The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2161  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:09 PM
moby's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
However, I am curious whether it is possible that Meghan's work visa is still active or did it expire when she left Suits?
Can't be absolutely certain about Canadian work visas but for most countries, work visas are tied to a sponsor or employer. When you leave that job, your work visa should no longer be valid. If you change jobs, then your new employer processes a new permit for you.
__________________

  #2162  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:09 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 5,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by moby View Post
The statement sounds like the couple is quitting the family, not the work. So personal and not at all officious. The ďmy familyĒ emphasis sounds like a plea to understand that this is a family issue as much as an official one.

I am curious about the period of transition referred to though. Transition to what? A life divided successfully between two continents? Living in Canada? Out of royal life? Seems like thatís leading to something big and final.
I'm not sure that I understand you completely: to me it seems they are quiting the 'royal work' but of course will remain 'valued members of my family' (just like her other grandchildren who don't work for the firm).

And I am glad that the statement confirmed that (as all evidence so far pointed out) they were indeed expected to remain full-time working members of the royal family.

In addition, it confirms that of the two options I shared earlier: Harry and Meghan's priority clearly lies with the 'earning an independent income' and not with 'continuing the work of the royal family while sharing some time abroad'.

I assume the transition period is needed to sort things like security etc out. Once all has been sorted out they might be on their own.

What do you all make of the queen addressing Harry and Meghan by their first names and not by their titles? Is it just to make it more personal or could it be an indication of what is to come?
__________________

  #2163  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:11 PM
Purrs's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
Yes, I don't understand the parlimentary system or the Canadian government well enough to get how it works either. Isn't it possible that like Theresa May Trudeau might not last a full term? So his promise might be pretty hollow.

In any case Trudeau is a great friend so I'm sure as long as he is in power they'll get special treatment. She snubbed Trump and he has a thin skin so he won't do anything for them. Probably why they won't come until he's out of office. But the next person might be the same way.
Yes, it's very possible his tenure as prime minister will not last very long.

(The situation in the UK was different, Teresa May resigned as leader of her party, Boris Johnson is from the same party and was chosen as the party's new leader and therefore, the new prime minister. In a parliamentary system, the leader of the party in power is the prime minister). For Trudeau, the issue is not within his own party but will they keep support of parliament in general? A no confidence motion from the opposition parties that passes would trigger a new election and probably another party in power. There aren't fixed terms in the parliamentary system like the American system.

As Trudeau is the leader of a party in a minority government because they won with a narrow margin of victory, it is unlikely they will last more than 2 years before another election at most (history has shown this). Minority governments can fall at any time with the passage of a no confidence motion.

At any time, an opposition party can bring forward a no confidence motion, having the other opposition parties support it so it passes. If it passes, the Prime Minister asks the governor general to formally call a new election within 50 days. The ruling party then is almost always defeated in the following election. No confidence motions can be called at any time although they are used strategically, they are called when the opposition parties agree to support it and think they will win the next election (or get concessions in a future government from the party they support). As well, they will propose no confidence motion only when they feel most voters are in agreement with them and they are likely to win the next election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion...fidence#Canada

Our last federal election was October 2019. His party only won 36 seats more than the next party, they won 157 seats out of a possible 338.

The only thing that Trudeau and the Liberals have going for them is that the current leader of the Conservative party (the largest opposition party) is not popular within his own party.

Historically minority governments in Canada only last 2 years at most, some have been less. In contrast to majority governments are much longer lived. They can last more than 4 years, sometimes to close to 5 years. In a majority government, the ruling party decides the time to calling a new election is usually based on favourable polls.) No confidence motions are not an issue when a party wins a majority government because there is no point of proposing them then.
  #2164  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:12 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenMathilde View Post
I don't think they'd apply for Canadian Citizenship. For one I don't think Meghan can be a citizen of three countries - someone else can correct me if I'm wrong. And Harry was always more interested in moving to somewhere in Africa - this whole "Canada/LA" thing sounds like Meghan's idea. What happens if they get divorced which sort of seems likely? Harry will have a citizenship he doesn't want. Plus they will have to pay taxes in two countries. Their finances will be a matter of public record.


No I think they'd go the "work visa" route. And really what sort of work is Harry going to do? He's never held a job. Meghan will be the one working.
If Meghan is living in Canada half the year, she probably won't be in Britain enough to fulfill residency citizenship requirements there.
  #2165  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:13 PM
QueenMathilde's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaira View Post
Did you even read the article? Not that you have to but it would maybe help...

And there is no point in rehashing the who had it worse. But again, I've been a royal watcher for way too long including during the early Kate years. What I've seen Meghan go through has been shocking even to me and I am pretty hard nosed and jaded about the media.



Of course I read the article. But it's ridiculous to say that Kate somehow got favorable treatment when they did all of that to her. I'd say it was the same as the others. Did you read my comment on what they did to the others? Bill Maher once did a "New Rules" about burning the American flag and he pointed out the British are much crueler to their royals and they're actual people. Remember squidgygate? That was before the internet.



And it goes back centuries - Anne Boleyn was called the "google-eyed whore" when she got married. For every negative headline about Meghan you pull up I can pull up one about Kate. Or the York sisters. I can pull up two or three about Camilla - for her wedding day to Charles they were selling t-shirts of Charles riding a horse with Camilla's face.


That's not to say Meghan should endure it. But she can't have looked very far into the royal family if she's surprised by all of this.


Anyway my guess is now she will get it worse not better. They should have waited and quietly left. I don't know whose advising them but they need better advisors.
  #2166  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:14 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Lewisville, United States
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fijiro View Post
I would say to a one, all my African-American friends who have expressed an opinion on this is supportive of Meghan and Harry. It's hard for me to call them selfish when they've had to put up with such double standards and people accept fake news as the gospel. Why should they sign up for another few decades of the kind of toxicity they've been subjected to?

I'm glad for them.
  #2167  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:15 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,672
Quote:
Historian Robert Lacey told the BBC Radio 4's PM programme the Queen's statement following the meeting was unusually personal, with several references to "my family" and "my grandson".

"It is remarkably hands-on. I mean it may have been processed through officials but this is the Queen, speaking to her people and speaking about her family, and I think coming right through it is the concern she feels," he said.

Instead of using the formal titles of the couple - the Duke and Duchess of Sussex - the Queen simply called them "Harry and Meghan".

Penny Junor, an author of books about the royals, said that the statement "read to me like a grandmother talking about the family", adding that it would "take the pressure off" the duke and duchess.

"I think they're in a very vulnerable state at the moment. I think they're unhappy, they feel isolated and unloved, unappreciated and they needed careful handling," she said.

"My reading from that statement is that the family has been sensitive to their vulnerability."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51099102

I couldnít agree more....
  #2168  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:15 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purrs View Post
I think you are mistaken. Yes, historically the Conservative party is pro monarchy (they complained in the 1960s about the new Canadian flag not having an Union Jack in it). However, this isn't much of a factor anymore. They are fiscally conservative (they criticize the other parties for spending too much money when in power) Their party favours even tighter regulation of immigration to Canada and it was under their government that business and independent immigration categories were cancelled. I'd be surprised if they supported this move.

I believe IF they thought there was enough anger from Canadian voters and had the popular support from the public, they would not hesitate to bring a nonconfidence motion and bring down the government. Both of the other two parties, the Bloc Quebecois or the NDP would probably back this motion.

So I do think the current government has to tread very carefully in this area.



You make valid points. I just said that the party is still thought to be strongly monarchist because the last Conservative PM , Stephen Harper, restored for example the label "Royal" to the Canadian Navy and the Canadian Air Force, among other things.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Curbside View Post
I would say to a one, all my African-American friends who have expressed an opinion on this is supportive of Meghan and Harry. It's hard for me to call them selfish when they've had to put up with such double standards and people accept fake news as the gospel. Why should they sign up for another few decades of the kind of toxicity they've been subjected to?

I'm glad for them.

The UK Home Secretary, who is of Ugandan-Indian (?) descent BTW, categorically denied today accusations of media racism against the Duchess of Sussex. And Piers Morgan accused Meghan of libel against Britain for her insinuations of institutional racism.
  #2169  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:15 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaiSoSo View Post
Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan.
We have absolutely no idea what goes on behind closed doors and while we all like to speculate and draw our own conclusions based on the things we do know, there's a lot that we don't known and never will. This constant argument that the family didn't show her enough support really is completely subjective.

First, we have no idea what kind of support she was given behind closed doors. We can speculate but we don't know.

Second, support is something given when respect is earned. As humans we typically don't go out of our way to show support to someone who hasn't earned our respect and hasn't shown themselves to be a team player. We simply don't know what the feelings are behind the scenes regarding Meghan and her attitudes and behaviors. It could be that the family was cold and distant and that's that. It could be that Meghan made it pretty clear she had no intention of being a team player, constantly went on and on about "single-handedly modernizing the monarchy," and basically spat on the expectations of her and they decided that maybe they didn't need to issue statements on her behalf if that was the way she wanted to behave. We really just simply don't know.

And third, as for the arguments about her treatment during pregnancy and post-partum, well, she was pregnant and post-partum, not in the throes of a terminal illness. Yes it's unpleasant to read unpleasant headlines and stories about yourself, particularly when you're in a hormonal state but pregnancy and being post-partum don't really entitle you to be treated with kid gloves by everyone around you, particularly as a public figure.

I really don't think I'll ever understand this constant shouting that the family never publicly supported her, they should have issued loads of statements rushing to her defense, etc. when we simply don't know what was happening behind closed doors and we don't know if she had earned the goodwill necessary for them to speak out on her behalf. Respect must be earned and while yes, there is basic human respect that should be given to each and every human by each and every human, that's vastly different than publicly coming to the defense of someone who has shown a lack of understanding of your organization and family and shown that she doesn't really want to operate on the usual terms of her position.
  #2170  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:17 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post

What do you all make of the queen addressing Harry and Meghan by their first names and not by their titles? Is it just to make it more personal or could it be an indication of what is to come?
To me itís more about making it personal because ultimately this is about family. Harry is HMís grandson before heís the Duke of Sussex...
  #2171  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:18 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaiSoSo View Post
Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.
I agree that calling someone vulgar is inappropriate. However, Catherine was not living in London during her first pregnancy or she would have been hounded a lot more.

My disagreement with you, however, is the idea that criticizing Harry and Meghan for using private planes and helicopters is off limits. I understand that sometimes private transportation is necessary for them due to security concerns, but if someone is going to lecture me on reducing my carbon footprint (perfectly reasonable), then they should walk the walk themselves- and I feel the same way about Charles and William.
  #2172  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:22 PM
texankitcat's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 1,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaiSoSo View Post
Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan. The Palace (pick one) was able to break the don't explain/complain policy for botox, hair extensions. Just today there was a statement put out that didn't make William look so great.

As for Catherine, I wouldn't necessarily say her treatment was the same as Meghan's if they just commented on things like the early morning emails I don't think they wouldn't be where they are now. Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.

As for running out to marry Harry....they are in love and that was really all that was needed. Perhaps Meghan gave the British media too much credit thinking... she isn't a party girl (like Harry was when he was younger), she takes her responsibilities seriously so they won't have much to complain about or maybe she thought Harry was worth the risk. But the risks became too much when they became parents and the media started comparing her child to a monkey, talking about at 8 months old that he was going to be a spoiled brat that showed her it was never going to stop. That being said the media had already run off two of Harry's loves was he supposed to be the single bachelor forever? Not being able to get married and have a family because the media would become unbearable?
Huh? Who has hair extensions and Botox? William? Prince Charles? Certainly not Kate since she needs neither. Who compared Archie to a monkey? Never saw that. Perhaps you can provide the link. As for the rest....never mind.
  #2173  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:28 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by texankitcat View Post
Huh? Who has hair extensions and Botox? William? Prince Charles? Certainly not Kate since she needs neither. Who compared Archie to a monkey? Never saw that. Perhaps you can provide the link. As for the rest....never mind.
A BBC reported was fired for referring to Archie has a monkey. I believe that William once called George a little monkey when he was a toddler, but Archie was just a newborn and it is reasonable to infer racial overtones.
  #2174  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:28 PM
moby's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I'm not sure that I understand you completely: to me it seems they are quiting the 'royal work' but of course will remain 'valued members of my family' (just like her other grandchildren who don't work for the firm).
Only that the general tone of the statement, and in particular this "create a new life as a young family" and "we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family" makes it sound like they want to separate from everyone else in the family and the "valued part" is a unilateral assurance that despite these wishes of the Sussexes, they will always be valued family members.

They devote a whole paragraph that focuses on what sounds like Harry and Meghan breaking away from the family, and no reference to the new work models that the Sussexes supposedly want to do. That's just me.

What I find appealing about the Queen's statement though is the lack of pretension, vs. "carve out a progressive new role within this institution" kind of language. The use of first names to me is an appeal to understanding that these are foremost her family members going through something. Perhaps this will go down as one of the "rawest" statements publicly made by the Queen? Not that I am familiar with all her press releases, but judging from the reaction of longtime royal watchers, seems to be so.
  #2175  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:31 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,122
I liked the statement. It was personal, supportive and gave the basic framework for what is going on with the promise of more info in a few days. The door is open for them to come back into full time work if they want..and maybe down the road it will happen, who knows.

I don't know that they are going to spend a solid 6 months in Canada then a solid 6 months in the UK. Might be more of 30 days or 60 days in Canada then back over to the UK for whatever engagements for a few weeks then back to Canada. Will be interesting to see how that works out.



LaRae
  #2176  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:34 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Texas, United States
Posts: 4
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Step Back as Senior Royals: January 2020

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaiSoSo View Post
Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan. The Palace (pick one) was able to break the don't explain/complain policy for botox, hair extensions. Just today there was a statement put out that didn't make William look so great.

As for Catherine, I wouldn't necessarily say her treatment was the same as Meghan's if they just commented on things like the early morning emails I don't think they wouldn't be where they are now. Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.

As for running out to marry Harry....they are in love and that was really all that was needed. Perhaps Meghan gave the British media too much credit thinking... she isn't a party girl (like Harry was when he was younger), she takes her responsibilities seriously so they won't have much to complain about or maybe she thought Harry was worth the risk. But the risks became too much when they became parents and the media started comparing her child to a monkey, talking about at 8 months old that he was going to be a spoiled brat that showed her it was never going to stop. That being said the media had already run off two of Harry's loves was he supposed to be the single bachelor forever? Not being able to get married and have a family because the media would become unbearable?


I would never say Meghan had it easy but I have followed Kate from the time it was revealed she was dating William until now. I remember when Camilla and Charles got married and the things said about her though Iím too young for the years they dated. Honestly, Iím tired of everyone forgetting how hard the tabloids where for them. Iím also tired of everyone forgetting the statement William released in support of Meghan when she and Harry were dating or how Harry and Meghan said themselves the Kate was a great source of support for Meghan and for them both. Or that Prince Charles walked Meghan done the aisle when her father wasnít there. I remember Camilla referring to her as Ďa Starí and how highly everyone spoke of her on the family. I remember Mike Tindall talking about how they all kept in contact, I remember Meghan giving Kate a bracelet just like her other close friends on her wedding day.

Iím frustrated that everyone feels the need to drag the rest of the family because Meghan has had a hard time adjusting to the media attention brutality and because she didnít get to be royal on her terms. Honestly, itís Harryís fault. Itís obvious he didnít explain weíll enough what being royal really was. Itís obvious that she didnít get to enough time to get used to the UK, itís culture, itís people and that she hasnít gotten things they way she envisioned them. Itís also obvious that Harry is a bit of a spoiled brat. He hasnít had to really deal with the repercussions of his actions throughout his life and that he can be selfish and childish and unrealistic. Also, neither of them is very pragmatic or realistic because they both seemed to think this is the method necessary to get the life they want. Between the two of them, neither thinks things through nor keeps a very steady head. They both come off to mean as overly emotional, petty, childish and unstable.

And other than maybe two times, when did Harry speak out against all the hate and brutality that Kate got especially when her and William were dating or even after other than to say it was horrible and sad or something vague and useless.
  #2177  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:36 PM
QueenMathilde's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaiSoSo View Post
Being invite to Christmas before you are married isn't the same as showing support when the media is hounding you constantly especially while you are pregnant and post-partum. Go back at look at how Harry publicly gave support to both Camilla and Catherine during their struggles. Not one did any of that for Meghan. The Palace (pick one) was able to break the don't explain/complain policy for botox, hair extensions. Just today there was a statement put out that didn't make William look so great.

As for Catherine, I wouldn't necessarily say her treatment was the same as Meghan's if they just commented on things like the early morning emails I don't think they wouldn't be where they are now. Catherine wasn't called things such as vulgar for wearing certain nail polish, she wasn't harassed during her entire pregnancy, she and William can take private planes, helicopters with no complaints.

As for running out to marry Harry....they are in love and that was really all that was needed. Perhaps Meghan gave the British media too much credit thinking... she isn't a party girl (like Harry was when he was younger), she takes her responsibilities seriously so they won't have much to complain about or maybe she thought Harry was worth the risk. But the risks became too much when they became parents and the media started comparing her child to a monkey, talking about at 8 months old that he was going to be a spoiled brat that showed her it was never going to stop. That being said the media had already run off two of Harry's loves was he supposed to be the single bachelor forever? Not being able to get married and have a family because the media would become unbearable?

It is for the queen - she did things for Meghan she didn't do for the others. Kate didn't get special treatment like that. And Kate was called trashy for sunbathing topless and getting her picture taken. AND Kate was picked on horribly for skipping out on events for having Hyperemesis gravidarum. Plus they did complain about their travels. And as I said earlier when Charles got married they sold t-shirts out front of Charles riding a horse with Camilla's face on it.



My guess is you only started caring about them and their treatment when Meghan showed up. You didn't like Kate so you didn't care that they were mean to her.


True that Meghan shouldn't have to put up with it - I actually like her much better than Chelsy Davy. Though I wasn't allowed to say anything negative about Chelsy Davy here because she was so popular.


She actually got a lot of protection from the media as it goes for the royals - if she thought the media was mean before she's in for a whole lot of "you ain't seen nothing yet". The British media is awful to everyone. They're famous for it - have been for years.


My guess is if Diana were still alive she would have cautioned Megan about all of this. And Meghan would have done better dating Harry longer and seeing what the royal family life was really like.
  #2178  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:40 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Coastal California, United States
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaira View Post
Did you even read the article? Not that you have to but it would maybe help...

And there is no point in rehashing the who had it worse. But again, I've been a royal watcher for way too long including during the early Kate years. What I've seen Meghan go through has been shocking even to me and I am pretty hard nosed and jaded about the media.
I agree, the attacks on Meghan have been far worse and contain more vitriol than any I read against Catherine, Chelsey, and Cressida.
Cressida was actually treated fairly well by the media - which I attributed to her being considered aristocratic v. middle class Catherine. I donít recall too much negativity about Chelsey either - she was a hard partying type, but so was Harry when he was dating her.
I truly hope Harry and Meghan are able to find their happily ever after, and I hope the Queen will in time be able to feel the same sentiment towards Harry and his wife that she expressed on the occasion of Charlesí marriage to Camilla ďthey have overcome Becherís Brook and The Chair and all kinds of other terrible obstacles. They have come through and Iím very proud and wish them well. My [grand]son is home and dry with the woman he loves.Ē
I think too many forget that the Queen has seen first hand the very real trauma being Royal causes. She watched it happen to her sister, her sons and their wives, and now her grandchildren. I assume she has insight, empathy, and compassion for all members of her family and as a deeply religious woman I suspect her faith gives her optimism that with patience Harry and Meghan will find a path that works for them and for the country Harry was born to serve and for the commonwealth the Queen and Charles care so deeply about.
  #2179  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:45 PM
moby's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,151
I honestly think that if Meghan just took more time to understand the media, the social environment, etc., she could have done so much more with her issues with the media. I wonder if she ever thought to take a step back, objectively assessed the situation, and thought of shining a spotlight on the issues she encountered—racism, responsible journalism, cyberbullying, heck even social integration— and made them her advocacies. Kind of like how the brothers made their mental health advocacy personal and related it to their own experiences. Those are still very progressive issues and she still would have rocked the boat, if that’s what she wanted. Again, I can’t imagine what it’s like to be in her shoes but if she, a Duchess and extremely privileged person, already genuinely felt that way, how much more worse for the thousands of immigrants, young people throughout the UK ones without actual support?

I think these would have been more constructive approaches.
  #2180  
Old 01-13-2020, 04:46 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
A BBC reported was fired for referring to Archie has a monkey. I believe that William once called George a little monkey when he was a toddler, but Archie was just a newborn and it is reasonable to infer racial overtones.
Just so we're clear and factual, Danny Baker was not a BBC reporter. He was Radio 5 presenter, who tweeted a picture of a monkey swaddled in cloth with the comment "Royal Baby leaves hospital".
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
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 of Sussex and The Invictus Games: 2014 and 2016-2018, 2020 Dman The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1150 09-06-2020 08:30 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abdication anastasia 2020 baby names baptism biography bridal gown british royal family brownbitcoinqueen canada carolin chittagong clarence house coronavirus diana princess of wales dna dubai duke of sussex dutch royal family earl of snowdon emperor facts fantasy movie future general news thread george vi hill historical drama history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs introduction jewellery languages list of rulers luxembourg mail mary: crown princess of denmark northern ireland norway palestine pless prince dimitri princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess eugenie princess of orange queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen mathilde random facts royal court royal dress-ups royal jewels royalty of taiwan royal wedding royal wedding gown settings stuart swedish queen thailand tips tradition uae customs united kingdom united states of america von hofmannsthal working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:57 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×