Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Meghan & Harry: WE QUIT

Options
1…3334363839…70

Comments

  • Options
    #1052
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Just people hahahahaha. Pull the other one, it has a bell on it.

    Yup, just people. I don’t make a fuss of famous people. I’ve stood next to a few in my life and basically ignored them. Noted who they were to myself and that was it. Maybe it’s you who can’t imagine Harry and Meghan being viewed as ordinary people. Hmmm.


  • Options
    #1053
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Yup, just people. I don’t make a fuss of famous people. I’ve stood next to a few in my life and basically ignored them. Noted who they were to myself and that was it. Maybe it’s you who can’t imagine Harry and Meghan being viewed as ordinary people. Hmmm.

    You are so cool. Blanking famous people hahaha. You’re trying too hard.


  • Options
    #1054
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    You are so cool. Blanking famous people hahaha. You’re trying too hard.

    It’s the truth. Believe it, don’t believe it. *shrug*


  • Options
    #1055
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    It’s the truth. Believe it, don’t believe it. *shrug*

    Anytime I see a famous person I kick them in the boll0cks. Just to prove how little I think of their fame hahahahaha.


  • Options
    #1056
    MoonUnit75
    Registered Users Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭MoonUnit75


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Those stories were proven to be fake news, none of them had any substance or proof to back up their claims, and the Sussex's are taking a lawsuit against the newspaper that published them.
    Taken from the court documents:

    What the Mail titles wrote:
    3. “How Meghan Markle’s Australian aide Samantha ‘the Panther’ Cohen rose from a Brisbane home to Buckingham Palace – before becoming the second aide to walk out on the ‘difficult Duchess”

    What the Duchess’s lawyers say:
    “The suggestion that Samantha Cohen (who was private secretary for both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex) walked out on the Claimant or that she did so because the Claimant was “difficult” to work for (a word used six times in this article) is untrue, as well as damaging.
    “Ms Cohen, who was a highly respected and dedicated member of Her Majesty the Queen’s staff for sixteen years, personally chose to come out of retirement in order to work for the Claimant.
    “Far from walking out on her, Ms Cohen even extended the original year which she had intended to work for as she wanted to carry on helping the Duke and Duchess with their office.
    “Further, the Claimant’s “personal assistant” was in fact assistant to both the Duke and Duchess, and, contrary to what the Defendant stated in the article, she did not ‘quit’.”
    It's not just Samantha Cohen, since 2018 they have lost:
    Edward Lane Fox, Harry's private secretary
    Katrina McKeever, senior communications secretary
    Melissa Touabti, Meghan's personal assistant
    Amy Pickeril,l Meghan's assistant private secretary
    Three nannies
    One of Meghan's bodygaurds.
    Oh please.
    They were publishing stories implying she was a hood gangster from Compton, that her love of avocados was "fuelling human rights abuses, drought and murder", and that she intentionally tried to kill Princess Charlotte with her wedding flowers.
    If it was really all about the serious issues, why weren't they reported? And why did they instead rip her to shreds for every perceived faux pas and minor indescretion, like the two page spread she got for daring to be pictured with her hands in her bloody pockets???

    This is how the press work. If you act or present yourself as being self-righteous and self-important, the press will react by taking you back down a notch or two, one step at a time. If you act respectful, humble and grateful for your exceptionally privileged position, not "holier-than-thou/do as I say not as I do" then they will praise you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1057
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Anytime I see a famous person I kick them in the boll0cks. Just to prove how little I think of their fame hahahahaha.

    Super.


  • Options
    #1058
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    This is how the press work. If you act or present yourself as being self-righteous and self-important, the press will react by taking you back down a notch or two, one step at a time. If you act respectful, humble and grateful for your exceptionally privileged position, not "holier-than-thou/do as I say not as I do" then they will praise you.

    Aaaah, this is just highlighting the vindictiveness of the media and underlining why Harry and Meghan made the right decision. Was that your intention?


  • Options
    #1059
    MoonUnit75
    Registered Users Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭MoonUnit75


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Aaaah, this is just highlighting the vindictiveness of the media and underlining why Harry and Meghan made the right decision. Was that your intention?

    OK, I get it, the press should reward and coddle the self-righteous, self-absorbed and self-indulgent. That's what the wider public want, is it? The press reflect the public mood, they aren't stupid enough to attack a popular figurehead who has earned public respect and works hard to maintain it. They do cut people who pretend to be all these things down to size very rapidly and very voraciously, I will give you that.


  • Options
    #1060
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    It's not just Samantha Cohen, since 2018 they have lost:
    Edward Lane Fox, Harry's private secretary
    Katrina McKeever, senior communications secretary
    Melissa Touabti, Meghan's personal assistant
    Amy Pickeril,l Meghan's assistant private secretary
    Three nannies
    One of Meghan's bodygaurds.

    If you're going to make the serious accusation that all those staff left solely becase of Meghan, you're going to have to back that up with proof.
    Sensationalist speculation from a "close source" via the Daily Fail doesn't count as proof, btw.
    This is how the press work. If you act or present yourself as being self-righteous and self-important, the press will react by taking you back down a notch or two, one step at a time. If you act respectful, humble and grateful for your exceptionally privileged position, not "holier-than-thou/do as I say not as I do" then they will praise you.

    Ah right, would that be all the times that she flicked her coat open?
    Or when she spent 5k of taxpayer money on a copper bath (which doesn't exist)?
    Or when she spent 500k of taxpayer money on soundproofing Frogmore Cottage? (never happened)

    Are you saying she deserves to have all those downright lies & fabrications published about her? Would you want anything to do with a media who posted fake news to paint you in a negative light?

    Can you please post some specific examples of her horrible early behaviour that resulted in the press treated in this way?


  • Options
    #1061
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    OK, I get it, the press should reward and coddle the self-righteous, self-absorbed and self-indulgent. That's what the wider public want, is it? The press reflect the public mood, they aren't stupid enough to attack a popular figurehead who has earned public respect and works hard to maintain it. They do cut people who pretend to be all these things down to size very rapidly and very voraciously, I will give you that.

    Coddling/vindictiveness. It’s just binary for you? No middle ground?

    Because, make no mistake, negatively highlighting an open coat or a hand on a baby bump is nothing short of vindictive.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1062
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Coddling/vindictiveness. It’s just binary for you? No middle ground?

    Because, make no mistake, negatively highlighting an open coat or a hand on a baby bump is nothing short of vindictive.

    I don't know how any reasonable person could say that a heavily pregnant woman deserves to be ripped to shreds in the national press for daring to not button up her coat.
    Its completely absurd and it beggers belief that this is even being offered up as a legitimate reason for the harrassment she has received.


  • Options
    #1063
    MoonUnit75
    Registered Users Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭MoonUnit75


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    If you're going to make the serious accusation that all those staff left solely becase of Meghan, you're going to have to back that up with proof.
    Sensationalist speculation from a "close source" via the Daily Fail doesn't count as proof, btw.

    What 'serious accusations' have I made? Listen to yourself.
    Ah right, would that be all the times that she flicked her coat open?
    Or when she spent 5k of taxpayer money on a copper bath (which doesn't exist)?
    Or when she spent 500k of taxpayer money on soundproofing Frogmore Cottage? (never happened)

    Are you saying she deserves to have all those downright lies & fabrications published about her? Would you want anything to do with a media who posted fake news to paint you in a negative light?

    Can you please post some specific examples of her horrible early behaviour that resulted in the press treated in this way?

    I'm talking about the general dynamic between the press and celebrities. Concentrate on what I am saying specifically, not what papers are saying or I am not going to respond. I agree with the comment above, it's like the woke-patrol in here have launched a tactical assault on anyone who isn't on team Sussex.


  • Options
    #1064
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    What 'serious accusations' have I made? Listen to yourself.


    See below, you stated that a number of staff have left their positions due to her demanding nature?
    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    The mood changed after several stories started to come out that clearly had substance, how she treated staff and her demanding nature led to loyal staff quitting.
    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    It's not just Samantha Cohen, since 2018 they have lost:
    Edward Lane Fox, Harry's private secretary
    Katrina McKeever, senior communications secretary
    Melissa Touabti, Meghan's personal assistant
    Amy Pickeril,l Meghan's assistant private secretary
    Three nannies
    One of Meghan's bodygaurds.

    Where is your proof for these accusations?
    I'm talking about the general dynamic between the press and celebrities. Concentrate on what I am saying specifically, not what papers are saying or I am not going to respond. I agree with the comment above, it's like the woke-patrol in here have launched a tactical assault on anyone who isn't on team Sussex.

    Yes, and I'm asking for specific examples of her horrible behaviour in her early that led to the press hating her and thus publishing stories about how her love for avocado is contributing to the increase in the murder rate.
    Surely that's not an unreasonable request?


  • Options
    #1065
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 21,679 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I was reading about the latest developments. Meghan really does struggle to carry her baby. She was photographed carrying him in a sling and Lord save us sure you'd swear she had a mini sumo wrestler attached to her.

    Of course this was captured by the Daily Mail.


  • Options
    #1066
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    It's not just Samantha Cohen, since 2018 they have lost:
    Edward Lane Fox, Harry's private secretary
    Katrina McKeever, senior communications secretary
    Melissa Touabti, Meghan's personal assistant
    Amy Pickeril,l Meghan's assistant private secretary
    Three nannies
    One of Meghan's bodygaurds.



    This is how the press work. If you act or present yourself as being self-righteous and self-important, the press will react by taking you back down a notch or two, one step at a time. If you act respectful, humble and grateful for your exceptionally privileged position, not "holier-than-thou/do as I say not as I do" then they will praise you.

    Unbelievably petty and pointlessly vindictive. This was already addressed in their lawsuit, pointing out one of their staff who was accused of leaving over Meghan's behavior, had actually stayed on longer than the scheduled retirement, because she LIKED them that much and did them a favour. Some rotation of staff would be normal as they move on with their own lives, as Meghan and Harry's household split from Will and Kates, or as already mentioned - retirement. There is absolutely not one shred of evidence that anything the rags printed about bad behavior from M&H caused any professional separations. You won't find one personal account of this. On the other hand, you will find dozens of people who have said M&H are the loveliest, most kindest, down to earth people you'd ever meet.
    Your post is only proof yet again of the kind of person YOU are, and not anything to do with Meghan or Harry. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #1067
    MoonUnit75
    Registered Users Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭MoonUnit75


    Stateofyou wrote: »
    Unbelievably petty and pointlessly vindictive. This was already addressed in their lawsuit, pointing out one of their staff who was accused of leaving over Meghan's behavior, had actually stayed on longer than the scheduled retirement, because she LIKED them that much and did them a favour. Some rotation of staff would be normal as they move on with their own lives, as Meghan and Harry's household split from Will and Kates, or as already mentioned - retirement. There is absolutely not one shred of evidence that anything the rags printed about bad behavior from M&H caused any professional separations. You won't find one personal account of this. On the other hand, you will find dozens of people who have said M&H are the loveliest, most kindest, down to earth people you'd ever meet.
    Your post is only proof yet again of the kind of person YOU are, and not anything to do with Meghan or Harry. :rolleyes:

    You’re right, I see it clearly now. William and Kate must have gotten so sick and tired of how lovely, kind and considerate Harry and Meghan became and how well they treat the staff. They just couldn’t take all the loveliness any longer so keep their distance.

    The staff are obviously furious at how watertight non-disclosure agreements prevent them from declaring how fabulous it all is.


  • Options
    #1068
    pinkyeye
    Registered Users Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭pinkyeye


    I don't know what Carlisle or Ipswich have to do with any of this?


  • Options
    #1069
    MoonUnit75
    Registered Users Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭MoonUnit75


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Coddling/vindictiveness. It’s just binary for you? No middle ground?

    Because, make no mistake, negatively highlighting an open coat or a hand on a baby bump is nothing short of vindictive.

    It was commented on over lots of different platforms, right back to their time in Australia when she didn’t even have much of a bump. It was the fact that it was appearing across social media that prompted the first articles from what I remember.


  • Options
    #1070
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    It was commented on over lots of different platforms, right back to their time in Australia when she didn’t even have much of a bump. It was the fact that it was appearing across social media that prompted the first articles from what I remember.

    Obviously the platforms you read are smut paparazzi platforms, you might want to work on your fake news ingestion. Secondary schools, some colleges and towns are even giving classes about how to better vet your news sources and social media to suss out fake news from reality/quality news sources. Ha.


  • Options
    #1071
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    MoonUnit75 wrote: »
    You’re right, I see it clearly now. William and Kate must have gotten so sick and tired of how lovely, kind and considerate Harry and Meghan became and how well they treat the staff. They just couldn’t take all the loveliness any longer so keep their distance.

    The staff are obviously furious at how watertight non-disclosure agreements prevent them from declaring how fabulous it all is.

    Who says any of them are sick of anything? Lying, smutty paparazzi sources, that's who. Case. In. Point.

    H&M don't have an attitude problem, you have a fake news problem. There's help available!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1072
    valoren
    Registered Users Posts: 5,462 ✭✭✭valoren


    Can they be that surprised that the Paps are taking an interest?

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51197099


  • Options
    #1073
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    With the pages and pages and pages of back/forth arguing by a few posters over Meghan coming out of a taxi with her coat half open, showing her bump when pregnant and discussing this at length, I do really fear for some people and their sanity.

    You do know guys, regardless of whether you're "for" Meghan stepping out of a car with her coat opened or closed, when pregnant, that the main reason they left, is not really related to their press coverage by the Daily Fail? You do know that don't you?

    That's it's much more related to the interfamilial disputes that we will never know the full story behind.


    Do you know that, don't you?


  • Options
    #1074
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Deleted User wrote: »
    With the pages and pages and pages of back/forth arguing by a few posters over Meghan coming out of a taxi with her coat half open, showing her bump when pregnant and discussing this at length, I do really fear for some people and their sanity.

    You do know guys, regardless of whether you're "for" Meghan stepping out of a car with her coat opened or closed, when pregnant, that the main reason they left, is not really related to their press coverage by the Daily Fail? You do know that don't you?

    That's it's much more related to the interfamilial disputes that we will never know the full story behind.


    Do you know that, don't you?

    But what would we do without those who provide commentary on the discussion at hand? That’s the really vital work, right there.


  • Options
    #1075
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,955 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Deleted User wrote: »
    With the pages and pages and pages of back/forth arguing by a few posters over Meghan coming out of a taxi with her coat half open, showing her bump when pregnant and discussing this at length, I do really fear for some people and their sanity.

    You do know guys, regardless of whether you're "for" Meghan stepping out of a car with her coat opened or closed, when pregnant, that the main reason they left, is not really related to their press coverage by the Daily Fail? You do know that don't you?

    That's it's much more related to the interfamilial disputes that we will never know the full story behind.


    Do you know that, don't you?

    What is the source that makes you uniquely privy to this 'revelation'?


  • Options
    #1076
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    cnocbui wrote: »
    What is the source that makes you uniquely privy to this 'revelation'?

    It's not a revelation- any thicko could deduce that. :pac::pac::pac:


  • Options
    #1077
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    But what would we do without those who provide commentary on the discussion at hand? That’s the really vital work, right there.

    Well, it would save my mouse a few clicks- which is made of plastic- which will deteriorate all the faster because of their verbal diarrhoea - which will mean more plastic in the world- so you could say, if these people just shut up for a while, it might save the planet from plastic waste :P


  • Options
    #1078
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,955 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    It's not a revelation- any thicko could deduce that. :pac::pac::pac:

    And here's me thinking that only a thicko would deduce that...


  • Options
    #1079
    wyrn
    Registered Users Posts: 6,977 ✭✭✭wyrn


    Deleted User wrote: »

    You do know guys, regardless of whether you're "for" Meghan stepping out of a car with her coat opened or closed, when pregnant, that the main reason they left, is not really related to their press coverage by the Daily Fail? You do know that don't you?

    That's it's much more related to the interfamilial disputes that we will never know the full story behind.


    Do you know that, don't you?
    Here's the thing, we can only comment with certainty on the published print and online press because we can read it. Whereas we are not privy to inter familial conflicts - despite what "palace insiders" may say as it is hearsay!


  • Options
    #1080
    bitofabind
    Registered Users Posts: 939 ✭✭✭bitofabind


    Doesn't look like their Canadian adventure is off to the best start - there a few days and already a threat of legal action against the Canadian press for taking unsolicited photos of Meghan in Vancouver:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51197099

    I think if the overriding reason for their stepping back from the Royal Family was for less press intrusion, it may prove to be misguided. Paps are under no obligation to stay away now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1081
    cryptocurrency
    Registered Users Posts: 1,611 ✭✭✭cryptocurrency


    This is a very big thread for fringe players in the british royal family


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement