The Duchess of Sussex: Family and Background - Page 123

xenobia · #**2441** 08-23-2018, 05:15 AM

I'm very certain that if Meghans father has physically abused her, no one would suggest that they would meet in person and "settle things". So why are some people suggesting that the victim should meet with the abuser, just because the abuse is emotional and hot physical? I don't get it.

Kataryn · #**2442** 08-23-2018, 06:12 AM

Most people here have cared for Harry for a long time and are happy he found a woman he could love and wed. For a lot of people that was enough to like Meghan and even more followed when the public found out what a good-hearted woman she is. But that's not the audience those terrible tabloids write for. They fulfil the wishes of people who are just like the Markles - they feel left behind, are jealous, unhappy and venegeful at all they deem to have a better life. These people are not interested in the truth at all, they just want to read something to feel better about themselves on pushing someone else, especially members of the RF, down. In a way, letting the Markles speak and report about it is as if the readers read reports about themselves, without realising what they actually do.

The BRF has learned to ignore these people. That's why Meghan cut her paternal family out of her life and hopefully will ignore them and the tabloids that report about their antics.

Madame Verseau · #**2443** 08-23-2018, 06:41 AM

You make an excellent point. The tabloids know their audience. Jr's latest bout of verbal diarrhea is what's being served up. Even though the US trip has been debunked it's still being run as it's going to happen before Aug 29, the date of the Sussexes' first engagement after summer break.

jacqui24 · #**2444** 08-23-2018, 07:17 AM

Why is Tom Jr commenting on Tom Sr and Meghan’s relationship since he hasn’t had a relationship with either for years?

Like how would he know except for what’s in his imagination?

M. Payton · #**2445** 08-23-2018, 09:07 AM

Abuse does not have to be physical, there are many forms of abuse such as emotional, mental and verbal all of which are very damaging to the spirit of a person be they a child or adult.....it can tear a person's very soul to have this happen to them daily and it can be done by a family member, a friend, an acquaintance, a stranger and even an employer.

Sr has complained about his *image* well truth be told, he is the only person responsible for that image he has shown the world. He does not like it when he is criticized in the media for his behavior or the way he looks, well that right there is on him only........just take a look in the mirror and tell me if you like what you see of yourself.....then change it for no one can do it for you and that does not mean running to the media who are laughing at the antics of the Markles and making money off their backs.

Winnie · #**2446** 08-23-2018, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

If Trevor Engelson had the bank accounts of George Clooney, Steven Speilberg, George Lucas, Will Smith, Jay-Z or any other major celebrity the Markles would have been swarming him, demanding that he pull strings to get Sam and Jr cushy jobs in Hollywood and Dad gets a mansion in Beverly Hills or Bel-Air. Jr gave away the game financial support from the Windsors.

Never really thought about that angle on this situation, but I agree that no matter who Meghan married if he had deep pockets, these three would probably insist on a share. That kind of entitlement mentality really blows my mind. I guess it is the age and social different of my era and those of today. We just NEVER asked for hand-outs from anyone. Just went out and got an additional small job.

ACO · #**2447** 08-23-2018, 11:43 AM

Of course it is about money and status. They didn't care about Meghan when she was married to Trevor or dating Corey. They were of no use to them. She starts dating a member of British royalty and suddenly they are screaming about how family matters. Give me a break.

Madame Verseau · #**2448** 08-23-2018, 01:45 PM

DM is desperate. It's running a story about Meghqn's uncle the bishop

https://www.google.com/amp/www.daily...p-regalia.html

This is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If the Fail is relying on the wacky uncles to get clicks they know Sr, Jr and Sam are hitting their expiration dates.

Osipi · #**2449** 08-23-2018, 01:58 PM

The Fail has definitely hit a new low here. This is blatantly an intrusion into someone's private life with intent to demean and mock this man's privacy just to have a story.

I would be my last Klondike bar that Mr. Markle did not give permission for these photos to be taken and published. In this regard, I think *any* of the Markles would be entitled to be angry about this story.

Perhaps that's the Fail's end game. To get the Markles all whipped up into a foam again?? Who knows.

ACO · #**2450** 08-23-2018, 01:58 PM

Now they are stalking Markles who have stayed out of the limelight?

Dalriada · #**2451** 08-23-2018, 02:01 PM

The uncle has not been reported to have said anything so thankfully people can’t judge with armchair psychology.

Fros · #**2452** 08-23-2018, 02:05 PM

It's using the same game plan as Tom Sr. Photos carrying fast food, saying he lives in squalor surrounded by trash.

Tom Sr. fell for this scheme and has been trying to "fix his image" at his daughters expense.

One can only hope this Markle who has been sensible enough to not eagerly run to the media does not fall into the same trap.

Queen Claude · #**2453** 08-23-2018, 02:06 PM

It is interesting that the same photo agency credited with the photos of the uncle is the same agency that took photos of Thomas Markle a few months ago.

I am far from a Thomas Markle apologist but IIRC it was said that he got sucked into doing the set up photos because he was told that if he did not cooperate then photos would be taken regardless and the photos taken without cooperation would not be flattering.

Fros · #**2454** 08-23-2018, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Queen Claude

It is interesting that the same photo agency credited with the photos of the uncle is the same agency that took photos of Thomas Markle a few months ago.

I am far from a Thomas Markle apologist but IIRC it was said that he got sucked into doing the set up photos because he was told that if he did not cooperate then photos would be taken regardless and the photos taken without cooperation would not be flattering.

It was the same photo agency that took the first pictures of Doria at the laundry mat after the engagement announcement and once again called into question her living conditions.

It's what they do. They take unflattering pictures, run bad stories calling their homes squalor and the offer a deal to fix up their image.

Tom was the only person who fell for it. Unfortunately for him along with trying to "fix his image" also included saying terrible things about his daughter and her new family.

The difference is after a little while they leave you alone if they get no response and then the palace steps in with letters and IpSo complaints about not distributing the pictures.

The difference with Tom Sr. is everyone in the industry knew he was collaborating with the photographer to fix his image so they continued to publish both the unflattering pics and the staged pics of him because the more unflattering pics they published the more staged pics he would do. It's an endless cycle and that's why it's best not to engage.

AlowVera · #**2455** 08-23-2018, 02:18 PM

Why are they re running this story? they already did this!

Dalriada · #**2456** 08-23-2018, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlowVera

Why are they re running this story? they already did this!

Yes the story ran with much more detail in July while Meghan was on her first official overseas trip in Ireland:

Meghan Markle's uncle is a bishop with his own church like the Queen http://dailym.ai/2vdD6cC

Queen Claude · #**2457** 08-23-2018, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fros

It was the same photo agency that took the first pictures of Doria at the laundry mat after the engagement announcement and once again called into question her living conditions.

It's what they do. They take unflattering pictures, run bad stories calling their homes squalor and the offer a deal to fix up their image.

Tom was the only person who fell for it. Unfortunately for him along with trying to "fix his image" also included saying terrible things about his daughter and her new family.

The difference is after a little while they leave you alone if they get no response and then the palace steps in with letters and IpSo complaints about not distributing the pictures.

The difference with Tom Sr. is everyone in the industry knew he was collaborating with the photographer to fix his image so they continued to publish both the unflattering pics and the staged pics of him because the more unflattering pics they published the more staged pics he would do. It's an endless cycle and that's why it's best not to engage.

Thanks a lot for the info about it being the same photo agency that took the laundry pictures.

Thomas Markle did not start making comments until after the story ran exposing that he was in on staging the photos. Obviously he was a troubled person all along but the "investigative report" exposing his cooperation with the photo agency seems to have been a trigger that sparked the crazy he started exhibiting a few days before the wedding.

Lady Reem · #**2458** 08-23-2018, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alvinking

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

Exactly! Plus other paternal in-laws to the royals were not/are not babysat by the royals, nor do they request to be. Doria’s side don’t behave like self-entitled nasties either.

Imagine if these people who we never really hear of, sat on their backsides waging a one sided war with the royals, like certain members of that other family who feel entitled to something?

What is happening to the Royals is harassment and bullying on a massive scale.

M. Payton · #**2459** 08-23-2018, 02:27 PM

Wonder how many are actually members of the Church of Markle's as compared to the Church of England? That would be very interesting .......

I do not see Meghan and Harry as members of the Church of Markle's ....

Marlo · #**2460** 08-23-2018, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M. Payton

Wonder how many are actually members of the Church of Markle's as compared to the Church of England? That would be very interesting .......

I do not see Meghan and Harry as members of the Church of Markle's ....

Why do you want to know? We don't need to know everything about them.