[joeysteele]

Except Prince Harry doesn't appear to like young girls at all
He has married and appears to be extremely Happy with the wife he's chosen who is actually near 3 years OLDER than him.

[jet]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Except Prince Harry doesn't appear to like young girls at all

.

He knows his favourite Uncle allegedly does though.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by jet

He knows his favourite Uncle allegedly does though.

So know you're insinuating Prince Harry is a paedophile only because of your applying guilt association to him, of one of his family.

I think you may find a lot of the Royals like/d Andrew.
Are they all guilty by association in your eyes too then.
Andrew was a favourite too of the late Queen Mother.
What would that make her then.

[jet]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

So know you're insinuating Prince Harry is a paedophile only because of your applying guilt association to him, of one of his family.

I think you may find a lot of the Royals like/d Andrew.
Are they all guilty by association in your eyes too then.
Andrew was a favourite too of the late Queen Mother.
What would that make her then.

I insinuated no such thing, nor think no such thing. How dare you make up lies like that. I said he knows his uncle allegedly likes young girls.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by jet

I insinuated no such thing, nor think no such thing. How dare you make up lies like that. I said he knows his uncle allegedly likes young girls.

I should have said possibly your insinuating that.

I shouldn't have spoken to you, you're beyond reason.
My apologies for not adding possibly.
You're the one associating Prince Harry with Andrew not myself.

Oh and be careful if you're going to start calling other members liars.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by jet

He knows his favourite Uncle allegedly does though.

By that logic you could accuse the whole royal family then of knowing Andrew's perversions ,but no as usual it's Harry to blame .

[Tom4784]

So we've reached the point in the olympic finals for mental gymnastics in the style of 'finding things to blame Meghan Markle for' and the latest offering is that because Andrew is a peadophile, that makes Harry a peado too for reasons, and that Meghan Markle is just a cover, just because bringing up Andrew makes the hatred for Meghan look foolish.

All because a royal 'expert' let her arse hang out several times and slated a child victim of sexual abuse and trafficking to defend Prince Andrew, and because this expert also has a negative opinion on Meghan, this means she must be defended at all costs.

It's all so grim.

[Beso]

A big tell tale sign...


Meghan being interviewed first..alone, and not as this loving couple.



Sad ginger sacks having to come in later all grovelling like to hoover up her fakeness...

Fake fake fake..

[Beso]

So the conversation about the titles and colour of skin and security etc...came before she was pregnant.

Hence her calling the subject, it. Rather than archie.

[arista]

[Glenn.]

6 whole pages? Have they nothing better to print?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

6 whole pages? Have they nothing better to print?

It's a pity that publication is allowed to be in print never mind cover anything.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

6 whole pages? Have they nothing better to print?

I wonder if newspaper reporters ever go on to being screen play writers ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Zizu

I wonder if newspaper reporters ever go on to being screen play writers ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

...’go on to be..’..?.....

[jet]

Jennie Bond's thoughts so similar to many of ours on here:

Finding peace is simple, Harry: step out of the spotlight.
The Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey today will only keep the couple in the public eye. Their pleas for privacy are a joke

Jennie Bond
Sunday March 07 2021, 12.01am, The Sunday Times


As the Duke of Edinburgh lies in his hospital bed, Prince Harry might have done well to heed the advice his grandfather has regularly handed out to his family: “Don’t talk about yourself, talk about everything else. Nobody’s interested in you.” Oprah Winfrey would beg to differ. And she is undoubtedly right.
We are all curtain-twitchers at heart, and her much-anticipated interview with Harry and Meghan, which will air in America today and here tomorrow, promises us the chance to peek over the palace walls and hear about the skulduggery within.

But aside from that, what is the point of the two-hour special? We know the couple were unhappy in their royal life, that they found the press coverage “toxic” and that they fled to America to protect their mental health.
It is five years since Harry authorised a palace statement complaining about the press targeting Meghan, and pinpointing the racist and sexist overtones of comment pieces and social media posts. It is almost 18 months since they blew the goodwill created by a successful tour of southern Africa with another explosive statement and an interview with ITV’s Tom Bradby.
The couple complaining about their lot in life, and the fact that no one had asked whether Meghan was “OK”, as the duchess praised Bradby for doing, sat badly with the suffering and abject poverty they had witnessed in preceding days.

I must admit I expected the main thrust of the Sussexes’ complaints to be against the media. But it seems now that Meghan, at least, is prepared to go further and attack “the Firm” as well. Oprah has done her job.
And yet I am still bewildered by the couple’s motive. People have asked me what my first question would be if I had somehow landed the interview. It would be: “Why the hell are you doing this? Go away, be private, live your lives in peace. That’s what you have begged for ... now just do it!”
It’s hard to take their pleas for privacy seriously when they have chosen to move to California: Celeb Central and the favourite hunting ground of the paparazzi. Even so, they could keep a low profile if they were careful, but they insist on popping up every other day on TV, radio and podcasts.

They want to control their own narrative and will work only with handpicked journalists. Fair enough. But then we hear they have signed multimillion-dollar deals with Netflix and Spotify — both of which will demand their pound of flesh and publicity.
With Prince Philip ill, the timing could hardly be worse. But, having signed the deal, Harry and Meghan have ceded control — which is the one thing they have fought so hard to capture.

And so the battle lines will be redrawn. There will be an interesting few months ahead as the Queen and duke turn, respectively, 95 and 100. And in July, Harry is due to join William in unveiling a statue of their mother to mark what would have been her 60th birthday. Will he be there? Will he be welcome? The curtains will be twitching again.
Oprah’s interview will be a sensation and will command a huge global audience. But it may not gain this troubled couple public sympathy. What is certain is that it will once again shine an unforgiving spotlight on every aspect of their lives. It is a strange way to go about securing the privacy, compassion and kindness they say they crave.

[Crimson Dynamo]

good article.

I read that 13 of the 30 so headlines they flashed up to highlight "the toxic UK media" were from USA and Australian newspapers

[user104658]

I've already explained why wanting privacy doesn't mean they want to be completely out of public life, and why saying "we want privacy" clearly does not mean "we want to become hermits" and that privacy, in this context, actually means having some agency and control over which aspects of life to share and which to keep private.

Maybe Jenny would benefit from coming to Tibb and reading some of my posts...? I don't like to think of her sitting there so confused and frustrated . Pop her an e-mail invitation, Jet?

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I've already explained why wanting privacy doesn't mean they want to be completely out of public life, and why saying "we want privacy" clearly does not mean "we want to become hermits" and that privacy, in this context, actually means having some agency and control over which aspects of life to share and which to keep private.

Maybe Jenny would benefit from coming to Tibb and reading some of my posts...? I don't like to think of her sitting there so confused and frustrated . Pop her an e-mail invitation, Jet?

Nobody has said they should live like hermits. Nobody. Ever.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by jet

Nobody has said they should live like hermits. Nobody. Ever.

Jenny Bond did Jet that's why I said you should invite her on here for a chat

"Finding peace is simple, Harry: step out of the spotlight.

The Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey today will only keep the couple in the public eye. Their pleas for privacy are a joke"

Its never too late to learn something new.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Jenny Bond did Jet that's why I said you should invite her on here for a chat

"Finding peace is simple, Harry: step out of the spotlight.

The Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey today will only keep the couple in the public eye. Their pleas for privacy are a joke"

Its never too late to learn something new.

If you don't know the difference between 'spotlight' and going about your life/work in a much less showy, PREACHY podcasts, big TELL ALL interview way, I can see where your confusion comes from. The Obama's would never. The Royals would never. They got CLASS!

[user104658]

Originally Posted by jet

If you don't know the difference between 'spotlight' and going about your life/work in a much less showy, PREACHY podcasts, big TELL ALL interview way, I can see where your confusion comes from. The Obama's would never. The Royals would never. They got CLASS!

Figuring out what THEY are happy with has nothing to do with me, or you, or Jenny Bond... I wouldn't want any sort of spotlight but if they've changed things and are now happy with it, then they've made the right decision for themselves, and it's bizarre that you and Jenny are insisting "no u haven't it's just the same!". It doesn't matter what you think of it . As with LT it's fine if you and Jenny don't care whether or not they're happy, but you don't get to decide what they should and shouldn't be happy with.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I've already explained why wanting privacy doesn't mean they want to be completely out of public life, and why saying "we want privacy" clearly does not mean "we want to become hermits" and that privacy, in this context, actually means having some agency and control over which aspects of life to share and which to keep private.

Maybe Jenny would benefit from coming to Tibb and reading some of my posts...? I don't like to think of her sitting there so confused and frustrated . Pop her an e-mail invitation, Jet?

yes TS but its the wanton failure to accept the reality of fame

they cant have selective privacy and then pick and choose when they want to use the media for financial gain. In Hollywood, there are very professional numerous freelance expert photographers who make their corn by snapping the likes of these 2 and its very,very worthwhile to do so. A good shot of either outwith an arranged photoshoot is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars currently.

At the moment they have zero goodwill with the written press in this country so they will have no compunction to use what is offered to them unlike say Simon Cowell who, if an unflattering pic or story was about to be run would probaly get a call from the editor prior to see what they can deal.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

yes TS but its the wanton failure to accept the reality of fame



they cant have selective privacy and then pick and choose when they want to use the media for financial gain. In Hollywood, there are very professional numerous freelance expert photographers who make their corn by snapping the likes of these 2 and its very,very worthwhile to do so. A good shot of either outwith an arranged photoshoot is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars currently.



At the moment they have zero goodwill with the written press in this country so they will have no compunction to use what is offered to them unlike say Simon Cowell who, if an unflattering pic or story was about to be run would probaly get a call from the editor prior to see what they can deal.

They seem outwardly to be happier, and express vocally being happier, with their celebrity existence in the US and their new level of self-determination in dealing with the press than when they were senior royals living in the UK being managed by "the institution" ... Which is entirely down to them...

You can't just say "Umm no let me explain why you are NOT happier" when they blatantly are . You might not want them to be, but at some point you, jet and Jenny have to accept what they're expressing as their reality rather than insisting it's another way because that's how you imagine it should work.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

They seem outwardly to be happier, and express vocally being happier, with their celebrity existence in the US and their new level of self-determination in dealing with the press than when they were senior royals living in the UK being managed by "the institution" ... Which is entirely down to them...

You can't just say "Umm no let me explain why you are NOT happier" when they blatantly are . You might not want them to be, but at some point you, jet and Jenny have to accept what they're expressing as their reality rather than insisting it's another way because that's how you imagine it should work.

i could care less how happy they are tbh

i still think they should consider my candle business plan

[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

i could care less how happy they are tbh

And doesn't that just sum up the issue LT!