Royal Gossip
July 23, 2017, 03:47:55 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 10   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Prince Harry is dating Meghan Markle VIII  (Read 14881 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Dark_Destiny
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2017, 02:22:03 pm »

Meghan enjoys the public attention. Why wear rings at all? It obvious she doesn't want her relationship to be private. Everytime i see a photo of her, i get the impression shes a cat licking up cream. She seems like an ambitious woman. I hope for PH sake that MM is not a gold digger.
Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8532


Harryite #21


« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2017, 02:43:53 pm »

Meghan Markle - who are the parents of Prince Harry’s Suits actress girlfriend?
http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/792219/Meghan-Markle-parents

The circus continues.  eating cookies  

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry plan trip to Africa - where Prince William PROPOSED to Kate
http://www.express.co.uk/travel/articles/790077/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-Africa

She's a w...re that everyone's making money off.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2017, 02:50:37 pm by windsor2 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Snowpea
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1880


« Reply #22 on: April 15, 2017, 03:04:29 pm »

Meghan enjoys the public attention. Why wear rings at all? It obvious she doesn't want her relationship to be private. Everytime i see a photo of her, i get the impression shes a cat licking up cream. She seems like an ambitious woman. I hope for PH sake that MM is not a gold digger.

She is creating the drama - the shy, innnocent, and discreet girlfriend just trying to go about her life and being harassed by the big nasty media. Just going about her day with her $2,000 bags and $ 600 designer ripped jeans. Diana did it with more style what with better styled hair and at least didn't hide behind sunglasses. Oh, and probably showered in the morning, too. Remember, to come out well in something like this, one must be able to to occasionally look up shyly and flicker those baby blues. Wait! Meggie Markles ain't Diana...won't she be floored?

Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8532


Harryite #21


« Reply #23 on: April 15, 2017, 04:07:49 pm »

Sealed with an 'H'! Meghan Markle steps out wearing ANOTHER piece of jewellery with Prince Harry's initial on after the royal flew out to Toronto to spend Easter with her (so where is he?)

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4405584/Meghan-Markle-displays-toned-legs-Toronto.html#ixzz4eKTZn9Su
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Just noticed the headline asking where's Harry. Good question as he seems to be MIA if he's supposed to be with Mehgan in Canada.
This is the article that the new comments stopped being accepted. Now instead of being pictured out and about with Harry as he's supposed to be in Toronto with her, we get her pap stroll where she's "selling" crap bags, ring, etc. Time for her to come clean and end this mess now.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2017, 04:13:32 pm by windsor2 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
deGuernsey
Baroness
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 889



« Reply #24 on: April 15, 2017, 04:47:22 pm »

Meghan enjoys the public attention. Why wear rings at all? It obvious she doesn't want her relationship to be private. Everytime i see a photo of her, i get the impression shes a cat licking up cream. She seems like an ambitious woman. I hope for PH sake that MM is not a gold digger.

She is creating the drama - the shy, innnocent, and discreet girlfriend just trying to go about her life and being harassed by the big nasty media. Just going about her day with her $2,000 bags and $ 600 designer ripped jeans. Diana did it with more style what with better styled hair and at least didn't hide behind sunglasses. Oh, and probably showered in the morning, too. Remember, to come out well in something like this, one must be able to to occasionally look up shyly and flicker those baby blues. Wait! Meggie Markles ain't Diana...won't she be floored?


So to lessen the "victimisation" by the big bad press why doesn't she do the adult thing which is to respect they have a job to do which really does benefit MM and extend her hand, introduce herself and allow them to take a pic she can pose for and then which will benefit both parties and get on with it.... there will be a few pushy paps but she can minimise the drama by speaking directly and respectfully to them. You know build up a rapport with them. They are not out to get her you know and many will give her a little room to breathe. Personally, I believe she LIKES and WANTS the drama. I have nothing against her but this just doesn't smell kosher.... something is off here and I don't know what it is but I know what I suspect anyway....
Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8532


Harryite #21


« Reply #25 on: April 15, 2017, 05:45:41 pm »

Well one thing's for sure, with Harry not being spotted anywhere in Toronto, the press will be asking what's going on; where is Harry? The DM has, so now E!news and the rest of them will. Mehgan better come clean now because I'm sure that reporters have already contacted the various agencies such as the Canadia police department that would have to be notified if Harry's in Canada. They'd know by now that he's not because he couldn't lay low this long without someone seeing him. So either she's seen in public with him in Toronto today or she comes clean with her exageration of the "romance" so that the press can put this to bed once and for all. She has to now prove he's with her or not. Now it's put up or shut up time. She's looking more like a girl with a crush on a tv star who's a prince than a mature woman who should have discretion when dating a prince.
What's the deal with bringing out her mum in the article in the Express paper? She can't cry victimization anymore because her actions over these months have disproved that she's a victim of any kind. Infact, she's showen to be the greddy, grasping manipulator.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2017, 05:50:23 pm by windsor2 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Snowpea
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1880


« Reply #26 on: April 15, 2017, 08:20:32 pm »

Meghan enjoys the public attention. Why wear rings at all? It obvious she doesn't want her relationship to be private. Everytime i see a photo of her, i get the impression shes a cat licking up cream. She seems like an ambitious woman. I hope for PH sake that MM is not a gold digger.

She is creating the drama - the shy, innnocent, and discreet girlfriend just trying to go about her life and being harassed by the big nasty media. Just going about her day with her $2,000 bags and $ 600 designer ripped jeans. Diana did it with more style what with better styled hair and at least didn't hide behind sunglasses. Oh, and probably showered in the morning, too. Remember, to come out well in something like this, one must be able to to occasionally look up shyly and flicker those baby blues. Wait! Meggie Markles ain't Diana...won't she be floored?


So to lessen the "victimisation" by the big bad press why doesn't she do the adult thing which is to respect they have a job to do which really does benefit MM and extend her hand, introduce herself and allow them to take a pic she can pose for and then which will benefit both parties and get on with it.... there will be a few pushy paps but she can minimise the drama by speaking directly and respectfully to them. You know build up a rapport with them. They are not out to get her you know and many will give her a little room to breathe. Personally, I believe she LIKES and WANTS the drama. I have nothing against her but this just doesn't smell kosher.... something is off here and I don't know what it is but I know what I suspect anyway....

Oh, we all know she's milking it for all it's worth.  flower Remember when she was wailing about all the press hanging out at her place, and there was like next to nobody there?

I have something against her, but then again I *despise* phonies and liars.
Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8532


Harryite #21


« Reply #27 on: April 15, 2017, 08:31:19 pm »

I hope that he shows up with the senior royals for Easter morning service. That'll put an end to her games as he's not been spotted in Toronto. That's the only way for this to end this mess on his part without getting his hands dirty so to speak.  eating cookies  Unfortunately for him, he's got people invested in him to bring attention to their plight such as the Heads Together runners in the London Marathon next week and the soldier's who need his support to keep their issues front and center in the press and within the halls of government, so he can't afford to be a f*ck-up.
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2890


« Reply #28 on: April 16, 2017, 01:08:57 am »

Meghan has quit her role with Reitman's clothing store as designer/promoter. It was quite swift apparently. She's either entering a nunnery or an engagement is on the horizon IMO.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4414730/GIRL-TOWN-Markle-quits-clothing-ambassador-role.html
Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8532


Harryite #21


« Reply #29 on: April 16, 2017, 01:18:57 am »

Oh that's nice. Now only if she can find him. She does like to play games around Easter and expects a game of hunt and seek just like her chef ex-boyfriend liked to plan for her.
  
https://felix2001a.tumblr.com/image/159616252340
eating cookies  

Let's see if she'll lose her role in Suits too or gets bumped down to recurring status. Her character's no essential to the show. They could use her salary to hire a strong female character to try and fill Giana Torres' central female lead that was very pivotal to the story. She used Harry to proote herself so it shouldn't come as a surprise that she's losing now. I bet she wished she never went this route.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2017, 01:26:23 am by windsor2 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2155



« Reply #30 on: April 16, 2017, 03:36:20 am »

I would hope that if Harry isn't in Toronto (and according to Rob Jobson he has gone to Canada to be with Meaghen) then he would be with his father for Easter and that would mean being in Scotland as that is where Charles is. Charles usually spends Easter in Scotland at Birkhall. It is rare for him to be at Windsor. The turnout for the Windsor service is usually only those who live on the Great Windsor Estate - the York's and Wessex's along with Anne and her children.

The Wales branch rarely attends the Easter service with the Queen anymore.

I have heard that Camilla's family is often at Birkhall for Easter with Charles but I have never seen any evidence of that happening.
Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 8532


Harryite #21


« Reply #31 on: April 16, 2017, 04:10:06 am »

I don't get why people are saying that she's getting more contracts from Reitman's when her line did poorly. Her line came out just as she outed her "romance" with Harry. The line should've done well, but seems like it didn't. Also, she's out being a billboard for other pricier outlets like JCrew and the various British brands and not to my knowledge, in her own clothing line on her numerous pap strolls. I think that she might've been dropped because of a non-complete clause in her contract, as she was out promoting other companie's accesories and not her own.
https://www.reitmans.com/en/the-soiree-from-meghan-markle/753248.html

« Last Edit: April 16, 2017, 04:12:37 am by windsor2 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2890


« Reply #32 on: April 16, 2017, 05:21:09 am »

There are people on another forum who are from Toronto who said Reitmans were pleased with sales. The firm isn't insane. In this economic climate they wouldn't be offering lucrative contracts just to be nice. That was in December, after her leather collection came out in November.

Meghan's not signing any longterm contracts and is tying up things in her old life because, IMO, an engagement is quite near.

I asked my friend about the inquiries about Windsor Guildhall as a locale and he said the inquiries werent from BP (which it would be via if it was about Eugenie.)
Logged
Fly on the wall
Princess
*******
Online Online

Posts: 11411


Lady of Threads


« Reply #33 on: April 16, 2017, 08:46:33 am »

Yeah about  a engmaent is in the works . Windsor Guildhall will be the place they get marriied
Logged

NEVER *despise* correction,for those who correct you ,truly LOVE you .They are willing to displease you and possibly lose your friendship ,rather than see you destroyed. Those who *despise* you ,on the other hand ,will allow you to FAIL...because what do they care ?

Every praise is not good and every criticism is not evil..!
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2155



« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2017, 09:20:16 am »

Why would they marry in the Guildhall and not at either St Georges or the Abbey?

The CoE has very clear guidelines on the remarriage of divorcees:

They can remarry in a church with a full church service if neither partner contributed to the breakup of the divorcee's previous marriage. As Harry had nothing to do with Meaghen's previous marriage then there is no issue with Harry having a full church service.

Meaghen's divorce is irrelevant to Harry having a church service.

It will be smaller than William's obviously given that he is now 5th in line. The chances of him becoming King are very slim. William had the full service he had because he is the future King but even then it wasn't a full State Occasion like Charles and Diana's was but that was because Charles was the heir apparent while William was only the heir apparent to the heir apparent.

Harry, being that much less important, could easily be sidelined to St George's but it will be a full church service.
Logged
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2890


« Reply #35 on: April 16, 2017, 10:12:14 am »

I think it would depend if Meghan was Jewish or not. I think it was posted here that she had been a regular at an LA synagogue when she she was younger. I don't think Meghan has ever stated what her religion is, but a civil wedding might be on the cards as I can't see Harry converting to Judaism.
Logged
Stargazer
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 347


« Reply #36 on: April 16, 2017, 11:10:32 am »

^If Meg were Jewish she would have to convert to CoE surely, otherwise he would have to renounce.
As far as the flogging of goods is concerned she may well be contracted to promote them or face penalties. I'm sure she would have never written into her contacts that they would be fulfilled unless she becomes involved with a Prince of the BRF before she had even met him. She hasn't, as far as I can see, claimed that he was with her in Toronto, or has spoken to the media at all. This could all be a fabrication of the media. Even someone here stated that the alleged pics were from October 2016.
That being said, if he were there, it's entirely possible that he has returned to the U.K. by private jet for the Easter service. Does anyone know what the media stalking rules are in Canada? Nicole Kidman successfully sued a photographer here in Aus , so wondering if our laws are similar.

I still don't think she is suitable! The exes, the self promotion etc all good if you are marrying a movie star - not good for the BRF.

 easter-bouncy HappyEaster

Anyway Happy Easter everyone!
Logged
Dark_Destiny
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #37 on: April 16, 2017, 11:53:53 am »


So to lessen the "victimisation" by the big bad press why doesn't she do the adult thing which is to respect they have a job to do which really does benefit MM and extend her hand, introduce herself and allow them to take a pic she can pose for and then which will benefit both parties and get on with it.... there will be a few pushy paps but she can minimise the drama by speaking directly and respectfully to them. You know build up a rapport with them. They are not out to get her you know and many will give her a little room to breathe. Personally, I believe she LIKES and WANTS the drama. I have nothing against her but this just doesn't smell kosher.... something is off here and I don't know what it is but I know what I suspect anyway....

^Oh so that's what MM was doing  tehe She must be a terrible actress if she can't pretend to go about her business during the day and look a trifle put out that her privacy is being invaded. I admire Meghan for being a self-made, independent woman but she needs to put a volume down on marketing herself. Sometimes when I look at her picture I get the sense that she is a 'street smart' type of person who understands the common people. But I quite agree with you deGuernsey and others here on the forum that she does like the attention and wants the drama, that's why she wears the rings so that people will start to speculate.

I thought Meghan was a Catholic and that she attended a Catholic high school? I also read somewhere that she will sometimes attend a catholic mass near Kensington Palace. My,my...a divorcee and a Catholic dating Prince Harry. Is this still allowable? Would Meghan have to convert if she and Harry get married?
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2155



« Reply #38 on: April 16, 2017, 01:20:13 pm »

Until the recent Succession to the Crown Act if Meaghen were Roman Catholic then she would have to convert or Harry would lose his place in the line of succession but since that act come into effect in 2015 that has changed.

There were three issues in that act:

1. Succession depends on birth order not gender - but only to children born after October 2011 (so Anne didn't suddenly jump ahead of her brothers, or Louise drop below James but the grandchildren of the Duke of Gloucester did change to birth order not gender)

2. The monarch must be a communicant member of the CoE but their spouse can be of any denomination or religion (in the past being Jewish wasn't a problem in law but being Roman Catholic was - now that isn't an issue). Prince Michael of Kent was thus restored to the line of succession with the passing of the act. Had this act been in place when Peter married Autumn wouldn't have needed to change from Roman Catholicism to CoE but she did so he kept his place. Now it doesn't matter anyway. So long as Charles, William and George all remain members of the CoE their spouses can be any religion they like.

3. Only the first six in the line of succession now need permission to marry rather than all descendants of George II who weren't descended from a British princess who married into a foreign royal house (which actually exempted the BRF due to their descent from George II's daughter but that was never tested in a court of law). This clause also removed the possibility of appealing to the Privy Council, waiting a year for parliamentary approval and then marrying without consent. Now Charles, William George, Charlotte, Harry and Andrew all need permission to marry while from Beatrice on down in the line of succession can marry anytime they like and they don't need the Queen's permission
Logged
Snowpea
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1880


« Reply #39 on: April 16, 2017, 02:41:04 pm »

Until the recent Succession to the Crown Act if Meaghen were Roman Catholic then she would have to convert or Harry would lose his place in the line of succession but since that act come into effect in 2015 that has changed.

There were three issues in that act:

1. Succession depends on birth order not gender - but only to children born after October 2011 (so Anne didn't suddenly jump ahead of her brothers, or Louise drop below James but the grandchildren of the Duke of Gloucester did change to birth order not gender)

2. The monarch must be a communicant member of the CoE but their spouse can be of any denomination or religion (in the past being Jewish wasn't a problem in law but being Roman Catholic was - now that isn't an issue). Prince Michael of Kent was thus restored to the line of succession with the passing of the act. Had this act been in place when Peter married Autumn wouldn't have needed to change from Roman Catholicism to CoE but she did so he kept his place. Now it doesn't matter anyway. So long as Charles, William and George all remain members of the CoE their spouses can be any religion they like.

3. Only the first six in the line of succession now need permission to marry rather than all descendants of George II who weren't descended from a British princess who married into a foreign royal house (which actually exempted the BRF due to their descent from George II's daughter but that was never tested in a court of law). This clause also removed the possibility of appealing to the Privy Council, waiting a year for parliamentary approval and then marrying without consent. Now Charles, William George, Charlotte, Harry and Andrew all need permission to marry while from Beatrice on down in the line of succession can marry anytime they like and they don't need the Queen's permission

It's all tangled up due to other issues they will privately not address so I think it is even more complicated. If they do get married, don't look for any titles for Meggie Marbles anytime soon.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 10   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!