Itssoeasy wrote: » She can quit if she wants but how can he quit as a senior royal ? In the not to distant future his father will become king and then his brother and nephew.
Boredstiff666 wrote: » What a load of old tosh. I have never seen any as you say 'racist' remarks about her just justified criticism. She put herself there. If you put yourself there expect criticism it goes with the job as a 'celeb' instead of playing the part of a royal. As regards you condemning people who criticise her/them. They take millions from the taxpayer every year and cost many millions more in security.........If I was paying for that I would reserve the right to criticise what I like even down to the colour of their socks............simply because 'I' pay for it.............It's my money and 'I' will say what 'I' want. They don't like it then get out of the job and f*ck off.........Trouble is they will still be taking millions from the tax payer when they do this so the tax payer can continue to say what they like about her/them. When they dont take or cost the tax payer a penny and all is paid back what they have been given (property etc) then they may have some kind of case in how they are criticised by some.........until they day comes........live with it because you put yourself there nobody else.
Hamsterchops wrote: » Kate will be a great queen, she's beautiful too.
Shelga wrote: » Yes but your load of waffle is based on the assumption that the royal family should exist in the first place. I don’t agree. I think it’s perverse to force this life on a baby from day 1. Saw a tweet that said it’s like the end of the Truman Show, where Truman sees the light, and rides off into the sunset with the one sane woman who was trying to show him that there is another kind of life. Couldn’t agree more!
Tom Mann Centuria wrote: » The tourists see their palaces, from a distance, pretty sure they don't get to have a chat with queenie or anyone else. The Palace of Versailles has coped quite well without an actual living royal using it for quite some time.
kowloon wrote: » The royals themselves aren't bringing in the tourists, you don't get to meet them. Versailles gets more visitors than any of the British sites long after they consigned their monarchy to history.
Seamai wrote: » Neither do I, 99.9% of tourists will never see a member of the royal family, both France and Italy get more tourists than the UK and neither have royal families.
Itssoeasy wrote: » You know they've been just waiting to use that headline since they got married. How come Kate Middleton didn't/doesn't get the same treatment as Meghan markle seemed to get ?
paw patrol wrote: » she seems toxic falls out with her friends , ditches her family , makes her husband give up his mates and now his family. any critical opinion of her is racist :rolleyes:
pc7 wrote: » I don’t get this argument, the amount of tourism the royals bring into UK is massive. I would have thought they are well covering their costs.
sbsquarepants wrote: » I very much doubt it. I'd say the amount of tourism they bring in is negligible anyway. Tourists tend to do touristy things, if you visit London you go see buckingham palace and so on, but that is not the same thing as travelling from Japan or wherever just to see buckingham palace. If you're in Dublin you go see the storehouse and the zoo, however i'm sure you could count on the fingers of one foot the number of people who actually flew across the world to visit either!
cannotlogin wrote: » So Meghan convinces Harry to leave the Royal family, while I struggle to convince a man to go for a drink!!! Harry appears completely smitten by an actress who has fallen of with her family and friends, and now he's doing the same. Princess Andrew must be delighted he's no longer the focus of attention. Expect divorce within 5 years when she's finished with him.
bubbles o hara wrote: » Are they also giving up their titles?
mariaalice wrote: » I consider the queen a great woman she is head of the UK biggest tourism organisation and works very hard. The rest I am not sure what they do. Its a bit selfish of Harry it will land more work on his brother.
w/s/p/c/ wrote: » Turned on the TV while making breakfast earlier and caught the last 5 mins of the repeat of last night's Tonight show on Virgin Media. They had a video call with some run of the mill snooty Royalist type. He was saying how Harry has been ruined, he was always a jack the lad, enjoyed a few drinks and always had his chest out and he doesn't do that any more. Yeah pal, its called growing up. He's a married man and a father now. It was followed by that d*ckhead Ivan Yeates calling her a charlatan! Typical West Brit talk. Fair play to them, a grown man making the best decision for himself and his family. If if found out that my granny plotted the murder of my mother and my uncle was a paedo, I would separate myself from my family too!! :-)
w/s/p/c/ wrote: » If if found out that my granny plotted the murder of my mother and my uncle was a paedo, I would separate myself from my family too!! :-)
Sardonicat wrote: » Yeah, I was with you til the bit about the Queen plotting to murder his mother. His mother was a manipulative attention seeker who deliberately courted press attention. She had a public fling with Al Fayed in a deliberate attempt to make another man jealous. She died as a result of being in a speeding car that crashed whilst being pursued by the press she deliberately courted to publicise the fling. The phrase 'hung by your own petard' springs to mind. She was far from the innocent victim she tried to portray herself to be. A serial adulterer with married men who never passed up an opportunity to be photographed doing her great deeds of charity (hugging people ) . If you want a toxic female royal there she is right there.
w/s/p/c/ wrote: » You do realise that comment was tongue in cheek! I am well aware of how Diana died. I am sure if there was any conspiracy that it was a plot against her demise it would have more than likely come out by now.
B.A._Baracus wrote: » Load of balls :pac: What does it exactly mean? He is minted. He is a royal despite whatever he may say. Even if he loses his money he'll just tap the royal family or his brother / father for some money. Doesn't mean a thing.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/19a7a778b727ad07a3bbcea8101c61b3.svg)
