Harry and Meghan’s Christmas card

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lillibet's hair is not brushed.

As someone with curly hair, I will posit that brushing Lilibet's hair could make it very frizzy. Or it could be that humidity makes her hair freak out a bit.

Or maybe she hates having it brushed. I did when I was her age, and I have a vivid memory of having my hair brushed and squirming around so much trying to get away that my mom whacked me with the brush. It's OK with me if Megan prefers unbrushed hair on a preschooler to that.

But regardless: You are criticizing the hair of a preschooler.

You don't think Meghan, who straightens her curly hair to the point of flatness, wouldn't know how to handle her daughter's curly hair?

What parent wants to do that to a 4 year old. Seriously my kid had hair like this and I just left her natural hair until SHE cared enough to change it - around 12 years old. I say she’s a child - let her be a natural child and not conform to your social media standards.

Really? You wouldn't put an anti-frizz product in your child's hair if you knew you were going to be outside for 2 hours for a photoshoot? REALLY? I'd LOVE to see your natural girl family photos, LOL!

I would proudly show anyone our family photo. I’m not embarrassed to have natural kid look in our photos. I think it’s sad that you feel the need to cultivate a certain look for yours.

[Anonymous]

I think we can assume that Spare is Harry's perspective of things but that does not make it truthful. If you take what he says at face value that is on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we can assume that Spare is Harry's perspective of things but that does not make it truthful. If you take what he says at face value that is on you.

If you take what the British tabloids say at face value, that's definitely on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They all look so disheveled and awkward both individually and with each other.

The girl’s hair definitely needs to be brushed and cut.

What up with the weird photoshopping his bald spot with tree leaves?

It is just such a bad Christmas card. So I looked up William’s. It looks classy while Harry’s looks so trashy.

Here is William’s:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9975zk98kyo

That's lovely ^^. They don't feel the need to hide their kids' faces...

With all the hate directed at the Sussexes--even on a place like DCUM from the hate hobbyists on this thread--I totally get why they hide their kids' faces.

By publishing the card, rather than sending it to family and friends, they open themselves to commentary. That they hide their kids’ faces is funny because they can fully hide their kids and themselves if they were smart enough to realize that their attempt at being public figures without talking about the royal family has failed miserably.

But William and Kate put out a picture every year and poor Harry thinks he’s still part of the royal family and wants to keep some of its traditions.

It's not a card, it's an Instagram post. One of many Instagram posts. Their Christmas card is just Harry and Meghan.

And since when do Kate and William own Christmas cards, to the point where Harry and Meghan--and presumably the rest of us--shouldn't be sending them out?! Geez.

Honestly you haters are a pathetic bunch. Get a real hobby, one that makes you happy, instead of spending 25 pages using incorrect details to hate on a family you never met.

Not sure if you are aware that you are on this thread too.

It is a Christmas card because that’s how it’s being reported in the media. But regardless, the point that Harry is miserable over his decision to leave the royal family still stands. He even dropped his demand that his family apologize to Meghan in a bid to get them to forgive him. But I don’t think William will consider it.

I just joined the thread 1-2 pages ago. Ask the moderator. So no, I haven't been in the ditch with you and your obsessive hate for 25 pages.

The fact that the media misunderstands--or is even lying about--an Instagram post does NOT make it a Christmas card. Do you want/expect your social media posts to count as your Christmas/holiday cards? What is wrong with you?

And what's your evidence that Harry is (a) miserable, or (b) dropped his demand for an apology? No, the Daily Mail certainly doesn't count. Harry has repeatedly said that he doesn't want to return to Britain except for visits to family and his charities. Read Anna Pasternak, Meredith Constant, or others about the terrible British media. Where, for starters, they have to publish everything the palaces give them, and delete everything the palaces don't like, if they want to maintain access to the royals. Many in Britain are calling for a new press investigation; the British media have gotten that bad.

It sounds like this is very important to you.

It was reported in the daily beast that he dropped his demand they apologize to his wife.

LOL! "The Royalist" Tom Sykes, who's monetizing Sussex hate based on rumours and innuendo. If I had a dime for every time Sykes lied, exaggerated, or omitted key facts, I'd be rich(er). You need to read more widely, honey.

I like tom Sykes style of writing but I agree, he doesn’t have the caliber of someone like Tina brown (a legit journalist who worked at the New Yorker) who has also trashed Harry as a fool and has said he regrets what he did.

Tina Brown doesn't talk to Harry; can you imagine Harry confiding in someone who's trashed him? Tina's made a living out of having lunch once with Diana. She may have edited the New Yorker, but you should take what she says about the royals with a grain of salt. She has her own agenda--cozy up to the palaces and/or get clicks for her subscription Substack via sensationalist rumors.

Holy sht.

Meghan’s little toads don’t live in reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lillibet's hair is not brushed.

As someone with curly hair, I will posit that brushing Lilibet's hair could make it very frizzy. Or it could be that humidity makes her hair freak out a bit.

Or maybe she hates having it brushed. I did when I was her age, and I have a vivid memory of having my hair brushed and squirming around so much trying to get away that my mom whacked me with the brush. It's OK with me if Megan prefers unbrushed hair on a preschooler to that.

But regardless: You are criticizing the hair of a preschooler.

You don't think Meghan, who straightens her curly hair to the point of flatness, wouldn't know how to handle her daughter's curly hair?

What parent wants to do that to a 4 year old. Seriously my kid had hair like this and I just left her natural hair until SHE cared enough to change it - around 12 years old. I say she’s a child - let her be a natural child and not conform to your social media standards.

Really? You wouldn't put an anti-frizz product in your child's hair if you knew you were going to be outside for 2 hours for a photoshoot? REALLY? I'd LOVE to see your natural girl family photos, LOL!

I would proudly show anyone our family photo. I’m not embarrassed to have natural kid look in our photos. I think it’s sad that you feel the need to cultivate a certain look for yours.

DP. It definitely wasn't a 2-hour photoshoot, either. It was an instagram post, one of many this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can assume that Spare is Harry's perspective of things but that does not make it truthful. If you take what he says at face value that is on you.

If you take what the British tabloids say at face value, that's definitely on you.

I do not. Nor do I read them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's clearly a Brit (or two) on this thread, taking things very, very personally. No one from the U.S. could possibly care about royal minutiae to such an extent. And "whinging"? Please.

Hey, it wasn't a Brit who started the thread. It's not a Brit who's been attacking Harry and Meghan for 25 pages--talk about taking the royals personally! Sorry you're butthurt.

You seem irrationally angry at everyone on this thread. I've only started reading the last few pages and it's clear how unhinged you are (my first post is the one you responded to, above). "Butthurt"? More like amused at your totally over the top posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They all look so disheveled and awkward both individually and with each other.

The girl’s hair definitely needs to be brushed and cut.

What up with the weird photoshopping his bald spot with tree leaves?

It is just such a bad Christmas card. So I looked up William’s. It looks classy while Harry’s looks so trashy.

Here is William’s:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9975zk98kyo

That's lovely ^^. They don't feel the need to hide their kids' faces...

With all the hate directed at the Sussexes--even on a place like DCUM from the hate hobbyists on this thread--I totally get why they hide their kids' faces.

By publishing the card, rather than sending it to family and friends, they open themselves to commentary. That they hide their kids’ faces is funny because they can fully hide their kids and themselves if they were smart enough to realize that their attempt at being public figures without talking about the royal family has failed miserably.

But William and Kate put out a picture every year and poor Harry thinks he’s still part of the royal family and wants to keep some of its traditions.

It's not a card, it's an Instagram post. One of many Instagram posts. Their Christmas card is just Harry and Meghan.

And since when do Kate and William own Christmas cards, to the point where Harry and Meghan--and presumably the rest of us--shouldn't be sending them out?! Geez.

Honestly you haters are a pathetic bunch. Get a real hobby, one that makes you happy, instead of spending 25 pages using incorrect details to hate on a family you never met.

Not sure if you are aware that you are on this thread too.

It is a Christmas card because that’s how it’s being reported in the media. But regardless, the point that Harry is miserable over his decision to leave the royal family still stands. He even dropped his demand that his family apologize to Meghan in a bid to get them to forgive him. But I don’t think William will consider it.

I just joined the thread 1-2 pages ago. Ask the moderator. So no, I haven't been in the ditch with you and your obsessive hate for 25 pages.

The fact that the media misunderstands--or is even lying about--an Instagram post does NOT make it a Christmas card. Do you want/expect your social media posts to count as your Christmas/holiday cards? What is wrong with you?

And what's your evidence that Harry is (a) miserable, or (b) dropped his demand for an apology? No, the Daily Mail certainly doesn't count. Harry has repeatedly said that he doesn't want to return to Britain except for visits to family and his charities. Read Anna Pasternak, Meredith Constant, or others about the terrible British media. Where, for starters, they have to publish everything the palaces give them, and delete everything the palaces don't like, if they want to maintain access to the royals. Many in Britain are calling for a new press investigation; the British media have gotten that bad.

It sounds like this is very important to you.

It was reported in the daily beast that he dropped his demand they apologize to his wife.

So you concede... nobody's Instagram post becomes their Christmas card because "the media says so."

LOL

Tom Sykes of the Daily Beast is a big player in the media industrial hate machine against the Sussexes. Sykes went to Eton with William, and there's speculation he's paid by KP, which has been proven to bully rota journalists and to use paid bots (Sykes was kicked out of the rota last summer, but he's still useful). There's also speculation that Sykes is angling for a journalistic seat deep inside future King William's court, so he's playing to William's more incandescent tendencies toward his brother.

Toying with haters like you is fun. I wouldn't say it's important to me, or even that I'm a huge fan of Meghan or her show. I just think haters like you, who spend their time on biased hate channels, are disgusting. So I'm here to blow up your little hate thread, and to have fun doing it.

I didn’t know that about Sykes. Good for him.

Good for Sykes for... monetizing hate and ignoring or twisting key facts?

How is reporting that Harry dropped his demand that his family apologize to his wife “monetizing hate”? And you know it makes sense he would do that. He’s been begging for them to reconcile with him, saying he wants to move on. Of course, this is after he and his wife called his family racist on Oprah. He later denied that but it made him look more like a fool.

Because Sykes makes stuff up all the time to sell his Substack subscriptions. There are Reddit subs that pick Sykes' columns apart.

It's clear Harry wants to reconcile with Charles, who's been ill. But it's much less clear Harry wants to reconcile with William and Kate. Since you're familiar with Spare, you'll know the stories about William shoving Harry, Kate allowing that lie about Meghan making her cry when it was the other way around, the questions about Archie's skin color, both of them briefing the press against Harry and Meghan, and so much more.

All of that is irrelevant except for the racism accusation, which Harry tried to take back. He said his wife didn’t call his family racist, when she did, for millions to see.

Wut? Why are you calling all the things William and Kate did to Harry "irrelevant", like William shoving Harry, Kate making Meghan cry, and the rest? And when Kate asked about Archie's skin color, is that "irrelevant" to you? Or are only the things Harry and Meghan say "relevant" to you?

And what's wrong with Harry saying there was "unconscious bias" among the royals?

Answers on a postcard, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's clearly a Brit (or two) on this thread, taking things very, very personally. No one from the U.S. could possibly care about royal minutiae to such an extent. And "whinging"? Please.

Hey, it wasn't a Brit who started the thread. It's not a Brit who's been attacking Harry and Meghan for 25 pages--talk about taking the royals personally! Sorry you're butthurt.

You seem irrationally angry at everyone on this thread. I've only started reading the last few pages and it's clear how unhinged you are (my first post is the one you responded to, above). "Butthurt"? More like amused at your totally over the top posts.

"Irrational" is spending 27 pages trashing Harry and Meghan. That's not me, although it's probably you.

I like having fun with language, sorry if you can't take it. Or, you're trying to get the thread locked because it isn't going your way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's clearly a Brit (or two) on this thread, taking things very, very personally. No one from the U.S. could possibly care about royal minutiae to such an extent. And "whinging"? Please.

Oh no, you're losing the thread now that facts are entering the discussion. Time to run to the moderator to get the thread shut down--it's always the Kate and William stans who get these threads locked.

Good grief. Everything is always a competition to you, isn't it? Would it be fair to say you're a mega Meghan/Harry stan? Obsessive, even?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can assume that Spare is Harry's perspective of things but that does not make it truthful. If you take what he says at face value that is on you.

If you take what the British tabloids say at face value, that's definitely on you.

I do not. Nor do I read them.

You read Tom Sykes. Same difference. He used to be rota, until he was kicked out for leaking details about Charles' funeral plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a posed casual photo. Totally fine. My daughter hates when I wash / brush her hair, and so her hair, which I don’t let grow past her shoulders, kind of look like this all the time.

It's posed, but definitely not casual. Meghan is practically wearing a gown. Her daughter has on a dress and shiny dress shoes. It's the equivalent of going for a 5 mile run, coming home, not showering or washing your face , keeping your hair up in the sweaty ponytail, and throwing on a fancy dress to attend a wedding.

DP who just joined this thread here. Worry about your own family instead of hating the Instagram post of a family you've never met, and who you only know through lies spread by the British tabloids. Why this obsessive hate, are you escaping something in your own life?

My opinions (mainly negative) of the Sussexes are not formed by the British tabloids, which I do not read or pay attention to. My opinions are formed by the words that come out of their mouths that I hear with my own ears and their own actions that I can see for myself.

This reminds me of when people accuse Trump 'haters' of being brainwashed by the media. We don't nee the media to hear what he is saying on TV or read what he is tweeting. It's right in front of us.

Just get off the fox box. They lie by omission and sway by bias opinion. H&M are rarely in any other news, so I’m sure this is where your “opinions” come from

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They all look so disheveled and awkward both individually and with each other.

The girl’s hair definitely needs to be brushed and cut.

What up with the weird photoshopping his bald spot with tree leaves?

It is just such a bad Christmas card. So I looked up William’s. It looks classy while Harry’s looks so trashy.

Here is William’s:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9975zk98kyo

That's lovely ^^. They don't feel the need to hide their kids' faces...

With all the hate directed at the Sussexes--even on a place like DCUM from the hate hobbyists on this thread--I totally get why they hide their kids' faces.

By publishing the card, rather than sending it to family and friends, they open themselves to commentary. That they hide their kids’ faces is funny because they can fully hide their kids and themselves if they were smart enough to realize that their attempt at being public figures without talking about the royal family has failed miserably.

But William and Kate put out a picture every year and poor Harry thinks he’s still part of the royal family and wants to keep some of its traditions.

It's not a card, it's an Instagram post. One of many Instagram posts. Their Christmas card is just Harry and Meghan.

And since when do Kate and William own Christmas cards, to the point where Harry and Meghan--and presumably the rest of us--shouldn't be sending them out?! Geez.

Honestly you haters are a pathetic bunch. Get a real hobby, one that makes you happy, instead of spending 25 pages using incorrect details to hate on a family you never met.

Not sure if you are aware that you are on this thread too.

It is a Christmas card because that’s how it’s being reported in the media. But regardless, the point that Harry is miserable over his decision to leave the royal family still stands. He even dropped his demand that his family apologize to Meghan in a bid to get them to forgive him. But I don’t think William will consider it.

I just joined the thread 1-2 pages ago. Ask the moderator. So no, I haven't been in the ditch with you and your obsessive hate for 25 pages.

The fact that the media misunderstands--or is even lying about--an Instagram post does NOT make it a Christmas card. Do you want/expect your social media posts to count as your Christmas/holiday cards? What is wrong with you?

And what's your evidence that Harry is (a) miserable, or (b) dropped his demand for an apology? No, the Daily Mail certainly doesn't count. Harry has repeatedly said that he doesn't want to return to Britain except for visits to family and his charities. Read Anna Pasternak, Meredith Constant, or others about the terrible British media. Where, for starters, they have to publish everything the palaces give them, and delete everything the palaces don't like, if they want to maintain access to the royals. Many in Britain are calling for a new press investigation; the British media have gotten that bad.

It sounds like this is very important to you.

It was reported in the daily beast that he dropped his demand they apologize to his wife.

So you concede... nobody's Instagram post becomes their Christmas card because "the media says so."

LOL

Tom Sykes of the Daily Beast is a big player in the media industrial hate machine against the Sussexes. Sykes went to Eton with William, and there's speculation he's paid by KP, which has been proven to bully rota journalists and to use paid bots (Sykes was kicked out of the rota last summer, but he's still useful). There's also speculation that Sykes is angling for a journalistic seat deep inside future King William's court, so he's playing to William's more incandescent tendencies toward his brother.

Toying with haters like you is fun. I wouldn't say it's important to me, or even that I'm a huge fan of Meghan or her show. I just think haters like you, who spend their time on biased hate channels, are disgusting. So I'm here to blow up your little hate thread, and to have fun doing it.

I didn’t know that about Sykes. Good for him.

Good for Sykes for... monetizing hate and ignoring or twisting key facts?

How is reporting that Harry dropped his demand that his family apologize to his wife “monetizing hate”? And you know it makes sense he would do that. He’s been begging for them to reconcile with him, saying he wants to move on. Of course, this is after he and his wife called his family racist on Oprah. He later denied that but it made him look more like a fool.

Because Sykes makes stuff up all the time to sell his Substack subscriptions. There are Reddit subs that pick Sykes' columns apart.

It's clear Harry wants to reconcile with Charles, who's been ill. But it's much less clear Harry wants to reconcile with William and Kate. Since you're familiar with Spare, you'll know the stories about William shoving Harry, Kate allowing that lie about Meghan making her cry when it was the other way around, the questions about Archie's skin color, both of them briefing the press against Harry and Meghan, and so much more.

All of that is irrelevant except for the racism accusation, which Harry tried to take back. He said his wife didn’t call his family racist, when she did, for millions to see.

Wut? Why are you calling all the things William and Kate did to Harry "irrelevant", like William shoving Harry, Kate making Meghan cry, and the rest? And when Kate asked about Archie's skin color, is that "irrelevant" to you? Or are only the things Harry and Meghan say "relevant" to you?

And what's wrong with Harry saying there was "unconscious bias" among the royals?

Answers on a postcard, please.

Stop whinging!
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lillibet's hair is not brushed.

As someone with curly hair, I will posit that brushing Lilibet's hair could make it very frizzy. Or it could be that humidity makes her hair freak out a bit.

Or maybe she hates having it brushed. I did when I was her age, and I have a vivid memory of having my hair brushed and squirming around so much trying to get away that my mom whacked me with the brush. It's OK with me if Megan prefers unbrushed hair on a preschooler to that.

But regardless: You are criticizing the hair of a preschooler.

You don't think Meghan, who straightens her curly hair to the point of flatness, wouldn't know how to handle her daughter's curly hair?

What parent wants to do that to a 4 year old. Seriously my kid had hair like this and I just left her natural hair until SHE cared enough to change it - around 12 years old. I say she’s a child - let her be a natural child and not conform to your social media standards.

Really? You wouldn't put an anti-frizz product in your child's hair if you knew you were going to be outside for 2 hours for a photoshoot? REALLY? I'd LOVE to see your natural girl family photos, LOL!

I would proudly show anyone our family photo. I’m not embarrassed to have natural kid look in our photos. I think it’s sad that you feel the need to cultivate a certain look for yours.

+100. I'm developing a clear image of that poster--it's Mrs. Bouquet/Bucket in northern Virginia. That would explain the fawning over the royals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They all look so disheveled and awkward both individually and with each other.

The girl’s hair definitely needs to be brushed and cut.

What up with the weird photoshopping his bald spot with tree leaves?

It is just such a bad Christmas card. So I looked up William’s. It looks classy while Harry’s looks so trashy.

Here is William’s:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9975zk98kyo

That's lovely ^^. They don't feel the need to hide their kids' faces...

With all the hate directed at the Sussexes--even on a place like DCUM from the hate hobbyists on this thread--I totally get why they hide their kids' faces.

By publishing the card, rather than sending it to family and friends, they open themselves to commentary. That they hide their kids’ faces is funny because they can fully hide their kids and themselves if they were smart enough to realize that their attempt at being public figures without talking about the royal family has failed miserably.

But William and Kate put out a picture every year and poor Harry thinks he’s still part of the royal family and wants to keep some of its traditions.

It's not a card, it's an Instagram post. One of many Instagram posts. Their Christmas card is just Harry and Meghan.

And since when do Kate and William own Christmas cards, to the point where Harry and Meghan--and presumably the rest of us--shouldn't be sending them out?! Geez.

Honestly you haters are a pathetic bunch. Get a real hobby, one that makes you happy, instead of spending 25 pages using incorrect details to hate on a family you never met.

Not sure if you are aware that you are on this thread too.

It is a Christmas card because that’s how it’s being reported in the media. But regardless, the point that Harry is miserable over his decision to leave the royal family still stands. He even dropped his demand that his family apologize to Meghan in a bid to get them to forgive him. But I don’t think William will consider it.

I just joined the thread 1-2 pages ago. Ask the moderator. So no, I haven't been in the ditch with you and your obsessive hate for 25 pages.

The fact that the media misunderstands--or is even lying about--an Instagram post does NOT make it a Christmas card. Do you want/expect your social media posts to count as your Christmas/holiday cards? What is wrong with you?

And what's your evidence that Harry is (a) miserable, or (b) dropped his demand for an apology? No, the Daily Mail certainly doesn't count. Harry has repeatedly said that he doesn't want to return to Britain except for visits to family and his charities. Read Anna Pasternak, Meredith Constant, or others about the terrible British media. Where, for starters, they have to publish everything the palaces give them, and delete everything the palaces don't like, if they want to maintain access to the royals. Many in Britain are calling for a new press investigation; the British media have gotten that bad.

It sounds like this is very important to you.

It was reported in the daily beast that he dropped his demand they apologize to his wife.

So you concede... nobody's Instagram post becomes their Christmas card because "the media says so."

LOL

Tom Sykes of the Daily Beast is a big player in the media industrial hate machine against the Sussexes. Sykes went to Eton with William, and there's speculation he's paid by KP, which has been proven to bully rota journalists and to use paid bots (Sykes was kicked out of the rota last summer, but he's still useful). There's also speculation that Sykes is angling for a journalistic seat deep inside future King William's court, so he's playing to William's more incandescent tendencies toward his brother.

Toying with haters like you is fun. I wouldn't say it's important to me, or even that I'm a huge fan of Meghan or her show. I just think haters like you, who spend their time on biased hate channels, are disgusting. So I'm here to blow up your little hate thread, and to have fun doing it.

I didn’t know that about Sykes. Good for him.

Good for Sykes for... monetizing hate and ignoring or twisting key facts?

How is reporting that Harry dropped his demand that his family apologize to his wife “monetizing hate”? And you know it makes sense he would do that. He’s been begging for them to reconcile with him, saying he wants to move on. Of course, this is after he and his wife called his family racist on Oprah. He later denied that but it made him look more like a fool.

Because Sykes makes stuff up all the time to sell his Substack subscriptions. There are Reddit subs that pick Sykes' columns apart.

It's clear Harry wants to reconcile with Charles, who's been ill. But it's much less clear Harry wants to reconcile with William and Kate. Since you're familiar with Spare, you'll know the stories about William shoving Harry, Kate allowing that lie about Meghan making her cry when it was the other way around, the questions about Archie's skin color, both of them briefing the press against Harry and Meghan, and so much more.

All of that is irrelevant except for the racism accusation, which Harry tried to take back. He said his wife didn’t call his family racist, when she did, for millions to see.

Wut? Why are you calling all the things William and Kate did to Harry "irrelevant", like William shoving Harry, Kate making Meghan cry, and the rest? And when Kate asked about Archie's skin color, is that "irrelevant" to you? Or are only the things Harry and Meghan say "relevant" to you?

And what's wrong with Harry saying there was "unconscious bias" among the royals?

Answers on a postcard, please.

Stop whinging!
DP

Answer the arguments and stop posting insults....