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

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616610#Comment_119616610

You said the reason the onus is one them is because the RF are bankrolled by the public.

That is of no concern to them.

The RF never denied the conversations took place, so by your logic it's up to them to out the racist because that racist is taking lots of money off Joe Public.

As for the ginger one and B-List actress just being lying grifters, surely if that were true they would have never left?

Sardonicat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616627#Comment_119616627

But we know M is a liar. And there "work" is a grift. Bring paid to be filmed because they are interesting because they are a Duke and Duchess.

They didn't actually want to 'leave'. They wanted to step down from royal duties but keep the HRH and cash in on that.

Do I think Meghan was bullied and treated badly by the press? Yes. Do I think that racism was behind that? Yes

That doesn't mean I don't think they're a pair of grifters. The Royal family is a grift.

If the family was so odious to M and H why continue to use their titles and want titles for their kids? Why would you want your bi-racial babies to be Prince and Princess of a racist Royal family?

If you want out, go for it. Be out. More power and mucho respecto to ye. Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their little Prince and Princess? Boo hoo, Daddy cut me off! Come film me being a Duchess. That sound like "out" to you?

Multipass

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616627#Comment_119616627

They never left, that’s the problem 😂

Nor did they ever intend to fully leave. They’re throwing an extended strop because they didn’t get the half in, half out that they wanted. And making your own money is really really hard work, a real shock to the system, and so unfair, boo hoo.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616715#Comment_119616715

If the family was so odious to M and H why continue to use their titles and want titles for their kids?

They wanted security for their kids, which understandable.

But again if they are just out for the money, why leave?

They get to grift and have to do very very little in return, I mean far better than having to whore themselves to media organisations, wouldn't you agree?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119614379#Comment_119614379

She’s made her millions at this stage and I imagine most Americans couldn’t care less- it was a dreadful interview though and I don’t believe it was not staged- any good non-partisan interviewer would have not left things hanging in the air like she did- it was designed for maximum impact no question about that - obviously and legally they couldn’t name the “racist” individual but no self respecting interviewer would allow a cloud over multiple people with the word racist hanging over them- besides the Queen and Prince Philip I believe who were deliberately excluded, everyone else was a “suspect” in terms of how that story was presented

Sardonicat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616743#Comment_119616743

What's stopping them getting security for their kids themselves? Try washing their own clothes, cleaning their own home, cooking their own meals, not buying a €14m mansion, etc and freeing up some cash to pay for security. Harry wasn't broke. They wanted out, right?

Neyite

We can start by King Charlie explaining to the great British public why they had they to pay to silence a child who was trafficked and raped.

If you are going to ask Charlie that then it's probably best that you know that even the Royal family knew that paying off Andrew's settlement from the public purse would cause a peasant revolt. It was paid for from the personal wealth of the Queen, which is distinctly separate from the public income that they receive in varying amounts. Not much more palatable granted, but an important distinction nonetheless.

It's also important to note that Andrew (ab)used his Royal status to dodge questioning by the FBI in their investigation into Maxwell/Epstein. Now that, is a question worth asking Charlie about, if you ever do get a hold of him 😁

But I can see from H&M's point of view they must be wondering why Andy gets bankrolled and stays within the fold and they get ousted for what appears to be much less.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616783#Comment_119616783

They are, it's one of stated reasons they are whoring themselves to media organisations.

But again, you failed to answer my pretty simple question.

Here it is again.

But again if they are just out for the money, why leave?

They get to grift and have to do very very little in return, I mean far better than having to whore themselves to media organisations, wouldn't you agree?

In your own good time.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616806#Comment_119616806

It was paid for from the personal wealth of the Queen

I do love this fantasy when it gets belted out, like the Queen made her personal fortune by moonlighting as a mechanic on the evenings and weekends. 😂

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616064#Comment_119616064

To me what you posted there, is what I’d believe to be normal banter in any family. Introduce a person mixed race into the equation, does it still work? Absolutely , it’s still gingerist 😂

Turn it around the other way hoping for ginger over brown, hmm.. well let’s say it’s now not gingerist any more😂

I dunno what type of conversations people in mixed race marriages have with their families- what’s the norm? But what I do know is that if you’re sure that the family you’ve married into loves you and respects you regardless of your ethnicity, then any comments made relating to your baby relating to look and colour shouldn’t be taken to imply racism - but as you say, we don’t know the wording and even when this aledged comment was made is in dispute no less the wording of it

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616852#Comment_119616852

then any comments made relating to your baby relating to look and colour shouldn’t be taken to imply racism

If a family member belonging to you is "concerned" how dark your baby will be, I doubt it's banz.

He / She is probably a racist shíthead.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616783#Comment_119616783

There’s excellent value in some midlands towns in Ireland for instance- a daysent 2000 sq ft detached with a nice bit of road frontage for under 500k

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616867#Comment_119616867

i don’t disagree given the emphasis on the word “concerned” - but was the word “concerned” used in the interview? I just can’t recall at this stage - if you use the word commented or queried it wouldn’t have the same impact so hence my ask for clarification

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119615400#Comment_119615400

only they know why they didn't name the individual, i am certainly not going to be able to answer that question.

valoren

Let's imagine the scenario. Harry and Meghan want to step back. They want half in half out i.e. they want to make their own money but, since they are super-duper popular, they want to retain a link to the monarchy and give them more appeal via attending the high profile events which will mutually help build their respective brands. Think movie premieres etc. A circular arrangement. They want to be able to mimic the influencer model but with a royal title this will propel them towards financial independence so much sooner. They perhaps suggest a point where financial support will cease. Say a cool $100 million. The kind of money which will give a life of luxury in the wealthiest parts of California. They want to move to the USA and of course Harry, as a (now) son of a King, will be requiring round the clock security. His dad is all for it and so is the Queen. The pay for their security, they help them with deposits and expenses and Harry doesn't need to touch his inheritance money. His family are worth billions and are keen to help him build his life overseas. Harry is told that his kids can have Prince/Princess titles and it is entirely up to him and Meghan if they want that or not. Now supposing the above arrangement is put in place we, in parallel, also accept that Meghan suffered what she says she suffered from in the Oprah interview. Now ask yourself would this Oprah interview even happen? Would they be making accusations of racism? Neglect? My hole they would be. The reason they did that interview was because they didn't get what they wanted and then tried to conjure up whatever they could to clap back at those who wouldn't give them the life of riley they wanted.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119615713#Comment_119615713

i label those who have shown themselves to be fauners, fauners because that is what they are.

it is me and others who are unbiassed and impartial because we realise the RF are not the cuddly fareytale that their hangers on try to show them as and we know they have engaged in plenty of questionable behaviour so can deduct from that what harry and meghan says has a lot more truth to it then not.

walshb

Well, one either believes Harry and Meghan, or they believe William......

"We are absolutely not a racist family."

Now, I doubt William was talking about every RF who ever lived.....because let's be honest, every family in history could not say that ALL their members were never racist, or never showed any racist tendencies. Racism, after all is part of human nature. ALL humans can suffer from it as well as exhibit it.

Sardonicat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616867#Comment_119616867

Indeed. So why would you want your child of bi-racial heritage to be a Prince or Princess of the family of odious racists?

Why spend your vast wealth on mansions and staff to do your bidding when you want out of that lifestyle and leave nothing over to pay for the security to keep your kids safe? In your own good time....

Entitled sh1ts who thinks the world owes them a luxurious lifestyle - no different from the odious RF.

walshb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616947#Comment_119616947

Name one poster (and provide evidence) who said the RF are above criticism, or are perfect and ok and wonderful and cuddly...

You are hugely anti the monarchy, so anything that paints them in a bad light (evidence or not) doesn't matter to you, as once it hurts them, all is good. And because not everyone is like this, you decide to label them fawners; which is incredibly stupid, tbf

Just to be clear- I’m neither an anti monarchist or pro so no interest in being categorised and pointless engaging with me on that level- I’ll just laugh at you - I’m simply commenting on a news story in CA forum about some of the RF and putting forward my view on it- I view the monarchy in the same way I view any other “celebrities” or people with vast wealth and power that I won’t ever have in my social group.

My comments have nothing to do with pro or anti monarchy - monarchy tolerant of their existence is probably the best description given in that it’s the UK that decides whether to keep them or not- none of my business.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616227#Comment_119616227

and quite rightly so because the reason they don't believe her claim of being suicidal is because of their issues with her, or because a knuckle dragger who flounced out of his job like a big baby on to an irrelevant television channel watched only by big babies was asked to provide proof that she was lieing and couldn't.

walshb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119617099#Comment_119617099

Yes, and the other side is that she can't prove that she's telling the truth. Or at least to date I haven't seen anything.

Just because someone claims and says something doesn't mean it's genuine, sincere, true. We don't automatically have to believe everything someone claims/says. That's called being human.

I don't believe her claim of suicide, and I don't automatically believe that the person in the racist story was being intentionally racist. We don't even know if this whole racist situation/conversation took place: I think she and him used the two cards (racism and suicide) in a very insincere way, to paint themselves a certain way, and to make the RF out to be the baddies.

And you know what, they cannot disprove or prove, same way I cannot. It's a crock of sh1t!

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119615806#Comment_119615806

Why did they each give 2 very different versions of this alleged racism?

Meghan - several conversations about what skin colour Archie might have while she was pregnant.

Harry - one comment about what skin colour any future children might have before they got married.

It doesn't take a genius to spot the difference.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616967#Comment_119616967

they don't have to say such out right, they just have to emplie it.

i believe you and a couple of others are guilty of the charge and i use your posts as evidence.

J.O. Farmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616867#Comment_119616867

It was used by Megan, I don't know if it was used with Harry though by whoever brought it up.

If you changed "concerned" to "curious" does it change the context.

The problem is nobody knows how the conversation with Harry went down to know if concern was being conveyed to Harry.

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119616823#Comment_119616823

They left because Meghan thought she could be the duchess of woke and speak publicly about political issues.

Ms2011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119617072#Comment_119617072

I think it has been a common conclusion in this thread that if you defend H&M you are anti RF and if you question H&M you are pro RF.

I am neither, I neither like nor dislike either the RF or H&M. I often don't see things in the same light as some posters and other times I find accusations like how a coat was buttoned or bulges in clothing being microphones just down right laughable.

I do think H&M don't do themselves any favours sometimes but I also don't think they deserve the extreme scrutiny they get and I do think that there are people behind the scenes ('royal sources' etc) pulling strings to make them look worse than they are especially since they had the gall to do such a high profile interview.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119617186#Comment_119617186

Nope, concerned was the word used, no need for whataboutery.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119617214#Comment_119617214

That job had already been taken by the future King Charlie.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119617124#Comment_119617124

that's not the other side of it at all as there is no other side.

the reason there is no other side is that she doesn't have to prove to you whether she was suicidal or not.

yes, simply claiming something doesn't make it true, but when someone is saying they felt suicidal, then it is generally the decent thing to believe them or at least give them the benefit of the doubt, unless the person is well known for making such claims and there is actual evidence to show they aren't.

there is not a shred of evidence that meghan didn't feel suicidal, simply people deciding she wasn't because of percieved slights against them.

the ones who don't believe she was suicidal are the ones who need to provide the proof of such in this instance, but they have nothing.