Royal Gossip
April 20, 2019, 07:53:00 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

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

Pages: 1 ... 109 110 111 [112]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Duke and Duchess of Sussex: Press Articles & Random Chat  (Read 106637 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
lesken
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1586


Live, Love, Laugh


« Reply #2220 on: December 31, 2018, 03:52:14 pm »

@Sandy You may be right about Murks really caring. But if Kate all of a sudden starts hunting again this year when there has been a rift, it may be to show she is one of the family whereas Murks is not and that could bug Murks. This is just one theory. She may be practicing to show George how to hunt for all I really know.  Just interesting timing.
Logged

The only constant is change.
Miss Hathaway
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2496



« Reply #2221 on: December 31, 2018, 04:08:04 pm »

^^ Yes, Sandy, and I do disagree with your opinion.  The Royals don't work that way.  But they have no problem freezing out someone.  That's what they all did on Christmas, and it's on video for all to see. 
^ lesken, another theory is that Megs is behind the "playing scrabble with Kate" and "riding in a Rover with Liz and Phil" and "Kate goes hunting" -- because Megs is working the PR to benefit herself.  It isn't working, but she is a narcissist and hasn't figured that out, yet.    Hi
Logged
AnaBolena
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3586


We Read To Know We Are Not Alone - C.S Lewis


« Reply #2222 on: December 31, 2018, 04:13:02 pm »

Meg didn't have to report anything. I think the disturbing visit by Sam to KP with the media around is the root cause. The whole world saw the spectacle.

That article in the DM states words to that effect.
Logged

“Without music, life would be a mistake.”
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11157


« Reply #2223 on: December 31, 2018, 04:18:14 pm »

^^ Yes, Sandy, and I do disagree with your opinion.  The Royals don't work that way.  But they have no problem freezing out someone.  That's what they all did on Christmas, and it's on video for all to see.  
^ lesken, another theory is that Megs is behind the "playing scrabble with Kate" and "riding in a Rover with Liz and Phil" and "Kate goes hunting" -- because Megs is working the PR to benefit herself.  It isn't working, but she is a narcissist and hasn't figured that out, yet.    Hi

Freezing out does not involve Meghan being there. Freezing out is a situation when Fergie pathetically waved at the Queen when she went by in a carriage after the Queen had isolated her from a royal event.

I think a lot of things have been read into that video. Unless William goes before the cameras and says Oh I can't stand that Meghan. it is all speculation and perhaps hope tht Meghan will be humiliated.

I don't think Meghan orchestrated the PR. The DM obviously has it in for her, why would she confide in them of all sources?

lesken, not all royal women hunt to "prove" they are in the family.  Kate already got the ring. She was trying to "fit in" before she got it and after years, she did get the ring. Kate would look weird if she truly thought Oh I'll spite that Meghan and go blast a few birds from the sky. She'd have to be not right in the head if she really thought that way.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2018, 04:20:53 pm by sandy » Logged
lesken
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1586


Live, Love, Laugh


« Reply #2224 on: December 31, 2018, 04:41:11 pm »

@ Sandy,  I don't know. Again you could be right. But women can be petty in their own way. It just struck me that Waity decided to hunt this year maybe to just let Murks know, she does not really fit in. It is a subtle thing. I don't know that all royal women hunt. I thought Anne gave it up a long time ago, at least Uncle David talked about how she doesn't like blood sports anymore way back when. I don't know who hunts or does not in that family. I think that even though waity showed a united front at Christmas, she could behind the scenes do things that Murks won't be a part of, thereby separating them. And it could be Waity decided to hunt this year just because. And Murks flaunts this to show that she is the noble one to not hunt. I must admit, this is one thing Murks does that I approve of and applaud. But I am a typical animal rights Californian.
Logged

The only constant is change.
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11157


« Reply #2225 on: December 31, 2018, 04:45:06 pm »

Camilla gave up hunting and she's a rung ahead of Kate.She did years ago but as she got older gave up the hunts (since outlawed) and shootings, She apparently likes long walks instead. I don't think there is all that pressure on the women hunting, the senior royal men perhaps? Charles had to give up polo as he got older and I have not seen any hunting scenes with him recently. Philip likes carriage riding. After a certain age they may give up the hunting.
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 38563



WWW
« Reply #2226 on: December 31, 2018, 04:53:47 pm »

Usually the  men go hunting and the women join them for lunch afterwards. So the idea of Meg and Kate eschewing hunting for moral reasons might just be plain BS.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 12320


Harryite #21


« Reply #2227 on: December 31, 2018, 10:09:31 pm »

The ultimate inspiration! How Meghan made a New Year's resolution in 2016 to 'be open to change' and 'leave room for magic' - mere months before she met her future husband Prince Harry
* Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, was still blogging on her lifestyle site The Tig on January 1, 2016
* In a New Year's Day post, the now-37-year-old wrote about her New Year's resolutions for the coming year
* She said she usually resolved to stop swearing, quit biting her nails, run a marathon, and re-learn French
* That year, though, she made a larger goal 'to leave room for magic'
* She resolved to 'make my plans, and be okay if they sometimes break and to 'set my goals, but to be open to change'
* In July of that year, she met Prince Harry on a blind date, and the two married less than two years later
On January 1, 2016, Meghan was 34, single, and starring in Suits. She was also keeping up a lifestyle site, The Tig, where she shared a post on New Year's Day outlining her resolutions for the coming year.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6543041/Meghan-Markles-2016-New-Years-resolution-Tig-Leave-room-magic.html
The timeline’s wrong as they met in May 2016 whilst she was still living with Corey. Her dumb VF article, she said that the were dating 6 months before the public found out; she played games on social media to get the news out. I love how the public’s not fooled and comments are stating that she lived with Corey at the time she met Harry.
Comments:
Kitty Woo, London, United Kingdom, 3 minutes ago
She's actually acting out one of her naff rom coms isn't she?
Goose1965, Birmingham, United Kingdom, 4 minutes ago
I wish somebody would wave a magic wand and make this scarecrow disappear
willow1 lalaland uk, lalaland, United Kingdom, 6 minutes ago
Even lots of men are now posting negative comments, usually they ignore royal posts as they can't be bothered? Markle is despised by all!
Puddin Head, Big Arm, United States, 8 minutes ago
Hey nothing says magic like hounding a club owner to set up a date in exchange for ahhhhh blogging advice yeah magic.
Delectable Flower, Peterborough, 9 minutes ago
Wonder if Corey was thinking he was her little bit of magic ... Oops we should be writing that our of her narrative as she deck wasn't whacked up with someone when she met Hazza was she easter-wink
Mahdi Fatima, Gombe, Nigeria, 14 minutes ago
Arranged magic is no magic...If she met him at a party or sthing, it will be magical...not a date that was personally arranged
Saucers, Port Glasgow , United Kingdom, 23 minutes ago
Meghan was obsessed with becoming a Royal and Harry was dumb enough to fall for it. He doesn¿t deserve to keep his title and Royal standing.
stjohnswoods, Columbia, United States, 54 minutes ago
She's a stalker whose slimy behavior is even now evident for all to see. "... she met Prince Harry on a blind date." Sure she did.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2018, 10:20:39 pm by windsor2 » Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 38563



WWW
« Reply #2228 on: December 31, 2018, 10:17:04 pm »

The timeline might be off, but I wouldn't worry about accuracy with these people. I wouldn't bother getting picky really. This is a tabloid that described Meg as missing the 'roar of the crowds and sight of greasepaint and smell of popcorn' as if she had been doing vaudeville or been a stage actress.

Samantha Markle was designated a ‘fixated person’ & a ‘risk’ by Scotland Yard
https://www.celebitchy.com/604388/samantha_markle_was_designated_a_fixated_person_a_risk_by_scotland_yard/

Protection officers and Scotland Yard detectives 'place the Duchess of Sussex's half-sister Samantha Markle on a 'fixated persons' list over the risks she poses of embarrassing the Royal family'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6539603/Detectives-place-Duchess-Sussexs-sister-Samantha-Markle-fixated-persons.html

Any bets that we're on the list? I wager MI6 already has a huge file on me!

As for embarrassing the BRF, the members do that very well themselves.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
sandy
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11157


« Reply #2229 on: December 31, 2018, 11:24:36 pm »

Are Tom Jr and Tom Sr on the list? I see no references to them?
Logged
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4611


« Reply #2230 on: January 01, 2019, 12:12:20 am »

^ No they aren't. But then they didn't take a cameraman with the to the entrance of a royal palace, (KP) and request entry to the private quarters. I think the RPOs regarded that gesture as upping the ante. Her name on this list robs her of credibility as it portrays her as strange and slightly deluded. It also hobbles her interplay with the London tabloids, as the public would be entitled to question why these newspapers were quoting a person on a list of stalkers and harassers  held by Scotland Yard.
Logged
cate1949
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6035



« Reply #2231 on: January 01, 2019, 01:26:49 am »

Hi Ladies!  Been lurking but just wanted to wish everyone the very best year ever in 2019.  Bless you all.

Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2659



« Reply #2232 on: January 01, 2019, 02:15:16 am »

The thing to remember with this 'list' is that no one official knows who is no it. The person themselves aren't told and the police also don't publish any such list.

All being on the list means, by the way, is that if Samantha were to go to the UK again she would be watched and stopped from getting anywhere near Meghan, unless Meghan actually asked for her to be allowed in ... so no different to what happened at KP all those months ago.

At this point, IF Samantha is on the list, she wouldn't be stopped from entering the UK but if she continues and Scotland Yard to determine that she is a risk to Meghan's safety then she could be denied entry to the UK ... safety not embarrassment would be the determining factor in denying her entry to the UK.

The 'fixated persons' list, I have heard, goes into the 1000s with many fixated on one or more royals and other celebrities and they are simply watched - not stopped from even going to royal events but kept under a closer watch at such an event than an non-fixated person (my source for that is from a police officer in 2005 when I was in the crowd in The Mall for the 70th anniversary celebrations of the end of WWII which took place on the Sunday after the 7/7 bombs went off and he was asked if he had to watch out for anyone in particular or just his section of the crowd in general and he told us ... that there were officers in plain clothes in the crowd and some would be watching specific known individuals who were known to be fixated on one or more royals and thought to be a potential threat. The uniformed officers, in the section of the crowd where such person was, would also be notified. Of course he didn't tell us whether there was such a person in our section of the crowd.)
Logged
windsor2
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 12320


Harryite #21


« Reply #2233 on: January 01, 2019, 02:56:10 am »

^ Hi cate1949.
Happy New Year everyone.  loveshower

This chap, Omid Scobie's an idiot as he's talking up his mate Meghan; how she won't be taken down and is just getting started.  bored3 Harry's just the supporting member of this drama as Meghan's front and centre ready to push her agenda in 2019.  bignono
https://skippyisheretostay.tumblr.com/post/181599128023/happy-new-year-oh-this-is-too-good-this-is

The actual link to the article goes straight to the shopping section.  huh  The publication must've pulled the article.  dontknow
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a25708976/meghan-markle-2018-year-in-review/
Logged

Keep Calm and Carry On
Fly on the wall
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 13797


Lady of Threads


« Reply #2234 on: January 01, 2019, 04:53:39 am »

The BRF need to put themselves on this fixated list bunch of creeps in that family



HAPPY NEW YEAR !!
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 38563



WWW
« Reply #2235 on: January 01, 2019, 04:58:59 am »

All being on the list means, by the way, is that if Samantha were to go to the UK again she would be watched and stopped from getting anywhere near Meghan, unless Meghan actually asked for her to be allowed in ... so no different to what happened at KP all those months ago.
At this point, IF Samantha is on the list, she wouldn't be stopped from entering the UK but if she continues and Scotland Yard to determine that she is a risk to Meghan's safety then she could be denied entry to the UK ... safety not embarrassment would be the determining factor in denying her entry to the UK.

The 'fixated persons' list, I have heard, goes into the 1000s with many fixated on one or more royals and other celebrities and they are simply watched - not stopped from even going to royal events but kept under a closer watch at such an event than an non-fixated person (my source for that is from a police officer in 2005 when I was in the crowd in The Mall for the 70th anniversary celebrations of the end of WWII which took place on the Sunday after the 7/7 bombs went off and he was asked if he had to watch out for anyone in particular or just his section of the crowd in general and he told us ... that there were officers in plain clothes in the crowd and some would be watching specific known individuals who were known to be fixated on one or more royals and thought to be a potential threat. The uniformed officers, in the section of the crowd where such person was, would also be notified.
Of course he didn't tell us whether there was such a person in our section of the crowd.)

If UK intelligence is monitoring an American citizen, that might mean that they are monitoring others as well and this could be considered a MAJOR privacy and civil rights violation. Worrying about someone embarrassing the royals does not merit being under surveillance at the hands of ANY foreign intelligence agency. Second, if these agencies are SO good at their jobs, why didn't Kate or Meg cause concern? I mean really, that is a concern I have.

Quote
The thing to remember with this 'list' is that no one official knows who is no it.
The person themselves aren't told and the police also don't publish any such list.

If US citizens are being monitored without their knowing, I am dead sure that this would cause a massive backlash. Right after the knowledge of what Snowden exposed and of course, this is way out of line for the BRF/MI6 if there is such a list. At least no AMERICAN citizen should be getting monitored by that family if in fact there is something like this going on. Samantha is coming across as toxic, yes, but if there are others, it IS the business of the American citizenry. In the UK the BRF can play all the games they want with their subjects, but in the US, we are NOT SUBJECTS, we are CITIZENS!

Samantha, I can understand, but if there are others being monitored, I believe the people in question have a right to know.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
marion
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3126



« Reply #2236 on: January 01, 2019, 09:31:14 am »

I'm staggered the security forces don't have anything better to do considering they only say Samantha's an embarrassment to the RF, not an actual physical risk,  and they're continually moaning they're under-resourced and overstretched.

If the RF don't like being  embarrassed I suggest they do something about the causes of that embarrassment and that includes waity/willy and the subject on the  MO thread as well as murky. They allowed 2 totally unsuitable people to marry into the RF so I suggest they  deal with the situation.

Anyway, I'm sure murky herself is quite capable if causing more embarrassment without any help from Samantha.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 109 110 111 [112]   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!