The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #501  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:05 AM
Alisa's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,993
For all the posters who are commenting without having watching the interview I really think you are doing yourself a disservice. Watch the interview and then you'll have an informed opinion.
As usual, alot has been taken out of context or reworded to write articles to fit certain press agenda.
__________________

__________________
Those who plot the destruction of others often perish in the attempt. ---Phaedrus
  #502  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:05 AM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fem View Post
After sleeping on the interview, the biggest revelations is that they're both fishes out of the water, not knowing what to do, not having any direction and desperately trying to find some sympathy in people.

Two things we know are a lie:
1. The "wedding before the wedding", for two reasons:
a/ they would not be allowed to marry twice, and the wedding in St George's Chapel was the traditional wedding ceremony (imagine if not? the press would have a field day)
b/ they need AT LEAST 5 people there, one to perform the ceremony, the marrying couple, two witnesses.
And Royal Family or not, the rules of the Church of England are the same for everyone.
2. The question about Archie's skin colour, which was, of all the things, corrected by Harry himself, after his wife lied. It didn't happen while she was pregnant, but before they even got married. His hesitation in discussing the whole conversation makes me think that Meghan lied not just about the timing, because he was pretty open (too open) with other things. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing was made up.

Things that are possibly a lie or were twisted to show them as poor, poor people:
1. The security issue - they made us believe it was the big, bad RF who pulled their security, while it was Canada's decision, as they refused to pay for security of non-working royals (and they were funding their security since November to March, which is a nice bill...). I'm not sure if it's a lie lie, or they just are so out of their depth, thinking the title is only the title and it doesn't bring several issues while they are residing in a different country (especially Commonwealth country).
2. The refusal to get Meghan help - members of TRF, Harry including, admitted that they were getting help for mental health issues. Family openly supports organizations connected to mental health. I could believe that Meghan was offered a well-known, discreet professional and wanted someone else, or a specific place, and was said no.
3. The hospital appearence with Archie - I didn't see anyone commenting on that yet, but it was something that surprised me a lot. Were Harry and Meghan born yesterday? To claim they didn't know it was tradition to pose for some photos after leaving the hospital with the baby, and that they would do it if they were told they supposed to. I'm sorry what? It's not like Harry was there when his cousins, James and Louise, were born. Or his nephews and niece. Meghan was already a member of BRF when Louis was born and she didn't know... Am I supposed to believe that?
4. The titiles - Meghan twisted the issue so much it confused Oprah and everyone else around too, while knowing perfectly well that Archie would get the royal title after Charles becomes king. If there was an idea to issue new LPs that would change that rule, it wouldn't surprise me that much, as Charles was never a fan of Beatrice and Eugenie having HRHs. But that does not, at all, connects to them receiving security, as it was mentioned time and time again, plenty of royals, not to mention full-time working royals, do not have that protection.
5. The Royal Family was jealous of Meghan's popularity and thought she would be the new Diana, so they set on destroying her. I don't think any comment is neccessary.

Things I actually could believe in:
1. The institution was not ready to handle the couple's popularity and press reactions to Meghan. They tried all of their old tricks that simply did not work, hence asking Meghan to stay at home so that she wouldn't be seen outside, thinking it'll stop the articles.
I think you have it bang on. I also think that the Charles money supply has stopped and they never calculated on that.
__________________

  #503  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:11 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
For all the posters who are commenting without having watching the interview I really think you are doing yourself a disservice. Watch the interview and then you'll have an informed opinion.
As usual, alot has been taken out of context or reworded to write articles to fit certain press agenda.

I don't think I could stomach the interview after reading through the posts here.
  #504  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:11 AM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estel View Post
But it would be verifiable. Imagine if he came out and said none of this BS happened. It would throw their entire interview out of the window. I don't think she would do something like that given how calculative she is.
Perhaps what happened that day was the legal wedding, and the one we saw was a farce. They went inside to sign a register, who knows whether they did or not.
I know the BRF won't comment on anything and I'm now at the stage where I'm utterly fine with that. But I do sort of want the Archbishop of Canterbury to clarify this point. I don't know if he can but I for one would like to have this point cleared up legally.
  #505  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:13 AM
Alisa's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
It seems that we get a lot of this "sad royals" narrative (or "being trapped") especially from the British royals. True, and you probably know better than I do, there were also rumors than Willem-Alexander, Philippe or Frederik were once unhappy (maybe felt trapped?) in their roles, but, now, it seems that they are all very happily married and have very happy children (W-A and Philippe are even kings themselves).


Mutatis mutandis, I also see Charles and Camilla happily married and William and Kate having a well-balanced family life. Are they in some kind of trap that would make us feel sorry for them as Harry said ? I don't know them as well as Harry presumably does, but on the surface it doesn't look that way. But, even if it were true, contrary to what their public images suggest, I don't think Harry should be saying that openly on international TV and violating their trust on private family matters. He is free to speak about himself and his immediate family and how he feels, but do not drag your father and your brother into that narrative without their consent.


On the issue of security, I am also sure there are Forum members here who are far more knowledgeable than I am on the existing security arrangements for members of the RF , both in the UK and in Canada, and the limitations, not only financial, but possibly legal/statutory on those arrangements. I will let them comment then. I would just say that Harry should know those rules and limitations, not least by looking at other members of the Family, and that shouldn't have come as a surprise to him.


Personally, I think that Harry put a lot of emphasis on the security issue to justify his subsquent claim that the Netflix/Spotify deals were never planned a priori, but he had been cut off financially and needed money to pay for security. Oprah was obviously coordinating with them even she intentionally asked the question to allow them to defend themselves from the accusation that they were "money-grabbing royals".
That's the point though isn't it. It is what the public see. The royals put on a public face-no one really knows what goes on behind closed doors. Charles and Camilla and the Cambridges marriage could all be hanging by a thread and the public could never know it.

I never would've thought that the Duchess would've been suicidal while 5 months pregnant.
__________________
Those who plot the destruction of others often perish in the attempt. ---Phaedrus
  #506  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:16 AM
An Ard Ri's Avatar
Super Moderator
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: An Iarmhí, Ireland
Posts: 31,968
I'm debating whether to watch it or not as I was trying to avoid it,which is impossible!
  #507  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:18 AM
Princess Xenia's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: ..., United States
Posts: 399
I have never seen a good thing come out from publicly whining about your relationships with your family and in-laws. If you have a problem, ask for help from a professional or talk it with the ones who you a have a problem or let it go and ignore the people who bother you.

I don’t get why Harry and Meghan think they are so interesting? The sole reason may be interesting is that belong to an institution that they want no part of and yet they are trying to damage the ‘Firm’ and keep their titles.

Can they give up their titles on their own or should it be done by the parliament??
  #508  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:21 AM
Alisa's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,993
That's exactly why you should watch it. Some of the comments here are gross exaggerations of the actual interview. Watch it for yourself and form your own conclusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
I don't think I could stomach the interview after reading through the posts here.
__________________
Those who plot the destruction of others often perish in the attempt. ---Phaedrus
  #509  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:22 AM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
For all the posters who are commenting without having watching the interview I really think you are doing yourself a disservice. Watch the interview and then you'll have an informed opinion.
As usual, alot has been taken out of context or reworded to write articles to fit certain press agenda.
I have no interest in boosting the ratings of anything they appear in. To do so will only lead to more interviews. I'd rather all of this stop. So I won't watch. I know it's to much to hope that they'll fade into the background but I won't help support them.
  #510  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:28 AM
Estel's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Somewhere, India
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
I don't think I could stomach the interview after reading through the posts here.
Neither can I. I have read the posts here, and have heard YT commentators quote them, and that's enough for me. Cannot tolerate such venom.
  #511  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:32 AM
Marengo's Avatar
Administrator
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Posts: 23,155
I think posters have made it clear how often they are not going to watch this interview. If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it. If you want to watch it on loop for the rest of the year do just that. But let's not bore other members with our television preferences as it does not fall within the scope of this thread.

You can discuss alternative television tips in this thread.

Please move on...
__________________
TRF Rules and FAQ
  #512  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:33 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blog Real View Post
I just think: if Diana were alive, which side would she be in this story? it's interesting, but we'll never know.
None of this would have happened if Diana was still alive!
I half wonder if Harry would have even ended up with Meghan, but that's neither here nor there now.



I must didn't watch the interview- and don't plan to, but have seen quotes online.
The one thing I saw was Harry talking about "being saved" and how Meghan "saved me" - or something to that nature, and it really shook me, that's not the healthiest way to talk about your spouse. it's quite alarming.
  #513  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:34 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,757
CBS has put out a few new clips.

https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/s...18005158191111

"Rude and racist are not the same thing."
  #514  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:34 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,388
Anyone think they wanted this to be their Panorma? Am I a bit late to the party on that view.

I really get the sense that they're pushing the whole "three in the marriage" view except the third person was "The Firm" this time.

If they did think that, it was foolish of them because they aren't as popular as Diana was to ever drum up the outcry she got. They needed to stick it out in RF for a lot longer than they did.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #515  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:37 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
None of this would have happened if Diana was still alive!
I half wonder if Harry would have even ended up with Meghan, but that's neither here nor there now.
That's interesting to think about. As horrible as it is to say, I'm not sure Harry's parents continuing their war in the media, and in private, throughout his entire life would have been so much better for him than Diana's death was. He'd have had two living parents pulling him in two completely different directions, and trying to inculcate two completely different sets of values and expectations. No matter what he did, he'd have disappointed one of them. Regardless of who he married, that wouldn't have been easy for him.
  #516  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:39 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 10,768
The silliness about the secret wedding ceremony is something that can be verified.

My two biggest concerns....from what I am reading here. ..because I didn't watch:

1) The idea of Meghan cloistered, suicidal and on the verge of a nervous breakdown and being denied help when she begged for it. This is shocking, cruel and unconscionable IF true. It renders all the yammering about the importance of erasing the stigma around mental health coming from the Windsors complete #$@%.

2) The idea of handwringing from a senior member of the BRF about the skin tone of any future children of the couple. Any child of a mixed race and a White person will look nearly 100% White but even if not...SO WHAT? Seriously. I NEED this one to be a lie. Or a misunderstanding. Or anything. Because if it's true...it sheds new light on MM's alleged difficult diva behavior before and during her time in the BRF. How dare anyone ruminate about the possibility of her child being "too dark".

3) Harry's estrangement from his father sheds new light on the "I am my MOTHER'S SON" Archewell statement a few months back. It's very sad, imo.

It's a good thing...a VERY good thing...that it will be at least two decades before George and Louis marry. Because i cannot imagine any sane young woman wanting to marry into that family in the wake of this interview.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
  #517  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:41 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
I suppose they could also have found a "standing structure" somewhere as well, possibly the same Orangery.

But yes the other points do stand and if the AofC actually performed a full legally binding wedding three days before then having another actual wedding later throws up all sorts of questions, even if there were no witnesses. I actually know someone who works at Church House, I might email them and see if they have any light to shed.

A.
how coudl they have a legally binding ceremony without a licence and 2 witnesses??????
  #518  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:42 AM
Kellydofc's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Out in the country, United States
Posts: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Anyone think they wanted this to be their Panorma? Am I a bit late to the party on that view.

I really get the sense that they're pushing the whole "three in the marriage" view except the third person was "The Firm" this time.

If they did think that, it was foolish of them because they aren't as popular as Diana was to ever drum up the outcry she got. They needed to stick it out in RF for a lot longer than they did.
I'm seeing quite a stir of sympathy for them here in the US. So it might play out well for them in the short term here. Especially among certain groups of people and please understand I'm generally very left leaning so my entire Twitter feed was flooded with people who bought everything they were saying. Long term, I don't know people can be very fickle.
  #519  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:45 AM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Anyone think they wanted this to be their Panorma? Am I a bit late to the party on that view.

I really get the sense that they're pushing the whole "three in the marriage" view except the third person was "The Firm" this time.

If they did think that, it was foolish of them because they aren't as popular as Diana was to ever drum up the outcry she got. They needed to stick it out in RF for a lot longer than they did.
Yes, they absolutely wanted this to be their Panorama. But they don't have the status of Diana, and they will never have it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
how coudl they have a legally binding ceremony without a licence and 2 witnesses??????
They couldn't
  #520  
Old 03-08-2021, 08:45 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 210
So I watched the clip where Meghan talks about the "secret wedding."

Meghan (using a lot of hand gestures): "3 days before our wedding, we got married! No one knows that."
Oprah (sounding like I do when I feign more excitement about something than I'm feeling to be honest): Ahhhhh
Oprah looks from Meghan to Harry, looking for a reaction or to engage him in the conversation, but he looks away and stares at the chicken he is stroking. (all of this being filmed in the chicken coop)


Can I just say, that not only is the story of the secret wedding bizarre, so is the scene of it being told...
__________________

Closed Thread


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
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex with Oprah III - Post-Interview, March 9th 2021 - Marengo The Electronic Domain 746 03-12-2021 05:30 AM




Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asian baby names baptism birth britannia british british royal family british royals camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing coronation crown jewels customs duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style gemstones genetics george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan henry viii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan history king edward vii king juan carlos liechtenstein line of succession list of rulers luxembourg meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists mongolia mountbatten names pless politics prince harry princess eugenie queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry royalty of taiwan st edward sussex suthida swedish queen tradition unfinished portrait united states of america wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:46 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×