Too late!
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I don't think that the Church of England repealed it's ban on divorced people marrying in Church, during the lifetime of the original spouse/s, until 2002. It's why Anne and Tim had to marry from Balmoral in the Church of Scotland. Pretty ironic given how the CoE came into existance.
I think that TQ and TQM were 2 strong proponents of the indissolublist line and made it very difficult for Charles and Camilla to marry. I think the background of Edward and Wallis was problematic for those who had lived through the crisis. I remember reading that Charles threatened to take Britain to the European Court of Human Rights.
I think that there is more scrutiny of the heir than those lower down the LoS. I would think that the Harkles probably threatened to throw a tantrum and cry racism
William and Catherine not being treated respectfully by the Jamaican PM was disgraceful. They must have invited the Cambridges, so if they feel that way don't invite them then be rude to them. Then rubbish the Stoats as well, as regardless of her flapping Minge he's the son of the king of England.Don’t know how much of this is true but after the joint photo shoot of the four of them on the red carpet vids show Brian Robbins dragging his wife away by the hand from the Harkles as Peg tries to start up a conversation with his wife.
If they had travelled to Jamaica on the same plane as them no doubt Peg had been chewing his ear off the whole time until he couldn’t stand it any longer. Don’t blame him if he didn’t want to travel back with her.
Regarding sticking them in the ‘cheap seats’, JMO but I suspect this was the PM‘s idea. He had little respect for Wills and Catherine when they were in Jamaica on an official visit so he wouldn’t have much respect for the trumped up spare and his Ho. He probably thought it was highly amusing to stick so called royalty in the middle of the riffraf ……. as we all did ……. I still have a good chuckle each time I see their faces when they realise where they have to sit
Let them break free from the benign UK and flee into the sinister arms of Xi.
I see Nutty's just posted the same!
Yes, I can.I learned something today while reading Hardman's book. He wrote:
Before his wedding to Camilla Parker Bowled in 2005, a proposed civil ceremony inside Windsor Castle had to be relocated to the town hall following an error over the licensing arrangements ....
Can anyone remember this?
No, he shouldn't step down. Stepping down has always been the cowardly way and would change nothing. The 'humanitarian' orange scrubber should stay and sort out this mess that he has contributed to, that he is also responsible for especially since it was brought to his notice and he just passed the buck on to someone else.Now being reported in the US.
People Magazine:
View attachment 2722485
View attachment 2722487
View attachment 2722501
View attachment 2722503
Surprisingly well balanced. Unlike the Times that tried to spin the story favourably for Harry.
Prince Harry Urged to Step Down from African Parks amid Abuse Reports
archived 29 Jan 2024 17:54:19 UTCarchive.ph
There's just one response to any defence he can throw - why, if he could hop on private jets to go receive paid for awards and be humiliated by presumably the Jamaican PM while his wife made a fool of herself in a car cover, did he not go to Africa to find out what was going on. Surely anyone with sooo many years' experience of dealing with systems and people would know that a call or a letter or an email, or even two, would not have led to any sort of information being shared or action being taken.
He's done nothing, he's learnt nothing, and he wants to do and learn nothing other than being feted and catered to just for existing. Even hell wouldn't want credit for bringing those two perfectly-matched infected boils together
Thinking about this further - how old was Camilla when Diana died? One thing the Queen would have been very clear on is no further children of Charles by her to mess up the line. If they were from a married second wife of the heir they would have had to be in there. Elizabeth I and Mary I just two examples of that.
In other news...
Harry incurred over £2,000,000 in expenses ..... All that, for a £140,000 win.
What an extreme loser.
View attachment 2722510
View attachment 2722512
Prince Harry's Lawyers Seek $2.5 Million in Fees After Win in British…
archived 29 Jan 2024 18:02:23 UTCarchive.ph
It will be absolutely hilarious if the judge decides those fees are excessive and doesn't make the papers pay them. Thus either leaving Hazno to pick them up himself in spite of his "win", or his legal team to reduce them, which will undoubtedly piss them off and make them less likely to work for him in future. It does sometimes work out like that.
Those lawyers saw him coming a mile off - did Elton get a cut of that?
Article in The Telegraph:In other news...
Harry incurred over £2,000,000 in expenses ..... All that, for a £140,000 win.
What an extreme loser.
View attachment 2722510
View attachment 2722512
Prince Harry's Lawyers Seek $2.5 Million in Fees After Win in British…
archived 29 Jan 2024 18:02:23 UTC
Prince Harry considers further legal action against Mirror newspapers…
archived 29 Jan 2024 20:02:36 UTC
Oh bleeping hell! Check her pockets!!! Check her cavaties!!! You never know what she’s shoved up her ass!
I don't think it was a children issue. I think that the issue was that the Queen was a devout traditionalist and did not believe that marriages could be dissolved and as the heir Charles would be the Defender of the Faith. By the 2000s, while Charles was technically a widower, Andrew Parker-Bowles was still alive and it was an additional complication that APB was Catholic and he and Camilla had been married in the Catholic church - although the same could be said about Megain.
Thanks @LadyMuck
African Parks was established in 2000 and has its HQ in Johannesburg. The charity is not Harry's charity, he's one of many directors and was promoted to attract investors. AP is worldwide with many directors in each country.
There are 1400 rangers who confiscate guns, ivory and pangolin scales. Often they are attacked and killed by poachers.
BookWorm said that the Mail and the Times were getting hysterical, and the Mail didn't even investigate. They want Harald to resign, typical cancel culture, but it would be an opportunity for Harald to become involved and improve matters.
Catholic priests commit atrocities but the Church still exists, and the same applies here. It's a bandwagon, and the matter should be referred to the police in the Congo.
African Parks said they'd sought without success to engage with Survival International, who BookWorm has never heard of. If Survival International were really concerned with preventing these abuses why didn't they work with African Parks instead of going to the Daily Mail?
BookWorm also referred to a music charity inked to King Charles, whose Asian global music star has been caught on camera setting about another man slapping him on the head with a slipper. The global man said the other man "didn't mind".
........................
I think BookWorm's point is that AP is a large global organisation, and there's no more reason for the Stoat to resign than any other director. That this is a bandwagon and should have been dealt with differently by Survival International instead of going to the press in the UK.
What's not addressed by BookWorm though is that if these allegations were put to the Stoat last May, (and presumably to other officials too), that nothing seems to have been done. There is a time gap of 8 months since last May. Did Survival International go to the press now because they've been stonewalled by African Parks since last May? As the Stoat was told in May, and as this is the first we've heard of it, this is feasible.
I think BookWorm is wrong that this is nothing to do with the Stoat. As the son of the Monarch he has a lot of influence, and the time to "get involved and do some good" was in May last year when he was informed of the abuse. Not now, he's missed that opportunity and did nothing.
In the C of E you can re-marry in the church, but you will need a permission from a bishop to do so (or at least that's what I was told a while ago).
She was over 50 wasn’t she?
You can see the maths at work in that Telegraph article:Article in The Telegraph:
Prince Harry considers further legal action against Mirror newspapers…
archived 29 Jan 2024 20:02:36 UTCarchive.ph
Presented 148 articles initially, told to whittle it down and arrived at 33.
Fifteen of those were found to be plausible & £140,600 awarded.
That leaves 115 yet to be decided, and at a 45% success rate that means that there's another 59 cases that could be won meaning a possible additional pay-out of £550,000 to come - ker-ching!
(Of course on the same basis it could mean another £7,000,000 in legal fees...)
I suspect what they aren't telling their client is that they chose the strongest 33 cases (you know, the ones with actual evidence) & so the future success rate may not be as high - "but look what you could win!" and don't look at what we will bill..
H absolutely IS thick, Diana herself stated it on camera.
On the day, or three days before?
It’s vicar’s discretion. Some will not consider it.
Some will, depending on whether the couple are regular church attendees, reason for divorce etc.
Or just want somewhere nice for the photographs.
My vicar friend was bemused when he found a wedding party outside his church with bridesmaids, family…even a horse and carriage. But no wedding!
Seemed they had a registry office wedding but wanted somewhere nice for the photographs!
He was very understanding….but got a good sized donation for charity from them.
- Status