The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 1: September-December 2020

[Lee-Z]

One of the "reasons for being" of *his* family is that they are a representing all the people in their kingdom equally.

What he imo effectively is saying is not just that his family isn't aware, but they can never be aware because it's impossible to walk in another person's shoes.

in other words, again imo, he is undermining their "reason for being"

I think it's fine for Harry to pursue his own goals, but imo he walks a fine line when he brings his family into it.

[victor1319]

I think we should not put too much into the words of Harry! Especially not everytime he is opening his mouth.

In the end: He ain't black neither!

[Curbside]

Originally Posted by Denville

Then Harry can't know what its like either.....

No, but he's got more of a clue than he would were he intimately involved with someone of a more similar background.

[Sun Lion]

Diana's old flatmate attended Harry and Meghan's wedding and asked George and Amal Clooney how they knew the couple ... and they said they didn't!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...e-wedding.html


And someone paid $400 US an hour to rent the location for the Teenage Therapy podcast - the Sussex's house not used, despite being close by and having all those rooms and extra buildings.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-property.html

[Curryong]

If the organisers of the Teenager Therapy charity and the Sussexes didn't want to use the Montecito property that is up to them. It might not have been convenient for the charity to go to Montecito. And it worked out. The charity spoke about being absolutely ecstatic at the amount of PR the chat garnished online.

As for the wedding story, a bit of stray gossip relayed by Rachel Johnson two and a half years after the wedding that may be true, may be not. Rachel Johnson herself was made notorious by her example in a tabloid article she wrote before the Sussexes' engagement. 'Exotic blood' anyone? And has never had a good word to say about Meghan ever since.

I believe the Clooneys did know the Sussexes from reading before the couple's engagement that they had met at the Oxfordshire Soho House. However, they could also have been at the wedding because of Charles. They attended his glittering Prince's Trust dinner the same year as the wedding and Amal is Ambassador for the Trust's award for female achievement.

[acdc1]

Originally Posted by Sun Lion

Diana's old flatmate attended Harry and Meghan's wedding and asked George and Amal Clooney how they knew the couple ... and they said they didn't!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...e-wedding.html


And someone paid $400 US an hour to rent the location for the Teenage Therapy podcast - the Sussex's house not used, despite being close by and having all those rooms and extra buildings.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-property.html

I thought George said in an interview with The Daily Mail that "‘We live not too far from one another and we have dinners and stuff and we’re friends with them for all the reasons that you’re friends with anybody.... They’re just really nice, fun, kind people, they’re a very loving couple..."

Here's a link to that interview. Maybe they didn't know each other prior to the wedding and became closer afterwards? I've long thought that the Clooney's are the type of celebrity philanthropist couple that Meghan and Harry are aspiring to be.

[REAL COUNTESS]

The first story I read about a day after the wedding. The Clooney's did not know them, but Meghan said, when the Tabloids are getting nasty Amal and George will fight for them or her. It also was said that Oprah will do the same, so hence the invitation. It may was from the DM, if this story is true, it is really sad and I feel she is very insecure about herself? Also if they, or someone else paid all that money to rent a place to do the podcast about Mental Health, it leaves open one question, why? did they not want to show their house, or didn't they wanted these young people in their house? Maybe someone can answer that.

[AC21091968]

Originally Posted by Denville

Yes Diana was vulnerable but it was the BBC who manipulated her, if anyone did, into doing that interview. so if anyone's to blame, its them...and journalists are often unscrupulous
But truth is, that Di wanted to do it. She kept it a secret because she knew the RF and her own staff and most of her friends and family would disapprove or try to dissuade her from it..
The RF certainly didn't want her to do it, had they known of it..
Of course the RF isn't for everyone, but Meghan was a mature woman when she joined it, and if she didn't know much about what it entailed that's on her. She was old enough to learn and to have enough life experience to work out whether she could fit in with that life. She was not a very young sheltered girl like Diana had been, nor I think did she have mental problems that might make adjustment difficult for her. However I and other people did feel that she didn't know really what she was getting herself into... but most of her fans seemed to believe that she was aware of what it would be like, that she was keen on the job and would be a welcome addition to the RF...

I think Dominic Lawson agrees with you. Dickie Arbiter has tweeted out a picture of The Sunday Times article written by Lawson. It has the title "By foul means, the BBC helped destroy Diana" with the blurb "The Panorama interview, gained through deceit, set the princess on a tragic".

Dickie Arbiter [Flag of United Kingdom] @RoyalDickie
There's an excellent 'must read comment' piece by #DominicLawson in today's @sundaytimes headlined 'By foul means, the BBC helped destroy Diana'
7:40 PM · Oct 25, 2020·Twitter for Android

https://twitter.com/RoyalDickie/stat...84191485984768

I agree with you that Diana and Meghan's cases are different, despite both have trouble fitting in royal live and have dysfunctional families. Diana was young and kind of "stuck with it" in the beginning, until everything gets worse. Meghan was older when she married into the royal family and appears to have left royal duties less than two years.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by AC21091968

I think Dominic Lawson agrees with you. Dickie Arbiter has tweeted out a picture of The Sunday Times. It has the title "By foul means, the BBC helped destroy Diana" with the blurb "The Panorama interview, gained through deceit, set the princess on a tragic".

Dickie Arbiter [Flag of United Kingdom] @RoyalDickie
There's an excellent 'must read comment' piece by #DominicLawson in today's @sundaytimes headlined 'By foul means, the BBC helped destroy Diana'
7:40 PM · Oct 25, 2020·Twitter for Android

https://twitter.com/RoyalDickie/stat...84191485984768

I agree with you that Diana and Meghan's cases are different, despite both have trouble fitting in royal live and have dysfunctional families. Diana was young and kind of "stuck with it" in the beginning, until everything gets worse. Meghan was older when she married into the royal family and appears to have left royal duties less than two years.

I wouldn't entirely agree.. I think that Diana wanted to do the interview, so while Bashir did apparently apply a bit of pressure she had an itch to talk about her problems publicly and I think she wanted to respond to Charles's admission of adutlery by telling about her affair with Hewitt. She had enough self control and common sense to keep the whole filming etc secret which suggests that she knew very well the RF and most of her own friends would disapprove and try to dissuade her...

[Osipi]

Whether or not Diana was coerced, bamboozled or goaded into doing the interview when she did does not, to me, fit into being compared with Meghan at all. Perhaps the BBC interview was a win/win situation for both Diana and the BBC. They both got something out of it.

At that time, Diana had been a well established member of the British royal family and married to the heir to the throne and had produced the heir and the spare. She had put in the footwork that endeared here to a global public. She was a still a *huge* factor in British royal reporting at the time too as anything "Diana" caught the eye of the readers. It was huge.

Zooming ahead to 2020 and Meghan, the comparison is, to me, like comparing the accumulated masterpieces of Beethoven and putting them alongside Norman Greenbaum's one hit wonder "Spirit in the Sky" that was immensely popular at the time but faded into the sunset like the pet rock fad. Meghan, to the royal world was a bit of magic in and of itself though. The "now you see her, now you don't" kind of magic.

[Sandy345]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

Even if he didn't (want to stay), I doubt Meghan would leave.
The only way I see Harry returning to the UK would be if he and Meghan split up.

I don't want Harry to ever sacrifice his marriage to return to the UK and I don't know why there is always talk of their "splitting." The best way for him to return if he and his brother come to an understanding and perhaps there is some interference by the royals to deal with the often wildly negative comments about Harry and his family in the media. I think Meghan and Harry were worried for their baby having negative comments made about him in the media and on social media. Charles did well with his PR person Bolland, perhaps some intervention like that would solve the issues. Maybe Harry doesn't want to go back, maybe there were some bitter words said when he and William had their disagreement. It may take some time for this situation to be resolved.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by angieuk

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l-Marines.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...rt-claims.html

Just accept the fact they're never coming back; except for weddings and funerals; same as the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.

Don't believe Wallis returned to the UK for the funeral of King George V1.

I doubt that Harry is never going to return to the UK aside from those two instances; he surely would want to visit his father and grandparents....We'll have to see how that plays out.

Why would Wallis attend the funeral of George VI? And, even if she wanted to, the Queen Mother would have forbidden it.

[Sandy345]

The break that Harry has from his family is nowhere near as bad as Edward's break. The only royal that Received Edward for visits was Queen Mary--and later on he and Wallis did return (in the late sixties) to be at a ceremony with HM, Philip, the Queen Mother, and the Gloucesters, to dedicate a memorial to Queen Mary. And Philip, HM and Charles visited the Windsors when he was ill and apparently things went very well in the visit, there is a picture of Wallis greeting Prince Charles. Plus Harry and Meghan unlike the Windsors have a child and may have more.

[Zaira]

Originally Posted by TLLK

I am rather surprised by the Major General's revelation that reportedly the Royal Marines have not received any communication (written/electronic/phone) from Prince Harry in the last 6 1/2 months. According to Thompson, this is why they're considering seeking a new Captain General. I truly hope that Thompson is misinformed and that Prince Harry has been communicating with the Royal Marines.




Going to take into consideration that this is the DM and it's possible that their "informed sources" are uniformed ones.

Worth noting Harry has denied these reports and that the Mail on Sunday has been sent legal notice over this story.

As it is, a general who retired in the 80s is hardly the most up to date source. And given the pandemic, of course Harry couldn't travel back.

IMO another Mail hit piece all around. They are going after everything dear to Harry and it's gross and shameless.

Originally Posted by ACO

Exactly. We really have zero idea how any of them really are doing because they truly avoid letting us see it. It’s a big deal when they do as history has repeatedly shown. It’s usually revealed at breaking points, which begs to wonder if those points could have been avoided. We shall never know...

In other news — Harry in conversation for British GQ

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/gq-her...on-anti-racism

GREAT conversation. I have been so impressed with Harry (and Meghan) in these conversations. They have been substantive, thoughtful and it's clear they know their stuff. Harry especially is shining in these sit-downs. The growth in Harry over the past decade has been so great to follow.

And sigh, not shocked that people are clutching their pearls over him talking about race and bias. But he is right to name both his own prior complicity and how the onus can't just be on Black people or POC to "educate" others. This is a concept that many struggle to understand.

Really so pleased with the work they are doing and the trajectory they are setting up.

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by Zaira

Worth noting Harry has denied these reports and that the Mail on Sunday has been sent legal notice over this story.

As it is, a general who retired in the 80s is hardly the most up to date source. And given the pandemic, of course Harry couldn't travel back.

IMO another Mail hit piece all around. They are going after everything dear to Harry and it's gross and shameless.

Thank you for the update Zaira.

Originally Posted by Mirabel

Even if he didn't (want to stay), I doubt Meghan would leave.
The only way I see Harry returning to the UK would be if he and Meghan split up.

However if little Archie is young enough, I expect that Prince Harry might choose to reside wherever his son is living to share custody.

[Sun Lion]

Do the Duke and Duchess of Sussex know their names and image are being used to promote the property used for the Teenage Therapy podcast?

Lovely property.

The photo of the Duke and Duchess with the teenagaers shows the beach behind them and someone walking past.

Once this photo was put up by the teens/their organization a week of so ago - along with video footage - it became clear that the "event" wasn't held at Harry and Meghan's private home.

Especially with one of the teens lying on a bed.

Hiring a place allows for business write-offs I guess, and protects from being sued for any injury that may occur if people are on your own property.

Here's the link -

https://giggster.com/listing/montecito-beach-house

This is the same website that had the Sussex's Montecito estate on it's books prior to them moving there.

(Giggster is the Airbnb for filming locations according to LinkedIn.)

Who owns the copyright for that photo - it's springing up in a lot of places.

[Sandy345]

I doubt there will ever be a question of custody. I wish the couple and their darling child well and I have no question that they will stay together and raise their child together.

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Sun Lion

Do the Duke and Duchess of Sussex know their names and image are being used to promote the property used for the Teenage Therapy podcast?

There is the possibility that M&H knew about it, and perhaps are taking a financial cut from future rental income for a predefined period.

Originally Posted by Sandy345

I don't want Harry to ever sacrifice his marriage to return to the UK and I don't know why there is always talk of their "splitting." The best way for him to return if he and his brother come to an understanding and perhaps there is some interference by the royals to deal with the often wildly negative comments about Harry and his family in the media. I think Meghan and Harry were worried for their baby having negative comments made about him in the media and on social media. Charles did well with his PR person Bolland, perhaps some intervention like that would solve the issues. Maybe Harry doesn't want to go back, maybe there were some bitter words said when he and William had their disagreement. It may take some time for this situation to be resolved.

I do not think a "Bolland-style" intervention is necessary at all. Harry has very publicly demonstrated that he is not a reliable foot soldier for The Firm, so I doubt any such efforts will be made to welcome him back to a royal role. He will be welcome privately as a member of the firm, but that too, depending on his past and future behaviour, may be strained.

The fact is that if Harry wanted to leave The Firm, he could have done so in a polite and dignified manner. Giving HM 20 minutes notice before putting out a public statement, publishing an online list of demands without securing the consent of the Boss, publicly debating who has the right to use the term "royal" are hardly acts that give one a sense of respect and dignity towards the Firm, the Queen, the PoW or the Duke of Cambridge.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Sandy345

I don't want Harry to ever sacrifice his marriage to return to the UK and I don't know why there is always talk of their "splitting." The best way for him to return if he and his brother come to an understanding and perhaps there is some interference by the royals to deal with the often wildly negative comments about Harry and his family in the media. I think Meghan and Harry were worried for their baby having negative comments made about him in the media and on social media. Charles did well with his PR person Bolland, perhaps some intervention like that would solve the issues. Maybe Harry doesn't want to go back, maybe there were some bitter words said when he and William had their disagreement. It may take some time for this situation to be resolved.

I was the one who said the original comment and I never said anything about them splitting up or returning to the UK. I just said they might not want to stay in the US. They could go back to Canada or to a country in Africa. Harry might not want to become a US citizen.

[Denville]

Do you really think Meghan wants to go to Africa or back to Canada? She's where she wants to bre now in LA, Hollywood, and as Long as Harry wants the marriage to work he'll stay. ANd for the moment I think he's Ok and maybe he's happier there than he was in the UK.. but I do wonder if he may not feel the pull of England eventaully