Sophie is so busy and hardworking
Harry & Meghan #358 Better to have the World think you're a Thicko than go to Court and remove all doubt
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Oooh, I need a good thunderstorm, whereabouts are you? Is it heading to the West Midlands?
"We've got British Flags everywhere, all over every store, and[that day] was like British Day, and Martin said, 'I'm taking him a bike,' and I remember laughing. But you've got to understand that he's that person. He grew up in the same town as Ricky Gervais and he has the same humor," revealed Jennifer.Thank you for the new thread Dan Dan the ice cream man and congratulations on the winning title Jonathanlynch
Inside the 'joyful' moment Prince Archie's birthday bike was gifted to him - and why sister Princess Lili will be pleased too
Mad Dogs and Englishmen, a bike shop in California, made the kind gesture on May 6 2023www.hellomagazine.com
Has anyone seen this psychophantic bilgefrom the owners of the bike company that gifted Aldi a bike . It's absolute brown nosing to the extreme . It does mention online trolling over it though so that could be us l suspect .
I do hope so
BiB ok...
P.S. This also means we're back to "We gave them a bike". Pick a story and stick with it lol
Last edited:
Thank you DanDan and Jonathan for the recap and title.
A bit of background here, and I've just put the main points. There are lots of articles on this matter.
"Fairbridge abuse survivors welcome government help after talks fail with Prince Charles's charity"
ABC South West WA
Wed 24 Mar 2021 at 12:27
Federal and state governments will step in to pay the redress claims of dozens of survivors of abuse at Fairbridge Farm Schools, after negotiations fail with charities linked to Prince Charles.
It comes after Prince Charles's personal charity the Prince's Trust Group, and associated entity Fairbridge Restored, said they were unable to sign up to the National Redress Scheme, to the frustration of the Australian government.
Vice-president of past-pupils' group Old Fairbridgeans Association in WA, Derek Smith said many experienced dark times including sexual abuse.
"I've talked to many children and they just go back in a huddle — what they are trying to tell me they, can't tell me," Mr Smith said.
Fairbridge survivors and their advocates have been fighting for years for the Commonwealth and State governments to act as funders-of-last resort in cases where organisations can't — or won't — sign up to the National Redress Scheme.
Despite long negotiations with the Australian government, both the Prince's Trust and Fairbridge Society have said they could not — for a variety of legal reasons — sign up to the National Redress Scheme and were looking at other ways to help.
A Prince's Trust spokesperson said: "We welcome this decision by the Australian Government, and The Trust remains committed to providing Fairbridge with funds to support victims and survivors."
........................
From this it seems that the Australian government finally stepped in 2 years ago to compensate about 70 victims, but there were hundreds more. Some compensation seems to have been paid in 2015.
A bit of background here, and I've just put the main points. There are lots of articles on this matter.
"Fairbridge abuse survivors welcome government help after talks fail with Prince Charles's charity"
ABC South West WA
Wed 24 Mar 2021 at 12:27
Federal and state governments will step in to pay the redress claims of dozens of survivors of abuse at Fairbridge Farm Schools, after negotiations fail with charities linked to Prince Charles.
- Former child migrants at Fairbridge Farm Schools will finally be able to access redress for abuse suffered after years of delays
- The Commonwealth and state governments will meet the costs of at least 70 claims from Fairbridge abuse survivors
It comes after Prince Charles's personal charity the Prince's Trust Group, and associated entity Fairbridge Restored, said they were unable to sign up to the National Redress Scheme, to the frustration of the Australian government.
Vice-president of past-pupils' group Old Fairbridgeans Association in WA, Derek Smith said many experienced dark times including sexual abuse.
"I've talked to many children and they just go back in a huddle — what they are trying to tell me they, can't tell me," Mr Smith said.
Fairbridge survivors and their advocates have been fighting for years for the Commonwealth and State governments to act as funders-of-last resort in cases where organisations can't — or won't — sign up to the National Redress Scheme.
Despite long negotiations with the Australian government, both the Prince's Trust and Fairbridge Society have said they could not — for a variety of legal reasons — sign up to the National Redress Scheme and were looking at other ways to help.
A Prince's Trust spokesperson said: "We welcome this decision by the Australian Government, and The Trust remains committed to providing Fairbridge with funds to support victims and survivors."
........................
From this it seems that the Australian government finally stepped in 2 years ago to compensate about 70 victims, but there were hundreds more. Some compensation seems to have been paid in 2015.
It is ! Should be with you now. ( lightning map, installed when daughter was doing a weather dependent job)
Decent bit of rain, still feels like electricity in air London outskirts
I'm in London and it's still far too humid for my liking. I hope the rain heads down south soon.
I haven't done anything all day because it's too hot (apart from Tattling)
One of my favourite authors is Terry Pratchett, because he makes an imaginary world that is full of all kinds of inconsistencies, somehow make sense! And also because its usually the right person who wins, often heavily influenced by the powers that be! and I always like a happy ending!
If you stop watching these threads for a few days, you end up extremely confused! I would imagine media claims do self regulate and adhere to ''codes'' but they may not be quite the self regulation or 'codes' we would like them to adhere to!
In a world of rumours, Add in the men in grey and the RF press office, and unofficial briefings from people like Princess Diana, then it must get extremely murky to make sense of it all.
because there must be times when information is accessed that obviously shouldnt, but there must also be times when info is accessed that end up stopping a disaster. Im thinking more of serious things like terrorist threats, or child abuse cases, where people are too scared to inform in case they are seen as interfering. Which surely has to be more of an option, if we end up closing up all information, in case it leaks or breaks privacy?
I'm in London and it's still far too humid for my liking. I hope the rain heads down south soon.
I haven't done anything all day because it's too hot (apart from Tattling)
I went out for an early bike ride at 7.30 to miss the heat and the crowds- turns out it wasn’t exactly an original idea !
Well you did it, brought it across !I was replying to @LadyMuck just as the previous thread closed and I'm not sure how to bring across the post - is that possible anyone, hopefully the below makes sense....
It was from the Laura Poirot tweet about Archie and the RF being complicit.
Just out of interest has anyone on this thread ever written to the BRF about the Harkles Children?
There seem to be so much on the WWW now about the existence of the children, I just don't see how it can be ignored....
The "never complain, never explain" game is strong with this one!
ETA: Seems I brought it across, I've zero idea how I did that
can't find a hand clapping, the one I found looks as though it's telling you to eff off so gave it a swerve....! Here's a crown and mushroom.From Laura Poirot...
"After the RF helped stage a fake birth, photocall and christening of the first child? No, there must be an agreement in place with mutual benefits."
Of course there's an agreement in place, always was and still is. It would have been impossible to stage the christening in the Queen's private chapel at Windsor, pretend Welby was there, allow Chris Allerton to Photoshop the Royals in for public release, cleared his access to the Palace.
Impossible without Palace approval and help.
This is the elephant in the room and where the press won't go. Even BookWorm, Celt and Lady C won't go there. But our Laura did!
I've been saying this for years.
I have really warmed to them-now Edwards the Duke of Edinburgh & Sophie the Duchess. I hadn't realised how much they do ; Sophie is first-class.
So I was bored doing the laundry and checked out L Poiroit’s page. Just curious why Doria was getting an allowance from the RF? Did we cover this and I missed it?
Attachments
Probs on insistence from her no-good hoe of an off-spring.
" all hoes together"......
I think it was discussed many threads ago.
Smegz may have been paying her mum out of whatever allowance she was given, but even if that was the case it's still outrageous. Doria was quick to take money from the Royal coffers and was she grateful? Of couse not, the snakey witch.
Smegz and her mum have probably been siphoning off money from Haznos bank since the beginning. There was a rumour at one time that Doria had millions in the bank but of course that can't be substantiated.
Can't wait for the divorce when we might find out some of the truth.
I have just been reading a book called The Tewkesbury Tomb for most of the day.
I'm watching Mamma Mia here we go again (don't judge lol) and the actor who plays young Harry is the one who plays the POW in The Windsors.
Honestly I can't see him as anyone else now, it's amusing me no end. I'm easily pleased.
Honestly I can't see him as anyone else now, it's amusing me no end. I'm easily pleased.
Breaks of privacy dont' apply to things that are truly in the public interest.
-dangers, corruption, distribution of funds...crime..
So danger wouldn't be hidden, just the gloating at the victims, false accusations, reputation destruction by accusation without evidence ....
It is very easy to control this, a serious amount of worlds media does, without totalitarian censorship, but they have-written laws and avoid the sensationalisation of ''serious'' stories, stories which can ruin lives if untrue.The Palace of course couldn't control this, you can't complain about the media when you expect from the media to ''polish'' your image.
And with certain regulations ''media image polishing'' is done by separate, profesional body's.
Rarely however is it executed in Britain, so you get the Kings press secretary writting a book about the King, instead of writting a book about his work for the King (the expertise, I wouldn't have a issue with that.)
This whole thing sounds like I'm trying to sell ''media censorship, which I dont, I'm just trying to show the manipulation of the public via their own ''interests '' if you want.
The internet is a hard place to have a balanced conversation because the average user lives by the us vs them mantra, but I will try to explain:
The ''sting'' against Gary Goldsmith (Kate's uncle) came out a few days before their engagement announcement.
cocaine, hookers,W&K at the Maison the Bang Bang (he will invite them to ''compromise'' the future King)...
Human interest-glorious gossip,the ''pure'' Kate with a junkie uncle...
The motives however were never ''in the public interest'' they wanted to ''show the power''
namely to succeed in separating them, because they succeeded multiple times in the history of Royal reporting to actually separate Royal couples, Charles and Camilla (partially)Charles and Sarah Spencer , and another one (brain dead) Andrew and Koo, Harry and Chelsy, almost Edward and Sophie and it goes on,
Directly or indirectly without ''the people'' actually saying ''we don't want Kate as future bride'' the press decided for them based on ''outrage'' about the ''morality'' and ''suitability'' of the potential bride without -simplified giving a single duck about...the groom, or the public.
''But, but their position, they are rich, our taxes...''
That part ''But, but their position, they are rich, our taxes...'' doesnt work for me..because well I chose so.
Related to my point directly about Gary
Autumns uncle also Gary (yes serious) is or was a brothel owner.
The chances that you had an idea about it are slim, but if you did, you are likely aware that most people didn't. And that's it, why if ''public interest'' is the ultimate excuse, was Gary (Kate) million times rehashed while Gary (Autumn) wasn't.
No, its not ''popularity'' or ''rank'' of a Royal they marry, its -$$$ using human interest via ''prominence'' of the target.
Just googled that. Is it good?
I enjoy a murder mystery
- Status