50sGirl
VIP Member
You should put that forward for the next thread title - Whimpering Windsor and Mithering Markle!
- Notice
Anne docu showed how it's done. If you think about it, her and H were the equivalent of each other, second to older brother who would be king, but one chose duty and appears to be v content and secure in their own skin. Tim Laurence was a big surprise, never heard him speak before. V steady, confident, a real gentleman, I get the attraction. They seem v happy.
carriebooboo
VIP Member
This is the best bit of the Camilla Long article:
At this point, as one of Meghan’s matcha-licking buddies, I might be vaguely asking whether friendship with Meghan has been all it’s cracked up to be. Having spent the past five years secretly, or otherwise, conducting a PR campaign for her by feeding stories about her bomb-ass roast chicken, I now risk being further thrown under the bus and unveiled just so that she can have her triumphal post-court, tear-choking, street-style moment à la Amber Heard. On Wednesday, in a fresh submission to the court, the duchess said unmasking these friends would be an “unacceptable price to pay” as they were private citizens and “young mothers”. But Kate’s a young mother, and Meghan hasn’t ever defended her. Far from it: she has apparently allowed a whole book to be published tearing her down. Why wouldn’t she screw over her mother friends if it suited?
She’s already thrown away far more than mere friends: her own family, his family, even their home over here. It’s devastating to think how far this humourless couple have fallen in their pursuit of what they call “happiness”. They’ve gone from hanging out with Jay-Z and Beyoncé to trying to persuade a judge that Meghan has some kind of psychic hold over her mates (who leaks positive stories without telling the subject first?). There are the sad video messages with the usual authoritarian language: just a few days ago a comatose Prince Harry issued one from some rapper’s brocaded toilet, reminding us of “what is right”. Whoever’s words he was reading, they didn’t feel like his. The script’s now all wrong.
Harry isn’t an eco-travel crusader any more than Meghan’s an anti-bullying campaigner or a feminist. Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the bitchy story that will generate the best headlines.
Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims.
At this point, as one of Meghan’s matcha-licking buddies, I might be vaguely asking whether friendship with Meghan has been all it’s cracked up to be. Having spent the past five years secretly, or otherwise, conducting a PR campaign for her by feeding stories about her bomb-ass roast chicken, I now risk being further thrown under the bus and unveiled just so that she can have her triumphal post-court, tear-choking, street-style moment à la Amber Heard. On Wednesday, in a fresh submission to the court, the duchess said unmasking these friends would be an “unacceptable price to pay” as they were private citizens and “young mothers”. But Kate’s a young mother, and Meghan hasn’t ever defended her. Far from it: she has apparently allowed a whole book to be published tearing her down. Why wouldn’t she screw over her mother friends if it suited?
She’s already thrown away far more than mere friends: her own family, his family, even their home over here. It’s devastating to think how far this humourless couple have fallen in their pursuit of what they call “happiness”. They’ve gone from hanging out with Jay-Z and Beyoncé to trying to persuade a judge that Meghan has some kind of psychic hold over her mates (who leaks positive stories without telling the subject first?). There are the sad video messages with the usual authoritarian language: just a few days ago a comatose Prince Harry issued one from some rapper’s brocaded toilet, reminding us of “what is right”. Whoever’s words he was reading, they didn’t feel like his. The script’s now all wrong.
Harry isn’t an eco-travel crusader any more than Meghan’s an anti-bullying campaigner or a feminist. Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the bitchy story that will generate the best headlines.
Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims.
antinoos
Well-known member
Inspired by MillicentMargarets spot on post Ive become quite fascinated by Travalyst and what its ultimate purpose (if any) might be. Ive been looking at the formal documents and filing history of Travalyst and an intriguing story eventually emerges. I'm sorry its long and I will try and "Campagne" it but the whole thing is very revealing and not immediately obvious. Certainly none of our useless preening press seem to have noticed.
Travalyst starts life as a new "Global Initiative" launched with highly professional razzamatazz on the Royal Family Website and at an event in Amsterdam on 3rd September 2019.
It is described as a "new partnership" to "bring travel companies together" to "promote ethical and sustainable travel".
Amongst the Household names persuaded to allocate part of their PR budgets to this obscure hokum and attach their brands to a still popular member of the pre-eminent global soap opera (without frankly having to do much) are Ctrip, BookingCom, Skyscanner, TripAdviser and Visa. Several lucky members of these firms upper adminisphere of wokeflakes have fetched up at some fancy hotel in Amsterdam so they can tell their friends (who dont already know) what Harry smells like.
Harry makes a long and essentially meaningless speech , though in contrast to what is to come as the highly accomplished RF machine cede control to a half-educated bit part cable-tv actress, it is very well-written.
To summarise Travalyst is in the "encouragement" side of the do gooding business. Everyones going to be encouraged to travel in and to environments in need of a dose of ethics and sustainabilty by ethical and sustainable means. Destinations are going to be "upheld" and "travellers" the pretentious name middle class people give to tourists or holidaymakers are going to be "encouraged"to leave those communities "better". It is (still) entirely unclear how or even if these gaseous post-colonial objectives might be achieved, but they sound nice to idiots.
Is all the kind of bullshit you get in the Lifestyle Sections of self-styled progressive newspapers. Where amidst the advertorials for £600 blouses and house makeovers by millionairre architects called Tarragon and Hugo; us rubes are advised how to have an "ethical Xmas" with decorations made from recycled brown paper. gifts of timeshare goats in Botswana and penitential vegan "feasts" by people who spend December in the Caribbean.
Shortly after this it appears things started to go precipitately downhill and behing the scenes Madame has her full time cunt on. Nothing Travalyst happens - though the difference between that and anything Travalyst might actually do other than make speeches remains unclear.
Most importantly it doesnt exist as any kind of seperate corporate entity. It is simply an "intiative" supported by Harry under the aegis of the BRF. A key part of the discussions in January must have been how they were going to seperate all such intiatives and roles. That and all the lovely moolah accumulated in the no doubt scrupulously kept accounts of William and Harrys Foundation.
Suddenly in April 2020 Travalyst is finally Incorporated - the bare minimum to establish a Company Limited by Guarantee as a not-for-obvious-profit Organisation. It has "boilerplate" ie off the peg Memorandum and Articles called Mem and Arts which set out the company constitution objectives and rules.
Slightly under cover of darkness in a story that finally broke around 20th July 2020 (when its in the Mail) the Foundations funds are split in half with one half remaining in a renamed William and Kate foundation and the rest distributed to the ex-Royal Sid and Nancy. "Doria says we should get it in bags Harry?". In fact, which sparks all the controversy, its paid to the soon to be ex-Sussex Royal as no other vehicle actually exists other than Travalyst.
After the "ethics and sustainability" of this are publically questioned serious monies top lawyers CMS ammend the Mem and Arts in a big old hurry on 28th July 2020. You have to look carefully but a new s49 "Dissolution" is added at the end of the Articles of Association.
Now what poppets do we think that might facillitate? I feel a seperate post comming on.
Travalyst starts life as a new "Global Initiative" launched with highly professional razzamatazz on the Royal Family Website and at an event in Amsterdam on 3rd September 2019.
It is described as a "new partnership" to "bring travel companies together" to "promote ethical and sustainable travel".
Amongst the Household names persuaded to allocate part of their PR budgets to this obscure hokum and attach their brands to a still popular member of the pre-eminent global soap opera (without frankly having to do much) are Ctrip, BookingCom, Skyscanner, TripAdviser and Visa. Several lucky members of these firms upper adminisphere of wokeflakes have fetched up at some fancy hotel in Amsterdam so they can tell their friends (who dont already know) what Harry smells like.
Harry makes a long and essentially meaningless speech , though in contrast to what is to come as the highly accomplished RF machine cede control to a half-educated bit part cable-tv actress, it is very well-written.
To summarise Travalyst is in the "encouragement" side of the do gooding business. Everyones going to be encouraged to travel in and to environments in need of a dose of ethics and sustainabilty by ethical and sustainable means. Destinations are going to be "upheld" and "travellers" the pretentious name middle class people give to tourists or holidaymakers are going to be "encouraged"to leave those communities "better". It is (still) entirely unclear how or even if these gaseous post-colonial objectives might be achieved, but they sound nice to idiots.
Is all the kind of bullshit you get in the Lifestyle Sections of self-styled progressive newspapers. Where amidst the advertorials for £600 blouses and house makeovers by millionairre architects called Tarragon and Hugo; us rubes are advised how to have an "ethical Xmas" with decorations made from recycled brown paper. gifts of timeshare goats in Botswana and penitential vegan "feasts" by people who spend December in the Caribbean.
Shortly after this it appears things started to go precipitately downhill and behing the scenes Madame has her full time cunt on. Nothing Travalyst happens - though the difference between that and anything Travalyst might actually do other than make speeches remains unclear.
Most importantly it doesnt exist as any kind of seperate corporate entity. It is simply an "intiative" supported by Harry under the aegis of the BRF. A key part of the discussions in January must have been how they were going to seperate all such intiatives and roles. That and all the lovely moolah accumulated in the no doubt scrupulously kept accounts of William and Harrys Foundation.
Suddenly in April 2020 Travalyst is finally Incorporated - the bare minimum to establish a Company Limited by Guarantee as a not-for-obvious-profit Organisation. It has "boilerplate" ie off the peg Memorandum and Articles called Mem and Arts which set out the company constitution objectives and rules.
Slightly under cover of darkness in a story that finally broke around 20th July 2020 (when its in the Mail) the Foundations funds are split in half with one half remaining in a renamed William and Kate foundation and the rest distributed to the ex-Royal Sid and Nancy. "Doria says we should get it in bags Harry?". In fact, which sparks all the controversy, its paid to the soon to be ex-Sussex Royal as no other vehicle actually exists other than Travalyst.
After the "ethics and sustainability" of this are publically questioned serious monies top lawyers CMS ammend the Mem and Arts in a big old hurry on 28th July 2020. You have to look carefully but a new s49 "Dissolution" is added at the end of the Articles of Association.
Now what poppets do we think that might facillitate? I feel a seperate post comming on.
Last edited:
Gosh Meghan has a real issue hearing no from people she feels are beneath her (everybody). To stamp her feet to a member of staff that has worked for the queen for 18 years is an incredible affront. I don’t think we’ve heard anything of the true feelings of the royal family.... but Meghan just cannot keep her mouth shut. It really is a case of give her enough rope... oh to be a fly on the wall at family get togethers!!! She thinks it was the staff but it’ll have been everybody. They love by duty and obligation everyday for decades and she can’t do it for a few months without writing an f***ing book. It beggars belief.
Campagne
VIP Member
Angela Kelly is fiercely loyal to the Queen and she would be a brilliant; sharp gatekeeper, as she is one of her closest ( literally and figuratively) members of staff.I think we can safely bet that Angela Kelly is NOT a fan of M...
Facehugger
VIP Member
I think Zara is a complete star, like her Mother. Remember at Merkin's wedding, she was just about ready to pop with a real baby (not a moon bump) and couldn't even sit straight, she was very uncomfortable, but she was still there in attendance smiling away. Very down to earth indeed
freda19
VIP Member
Finally watched the last Lady C video. Some interesting points for the benefit of anyone who can't be bothered watching it, as I often feel like that myself.
Very cagey re talking about surrogacy and the extreme secrecy smeggy demanded but stressed the need for honesty for the child's sake. Make of that what you will.
Calls scoobie doo Amid Scabies
because she says he and Durand werre irritating and trying to cause her problems behind the scenes when she was writing her book. Maybe it was them trying to get her to put the kiddie fiddling thing into print, cunts
Then calls Carolyn Durand "Cowering Durand" because she has been in hiding and is refusing to do promotion or interviews, leaving scoobie to take all the flak for something she knew was a load of shite. She says clearly the book was just easy money for Cowering Durand whereas scoobie took it more seriously but clearly had no concept of the damage he was doing. She also says some of the things he said about Kate and other royals re past events were in complete contrast to the positive way he reported on them back in the day before he became smeggy's mouthpiece, so he can't be taken seriously and has fucked up big time. He has twisted his interpretation to fit the book narrative of smeggy being the victim of the royals and is now toast.
Regarding smeggy's questionable past she is of course very cagey, citing libel/slander laws and the smeggy love of litigation, but she was grinning widely and said the Royals let no one who has inserted themselves into the Royal circle go unchecked, NOBODY! and that the checks are very very thorough and miss nothing. I think it was at that point she said WTTE " ... but I'm sure we'll be hearing more about that subject in the near future".
It was interesting.
Very cagey re talking about surrogacy and the extreme secrecy smeggy demanded but stressed the need for honesty for the child's sake. Make of that what you will.
Calls scoobie doo Amid Scabies
because she says he and Durand werre irritating and trying to cause her problems behind the scenes when she was writing her book. Maybe it was them trying to get her to put the kiddie fiddling thing into print, cuntsThen calls Carolyn Durand "Cowering Durand" because she has been in hiding and is refusing to do promotion or interviews, leaving scoobie to take all the flak for something she knew was a load of shite. She says clearly the book was just easy money for Cowering Durand whereas scoobie took it more seriously but clearly had no concept of the damage he was doing. She also says some of the things he said about Kate and other royals re past events were in complete contrast to the positive way he reported on them back in the day before he became smeggy's mouthpiece, so he can't be taken seriously and has fucked up big time. He has twisted his interpretation to fit the book narrative of smeggy being the victim of the royals and is now toast.
Regarding smeggy's questionable past she is of course very cagey, citing libel/slander laws and the smeggy love of litigation, but she was grinning widely and said the Royals let no one who has inserted themselves into the Royal circle go unchecked, NOBODY! and that the checks are very very thorough and miss nothing. I think it was at that point she said WTTE " ... but I'm sure we'll be hearing more about that subject in the near future".
It was interesting.
Last edited:
mardymare
VIP Member
Yankee Wally's latest video - funny moments but very long - view it on 1.25 playback speed. (Thank you whoever suggested that)
İ found this comment below the video - interesting re. autism and Harry....
I worked with special needs children for thirty years. I've written about Henry being autistic as a child, and what we're seeing in Henry is what they are like as "adults." The "speech" Rachel wrote for him to read off the teleprompter at the "summit" is how autistics are when they get older. And the cuteness as a kid doesn't age well. Henry's looks will get nastier and nastier over the years because he doesn't have a loving wife who would help him look his best. And at least get him to have his hair cut and get rid of that nasty-ass beard. But nobody is home as we've plainly seen since leaving the UK. He can barely speak. But he's always been that way. But he evolved into Henry the Jokester and everyone loved him. I did. But their emotions are easily stirred, they are extremely sensitive. Rachel knows this and has stirred and stirred and stirred since the beginning. And still stirs and stirs and stirs until she's got him stirring the "we hate and resent everyone because they were all against us succeeding as royals" stew she brewed for them. Autistics can't process feelings. It's too overwhelming for them. Diana tried to shield him. Charles wouldn't accept he was a limited child. Then DIana passed, and the family had to have a serious look at who H. really was, and pledge to protect him. We now know that wasn't such a good idea, but it seemed so at the time. Along comes Rachel who fashioned herself as Diana v. 2, included wearing Diana's perfume, mannerisms, dress-a-like. Henry told her early on that she reminded him of his mum, and that's all Rachel needed. She fills the empty well inside Henry where a personality and some values should be with the black and evil thoughts and accusations. I guarantee you, if Henry had married a kind, but not too bright girl, like himself, but was sweetness and light, and said lovely things to him about the Queen and family, that's how Henry would be today. He's a blank slate for anyone to right on. Look at his photos as a child. It's that vacant face you showed and said archificial looks like H. He doesn't. Every photo of Henry as a child is expressionless, other than that sort of pleading look of his as he gazed up at William, "What are we doing?" No animation or playfulness or personality. Nothing. He devised this person called "Henry the adorable, Henry the lovable." He wasn't a real soldier either. His security detail for ten years dressed as marines and played war games with him. His two "tours" in Afghanistan amounted to being shown from far away where some skirmishes took place, and he got to "observe." When got bored, he'd order up a royal helicopter, and off he'd go without getting permission, or even a "Ta-ta." He was rude, arrogant, irresponsible, entitled, and let everyone know when in the service. He also has always treated staff and royal "servants" like crap and Diana wasn't around to correct him. But he and Rachel certainly hooked up on that one. He looked great in uniforms, and the military thought it was worth tolerating the pain-in-the-ass prince because little boys would want to be like him when they grew up, and join the military. But after ten years they couldn't take it any more. They said to the Queen, "Take him back! We tried. He's a spoiled, nasty adolescent, and your hopes the military would mature him was a fail. Sorry, Majesty, we tried." He did not father a child. I know "Archie Fever" still runs deep, but it ain't so. Was Henry jealous of William? Probably. Resentful, angry, hateful? I doubt it. This cesspool that we think we're seeing that was always there, wasn't. Rachel created the cesspool and splashed it up on Henry and in his face every day. She made him the monster image of herself. And he believed her tales of William the Evil, William the Snob, Kate and the royal family the Racists. That's the tragedy. Henry could have done some real good brining awareness to special needs children. Rachel convinced him that the sort of Royal life they would have had wasn't good enough for them. She would make them rich and famous. Say, how's that going for you, Rachel? Feeling OK lately? Oh ... sorry.
İ found this comment below the video - interesting re. autism and Harry....
I worked with special needs children for thirty years. I've written about Henry being autistic as a child, and what we're seeing in Henry is what they are like as "adults." The "speech" Rachel wrote for him to read off the teleprompter at the "summit" is how autistics are when they get older. And the cuteness as a kid doesn't age well. Henry's looks will get nastier and nastier over the years because he doesn't have a loving wife who would help him look his best. And at least get him to have his hair cut and get rid of that nasty-ass beard. But nobody is home as we've plainly seen since leaving the UK. He can barely speak. But he's always been that way. But he evolved into Henry the Jokester and everyone loved him. I did. But their emotions are easily stirred, they are extremely sensitive. Rachel knows this and has stirred and stirred and stirred since the beginning. And still stirs and stirs and stirs until she's got him stirring the "we hate and resent everyone because they were all against us succeeding as royals" stew she brewed for them. Autistics can't process feelings. It's too overwhelming for them. Diana tried to shield him. Charles wouldn't accept he was a limited child. Then DIana passed, and the family had to have a serious look at who H. really was, and pledge to protect him. We now know that wasn't such a good idea, but it seemed so at the time. Along comes Rachel who fashioned herself as Diana v. 2, included wearing Diana's perfume, mannerisms, dress-a-like. Henry told her early on that she reminded him of his mum, and that's all Rachel needed. She fills the empty well inside Henry where a personality and some values should be with the black and evil thoughts and accusations. I guarantee you, if Henry had married a kind, but not too bright girl, like himself, but was sweetness and light, and said lovely things to him about the Queen and family, that's how Henry would be today. He's a blank slate for anyone to right on. Look at his photos as a child. It's that vacant face you showed and said archificial looks like H. He doesn't. Every photo of Henry as a child is expressionless, other than that sort of pleading look of his as he gazed up at William, "What are we doing?" No animation or playfulness or personality. Nothing. He devised this person called "Henry the adorable, Henry the lovable." He wasn't a real soldier either. His security detail for ten years dressed as marines and played war games with him. His two "tours" in Afghanistan amounted to being shown from far away where some skirmishes took place, and he got to "observe." When got bored, he'd order up a royal helicopter, and off he'd go without getting permission, or even a "Ta-ta." He was rude, arrogant, irresponsible, entitled, and let everyone know when in the service. He also has always treated staff and royal "servants" like crap and Diana wasn't around to correct him. But he and Rachel certainly hooked up on that one. He looked great in uniforms, and the military thought it was worth tolerating the pain-in-the-ass prince because little boys would want to be like him when they grew up, and join the military. But after ten years they couldn't take it any more. They said to the Queen, "Take him back! We tried. He's a spoiled, nasty adolescent, and your hopes the military would mature him was a fail. Sorry, Majesty, we tried." He did not father a child. I know "Archie Fever" still runs deep, but it ain't so. Was Henry jealous of William? Probably. Resentful, angry, hateful? I doubt it. This cesspool that we think we're seeing that was always there, wasn't. Rachel created the cesspool and splashed it up on Henry and in his face every day. She made him the monster image of herself. And he believed her tales of William the Evil, William the Snob, Kate and the royal family the Racists. That's the tragedy. Henry could have done some real good brining awareness to special needs children. Rachel convinced him that the sort of Royal life they would have had wasn't good enough for them. She would make them rich and famous. Say, how's that going for you, Rachel? Feeling OK lately? Oh ... sorry.
NOID-phal
VIP Member
I think Harry & Meghan thought they would win the battle of public opinion, and then going forward the media wouldn't dare to publish negative stories about them. Harry is not intelligent, that's clear. But I think Meghan thinks she is smart, fatal mistake. She is trying to deal with a UK problem using US tactics, listening to the wrong people.
TheJoanCollinsFanClub
VIP Member
The new Bond Film poster...
“FROM BRENDA WITH LOVE”...
NotDumbNotBlonde
VIP Member
The Queen is very close to Angela Kelly so it's really not clever of Meghan to set herself against her.What an ungrateful spiteful bitch she is.
That tiara is beautiful and most women would be overwhelmed with gratitude if they were allowed to wear it, but oh no Maleficent thinks it's not good enough and then throws the Queen's dresser under the bus. That poor woman will now be targeted and jeered at by the Sussex Squad army of trolls.
It was Kelly's advice that "The Queen will be wearing a hat" which Meghan famously ignored.
thegirlscout
VIP Member
Would you say 38 is a ‘young mother’? Not age shaming but Meghan’s said all these women are ‘young mothers’ but I’d say that range would be teen-25?
Part of me wishes Anne was born first or Charlotte was born first. Won’t have another Queen in my lifetime
antinoos
Well-known member
She has said in a Witness Statement that because they are young mothers (amongst other reasons) they are particularly vulnerable to the kind of Press intrusion the Mail will visit on them for helping their friend. Thats one of the reasons its such a hopeless argument. If she wins any "young mother" (whatever that might actually mean these days!) would be entitled to anonymity. Its also in my view quite sexist.
antinoos
Well-known member
Im sure they have, if they are paying it will be subtle circuitous and opaque - but very very risky! I'm genuinely intrigued about just who has the bottomless pit to fund this. I think we can be quite sure that its not her; she simply doesnt have the resources. It has become THE story and its unravelling will I suspect be the final chapter in the Mother of Vipers bid for global hegemony. She does have all the makings of a historical supervillainess a cross between Imelda Marcos, Elizabeth Bathory and Lady C's favourite Madame Fahmy who literally got away with murder (because of real British racism actually).
Nice headline:
www.dailymail.co.uk
Former minister likens Harry to 'Carnivore advocating VEGETARIANISM':
The Duke of Sussex was savaged last night after his speech urging the travel industry to rebuild greener was likened to 'A carnivore advocating vegetarianism'. He was criticised by a former transport minister
Chilli pepper 19
VIP Member
To be honest no one probably seen it either as she probably popped it straight into Dorias handbag during the reception
Brenda is savage
I can imagine Diana's ghost appearing soon shouting "for fucks sake Harry, give it a bloody rest"
Silly-old-Slapper
VIP Member
NOID-phal
VIP Member
It's never a good sign when staff don't like you. I've been considering who I'd lie for in court, my husband, that's it. Meghans reputation as a ghoster and serial user is against her here, her friends will undoubtedly feel its just not worth lying in court for her.
I love your analysis of the shenanigans, aunty.
