[arista]

Originally Posted by Livia

People clearly give a **** or no one would be posting in this thread.

Yes I brought the thread back
as it went Front Page on the Sun
and the Mirror,

Posting again

[Livia]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes I brought the thread back
as it went Front Page on the Sun
and the Mirror,

People are interested. And once H&M get around to their next achingly embarrassing, highly transparent publicity stunt, people will want to talk about that too.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

really, who gives a ****. The queen is dead, she can't complain any more

Absolutely bots.
Although the stupid media clearly do.

I say again too Lillibet is NOT just a pet name for the late Queen.
An Elizabeth in my family got called Lillibet from aged 2 onwards.
Born in 1919.

Long before the late Queen was even born.

I wonder what quantity of those given the name Elizabeth over the centuries had the same pet term.

[Liam-]

Weren’t people recently slagging off Harry because he openly talked about the day Lizzie died? Why are people now salivating at the thought of a book which capitalises on her death and final weeks by some money hungry aide?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Weren’t people recently slagging off Harry because he openly talked about the day Lizzie died? Why are people now salivating at the thought of a book which capitalises on her death and final weeks by some money hungry aide?

"trusted" aide

[bots]

i always think of paul burrell when anyone says trusted aide .... and he was full of ****

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i always think of paul burrell when anyone says trusted aide .... and he was full of ****

Trusted kind of implies they don't write books or blab to the media about their employers either

[UserSince2005]

Get him and his enlarge prostate gone! Pronto!

[Livia]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Absolutely bots.
Although the stupid media clearly do.

And everyone who's bothered to post in this thread, including yourself.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by jet

Can you point out the 'lies and dodgy motives' that you attribute to me?
I said they had trademarked the name for monetary purposes, which they had. They subsequently discovered that its use was forbidden by the Institution. Harry should have known this, but well, he’s Harry….and when Meghan sniffs dollar signs she just blunders ahead regardless.

I was just quoting your post.


However...

You go back to making the same claim about them. You have no idea about the ins or outs of anything. Pretty sure all of their expensive trademark lawyers would have known about the information you're pretending they had no idea about.

Seems a bit dodgy in motive to me, but whaddo I know?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Livia

And everyone who's bothered to post in this thread, including yourself.

I normally avoid Royal threads as I've little interest.

On this I knew an ancestor of mine had the pet name Lillibet long before the late Queen had.

So I made my post if that's okay with you?????

[The Slim Reaper]

Did your ancestor try and monetise the name, joey?

[thesheriff443]

It doesn’t matter what they call their child but every one knows by now , what ever they do it’s for attention, sympathy or money

Harry for someone who has been active and in a war zone always comes across as a weak drip of a man

But they have both made themselves look pathetic at every opportunity

[Glenn.]

[jet]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I was just quoting your post.


However...

You go back to making the same claim about them. You have no idea about the ins or outs of anything. Pretty sure all of their expensive trademark lawyers would have known about the information you're pretending they had no idea about.

Seems a bit dodgy in motive to me, but whaddo I know?

I posted what was widely reported at the time, and as those reports were never denied or legal action taken by the very litigious Sussexes it is my opinion that they were likely to be true. I am not insisting that anyone have the same belief.

FYI you do not need an attorney to file an application for a trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Weren’t people recently slagging off Harry because he openly talked about the day Lizzie died? Why are people now salivating at the thought of a book which capitalises on her death and final weeks by some money hungry aide?

I don’t see anyone salivating over the book, just discussing it…
A simple google taking a few seconds would have shown that the book was not written by a ‘money hungry aide’ which some keep insisting it was.

As I already posted in this thread:

Robert Hardman is an internationally renowned writer and broadcaster, specializing in royalty and history for more than twenty five years.

He has previously written the acclaimed books Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work, Our Queen and Queen of the World, along with the BBC and ITV television documentaries of the same name. Among other television credits, he wrote and presented the BBC Two documentary George III – The Genius of the Mad King and wrote the BBC series, The Queen’s Castle. Hardman interviewed the Prince of Wales for the BBC’s Charles at 60, the Duke of Edinburgh for the BBC’s The Duke: In His Own Words and the Princess Royal for ITV’s Anne: The Princess Royal at 70.

[Maru]

I was listening to a clip and a commentator whom I think was H&M-friendly (it shouldn't matter, but it often does...) was suggesting it could've been timed to keep a certain royal out of the news. Well, intentionally or not, it is certainly well-timed. I haven't seen or heard much of anything anymore about Andrew after this broke.

[bots]

that actually has a ring of truth about it

[jet]

Originally Posted by Maru

I was listening to a clip and a commentator whom I think was H&M-friendly (it shouldn't matter, but it often does...) was suggesting it could've been timed to keep a certain royal out of the news. Well, intentionally or not, it is certainly well-timed. I haven't seen or heard much of anything anymore about Andrew after this broke.

I'm not sure, Maru. We haven't heard anything new about any of the people on the 'Epstein List' since it broke....not that I'm aware of anyway...

[Beso]

What's happened our kate? Shes in hospital.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by jet

I'm not sure, Maru. We haven't heard anything new about any of the people on the 'Epstein List' since it broke....not that I'm aware of anyway...

There wasn't any prominent listing of anyone that I saw here, but admittedly I'm a very light news watcher now, especially US news as so much is scripted filler. So my scope is at a minimum on purpose Most of what I saw that had good details came from independent content creators and some social media.

Andrew was the only one who seemed to receive a prominent media blitz surrounding his listing as far as I could tell. Our news is so micromanaged at the industry-level that it's next to impossible to believe we'll ever see a situation anytime where Hollywood calls itself out en masse.

I would not be surprised to learn Hollywood is one of the most corrupt places on Earth. H&M's desire to deal with it at all would be a serious indictment for some as so it's become increasingly common see it as a land for degenerates and opportunists. Years of being bombarded with reality TV has had a deleterious effect on its influence as more see through so much of the pomp ... not quite the classy culture we used to enjoy peering at in the magazines. Now it's become quite vulgar.

The royals are a standout compared to all that.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Maru

There wasn't any prominent listing of anyone that I saw here, but admittedly I'm a very light news watcher now, especially US news as so much is scripted filler. So my scope is at a minimum on purpose Most of what I saw that had good details came from independent content creators and some social media.

Andrew was the only one who seemed to receive a prominent media blitz surrounding his listing as far as I could tell. Our news is so micromanaged at the industry-level that it's next to impossible to believe we'll ever see a situation anytime where Hollywood calls itself out en masse.

I would not be surprised to learn Hollywood is one of the most corrupt places on Earth. H&M's desire to deal with it at all would be a serious indictment for some as so it's become increasingly common see it as a land for degenerates and opportunists. Years of being bombarded with reality TV has had a deleterious effect on its influence as more see through so much of the pomp ... not quite the classy culture we used to enjoy peering at in the magazines. Now it's become quite vulgar.

The royals are a standout compared to all that.

I really enjoy your posts. It is refreshing to read thoughtful posts coming from an American perspective.

[arista]

BBC News Text :
[The Daily Mirror says that a monument
honouring Queen Elizabeth II
is to be announced this weekend
to coincide with the second anniversary
of her death.
The paper says the sculpture will be
in St James's Park,
which is overlooked by
Buckingham Palace,
and will be unveiled in 2026.]