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 11-10-2018, 07:36 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,537
And round and round we go.....this issue clearly demonstrates the ability of the media to totally character assassinate a person and people will believe it wholeheartedly!

Isn't it any wonder that Harry and Meghan take great lenghts to keep their private life so private that as of this day we don't even know what their country home looks like?

I expect that behaviour will increase when their child is born! We will see them even less than the Cambridge children.
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 11-10-2018, 07:38 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,527
Sheeesh. You'd think there were reporters with microphones and a film crew in the room the way this story is gaining traction.

I would think though that if several pieces of very expensive and historical jewelry were going to be brought out and in the room with the Queen, Meghan and Harry, the only people standing by were probably well trusted staff. As this story seems to have been "leaked", it stands to reason that right now someone's head is on the chopping block and HM knows exactly what head she wants if that culprit was in the room and witnessed all of this.

Personally, I think the story is pure hogwash but then again, there's a lot of hogs out there that need washing. There's a lot of mud out there.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 11-10-2018, 07:44 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Sheeesh. You'ry expensive and historical jewelry were going to be brought out and in the room with the Queen, Meghan and Harry, the only people standing by were probably well trusted staff. As this story seems to have been "leaked", it stands to reason that right now someone's head is on the chopping block and HM knows exactly what head she wants if that culprit was in the room and witnessed all of this.

Pe
but if you say the story was "leaked" by some staff member, then presumably its true.... maybe exaggerated but essentially true. the queen's sacking some one who "leaked it" will not take away from the fact that there was some kind of a row....
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 11-10-2018, 07:59 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeT View Post
I read the article written by Low, it references the Sun throughout: “according to the Sun”, “the article in the Sun”...

The Times used tabloid quotes throughout the article, that tells me all I need to know about ‘quality journalism’, when one can’t write an article without multiple references to tabloids.
Was there information in the Times article that was not in the Sun article? The People article quotes both The Sun and The Times and Wootton's tweet also suggests that The Times has additional information. If The Times pursued the story due to something initiated by The Sun and did not acknowledge the tabloid that would be poorer journalism than The Times running the story with no acknowledgement of The Sun thus implying that the story that they are running came from their own initiative JMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:12 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by alvinking View Post
There is for instance and archive video at one of these reception where Princess Alexandra is chatting an Ambassador of Ghana reminding him, that it was she who represented the Queen at Ghana's Independence Ceremonies in Accra in 1957. And the Ambassador after not being sure maybe he as too young back then finally concur.
It was Nigeria in 1960, but since they are the biggest players in West Africa I guess it can be easy to confuse them at times.
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:16 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: pinner, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,938
Quote:
the fact that there was some kind of a row....
There are NO 'Facts' here, none that are 'copper bottomed', ALL of this is supposition intended to help flog a book..
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:25 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 4,738
The story sounds plausible, if a bit exaggerated.

What I can believe is that Meghan may have noticed a particular tiara in the catalogue (we've always suspected there is a catalogue of all the jewels in the vault) and asked if she could wear that.

But when it was explained that the provenance was dodgy, I could see her simply opting for her second choice without any huge drama.


(Lainey's tale about one-upmanship from Eugenie seems false, since I doubt the tiara in question was the Greville. There's no doubt about the provenance for that).
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:27 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,527
Now this took a while as my memory fades in and out at times but a name was nagging me. I'd heard it before somewhere and it finally came to me. Dan Wooten. Yeps. He's been in the limelight a lot recently and mostly because of those that shall not be mentioned here.

Now I sincerely believe this is a trash story with absolutely no merit behind it. Its not the first time that other publications have picked up garbage that came out of Wooten's mouth.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:34 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,091
I read the article. The stories are all jumbled now. Valentine Low is on twitter now saying he has his own source. He removed some pieces of the story like the Queen's opinion of the need of the veil but says that a source "was surprised by their behavior" over tiara. So someone seeking out the press to attack Meghan?

The timing is very interesting and frankly the whole thing sounds ridiculous especially with the other stories that came out yesterday also very negative at Meghan. "A personal assistant from he tour has quit." Or the tour is over and she moved on. Personally sounds like someone behind the scenes has it out for Meghan.

I just can't see the Queen being that incompetent to offer a tiara and then withdraw it. That is what Valentine said happened and caused the entire "blow up." He is quoted to say, "Why did that happen?" So I guess a followup is to come?
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:46 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: NYC, United States
Posts: 729
I read all of the articles independently. DailyMail got the info directly from the Sun article, and referenced it as so. The Times did the exact same thing DM did. They are smart enough to cover their asses by saying throughout the article that their information came from the Sun article just in case it's not so. They didn't confirm if anything was true or not, just restated what was said in the Sun.

Now, VL is backtracking on what he wrote in the article and I think we're going to see a lot of back tracking soon in the coming days.

This is what I think happened. Meghan was presented not with a catalog of tiaras, but with a select few as Kate was. She choose the emerald one, and later found out that it wasn't possible due to providence. She may have been disappointed, but I really can't see a grown woman in her 30's throwing a freaking tantrum over a tiara. Harry may have been a lot more disappointed for her because of everything that was going on, and I can see him asking about the issue. However, I can't see him having a strop with the Queen over a tiara on behalf of Meghan.
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:50 AM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,971
JMO. There is nothing in this story that is consistent with past BRF behavior. It's made up of whole cloth and either planted by someone who wanted attention (inside BP) or someone who wanted to sell clicks (the rest of the world).

And, again, IMO, the fact that they invented a green tiara was purposeful to create an imaginary rift between the part of the family that did not wear a green-stoned tiara and the part of the family that did wear a green stoned tiara.

And that Russian bit was just to grab the attention of royal watchers who love bright shiny things. Remember how this whole invent a lie thing works. Lie BIG and then see how many people fall for it.

Haven't we all spent enough time on social media to realize how often someone is just trying to have us on these days? Think this through folks, it's a pile of dung and someone is just ROFL at how many people are falling for this story.

JMO.
__________________
"And the tabloid press will be a pain in the ass, as usual." - Royal Norway
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:54 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 10,974
There's no reason at all..not a shred of any evidence that Meghan ever wanted to wear an emerald in her tiara. This is fabrication to sell stories and a book.

Nothing in Meghan's history indicates she's ever been a fan of emeralds or wanted to wear them. Nothing about her we know indicates there would be any type of behavior they are talking about. It makes zero sense that this supposed exchange about the tiara with the Queen ever took place...if the Queen has an issue with Harry or whomever she's not going to go about it the way it's being implied/suggested.

I feel sorry for folks who believe this type of nonsense....they must already have a negative view of Harry/Meghan and this fits the narrative to justify their feelings.



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 11-10-2018, 08:56 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,091
Valentine is even more confusing trying to explain his story. He basically saying the "Meghan wants, Meghan gets" reference from Jobson is about this tiara that was offered and then jacked away. Then he says "Maybe it was Harry being the pain and not [Meghan]." Please pick a story and stick with it.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
meghan markle, prince harry, prince harry of wales, tiara, wedding


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Meghan Markle: Wedding Dress Suggestions and Musings soapstar Royal Style File 1819 05-19-2018 06:22 AM
Meghan Markle: Wedding Tiara and Jewelry Suggestions and Musings Tilia C. Royal Jewels General Discussion 999 05-19-2018 06:02 AM




Popular Tags
aristocracy armenia belgian birthday celebration bracelets british royal family charles of wales clothes corruption crown crown prince hussein's future wife current events cyprus daughter denmark discussão duchessofcambridge duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex duke of york earl of wessex extramarital affairs felipe vi french revolution future wife of prince hussein genealogy general news germany hamdan bin mohammed headship her children introduction juan carlos lady louise mountbatten-windsor letter lineage meghan markle modernization mohammed vi monaco christening monogram naples nelson mandela bay official visit patron potential areas prince harry princenapoleon prince nicholas prince of wales prince peter princess benedikte princesses princess eugenie princess louise princess royal qe2 sarah duchess of york savoy siblings south korea spain state visit the crown titles uk styles united kingdom windsor castle windy city wivies



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:34 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises