Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
With Love, Meghan on Netflix
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Uh, no. |
Anonymous
|
Chandauka apparently has a history of hostile takeovers, per her Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Chandauka
“Since qualification, Chandauka has worked on a number of high-profile transactions, including the attempted hostile takeover of the London Stock Exchange Group by the Macquarie Group; the acquisition of The Body Shop by L’Oréal; Nike, Inc.’s acquisition of Umbro; and the initial public offering (IPO) of Ferrexpo as the first Ukrainian company to be listed on the London Stock Exchange.” But sure, keep trying to deflect by trashing Harry and Meghan. PP blaming Meghan for this sh!tshow should be ashamed. |
Anonymous
OK, easy peasy. Iain Rawlinson chaired Tusk Trust, another African charity, from 2003 to 2014 when William was patron. Sophie just appointed him trustee to Sentebale, although her legal right to do so is doubtful because the board (who all resigned rather than work with her) has that power. This is all extremely easy to google. If you care about an African take, listen to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfYvwF-F3yA Insults are all you've got. So here you go: willing to bet I'm more attractive, better dressed--and slimmer, yes!-- than you. Two can play at your playground insults game. |
Anonymous
Are you the scumbag who posted in the Prince Andrew Accuser thread that Giuffre's new video exonerates Andrew? Stop bullying Meghan and go crawl back in your cave. |
Anonymous
| Wow even people magazine is reporting about the video where Meghan tells that woman to step aside and that Harry had asked her to issue a statement defending Meghan. I'm surprised because they are generally pro Meghan and Harry. |
Anonymous
Deflect, deflect.... People was just picking up other reporting. Go crawl back under your rock. |
Anonymous
No one cares about this Sentebale crap. |
Anonymous
|
Just getting up to speed on all of this. My impression is that the charity was run sort of loosey goosey as a project for Harry and associates, whose objectives were noble, but also served as a vanity project. Proper leadership and admin channels were not always taken though Harry didn't see it that way because he has been catered to his whole life and things just happen because he wants them to. This new leader wanted it to be more sustainable locally, more professionally run with normal board turnover, both of which is the goal (or should be) of nonprofits. She wanted to make it less white-savior-y.
She probably was annoyed by Meghan who liked how Harry's association with them reflected well on her and resented being asked to defend her as that is not part of their mission. TLDR - Harry is used to getting his way (though he comes by it honestly) and this lady was over it and wanted to change things up and not kowtow to a prince. I think she will regret being so outspoken though, even if it was the truth as she sees it. |
Anonymous
Ironic, because People are the first ones usually briefed by H&M and their PR machine lol. |
Anonymous
Can you do us a favor? Name a few instances where you think H&M were in the wrong? Can you name a few flaws of theirs? A few times when they messed up? |
Anonymous
Nope! Not me. Here, love, let’s let the notoriously right-wind bullying tabloid, The Guardian, ring in on this! “Meanwhile, it goes without saying that despite its brevity, the above paragraph will serve as the twat-signal to the so-called “Sussex Squad”, a hilarious cavalcade of single-issue human beings who patrol the internet round the clock, policing any and all criticism of the Montecito millionaire couple who ironically need expensive security in part to deal with nutjob fans like them. I mean, I’m paraphrasing, but only vaguely. The Squad also does a lot of other valuable work, like explaining that laughing at Meghan’s ridiculous Netflix lifestyle show is racist.” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/01/prince-harry-institution-charity-windsors |
Anonymous
They shouldn't have published a book. Happy? Can you do us a favor? Answer a single question about why you're ignoring the mounting evidence that Sophie misappropriated 600k, tried to abandon thousands of children with AIDS by pivoting to the already crowded climate change charity, the presence of William's long-time ally by her side, and the events that unrolled when the board tried to get her to resign and she threatened to bankrupt Sentebale with a huge lawsuit in London (so the board resigned rather than bankrupt Sentebale) and tried to deflect onto Meghan instead (with your help)? This is all extremely to google if you (and the "just catching up" poster who is probably also you, trying to get away from being outed as supporting Andrew) even try your google machine. Go ahead, answer a single one of these questions. We'll wait. |
Anonymous
Cute, love. You completely ignored this quote from the article's first para: "I’m in such a muddle with it all that I can’t remember if I’m allowed to say that purely from my observations of her telly interviews, Sentebale chair Sophie Chandauka does seem like a right old loose cannon." Intead you go deep into the article for lame material that sorta, kinda, not really, supports your hatred of side players, the Sussex Squad. Who seem to be anybody who disagrees with you and your pathological hatred of Meghan. Seek professional help. Still no answers to the many questions about one of the actual leading players, Sophie Chandauka, and what she's been up to including misappropriating 500k? |
Anonymous
Demanding that the woman defend Meghan is newsworthy (tabloid standards of course) because she has been previously accused of bullying in the UK and the US. |
Anonymous
Reporting you as a troll. Zero answers to legitimate questions about Sophie's doings, just more insults. |