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

Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21

Options
1…188189191193194…727

Comments

  • Options
    #5702
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    jm08 wrote: »
    I want you to explain to me why they were given a title and Archie was not.

    Are you for real?

    In case you don’t know. I am not a member of the RF, and nor do I have any role for the sovereign

    Now, can you answer me. Are you saying that Archie not being titled prince was due to racism?


  • Options
    #5703
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Again switching the goalposts. If she told her doctors how she was feeling then they would have a duty to protect her and get her the help she needed. If she did tell them and they did nothing then it’s them who she needs to air her frustrations at, not the RF who didn’t know she was suicidal.


    It seems that the Queen's physicians were involved after all because it is royal protocal. She was allowed have a female doctor.

    Having politely declined the services of Alan and Guy as lead physicians, Meghan and Harry have chosen a female doctor to oversee the birth of their first child. However, royal protocol is royal protocol, and the Queen's doctors can't be excluded from the birth all together.


    Instead, while the female doctor will lead the delivery of the baby, the more traditional team will still be around ready to step in should there be any complications during the birth.


    Looks like they were keeping a close eye on her.


  • Options
    #5704
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    walshb wrote: »
    Are you for real?

    In case you don’t know. I am not a member of the RF, and not do I have any role for the sovereign

    Now, can you answer me. Are you saying that Archie not being titled prince was due to racism?


    Looks like it to me. The other excuse of cutting down the number of working royals is bull**** considering the Queen, Charles & Camilla, Anne are getting on a bit and the next King, Charles has only two sons (unlike the Queen having four children) which means that William & Kate are going to have a very heavy workload.


  • Options
    #5705
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    jm08 wrote: »
    Looks like they were keeping a close eye on her.

    That is quite the paranoid statement. Dear lord.

    They were on hand only in the event of something going wrong as they cannot be out of the picture entirely due to protocol, but they were very limited in what they could do. She did not want “men in suits” delivering her baby. (Most would want whoever is most capable of the job, gender irrelevant) She had her own team which consisted of more than just one woman like you say, but it a was female led team. Her team also cost tens of thousands whereas the Queen’s team do not charge.


  • Options
    #5706
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    jm08 wrote: »
    Looks like it to me. The other excuse of cutting down the number of working royals is bull**** considering the Queen, Charles & Camilla, Anne are getting on a bit and the next King, Charles has only two sons (unlike the Queen having four) which means that William & Kate are going to have a very heavy workload.

    Looks like it..?

    Ok, fine.. so the Queen, who made this change is racist. Did it due to her being racist?

    So, seeing as she wasn’t the one who made the skin color comment, according to the gruesome twosome, we have at least two racists now in the RF..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5707
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    retro:electro wrote: »
    That is quite the paranoid statement. Dear lord.

    They were on hand only in the event of something going wrong as they cannot be out of the picture entirely due to protocol, but they were very limited in what they could do. She did not want “men in suits” delivering her baby. (Most would want whoever is most capable of the job, gender irrelevant) She had her own team which consisted of more than just one woman like you say, but it a was female led team. Her team also cost tens of thousands whereas the Queen’s team do not charge.


    Well, her ''team'' seems to have consisted of one female doctor who had the Royal Physicians looking over her shoulder.

    Have you a link to the cost of the team please?


  • Options
    #5708
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    jm08 wrote: »
    Well, her ''team'' seems to have consisted of one female doctor who had the Royal Physicians looking over her shoulder.

    You are confusing the term “female led team” with one solitary doctor who was a woman.

    And in any event, it’s her team she should have reached out to when she felt suicidal thoughts while pregnant. Not HR. It’s anyone’s guess why she didn’t.

    Not sure of the cost of the team but this article breaks down some of the costs

    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9033848/meghan-markles-pregnancy-cost-revealed-royal-baby/amp/


  • Options
    #5709
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    walshb wrote: »
    Looks like it..?

    Ok, fine.. so the Queen, who made this change is racist. Did it due to her being racist?

    So, seeing as she wasn’t the one who made the skin color comment, according to the gruesome twosome, we have at least two racists now in the RF..


    If you can give me a reason as to why he wasn't given a title and an explaination as to whywe were told that this decision was Harry and Meghan's decision not to give the child a title, I'll evaluate your explaination.


  • Options
    #5710
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    walshb wrote: »
    Looks like it..?

    Ok, fine.. so the Queen, who made this change is racist. Did it due to her being racist?

    So, seeing as she wasn’t the one who made the skin color comment, according to the gruesome twosome, we have at least two racists now in the RF..


    Maybe three - Princess Michael of Kent is a racist.


  • Options
    #5711
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    jm08 wrote: »
    If you can give me a reason as to why he wasn't given a title and an explaination as to whywe were told that this decision was Harry and Meghan's decision not to give the child a title, I'll evaluate your explaination.

    You have been given the reason, over and over, you have just ignored any answers that are given to you and continue to ask them. Over and over.
    Personally I think you're taking the piss at this stage, and it's probably time to report your posts for trolling


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5712
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    jm08 wrote: »
    If you can give me a reason as to why he wasn't given a title and an explaination as to whywe were told that this decision was Harry and Meghan's decision not to give the child a title, I'll evaluate your explaination.

    Sorry, why are you asking me about Archie not getting a title?

    You think it’s racism related

    I don’t..

    You need to address this belief to the RF, not me..

    A meeting with her majesty is what you need..


  • Options
    #5713
    Deeec
    Registered Users Posts: 4,846 ✭✭✭Deeec


    jm08 wrote: »
    If you can give me a reason as to why he wasn't given a title and an explaination as to whywe were told that this decision was Harry and Meghan's decision not to give the child a title, I'll evaluate your explaination.

    This has been explained over and over again both in this thread and in the media. It has nothing to do with Archie's skin colour. What bit are you finding difficult to understand?


  • Options
    #5714
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    walshb wrote: »
    Sorry, why are you asking me about Archie not getting a title?

    You think it’s racism related

    I don’t..

    You need to address this belief to the RF, not me..

    A meeting with her majesty is what you need..


    The claim was that only the children of those directly in line to the throne were given a title. But that is not the case. Its only the first born and all the rest are discretionary. Now that you know this, I want to know why you think Archie was excluded.



    I want to know why you think they are not racist.


  • Options
    #5715
    Deeec
    Registered Users Posts: 4,846 ✭✭✭Deeec


    jm08 wrote: »
    The claim was that only the children of those directly in line to the throne were given a title. But that is not the case. Its only the first born and all the rest are discretionary. Now that you know this, I want to know why you think Archie was excluded.



    I want to know why you think they are not racist.

    Is Harry directly in line to the throne? - I don't think so. Tell us why Archie should get a title based on the fact his dad is not directly in line to the throne.


  • Options
    #5716
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Deeec wrote: »
    This has been explained over and over again both in this thread and in the media. It has nothing to do with Archie's skin colour. What bit are you finding difficult to understand?


    The explaination that has been given in this thread is that there is a rule that only the great grand children of the person directly in line to the throne gets a title isn't true.


    The rule is that only the eldest grandchild directly in line to the throne gets a title, so Charlotte's and Louis titles are at the discretion of the Queen.


    Now that you know what the rule is, can you explain why Charlotte and Louis got discretionary titles and Archie did not.


    Then , can you explain why it was said that not giving Archie a title was because Meghan and Harry requested it?


  • Options
    #5717
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,174 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    jm08 wrote: »
    The claim was that only the children of those directly in line to the throne were given a title. But that is not the case. Its only the first born and all the rest are discretionary. Now that you know this, I want to know why you think Archie was excluded.


    No, it used to be only the first born son, but the queen changed it in 2012 to apply to all of Williams children (who weren't even born yet). This was done to avoid a situation where if the first born was a girl she wouldn't have a title but her brother would.

    But yeah, the queen totally did it to spite Archie and meghan, before she even knew them.


  • Options
    #5718
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    jm08 wrote: »
    The explaination that has been given in this thread is that there is a rule that only the great grand children of the person directly in line to the throne gets a title isn't true.


    The rule is that only the eldest grandchild directly in line to the throne gets a title, so Charlotte's and Louis titles are at the discretion of the Queen.


    Now that you know what the rule is, can you explain why Charlotte and Louis got discretionary titles and Archie did not.


    Then , can you explain why it was said that not giving Archie a title was because Meghan and Harry requested it?

    The rules of succession were changed before Charlottes birth, removing the gender barrier ie should anything happen to George, then Charlotte is next in line and not Louis. It’s in the Queens gift to give titles.


  • Options
    #5719
    Deeec
    Registered Users Posts: 4,846 ✭✭✭Deeec


    jm08 wrote: »
    The explaination that has been given in this thread is that there is a rule that only the great grand children of the person directly in line to the throne gets a title isn't true.


    The rule is that only the eldest grandchild directly in line to the throne gets a title, so Charlotte's and Louis titles are at the discretion of the Queen.


    Now that you know what the rule is, can you explain why Charlotte and Louis got discretionary titles and Archie did not.


    Then , can you explain why it was said that not giving Archie a title was because Meghan and Harry requested it?

    Because their father will be king. Archie's father will not be king.


  • Options
    #5720
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    This article explains it all.

    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.insider.com/prince-harry-meghan-markle-archie-snubbed-prince-title-royal-decree-2021-3%3famp


  • Options
    #5721
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    retro:electro wrote: »
    You are confusing the term “female led team” with one solitary doctor who was a woman.

    And in any event, it’s her team she should have reached out to when she felt suicidal thoughts while pregnant. Not HR. It’s anyone’s guess why she didn’t.

    Not sure of the cost of the team but this article breaks down some of the costs

    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9033848/meghan-markles-pregnancy-cost-revealed-royal-baby/amp/


    So, it looks like medical costs were £15,000.



    The rest of that article is ridiculous - but what do you expect from The Sun. For instance, they put the cost of the New York party at 250K and then said it was Serena Williams who paid for it. The other thing was the jet to New York (which Amal Clooney, who was going to the party, paid for).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5722
    Bobtheman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,703 ✭✭✭Bobtheman


    I wish the two of them would **** off and never be heard from again. If somebody made a racist comment take it up with them. Rather than the whole world.
    Pretending she could not go see a psychiatrist is pure and utter bull****. She was not a prisoner.
    Her husband comes across as powerless. He should have taken issue but seemingly stood by.
    Whinge bags. Multi millionaires playing victims
    Meegan is a diva.
    Pure and simple


  • Options
    #5723
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    jm08 wrote: »
    The claim was that only the children of those directly in line to the throne were given a title. But that is not the case. Its only the first born and all the rest are discretionary. Now that you know this, I want to know why you think Archie was excluded.



    I want to know why you think they are not racist.

    Been explained to you several times regarding the awarding titles to the great grandchildren.

    Queen made change before Harry and Markle even knew each other..

    Seriously, your utter failure to grasp this is either you deliberately refusing to, or you being extremely uneducated on simple logic..


  • Options
    #5724
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    Deeec wrote: »
    Because their father will be king. Archie's father will not be king.


    But the rule is the grandchildren of the Queen/King get the title of Prince/Princess, not just the children.


    The Queen & Princess Margaret got their Princess titles through their grandfather being King, as their father was the 2nd son and would not have been King except his brother abdicated.


  • Options
    #5725
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    walshb wrote: »
    Been explained to you several times regarding the awarding titles to the great grandchildren.

    Queen made change before Harry and Markle even knew each other..

    Seriously, your utter failure to grasp this is either you deliberately refusing to, or you being extremely uneducated on simple logic..


    But that explaination you have given is not correct. By that rule, Charlotte & Louis should not have titles.


  • Options
    #5726
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,165 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    jm08 wrote: »
    But the rule is the grandchildren of the Queen/King get the title of Prince/Princess, not just the children.


    The Queen & Princess Margaret got their Princess titles through their grandfather being King, as their father was the 2nd son and would not have been King except his brother abdicated.

    Archie is not a grandchild of the Queen.


  • Options
    #5727
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    jm08 wrote: »
    So, it looks like medical costs were £15,000.

    No, those weren’t the medical costs. That was just the cost of her package at that particular hospital. I’m not sure how much her specific team cost but I do know it had to be paid for.


  • Options
    #5728
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    jm08 wrote: »
    But the rule is the grandchildren of the Queen/King get the title of Prince/Princess, not just the children.


    The Queen & Princess Margaret got their Princess titles through their grandfather being King, as their father was the 2nd son and would not have been King except his brother abdicated.

    Archie is not a grandchild of the Queen. He will get the title of Prince when Charles takes the throne, as he is the grandchild of Charles.

    Get it yet?


  • Options
    #5729
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    jm08 wrote: »
    But the rule is the grandchildren of the Queen/King get the title of Prince/Princess, not just the children.


    The Queen & Princess Margaret got their Princess titles through their grandfather being King, as their father was the 2nd son and would not have been King except his brother abdicated.

    Peter Phillips. Zara Phillips. Lady Louise and Viscount Severn are all grandchildren of the Queen but are not Princes and Princesses.


  • Options
    #5730
    jm08
    Registered Users Posts: 11,300 ✭✭✭✭jm08


    walshb wrote: »
    Archie is not a grandchild of the Queen.


    He will be a grandchild of the next king though (unless Charles is going to be skipped for William).


    Can anyone explain why it was said that Harry & Meghan decided that they did not want a title for Archie when that isn't true. Who made that tale up?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5731
    Mena Mitty
    Registered Users Posts: 5,996 ✭✭✭Mena Mitty


    jm08 wrote: »
    Were they her medical team of private doctors or the RF's medical team of private doctors?

    Whether they were private doctors or RF doctors, they should have picked up on her state of mind at her antenatal checkups.....if what's been said is true.


Advertisement