[Crimson Dynamo]

16 bathrooms

Privacy

[Beso]

The skin thing was probably mentioned to harry by one of his pals on a night out.

[jet]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...sion-fshxnmgbq

Harry and Meghan interview ditches subtlety in embrace of tabloid television
Quentin Letts
Monday March 08 2021, 5.28am, The Times

One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.

As a work of televised theatre, Oprah Winfrey’s interview was soft-focus: the setting bucolic, Queen Oprah in delicate mauve, shots of the royal couple’s pets and — privacy alert — of toddler Archie. There were meaningful, emotive nods as they said “yeah” to each other in the Californian manner.

But the content was unsubtle. This was Semtex in swaddling bands. Cyanide en gelee. The biggest act of strategic self-harm since the scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow. It may have been presented as schmaltz but this two-hour gloopathon was politically ruinous.

“Life is about telling stories, right?” said la Markle, all high-resolution lip gloss. “Telling stories through a truthful lens.” Her eyes sparkled behind lashes as long as ravens’ wings.

Stories were duly delivered, a steaming dump of indiscretions: whinges about money and titles and bodyguards and the rotten tabloid press (which must be quite different from tabloid television). That Kate Cambridge? A B*I*T*C*H! “But I have forgiven her,” purred Meghan with her truthful lens.


Further atrocities: she had had to teach herself the words to God Save the Queen; no one had advised her how to keep her legs crossed; people had been beastly about her on the internet. We had our first blinked-back tear at 1.54am. Either that, or some unfortunate midge had made it past the ravens’ wings and had jabbed her in the eyeball.

Then came the intended killer blow: someone in royal circles had speculated about what skin tone the Sussexes’ baby was going to have. “That conversation I am never going to share,” said Prince Harry, after he and his wife had disgorged its existence to a worldwide audience.

Harry had not appeared in the first half, when we were assured Meghan was not a gold-digger. “I never looked up my husband online,” she claimed, when Oprah asked if she had done her “research”. Harry now took his place alongside his duchess and we found he has started saying “like” and he has the beginnings of an American accent. He disclosed that his father stopped taking his telephone calls for a while. Maybe Charles simply didn’t recognise him with that valley girl uplift.

The programme was entitled Meghan & Harry. Most of us used to put them the other way round. Her Grace wore a dark dress with white splodges. Blasted seagulls. She, in turn, proceeded to deposit industrial quantities of guano on a royal family that had, we heard, welcomed her warmly to their midst. Things only started to go wrong after the row about the bridesmaids’ dresses. Or was it after the couple’s official trip to the Pacific (translation: the rest of “the Firm” were envious of its success)? We heard both.

Further inconsistencies followed. One minute Meghan disclaimed grandeur, the next she was concerned about her “status”. One moment she was unfussed about honorifics, the next she was furious Archie was not going to be a prince. She was astonished when her police protection was withdrawn (bodyguards are a must-have accessory in Hollywood). The next she was writing to the Queen to say she didn’t care less about protection. Oprah let these self-contradictions go through to the wicketkeeper.

It ended with Meghan comparing herself — sorry about this — to the Little Mermaid and Harry saying “time heals all things, hopefully”. Someone possibly said the same to the Earl of Uxbridge at the Battle of Waterloo, even as much of one of his legs was disappearing over the brow

[Beso]

Originally Posted by jet

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...sion-fshxnmgbq

Harry and Meghan interview ditches subtlety in embrace of tabloid television
Quentin Letts
Monday March 08 2021, 5.28am, The Times

One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.

As a work of televised theatre, Oprah Winfrey’s interview was soft-focus: the setting bucolic, Queen Oprah in delicate mauve, shots of the royal couple’s pets and — privacy alert — of toddler Archie. There were meaningful, emotive nods as they said “yeah” to each other in the Californian manner.

But the content was unsubtle. This was Semtex in swaddling bands. Cyanide en gelee. The biggest act of strategic self-harm since the scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow. It may have been presented as schmaltz but this two-hour gloopathon was politically ruinous.

“Life is about telling stories, right?” said la Markle, all high-resolution lip gloss. “Telling stories through a truthful lens.” Her eyes sparkled behind lashes as long as ravens’ wings.

Stories were duly delivered, a steaming dump of indiscretions: whinges about money and titles and bodyguards and the rotten tabloid press (which must be quite different from tabloid television). That Kate Cambridge? A B*I*T*C*H! “But I have forgiven her,” purred Meghan with her truthful lens.


Further atrocities: she had had to teach herself the words to God Save the Queen; no one had advised her how to keep her legs crossed; people had been beastly about her on the internet. We had our first blinked-back tear at 1.54am. Either that, or some unfortunate midge had made it past the ravens’ wings and had jabbed her in the eyeball.

Then came the intended killer blow: someone in royal circles had speculated about what skin tone the Sussexes’ baby was going to have. “That conversation I am never going to share,” said Prince Harry, after he and his wife had disgorged its existence to a worldwide audience.

Harry had not appeared in the first half, when we were assured Meghan was not a gold-digger. “I never looked up my husband online,” she claimed, when Oprah asked if she had done her “research”. Harry now took his place alongside his duchess and we found he has started saying “like” and he has the beginnings of an American accent. He disclosed that his father stopped taking his telephone calls for a while. Maybe Charles simply didn’t recognise him with that valley girl uplift.

The programme was entitled Meghan & Harry. Most of us used to put them the other way round. Her Grace wore a dark dress with white splodges. Blasted seagulls. She, in turn, proceeded to deposit industrial quantities of guano on a royal family that had, we heard, welcomed her warmly to their midst. Things only started to go wrong after the row about the bridesmaids’ dresses. Or was it after the couple’s official trip to the Pacific (translation: the rest of “the Firm” were envious of its success)? We heard both.

Further inconsistencies followed. One minute Meghan disclaimed grandeur, the next she was concerned about her “status”. One moment she was unfussed about honorifics, the next she was furious Archie was not going to be a prince. She was astonished when her police protection was withdrawn (bodyguards are a must-have accessory in Hollywood). The next she was writing to the Queen to say she didn’t care less about protection. Oprah let these self-contradictions go through to the wicketkeeper.

It ended with Meghan comparing herself — sorry about this — to the Little Mermaid and Harry saying “time heals all things, hopefully”. Someone possibly said the same to the Earl of Uxbridge at the Battle of Waterloo, even as much of one of his legs was disappearing over the brow

5.28..

Iove the image of him snorting cocaine all night.

The last paragraph..

[rusticgal]

Lol...yes many contradictions and inconsistencies as I stated on my earlier post.

[arista]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it was a much bigger crisis for the royals when diana died

No it is not.

[arista]

Originally Posted by arista

Sadly Parmy could not Fix your TV
he would need Triple time & a Bonus to assit.

[arista]

[arista]

[arista]

[Meghan Markle's half-sister Samantha SLAMS her
Oprah interview, accusing Duchess of
using 'depression as an excuse to treat
claim that they haven't seen each other in 20 years
Samantha, 56, who shares a father, Thomas,
with Meghan, 39, unleashed a furious rant
against her half-sister in the wake of
her bombshell Oprah interview
On Monday morning, new clips from the
interview showed Meghan discussing her
relationship with her father and Samantha
She accused her dad of 'betraying her' and
said that her half-sister Samantha
'doesn't know her' and claimed
they haven't see each other in 20 years
Samantha shared proof to refute this claim,
sharing images of herself and Meghan at her
college graduation 13 years ago
Meghan also claimed in the interview clips
that Samantha only changed her name back
to Markle when her half-sister began dating Harry
Samantha shared evidence to the contrary,
revealing that she filed a petition to change
her last name to Markle in December 1997
When asked about Meghan's admission that
she struggled with suicidal thoughts, Samantha
accused her of using her mental health as 'an excuse'
'Depression is not an excuse for treating
people like dishrags and disposing of them,
' she said of her half-sibling's struggle]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ter_mailonline

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by arista

No one cares what this scummy little bitch has to say.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

No one cares what this scummy little bitch has to say.

Sure
but we need all viewpoints

[Glenn.]

Depends what kind of viewpoints they are though. A money hungry scumbag doesn’t count as one

[arista]

[arista]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Depends what kind of viewpoints they are though. A money hungry scumbag doesn’t count as one

Its an alternate
I assume she could be on GMBHD itv
in a few hours.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Depends what kind of viewpoints they are though. A money hungry scumbag doesn’t count as one

Completely agree


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by arista

Its an alternate
I assume she could be on GMBHD itv
in a few hours.

No doubt. Obsessed piers will need someone to have a rant with I suppose

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Because that was off bounds...Oprah not wanting to put her friend in a bad light.

It was said at the beginning that NOTHING IS OFF BOUNDS , maybe they did talk briefly about her family but they had to condense the interview down as it would of been far too long. There has to be structure and not going off at a tangent .

And the fun and games the tabloids & media would have had if this interview was dragged out and broadcast over a few days , no doubt Meghan would be called a "whining drama queen" for taking up soo much air time and blah blah .

Also what did you want to know about her family?, she said she's lost her dad so clearly that relationship is damaged no thanks to him selling malicious stories on her and doing bitter resentful interviews .

Her dad is obviously a painful topic , plus that wasn't the focus just like her mum wasn't the focus . This was about the reasons why they stepped back and highlighting the royal family but mostly the institution/ firm on a whole and how toxic and unfeeling it is especially behind the scenes.

As i've said already i think Harry& Meghan made the right decision, and i wish them the best and hopefully they've got that peace now . They seem happy with where they live.

[arista]

[An audience of 17m is a staggeringly low performance in US TV terms.
96.4m watched @SuperBowl
2021.
Last night, pundits were suggesting #MeghanandHarryonOprah might do better..]

[arista]

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by jet

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/h...sion-fshxnmgbq

Harry and Meghan interview ditches subtlety in embrace of tabloid television
Quentin Letts
Monday March 08 2021, 5.28am, The Times

One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.

As a work of televised theatre, Oprah Winfrey’s interview was soft-focus: the setting bucolic, Queen Oprah in delicate mauve, shots of the royal couple’s pets and — privacy alert — of toddler Archie. There were meaningful, emotive nods as they said “yeah” to each other in the Californian manner.

But the content was unsubtle. This was Semtex in swaddling bands. Cyanide en gelee. The biggest act of strategic self-harm since the scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow. It may have been presented as schmaltz but this two-hour gloopathon was politically ruinous.

“Life is about telling stories, right?” said la Markle, all high-resolution lip gloss. “Telling stories through a truthful lens.” Her eyes sparkled behind lashes as long as ravens’ wings.

Stories were duly delivered, a steaming dump of indiscretions: whinges about money and titles and bodyguards and the rotten tabloid press (which must be quite different from tabloid television). That Kate Cambridge? A B*I*T*C*H! “But I have forgiven her,” purred Meghan with her truthful lens.


Further atrocities: she had had to teach herself the words to God Save the Queen; no one had advised her how to keep her legs crossed; people had been beastly about her on the internet. We had our first blinked-back tear at 1.54am. Either that, or some unfortunate midge had made it past the ravens’ wings and had jabbed her in the eyeball.

Then came the intended killer blow: someone in royal circles had speculated about what skin tone the Sussexes’ baby was going to have. “That conversation I am never going to share,” said Prince Harry, after he and his wife had disgorged its existence to a worldwide audience.

Harry had not appeared in the first half, when we were assured Meghan was not a gold-digger. “I never looked up my husband online,” she claimed, when Oprah asked if she had done her “research”. Harry now took his place alongside his duchess and we found he has started saying “like” and he has the beginnings of an American accent. He disclosed that his father stopped taking his telephone calls for a while. Maybe Charles simply didn’t recognise him with that valley girl uplift.

The programme was entitled Meghan & Harry. Most of us used to put them the other way round. Her Grace wore a dark dress with white splodges. Blasted seagulls. She, in turn, proceeded to deposit industrial quantities of guano on a royal family that had, we heard, welcomed her warmly to their midst. Things only started to go wrong after the row about the bridesmaids’ dresses. Or was it after the couple’s official trip to the Pacific (translation: the rest of “the Firm” were envious of its success)? We heard both.

Further inconsistencies followed. One minute Meghan disclaimed grandeur, the next she was concerned about her “status”. One moment she was unfussed about honorifics, the next she was furious Archie was not going to be a prince. She was astonished when her police protection was withdrawn (bodyguards are a must-have accessory in Hollywood). The next she was writing to the Queen to say she didn’t care less about protection. Oprah let these self-contradictions go through to the wicketkeeper.

It ended with Meghan comparing herself — sorry about this — to the Little Mermaid and Harry saying “time heals all things, hopefully”. Someone possibly said the same to the Earl of Uxbridge at the Battle of Waterloo, even as much of one of his legs was disappearing over the brow

Maybe Charles simply didn’t recognise him with that valley girl uplift.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by arista

[Meghan Markle's half-sister Samantha SLAMS her
Oprah interview, accusing Duchess of
using 'depression as an excuse to treat
claim that they haven't seen each other in 20 years
Samantha, 56, who shares a father, Thomas,
with Meghan, 39, unleashed a furious rant
against her half-sister in the wake of
her bombshell Oprah interview
On Monday morning, new clips from the
interview showed Meghan discussing her
relationship with her father and Samantha
She accused her dad of 'betraying her' and
said that her half-sister Samantha
'doesn't know her' and claimed
they haven't see each other in 20 years
Samantha shared proof to refute this claim,
sharing images of herself and Meghan at her
college graduation 13 years ago
Meghan also claimed in the interview clips
that Samantha only changed her name back
to Markle when her half-sister began dating Harry
Samantha shared evidence to the contrary,
revealing that she filed a petition to change
her last name to Markle in December 1997
When asked about Meghan's admission that
she struggled with suicidal thoughts, Samantha
accused her of using her mental health as 'an excuse'
'Depression is not an excuse for treating
people like dishrags and disposing of them,
' she said of her half-sibling's struggle]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ter_mailonline

Proof of lies ...oh dear

[Shaun]

I've largely avoided the topic because I cannot fathom how people spend so much of their time and ire directed at these people, so went into the interview last night pretty blindsided (I only watched the first half with just Meghan, haven't watched the rest with the pair of them yet) and I thought she came across as compassionate, calm, and pretty honest and likeable... she also possessed something that seems rare in the royal family: warmth.

I actually quite like Charles (for his environmental and charity work, anyway, don't really have an opinion on his personality) but the queen herself is just... without need for explanation. Very stiff, cold, whatever... to expect much vitality out of a person her age might seem asking too much but she's always been the same in my 30 years of life

I think the entire subject is just an excuse for people to exorcise their demons and throw all of their personal problems at a fictional one they've created from appearing on the telly and in the press. It is... beyond desperation, the levels to which trolls (not just on here, but on here as well) will sink to bait a reaction, invade privacy, claim ownership over people's personal lives, invent conspiracy, assert falsehoods, and just show off their complete lack of empathy. It's a disease.

The British identity is in crisis; stuck between archaic tradition and embracing modernity. Desperately seeking to isolate ourselves from Europe but at the same time asserting our influence and importance over the world. As a result it seems the public are split 50/50 (as is now the case with everything) regarding them... some clutching their pearls, expecting Meghan to vanish and never touch Our Beloved Prince And His Nan ever again, others expecting a reenactment of the end of Louis XVI. As always, the solution is probably somewhere down the middle, and in this case I'd highly recommend getting over it and ****ing ignoring them if they make you so irate.

[arista]

Her Dad will be on
be GMBHD itv.

[jet]

Originally Posted by arista

[An audience of 17m is a staggeringly low performance in US TV terms.
96.4m watched @SuperBowl
2021.
Last night, pundits were suggesting #MeghanandHarryonOprah might do better..]

Oops.