Meghan and Prince Harry are moving to the U.S./Canada - OFFICIAL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

Archie is no more important than the Yorklets.

Right and the Queen thought that they are important enough to warrant a splashy royal wedding.

What's your point? They are still royal. Nothing to do with custody and not raising a child in the UK.

The point is that even the distant York’s were important enough to the queen to warrant extravagant weddings. Archie (and his parents) is a thousand times more important.

You’re the one arguing he’s irrelevant. Everyone else sees the reality that he’s very important to the queen and the royal family. Especially right now.

Lol why is Archie a thousand times more important?

For starters his father is the most popular of the royal family. More popular than the queen, more popular than the future king, and the second in line for the throne. That’s why he’s more important to the palace than the York’s.

Secondly, he’s more important in terms of succession. He’s further up on the succession chain than the York’s.

No need to eye roll. Let's look at history. When the York girls were born (they are from a generation before, so the comparison is their situation when they were Archie's current age), their father was *higher* up than Harry currently is, actually, because Charles only had two kids versus William having three. And guess what? When Archie is an adult (like the York girls are now adults), Archie will be bumped down the line (just like the Yorks were when Will's kids were born) by whatever kids George has, along with whatever kids Charlotte has and Louis has. So, Archie's importance to succession, based on where he is RELATIVE to his generation of royals, is similar to those of the Yorks, but slightly WORSE because he has three royal cousins ahead of him (George, Charlotte, Louis).

(By the way, Harry is not second in line for the throne right now. Not sure where you got that idea. William's kids bumped Harry down the line.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

With three little Cambridges, there is more than enough kindling for the cuteness mill for the next fifteen years, at least.

Funny how there are 3 little Cambridge’s right now and Archie is still getting tons of media attention...

Cambridge kids are cuter. There. I said it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The Queen absolutely held custody of Diana's children and Fergie's children over their heads. They were told play nice or you won't have access to.your children. She is not above doing it again.

Canada is a separate legal system from the UK, so you have some protection there and it is an easily trip to have game the baby to th e US if you need an American court for more protection. And it's a good PR compromise for Harry. He's in a Commonwealth country, but not the UK

Custody issues don't come up unless in divorce proceedings. The Cambridges travel with their children internationally all the time.

It seems that both Diana and Fergie had ample access to their children. Diana would have even more if she didn't prefer to hang out in Mediterranean with rich Arabs.

Archie isn't important to the crown. The comparison here is Fergie (not Diana, whose son was in the direct line of succession), and Fergie had plenty of access to her kids and joint custody.

And a terrible settlement in exchange for that

That’s her own fault. When asked what she wanted, she said ‘your friendship’. Okay.

Sounds like she was afraid of her Mother in Law, the Queen.

She was right to be afraid. Diana died because she crossed the Queen. Epstein is dead because the scandal got too close to the Queen.

You sound like a paranoid schizophrenic, pp. Really.

Spent a lot of time on the psych wards? You'd know, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

Archie is no more important than the Yorklets.

Right and the Queen thought that they are important enough to warrant a splashy royal wedding.

What's your point? They are still royal. Nothing to do with custody and not raising a child in the UK.

The point is that even the distant York’s were important enough to the queen to warrant extravagant weddings. Archie (and his parents) is a thousand times more important.

You’re the one arguing he’s irrelevant. Everyone else sees the reality that he’s very important to the queen and the royal family. Especially right now.

I think its clear William won't be granting Archie any splashy royal wedding when he's ready to get married in about 30 years unless there is a reconciling. His sister in law has decided she wants nothing to do with the family.

Archie’s parents can pay for his wedding with all those millions they’re looking to make. No need to fleece taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

Good point. Were Prince Charles's sibllings/children as famous as William and Harry's family?

When they were young, they were very popular. Sarah Furguson obviously was nowhere near as popular as Diana but she and her daughters generated tons of media coverage. It’s likely that Archie follows a similar trajectory, but who knows? His parents opting out of the Firm means he could be even more famous world wide as he grows up. It’s all uncharted territory.

Over 100,000 people turned out to witness Andrew and Fergie's wedding. There was something coined "Fergie Fever" at the time.

Yes, and 2 million spectators came to see Princess Diana!s wedding. That’s the difference.

Meghan and Harry's wedding had around 100,000 people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

With three little Cambridges, there is more than enough kindling for the cuteness mill for the next fifteen years, at least.

Funny how there are 3 little Cambridge’s right now and Archie is still getting tons of media attention...

Cambridge kids are cuter. There. I said it.

Toddlers are always cuter. Archie is pretty cute, though.

The entire Windsor line is the better for the addition of the Spencer/Middleton/Markle genes. Windsors are not attractive people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

With three little Cambridges, there is more than enough kindling for the cuteness mill for the next fifteen years, at least.

Funny how there are 3 little Cambridge’s right now and Archie is still getting tons of media attention...

Cambridge kids are cuter. There. I said it.

And they don't have goofy cartoon names.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

With three little Cambridges, there is more than enough kindling for the cuteness mill for the next fifteen years, at least.

Funny how there are 3 little Cambridge’s right now and Archie is still getting tons of media attention...

Cambridge kids are cuter. There. I said it.

Toddlers are always cuter. Archie is pretty cute, though.

The entire Windsor line is the better for the addition of the Spencer/Middleton/Markle genes. Windsors are not attractive people.

Well, they have centuries of inbreeding to thank for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

Archie is no more important than the Yorklets.

Right and the Queen thought that they are important enough to warrant a splashy royal wedding.

What's your point? They are still royal. Nothing to do with custody and not raising a child in the UK.

The point is that even the distant York’s were important enough to the queen to warrant extravagant weddings. Archie (and his parents) is a thousand times more important.

You’re the one arguing he’s irrelevant. Everyone else sees the reality that he’s very important to the queen and the royal family. Especially right now.

Lol why is Archie a thousand times more important?

For starters his father is the most popular of the royal family. More popular than the queen, more popular than the future king, and the second in line for the throne. That’s why he’s more important to the palace than the York’s.

Secondly, he’s more important in terms of succession. He’s further up on the succession chain than the York’s.

Have you lost your marbles? Archie now takes a backseat to William’s children and grandchildren.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isn't important to the line of succession, but he is important to the Palace. Archie, like Meghan and Kate and Harry and Will and Will's children, are imminently marketable. They are pretty and/or cute and very useful for keeping a charming face on the monarchy. The courtiers who run the palace are perfectly willing to prevent Archie from leaving the UK if they thought it was best for the palace.

Archie is no more important than the Yorklets.

Right and the Queen thought that they are important enough to warrant a splashy royal wedding.

What's your point? They are still royal. Nothing to do with custody and not raising a child in the UK.

The point is that even the distant York’s were important enough to the queen to warrant extravagant weddings. Archie (and his parents) is a thousand times more important.

You’re the one arguing he’s irrelevant. Everyone else sees the reality that he’s very important to the queen and the royal family. Especially right now.

Lol why is Archie a thousand times more important?

For starters his father is the most popular of the royal family. More popular than the queen, more popular than the future king, and the second in line for the throne. That’s why he’s more important to the palace than the York’s.

Secondly, he’s more important in terms of succession. He’s further up on the succession chain than the York’s.

No need to eye roll. Let's look at history. When the York girls were born (they are from a generation before, so the comparison is their situation when they were Archie's current age), their father was *higher* up than Harry currently is, actually, because Charles only had two kids versus William having three. And guess what? When Archie is an adult (like the York girls are now adults), Archie will be bumped down the line (just like the Yorks were when Will's kids were born) by whatever kids George has, along with whatever kids Charlotte has and Louis has. So, Archie's importance to succession, based on where he is RELATIVE to his generation of royals, is similar to those of the Yorks, but slightly WORSE because he has three royal cousins ahead of him (George, Charlotte, Louis).

(By the way, Harry is not second in line for the throne right now. Not sure where you got that idea. William's kids bumped Harry down the line.)

I never said Harry was second in line for the throne. I said he’s more POPULAR than the next in line for the throne (Charles) AND the second in line for the throne (William.)

There is a difference between succession and popularity.

[Anonymous]

Before she died, Diana thought that she might be murdered by staging a car accident.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/princess-diana-death-letter-prince-charles-accident-plan-car-paris-tunnel-crash-10-months-a7918671.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Before she died, Diana thought that she might be murdered by staging a car accident.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/princess-diana-death-letter-prince-charles-accident-plan-car-paris-tunnel-crash-10-months-a7918671.html

Such a happy, supportive family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you all think Prince William is against interracial marriage?

He's probably not keen on Americans marrying the BRF.

I think it’s more like he’s not keen on bright, smart women.

Or gold diggers.

All he has to do is look at his wife and his wife’s sister for that.

They came from wealth, they married into very great wealth. BTW, is Kate planning to hawk the royal name for millions?

No they came from a flight attendant and party supply store owner who put every pound into private school so they could land rich husbands.

Meanwhile Uncle Garry financed it and after it worked the son-in-laws paid for their house and $20,000 a week vacations in the West Indies.

Sounds like all the hard work and effort they put into their kids worked better than they could ever have imagined. Kudos to them. The rest of us can only hope to be so lucky in our efforts.

DP. I would not want Kate's life for my daughter. Not in a million years.[/quote
Agreed. Acting like a subordinate in life. Won't she eventually be expecyed to curtsy to her husband? Even now... curtsy to someone because of their place in the family. *barf* Smile pretty for the important people.

And yet - Meghan loves that part of royal life.

If she loves it so much, why is she walking away from it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Before she died, Diana thought that she might be murdered by staging a car accident.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/princess-diana-death-letter-prince-charles-accident-plan-car-paris-tunnel-crash-10-months-a7918671.html

And a former MI6 agent testified under oath that MI6 was involved in the car crash.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/160515.stm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They just seem like not-so-smart attention seekers. I guess I will be seeing them a lot on the tabloid covers in the checkout line at the grocery store. Good for them, I guess?

They are the opposite of attention seekers, you fool. Have you read NOTHING about Harry AT ALL? He loathes attention. He wants to protect his wife from it.

Good God, there are so many ill people on this thread insisting the world inside their heads is the real one, when it clearly isn't.