Harry and Meghan: Finding Freedom

[jet]

On Tuesday 11 August, Finding Freedom, a biography about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, is being published. Written by royal journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, the book documents the reporters' experience of working in close proximity to the couple.17 mins ago

Anybody buying?

[user104658]

On Tuesday 11 August, Finding Freedom, a biography about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, is being published. Written by royal journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, the book documents the reporters' experience of working in close proximity to the couple.17 mins agoAnybody buying?

I don't know how much they could possibly know about them in 17 minutes? Snap judgements and impressions only, I'd imagine. Useless.

[Cherie]

Nope

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/Royal-news-Omid-Scobie-2357415.jpg?r=1583940328056http://cdn1.leerealestate.com/assets/2016/11/14082226/Carolyn-Durand1.jpg

[thesheriff443]

Only if I had a wonky table leg

[jet]

Nope

I'm too nosy not to. :hehe:

[rusticgal]

Only if I had a wonky table leg

:joker:


I wont be...even for a wobbly table leg :laugh:

[Livia]

For a couple who wanted to step out of the public eye.... here they come AGAIN!

I hope to see this book in the bargain bin soon.

[thesheriff443]

For a couple who wanted to step out of the public eye.... here they come AGAIN!

I hope to see this book in the bargain bin soon.

Well if we ever get a bog roll shortage again, we all know what to buy.

[The Slim Reaper]

Is this the follow up to finding nemo? Tough act to follow.

[thesheriff443]

Is this the follow up to finding nemo? Tough act to follow.

The title should be, finding out the sun don’t shine out of our arse holes.

[jet]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/07/25/prince-harry-meghans-lack-protest-finding-freedom-suggests-dont/

Harry and Meghan's lack of protest at 'Finding Freedom' suggests they don't mind hacks, provided they come out well
Readers of new book could be forgiven for thinking rest of monarchy have found their freedom from the Sussexes
ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR

Less tell-all and more tell again, royal-watchers have been left feeling considerably short-changed to read so-called insights which have been long reported by the mainstream media the Sussexes have grown to despise.

Some of the quotes attributed to Meghan, including "I gave up my entire life for this family", appear to have been uttered during a hitherto off-the-record moment with chosen journalists including one of the book's authors, Omid Scobie.
By their very nature, off-the-record briefings with members of the royal press pack are meant to remain private.
How curious that, in this particular case, Meghan has seemingly agreed to let this intrusion into her innermost thoughts slide.

The couple have long griped about the use of anonymous sources, yet their lack of protest appears to suggest that they don't actually mind unnamed friends having a quiet word with select hacks, provided they have got something positive to say.
Furthermore, they currently appear equally untroubled by their associates knowingly co-operating with a book which has been published by Rupert Murdoch-owned Harper Collins and his News Corp stable of newspapers, which also includes The Sun, a tabloid they have previously described as "invasive".

[Cherie]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/07/25/prince-harry-meghans-lack-protest-finding-freedom-suggests-dont/

Harry and Meghan's lack of protest at 'Finding Freedom' suggests they don't mind hacks, provided they come out well
Readers of new book could be forgiven for thinking rest of monarchy have found their freedom from the Sussexes
ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR

:joker:

[Niamh.]

Not usually in to Biographies or the Royal family but I'd read this one, so yeah I'll probably buy it

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/07/25/prince-harry-meghans-lack-protest-finding-freedom-suggests-dont/

Harry and Meghan's lack of protest at 'Finding Freedom' suggests they don't mind hacks, provided they come out well
Readers of new book could be forgiven for thinking rest of monarchy have found their freedom from the Sussexes
ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR

the abject hypocrisy of this woman laid bare for all to see

[rusticgal]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/07/25/prince-harry-meghans-lack-protest-finding-freedom-suggests-dont/

Harry and Meghan's lack of protest at 'Finding Freedom' suggests they don't mind hacks, provided they come out well
Readers of new book could be forgiven for thinking rest of monarchy have found their freedom from the Sussexes
ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR

So true...:laugh:


...you can write about me all you like...so long as its all positive stuff and puts me in a good light..

[bots]

So true...:laugh:


...you can write about me all you like...so long as its all positive stuff and puts me in a good light..


to be fair, i don't think anyone would think any differently :laugh:

[Ammi]

to be fair, i don't think anyone would think any differently :laugh:

...exactly...:laugh:...I can’t see anyone enjoying having negative media slants against them...

[user104658]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/07/25/prince-harry-meghans-lack-protest-finding-freedom-suggests-dont/

Harry and Meghan's lack of protest at 'Finding Freedom' suggests they don't mind hacks, provided they come out well
Readers of new book could be forgiven for thinking rest of monarchy have found their freedom from the Sussexes
ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR

"Camilla Tominey is the Royal Editor of the Sunday Express in London, a Royal expert for the American television network NBC and a seasoned Royal Commentator for broadcasters in Britain and around the world.

Camilla first started reporting on the British Royal Family in 2005, when she covered Prince Charles's marriage to Camilla Parker-Bowles at the Windsor Guildhall, watched by millions around the world. Since then she has reported on all the major Royal stories, including Prince William's engagement to Kate Middleton, their subsequent marriage and the births of Prince George and Princes Charlotte."

YAWN. Bias bias bias, it's just plain boring.

[Tom4784]

It's so sad that gossip passes as reporting these days.

[jet]

The Amazon reviews are mostly negative:

A book about two hypocrites who are self entitled, spoiled, greedy, obsessed with fame.

She claims to be a feminist, yet she is where she is because of the men she married. So she can keep her "empowerment" rubbish to herself.

He could have done so much with his privilege..could have studied hard, but he is a high school drop out and yet he thinks he is qualified to tell others how to live their lives.

They travel on private jets and squats on other people's home. They shouldn't be looked up to.


The financially independent multimillionaire couple who stood in Africa, telling the world how tough their own lives were.

Its not possible to add more of a review than that really - it says everything about them in a single sentence.

They also have a known, close, long term relationship with one of the authors, so hardly going to be an objective account. The book extracts in The Times were more than enough to choke on.

A recent quote from the newspapers indicates the close contact they have with one of the authors:

"However, in a judgment released today, he [High Court Judge Mr Justice Warby] said there was evidence that Meghan's side had "briefed the press" about the initial application to stop her friends from being publicly named during the High Court case. Mr Justice Warby said reporter Mr Scobie - who is set to release a biography about the couple next week - tweeted about the application just 58 minutes after they were filed."

[Niamh.]

That first reviewer sounds very sexist so I won't take their word on anything. Actually nothing about those reviews hints that they even read the book tbqh Jet

[Crimson Dynamo]

Essentially its fan fiction

:laugh2:

[Ammi]

....I like that the only verified purchase on Amazon is a 5 star review...:love:...

[jet]

That first reviewer sounds very sexist so I won't take their word on anything. Actually nothing about those reviews hints that they even read the book tbqh Jet

They can't have, it was only published today Niamh...

Many parts of it were serialised in the Times, which I have read. Some of the reviews mention this, so I assume that is where they read it too.

[Niamh.]

They can't have, it was only published today Niamh...

Many parts of it were serialised in the Times, which I have read. Some of the reviews mention this, so I assume that is where they read it too.

Well it isn't a proper review then and has no business in the review section :nono:

[user104658]

Well it isn't a proper review then and has no business in the review section :nono:

Triggered.

[Niamh.]

Triggered.

:oh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Finding Freedom review: Harry and Meghan whinge for England in a self-pitying, juicy moanathon

3/5

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have an extraordinary ability to take offence, if this schmaltzy account of Megxit is to be believed

https://media.giphy.com/media/zRMNxyKsj5tXW/giphy.gif

The Sussexes’ main whinge is against the press’s skewed view of their relationship. But when the Sussexes air their one-sided account in this extraordinarily sycophantic book, somehow that’s OK.

Two worlds – and two forms of PR – collided when Harry and Meghan got together. One is the American, schmaltzy, gushing, self-serving, highly litigious world – and this book is clearly written for the American market (“Harry deeply craves normalcy”). The other is the Queen’s world – never apologise, explain, give interviews or go to law. One form of PR led to the departure of the Sussexes from royal life after barely a year. The other has seen the Queen reign peerlessly for 68 years.

But then the Queen doesn’t take offence like the Sussexes do – on an Olympian scale. For example, there’s Prince William’s innocent advice to his brother soon after he met Meghan: “Don’t feel like you need to rush this. Take as much time as you need to get to know this girl.”

Harry and Meghan (or Meg, as he calls her) go ballistic at the slightest slight, like Henry VIII on a bad day. Yes, the tabloids can be pretty rough but, actually, the British press – and the British people (barring a few disgusting racists) – welcomed Meghan with open arms. But if you’re looking for offence, you’ll always find it.

Like so many rich and famous people used to getting their way, they’re astonished when they don’t. Harry tells a friend, “I’m tired of people covering engagements and then going off to write some rubbish about what someone is wearing.”

Surely Harry realises he can’t dictate his own headlines? Meghan isn’t much brighter, judging by the bons mots from her lifestyle blog The Tig: “Being yourself is the prettiest thing a person can be”; “Travel often – getting lost will help you find yourself.”

They wanted a future as semi-working royals – having their cake, eating it and not accepting the diminishing returns you get the further you get from the throne. The Queen made it clear it wouldn’t work.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/finding-freedom-review-harry-meghan-whinge-england-self-pitying/

[The Slim Reaper]

Henry VIII had 2 of his wives killed, but sure.

[user104658]

Finding Freedom review: Harry and Meghan whinge for England in a self-pitying, juicy moanathon

3/5

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have an extraordinary ability to take offence, if this schmaltzy account of Megxit is to be believed

https://media.giphy.com/media/zRMNxyKsj5tXW/giphy.gif

The Sussexes’ main whinge is against the press’s skewed view of their relationship. But when the Sussexes air their one-sided account in this extraordinarily sycophantic book, somehow that’s OK.

Two worlds – and two forms of PR – collided when Harry and Meghan got together. One is the American, schmaltzy, gushing, self-serving, highly litigious world – and this book is clearly written for the American market (“Harry deeply craves normalcy”). The other is the Queen’s world – never apologise, explain, give interviews or go to law. One form of PR led to the departure of the Sussexes from royal life after barely a year. The other has seen the Queen reign peerlessly for 68 years.

But then the Queen doesn’t take offence like the Sussexes do – on an Olympian scale. For example, there’s Prince William’s innocent advice to his brother soon after he met Meghan: “Don’t feel like you need to rush this. Take as much time as you need to get to know this girl.”

Harry and Meghan (or Meg, as he calls her) go ballistic at the slightest slight, like Henry VIII on a bad day. Yes, the tabloids can be pretty rough but, actually, the British press – and the British people (barring a few disgusting racists) – welcomed Meghan with open arms. But if you’re looking for offence, you’ll always find it.

Like so many rich and famous people used to getting their way, they’re astonished when they don’t. Harry tells a friend, “I’m tired of people covering engagements and then going off to write some rubbish about what someone is wearing.”

Surely Harry realises he can’t dictate his own headlines? Meghan isn’t much brighter, judging by the bons mots from her lifestyle blog The Tig: “Being yourself is the prettiest thing a person can be”; “Travel often – getting lost will help you find yourself.”

They wanted a future as semi-working royals – having their cake, eating it and not accepting the diminishing returns you get the further you get from the throne. The Queen made it clear it wouldn’t work.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/finding-freedom-review-harry-meghan-whinge-england-self-pitying/

*clicks link*

*checks author*

*googles author*

- Daddy was a Sir
- Also an advisor to Thatcher
- Blood relation of David Cameron
- Oxford Bullingdon alum.


Nothing to see here.

[Crimson Dynamo]

sounds like a decent stand up guy who writes perceptively

[Marsh.]

*clicks link*

*checks author*

*googles author*

- Daddy was a Sir
- Also an advisor to Thatcher
- Blood relation of David Cameron
- Oxford Bullingdon alum.


Nothing to see here.

:joker:

[jet]

The 26 most toe-curling quotes from Finding Freedom:
By DAN SALES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 17:51, 11 August 2020 | UPDATED: 23:46, 11 August 2020

Controversial new Harry and Meghan biography Finding Freedom was finally released today and unleashed a new wave of revelations about the Sussexes' strained relationship with the Royal family and Megxit.
But eyebrows have been raised by the fulsome praise heaped on the couple in the book by both the authors and an army of unnamed friends and sources.
Authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand provide very detailed accounts of the couple's intimate moments and inner thoughts - but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex claim they were not interviewed and did not contribute to the book.

……...Royal expert Penny Junor, author of Prince Harry: Brother, Soldier, Son, Husband, told MailOnline: ‘The authors certainly have some extraordinarily personal and private details about Harry and Meghan, but the couple have said they didn’t speak to them directly and we have to take their word for it.
'What seems absolutely clear, however, is that they colluded. If not, they would have kicked up a huge fuss about this book. I suspect they wanted to get their story and their feelings about how they were treated out into the public arena and have done so via friends who sound as though they were very well and carefully briefed.’

A few of the toe curlers:
‘Theirs was a love story that took hold in Africa – where now Meghan, on the last day of an incredible three-week stay, stretched her body into the perfect warrior pose. She quietly took in her surroundings from the grounds of their final home away from home on this trip, a modern villa in Livingstone, Zambia, just under ten miles upstream from Victoria Falls. The rising sun washed over her makeshift yoga garden, while an exotic flock of birds that looked as if they had just had their tails dipped in pots of colourful paints serenaded her.’

‘Jessica and her husband Ben – the eldest son of the former Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney and the host of the entertainment show eTalk – were the city’s hottest young power couple. She parlayed the brand-name Canadian family she married into and her sense of style into a boutique career as an influencer, stylist, and wedding planner. Her Instagram feed was filled with pictures of domestic perfection – like Jessica with her long, blown-out brown hair, her blue eyes fringed in black lashes, reading a book on the floor with her adorable twin sons, Brian and John, her lean legs crossed and on her feet a pair of sky-high black stilettos.’
- A portrait of one of Meghan’s closest friends and her husband

:joker: Jeez, this is awful, I nearly feel sorry for Megs and Harry. Pass me the sick bucket.

[jet]

'Meghan’s willingness to help others and her drive to excel meant she often was deemed "fake" by classmates at school who felt it was impossible for anyone to be that "perfect".'

‘Extremely organized, Meghan immediately impressed Harry with her packing skills. She has always taken pride in being a great packer – going as far as layering dryer sheets in between her clothes to keep them smelling fresh and no matter her destination always bringing tea-tree oil for bites, cuts and pimples – and her skills were appreciated by the prince.'

‘The Tig was polished and optimistic. Whether it was Meghan walking a rugged coastline in a perfectly belted camel coat or a “Tig Talk” with famous pals like the actress Priyanka Chopra or a recipe for “spicy broccoli and hempseed stew”, the website was curated eye candy that she hoped would be “the breeding ground for ideas and excitement – for an inspired
lifestyle”

‘During their two-hour drinks, Meghan sipped dirty martinis while the two discussed gun control, her career, her childhood dreams of becoming either president of the United States or a TV journalist, and her biracial upbringing.

– Meghan meets Piers Morgan after messaging him on Twitter during her visit to London in 2016

:facepalm: No more, I promise. Enough is enough.

[Marsh.]

:facepalm: No more, I promise. Enough is enough.

:fc:

[arista]

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/83CC/production/_113904733_dx_12082020_frontpage.jpg

[Cherie]

"spicy broccoli and hempseed stew”,

Niamh's dinner tonight

[Niamh.]

"spicy broccoli and hempseed stew”,

Niamh's dinner tonight

:hee:

[arista]

[Janet Street Porter brands Finding Freedom a ‘PR disaster’
for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and insists they
should have distanced themselves from the bombshell biography
Janet Street Porter criticised bombshell biography on
Loose Women in London
Said she felt book was 'PR disaster' for
Santa Barbara-bound Harry and Meghan
Added should have distanced themselves
from the gossip instead of addressing]


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8619563/Janet-Street-Porter-brands-Finding-Freedom-PR-disaster-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle.html

[jet]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/08/11/strangely-touchy-feely-finding-freedom-hasnt-brought-word-complaint/

Strangely, touchy-feely 'Finding Freedom' hasn't brought a word of complaint from the Sussexes

By
Camilla Tominey,
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
11 August 2020 • 9:00pm

One might have expected Harry and Meghan to issue a legal rebuke to the intrusion this 'unofficial biography' represents
Yet the eagerly-awaited publication of what Mr Scobie on Tuesday reiterated was an "unofficial, unauthorised biography" has strangely heralded not a whiff of discontent from a couple who have turned complaining into an art form

Perhaps the answer to this mystery lies buried in an "author's note" at the back of the book which contains the intriguing admission: "We have spoken with close friends of Harry and Meghan, royal aides and palace staff (past and present), the charities and organisations they have built long-lasting relationships with and, when appropriate, the couple themselves."

The revelation certainly appears to contradict repeated suggestions by both the authors and the Sussexes that they "were not interviewed and did not contribute". Similarly curious is the fact that the 350-page tome is prefaced by a quote by the American essayist Ralph Wardo Emerson – who, would you believe, just happens to be one of Meghan's favourites?...........

[Crimson Dynamo]

JSP is right. It's an absolute disaster and makes the pair look even worse than before

:facepalm:

[jet]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8625867/JAN-MOIR-finding-freedom-count-Harry.html

:hehe:

JAN MOIR: If this is finding freedom, count me in Harry!
By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 01:04, 14 August 2020

Another exciting week in the crazy lives of the exiled Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
Honestly, I hope this fabulous soap opera of entitlement and tatty pomp, rippled with a long raspberry of rudery in the direction of the old country, lasts forever and ever.

First, their Finding Freedom biography was published and what an enjoyable read it is.
Nestled between precise details of every perceived slight and snub suffered over the last terrible four years was the kind of gold-plated information that left no one in any doubt about their credentials as perfect human beings.
I particularly liked wee baby Meghan asking her mother 'what can we do about the homeless?' before returning to her plate of rusks…….

Second, we discovered that the Sussexes have bought a new home and have been living in Santa Barbara since June.
I sincerely hope their fugitive flight from oppression is finally over, along with their days of mansion-hopping.

They seem to have landed on their feet, complete with wet and dry saunas, in the ten-star luxury we all know they love.
The mansion has a torrid history, having been previously owned by a Russian oligarch accused of threatening to murder his wife. But who cares about that kind of detail when a couple of mill have been knocked off the asking price?
In sunny Montecito, everything makes sense. Well, a sort of sense. A move to the sun-dappled gorgeousness of the area known as the American Riviera?
That must have been the plan all along — and why not?

Here, amid their sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, Italian cypress trees, lavender bushes, 100-year-old olive trees, tennis court, tea house, children's cottage, swimming pool, guest house and the five-car garage that surround their nine-bed, 16 bathroom villa on their eight-acre estate, let us hope Harry and Meghan have found the simplicity and peace they crave…….

Now in the privacy of his own home — his first — Harry can get up in his Zoom pulpit and lecture the world to his heart's content. This week his little homily was on racism — and how we can all do more to help, every single one of us.
I would have more respect for ol' Simba if he admitted to his own silly mistakes in the past — calling an Army colleague the P-word and wearing a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party — but he does not. He can only lecture, not learn.

The couple have certainly moved to the right place — the local pizzeria sells cauliflower-crust pizza and even the soup kitchen is organic — with lectin-free chicken bone broth being a particular speciality. Meghan will be down there with her ladle before you can say: is the turmeric freshly grated?

Despite everything, the sincere wish of many Brits is that it all works out for them — not least because they have torched every route and friendship, every family tie and bond of kinship that leads back to their old life.
Now they may have mountain and ocean views along with hot and cold running luxury, but with a debt of honour still outstanding, the suspicion remains that they still cannot see the wood for the trees.

:laugh:

[The Slim Reaper]

Ahh yes, Jan Moir. The lovely daily mail writer who suggested stephen gately's death was because he was gay.

These are the people you think provide an insight into these private royal lives.

[Niamh.]

Ahh yes, Jan Moir. The lovely daily mail writer who suggested stephen gately's death was because he was gay.

These are the people you think provide an insight into these private royal lives.

Whaaaat?

[The Slim Reaper]

Whaaaat?

Don't you remember? I meant his gay lifestyle.

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/jan-moirs-column-on-stephen-gately-is-pccs-most-complained-about-article-ever/

[Niamh.]

Don't you remember? I meant his gay lifestyle.

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/jan-moirs-column-on-stephen-gately-is-pccs-most-complained-about-article-ever/

No I never saw that.

Talk about digging yourself a hole though :

“In writing that ‘it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships’ I was suggesting that civil partnerships – the introduction of which I am on the record in supporting – have proved just to be as problematic as marriages."

[The Slim Reaper]

No I never saw that.

Talk about digging yourself a hole though :

“In writing that ‘it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships’ I was suggesting that civil partnerships – the introduction of which I am on the record in supporting – have proved just to be as problematic as marriages."



“Yes, anyone can die at anytime of anything. However, it seems unlikely to me that what took place in the hours immediately preceding Gately’s death – out all evening at a nightclub, taking illegal substances, bringing a stranger back to the flat, getting intimate with that stranger – did not have a bearing on his death. At the very least, it could have exacerbated an underlying medical condition."

.

[Liam-]

Bigots gonna bigot

[jet]

Ahh yes, Jan Moir. The lovely daily mail writer who suggested stephen gately's death was because he was gay.

These are the people you think provide an insight into these private royal lives.

Nope. The people I think provide an insight are royal correspondents and biographers. She is neither.
I think it is an amusing article, is all. It made me smile anyway. :hee:

[Niamh.]

.

so distasteful and it was published the day before his funeral, these people are like vultures, no shame at all

[rusticgal]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8625867/JAN-MOIR-finding-freedom-count-Harry.html

:hehe:

JAN MOIR: If this is finding freedom, count me in Harry!
By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 01:04, 14 August 2020

Another exciting week in the crazy lives of the exiled Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
Honestly, I hope this fabulous soap opera of entitlement and tatty pomp, rippled with a long raspberry of rudery in the direction of the old country, lasts forever and ever.

First, their Finding Freedom biography was published and what an enjoyable read it is.
Nestled between precise details of every perceived slight and snub suffered over the last terrible four years was the kind of gold-plated information that left no one in any doubt about their credentials as perfect human beings.
I particularly liked wee baby Meghan asking her mother 'what can we do about the homeless?' before returning to her plate of rusks…….

Second, we discovered that the Sussexes have bought a new home and have been living in Santa Barbara since June.
I sincerely hope their fugitive flight from oppression is finally over, along with their days of mansion-hopping.

They seem to have landed on their feet, complete with wet and dry saunas, in the ten-star luxury we all know they love.
The mansion has a torrid history, having been previously owned by a Russian oligarch accused of threatening to murder his wife. But who cares about that kind of detail when a couple of mill have been knocked off the asking price?
In sunny Montecito, everything makes sense. Well, a sort of sense. A move to the sun-dappled gorgeousness of the area known as the American Riviera?
That must have been the plan all along — and why not?

Here, amid their sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, Italian cypress trees, lavender bushes, 100-year-old olive trees, tennis court, tea house, children's cottage, swimming pool, guest house and the five-car garage that surround their nine-bed, 16 bathroom villa on their eight-acre estate, let us hope Harry and Meghan have found the simplicity and peace they crave…….

Now in the privacy of his own home — his first — Harry can get up in his Zoom pulpit and lecture the world to his heart's content. This week his little homily was on racism — and how we can all do more to help, every single one of us.
I would have more respect for ol' Simba if he admitted to his own silly mistakes in the past — calling an Army colleague the P-word and wearing a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party — but he does not. He can only lecture, not learn.

The couple have certainly moved to the right place — the local pizzeria sells cauliflower-crust pizza and even the soup kitchen is organic — with lectin-free chicken bone broth being a particular speciality. Meghan will be down there with her ladle before you can say: is the turmeric freshly grated?

Despite everything, the sincere wish of many Brits is that it all works out for them — not least because they have torched every route and friendship, every family tie and bond of kinship that leads back to their old life.
Now they may have mountain and ocean views along with hot and cold running luxury, but with a debt of honour still outstanding, the suspicion remains that they still cannot see the wood for the trees.

:laugh:


OMG that was such an amusing and accurate read...I have always liked her column..

[jet]

OMG that was such an amusing and accurate read...I have always liked her column..

:hee: :wavey:

[Marsh.]

Nope. The people I think provide an insight are royal correspondents and biographers. She is neither.
I think it is an amusing article, is all. It made me smile anyway. :hee:

And yet you only ever provide links to the latter. Funny that.

[Cherie]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8625867/JAN-MOIR-finding-freedom-count-Harry.html

:hehe:

JAN MOIR: If this is finding freedom, count me in Harry!
By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 01:04, 14 August 2020

Another exciting week in the crazy lives of the exiled Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
Honestly, I hope this fabulous soap opera of entitlement and tatty pomp, rippled with a long raspberry of rudery in the direction of the old country, lasts forever and ever.

First, their Finding Freedom biography was published and what an enjoyable read it is.
Nestled between precise details of every perceived slight and snub suffered over the last terrible four years was the kind of gold-plated information that left no one in any doubt about their credentials as perfect human beings.
I particularly liked wee baby Meghan asking her mother 'what can we do about the homeless?' before returning to her plate of rusks…….

Second, we discovered that the Sussexes have bought a new home and have been living in Santa Barbara since June.
I sincerely hope their fugitive flight from oppression is finally over, along with their days of mansion-hopping.

They seem to have landed on their feet, complete with wet and dry saunas, in the ten-star luxury we all know they love.
The mansion has a torrid history, having been previously owned by a Russian oligarch accused of threatening to murder his wife. But who cares about that kind of detail when a couple of mill have been knocked off the asking price?
In sunny Montecito, everything makes sense. Well, a sort of sense. A move to the sun-dappled gorgeousness of the area known as the American Riviera?
That must have been the plan all along — and why not?

Here, amid their sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, Italian cypress trees, lavender bushes, 100-year-old olive trees, tennis court, tea house, children's cottage, swimming pool, guest house and the five-car garage that surround their nine-bed, 16 bathroom villa on their eight-acre estate, let us hope Harry and Meghan have found the simplicity and peace they crave…….

Now in the privacy of his own home — his first — Harry can get up in his Zoom pulpit and lecture the world to his heart's content. This week his little homily was on racism — and how we can all do more to help, every single one of us.
I would have more respect for ol' Simba if he admitted to his own silly mistakes in the past — calling an Army colleague the P-word and wearing a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party — but he does not. He can only lecture, not learn.

The couple have certainly moved to the right place — the local pizzeria sells cauliflower-crust pizza and even the soup kitchen is organic — with lectin-free chicken bone broth being a particular speciality. Meghan will be down there with her ladle before you can say: is the turmeric freshly grated?

Despite everything, the sincere wish of many Brits is that it all works out for them — not least because they have torched every route and friendship, every family tie and bond of kinship that leads back to their old life.
Now they may have mountain and ocean views along with hot and cold running luxury, but with a debt of honour still outstanding, the suspicion remains that they still cannot see the wood for the trees.

:laugh:


:joker:

Extension Rebellion to camp out on the grounds?

[jet]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/08/11/finding-freedom-meghan-could-quizzed-court-new-biography/

Finding Freedom: Meghan could be quizzed in court about new biography

The level of detail in Finding Freedom has prompted claims that Harry and Meghan must, at the very least, have authorised friends to speak
ByVictoria Ward and Camilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR

The Duchess of Sussex faces being quizzed in court over intimate details revealed in a new tell-all biography after the authors admitted that she was a source.Finding Freedom, a 350-word tome laying bare the innermost thoughts of both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, is expected to be thrust to the heart of a High Court privacy case brought by Meghan against the Mail on Sunday.

The Sussexes have tried to distance themselves from the book, while co-authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand have repeatedly insisted they were not interviewed and did not contribute, despite a startling level of detail charting the couple’s feelings.

However, buried in an “author’s note” at the back of the book, is the intriguing admission: “We have spoken with close friends of Harry and Meghan, royal aides and palace staff (past and present), the charities and organizations they have built long-lasting relationships with and, when appropriate, the couple themselves.”

The Mail on Sunday's legal team are understood to be looking closely at the book to determine whether it is evidence that the Duchess has allowed friends to speak to the media on her behalf, which is central to their case.

The Duchess could be called to the stand as part of the case.
Mark Stephens, a leading media lawyer and partner at Howard Kennedy solicitors, said: “Essentially, that’s a confession that this is as near as damn it to an authorised biography.”
He said the Duchess would likely be questioned about whether she gave the green light to friends and colleagues to contribute to the book in order to curate her own reputation.
“You can’t expect to get into a reputational boxing ring without risking a few punches landing on you,” Mr Stephens added.

The Duchess is suing the Mail on Sunday for breach of privacy after it published part of a letter she had written to her father.

Her insistence that she did not authorise five of her friends to speak to People magazine in interviews which revealed the existence of the letter is central to the case.
But Mr Scobie may have inadvertently already compromised her position after telling Good Morning America that she had intended for the contents of the letter to be made public.
Speaking to the US network in February 2019, he revealed that the Duchess “knew in her heart of hearts that this was going to be released to the papers,” adding: “Many of those things in that letter were written with the public in mind. She very much wanted to set the record straight.”

Finding Freedom, published on Tuesday, provides a highly personal account of Harry and Meghan’s relationship, charting every detail from the moment they met until their departure from royal life to America.

[jet]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8631205/CRAIG-BROWN-Finding-Freedom-fluff-Meghan-Markles-fingerprints-it.html

Lengthy but amusing review of Finding Freedom....this made me chuckle....


CRAIG BROWN: Finding Freedom is full of fluff, guff, gobbldegook and gush that has Meghan Markle's fingerprints all over it
By CRAIG BROWN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 22:01, 15 August 2020 | UPDATED: 01:40, 16 August 2020

In his largely adoring 2018 biography of Meghan, Andrew Morton revealed that after launching Tig in 2013, Meghan got in touch with Ivanka Trump, who was 'one of her female idols'.
Meghan was 'thrilled when she accepted her invitation to meet for drinks and dinner the next time Meghan was in New York'.
And so began a bout of vigorous back-scratching. 'Don't get me started on her jewellery collection: the late-night 'window shopping' I have done on my computer, snuggled up in bed with a glass of wine, staring longingly at her beautiful designs,' wrote Meghan of Ivanka.
'When we have drinks, I will make sure I order whatever she does – because this woman seems to have the formula for success and happiness down pat.'

:joker:

[Marsh.]

Well the daily mail are the experts on fluff and guff.

[arista]

https://storify.com/services/proxy/2/PyQXrtP07RrBfZeuUmluZw/https/media.fyre.co/VpR6lAL3QVWFIqx4fTu0_snpp1708m001-01_1597614792_001.png

Very Large Sun paper

[Glenn.]

Always knew Kate was a horrid commoner

[arista]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EfnOBnLWoAAtlIp?format=jpg&name=large

[jet]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EfnOBnLWoAAtlIp?format=jpg&name=large

Meghan wanted a part in Made in Chelsea and befriended someone from the show called Millie Macintosh.

Prince Harry asked Meghan Markle to snub ‘blabbermouth’ Millie Mackintosh from royal wedding


Prince Harry reportedly told Meghan Markle she could not invite her friend Millie Mackintosh to the royal wedding because she was a ‘blabbermouth’ who he believed would spill the beans about their special day. Fans were convinced Millie would be one of the famous faces attending Meghan’s wedding to Harry as the pair were believed to be close pals who met in 2015, a year before Meghan met Harry. However it has now been claimed that ‘Harry warned Meghan off Millie’, a former reality TV star who found fame on Made In Chelsea.

‘Harry doesn’t often tell Meghan what to do, but he put his foot down.’

:shocked:

https://metro.co.uk/2018/06/03/prince-harry-asked-meghan-markle-snub-blabbermouth-millie-mackintosh-royal-wedding-7600968/

[joeysteele]

Good grief, the desperation to smear this woman, that no one knows in the slightest personally, is getting worse.

[Marsh.]

Good grief, the desperation to smear this woman, that no one knows in the slightest personally, is getting worse.

.

[jet]

Good grief, the desperation to smear this woman, that no one knows in the slightest personally, is getting worse.

It had quietened down in here, I thought. Why the poking?

Her admirers could also post positive articles about her and the book as well, but don't. So it's more one - sided than it could, or should be. :shrug:

[Tom4784]

Good grief, the desperation to smear this woman, that no one knows in the slightest personally, is getting worse.

It's utterly bizarre, there's plenty of celebrities I don't care for but I don't live my life looking for affirmation of why I should hate them, it's so weird.

[AnnieK]

It had quietened down in here, I thought. Why the poking?

Her admirers could also post positive articles about her and the book as well, but don't. So it's more one - sided than it could, or should be. :shrug:

Joey was commenting on that article....how on earth is that poking? Its a forum and people are meant to comment. :shrug: He didn't even quote anyone

[jet]

Joey was commenting on that article....how on earth is that poking? Its a forum and people are meant to comment. :shrug: He didn't even quote anyone

He didn't quote the article so how do you know? What in that article was 'smearing' Meghan anyway?

[jet]

It's utterly bizarre, there's plenty of celebrities I don't care for but I don't live my life looking for affirmation of why I should hate them, it's so weird.

So dramatic. :joker:

[Cherie]

I'm sure we had a game on here recently on TiBBs most hated celeb, I think Piers Morgan won so that was okay :laugh:

[jet]

I'm sure we had a game on here recently on TiBBs most hated celeb, I think Piers Morgan won so that was okay :laugh:

How dare people not just dislike people that we dislike. :hehe:

[AnnieK]

He didn't quote the article so how do you know? What in that article was 'smearing' Meghan anyway?

So why did you accuse him of poking?

[jet]

So why did you accuse him of poking?

He didn't quote the article (which I don't think was 'smearing' anyway) so I got the impression he was being critical of posters in general. As the thread was quiet, it seemed like poking. :shrug:

[Tom4784]

I'm sure we had a game on here recently on TiBBs most hated celeb, I think Piers Morgan won so that was okay :laugh:

There's a difference between playing a game that ultimately has no impact on Piers Morgan (He'd likely love it, his career is built upon courting controversy a la Katie Hopkins) and supporting what is rapidly becoming toxic harassment of two people who literally left the country and their royal claims behind to get away from the British press.

I really shouldn't have to explain that difference.

[Cherie]

There's a difference between playing a game that ultimately has no impact on Piers Morgan (He'd likely love it, his career is built upon courting controversy a la Katie Hopkins) and supporting what is rapidly becoming toxic harassment of two people who literally left the country and their royal claims behind to get away from the British press.

I really shouldn't have to explain that difference.

Nobody is being harrassed, ii’s a thread on TIBB...there is no difference

[Tom4784]

Nobody is being harrassed, ii’s a thread on TIBB...there is no difference

Read what I wrote again. I'm not saying people on tibb are harassing them, I'm saying that the audience that reads these articles, they hunger for them are basically supporting the harassment they suffered.

[jet]

There's a difference between playing a game that ultimately has no impact on Piers Morgan (He'd likely love it, his career is built upon courting controversy a la Katie Hopkins) and supporting what is rapidly becoming toxic harassment of two people who literally left the country and their royal claims behind to get away from the British press.

I really shouldn't have to explain that difference.

What has that got to do with people on a little forum excercising their freedom of speech? You go on about how stupid and naive and brainless Con voters are - people who are actually READING this little forum.

[jet]

Anyway, can we get back on topic - oh wait - it was quiet in here. :laugh:

[rusticgal]

Good grief, the desperation to smear this woman, that no one knows in the slightest personally, is getting worse.


You don’t need to know someone personally to discuss them on a discussion forum..:shrug:

[Parmy]

Is this about meghan and harry not being in the limelight but being in the limelight again..

Thick as mince the pair of them, or harry at least. Maybe it is the papers putting them in the limelight but they are merely reporting stories of thier lives.

They need to stop acting the victim and just get on with the secretive lives and intrusion from the media will go away and I'm sure nobody will miss them.

[Marsh.]

You don’t need to know someone personally to discuss them on a discussion forum..:shrug:

You do when you start to discuss their innermost thoughts and feelings like you're their confidante.

[joeysteele]

You don’t need to know someone personally to discuss them on a discussion forum..:shrug:

I wonder how you'd feel if someone who didn't know you personally, was not actually just discussing you.
However was looking for any little thing, to character assassinate you.

There's a massive difference between discussing someone we don't know and will never know.
Even to expressing it's not how we'd do things.

However to do and use any endless gossip from others, to totally judge the thinking, the character and even unknown private life, then that is a world away from just discussing someone we don't know and never will know.

[Parmy]

I wonder how you'd feel if someone who didn't know you personally, was not actually just discussing you.
However was looking for any little thing, to character assassinate you.

There's a massive difference between discussing someone we don't know and will never know.
Even to expressing it's not how we'd do things.

However to do and use any endless gossip from others, to totally judge the thinking, the character and even unknown private life, then that is a world away from just discussing someone we don't know and never will know.


I would just pick up me gun and go hunting grouse/other animals, or perhaps just make an un needed extravagant purchase like I did yesterday and forget about the oiks.

[Tom4784]

What has that got to do with people on a little forum excercising their freedom of speech? You go on about how stupid and naive and brainless Con voters are - people who are actually READING this little forum.

I'll say what I said to Cherie, read what I said again because you've completely got the wrong end of the stick.

Also, the irony of you acting like my opinion is somehow an attack on your freedom of speech when in fact, you pulling that tired old card is more of an attack on my freedoms since you're invalidating my right to an opinion by making out that it's an attack on you.

I don't give a **** who reads this forum, I have my opinion on tory supporters and you're just going to have to hold that xx Also what the **** does that have to do with a discussion of two ex-royals. Stay focused.

[jet]

I wonder how you'd feel if someone who didn't know you personally, was not actually just discussing you.
However was looking for any little thing, to character assassinate you.

There's a massive difference between discussing someone we don't know and will never know.
Even to expressing it's not how we'd do things.

However to do and use any endless gossip from others, to totally judge the thinking, the character and even unknown private life, then that is a world away from just discussing someone we don't know and never will know.

Ummm….’Finding Freedom’ is Meghan putting her life out there for public consumption (wanting privacy my ass). But we shouldn’t discuss her?

[Parmy]

How can 2 people be harassed in a mansion that size, unless of course they keep spewing themselves out thier and look at their computers or papers then they realise that they are mere celebs now and can be treated by social media as such....its what they wanted wasnt it? We should be happy for them...as they should be for themselves....


Well i am, can they say the same though? It wont be long before one or both come crawling back.

[jet]

How can 2 people be harassed in a mansion that size, unless of course they keep spewing themselves out thier and look at their computers or papers then they realise that they are mere celebs now and can be treated by social media as such....its what they wanted wasnt it? We should be happy for them...as they should be for themselves....


Well i am, can they say the same though? It wont be long before one or both come crawling back.

Yep, always preaching hypocritcally about the latest 'thing' to keep relevant and then crying victim when everyone doesn't gush over the words of wisdom of a minor actress and a prince with 2 '0' levels. :hehe:

[Marsh.]

Yep, always preaching hypocritcally about the latest 'thing' to keep relevant and then crying victim when everyone doesn't gush over the words of wisdom of a minor actress and a prince with 2 '0' levels. :hehe:

Are you 12?

[rusticgal]

I wonder how you'd feel if someone who didn't know you personally, was not actually just discussing you.
However was looking for any little thing, to character assassinate you.

There's a massive difference between discussing someone we don't know and will never know.
Even to expressing it's not how we'd do things.

However to do and use any endless gossip from others, to totally judge the thinking, the character and even unknown private life, then that is a world away from just discussing someone we don't know and never will know.


If I was going to put ‘myself out there for publicity’...lecture people on right and wrong...promote myself by empathising with victims of atrocities only to use that platform to portray yourself as a victim yourself when you want for nothing....then I would have to accept the world and his wife are open to having an opinion on me...even if it’s on a little forum like this.

[jet]

If I was going to put ‘myself out there for publicity’...lecture people on right and wrong...promote myself by empathising with victims of atrocities only to use that platform to portray yourself as a victim yourself when you want for nothing....then I would have to accept the world and his wife are open to having an opinion on me...even if it’s on a little forum like this.

Perfectly said. :clap1:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Don't people constantly personally criticise politicians they don't know personally???

[Swan]

If I was going to put ‘myself out there for publicity’...lecture people on right and wrong...promote myself by empathising with victims of atrocities only to use that platform to portray yourself as a victim yourself when you want for nothing....then I would have to accept the world and his wife are open to having an opinion on me...even if it’s on a little forum like this.

Well said! Spot on!

[Swan]

Don't people constantly personally criticise politicians they don't know personally???

Only the ones they don't like. No hypocrisy whatsoever.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You could not make it up

[Marsh.]

Don't people constantly personally criticise politicians they don't know personally???

Only the ones they don't like. No hypocrisy whatsoever.

This has to be the worst comparison made yet.

Criticising a politicians actual work, which you know is in the public interest.

Versus, pretending to know the intimate details of a couple's marriage that you've never met in your life and presuming you know them better than they know themselves.

Yeah, good one.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry split: Duke may be forced to return to UK over visa

It's inevitable

Source: all media

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1324855/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-Duke-Duchess-of-Sussex-UK-return-visa-Royal-Family-latest

[Swan]

This has to be the worst comparison made yet.

Criticising a politicians actual work, which you know is in the public interest.

Versus, pretending to know the intimate details of a couple's marriage that you've never met in your life and presuming you know them better than they know themselves.

Yeah, good one.

I've never said i pretend to know harry and megan. Im pretty sure no one else here knows them on a personal level either. People in the public eye, and as hypocritical as they've been, im not sure why it shocks people that others will question their ACTUAL motives?!

They say one thing, they do another.

[Marsh.]

I've never said i pretend to know harry and megan.

The thread isn't about you.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I've never said i pretend to know harry and megan. Im pretty sure no one else here knows them on a personal level either. People in the public eye, and as hypocritical as they've been, im not sure why it shocks people that others will question their ACTUAL motives?!

They say one thing, they do another.

Good strong post Swan. I agree. I am sure the GBP think this way

[rusticgal]

I've never said i pretend to know harry and megan. Im pretty sure no one else here knows them on a personal level either.


Exactly...no one has. It’s just a cheap accusation to disrupt debate :laugh:

[Swan]

The thread isn't about you.

It's not about you either.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Exactly...no one has. It’s just a cheap accusation to disrupt debate :laugh:
Yes

[Marsh.]

It's not about you either.

I'm not the one assuming a post is about me.

[Marsh.]

Exactly...no one has. It’s just a cheap accusation to disrupt debate :laugh:

What? Like the politician analogy? :joker:

[joeysteele]

If I was going to put ‘myself out there for publicity’...lecture people on right and wrong...promote myself by empathising with victims of atrocities only to use that platform to portray yourself as a victim yourself when you want for nothing....then I would have to accept the world and his wife are open to having an opinion on me...even if it’s on a little forum like this.

Well all I'll say to that is you sadly surprise me.

[Swan]

I'm not the one assuming a post is about me.

You quoted me Marsh? I replied?!

[rusticgal]

What? Like the politician analogy? :joker:


It’s a comparison...or didn’t you get that?

Your only come back in any debate over the subject matter is that we cannot comment because we don’t KNOW them personally. Well you don’t either so how do you justify your line of defence :shrug:....

[Swan]

It’s a comparison...or didn’t you get that?

Your only come back in any debate over the subject matter is that we cannot comment because we don’t KNOW them personally. Well you don’t either so how do you justify your line of defence :shrug:....

Oi!!! Rusticgal, not EVERYTHING is about you ya know :rolleyes:

[rusticgal]

Well all I'll say to that is you sadly surprise me.

Why?

[Crimson Dynamo]

It’s a comparison...or didn’t you get that?

Your only come back in any debate over the subject matter is that we cannot comment because we don’t KNOW them personally. Well you don’t either so how do you justify your line of defence :shrug:....

Great point

[rusticgal]

Oi!!! Rusticgal, not EVERYTHING is about you ya know :rolleyes:

:laugh:

[joeysteele]

This has to be the worst comparison made yet.

Criticising a politicians actual work, which you know is in the public interest.

Versus, pretending to know the intimate details of a couple's marriage that you've never met in your life and presuming you know them better than they know themselves.

Yeah, good one.

Now that's really spot on.

I attack politicians, some I know some I don't.
For their policies, not personally.
Not criticising their choice of dress.
I don't even criticise them,( for those that have it ) ,wealth.

Whether I like them or not.

It's their deceit in their policies, lack of compassion and also if they are heaving burdens on others rather than relieving burdens on others, that's what I attack them on.

Not personally.
Certainly not anyone I didn't know and who I'd had no interaction with myself.

[Swan]

:laugh:

How DARE you give your opinion when a certain person doesn't agree with it, you should be ashamed of yourself :fist:

[Marsh.]

Your only come back in any debate over the subject matter is that we cannot comment because we don’t KNOW them personally. Well you don’t either so how do you justify your line of defence :shrug:....

It really isn't. But continue making stuff up. You're good at that.

Pointing out that a tabloid making a headline out of "quotes" with no source is pretty much believing any old story and you can't assume it to be true based on the fact that we don't know them is not, in fact, claiming to know them myself.

You have to do some strange mental contortions to come to that conclusion.

[Marsh.]

You quoted me Marsh? I replied?!

Oi!!! Rusticgal, not EVERYTHING is about you ya know :rolleyes:

And assumed my post was talking about you, as opposed to addressing a point you made in your post.

Maybe proof read your posts before hitting send.

[Marsh.]

Now that's really spot on.

I attack politicians, some I know some I don't.
For their policies, not personally.
Not criticising their choice of dress.
I don't even criticise them,( for those that have it ) ,wealth.

Whether I like them or not.

It's their deceit in their policies, lack of compassion and also if they are heaving burdens on others rather than relieving burdens on others, that's what I attack them on.

Not personally.
Certainly not anyone I didn't know and who I'd had no interaction with myself.

Exactly Joey. Spot on.

[joeysteele]

Why?

I thought you were better than that, that's all.
There it is however.
I best leave it there.

[Swan]

And assumed my post was talking about you, as opposed to addressing a point you made in your post.

Maybe proof read your posts before hitting send.

I'll bare that in mind next time, thanks marsh, you're great, thanks :hehe:

[Marsh.]

I'll bare that in mind next time, thanks marsh, you're great, thanks :hehe:

Great debating little man.

[rusticgal]

Great debating little man.


.....here come the put downs.

[Swan]

Great debating little man.

'little man' ?

Interesting.

Very telling choice of words there, Marsh.

[Marsh.]

.....here come the put downs.

I take it the page of them prior to that post are invisible.

[Marsh.]

'little man' ?

Interesting.

Very telling choice of words there, Marsh.

It's very telling that every "conversation" you have on this forum becomes about anything but the thread topic.

I'll leave you and rustic to your little meeting.

[rusticgal]

I thought you were better than that, that's all.
There it is however.
I best leave it there.


Joey...I’m entitled to an opinion on what I see, read, hear and watch. Please don’t say ‘you thought me better than that’ because that’s so condescending. If you don’t agree with me fair enough but don’t make it personal.

[Swan]

It's very telling that every "conversation" you have on this forum becomes about anything but the thread topic.

I'll leave you and rustic to your little meeting.

So, so touchy.

My first post in this thread was perfectly reasonable. Then you, being you, come in with the 'you're dumb, you know nothing, little man' because you don;t agree with my opinion. GREAT debate, as always Marsh :-)

edit - will you post something petty on my wall this time too? Like the previous times :)

[Marsh.]

So, so touchy.

My first post in this thread was perfectly reasonable. Then you, being you, come in with the 'you're dumb, you know nothing, little man' because you don;t agree with my opinion. GREAT debate, as always Marsh :-)


This... didn't happen. And it's still in this thread for people to see your bare faced lie.

If you can't deal with people... disagreeing with you then maybe a discussion forum isn't for you?

[Marsh.]

edit - will you post something petty on my wall this time too? Like the previous times :)

I don't know, depends if I get a PM of abuse like the previous 3 times too?

[joeysteele]

Joey...I’m entitled to an opinion on what I see, read, hear and watch. Please don’t say ‘you thought me better than that’ because that’s so condescending. If you don’t agree with me fair enough but don’t make it personal.

Not personal at all.
So don't accuse people falsely of being personal when they're not.

You asked me why.

I answered you.

If you don't like my answer to a question you actually asked me.
That's not my problem.

I could have answered dishonestly but didn't.
I'd suggest you don't ask questions to myself if you don't like the answers or only want answers which are what you wish to hear.

Nothing personal from myself in the slightest.
So kindly drop the accusation of same.

I'll know what to do should you ask me questions in the future however..
Best I don't answer them at all.

[Marsh.]

Not personal at all.
So don't accuse people falsely of being personal when they're not.

You asked me why.
I answered you.

If you don't like my answer to a question you actually asked me.
That's not my problem.

I could have answered dishonestly but didn't.
I'd suggest you don't ask questions to myself if you don't like the answers or only want answers which are what you wish to hear.

Nothing personal from myself in the slightest.
So kindly drop the accusation of same.

I'll know what to do should you ask me questions in the future however..
Best I don't answer them at all.

Spot on Joey. It's pathetic nonsense to keep the thread going in the same circles the previous ones did.

Constant distraction and deflection.

[Swan]

I don't know, depends if I get a PM of abuse like the previous 3 times too?

WAIT, from who????

I have NEVER PM'd you???

Prove it, right now!!!

[Marsh.]

I have NEVER PM'd you???


Lie all you want, you know exactly what you sent me. :laugh:

[Swan]

Lie all you want, you know exactly what you sent me. :laugh:

You have my permission to post it in this thread right now, i have NEVER PM'd you.

Literally what mod can access PM's to prove this?

Post in chats and games, anywhere.

[rusticgal]

Spot on Joey. It's pathetic nonsense to keep the thread going in the same circles the previous ones did.

Constant distraction and deflection.


....and it’s always your contribution that leads it down that path every single time....you never add to the debate..you just attack with the same old put downs and it condescends into this and then it gets closed. Well done..

[Marsh.]

....and it’s always your contribution that leads it down that path every single time....you never add to the debate..you just attack with the same old put downs and it condescends into this and then it gets closed. Well done..

Disagreeing =/= put downs and condescends. If that's how you take people not thinking every post you make is golden then that's on you.

And posts like this would hold more weight if they weren't coming after a string of your own baiting and insulting posts.

Practice what you preach.

[AnnieK]

To be fair...every single one of these threads ends up closed. Jet posts his thoughts, his friends come in to post :joker: or :clap1:. Someone refutes it... then gets accused of calling Jet obsessed, then it gets personal and thread closed. Its so boringly predictable. As much as Meghan fans need to see that people are not all going to like her, her detractors need to accept that not everyone has the same views.

This all started tonight because someone had an opinion that Jet disagreed with....not 12 hours after his previous post (that was late at night) and that poster was accused of "poking"

Ludicrous

[Marsh.]

It is. Joey can't post an opinion without being accused of "poking" and called a "Meghan admirer". :crazy:

[Swan]

It is. Joey can't post an opinion without being accused of "poking" and called a "Meghan admirer". :crazy:

Still waiting for those PM's Marsh?

[rusticgal]

It is. Joey can't post an opinion without being accused of "poking" and called a "Meghan admirer". :crazy:


It works both ways and you know it...how many times have we been called Meghan HATERS ..the put downs from quoting the Daily Mail etc...stop being a hypocrite.

[Swan]

Still waiting for you to not make a thread about yourself.

I haven't, i added an opinion, then replied to your quote. That's how forums work.

So again, don't change the subject, you said i've PM'd you, 3 times, and that they were 'abusive'. You know as well as i do i haven't. That's a really sick move on your part. Why would you lie like that?

[rusticgal]

Still waiting for those PM's Marsh?


Don’t hold your breath :laugh:

[Marsh.]

It works both ways and you know it...how many times have we been called Meghan HATERS ..the put downs from quoting the Daily Mail etc...stop being a hypocrite.

I haven't called anyone "Meghan HATERS".

Nor is there anything wrong with pointing out what a gutter rag the Daily Mail is.
Insulting tabloids and Daily Mail articles that are routinely posted is not personal, no matter how much you feel it is.

[rusticgal]

I haven't called anyone "Meghan HATERS".

Nor is there anything wrong with pointing out what a gutter rag the Daily Mail is.
Insulting tabloids and Daily Mail articles that are routinely posted is not personal, no matter how much you feel it is.


You constantly call out Jet for getting ALL his material from the Dailymail...when in fact he gets most of it from other sources which you choose to ignore...but hey ho..

[rusticgal]

I haven't called anyone "Meghan HATERS".



I didn’t say YOU did...but others do.

[rusticgal]

Not personal at all.
So don't accuse people falsely of being personal when they're not

Nothing personal from myself in the slightest.
So kindly drop the accusation of


Lol...it’s personal when you say you thought I was better than that...what makes you think you are better than I am because I don’t agree with you opinion :shrug:

[Tom4784]

To be fair...every single one of these threads ends up closed. Jet posts his thoughts, his friends come in to post :joker: or :clap1:. Someone refutes it... then gets accused of calling Jet obsessed, then it gets personal and thread closed. Its so boringly predictable. As much as Meghan fans need to see that people are not all going to like her, her detractors need to accept that not everyone has the same views.

This all started tonight because someone had an opinion that Jet disagreed with....not 12 hours after his previous post (that was late at night) and that poster was accused of "poking"

Ludicrous

In all honesty, I doubt there's many Meghan fans on this forum. I doubt she would even be discussed that much without the amount of vitriol towards her, it's less about being a fan of Meghan and more about opposing the strange and, quite frankly, worrying level of hatred people have towards her, even more so when it's clear in the press coverage that it's motivated by racism. Kate could hold her pregnant belly and be called glowing and effervescent, Meghan got snapped holding her belly and they accused her of attention seeking. The hatred towards her in the press and in the public in general is obviously motivated by pure bigotry.

People are free to dislike anyone but the level of hatred an ex-royal gets is just bizarre. It's no wonder why Harry wanted out.

I'm also tired of these pure cheerleading responses. You can agree with people but a post that exists purely to brigade your friends' post is just grim. A person can agree with anyone all they want but they really should add something to the conversation. Posting in a thread just to back up your friend's posts is just pointless.

[thesheriff443]

Over and over the use of the word hatred which is directed at one member if this is not dealt with I’m going to report this site.

You are letting dezzy gets away with abuse.

[Cherie]

Still waiting for those PM's Marsh?

You can ask a mod to confirm that you haven’t sent pms to Marsh if that is the case

[Cherie]

Of course Harry and Meghan can be discussed it’s not like they shy away from regularly airing their views :shrug:

[Parmy]

Are you 12?

Well you fairly refuted jets opinion there.:cheer2:

[Marsh.]

I didn’t say YOU did...but others do.

You called my a hypocrite because you've been called a Meghan Hater. Sit down.

[Marsh.]

Well you fairly refuted jets opinion there.:cheer2:

Petty name calling over Meghan's career is not an opinion.

[user104658]

When will any of us ever find freedom from this thread :worry:

[Marsh.]

Pull on the new flesh like borrowed gloves
And burn your fingers once again

[Cherie]

Pull on the new flesh like borrowed gloves
And burn your fingers once again

:joker:

[thesheriff443]

Pull on the new flesh like borrowed gloves
And burn your fingers once again

So what about the pm’s you sent me?

You couldn’t get a reaction from me in a thread so decided to try getting it by pm’s.

Must get you killed you not to get a reply

[Dogeatdog]

Josy when she logs into Tibb and sees the amount of replies in this thread

https://i.imgur.com/Esl1kpd.gif

[Crimson Dynamo]

When will any of us ever find freedom from this thread :worry:

https://media1.tenor.com/images/2476c2de6b157f1e2292f52226db4713/tenor.gif?itemid=10375300

[joeysteele]

Lol...it’s personal when you say you thought I was better than that...what makes you think you are better than I am because I don’t agree with you opinion :shrug:

I have NEVER said anywhere that I was better than you or anyone.

On an issue people can be surprised by others views.
That is not saying anyone is better than anyone else.

I've had many things thown at me on here, I even got an infraction for only defending myself against an antisemitism inference.

I'll explain even though I may be wasting my time.
You and myself during BB series have agreed and disagreed many times.
However, I clearly wrongly felt while you criticised anyone, you tried to do it fairly.
I get totally the criticism of this Royal couple, I don't get the claiming of knowing what, she thinks, feels and is doing to Harry as being fair in the slightest.

Life has taught me, things are rarely all black or all white, that there are loads of grey areas between issues of people and incidents.

I cannot accept while criticism is valid of lifestyle or actions.
No one on here can ever know the thinking, the feeling, the marital state or private lives of this Royal.couple.
To the point of every opportunity piling in the views of at best more gossip sources as facts.
This Royal couple will never impact on my life.
I don't know them, I'll never know them.
I'm not that bothered about them.
Although despite my reservations of some of their actions, I appreciate we will hear from them as the media and wider public will still want to.

I doubt they'll ever get the full private life they may want, however it's not a crime for them to want it.
So I wish them well, with their child for the future.

Giving up the Royal life, never meant they were going to be robots, not talking, not appearing, not being involved in causes.
They didn't lose their brains and hearts, they just have up fully involved active Royal duties.
Nothing else.
In my opinion.


Now fine, you carry on twisting my words.
Trying to bring down my character, as others have tried to on here before.
I'm surprised at that from you, that you'd even attempt to twist my wording to be presented by you as to a negative re myself.

You asked me to answer your question.
That I did, clearly though, very unwisely as I now suspect I WAS possibly asked the question for another reason.

NEVER anywhere, anytime on here in over 10 years, have I ever said I'm better than anyone else.
However if I disagree with someone or something, just as they have with me I've the right to say I do.
Sometimes I do strongly and sometimes less so.

Saying I'm surprised at the reaction of someone, does NOT in any shape or form, indicate I'm saying I'm are better than another.
That is frankly ridiculous.

I've talked, agreed and disagreed with you many times over the years.
However once anyone starts twisting my words and accuses me falsely of anything.
I'm done with them.

I've explained my comments.
You don't like my answer.
However unless I was to handclap, maybe there's no answer I'd make that would have been liked.

So good luck, all my best to you as I've said several times over the years to you.
However I won't put up with my words twisted.
Plus if only defending myself against others gets me infractions on here, then so be it.

As I said.
You asked me why I was surprised at you.
So I foolishly took the bait it seems and answered.

Being surprised at someone you've discussed things with over years, as to their response.
Is not personal or negative.

No more than asking a question to someone, you think would know the answer to something, then being surprised they didn't.
It's not personal, it's not negative.
Plus it's never indicating being better than another.

I have this your latest message, it's noted and stored.
I won't make the mistake of answering your questions again.
That's for sure.

Not because I think I'm better than you in the slightest but only to ensure I'm not being led into difficulty on here of false accusations to myself.

I've had enough of that on here to last me a lifetime.
Then since defending myself against inferences gets me into bother, avoidance is by far it seems the best policy.

[Marsh.]

So what about the pm’s you sent me?

You couldn’t get a reaction from me in a thread so decided to try getting it by pm’s.

Must get you killed you not to get a reply

Your baiting gets worse everytime you try.

[thesheriff443]

Petty name calling over Meghan's career is not an opinion.

Freedom is achieved by hitting th log out button or if you have nothing to add or no interest in the thread don’t post.

Hope this information was helpful.

[Marsh.]

Freedom is achieved by hitting th log out button or if you have nothing to add or no interest in the thread don’t post.

Hope this information was helpful.

If you can't handle people disagreeing with posts in the thread that sounds like a you problem. Maybe you should log out?

[thesheriff443]

Your baiting gets worse everytime you try.

So you didn’t send me pm’s ?

[thesheriff443]

Marsh has been called out plain and simple

[thesheriff443]

If you can't handle people disagreeing with posts in the thread that sounds like a you problem. Maybe you should log out?

I’m not the one saying I need time out.

Now back to what I’ve posted?

Do you deny you sent me pm’s

[Marsh.]

I’m not the one saying I need time out.

I never said I need time out. You're the one asking for people to stop disagreeing with Jet for some unknown reason.

Are you ok?

[thesheriff443]

I never said I need time out. You're the one asking for people to stop disagreeing with Jet for some unknown reason.

Are you ok?

That post code was ment for toy soldier, now back to you!

Why did you said me pm’s?

And that’s one of your usual baiting themes asking if someone is ok.

[jet]

As I have been referred to once again, my thoughts and articles on the thread subject wouldn’t even take up a page of the 7 here, i have made about 15 posts out of 150.
Instead of discussing with their own thoughts or articles, most of the posts are about why I or other people shouldn’t dare post anything negative about Meghan.
There is no positive discussion or articles to counteract opposite views. Meghan detractors can’t be responsible for that.
Words like hater, obsessed, vitriol, racism, bigotry, worrying, bizarre, grim, desperation etc etc etc are used along with snide remarks to inflame and goad and get the threads shut down. Is freedom of opinion about a public figure not allowed here without being continually harassed. Its beyond ridiculous now.

[Marsh.]

That post code was ment for toy soldier, now back to you!.

Right so we've established you're starting an argument with me on false pretences. Glad that was sorted

[Cherie]

As I have been referred to once again, my thoughts and articles on the thread subject wouldn’t even take up a page of the 7 here, i have made about 15 posts out of 150.
Instead of discussing with their own thoughts or articles, most of the posts are about why I or other people shouldn’t dare post anything negative about Meghan.
There is no positive discussion or articles to counteract opposite views. Meghan detractors can’t be responsible for that.
Words like hater, obsessed, vitriol, racism, bigotry, worrying, bizarre, grim, desperation etc etc etc are used along with snide remarks to inflame and goad and get the threads shut down. Is freedom of opinion about a public figure not allowed here without being continually harassed. Its beyond ridiculous now.

it's done to trigger you Jet, just ignore and carry on, as long as you are breaching no rules I don't see the issue what is discussed on here and if people want to discuss Harry and Meghan they can, and people who are tired of the threads can just scroll past

[Crimson Dynamo]

As I have been referred to once again, my thoughts and articles on the thread subject wouldn’t even take up a page of the 7 here, i have made about 15 posts out of 150.
Instead of discussing with their own thoughts or articles, most of the posts are about why I or other people shouldn’t dare post anything negative about Meghan.
There is no positive discussion or articles to counteract opposite views. Meghan detractors can’t be responsible for that.
Words like hater, obsessed, vitriol, racism, bigotry, worrying, bizarre, grim, desperation etc etc etc are used along with snide remarks to inflame and goad and get the threads shut down. Is freedom of opinion about a public figure not allowed here without being continually harassed. Its beyond ridiculous now.

Well said

[Josy]

Josy when she logs into Tibb and sees the amount of replies in this thread



https://i.imgur.com/Esl1kpd.gifYep.