The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #441  
Old 06-09-2021, 05:30 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
I agree with you.
well theres are LOADS of Elizabeths in the family.. Anne Eliz, Zara Anne Eliz Tindall, Isla Eliz Phillips, Lena ELiz Tindall, Beatrice Eliz of York, Davina Eliz Windsor, Louise MW has Eliz in her name and of course Charlotte...
Also, I think that Fred Windsor's daughter Maud is called Elizabeth too.

but they've all used it as a second name and used the full name..
__________________

  #442  
Old 06-09-2021, 05:48 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
If HM had been asked for her views on the name and she was less than positive, there is a reasonable chance that the next truth bomb might include comments on how the RF tried to prevent Lili being named as such due to racism!
I sincerely believe that what we're seeing with the naming of the Sussex child and the name being used of "Lilibet" is a classic example of "never complain, never explain" and it's working.

This is why I believe all the congratulations from the British side of family have been very generic and and frankly, quite stark and straight to the point. No matter what the reactions and the feelings and perhaps a whole lot of other emotions that are bouncing off palace walls these days, none of it will or should make it into the public domain. The BRF are above playing silly reindeer games for the sake of the entertainment world.

Harry and Meghan very well could have thought that with the recent "truth bombs" they've exploded into the public domain, they would really start up what would be known as the prize fight of the decade. What is actually happening with the way the BRF and the "Firm" are handling things resemble "Suppose They Gave A War And Nobody Came".
__________________

__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #443  
Old 06-09-2021, 05:55 AM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I sincerely believe that what we're seeing with the naming of the Sussex child and the name being used of "Lilibet" is a classic example of "never complain, never explain" and it's working.



This is why I believe all the congratulations from the British side of family have been very generic and and frankly, quite stark and straight to the point. No matter what the reactions and the feelings and perhaps a whole lot of other emotions that are bouncing off palace walls these days, none of it will or should make it into the public domain. The BRF are above playing silly reindeer games for the sake of the entertainment world.



Harry and Meghan very well could have thought that with the recent "truth bombs" they've exploded into the public domain, they would really start up what would be known as the prize fight of the decade. What is actually happening with the way the BRF and the "Firm" are handling things resemble "Suppose They Gave A War And Nobody Came".

Well said, @Osipi. From the perspective of the BRF, there is little point is complaining or disagreeing with H&M. At the moment, they seem to thrive on discord, so it is best to not provide any oxygen to their whining in the public domain.

I, too, had felt the Instagram messages of congratulations from the BRF where a little anodyne. This may well have been because they probably only heard of the birth from the announcement by H&M.
  #444  
Old 06-09-2021, 06:01 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,137
Palace source denies that Harry and Meghan asked the Queen to use Lilibet name.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57408163

Sussex spokesperson claims, however, that the Queen was the first member of the Family to be informed of the chosen name and was " supportive ".

The two statements are not necessarily mutually exclusive or contradictory.
  #445  
Old 06-09-2021, 06:09 AM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Palace source denies that Harry and Meghan asked the Queen to use Lilibet name.



https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57408163



Sussex spokesperson claims, however, that the Queen was the first member of the Family to be informed of the chosen name and was " supportive ".



The two statements are not necessarily mutually exclusive or contradictory.


That H&M feel the need to fight these ridiculous battles tells an awful lot about them.
  #446  
Old 06-09-2021, 06:22 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,762
The fact that it's the BBC that broke the "absolutely not" story gives it more credibility to me than if it was just the ever updated and contradictory DM stories on this issue. Especially with them treading on eggshells over Bashir.

I don't believe for one second the ridiculous stories that they continually happily zoom with HM and she's the first to know everything whilst they keep trashing everything she's work for for 70 years.

Even the "we definitely asked" stories leave a lot of wiggle room "well we asked if we could name the baby after her..." "she knew we wanted to use her name..."

The Sussexes have now updated "their truth" to include that Lili is a "sweet nod" to Doria who used to call Meghan "flower". The fact that this was not included on the press release whereas the other details about the name *were* and indeed Doria was not mentioned at all until there was backlash tells me "this truth" happened for them in the last couple of days.

I don't believe the palace knew of the birth before hand because otherwise they'd have had a statement read to go and not just a few lines over and hour later that didn't even mention the name.

You don't have to believe "Palace sources" are always correct to also realise "Sussex spokespeople" and Omid Scobie are most certainly not reliable either.

It really is sad that there's so much controversy over a name for a baby though. And once again, this doesn't at all reflect on her in the slightest.
  #447  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:06 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I sincerely believe that what we're seeing with the naming of the Sussex child and the name being used of "Lilibet" is a classic example of "never complain, never explain" and it's working.

This is why I believe all the congratulations from the British side of family have been very generic and and frankly, quite stark and straight to the point. No matter what the reactions and the feelings and perhaps a whole lot of other emotions that are bouncing off palace walls these days, none of it will or should make it into the public domain. The BRF are above playing silly reindeer games for the sake of the entertainment world.

Harry and Meghan very well could have thought that with the recent "truth bombs" they've exploded into the public domain, they would really start up what would be known as the prize fight of the decade. What is actually happening with the way the BRF and the "Firm" are handling things resemble "Suppose They Gave A War And Nobody Came".
Im not sure. I think that Meghan and Harry know that the RF WONT start a big public fight (but there may be subterranean hit backs from "members of the Palace staff) and that they are unlikely to do something dramatic and public like disowning them or cutting them out of the Will.. so they reckon they are safe to do things like call the RF racist and say they got married 3 days before their wedding and that the RF didn't want to help them ever and treated them oh so cruelly. The most the queen will say is probably "recollections may vary"...
  #448  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:17 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
The fact that it's the BBC that broke the "absolutely not" story gives it more credibility to me than if it was just the ever updated and contradictory DM stories on this issue. Especially with them treading on eggshells over Bashir.

I don't believe for one second the ridiculous stories that they continually happily zoom with HM and she's the first to know everything whilst they keep trashing everything she's work for for 70 years.


You don't have to believe "Palace sources" are always correct to also realise "Sussex spokespeople" and Omid Scobie are most certainly not reliable either.

It really is sad that there's so much controversy over a name for a baby though. And once again, this doesn't at all reflect on her in the slightest.
no, poor little thing. Shes only a few days old and her parents have ensured that there is plenty of talk about her name which is probably their aim.
I dont know when the Queen and RF found out, but I am sure that while theyre glad of a new baby and hope that they will see her one day, they are far from happy with any of the actions of the parents. Of course they have to extend congratulations publicly, but I agree that the congrats are probably generic... and that in private relations aren't that cosy.
I agree about the Zoom chats.
I'd say the queen did keep in touch and probably chatted last year about ordinary things like "how are you liking California" and "How is Archie doing..." but I doubt, quite honestly if Philip did a lot of chatting. I'm sure he wasn't happy with his grandsons behavior and I think he kept to himself a lot in the last year and probably didn't talk to H much.
  #449  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:27 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,762
And now they're accusing the BBC of libel and defamation:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...ibet-xqblbxx7t
  #450  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:31 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: İstanbul, Turkey
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
And now they're accusing the BBC of libel and defamation:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...ibet-xqblbxx7t
Are they serious?
  #451  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:33 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biset View Post
Are they serious?
Evidently. I wonder if the queen will get dragged into it. Odds are that if she was asked, she didn't disagree because she knew that they would do what they want to, anyway....
I remember at their wedding, thinking that the queen looked very tired and tense... and I wonder if it was partly because (Philip had been ill but he was up and about).. but partly because she had been experiencing the "Never satisfied" behaviour from H and Meghan.. that no matter what they got, they always wanted more and that as H put it "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets"...
  #452  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:47 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: İstanbul, Turkey
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Evidently. I wonder if the queen will get dragged into it. Odds are that if she was asked, she did'nt disagree because she knew that they would do what they want to, anyway....
I think Harry and Meghan have a different grasp of reality than others. I could imagine him telling the queen "By the way we're naming her Lilibet" and she said "How lovely". What was she going to do? Tell him no? I'm sure in Harry's mind, that's asking for permission.
  #453  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:54 AM
Royalist.in.NC's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Nowheresville, United States
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
Yes but are the BBC going to get into the name did they/didn't they debate unless they have a good source? And not a footman.

The Sussexes have open lied about a lot of things in the last few months. They also very publicly launched their Half In, Half Out manifesto claiming they had permission, hoping to make it a fait accompli and turns out it was a complete lie.

It's clear BP/the family had no idea the birth announcement was coming or it wouldn't have taken over an hour to release a statement and more for social media congratulations. And then the official statement was short and didn't mention the name.

Then there are all the reports that suggest HM did know they wanted to name the baby after her but "Lilibet" wasn't discussed it wouldn't be the first time a spokesman had twisted that sort of thing either.

Of course the unnamed source might just be trying to stir something up but the Sussexes word is worth absolutely nothing either.
I agree. If Harry had told HM that “we want to name the baby after you,”. ANYONE including HM would assume they meant “Elizabeth.” I cannot see Harry asking “may we name her Lilibet?”

And I also disagree with those who think that she wouldn’t say “no” so that she wouldn’t hurt their feelings. I think she would say something to the effect of “I’d rather you use Elizabeth to honor me.”
  #454  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:56 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,762
Emily Andrew's current take on all this. She said she absolutely believes that the Palace (on HM's behalf) ie not aides that hate the Sussexes briefed the BBC and that "shared that they were hoping to name their daughter after her" does not equal asking for permission to use Lilibet.

https://twitter.com/byEmilyAndrews/s...82026948124678
  #455  
Old 06-09-2021, 07:58 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biset View Post
I think Harry and Meghan have a different grasp of reality than others. I could imagine him telling the queen "By the way we're naming her Lilibet" and she said "How lovely". What was she going to do? Tell him no? I'm sure in Harry's mind, that's asking for permission.
Its very hard to understand them. I think at times that they are genuinely surprised when there are bad reactions to what they say.. ie " why are people saying we're in the wrong to say that we got married 3 days before the wedding. Why are people saying we are attacking the RF just because we have said that they are racists and heartless"...
Maybe they just thought there will be a lot of talk about the baby's name if we call her Lilibet rather than Elizabeth - and thats good. Now they are getting people complaining and they're saying "but we DID ask for permission". I agree that the Q probably said "have you got a name for her yet" and them replying "Oh yes, we're going to go for Lilibet" and the queen sighing internally and silently thinking that its better NOT to make a fuss, so not making any negative remark...
  #456  
Old 06-09-2021, 08:02 AM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,400
The clashes between the Palace sources, Sussex spokesperson and BBC are getting very messy right now

This kind of reminds me of the aftermath of the Oprah's interview, the Archie's birth certificate gate, bullying/mistreatment of staff allegation and the "service is universal" (after the removal of the Sussexes' royal patronages) fiasco.
  #457  
Old 06-09-2021, 08:16 AM
Royalist.in.NC's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Nowheresville, United States
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I sincerely believe that what we're seeing with the naming of the Sussex child and the name being used of "Lilibet" is a classic example of "never complain, never explain" and it's working.

This is why I believe all the congratulations from the British side of family have been very generic and and frankly, quite stark and straight to the point. No matter what the reactions and the feelings and perhaps a whole lot of other emotions that are bouncing off palace walls these days, none of it will or should make it into the public domain. The BRF are above playing silly reindeer games for the sake of the entertainment world.

Harry and Meghan very well could have thought that with the recent "truth bombs" they've exploded into the public domain, they would really start up what would be known as the prize fight of the decade. What is actually happening with the way the BRF and the "Firm" are handling things resemble "Suppose They Gave A War And Nobody Came".
I think you have an excellent point! Why give the Susssexes any more oxygen?

I thought it telling that the Cambridges referred to the baby as Lili in their congratulations and not her full name. I also thought the same thing about them saying congrats to Harry, Meghan and Archie instead of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex - which the royals always do when posting birthday wishes.

Looking back at the announcement I laughed when I saw they’d released it with the monogram. And the spine of Megan’s book didn’t even include the title. Literally every book I’ve ever seen (with the exception of very old books) has the title of the book written in large font with the author’s name in smaller font. It is blatantly obvious that they care very much about their titles and connection to the RF that they’ve been bashing for months. I guess nobody ever told them “don’t bite the hand that feeds you.”
  #458  
Old 06-09-2021, 08:20 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,766
Is there clarification on which statement(s) in the BBC article the Duke and Duchess's lawyer alleges to be false? As Mbruno said, the claims of the anonymous palace source and of the couple's spokesperson do not strike me as being mutually exclusive. "The Queen was not asked by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex about naming their daughter Lilibet" and "During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name" could both very well be true.
  #459  
Old 06-09-2021, 08:23 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Is there clarification on which statement(s) in the BBC article the Duke and Duchess's lawyer alleges to be false? As Mbruno said, the claims of the anonymous palace source and of the couple's spokesperson do not strike me as being mutually exclusive. "The Queen was not asked by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex about naming their daughter Lilibet" and "During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name" could both very well be true.
probably it IS true, in that they said they wanted to call her Lilibet and the queen thought it wasn't worth saying anything and that it mgiht well just provoke a bad response if she said that she'd rather the baby was called Elizabeth than Lilbet. Years ago, a royal wish was tantamount ot a command - in most cases but H and Meg are not working royals any more and were never very easy to deal with.. so I expect teh queen did not disagree but wasnt that happy
  #460  
Old 06-09-2021, 08:24 AM
Royalist.in.NC's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Nowheresville, United States
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
The fact that it's the BBC that broke the "absolutely not" story gives it more credibility to me than if it was just the ever updated and contradictory DM stories on this issue. Especially with them treading on eggshells over Bashir.

I don't believe for one second the ridiculous stories that they continually happily zoom with HM and she's the first to know everything whilst they keep trashing everything she's work for for 70 years.

Even the "we definitely asked" stories leave a lot of wiggle room "well we asked if we could name the baby after her..." "she knew we wanted to use her name..."

The Sussexes have now updated "their truth" to include that Lili is a "sweet nod" to Doria who used to call Meghan "flower". The fact that this was not included on the press release whereas the other details about the name *were* and indeed Doria was not mentioned at all until there was backlash tells me "this truth" happened for them in the last couple of days.

I don't believe the palace knew of the birth before hand because otherwise they'd have had a statement read to go and not just a few lines over and hour later that didn't even mention the name.

You don't have to believe "Palace sources" are always correct to also realise "Sussex spokespeople" and Omid Scobie are most certainly not reliable either.

It really is sad that there's so much controversy over a name for a baby though. And once again, this doesn't at all reflect on her in the slightest.
I agree with all you said. I thought it was her dad who called her “Flower”. Perhaps I’m wrong but they needed something to fit the narrative of “sweet nod to Doria.”
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
birth, harry and meghan


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 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
Birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor: May 6, 2019 JessRulz The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1495 04-04-2020 06:26 AM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia baby names baptism britain british british royal family british royals brownbitcoinqueen camilla's family camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese clarence house colorblindness customs dresses dubai duchess of sussex duke of sussex earl of snowdon elizabeth ii general news thread george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan jewellery kensington palace king edward vii lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers luxembourg medical monarchy mountbatten names nepalese royal family pless prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess chulabhorn walailak princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen consort queen elizabeth ii royal jewels royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family swedish queen thai royal family tradition uae customs united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:14 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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