muriel
Imperial Majesty
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2007
- Messages
- 14,210
- City
- London / Guildford
- Country
- United Kingdom
What a shame!Harry loses court bid over Murdoch allegations
Harry loses court bid over Murdoch allegationswww.bbc.co.uk
What a shame!Harry loses court bid over Murdoch allegations
Harry loses court bid over Murdoch allegationswww.bbc.co.uk
The thing is that a legal suit has procedures that must be observed. Maybe it’s not always obvious but it’s not a school yard to report to the teacher all the meanies.What a shame!
That is a pretty big statement to make, and might be considered slanderous to the UK judicial system as a whole.The Duke is just going to have to accept that he will get no justice in this case.
I have been watching Suits, and think it was great. And I agree with you, I think Megan's acting was her real passion too.Not sure where to put this at all? The BBCIPlayer has just made available the entire series of SUITS available for 1 year. I have just started watching Series 1. I am enjoying this so much. Meghan, as Rachel ZANE, is super in the series along with all the other cast-members. I think she would have gone on to more interesting parts as an Actress like many others have done after the series ended. Such a shame we won't see that now. I think acting was her real passion.
He's still a member of a foreign royal family, so diplomatically, I imagine that US officials would treat his application differently to your ordinary "Joe Blow" application.The argument that there would be ‘stigma attached’ and there are ‘law enforcement documents included’ sounds rather weird if it was a straightforward application and approval.
It would be relevant to know what kind of visa was granted to Princess Madeleine. Almost similar status.He's still a member of a foreign royal family, so diplomatically, I imagine that US officials would treat his application differently to your ordinary "Joe Blow" application.
Which is of course the reason why questions have been asked.
For me, watching the video of the First Lady of Nigeria was more informative than the Sun article - and I certainly agree with you about that source.. Wow! Paraphrasing, the First Lady said “we do not want our girls emulating film stars in America” and “nakedness is not beautiful.” She also mentions Meghan by name in another statement about her coming to Africa, but I’d have to watch it again to ascertain what the First Lady meant.Link to article and video here:
Meghan blasted by Nigeria's First Lady over 'nakedness' during 'faux royal trip'
MEGHAN Markle has been blasted in a speech by Nigeria’s First Lady over her “nakedness” following her visit to the country. The Duchess of Sussex recently jetted to Nigeria earlie…www.thesun.co.uk
The Sun is not a source I like using at any time, but it has the video of the First Lady speaking and more info about the trip.
The article also states that MM spent almost £120k on jewellery and clothes for the three day trip.
If that statement is true, then I think that's disgraceful and just shows up MM for what she is IMO - vain, self-obsessed and utterly selfish. It's both disgusting and wasteful. Moreover, apart from two outfits I saw (out of the many, many changes of clothes), she completely failed to dress respectfully and appropriately!!!
Feel free to disagree but consider how much good £120k would have done for homeless veterans or Nigerians in poverty. And no need to reply about how much money is spent on the BRF's wardrobe, they are doing a job they are paid to do representing the UK people (and are spending less on clothing in some quarters) and often recycle their clothing; HRH The Princess Royal is well known for doing this, often wearing outfits she was last seen wearing in public a few decades ago. MM is only interested in representing one thing - herself.
If it had been any public figure, there will be some criticism because showing up in expensive clothes in an African country would be inappropriate even for a "private citizen". Then don't use this pathetic third-wave feminism to defend Meghan because Harry didn't walk around with three rolexes on his wrist.As Meghan is a private individual and is not a working royal or any other sort of official representative, how much she spends on clothes really isn't anyone's business but hers. However, if they're going to go on faux official trips, they're going to have to accept that there will be criticism - and it's usually aimed at women.
Please do not just lump an entire continent together. And kindly don't tell me that I'm being "pathetic". Women's clothing is always remarked upon. Men's rarely is. That is a fact.If it had been any public figure, there will be some criticism because showing up in expensive clothes in an African country would be inappropriate even for a "private citizen". Then don't use this pathetic third-wave feminism to defend Meghan because Harry didn't walk around with three rolexes on his wrist.
I suspect she was advised on how to dress, and didn't listen. As per.Yes, women are far more scrutinized for what they wear than men are. Has been true since the dawn of time and will continue to be true long after the heat death of the universe and we're colonized on another planet.
It's not about the expense of the attire (as a private individual, her spending is her own affair), but rather the oversight that no one in her entourage advised her against wearing such attire to a predominantly Muslim country, which could be seen as highly disrespectful. In 2024, it is widely recognized that many, if not most, Muslim-majority countries observe standards of modesty. For example, it would be unthinkable to visit Tehran and stroll around dressed like Daisy Duke, so why go to Nigeria dressed like it's a 4th of July barbecue?
I'm not sure who advised her that going to a predominately Muslim country with a wardrobe that is best suited to the Riviera (French or Italian, take your pick) was a good idea, but it very clearly wasn't.
Next to optics, assuming that Harry and Meghan are reimbursed for the costs of this trip by Invictus, if that includes a clothing allowance, it might not (only) be her own money that was spent.I personally don't mind if Meghan spends a lot of money on clothes. The funds are hers, to use as and how she wishes. If she chooses to use them on expensive clothing, is that really any business of mine?
Saying that, there are definitely optics to consider for these kinds of trips. Especially around modesty and religious standards. So, I don't mind that she wore expensive dresses, but I think she should have chosen outfits that fully covered her shoulders and back. Too many of them looked like beach wear to me.