The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 7: Oct. 2022 - Apr. 2023

[HRHHermione]

He is the host of The Daily Show, and yes, he recently made some comments about Rishi Sunak and racism in the UK.

I used to watch his show, and he has never been a fan of the BRF - he has always been firmly in Harry and Meghan's 'camp'. I thought many of his criticisms were valid, but many of them were either exaggerated or uninformed e.g. the reason why Archie was not an HRH at birth. But that's been the case with many broadcasters, not just Noah.

Agreed, and Trevor Noah’s show is political satire and comedy so exaggerating for comic effect is his entire schtick.

Personally, I think it was quite odd to act like “talking to men about feminism” is some new and original approach when it’s been pretty standard since at least the third wave and was a hot topic of conversation in the feminist blogosphere in the mid-2000s and 2010s.

Judd Apatow is also an odd choice of guest given that many of his movies rely on unflattering stereotypes of women for comedy.

I just hope that was all and this is a one season podcast, unless it can be substantially reworked and given a lot more substance.

 

[Durham]

Am I correct in thinking that Trevor Noah was the guy who made a comment regarding the PM of the UK.

Yes he did. He used the occasion of the UK’s first non white PM to opine on racists in Britain. Not to celebrate that this could happen in modern Britain. Oh no! He just couldn’t resist the temptation to stir the pot!

He also said when the queen died that what he found fascinating was how "angry" people were that not everybody had the same opinion of the queen. He linked the queen’s death to what the British Empire did to people in Africa & India. That people were oppressed by the British crown. He listed various grievances.

None of this of course has anything to do with the late queen. And it doesn’t surprise me that Markle has someone with his sort of opinions on her podcast. Previous comments from both of them display shocking levels of ignorance about the monarchy & contemporary Britain. An informed & skilled interviewer would show both them up for what they really are.

 

[Ghost]

The same Trevor Noah who made some (disgusting) comments about KC III right after The Queen’s death. He is openly anti BRF.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I think some of the Kennedys have always had it in for the Royal Family because they don't get that this is the 2020s, not the 1920s, and the UK and the Republic of Ireland are now close allies. But this is defamatory, and to put them in the same category as Zelensky's award for his heroic stance against the Russian invasion is just bizarre.

People say "the Kennedys" as if they all think with one mind and speak with one voice. They most assuredly do not. They are an enormous family with many branches...Shriver, Lawford, Schwarzenneger, Cuomo,Smith etc.

I used to be an admirer of Kerry, but just like several of her cousins and her RFK siblings she has had...let's say...serious issues.

I am guessing it would have never occurred to the Bouvier/Kennedy branch of the clan i.e Caroline or her late brother JFK Jr to make comments like that.

It's as ridiculous to paint the entire BRF with the racist brush as it is to say that the entire Kennedy clan are adulterous bootleggers.

This "Award" is simply a fire and light show, with both the presenter and the honorees using one another for their own mutual benefit.

I don't take it seriously at all.

 

[Marengo]

According to a former counter terrorism expert the Duchess of Sussex received 'very real threats':

Neil Basu, the former head of counterterrorism at the Metropolitan Police who was charged with royal protection, said during an interview with Channel 4 that Markle was the target of “disgusting and very real” threats from the far right.

Forbes article here.

Interview by Channel4:

 

[Moonmaiden23]

By reading some of the commentary at far right message boards and even the good old Daily Fail, I don't doubt it for a minute.

I have never been a fan of hers, but her marriage to Harry has quite simply unhinged certain people.

 

[yukari]

According to a former counter terrorism expert the Duchess of Sussex received 'very real threats':



Forbes article here.

I've seen some clip of this Channel 4 interview and it seems he tried to talk about threats in general (which applied to most public figures. One (ex?)MP was murdered not long ago, right? but the interviewer steered him to the Sussexes. This is what I notice in journalists/reporters nowadays, they don't ask questions to get information but they ask with a preconceived answers they want to get to support their intended "story".

I'm not saying there's no real threats towards the Sussexes, but just like I'm sure there's real threats exist towards Andrew if we judge by the comments on social media or paps photos of them (if we count paps as threats like Harry does),
surely the Met knows more than us (and them) whether or not it deserve 24/7 Met security (or protecting Ronaldo since he seems to become the most hated person in Manchester and football hooligans are scary, they can act very extreme).

 

[Marengo]

Can we please turn down the volume a bit. You can like or dislike a person as much as you want but there is no excuse for using all sorts of unsuitable explatives.

We are happy to try to open up this thread more often. Don't ruin it for the rest because you can't contain your emotions and need to resort to all sorts of insults.

Posts have been deleted.

 

[JR76]

One (ex?)MP was murdered not long ago, right? but the interviewer steered him to the Sussexes.

Labour MP Jo Cox was murdered by a Neo-Nazi in 2016 and Tory MP David Arness was murdered by an Islamic Extremist in 2021.

 

[Erin9]

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

Perhaps one of the most telling comments Meghan had ever made came in this episode, where she made a comment something to the effect of she had tried for years to get on Andy Cohen’s show but she never could. Because that was at the heart of much of the early criticism leveled at her— it seemed an awful lot like she was using her newfound fame as a convenient tool to land the magazine covers, interviews, red carpet appearances and invitations she had never been able to swing in her own.

I know it was meant as a funny aside, but this is a pretty grim underlining of the reality of her situation: she’s surrounded by people who wouldn’t give her the time of day based on who she was as Meghan. Why does she want them around her now?

That is interesting and telling. It’s not surprising the lack of interest pre marriage. Meghan was simply not that well known when she was just Meghan. Now she’s known globally.

As to why- she gets to talk and be seen/heard. If there’s one thing I’m very clear about- it’s how important that is to her. She’s said it plenty of times.

I’m just glad this podcast is mercifully over. I would have thought with all the money, resources and time Meghan had, she’d have done a better job on a subject she says she’s so passionate about.

She spent more time on the 90s and further back than anything current imo. It seemed partially to be a platform for her to address her issues with how she’s been portrayed in the media- or how she wants to be portrayed. It lacked depth- or even being truly interesting imo. And lastly- as we’ve all said- it wasn’t about archetypes. It was about stereotypes.

It certainly did not elevate my opinion of her.

 

[Erin9]

People say "the Kennedys" as if they all think with one mind and speak with one voice. They most assuredly do not. They are an enormous family with many branches...Shriver, Lawford, Schwarzenneger, Cuomo,Smith etc.

I used to be an admirer of Kerry, but just like many of her cousins and her RFK siblings she has had...let's say...serious issues.

I am guessing it would have never occurred to the Bouvier/Kennedy branch of the clan i.e Caroline or her late brother JFK Jr to make comments like that.

It's as ridiculous to paint the entire BRF with the racist brush as it is to say that the entire Kennedy clan are adulterous bootleggers.

This "Award" is simply a fire and light show, with both the presenter and the honorees using one another for their own mutual benefit.

I don't take it seriously at all.

This is a good sum up of the Kennedy’s imo.

I don’t take this award seriously either. That’s not to say I don’t take ANY of the RFK awards seriously, but this isn’t one that I do.

 

[TLLK]

According to a former counter terrorism expert the Duchess of Sussex received 'very real threats':



Forbes article here.

Interview by Channel4:

Thank you for sharing this video. It was a fascinating glimpse into the world of counter terrorism and policing.

 

[Leopoldine]

Erin9 made a good point. It did seem to me that the podcast series was planned by her to be a vehicle to knock down some of the characterizations of her in the media. It just seemed to reinforce the media stories about control issues.

 

[HRHHermione]

Erin9 made a good point. It did seem to me that the podcast series was planned by her to be a vehicle to knock down some of the characterizations of her in the media. It just seemed to reinforce the media stories about control issues.

I agree with this interpretation as well. I think that limited what the podcast could do to rehab her image. It came off as very earnest. That quality Meghan has of taking herself very seriously has never played well in media. Funnily enough, in my opinion, it’s a quality King Charles had as a young man and it’s part of why he was knocked around by the press until he grew out of it and learned to joke at his own expense.

Being able to laugh at yourself in a healthy and positive way is something most people appreciate in others.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Have any press reporters officially used Prince Henry when reporting about the Duke of Sussex?

 

[SLV]

No, he has always been known as Harry.

 

[Mbruno]

Thank you for sharing this video. It was a fascinating glimpse into the world of counter terrorism and policing.

Counter terrorism in the UK at the national level is handled by the Security Service (popularly known as MI5), with electronic gathering intelligence povided by GCHQ (which is analogous to the NSA in the US). However,unlike the FBI in the US, MI5 does not have policing/law enforcement powers, that is, for example it cannot detain or interrogate people, only provide intelligence. So, the Metropolitan Police, which handles security in the Greater London area, also has its own specialist counter terrorism branch, called the Counter Terrorism Command or SO15. And, since Meghan is the topic here, note that the Counter Terrorism Command is separate from the Protection Command, which provides the RPO's, although they obviously work together and also with MI5.

Note that MI5 does not operate overseas either. Intelligence gathering overseas is handled by the Secret Intelligence Service, or MI6 (which is analogous to the American CIA). Accordingly, while MI5 and the Police (in England) are accountable to the British Home Secretary (i.e., the Interior Minister), MI6 is accountable to the Foreign Secretary, as is also GCHQ. In addition to counter terrorism, MI5 is also tasked with counter espionage inside the United Kingdom.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

People say "the Kennedys" as if they all think with one mind and speak with one voice. They most assuredly do not. They are an enormous family with many branches...Shriver, Lawford, Schwarzenneger, Cuomo,Smith etc.

I used to be an admirer of Kerry, but just like several of her cousins and her RFK siblings she has had...let's say...serious issues.

I am guessing it would have never occurred to the Bouvier/Kennedy branch of the clan i.e Caroline or her late brother JFK Jr to make comments like that.

It's as ridiculous to paint the entire BRF with the racist brush as it is to say that the entire Kennedy clan are adulterous bootleggers.

This "Award" is simply a fire and light show, with both the presenter and the honorees using one another for their own mutual benefit.

I don't take it seriously at all.

Again, where exactly in Kennedy's statement do you read her painting "the entire BRF with the racist brush"?

If you actually read beyond the clickbaity framing of her answer, all she says (literally the only paragraph – an answer to a question she was asked – in a long interview) is: "They went to the oldest institution in UK history and told them what they were doing wrong, that they couldn't have structural racism within the institution". Objecting to institutional racism isn't insinuating that everyone in that institution are deliberately racist.

It would really benefit discussion in here if people could take two seconds to separate the actual quotes in a news piece from the clickbait surrounding it.

I'm not saying there's no real threats towards the Sussexes, but just like I'm sure there's real threats exist towards Andrew if we judge by the comments on social media or paps photos of them (if we count paps as threats like Harry does),
surely the Met knows more than us (and them) whether or not it deserve 24/7 Met security (or protecting Ronaldo since he seems to become the most hated person in Manchester and football hooligans are scary, they can act very extreme).

"I'm not saying... BUT" says it all

 

[yukari]

(...)

"I'm not saying... BUT" says it all

As you see, I'm commenting on the Forbes article which basically a click bait, so to make better understanding of the context, I watch the interview. In there, the interviewer put emphasis on Meghan though, didn't she? The first he answered with "yes, there's a real threat of neo-Nazi. It's not the biggest threats but fast growing" which here he seems to talk about far-right extremist's threat in general since he mentioned about being misquoted (apologies that I don't quote directly, I'm paraphrasing), but then she stressed it again, and once again on Meghan as if it's not enough. She didn't put that much when she asked about Sarah Everard, didn't she? Like, is there a threat for women walking on the street or that London's street are not save for women or something like that?
Why? Is it because Harry currently in legal battle against HO for RPO? Thus a potential to generate click-bait?

Let's not exaggerating by saying that she's the most threatened royal or that she doesn't get Met RPO because she's biracial (which the article and the interviewer try to insinuate in this click-bait). For one, at least Meghan still manages to go wherever she want freely, unlike The Princess of Orange.

 

[Leopoldine]

The Duke of York has a more serious situation, IMHO.

 

[Marengo]

As forwarded by TLLK:

The Duchess of Sussex is in Indianapolis, IN tonight.

Article in the DM

 

[camelot23ca]

I've seen some clip of this Channel 4 interview and it seems he tried to talk about threats in general (which applied to most public figures. One (ex?)MP was murdered not long ago, right? but the interviewer steered him to the Sussexes. This is what I notice in journalists/reporters nowadays, they don't ask questions to get information but they ask with a preconceived answers they want to get to support their intended "story".

I'm not saying there's no real threats towards the Sussexes, but just like I'm sure there's real threats exist towards Andrew if we judge by the comments on social media or paps photos of them (if we count paps as threats like Harry does).

I think both traditional and online media are struggling to stay afloat/prove their worth at a time when consumers have almost unlimited ways - many of them free - to obtain information online. Journalism has never been free of agendas and bias, but as the pressure to stay relevant has increased, it’s all become much less subtle. They’ll zero in on what sells, and Meghan is a polarizing and controversial public figure who will draw people in.

It would be interesting to be able to compare the number and kinds of threats that various members of the Royal Family receive. For example, are online threats against Meghan and Harry worse or more serious than the armed man who managed to get onto the grounds of Windsor Castle while the Queen was present last year? Because that was a story for all of a day and did not provoke any heated discussion or lasting debate re: threats toward the BRF., which would not have been the case if the same situation had occurred with Meghan and Harry as the target. I wonder what effect Meghan and Harry’s decision to make a very public issue of their security, or lack thereof, has had on the number or serious nature of the threats they receive.

 

[Heavs]

She does not look particularly happy in those photos of her leaving the Marriott. Of course she is probably tired and wants to get home.

The Women's Fund of Central Indiana is a worthy charity I am sure but looking at the photos I'm not entirely sure this is the kind of crowd in the kind of area she pictured herself speaking to when they left the BRF. It looks like any other mid level fundraiser for regional corporations IMHO. Kerry Kenedy is part of this, perhaps she did it as a package deal for getting the Ripple of Hope award.

 

[Hallo girl]

The problem with on line/ social media threats / bullying is that in the majority of the cases they are anonymous. There is no obvious way although the security tech guys no doubt have ways to find out who they are or where they are.
I think we also have to be clear not to assume that critics of either Andrew or the Sussex family are also threats to them.

 

[TLLK]

She does not look particularly happy in those photos of her leaving the Marriott. Of course she is probably tired and wants to get home.

The Women's Fund of Central Indiana is a worthy charity I am sure but looking at the photos I'm not entirely sure this is the kind of crowd in the kind of area she pictured herself speaking to when they left the BRF. It looks like any other mid level fundraiser for regional corporations IMHO. Kerry Kenedy is part of this, perhaps she did it as a package deal for getting the Ripple of Hope award.

I'm guessing that this was part of the package too. The Sussexes' former public relations firm Sunshine Sachs also represents the RFK Human Rights and Ms. Kennedy, so likely it was arranged months ago.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Again, where exactly in Kennedy's statement do you read her painting "the entire BRF with the racist brush"?

If you actually read beyond the clickbaity framing of her answer, all she says (literally the only paragraph – an answer to a question she was asked – in a long interview) is: "They went to the oldest institution in UK history and told them what they were doing wrong, that they couldn't have structural racism within the institution". Objecting to institutional racism isn't insinuating that everyone in that institution are deliberately racist.

It would really benefit discussion in here if people could take two seconds to separate the actual quotes in a news piece from the clickbait surrounding it.



"I'm not saying... BUT" says it all

AZ, the problem with Ms. Kennedy's statement is that it is untrue. Harry's bride was warmly and openly welcomed into the BRF especially by the two people that mattered...the monarch and her Heir.

The Sussexes did face racism in the blogosphere and in the British media. They still do, obviously.

But it was when Meghan felt that the BRF didn't sufficiently have her back against all the negative publicity, a good part of it which was their own fault( the mass exodus of staff, friends and family denigrating her in the press) that she became depressed and the couple made the decision to leave.

She was unhappy in the institution because she was ill suited and ill prepared for it.

I feel that the Ripple Award is perpetuating a myth that is untrue.

 

[iceflower]

The Duchess of Sussex at the Women's Fund of Central Indiana event "The Power of Women: An Evening With Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex":


** Pic **

 

[Granada]

Well, so the Podcasts are over. Yesterday was the last one and of course there were two controversial things that stood out for me. Will Spotify re up a new contract for Podcasts in 2023? If I were a betting person I'd say no. OR it will be offered at such a mark down price that it will be declined.

One gem was, while laughing with Andy Cohen, the creator of "The Real Housewives" franchises, he was teasing about creating one specifically built around her and Meghan replied "No reality series" for her. Soooo what does She consider the Netflix Show coming out next week allegedly STARRING her and Harry to be?

Secondly and I found this to be rather chilling, Meghan ended the Podcast Series with this comment, a quote by some Greek Poet.
" What didn't you do to bury me ? but you forgot that I was a seed ".Yikes ! Are her inlaws,The Windsors a real life Game of Thrones Family ?

That pointly barbed comment makes me think Meghan has GIANT anger issues, it almost makes her sound a bit unhinged.
She was only married into the Royal Family for less than 1 and 1/2 years before her and Harry left. May 2018 till Nov Nov 2019 when they went to Vancouver Canada. And then the Sussex Manifesto was released in Jan 2020.

Is she STILL bitter about not getting the half in-half out deal ?
My goodness, I had a horrible 9-5 job that I hated, but worked at for 7 long years. A mean Boss too. But thats life. It didn't define me or break me.

Every week there seems to be an escalation of grievances by The Sussex's. The Ripple of Hope Awards Dinner next week ought to be a real doozy.
Accepting an award for calling out The Firm-Family for being racist. Based on allegations made in an fact challenged and in some cases debunked Oprah Interview.
What WILL they say in accepting the Award ? Double down OR ignore what statements " winning " the Award was based on?

 

[Marengo]

A new trailer has been released to promote Invictus, in which the duke and duchess are playing table tennis.

Article of the Daily Mail here.

 

[Durham]

This former Met officer is quite political. He's a critic of the Home Office & the Home Secretary who he essentially accuses of using racially charged language. This despite the fact that the Home Secretary is a woman of colour.

So he has an agenda. And so does Channel 4 & the interviewer, Kathy Newman, when it comes to the monarchy.

Were H&M subject to threats? No doubt they were. But it would be useful to have some context as well. Were they uniquely targeted more so than other public figures?

But of course the interviewer didn't ask these questions. It would be interesting to have an interview with someone from RAVEC but that won't ever happen.