The Duchess of Sussex: Family and Background - Page 118

O-H Anglophile · #**2341** 08-20-2018, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soula

Most of this would have been avoided if Meghan had invited some of the family to the wedding, they would have been embarrassing but not to the extent that it has now escalated to.

I'm sure they would have still talked but it wouldn't have got this bad. This is the gift that keeps on giving as far as the press is concerned.

As for the wall of silence from KP, Harry shouldn't have made the "family she never had" comment. He should have kept silent. To be fair, however dysfunctional a family is, they wouldn't want that stated on an international stage.

Just MHO....

Neither of Meghan's half siblings deserved to be invited to her wedding-they started being hateful as soon as the rumors of the relationships broke. I'm sure they would have found a way to draw attention to themselves before, during and after the wedding if invited. It might have been worse.

And Meghan's dad was not only invited but was to have participated in the wedding! But he ruined that.

When Harry said that people still didn't realize what he meant and called him out. But the Markles themselves showed all of us what he meant and now most people are saying now they understand.

JuliannaVictoria · #**2342** 08-20-2018, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soula

Most of this would have been avoided if Meghan had invited some of the family to the wedding, they would have been embarrassing but not to the extent that it has now escalated to.

I'm sure they would have still talked but it wouldn't have got this bad. This is the gift that keeps on giving as far as the press is concerned.

As for the wall of silence from KP, Harry shouldn't have made the "family she never had" comment. He should have kept silent. To be fair, however dysfunctional a family is, they wouldn't want that stated on an international stage.

Just MHO....

How would this have been better? The family that's bashing her now except her father is the same family that were bashing her as soon as they found out she was dating Harry. Should she have invited the abusive brother who held a gun to his girlfriend's throat or the spiteful sister who was threatening to write a tell all book as soon as news broke that she was dating Harry. THEY are the ones still chatting, and we can now include her father. And Harry was right to make that statement, because as WE and the world can all see now, he was absolutely right.

XeniaCasaraghi · #**2343** 08-20-2018, 11:57 PM

Meghan was right not to invite these clowns to the wedding. Only people who can behave civilized should be allowed around civil people. And clearly Harry knew what he was talking about when he made the comment about her family.

Kataryn · #**2344** 08-20-2018, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonk

What's so interesting is that Tom Sr. says that Meghan asked him to tell Samantha to stop bad mouthing her to the press and not to share her personal information with her, which is totally understand able from her viewpoint. She doesn't have a relationship with Sam and he does. He also stated that she asked him to stop speaking to Sam and he said he couldn't choose one child over the other. Also, understandable. But what Tom Sr., doesn't seem to understnad is that by NOT publicly denouncing some of the things both Sam and Tom Jr., has said about Meghan to the media, he is picking one child over the other. At least, that's how it appears to me.

I tried to go back in history to think of two siblings that disliked each other so immensely it bordered on a sickness. I don't know how Meghan feels about Samantha causes she chooses to ignore her but it obvious that Samantha has a clearly dislikes Meghan. I have never seen or heard anyone talk about a sibling is such a denigrating and nasty way. I mean, I don't think I have ever disliked or hated anyone in my life the way she talks about Meghan.

The aunts of Louis XVI. (the daughters of Louis XV.) had reportedly such a hatred towards Marie-Antoinette. Okay, they were not siblings. But they called her "L'Autrichienne" (The woman from Austria" which saounded exactly like "L`autre chienne" (the other bitch), which is so ironic, for they were bitchy to her. As for hate between siblings: this is so much of a taboo, really. Even in "Cinderella" the sisters are both against their stepsister, who shares no blodd with them.

Osipi · #**2345** 08-21-2018, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dman

I don’t know, but it just appear like Mr. Markle is running around like a chicken with his head cut off.

I know I’m talking about two different families born and raised in two different worlds, but if you watch the Middleton’s conduct their daily lives, they conduct themselves in the manner in which they are fully aware of the world their daughter and sister married into on the 29th of April, 2011. The Markles don’t appear to have grasped this reality. It’s like they see it has a Hollywood type of life. No basic understanding of the royal institution and the massive weight that’s now of Meghan’s shoulders.

If they understood this, they would be focused on supporting Meghan and keeping the media at arms length.

Its not only the Markles. I would bet my last bowl of Spaghetti Os that, if surveyed, the majority of the population of the United States and perhaps a good percentage of the UK population would have absolutely no idea of how the royal institution is run and maintained and the ins and outs of protocol and handing things. Most equate the word "princess" with a Disney aspect to it.

It wouldn't matter if the Markles understand Meghan's role or not. Meghan could have become the Secretary General of the UN or a senior advisor at the White House or Empress of the World and the Markles would still be lashing out at her. Their vendetta against her is against her person not because of what she's accomplished in life although she's accomplished far more than any of them ever will.

Its just a possibility but I have a sneaking suspicion that Samantha was trying to do everything in her power to sabotage Meghan's wedding because she knew she'd be left out of it. The coup came when Daddy bought into her line that he needed to "improve his image". Daughter plays Daddy's ego like a Stradivarius violin and the wedding falls apart. Well... almost. This continues to this day. Daddy still doesn't realize that perhaps he doesn't have a working phone number for Meghan most likely because its a possibility that number would be passed to Sam, TMZ, Piers Morgan or anyone else and would no longer be a "private" number.

Tom, Sr. knows very well he's the cause of the problems. Tom, Sr. knows his daughter Samantha is using this situation to create her own pedestal to be on. Tom, Sr. most likely wishes he had acted as his ex-wife has and kept her dignity and her closeness with her daughter. Tom, Sr. knows he cannot turn the clock back and have a "do over". He's putting the blame everywhere but where it really belongs. On himself.

For every action there is a reaction and for every reaction, there is an outcome. Its up to him.

jacqui24 · #**2346** 08-21-2018, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dman

Meeting in the middle is getting together, talking and burying the hatchet. Right now, everyone is in their corners and the mess is continuing to stew.

I do understand the pickle the Sussex’s are in though. Trust go a long way with the royals. A lot of people are thinking that the royal couple are frightened of talking to Tom and then he go back and tell the media what was said. Look at what he did with Piers Morgan.

How do you bury the hatchet with someone that feels like they are completely justified in selling you out to the highest bidder, threaten you publicly, and want you to take blame for their action (his words, not my assumption)? I just haven't seen any realistically actionable suggestion to come into the middle. The problem isn't that everyone is in their corner. The problem is that Tom refuses to be reasonable and take pleasure in public flogging of his daughter and her new husband because he's not getting his way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

It wouldn't matter if the Markles understand Meghan's role or not. Meghan could have become the Secretary General of the UN or a senior advisor at the White House or Empress of the World and the Markles would still be lashing out at her. Their vendetta against her is against her person not because of what she's accomplished in life although she's accomplished far more than any of them ever will.

I would argue that Meghan's accomplishments are precisely why Samantha and Tom Jr. hate her. Even Tom Sr whenever he can't take credit for it. It's their way to "put her in her place" because they feel inferior comparing themselves to her and what she's been able to do for herself. With the older Markle children, there is a clear sense that she got better end of the stick as a child and they are so jealous of her life compared to theirs. Samantha's jealousy was clear to those that were around her even before this mess. And I think the most telling comment from Tom's rambling is his comment about Doria. He is pissed at Meghan, but ultimately he's pissed because he feels like she, and the world, chose Doria over him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soula

Most of this would have been avoided if Meghan had invited some of the family to the wedding, they would have been embarrassing but not to the extent that it has now escalated to.

I'm sure they would have still talked but it wouldn't have got this bad. This is the gift that keeps on giving as far as the press is concerned.

As for the wall of silence from KP, Harry shouldn't have made the "family she never had" comment. He should have kept silent. To be fair, however dysfunctional a family is, they wouldn't want that stated on an international stage.

Just MHO....

How is giving them access any better? Do you honestly think these people would stop talking? No, it would only breath life in their profit seeking mission they are on to sell Meghan to the highest bidder. If they had been at the wedding, it would actually increase their credibility and give a sense that they have an "in", which ultimately is most desirable for tabloids. It's not about if they are embarrassing or not. Tom can argubly be labelled as such, but he was invited in the wedding. In fact, he was part of the wedding. But he screwed it up. So obviously, inviting them doesn't solve the problem. Samantha and Tom Jr. were already on full on attack mode. And based on emails released by Tom Jr., he was behaving like family that hasn't bothered for years now all of sudden coming out of woodwork to get a piece of the pie that doesn't belong to him behind the scenes.

At the time Harry made that comment, I took it differently and saw as that she didn't have a big family like the BRF where cousins and second cousins all celebrate the holiday together, but I suppose only Harry knows what he truly meant. I don't believe he intended to that to hurt anyone's feelings or be malicious about it.

People don't just change overnight. People that tend to show bad judgment don't just show it with one event. It's clear that Meghan has remained dignified for years and refused to air dirty laundry in public, which is the way to go in my book. She chose to maintain a relationship with her dad over the years even if there were periods of estrangement due to his now obvious bad judgment. She chose to remember the good times and draw on that and clearly let go of the bad in the past. The key thing about letting go of bad things in the past is that it has to be in the past. As long as this behavior continues in the present, Tom leaves her with no choice but to stay away.

Soula · #**2347** 08-21-2018, 01:58 AM

As I said, it's just MHO... but I think a lot of wind would have been taken out of their sails

I also don't think Markle Sr is talking to the press, I could be wrong but I think the latest stories are part of his 9 hour rant that the press will release slowly to keep the fire going

jacqui24 · #**2348** 08-21-2018, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soula

As I said, it's just MHO... but I think a lot of wind would have been taken out of their sails

I also don't think Markle Sr is talking to the press, I could be wrong but I think the latest stories are part of his 9 hour rant that the press will release slowly to keep the fire going

It’s not always with the same publication. I believe someone other than DM got at least another interview with him. He was on the cover of The Sun on Sunday. I think The Mirror also had something. DM has published new stories and claim it’s a different interview than the 9 hours. And putting aside the fact that I don’t think she should have to invite anyone that dishs out verbal abuse at her publicly anytime they are unhappy, I’m also don’t understand how inviting family who tends to be chatty and hasn’t bothered to be in her life before Harry takes wind out of sails. It would only give them more legitimacy.

CTchic · #**2349** 08-21-2018, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soula

As I said, it's just MHO... but I think a lot of wind would have been taken out of their sails

I also don't think Markle Sr is talking to the press, I could be wrong but I think the latest stories are part of his 9 hour rant that the press will release slowly to keep the fire going

If Meghan invited the Markles, they would have given weekly exclusives to the tabs about private conversations with royals and celebs. Hell probably be given a column. They would have been legitimised.
BTW, what about the Raglands? Meghan did not invite them either but did we hear anything from them? Apart from the Uncle who gave a positive interview but did not expect an invite, we heard nothing from them.

ACO · #**2350** 08-21-2018, 04:08 AM

Anyways, when Thomas said that Meghan was the reason Samantha was so cruel and that if she would just bend to her will she would stop -- that was when he ceased being a father. He made his decision to support one child being a bully to the other. That is who Thomas Markle is.

Soula · #**2351** 08-21-2018, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTchic

If Meghan invited the Markles, they would have given weekly exclusives to the tabs about private conversations with royals and celebs. Hell probably be given a column. They would have been legitimised.
BTW, what about the Raglands? Meghan did not invite them either but did we hear anything from them? Apart from the Uncle who gave a positive interview but did not expect an invite, we heard nothing from them.

As I said it just my opinion....

Re the Raglands being invited I read somewhere, maybe on this thread, that some of the Raglands were there but not up front with Doria

Does anyone know if they were or have links to pics?

Tarlita · #**2352** 08-21-2018, 05:36 AM

There are no photographs as such of Uncle Joffrey and his wife. However, they were recognized by people who knew them, as part of the congregation, as the TV camera's panned the crowd in the church. For all any of us know there may have been other family members, just that we and the media are not familiar with what they look like.

alvinking · #**2353** 08-21-2018, 06:00 AM

Vice Admiral Timothy Laurence, husband of Princess Anne
What is the name of his father? What is the name of his mother?Does he has siblings? What are the name? Do they have children? What are their names?
What do all they people do in life?

Sophie Rhys-Jones, Wife of Prince Edward, same questions

and I can ask the same questions for Birgitte van Deurs, Katharine Worsley, Marie Christine von Reibnitz, Angus Ogilvy, Mark Philips, Autumn Kelly, Michael Tindall.

Even for exposed personalities like Philip Mountbatten, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, Diana Spencer, Sarah Ferguson, Camilla Parker Bowles, very few people could answer these questions

My point is families of in laws are not all over the press and these people who are married in the BRF are not bending over backward to accommodate their irrational whims of celebrity

Madame Verseau · #**2354** 08-21-2018, 06:06 AM

Here's an interesting tidbit I ran across. Sr whines he may never see his grandchildren from Harry and Meghan. Well that could be arranged

https://amp.news.com.au/entertainmen...31304d4674bd3b

I'm surprised the law is still on the books. The sovereign has custody of minor grandchildren. That means the queen and Charles when he becomes king can block the Markle malcontents from having contact with Harry and Meghan's kids. They can use the public attacks and the adjudicated bad acts of the half sibs as grounds along with Dad's ties to the older kids. Dad, Sam and Jr don't have a legal leg to stand on, and going to an American court won't help. I wouldn't be surprised if Dad figures it out he may shut up and throw his older kids under the bus if distancing himself from them helps him gain access.

Osipi · #**2355** 08-21-2018, 06:20 AM

I seriously doubt that the Queen (or Charles as King when the time comes) would expressly cite this law to prevent a grandfather from seeing his grandchildren if it was approved by the parents, themselves.

A lot of the laws do seem to be archaic but I see them more in place to protect the royal family and the Crown than to hinder royals parenting their children. Now, should any royal parent give a A-OK for their child to go to the middle east and join a rebel training camp, that's when the monarch could logically step in and squash that right in the bud.

As it stands right now, Meghan could deliver her first born in the next year and Harry and Meghan could prohibit any contact with Tom, Sr. if that is their wish. The monarch wouldn't interfere with that at all and leave it up to the parents.

The Markles can huff and puff but they'll never blow the royal house down and how it works.

alvinking · #**2356** 08-21-2018, 06:29 AM

Well however archaic this law may be, it has been used 4 times recently. No custody settlements during the divorce of Charles, of Anne, and of Andrew, and John Major was appointed legal Guardian of William and Harry after the death of Diana, regardless of her will's wishes.

On a side not at Harry's wedding, Former Prime Minister John Major was there, not as a Prime Minister, but as a former legal guardian of Harry

Rudolph · #**2357** 08-21-2018, 06:53 AM

We’re not talking about a death or divorce. If H&M have children, mr Markle will of course be able to see them if that’s what the parents want.

Why would the Queen care. It’s up to the parents.

QueenEmpath · #**2358** 08-21-2018, 06:55 AM

I feel bad for Meghan. She's settling in her new royal life which is very different from Hollywood. I hope the whole drama created by Thomas Sr and Samantha won't put her on the wrong end.

alvinking · #**2359** 08-21-2018, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph

We’re not talking about a death or divorce. If H&M have children, mr Markle will of course be able to see them if that’s what the parents want.

Why would the Queen care. It’s up to the parents.

I guess you did not understand, it is not about death or divorce, it is about custody. I just said that this law was applied recently in these two cases

And the Queen has nothing to d with it as far as her great grand Children are concerned. The monarch has custody of his/her grand children

It is Charles once monarch who will have custody of his grand children, so theoretically it will be charles decision. Case in point Diana wanted her brother and sister to be legal guardian of her children, The Queen overruled her will, and appointed John Major. Just drawing a parallel to show that it is the will of the custodian that matters, not that of the parents

Osipi · #**2360** 08-21-2018, 07:23 AM

Well, if there's one thing that the e(strange)d family understands, its the ins and outs of legal guardianship. If I'm not mistaken, several of Samantha's children have guardians that had legal custody of them over their mother.

I don't think the Queen or Charles would ever override parental decisions made by the parents unless it was absolutely necessary for the welfare of the child. With William and Harry and overriding Diana's choices of guardians, it was because of their proximity to the Crown as William is a future monarch. I agree with the Queen on this move.