The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3621  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:39 AM
crm2317's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
Wow....of course you only ever here from those in the military who love Harry, lol



Did she say anything about Charles and the article she wrote on his relationship with his sons?


Not in the segment I saw, I only saw the last few minutes of her appearance.

She also said that there are no real winners in this situation and that the royal family will feel Harry’s loss in terms of carrying out duties.
__________________

__________________
God Save the House of Windsor
  #3622  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:44 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Quote:
the regiments suggesting they were “disappointed and disgusted” by his attitude for “Queen and country” and so would refuse to raise a glass to him as their honorary colonel etc at events.
This chimes with the views of my Military chums [mostly from 'Guards' regiments]. They were incensed by the mess resulting from last weeks 'leak', and 99% of the affection they felt for Sussex, evaporated overnight..

He simply no longer represents them..and they are more angry than saddened..
__________________

  #3623  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:53 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by crm2317 View Post
Not in the segment I saw, I only saw the last few minutes of her appearance.

She also said that there are no real winners in this situation and that the royal family will feel Harry’s loss in terms of carrying out duties.
Thanks ! I agree with her about there being no real winners. Technically, I think the BRF came out ahead, but they are losing Harry and Archie... and yes, losing two working Royals. Clearly he and Meghan didn’t get exactly what they wanted..

Two tweets from Dan Wooten - who apparently also is no fan of Meghan.


Quote:
Royal commentators are missing the point - Meghan is DELIGHTED with this result. She’s got exactly what she wants: the ability to make millions and millions without royal oversight, to spend as much time as she wants in Hollywood and to avoid any duty in the UK. Their plan is go!
https://twitter.com/danwootton/statu...063853568?s=21

I’m sure this is true....She also got Harry away from his family

Now, this headline is awesome, lol. That’s one thing the NY Post is good at, lol

https://twitter.com/tvrav/status/121...495108608?s=21
  #3624  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:56 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
This chimes with the views of my Military chums [mostly from 'Guards' regiments]. They were incensed by the mess resulting from last weeks 'leak', and 99% of the affection they felt for Sussex, evaporated overnight..

He simply no longer represents them..and they are more angry than saddened..
I’m not shocked given that they are fighting on the Queen’s behalf, and they love her, like everyone does
  #3625  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:18 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 15,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
Thanks ! I agree with her about there being no real winners. Technically, I think the BRF came out ahead, but they are losing Harry and Archie... and yes, losing two working Royals. Clearly he and Meghan didn’t get exactly what they wanted..
The more I think about it, the more I come to realize that the aim of remaining "part time" royals just wasn't going to wash in any way, shape or form. As I was seriously hoping that the aim of the Sussexes "financially independent" part was solely aimed towards their foundation and finding out as *fact* that it is otherwise so, it became an either/or situation. You work for the "Firm" or you don't. Period.

I just can't see the Queen or anyone else involved with the family "Firm" brand agreeing to half measures. If they had done so, what would have seemed to be obvious is that with the Sussexes setting up their own "business" and commercial ventures, they would be using their royal status and their work for the "Firm" such as tours would be seen as a free promotional gig for their own brand and be a global platform to advance their own business rather than be seen as serving Crown and Country.

This would happen with *anything* Harry and Meghan were attached to. The question would be are they representing their regiment (for example) or using said regiment to be in the spotlight to promote something to do with their own "brand".

The free ride and the free platform is gone as it should be. Promotion and advertising doesn't come cheap these days and like any other business, Harry and Meghan will have to foot the bill to do so.

BTW: "The Great British Break Off" headline really made me chuckle.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #3626  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:21 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi View Post
Okay...so will they be able to keep their domain name (sussexroyal.com)??
We presume not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post

1. What legal status is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, a PRIVATE CITIZEN living in Canada under? Has fanboy Trudeau queue-jumped the immigration system for them?
Presumably right now, she has a visitors visa. However nothing like that is going to be confirmed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
2. Who is going to be paying for the security of these PRIVATE CITIZENS. The Canadian taxpayer better not be stuck with the bill.
Whether Canada chooses to pay their bill or not is a matter for Canada and it’s parliamentary system. Their security when they are in the U.K. will come from the Met Office presumably.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
3. What assets does Charles have that do not come from the Duchy of Cornwall. All his personal savings and investments come from the money he made from the Duchy.
His inheritance from his grandparents for a start.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crm2317 View Post
Camilla Tominey is on the Andrew Marr show this morning. She suggests the Queen made the call regarding Harry’s military appointments as information had came through from some of the regiments suggesting they were “disappointed and disgusted” by his attitude for “Queen and country” and so would refuse to raise a glass to him as their honorary colonel etc at events.
This is the saddest part, I really don’t think Henry thought this through.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
Something else I wonder: what is the point of this “transition period”? It’s pretty short.

What value add is there really? Are there engagements they had scheduled already? Is it for their staff? Something else??
It’s enough time to get anything scheduled done, and to sort out the security situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post

Things I still want to know:

How commercial are Harry and Meghan planning to get, and how embarrassing for the British monarchy is that likely to be?
The statement suggested that they will uphold the values of Her Majesty, Henry still has a lot of respect for his grandmother and family so I don’t think we’re going to see anything OTT. However initially we were told there would be no checks and balances on them, a story is running today which says the opposite and there will be some oversight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
Will the name of the Sussex Royal foundation have to change?
Presumably, yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
Where are they going to live (North America covers a lot of ground)?
Canada has always been the key country, America doesn’t offer them enough privacy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
If they stay in Canada, does that mean they will be jumping the immigration queue or otherwise having the rules bent for them?
That we don’t know, and I don’t think we will ever know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
Who is going to be paying for their security?
Hasn’t been decided or announced, in the U.K. they still hold U.K. titles so I imagine the Met Office.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
How long is Charles going to be footing the bill for their so-called financial independence?
Until he ascends the throne is a logically conclusion. Or if in a years time H&M have made enough money they may choose to go it alone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
Are we going to be seeing tell-all interviews or is there an agreement that they will be discreet? If so, does that mean Meghan can no longer have her friends spilling the beans?
Royal Reporters were told last week that H&M had no plans for any interviews. Why would you bite the hand that feeds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
Are they going to be showing up for things like Trooping, etc.--in other words, the fun stuff--or are they completely out?
They are still members of the family, Trooping is primarily a family event so I don’t see why not. I doubt we’ll see them at Ascot or Garter Day however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
Well to be honest both titles sound divorced because before he was Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex. Now he is just Harry, Duke of Sussex.

Before he was HRH The Duke of Sussex.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #3627  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:29 AM
QUEENECE29's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 1,987
I wish good luck to the Sussex Family, I believe it will be a good life for them.
__________________
my royalty pages
https://www.instagram.com/worldroyalnews/
  #3628  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:44 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 826
Well I'm happy for them and I can't wait where this will take them. And who knows where this will take them in a few years time. At this point I don't see this as being permanent.
  #3629  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:49 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,158
In the Queen's statement, she said "I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life."

There's a very interesting article about royal coverage in The Guardian this morning:

"So, when reading about Harry and Meghan, it really does pay to keep your wits about you. There is a surface level to the story – not all of it untrue – and there are many anonymous sources of varying degrees of reliability to give colour and context. And, in the background, there are quite a lot of worried newspaper executives and former editors, who have absolutely zero interest in treating the couple kindly or even-handedly."

I recommend reading the whole article by Alan Rusbridger (who is is principal of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford University, and chairs the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism) here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-meghan-markle
  #3630  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:00 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Posts: 18
Isn't he still Prince Harry. He is British prince by birth?
  #3631  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:01 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by crm2317 View Post
Camilla Tominey is on the Andrew Marr show this morning. She suggests the Queen made the call regarding Harry’s military appointments as information had came through from some of the regiments suggesting they were “disappointed and disgusted” by his attitude for “Queen and country” and so would refuse to raise a glass to him as their honorary colonel etc at events.

If that is true, I am sure it will be hurtful for Harry.
  #3632  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:06 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanka View Post
Isn't he still Prince Harry. He is British prince by birth?
He is yes, but he is choosing not to use his HRH style nor his Prince title.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #3633  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:18 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by crm2317 View Post
Camilla Tominey is on the Andrew Marr show this morning. She suggests the Queen made the call regarding Harry’s military appointments as information had came through from some of the regiments suggesting they were “disappointed and disgusted” by his attitude for “Queen and country” and so would refuse to raise a glass to him as their honorary colonel etc at events.
As far as I know Harry is not the Hon. Colonel of any regiments, which suggests that Camilla Tominey is talking through her hat!
  #3634  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:19 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
The more I think about it, the more I come to realize that the aim of remaining "part time" royals just wasn't going to wash in any way, shape or form. As I was seriously hoping that the aim of the Sussexes "financially independent" part was solely aimed towards their foundation and finding out as *fact* that it is otherwise so, it became an either/or situation. You work for the "Firm" or you don't. Period.

I just can't see the Queen or anyone else involved with the family "Firm" brand agreeing to half measures. If they had done so, what would have seemed to be obvious is that with the Sussexes setting up their own "business" and commercial ventures, they would be using their royal status and their work for the "Firm" such as tours would be seen as a free promotional gig for their own brand and be a global platform to advance their own business rather than be seen as serving Crown and Country.

This would happen with *anything* Harry and Meghan were attached to. The question would be are they representing their regiment (for example) or using said regiment to be in the spotlight to promote something to do with their own "brand".

The free ride and the free platform is gone as it should be. Promotion and advertising doesn't come cheap these days and like any other business, Harry and Meghan will have to foot the bill to do so.

BTW: "The Great British Break Off" headline really made me chuckle.
I agree with all of this. You’re either in or you’re out; you can’t halfway commit to the hard work the Royals do, and it seems clear that H and M were not committed. Their priorities, I hate to say, are themselves...not the BRF, not the family relationships, not the British people...but themselves. They want to make money, period...they want to be a business in and if themselves. Well, good luck I guess, but I agree with those who believe that they’ve now lost a good deal of their appeal. If this were Harry Smith and Meghan Jones, no one would care about them....
  #3635  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:22 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
We presume not.



Presumably right now, she has a visitors visa. However nothing like that is going to be confirmed.





A Canadian minister interviewed by the CBC (Canada's equivalent to the BBC) was quoted in this forum as saying that, as members of the Royal Family, Harry and Meghan do not need a visa to come to Canada as visitors; they can visit at any time and without asking for permission (permanent residency and working of course are different matters).


Now that H&M have lost official status in the UK though (they are no longer officially representing the Queen) , I am not even sure if what the minister said still applies. They may get away with it until the "transition period" is over in the spring, but, in any case, they will have to sort out their immigration situation very quickly. I am afraid Meghan might have to go back to acting to get a work permit that would allow her and her family to stay in Canada. It shouldn't be that difficult for her given her connections in the TV industry.







Quote:


Whether Canada chooses to pay their bill or not is a matter for Canada and it’s parliamentary system. Their security when they are in the U.K. will come from the Met Office presumably.
The Metropolitan Police is already reviewing Andrew's security arrangements because he is no longer a full-time royal. I don't see how they would not do the same now for Harry and Meghan. On the other hand, it was already politically hard for the Canadian government to foot their security bill in Canada when they were HRHs. Now that they have been cut off from the official Royal Family, I would say it is practically politically impossible to justify it.


Originally I thought H&M would keep state security and that both the UK and Canada would pay for it, but their divorce settlement with the official Royal Family was more draconian than I had anticipated. Now I am inclined to believe they will keep only minimal security while in the UK and will have to pay for it themselves in Canada if they want it. Prince Charles will probably pay for their security from his private income however.
  #3636  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:22 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
As far as I know Harry is not the Hon. Colonel of any regiments, which suggests that Camilla Tominey is talking through her hat!
You would be correct, Henry is not honorary colonel of any regiment. He was Commodore-in-Chief, Hon Air Commandant and Captain General.

However I do believe that there is some air of truth to what is being said about why Henry's military appointments have been removed. It's not something I ever contemplated.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #3637  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:23 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
This Yoko Ono'ing Meghan for this decision. Harry is on the record for not being comfortable in royal life long before meeting Meghan. The media vitriol was and still is there; the Guardian did research and found 72% of stories about Meghan were negative. Add in the betrayal of Meghan's family (Markle just gave an interview saying the Sussexes are turning the BRF into a Walmart with a crown) and the trolls and no outward support from the BRF until the queen's statement and the Sussexes are suppose to endure this for queen and country? If Harry were future king and not William I may get the disappointment, but even that is still too much. I think some people are hoping for a divorce and Harry comes back with his tail between his legs and suffer in silence. Harry chose his wife and son over this mess, a mess triggered by a leak to the Sun. There are still things needing to be worked out and I wish the Sussexes well.

Oh as for Markle -.he's mad that his fantasy of life long financial support from Meghan and the royal coffers has imploded. (I don't get why he is talking to DM as he could be called in to testify in the lawsuit; what he says could be used at trial. )
The Guardian only looked at coverage from the past 18 months. If you looked at the 15-20 years Kate's been in the public eye, there have been plenty of 18-month periods where the coverage has been mostly negative. This isn't one of them, because she's done an excellent job in role she chose to take on, and the press eventually got bored with trying to find things to criticize when there really weren't any. The same would have happened with Meghan had she behaved the same way as Kate. There were far worse things said about Camilla than about either Meghan or Kate for decades, and basically no positive coverage until fairly recently. Is it fair that marrying into the royals requires enduring that? No, but it's not unique to Meghan, and it shouldn't have come as surprise. If she was truly unaware that the press could be that bad, that's her own fault for not having bothered to look into how previous royal brides were treated by the press.

Harry's far from blameless here, but if he'd set out with the intention of quitting the royal family because his wife didn't like it, he'd have just married Chelsy Davy or Cressida Bonas and done that to begin with. Meghan is getting blamed because she incorrectly assured him that she could handle it when, by her own words, she had no idea what would be involved. Now that he's married and has a baby, she's decided she doesn't like it anymore, and put him in a situation where he has to choose - and where there's basically no right answer. Harry's responsible for his own actions, but Meghan's responsible for creating the situation.

I'm not sure what you wanted the queen to do by way of support. Issuing public statements of support for royals being pilloried by the media for various perceived offenses against fashion and the status quo isn't the way it's done - she hasn't done it for anyone else, and if Meghan believes it should have been done for her because she's special, that's just further proof of what her detractors have said about her. It's not the queen's fault that Meghan's relatives are so much worse than Kate's or Camilla's or anyone else's. The queen isn't going to tell Thomas and Samantha Markle to stop saying mean things about Meghan, because it would be wildly inappropriate for her to publicly insert herself into someone else's family drama that doesn't involve her. Even if she did, does anyone seriously think that would have made them stop doing it? Meghan should have understood that. If she didn't, that's her own shortcoming, not the queen's.

No one would have cared all that much that they wanted to effectively retire early from royal life, but that's not what they did. Instead, they announced a "have their cake and eat it too" arrangement as thought it had been decided, when it hadn't been and wasn't up to them to decide. There was no good reason to do that, and I'm not sure how anyone can take anything either of them says seriously after they shamelessly lied to the public like that.
  #3638  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:32 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Actually, they still are HRH. They're not going to be using it. To say they're not HRH means they've been stripped of that similar to Diana and Sarah were on their divorces. That didn't happen.

""The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family."

Of course they'd not be included in the court circular for work they do. They're no longer associated with the "Firm" and its the Queen that decides what goes in or doesn't as work done to represent herself and the monarchy.
Tehn it is all moot. I can't see any time when they would use their titles except at maybe a big event like a Coronation.. where they would still be noted as HRH Duke of Sussex etc. They can't use them for their "work llife"...they wotn be visiting the RF much...
  #3639  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:33 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
He is yes, but he is choosing not to use his HRH style nor his Prince title.
I did not see anything for his prince title? Only HRH style.
  #3640  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:37 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanka View Post
I did not see anything for his prince title? Only HRH style.


They’re linked, there would be little point using one without the other. From now on they’re Henry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex,
__________________

__________________
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 abu dhabi american history anastasia once upon a time ancestry armstrong-jones baby names biography british royal family brownbitcoinqueen carolin cht cpr duchess of sussex duke of sussex earl of snowdon family tree games general news thread george vi gradenigo haakon vii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs interesting introduction jewellery jewelry jumma kids movie list of rulers luxembourg mailing maxima monarchy mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family pless prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess elizabeth princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange queen elizabeth ii queen louise queen maud resusci anne royal balls royal events royal family royal jewels royal spouse royalty royalty of taiwan royal wedding russian court dress spain stuart thai royal family videos von hofmannsthal wedding gown


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:36 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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