- Notice
antinoos
Well-known member
So here we have it "We All Poop".
In a rare moment, almost, of self awareness Meghan says in her latest Witness Statement (WS) "..It's not me thats on trial here.." But it is Megsy-Sue you are so wrong.
Not only on trial but you have already lost - even if, as is possible, you succeed on the narrow point of your privacy being breached. So what? You get maybe at best 60-70% of your costs back. The Damages will be small. They are in cases like this; and anyway you have chosen to ride the Tiger of publicity as the Judgment makes clear. You are no babe in the woods. You deserve scant (one of Warby's favourite words) sympathy.
The Mail has nothing to lose, even if it loses. The Costs and damages will be a small fraction of the increased revenue generated so far let alone the millions generated as an eager public watch the ongoing shaming and humiliation of people they have come to despise. The Mail has no reputation to lose. The Nations and, to an extent now, the worlds secret dirty pleasure. A mix of salacious gossip and Presbyterean outrage larded with Tits, Ass and Hunks. "By office boys for office boys" sniffed Lord Salisbury two centuries ago, an institution then, like the Royal Family.
Warby is scathing, in his restrained manner, about Meghan, as he was in his previous Judgment:
"The other Statement was from the Claimant herself. It was short, containing little that was factual - or certainly little that needed to be proved, by the Claimant or anyone else."
"The defendant suggests that the claimants side briefed the press in relation to this application, and the evidence bears this out.......Indeed there is evidence to support the defendants assertion that the claimants side have been energetically briefing the media about these proceedings from the beginning"
He fingers ("Wetwipe now!") "someone called Omid Scobie". Come off it Yeronner! Next you'll be saying "The Beatles what are they? Some popular music combination?" . As a clear mouthpiece, direct to the Duchess, which will of course become highly significant. He is in for a lifetime of pain Lady C's "Scabies". As this cases other obvious and disposable hate figure.
He also teases the Mails famous, in my little world, and formidable solicitor Keith Mathieson. Wondering aloud if he waited up till midnight to send the Response (improperly) to the Mail so they could publish it. Sniffily dismissing his evidence; but significantly not as he did with Sherbourne at the previous hearing taking him and White (the Mails barrister whom he clearly respects) to the woodshed. He knows and we all know they are acting for a bunch of shits. They arent pretending to be saving the world.
Indeed he helpfully explains how their arguments might be improved.
He does all this because he knows the anonymity of the FFF is unsustainable legally and practically. What he does is to take the Claimants evidence when unapposed at face value. He humanely shields the FFF, for the time being, so that there can be no excuse for them not making witness statements about what really happened. He makes it perfectly clear that come trial this protection will almost certainly "evaporate".
So what is the story? We now have evidence from two of the five. Directly from B and indirectly in a lawyers WS from "one other".
B says she and the other 4 in communication decided they were so worried about the evil Britishers assault on the peoples Duchess that B was tasked with doing something. She contacted Jess Cagle (so many names in this matter sound like slang for something below the waist) editor of People. Jess "set up" for all 5 to speak to People "..on the basis their identities would not be revealed, they would not have done so otherwise" (important). "The claimant played no part in arranging the interviews, was not aware they were being planned, and did not become aware of the article until after it was published". This is what Meghan must prove to succeed against the Mails defence that she condoned or acquiesced in or solicited (words to that effect) the article.
The Mail argue that in fact Friend B has regularly leaked material about Meghan to the press to thier mutual benefit and in one of the drier assides in the Judgment Warby says:
"Over 45 paragraphs Friend B addresses one by one each press cutting explaining the context and role she played in relation to each. The gist of her evidence is that it is misleading and untrue to suggest that this material undermines what she said in her first statement."
He does not say he believes her, merely that her evidence is uncontested in this regard.
Helpfully Warby hints that both the promise of anonymity and the ignorance of Meghan could subsequently be challenged - and all would change.
The "one other" friend in evidence given via Meghans lawyers discloses that she fear she would "..(with reason) suffer intrusion and distress if the order sought is not made."! "with reason"! Now, this is something of a bombshell. Why you might ask? What is her evidence or her circumstances? Is this the "unsatisfactory witness"? Hmmmmmm!
I wont go on. The battle lines are drawn. For the FFF doom approaches. Their evidence (and Thomas's see below) is at the heart of the case. If it carries on they will have to give WS endorsed with Statements of Truth about what happened and they will be dragged over to London in January when the anonymity will "evaporate" and what happened to Amber and Johnny will happen to them. They will pay a price in "splash and spreads" for their misguided friendship with another b-lister who didnt scruple to advertise a product that literally meant your shit dont stink.
And Thomas. The other key witness.
I look at those ill advised photos of this elderly man, chumpishly posing as he was clearly advised to. They are endearing not sinister. He appears to be what he is. A "rube" who made his living in the physically demanding and unglamorous world behind the tinsel; and against the odds won the lottery and spent his money on the daughter he adored. A striking girl who got in front of the lighting rigs he worked on, and despite having no proper talent, made something of herself and could have been something truly remarkable, but instead became Meghan Markle. Those harsh phonemes that will be forever associated with deceit, treachery, betrayal, abusive relationships and public shaming.
It is a tragedy worthy of Sophocles. Character is fate and the narrative arc ends with Justice.
Aunty needs a walk.
In a rare moment, almost, of self awareness Meghan says in her latest Witness Statement (WS) "..It's not me thats on trial here.." But it is Megsy-Sue you are so wrong.
Not only on trial but you have already lost - even if, as is possible, you succeed on the narrow point of your privacy being breached. So what? You get maybe at best 60-70% of your costs back. The Damages will be small. They are in cases like this; and anyway you have chosen to ride the Tiger of publicity as the Judgment makes clear. You are no babe in the woods. You deserve scant (one of Warby's favourite words) sympathy.
The Mail has nothing to lose, even if it loses. The Costs and damages will be a small fraction of the increased revenue generated so far let alone the millions generated as an eager public watch the ongoing shaming and humiliation of people they have come to despise. The Mail has no reputation to lose. The Nations and, to an extent now, the worlds secret dirty pleasure. A mix of salacious gossip and Presbyterean outrage larded with Tits, Ass and Hunks. "By office boys for office boys" sniffed Lord Salisbury two centuries ago, an institution then, like the Royal Family.
Warby is scathing, in his restrained manner, about Meghan, as he was in his previous Judgment:
"The other Statement was from the Claimant herself. It was short, containing little that was factual - or certainly little that needed to be proved, by the Claimant or anyone else."
"The defendant suggests that the claimants side briefed the press in relation to this application, and the evidence bears this out.......Indeed there is evidence to support the defendants assertion that the claimants side have been energetically briefing the media about these proceedings from the beginning"
He fingers ("Wetwipe now!") "someone called Omid Scobie". Come off it Yeronner! Next you'll be saying "The Beatles what are they? Some popular music combination?" . As a clear mouthpiece, direct to the Duchess, which will of course become highly significant. He is in for a lifetime of pain Lady C's "Scabies". As this cases other obvious and disposable hate figure.
He also teases the Mails famous, in my little world, and formidable solicitor Keith Mathieson. Wondering aloud if he waited up till midnight to send the Response (improperly) to the Mail so they could publish it. Sniffily dismissing his evidence; but significantly not as he did with Sherbourne at the previous hearing taking him and White (the Mails barrister whom he clearly respects) to the woodshed. He knows and we all know they are acting for a bunch of shits. They arent pretending to be saving the world.
Indeed he helpfully explains how their arguments might be improved.
He does all this because he knows the anonymity of the FFF is unsustainable legally and practically. What he does is to take the Claimants evidence when unapposed at face value. He humanely shields the FFF, for the time being, so that there can be no excuse for them not making witness statements about what really happened. He makes it perfectly clear that come trial this protection will almost certainly "evaporate".
So what is the story? We now have evidence from two of the five. Directly from B and indirectly in a lawyers WS from "one other".
B says she and the other 4 in communication decided they were so worried about the evil Britishers assault on the peoples Duchess that B was tasked with doing something. She contacted Jess Cagle (so many names in this matter sound like slang for something below the waist) editor of People. Jess "set up" for all 5 to speak to People "..on the basis their identities would not be revealed, they would not have done so otherwise" (important). "The claimant played no part in arranging the interviews, was not aware they were being planned, and did not become aware of the article until after it was published". This is what Meghan must prove to succeed against the Mails defence that she condoned or acquiesced in or solicited (words to that effect) the article.
The Mail argue that in fact Friend B has regularly leaked material about Meghan to the press to thier mutual benefit and in one of the drier assides in the Judgment Warby says:
"Over 45 paragraphs Friend B addresses one by one each press cutting explaining the context and role she played in relation to each. The gist of her evidence is that it is misleading and untrue to suggest that this material undermines what she said in her first statement."
He does not say he believes her, merely that her evidence is uncontested in this regard.
Helpfully Warby hints that both the promise of anonymity and the ignorance of Meghan could subsequently be challenged - and all would change.
The "one other" friend in evidence given via Meghans lawyers discloses that she fear she would "..(with reason) suffer intrusion and distress if the order sought is not made."! "with reason"! Now, this is something of a bombshell. Why you might ask? What is her evidence or her circumstances? Is this the "unsatisfactory witness"? Hmmmmmm!
I wont go on. The battle lines are drawn. For the FFF doom approaches. Their evidence (and Thomas's see below) is at the heart of the case. If it carries on they will have to give WS endorsed with Statements of Truth about what happened and they will be dragged over to London in January when the anonymity will "evaporate" and what happened to Amber and Johnny will happen to them. They will pay a price in "splash and spreads" for their misguided friendship with another b-lister who didnt scruple to advertise a product that literally meant your shit dont stink.
And Thomas. The other key witness.
I look at those ill advised photos of this elderly man, chumpishly posing as he was clearly advised to. They are endearing not sinister. He appears to be what he is. A "rube" who made his living in the physically demanding and unglamorous world behind the tinsel; and against the odds won the lottery and spent his money on the daughter he adored. A striking girl who got in front of the lighting rigs he worked on, and despite having no proper talent, made something of herself and could have been something truly remarkable, but instead became Meghan Markle. Those harsh phonemes that will be forever associated with deceit, treachery, betrayal, abusive relationships and public shaming.
It is a tragedy worthy of Sophocles. Character is fate and the narrative arc ends with Justice.
Aunty needs a walk.
Last edited:
antinoos
Well-known member
A quick Campagne summary of an ingenious and slyly funny Judgment:
A plague on both your houses you are both litigating the claim in public for self serving reasons.
I want the trial as soon as possible and Im not letting this get in the way.
I know the identity of at least most of the FFF cant properly or practically be protected indefinitely, but "in the interests of the administration of justice" (via a legal argument only a particle physicist like the Mail's Barrister can follow) Im going to preserve anonymity whilst you prepare for trial so thatthe witnesses have no excuse not to cooperate the trial can be prepared without even more of a media circus. Then Im going to lift the anonymity because it will be impossible to preserve it review the situation.
There are a number of real gems buried in the Judgment but that will require a longer post than I have time for now.
He has as we say in the trade "shot Meghans fox" and also warned the Mail (not too harshly which is surprising) about using their lawyers as journalists and vice versa. His eyebrows are raised to proxima centauri during most of his deliciously dry account of both parties conduct.
Now the real bloodbath will commence. She has till next January when this will be Johnny Depp the sequel ("Who Shat On the Great Bed of State"); discontinuance is no longer even vaguely justifiable and settlement except on humiliating terms looks highly unlikely. I do hope Daddy Markle has good security and Harry finds inner peace doing his Yoga with Doria.
I think its even possible that she wont get her costs as this is an interim not a final resolution of the issue. What we didnt know btw was all the procedural stuff in which both parties broke the rules and dissed the Court. A fascinating insight in itself.
Later, maybe tomorrow morning, Auntie is on holiday and Mrs Auntie thinks Im having an affair.
A plague on both your houses you are both litigating the claim in public for self serving reasons.
I want the trial as soon as possible and Im not letting this get in the way.
I know the identity of at least most of the FFF cant properly or practically be protected indefinitely, but "in the interests of the administration of justice" (via a legal argument only a particle physicist like the Mail's Barrister can follow) Im going to preserve anonymity whilst you prepare for trial so that
There are a number of real gems buried in the Judgment but that will require a longer post than I have time for now.
He has as we say in the trade "shot Meghans fox" and also warned the Mail (not too harshly which is surprising) about using their lawyers as journalists and vice versa. His eyebrows are raised to proxima centauri during most of his deliciously dry account of both parties conduct.
Now the real bloodbath will commence. She has till next January when this will be Johnny Depp the sequel ("Who Shat On the Great Bed of State"); discontinuance is no longer even vaguely justifiable and settlement except on humiliating terms looks highly unlikely. I do hope Daddy Markle has good security and Harry finds inner peace doing his Yoga with Doria.
I think its even possible that she wont get her costs as this is an interim not a final resolution of the issue. What we didnt know btw was all the procedural stuff in which both parties broke the rules and dissed the Court. A fascinating insight in itself.
Later, maybe tomorrow morning, Auntie is on holiday and Mrs Auntie thinks Im having an affair.
Fedupwithads8
Member
Favourite comment under KP birthday message 
Attachments
antinoos
Well-known member
Auntie LOVES Warby.
A brilliant Judgment, No doubt its being portrayed as some kind of triumph or vindication but its a disaster for her.
Im too tied up for most of today and I want to read and consider it so if you are interested in my analysis, draw close to the cauldron later.....when the brindled cat has mewed....
A brilliant Judgment, No doubt its being portrayed as some kind of triumph or vindication but its a disaster for her.
Im too tied up for most of today and I want to read and consider it so if you are interested in my analysis, draw close to the cauldron later.....when the brindled cat has mewed....
antinoos
Well-known member
I just dont buy the central premise. WHY do we need protecting from essentially things that people say and write - I mean sure we need protecting from things that are already illegal like addictive and dangerous drugs, pedophilia, terrorism, slavery and exploitation etc but its already illegal to advocate these things online? WHO is entitled to do the protecting? HOW do we control those given such enormous nakedly political power over the flow of information. Unaccountable censorship is a far greater threat to our "safety" than policing, essentially, language which should only be allowed in the most extreme cases.
We have to stand up to this bullshit because it is producing a seriously fucked up society where intellectual and moral non entities like Meghan and Harry are in our faces daily preaching and bossing us about from positions of entirely unearned and unaccountable privilege; and our freedom of expression and liberty to express our opinions has never been under such assault. So many people confess they are afraid to say what they really think whilst the voices of these idiotic arseholes are magnified and widely broadcast.
Sorry it makes me mad - and worried. We live in an increasingly less free society and young people especially seem to be accepting that its a good thing. Once all the dissenting voices have been silenced in our woke Utopia, and the last micro-aggression extinguished, what will we be living in? And how will we ever be able to change it...
antinoos
Well-known member
I have just read the unbelievably self-important boring and stupid article Meghan wrote for Harry calling for censorship of the digital media. Behind all the pretentious self-aggrandising waffle and axe grinding is the hilarious revelation that the stupid bitch - who thinks she is in the same league as Michelle Obama (who possibly deserves some element of her universal popularity) when in fact she makes Hilary Clinton look likeable and decent - has taken to cold calling "leaders, chiefs and CEO's" of brands us normals use and telling them off. No doubt they deserve each other as they swap woke claptrap and try to get each other off the phone. Jesus the level of delusion.
They have gone from being a relatively contained menace to the BRF to a general threat like Coronavirus. What that article calls for is sinister. Censorship of people like us by people like them through their useful idiots in thinly disguised political pressure groups like "stop funding hate" which basically campaigns against conservative politicians and ideas (which is fine) whilst pretending to be something else (which is not at all fine - indeed dangerous).
As well as entirely destroying his relationship with a public that used to really love him; and estranging him from all his friends and family; she is now ensuring there will be no way back at all for him into any kind of Royal ceremonial role by entirely politicising the fucking numpty.
No-one believes he wrote, or understands, a word of that article. There needs to be an intervention. He is too stupid to see it but he is being destroyed. Someone in the BRF needs to abandon strategy "lets wait for the Titanic to meet the iceberg" and say something or next, when things start falling apart, she'll have him join the Taliban - one for you possibly Pom Bear.
They have gone from being a relatively contained menace to the BRF to a general threat like Coronavirus. What that article calls for is sinister. Censorship of people like us by people like them through their useful idiots in thinly disguised political pressure groups like "stop funding hate" which basically campaigns against conservative politicians and ideas (which is fine) whilst pretending to be something else (which is not at all fine - indeed dangerous).
As well as entirely destroying his relationship with a public that used to really love him; and estranging him from all his friends and family; she is now ensuring there will be no way back at all for him into any kind of Royal ceremonial role by entirely politicising the fucking numpty.
No-one believes he wrote, or understands, a word of that article. There needs to be an intervention. He is too stupid to see it but he is being destroyed. Someone in the BRF needs to abandon strategy "lets wait for the Titanic to meet the iceberg" and say something or next, when things start falling apart, she'll have him join the Taliban - one for you possibly Pom Bear.
antinoos
Well-known member
Christ I'd rather eat my own spleen than attend that event. I'm risking allegations of sexism here but isnt this just a bunch of rich privileged women filling their day. In the past it would have been patronising coffe mornings to raise money for a dialysis machine but this is the new moneyed elite version. It enables bored rich people to fill their days with self-important but completely pointless showing off.
it is maddening. If they really wanted to "make a difference" they could try either working at something challenging, or giving away some of their personal wealth for a life of modesty. Who gives a flying fuck what a cable tv star hitched to a troubled minor royal thinks about a "gender inclusive newsroom" which even sounds like propaganda - if it sounds like anything.
it is maddening. If they really wanted to "make a difference" they could try either working at something challenging, or giving away some of their personal wealth for a life of modesty. Who gives a flying fuck what a cable tv star hitched to a troubled minor royal thinks about a "gender inclusive newsroom" which even sounds like propaganda - if it sounds like anything.
Last edited:
Ubu1uk
VIP Member
I actually have some royal gossip although probably a bit outdated. A friend of a friend works for Lady Elizabeth Anson the Queen's cousin. They are quite friendly although in fact Lady E is horrible to work for at any rate. But regardless every so often the Queen calls round for a private supper. I knew that at the time of the the engagement leading up to the wedding nobody in the family was allowed to mention H&M to the Queen as my friend mentioned it but today she told me that before they had got engaged the Queen was having supper with Lady E and said to her "I hope I am dead before those two get married" Which is quite a revelation really.
freda19
VIP Member
I'm sorry she was ill and took her own life, but she battered her partner. I don't care if her partner was male, female or one of yorkie's aliens, domestic violence is reprehensible and it needed one of smeggy's lights shining on it. Caro was allegedly often very hands on with her blokes. Her previous one emigrated to Oz to ensure distance between them after hinting at how handsy and unpredictable she was.Basically yes. She was hounded to death by the press
I'm getting very tired of this narrative. Flacks death was a tragedy but the police/prosecution service were the ones who pursued her. The press just reported on the case.
My heart breaks for her family but there is no one thing/person to blame. She knows how the press operate and used it to her advantage but those same chirpy pally guys find a chink in your armour and will go for it. No one is immune.
Anyway back on topic, I wonder if anyone has explained the judgement in full to her yet or is she still up to high doh over the word "won".
It's what they do. Caroline used them when it suited her.
The press can be cunts, no doubt about it, so best not court them in any way. 'If you sup with the devil then use a long spoon.'
Last edited:
SansaStark
Well-known member
So he gave her a selfie?
I’m still in shock at just how badly they’ve fucked it all up. They had EVERYTHING! Never would’ve had to worry about anything for the rest of their lives. Opportunities that many people would be eternally grateful for. Seeing their kids grow up never being hungry, receiving excellent education, career options wide open, travelling the world, EVERYTHING! I know it’s been said before, but what a pair of fuckwits to throw it all away because you were never going to sit on the thrones and had to toe the line publicly. Think my disbelief will outlive their fame tbh
antinoos
Well-known member
In fact I was going to answer Baguettes question about what happens next but I made the mistake of opening the link to "Harrys" foray into reactionary woke politics.
Anyway back to IL 2019 000110
They key thing is the Trial Window which is the period of a few weeks in January 2021 when following what is quaintly called a "tea party" the clerks for the barristers fix the trial date in stone for a 7 day trial, and nothing but settlement can stop it happening. Settlement can happen at any time - hopefully before too much money has been wasted but quite commonly during the trial when it already has been, frequently the day before, and above all USUALLY 95% of High Court Claims settle before trial!
In order for the Trial to happen the parties need to complete "disclosure and inspection". Each sends the other a highly ordered list of all the material: documents, YouTube clips you name it, they intend to rely on in the trial. Subsequently it becomes increasingly difficult to add to Disclosure although in practice new material often crops up. Eventually you need leave to introduce it which gets more tricky the closer you are to trial. Inspection just means the other party has a right to see all the Discovery including the original form of all documents etc to check their veracity.
This can lead to disputes between the parties about the extent of Dislcosure and also applicatiosn for Court Orders for Dislcosure of things the parties want to keep hidden. Very likely in this case from both sides.
Then the parties Exchange Witness Statements. These contain a summary of the Evidence that each Witness will give. As with Discovery introducing new Witnesses becomes more difficult as Trial gets closer; and I suspect there will be disputes especially about the FFF. I suspect only friend B will be put forward to speak for all of them and this will result in another Application to Warby (or whoever, its not necessarily always going to be him).
There is then a Case Mangagement Conference at which any outstanding issues are resolved and the Parties have to disclose both how much they have spent so far and what they expect to spend to the conclusion of the Trial. The Court can impose limits. If you then go over these limits, without seeking permission, you cant recover the excess if you win.
The CMC will also determine special factors like Expert Evidence (cant quite think what in this case: Yoga?) Remote Evidence (possible) etc.
Then the Trial of the Century
In parallel the parties have to explore settlement. This can be informal but is usually a formal process of ADR (alternative dispute resolution) which can be nearly as expensive as a trial with the parties and lawyers posturing in front of each other, over fancy sandwiches and stilted legal anecdotes, about how certain they are they are going to win when everyone knows that at least one party, or at least their lawyers, think the exact opposite.
Thats it from Aunty.
Anyway back to IL 2019 000110
They key thing is the Trial Window which is the period of a few weeks in January 2021 when following what is quaintly called a "tea party" the clerks for the barristers fix the trial date in stone for a 7 day trial, and nothing but settlement can stop it happening. Settlement can happen at any time - hopefully before too much money has been wasted but quite commonly during the trial when it already has been, frequently the day before, and above all USUALLY 95% of High Court Claims settle before trial!
In order for the Trial to happen the parties need to complete "disclosure and inspection". Each sends the other a highly ordered list of all the material: documents, YouTube clips you name it, they intend to rely on in the trial. Subsequently it becomes increasingly difficult to add to Disclosure although in practice new material often crops up. Eventually you need leave to introduce it which gets more tricky the closer you are to trial. Inspection just means the other party has a right to see all the Discovery including the original form of all documents etc to check their veracity.
This can lead to disputes between the parties about the extent of Dislcosure and also applicatiosn for Court Orders for Dislcosure of things the parties want to keep hidden. Very likely in this case from both sides.
Then the parties Exchange Witness Statements. These contain a summary of the Evidence that each Witness will give. As with Discovery introducing new Witnesses becomes more difficult as Trial gets closer; and I suspect there will be disputes especially about the FFF. I suspect only friend B will be put forward to speak for all of them and this will result in another Application to Warby (or whoever, its not necessarily always going to be him).
There is then a Case Mangagement Conference at which any outstanding issues are resolved and the Parties have to disclose both how much they have spent so far and what they expect to spend to the conclusion of the Trial. The Court can impose limits. If you then go over these limits, without seeking permission, you cant recover the excess if you win.
The CMC will also determine special factors like Expert Evidence (cant quite think what in this case: Yoga?) Remote Evidence (possible) etc.
Then the Trial of the Century
In parallel the parties have to explore settlement. This can be informal but is usually a formal process of ADR (alternative dispute resolution) which can be nearly as expensive as a trial with the parties and lawyers posturing in front of each other, over fancy sandwiches and stilted legal anecdotes, about how certain they are they are going to win when everyone knows that at least one party, or at least their lawyers, think the exact opposite.
Thats it from Aunty.
PennyCrayon
VIP Member
I want to watch Gavin & Stacey now
Does she know you have a forum full of women hanging on your every word? An affair would probably be easier for her to understand.
Last edited:
Baguette
VIP Member
The National Theatre in their infinite wisdom, in the middle of the biggest disaster to hit the theatre industry with job losses in their thousands, decided to make a cute Happy Birthday post for their beloved and completely invisible Patron.
The comments have been epic and they are in heavy delete mode. I particularly liked'
'Should have had a proper actress as a Patron' which had this reply 'Should have had a proper Royal!'
'The first time I saw Meghan Markle she was giving a blow job in 90210. That's all I can see when I see her'
Popcornstein
Well-known member
Harry gets these in his packed lunch.She will hand them each a banana that says "you are strong", "you can do this" (lie on the stand for me if called in as witness), "you are loved"
Maggiemaynot
VIP Member
Dear Harry and Meghan,
Could you please refrain from lecturing us mere peasants from your self appointed positions as High Priest and Priestess of Wokeness.
Many of us have lost our jobs. Many of us are struggling to pay rent,mortgages,and all the many bills of normal households.
We realise you have no such problems as you don’t really appear to pay for anything much. But perhaps a little empathy for the daily struggles of us normal people in the midst of a worldwide pandemic wouldn’t go amiss.
A great majority of us have worries much closer to home right now than trying to concentrate on your meaningless word salads that don’t actually say anything.
In conclusion I would just like to add Get. Tae. Fuck.
As we say in the finest households of Scotland.
Cheers, Maggie
Could you please refrain from lecturing us mere peasants from your self appointed positions as High Priest and Priestess of Wokeness.
Many of us have lost our jobs. Many of us are struggling to pay rent,mortgages,and all the many bills of normal households.
We realise you have no such problems as you don’t really appear to pay for anything much. But perhaps a little empathy for the daily struggles of us normal people in the midst of a worldwide pandemic wouldn’t go amiss.
A great majority of us have worries much closer to home right now than trying to concentrate on your meaningless word salads that don’t actually say anything.
In conclusion I would just like to add Get. Tae. Fuck.
As we say in the finest households of Scotland.
Cheers, Maggie
Scotch Mist
VIP Member
This is actually more worrying than their cry baby antics trying to mend their broken image. They want to control what people write with only the 'correct' opinion allowed. We are heading towards communism here with one dictated point of view.
Prince Harry says social media stoking 'crisis of hate'
Prince Harry on Thursday said social media was stoking a 'crisis of hate,' and he appealed to companies to rethink their roles in advertising on digital platforms.www.dailymail.co.uk
Wah Wah Wah Wah!! Fucking cry baby!! Maybe tell your wife to stop ringing the press hey ginger nuts
Labelling everything you disagree with as 'hate speech' is a disgusting tactic used by those who want to oppress us.
antinoos
Well-known member
Aunty is blushing darlings. Tomorrow. I am not worthy...its a fab Judgement, exquisite. he has both thier numbers of course; but this is only a problem for one of them....I want to watch Gavin & Stacey now
Does she know you have a forum full of women hanging on your every word? An affair would probably be easier for her to understand.