[rusticgal]

Ive got to google Porchy now to see if Andrew looks like him...

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

he died before he could tho, andrew is alive

The only reason we found out about him more than likely, was because he'd died. He didn't die under investigation.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by jet

Yes, she lied about how she wasn't welcomed, when the family went out of their way (google how Meghan was made to feel special from the start compared to Kate or any other bride because she was in a new country) she lied about having no real family and her relationship with her father so that she wouldn't have to bring Harry to meet him and let the Palace aids help him when he was being harrassed by paps) - Harry in the radio interview "We will be the family she never had".

She lied about wanting to be part of the royal family and carry out her duties like the rest of them when they had been planning their escape even before they married.
She lied about how they didn't look after her enough during her pregnancy when she refused visits from Kate and William and Camilla, that nobody cared enough to ask her if she was okay.
She lied that she couldn't spend Xmas at Sandringham with Harry's family because Archie was to young to fly from Canada, then they jetted off with Archie to LA. There is lots more I'll think of after I post this...

Can you provide actual evidence of any of this?

[jet]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I said there was photographic evidence that proves he's a liar which that photograph does in 2 ways, the first he said he'd never been upstairs in that house but the photograph with him in it was taken upstairs and the 2nd is that he said he'd never met that particular girl but there he is standing next to her

Oh right. I think he said he didn't recall meeting her? But really, he's a pompous ass and I'm not interested in him.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Can you provide actual evidence of any of this?

I'd like to know aswell but doubt we'll ever get a coherent answer

[jet]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I'm sure

Will have a look into this all later I think..as I said in one of these threads..never been that interested in monarchy stuff, but..this seems almost like a war! Thanks for the reply. Royal wiki

You are welcome.
The warring Windsors!

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Can you provide actual evidence of any of this?

"a close friend said"

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I'd like to know aswell but doubt we'll ever get a coherent answer

Originally Posted by Jordan.

"a close friend said"

I know. Don’t even know why I bothered asking

[jet]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I'd like to know aswell but doubt we'll ever get a coherent answer

I've said this many times before but Google reliable Royal correspondents whose 'reveals' have stood the test of time. It takes time but its worth it for the drama!

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Can you provide actual evidence of any of this?

Do your own research? You could start by finding Harry's radio interview (Utube?) or reading their friend Omid Scobies biography of them.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Well dont then....if you dont agree with it then say so and present your own reasons as to why you think its a load of rubbish...its a debate not a court of justice.

The majority of what jet posted as his ‘facts’ were nothing more than tabloid fodder. It’s difficult to present your own reasonings with tabloid rumours. If jet is so convinced everything he posted is correct then it shouldn’t be difficult to provide actual evidence of it instead of fobbing people off with ‘look for yourself’

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Well dont then....if you dont agree with it then say so and present your own reasons as to why you think its a load of rubbish...its a debate not a court of justice.

EXCEPT others aren't saying they KNOW what wrong Meghan Markle has done, because I'd say there's no wrong to find anyway in my view.

So it's down to those who claim to know and who are publicly without concrete facts, saying so too for sure she has done and said great wrong.
Then it's only for them to prove their claims.

Not for those, who are NOT in FACT accusing her of anything at all.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Youtube video

[jet]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

EXCEPT others aren't saying they KNOW what wrong Meghan Markle has done, because I'd say there's no wrong to find anyway in my view.

So it's down to those who claim to know and who are publicly without concrete facts, saying so too for sure she has done and said great wrong.
Then it's only for them to prove their claims.

Not for those, who are NOT in FACT accusing her of anything at all.

Bull****, that's not how debate works.

I'm telling of what I have seen, heard, read, and researched from long time reliable royal commentators and formed my own opinions. I don't have to prove anything. Anyone is welcome to do their own research and rebut what I post if they don't agree.
Those that like/admire her could do their research for balance and post their findings about her, but they don't.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by jet

Bull****, that's not how debate works.

I'm telling of what I have seen, heard, read, and researched from long time reliable royal commentators. I don't have to prove anything. Anyone is welcome to do their own research and rebut what I post if they don't agree.
Those that like/admire her could do their research for balance and post their findings about her, but they don't.

who are royal commentators in UK?


over here we got a few, more notably Marc van der Linden whom is a true royalty expert, mostly him when talking about royal news all across the world

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

EXCEPT others aren't saying they KNOW what wrong Meghan Markle has done, because I'd say there's no wrong to find anyway in my view.

So it's down to those who claim to know and who are publicly without concrete facts, saying so too for sure she has done and said great wrong.
Then it's only for them to prove their claims.

Not for those, who are NOT in FACT accusing her of anything at all.

He doesn’t have to prove anything....they are his facts and if people don’t want to believe it then it’s up to them...goading and ridiculing is all they can do in response. We were all having a decent chat on here until certain people join the thread...

[jet]

Originally Posted by Nicky91

who are royal commentators in UK?


over here we got a few, more notably Marc van der Linden whom is a true royalty expert, mostly him when talking about royal news all across the world

Yes, royal experts. There are a lot Nicky, I've posted their names many times, not doing it all again.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

He doesn’t have to prove anything....they are his facts and if people don’t want to believe it then it’s up to them...goading and ridiculing is all they can do in response. We were all having a decent chat on here until certain people join the thread...

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

He doesn’t have to prove anything....they are his facts and if people don’t want to believe it then it’s up to them...goading and ridiculing is all they can do in response. We were all having a decent chat on here until certain people join the thread...

What you say is correct if he were talking about facts though. He isn’t.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

So that’s a firm no on providing any evidence to back why you unnecessarily hate her so much?

I don't have to provide anything but my own findings and views. Get a grip.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by jet

I don't have to provide anything but my own findings and views. Get a grip.

But you claim to have evidence

[Glenn.]

When your findings come from the Daily Mail you can’t expect other people to fall for them as easily as you do.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I mean the FACT that they bleated on about privacy and the FACT they are doing a primtime expose access all areas 90 minute faux interview

The fact they bleated on about British tabloids taking them to court and then the FACT they released details of a pregnancy with a cloying picture to the Press Assocation so that all tabloids could run it and they did

these FACTS seem not to be counted

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

When your findings come from the Daily Mail you can’t expect other people to fall for them as easily as you do.

the happy couple used that publication recently to tell THE WORLD about their happy news

so they seem happy about its ability to report news?

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

I mean the FACT that they bleated on about privacy and the FACT they are doing a primtime expose access all areas 90 minute faux interview

The fact they bleated on about British tabloids taking them to court and then the FACT they released details of a pregnancy with a cloying picture to the Press Assocation so that all tabloids could run it and they did

these FACTS seem not to be counted

We've already been through this, doing an interview to clear things up and get your side of the story across is not the same as doing a Kardashian show where camera's have access to your home and life 24/7 like a endless reality show.

I don't understand why that's so difficult to grasp , they can't disappear from the face of the earth therefore they are taking back a bit of control for the sake of their mental health and their son especially now with another baby on the way . But no matter what Meghan does tabloids will always write BS about her to fit their narrow minded pathetic agenda.