Disgusting and an insult to the Queen. :twisted:
Ugh goodness, no. I am not a royalist, but this is SO disrespectful to the royal family and also George Floyds family. What the heck??!
Itâs the Mail! What do you expect?
More to the point, itâs by âour friendsâ the Frogs.
Of course, theyâre only jealous of us. We have always outshone them and always will.
I find the irony in all of this outstanding. All that is mistaken, printed, misrepresented articles about Meghan seem to be believed, commented on, sneered at and not questioned.
But when something is misused about the queen, everyone is in an uproar.
Talk about unfair and disgusting. Yep, you got. I wonât comment about whatâs being said on this side of the pond. Decorum and all that.
Of course. What do you expect.
The Queen is our head of state and is highly regarded by most British people (though there will always be the anti-British few).
MeAgain and her dopey husband have chosen their own way and, in addition, have offended the Queen and, consequently, the majority of the British people.
No doubt, people in America will feel differently. I suspect that they have little regard for our Queen and see a third-rate actress as preferable. Thatâs their right.
If MeAgain has been misrepresented, can you provide some evidence to support that?
I wonât debate about one person being better than another with you, JBR.
I know right from wrong, and I recognize that no one person is better than another because of birthright.
Period.
Personally, I appreciate the cartoonâs poignant aspect.
I think I have explained my opinion clearly.
As far as I, and I believe the majority of people in this country, are concerned the Queen is regarded way above MeAgain.
Not solely because of her birthright, but because of her conduct and behaviour.
There are so many things coming to light that debunk this pairâs interview.
Letâs take the racist slur. Winfrey backed up the claim of racism from Britain with a montage of headlines, implying they backed up Meghanâs claim of racism from the British press.
Well over half of the headlines came from foreign press with five originating in the US.
Meghan claimed the âFirmâ kept her passport, driving licence and the like when she joined the royal family and she simply had not seen them. How then did she manage four holidays and two world tours without them.
Meghan claimed she and Harry were married three days before their wedding. English law states there must be a minimum of 5 people at a wedding; the vicar, bride and groom and two witnesses. So the claim of Harry and her with the Bishop marrying them in her back yard is simply false.
Harry stated that unlike archie, he was never taken out for a cycle ride with his dad and yet we see photographs of Charles together with his two boys enjoying a bike ride.
There are many more inconsistencies to their interview to mention here. Criticism must also be laid at Winfreyâs door for holding an interview that was so biased toward sensationalism, with egregious statements going unchallenged and in fact three questions were so loaded they simply elicited an answer favouring racism.
Now I dislike Piers Morgan with a vengeance, but it seems he does have a point.
Yes, I would imagine you are right JBR.
I donât know the woman (Meghan), but as I said a few pages back, trouble certainly does seem to follow her around, and she does appear to upset a lot of people for one reason or another.
Maybe we will never know the truth.
Harry the dope and his gold-digging wife are liars and, along with Winfrey, are more biased than the BBC.
Well said, JBR.
Itâs the French, they hate us anyway.
Spot on post poobear.
Presumably those tours and holidays were organised by staff, so she wonât have needed to have carried her documents in the same way that Iâd imagine most dignitaries donât have to.
Donât think they said their wedding wasnât witnessed, but the witnesses were presumably nobody high ranking enough to have been mentioned.
Absolutely! As if the person chosen personally by god to rule over you would need to kneel on anybodyâs neck, she has people to do that for her.
Mind you those French could teach us all a thing or two about dealing with Monarchs.
Alas. I fear that the guillotine might not be acceptable to the Health and Safety Executive unless some suitable PPE could be developed.
An initial risk assessment suggests potential harm from splinters as well as covid contamination. Plus insufficient support for the head could lead to neck and spinal injury. Not safe at all.
Plus, there would have to be provisional psychological support available should the intended recipient of the process suddenly become overwhelmed with suicidal thoughts once the blade has started to fall and ask for help. Members of the family and her household staff are, after all, renowned for their insistence to offer immediate assistance to the helpless at the first signs of stress.
The marriage licence stated it would take place at Windsor Castle Chapel.
The Queen reigns supreme. Poll or not.
âThis poll shows that whatever the Americans may think, it is clear that the common sense of the British people prevails.â
That wasnât your original point.
However, letâs not split hairs. You make a valid point about the âlegalâ wedding not having taken place. Presumably Meghan meant that they made vows in a private ceremony and that this was their ârealâ wedding, even though not legally binding.
In any case, the main point she was making thoughout the interview is that there are two ârealitiesâ. One behind closed doors and one put out for the public. Trouble is that a televised interview is also a shop display reality for public consumption, and should be viewed in that context.