[jet]

Originally Posted by Liam-

They might be sympathetic towards them, but they can’t claim it’s their story or that it’s from their point of view, if they haven’t spoken to the couple directly, it’s based off of hearsay and press reports

They knew this book was going to be written a year ago. The authors themselves said they were contacted by the couple about their intentions for the book way back. Harry and Meghan talk to their friends....the friends talk to the authors. Surely you know how these things work.

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by jet

They knew this book was going to be written a year ago. The authors themselves said they were contacted by the couple about their intentions for the book way back. Harry and Meghan talk to their friends....the friends talk to the authors. Surely you know how these things work.

I guess if any untruth is spoken..they will be in touch with their Lawyers

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Liam-

A book by a couple of journalists, about a couple they haven’t spoken to, based on press stories and anonymous ‘sources’

I’m sure it’ll be incredibly accurate

...yeah, whatever it’s slant, a book aimed at making money above all else...

[Christmas Dynasnow]

we still have no evidence the drone was taking pics or was up there due to them. Lots of drones in LA

[Nicky91]

well i can imagine that, since we call ours Queen Maxima too so

you guys have every right of the ''Queen Kate'' title

[Nicky91]

royalty news is among my interests yes

if some were doubting that from me, i personally like Harry/Meghan as couple, i Always knew of Harry he was into women who aren't from royal/upper class world, and Harry living in glamorous hollywood, good for him too

would they have been aware there being drones in LA, yes but do they have rights to sue, yes they do

invasion of privacy, no matter where is just wrong and against the law

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Nicky91

royalty news is among my interests yes

if some were doubting that from me, i personally like Harry/Meghan as couple, i Always knew of Harry he was into women who aren't from royal/upper class world, and Harry living in glamorous hollywood, good for him too

would they have been aware there being drones in LA, yes but do they have rights to sue, yes they do

invasion of privacy, no matter where is just wrong and against the law

Yes and I guess you 'like' them rather than 'love' them. Just like I 'dislike' but dont 'hate' them.
Harrys previous girlfriends have come from well established families so you are wrong there...
...also no one has said that drones are acceptable and that they dont have a right to sue...

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Yes and I guess you 'like' them rather than 'love' them. Just like I 'dislike' but dont 'hate' them.
Harrys previous girlfriends have come from well established families so you are wrong there...
...also no one has said that drones are acceptable and that they dont have a right to sue...

yeah ok fair enough, also even though Thomas Markle's personality i don't like, i do like his work as camera guy for Married with Children

[Kizzy]

As if Meghan should have rights like everyone else though....

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

As if Meghan should have rights like everyone else though....

sorry....who said she hasnt?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

sorry....who said she hasnt?

Did I say anyone had?... The fact is she has, and she is as free as anyone to excersise those rights.
Privacy is an important issue imo, fair play she should seek to maintain it.

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Did I say anyone had?... The fact is she has, and she is as free as anyone to excersise those rights.
Privacy is an important issue imo, fair play she should seek to maintain it.

Like I said before...No one has said otherwise..

[Brother Leon]

Let’s hope no one randomly takes photos of your kids without consent when you are out and about then. According to you there is no reason to be upset about that.




Never mind someone doing it on your own property.

[arista]

Spoiler:

Very Large Sunday Times

[Marsh.]

He supported William and Kate and expected the same in return. Shameful.

[Liam-]

William has always seemed like a snotty prat, just like his dad.

[jet]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...han-Harry.html

'We rolled out the red carpet for Meghan': Frustrated Kate Middleton and Prince William hit back at claims in devastating biography that Duchess and Harry felt shunned by the Royal Family and insist they welcomed her with open arms

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge last night hit back at claims in a bombshell new biography that they actively spurned Meghan Markle.

The authors of Finding Freedom claim relations between the Sussexes and Cambridges became so bitter that Kate humiliatingly snubbed her sister-in-law at Meghan's farewell appearance as a senior Royal.

But close friends of William and Kate issued a fierce defence, insisting the couple had 'rolled out the red carpet' for Meghan and 'done all they possibly could' to welcome the US actress into the Royal Family.

According to the friends, the Cambridges 'welcomed Meghan with open arms' by inviting her to Anmer Hall, their family home in Norfolk, where Kate personally cooked vegan meals for her brother-in-law's then fiance.

William and Kate also invited Meghan's friends, bridesmaids and page boys to a party before her wedding to Harry in May 2018, and keen tennis fan Kate asked Meghan to join her in the Royal Box at Wimbledon for two successive years.

'It's just completely wrong to suggest they didn't talk and plain wrong to say the Cambridges weren't welcoming,' a friend told The Mail on Sunday............

[Marsh.]

daily mail

a friend told The Mail on Sunday............

Versed.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Versed.

No article by a named royal correspondent this time - especially for you.
You're welcome!

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

No article by a named royal correspondent this time - especially for you.
You're welcome!

A tabloid article... citing unnamed "sources". The same ones you cast aside when it doesn't fit your narrative?

Nope. The article isn't doing what you think it is doing.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

A tabloid article... citing unnamed "sources". The same ones you cast aside when it doesn't fit your narrative?

Nope. The article isn't doing what you think it is doing.

Could you clarify what you are trying to say?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Could you clarify what you are trying to say?

Tabloid. Gossip. Is. Not. Factual.

Books. Written. Based. On. Hearsay. Are. Just. That.

[Marsh.]

I imagine they are. Nobody wants a book version of what was all over the news already months ago.

[Ammi]

...I was watching the Princess Diana V the Media programme last night...and a Royal corespondent themselves said that, that title means they’ll always go with the most commercially profitable slant/story and other than that it doesn’t give any special insight over any other media...which makes complete sense obviously...

[arista]