The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 7: Oct. 2022 -

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Alisa

It's interesting to note that the Queen Consort had lunch with Jeremy Clarkson AND Piers Morgan a few days before this article was released. I was hoping that she would release a statement condemning the article and Clarkson's comments but alas the silence is deafening.

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

Just to clarify they were guests at the same event. There were a large number of guests from media, the arts etc. not just Clarkson and Morgan. We do not know if they even spoke to each other at the event.

@Hallo girl is correct, the Queen attended a lunch for a large number of guests from the media, arts and journalism. It was certainly not a lunch only attended by Camilla, Piers & Jeremy.

That said, I see no harm in Camilla meeting with Piers and Jeremy, if that is her choice. Jeremy is a highly regarded motoring journalist, who also writes a few columns. Camilla does not have to agree with every thing either Jeremy or Piers have to say, though in relation to Meghan's behaviour, their views may be aligned.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by muriel

@Hallo girl is correct, the Queen attended a lunch for a large number of guests from the media, arts and journalism. It was certainly not a lunch only attended by Camilla, Piers & Jeremy.



That said, I see no harm in Camilla meeting with Piers and Jeremy, if that is her choice. Jeremy is a highly regarded motoring journalist, who also writes a few columns. Camilla does not have to agree with every thing either Jeremy or Piers have to say, though in relation to Meghan's behaviour, their views may be aligned.

I never said that the Queen Consort dined solely with Jeremy Clarkson and Piers Morgan. I apologize if my post gave that impression. In fact, QC was the reportedly the guest of honor of host of the small and intimate lunch.

That being said, should Camilla continue to champion women's rights, and publicly denounce violence against women she ought to refrain from being in the company of people who publicly encourage violence against women.

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by Alisa

I was absolutely appalled that such an article like this was allowed to be published.
It is one thing to dislike The Duchess of Sussex because of her actions and her views and another thing to "hate her on a cellular level".
Clarkson's comments are vile and disgusting. His half-hearted apology is pathetic and weak.

It's interesting to note that the Queen Consort had lunch with Jeremy Clarkson AND Piers Morgan a few days before this article was released. I was hoping that she would release a statement condemning the article and Clarkson's comments but alas the silence is deafening.
If the Queen Consort really wants to be taken seriously in her efforts to stop misogyny and violence against women she ought to stop associating with men like Clarkson.

I don’t believe he actually meant the apology and someone posted that it was rather for readers not the Sussexes. Secondly, what does the Queen consort have to do with this? There were other people like Judy Dench and some celebrities present at the lunch, so it is not like she was just hanging out with Piers and Jeremy and she’s not a personal friend or family to Jeremy Clarkson so I don’t see how this will affect her talking about violence against women. Just because she was there with them, doesn’t mean she spoke to them. Plus the Sussexes can speak for themselves.

[HenRach Dominion]

Originally Posted by muriel

I often find rather than reacting to the specific words used, it is useful to try and think about the point the writer may be trying to make. Whilst he does not articulate it as such, I suspect his thought process probably was driven by some of the following factors.

> Choosing commercial gain over a life of service is the very antithesis of what the royal family stands for. Consistently monetising her all too brief royal career cannot sit well with the great British public.

> Meghan's royal career lasted all of 18 months. It could be argued that the length of her royal career hardly represents perseverance in any way.

> The monetisation has largely involved being critical of the royal family and trying to undermine the institution of the monarchy, usually without any compelling evidence being offered.

> All of this is perhaps more galling as it was set in the run up to the death of the longest serving and much loved monarch and consort.

If viewed in this framework, a lot of people have strong feelings about how Meghan has behaved. They may not articulate it as such, but they are entitled to their views.

For the longest, I could never understand why HRH The Duchess of Sussex got so much vitriol compared to any other public figure but now I'm beginning to.

As an American, the British Royal Family are a cross between celebrities and glorified ambassadors to me. I have no personal fealty to them. To the British people, however, they're a patriotic symbol that ultimately represents them as a people. So when TRH The Sussexes criticize members of the British Royal Family, especially in their roles as servants to the United Kingdom as a whole and its people in particular, many of those people feel that their culture and they themselves are being attacked.

Now, I haven't read the full article, nor do I plan to, but I suspect that Clarkson isn't anywhere near as critical towards HRH The Duke of Sussex, the one who has been a lot more vocal about his criticisms about his own family. Even if Clarkson was as critical, I doubt he expressed a desire to see him punished in a highly sexualized way.

As you say, everyone is entitled to their views, no matter how crass they are, but many people, some in this very forum, have been able to express criticisms about HRH The Duchess of Sussex without stooping to Clarkson's level. There's a reason why a major paper like The Sun would personally choose Jeremy Clarkson, a man known for vulgarity, to write an op-ed about HRH The Duchess of Sussex. There's a reason why Clarkson used the metaphor of Cersei's Walk of Punishment as an appropriate punishment for HRH The Duchess of Sussex: it's a dog whistle to every reader who irrationally loathes her. The United Kingdom may be different, but violent rhetoric from both political leaders and popular press in the United States have led to a lot of violent actions recently.

I'm just happy to see that over 20,000 British readers felt the op-ed went to far and forced The Sun to take it down.

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by Alisa

I never said that the Queen Consort dined solely with Jeremy Clarkson and Piers Morgan. I apologize if my post gave that impression. In fact, QC was the reportedly the guest of honor of host of the small and intimate lunch.

That being said, should Camilla continue to champion women's rights, and publicly denounce violence against women she ought to refrain from being in the company of people who publicly encourage violence against women.

There appears to be a great deal of misinformation being spread through social media about the private luncheon that the QC was invited to that day. The QC was one of the guests of the host as was Dame Judi Dench, Dame Maggie Smith, Hugh Bonneville, Tess Daly, Claudia Winkleman etc. Also the luncheon was held three days prior to Clarkson's article being published, so at this point few people knew what awful things he was about to state in the article.


https://www.newsweek.com/queen-camil...lained-1768050


The "Palace" rarely makes any comments regarding the individual members especially if they are adults with their own communications team. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have already issued a statement regarding their thoughts on Clarkson's apology and for now it appears that they don't plan to release another one. Also there was enormous and well- deserved public backlash against The Sun and in particular Clarkson. IMHO that has a far greater impact than anything the "Palace" could ever do.

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by HenRach Dominion

For the longest, I could never understand why HRH The Duchess of Sussex got so much vitriol compared to any other public figure but now I'm beginning to.

As an American, the British Royal Family are a cross between celebrities and glorified ambassadors to me. I have no personal fealty to them. To the British people, however, they're a patriotic symbol that ultimately represents them as a people. So when TRH The Sussexes criticize members of the British Royal Family, especially in their roles as servants to the United Kingdom as a whole and its people in particular, many of those people feel that their culture and they themselves are being attacked.

Now, I haven't read the full article, nor do I plan to, but I suspect that Clarkson isn't anywhere near as critical towards HRH The Duke of Sussex, the one who has been a lot more vocal about his criticisms about his own family. Even if Clarkson was as critical, I doubt he expressed a desire to see him punished in a highly sexualized way.

As you say, everyone is entitled to their views, no matter how crass they are, but many people, some in this very forum, have been able to express criticisms about HRH The Duchess of Sussex without stooping to Clarkson's level. There's a reason why a major paper like The Sun would personally choose Jeremy Clarkson, a man known for vulgarity, to write an op-ed about HRH The Duchess of Sussex. There's a reason why Clarkson used the metaphor of Cersei's Walk of Punishment as an appropriate punishment for HRH The Duchess of Sussex: it's a dog whistle to every reader who irrationally loathes her. The United Kingdom may be different, but violent rhetoric from both political leaders and popular press in the United States have led to a lot of violent actions recently.

I'm just happy to see that over 20,000 British readers felt the op-ed went to far and forced The Sun to take it down.

If you didn’t know why the Sussexes aren’t that high rated, watch the Oprah interview, the Netflix docu-series and read the threads on the forums about the docu-series and the interview as well as Tom Bowers book and the Valentine Low’s book, you will get a much fuller picture.

The reason why no one says the kind of things that Jeremy Clarkson on these forums is because there are clear rules on this platform and people who go against them will either be blocked for some days or have their account removed, even people who have just been critical or doubtful have been admonished by moderators or have left the forums.

[Denville]

well yes and no. I hope that people can be critical of a royal without resorting to the vicious and vulgar attacks made by Clarkson

[Elenath]

Originally Posted by SirGyamfi1

If you didn’t know why the Sussexes aren’t that high rated, watch the Oprah interview, the Netflix docu-series and read the threads on the forums about the docu-series and the interview as well as Tom Bowers book and the Valentine Low’s book, you will get a much fuller picture.

The reason why no one says the kind of things that Jeremy Clarkson on these forums is because there are clear rules on this platform and people who go against them will either be blocked for some days or have their account removed, even people who have just been critical or doubtful have been admonished by moderators or have left the forums.

You don't get a full picture here at all. From the very beginning the opinion here about Meghan has been mostly negative. It's one of the reasons I am rarely here. I'll get flack for this, but there's a massive double standard here. People have been complaining for years about the BRF and how it's so damn dysfunctional. And all of a sudden people act like it's the most loving family in the UK. The things Harry and Meghan talked about in their docu have al been said before. None of this is new. People here have said the palaces brief and leak stories about each other and now, all of a sudden, it's new? Diana, Sarah and Philip complained about the "men in grey suits". The gossip press has never been considered reliable on this forum, but from the beginning they have been treated as such if the articles were about Meghan.

You will never hear me say H&M are perfect or that I agree with everything they've done, but if you want a complete picture, this forum has never been it.

[Toledo]

I have to say I'm exhausted with the Sussex duo and their adventures, but regardless of my disappointment with them, that Jeremy Clarkson's article was beyond repugnant and so are all the people involved from the moment he submitted it for review to the one who choose the headlines.

One thing I give credit to the Montecito couple, and Prince William and Princess Catherine before them, is that we can all agree the tabloids need disgusting articles as click baits for attention.

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by Elenath

You don't get a full picture here at all. From the very beginning the opinion here about Meghan has been mostly negative. It's one of the reasons I am rarely here. I'll get flack for this, but there's a massive double standard here. People have been complaining for years about the BRF and how it's so damn dysfunctional. And all of a sudden people act like it's the most loving family in the UK. The things Harry and Meghan talked about in their docu have al been said before. None of this is new. People here have said the palaces brief and leak stories about each other and now, all of a sudden, it's new? Diana, Sarah and Philip complained about the "men in grey suits". The gossip press has never been considered reliable on this forum, but from the beginning they have been treated as such if the articles were about Meghan.

You will never hear me say H&M are perfect or that I agree with everything they've done, but if you want a complete picture, this forum has never been it.

Lots of people were happy for Harry finding someone, the people who weren’t approving were admonished and some even left the forums. No one ever said they are most loving family ever or implies that because no family is completely like that including other royal families. Did Diana, Philip and Sarah get paid 100s of millions of dollars for book deals and docuseries? No. That is one major difference between those people and the Sussexes. The issue with the Sussexes wasn’t the so-called grey men, but their communications staff and secretaries who actually tried their best to help them but were rudely treated by them. Which gossip press has been considered reliable on the forums? Not all the articles put on the forums are from tabloids and not everyone here believes what they read. Well, it’s a shame (not) that you think the forums aren’t fair or balanced . Not a single person you listed complained about the residences they lived in, make inaccurate comments about the Commonwealth, no one attacked the marriages of other family members, accused a family member of being r****. You are entitled to your views.

[Granada]

As someone who was around for the Diana-Fergie years of unrelenting media and press intrusion, I think they, especially Fergie, received unbelievable attention and in Fergie's case, soul shattering criticism, ala The Duchess of Pork.
Princess Margaret got bad press too, laughed at and mocked over her younger lover "toy boy, Roddy".

Unfortunately, Sarah thru her foolish actions, played into their hands, something The Sussex's are guilty of too. Like being tone deaf on the South African Tour and complaining that no one asks how Meghan is "feeling" while visiting in an area of abject poverty no less. That's when the "coverage" turned and whispers of Megan's high handedness and demanding bossy demeanor issues with Staff started to be heard.

I also think that Meghan tries to hard to make sure WHATEVER narrative or Story she wants to project always seems to depict her as being "better" than others. Like how She left Deal or No Deal, basically because it in her eyes "objectified" Women, and got big blow back from many. From Whoopie Goldberg to her former co-workers, who resented that insinuation.
Or being a "game-changer". That is a very important part of her personality. From the never ending retelling of the dishwasher soapsuds commercial to the cringe inducing moment in the docu-series where upon visiting her old School Principal She reminded her that She was always going to be famous ..... Really ?

Or her "victim" status, that She bring up too frequently also. Poor Me. A constant refrain.
For example, In the Podcast She mentioned the supposed "fire-smoking heater" situation that sounded exaggerated, contrived and drama Queenish. How "they" made her go to the next Engagement in South Africa, when Archie was NEVER in any danger.

But I thought the worst, absolute worst, was in the Docu-series interview letting the World AND her poor niece think that the Palace had banned Ashleigh from coming to The Wedding. The Palace "insiders" have pushed back on that, saying that simply isn't true. Had Meghan wanted her there, she would have been there.
But Meghan didn't want awkward conversations or whispers about nutty sister Samantha, so it was easier to not to have Ashleigh there. I found that part in the docu-series where Ashleigh talks about her hurt at being excluded shameful. So sad.

I feel Meghan used her in the docu-series to promote the "mean-bad Palace" narrative and willingly didn't invite her to the Wedding, on a pretext of lies.

[FigTree]

Originally Posted by Elenath

You don't get a full picture here at all. From the very beginning the opinion here about Meghan has been mostly negative. It's one of the reasons I am rarely here. I'll get flack for this, but there's a massive double standard here. People have been complaining for years about the BRF and how it's so damn dysfunctional. And all of a sudden people act like it's the most loving family in the UK. The things Harry and Meghan talked about in their docu have al been said before. None of this is new. People here have said the palaces brief and leak stories about each other and now, all of a sudden, it's new? Diana, Sarah and Philip complained about the "men in grey suits". The gossip press has never been considered reliable on this forum, but from the beginning they have been treated as such if the articles were about Meghan.

You will never hear me say H&M are perfect or that I agree with everything they've done, but if you want a complete picture, this forum has never been it.

I don’t see any of the Sussexes story being put forward here to be sure but that is because they have endlessly had their version of the events put forth. You don’t have to argue it. It’s there. So inevitably it turns into the other sides point of view being raised, or what we think it may be, because they don’t talk.

In really simple terms, Meghan wanted a platform and other stuff, it wasn’t what she thought, the media are their usual debased selves, she wanted out. She made Harry see that all the things he wanted but the royals had been controlling about him for years were possible. They wanted the part time model where they could choose media and have more freedom. It was denied. They have huge bills to pay. Not much of a platform. Limited talent but they want the platform and the money. So all that lovely stuff they dreamed off of controlling which journalists had access to events and things is all a fantasy because no one is interested in a single thing they do really unless 1. It’s Invictus where they have to engage with all media or 2. They are talking about the family. Everything else is turning out small potatoes. So really in the end.

The royal machine is a fiercely pragmatic and ruthless machine. Doesn’t mean they as a family are like that but the public facing role of it has to be like this to survive. It ain’t personal.

[Marengo]

The Spare-thread has shown that most are able to discuss the Sussexes without breaking any rules and FAQ. We therefore have decided to update and simplify the guidelines for this thread. Please contact us if things are unclear.

This thread will be re-opened once there is news about the couple that is not related to the book.


***


Prior to posting, news-links from reliable sources* can be posted freely. Links to support factual information [f.e. to a wikipedia article] can be posted freely.

Articles from semi-reliable sources** will have to be sent to the mod. team prior to posting.

• The mod. team will check these links and assess if they can be posted.
• The mod. team will post the links themselves, while crediting the poster who sent it.
• Moderators for this thread will be the British mods: Zonk, JessRulz, soapstar, Ista, HRHHermione and Marengo. It is best to cc all of us.

Opinion articles, opinion columns and videos can not be posted at all.

When in doubt: PM the mods.


The following aspects are considered off-topic:

• Rehashing of events from 2017-2021, unless DIRECTLY relevant to the new information
• Unsubstantiated gossip, rumour, speculation, hearsay and innuendo. Social media is not a source. All new information must be accompanied by a link to a media outlet. An exception is made for the accounts of established royalty reporters.
• Debates over titles or stripping of titles
• Accusations or inference of racism towards the subject, other members or the media
• Aggressive, sarcastic or disruptive tones
• Agenda-driven posts or posts deemed to have intent to disrupt the thread
• Bickering, arguing or back-and-forth discussions to the exclusion of others
• Post that otherwise add nothing of merit, interest or benefit to the discussion

-
* Reliable sources are established newspapers such as the Times, the Guardian, the Telegraph, the New York Times.
** Semi-reliable sources are tabloids such as the Daily Mail or the Sun.
NB. click on the hyperlink to find more information about sources.

[iceflower]

The Duke of Sussex as Patron joined the call for nominations for the 2023 Well Child Awards:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kIUbCVWaSA

[HRHHermione]

There are developments in Samantha Markle's legal case against the Duchess of Sussex, as reported by The Times:

https://archive.ph/mfwws

[Heavs]

Originally Posted by HRHHermione

There are developments in Samantha Markle's legal case against the Duchess of Sussex, as reported by The Times:

https://archive.ph/mfwws

Ugh, that could get very messy very quickly, especially if it really does end up at trial and get televised. We're in for "sorry I forgot" a lot I suppose. I do think reading up on it that this whole lawsuit shows that Meghan and Samantha are definitely related. They have both certainly nastily maligned each other in the press, both are incredibly stubborn and willing to go to court even though it might be worse in the long run.

It is interesting that she and some of the other members of Meghan's paternal family are basically trying to do what she and Harry try to do with his family and that when the shoe is on the other foot they really don't like it, for obvious reasons. I doubt they see it that way though.

[Toledo]

Originally Posted by Heavs

Ugh, that could get very messy very quickly, especially if it really does end up at trial and get televised 1...

I believe in the USA to have it televised both parties have to be in agreement. The Sussex duo needs to give us all, King CIII too, a break and stay off the news 'till the next Halley's comet comes along.

A televised trial will be a disaster for all parties involved because we will see unpleasant theatrics like their father on the aisle or the stand, then Doria forced to be on the stand too. Just unpleasant to watch.

[Duke of Marmalade]

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/202...ortia-de-rossi
Harry and Meghan present at the renewal of the vows of Ellen and Portia. Funny they are best friends with a person who fell from grace because of a toxic environment for staff, bullying, racism etc. it seems only important when it suits a purpose.

[TLLK]

Originally Posted by Heavs

Ugh, that could get very messy very quickly, especially if it really does end up at trial and get televised. We're in for "sorry I forgot" a lot I suppose. I do think reading up on it that this whole lawsuit shows that Meghan and Samantha are definitely related. They have both certainly nastily maligned each other in the press, both are incredibly stubborn and willing to go to court even though it might be worse in the long run.

It is interesting that she and some of the other members of Meghan's paternal family are basically trying to do what she and Harry try to do with his family and that when the shoe is on the other foot they really don't like it, for obvious reasons. I doubt they see it that way though.

Yes this could be rather ugly if it ends up in court and I agree that both women share some core personality traits.

[Granada]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Since a Judge has ruled that Depositions can go forward, what are the Sussex's options ? The Judge did state that "some of the claims maybe ripe for dismissal" though. Is it just Settle with a check or prepare for Depositions ?

Kind of funny that the "Suit" happy, litigious Sussex's are on the receiving end for a change.
The drama that always surrounds these Two is exhausting. They seem to thrive on it and rehashing grievances and then settling scores.

I'm actually of the mindset that in the end Megxit was the best thing for The Royal Family. A mere 18 months duration, I can't imagine if they had stayed longer, what more complaints and never ending controversies would have been alleged.

I'm guessing that the "will they or won't they attend" Coronation questions are making *some* in the Family and Staff perhaps long for it to be over too.
Which I find so sad, as it overshadows Charles's and The UK's big day.
Such unnecessary drama.....