Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 3

[Anonymous]

Harry isn’t a fan of the 1st amendment because he doesn’t think anyone should be allowed to say or write anything remotely negative about him or his family. The irony of course is that he feels entitled to have a platform where he can trash his family and comment on whatever he likes. Even worse: he feels entitled to be considered a mental health expert.

He’s bonkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Queen is standing by the BBC’s story that she wasn’t consulted on the name “Lilibet,” despite H&M’s threats to sue the BBC. Could get interesting.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-war-with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet

Did they really need the Queen’s permission though? This seems like a tempest in a teapot.

They don't need the queen's permission. She cannot have the name disallowed (the way that Elon Musk's DD's name was disallowed). She cannot confine them to a country estate or evict them from their apartment. She cannot threaten to cut them off financially or take their patronages away, etc. But she can refuse to agree to their reality. She can go farther and refuse to see Harry when he returns, but she likes him and probably wouldn't ever do that.

This public disagreement, though, just hurts H&M. They want to remain in her good graces, publicly and privately. From a practical perspective, they need to remain British royalty to keep their fame and their source of income. Unlike Angelina Jolie, who can go back to acting when she needs money, all they have to make money from is their public approval, and that's related to being British royalty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a big space between love and hate. The people in the Refinery article are extreme. There are some posters here who are extreme one way or the other two. What I don’t get is being labeled a hater for pointing out that something is obviously not right with these two. They’re grown adults who went from saying how Meghan couldn’t wait to hit the ground running and Harry’s family would be the family she never had to whining about no one asking how they’re doing on a tour of the most impoverished continent in the world. Then they move into a $15M mansion in the middle of the world’s biggest crisis of our times and whine about how Harry’s dad cut them off. They’ve been caught in numerous lies (the marriage before the wedding, Archie being denied a title he was entitled to, getting the Queen’s permission to use Lilibet), hypocrites (lecturing on environmentalism, then flying private, keeping their titles, accusing the BRF of being mean and racist but naming their child after the head of the institution). Nonetheless, most of us don’t “hate” them. I couldn’t care less what happens to these two. But I don’t have any respect for them and struggle to see how any rational, objective person could have any admiration for these two.

I’m not interested in watching, reading or listening to any of their productions, podcasts or books. I’ve watched Harry grow up and feel sorry for him and sad at how lost he seems. I’m not a “hater” but I’m certainly not a fan. I think this is probably where most people fall on the spectrum.

Agree. There is something seriously wrong with those who have such cult-like blind faith and rabidly defend H&M. It's so odd and so pervasive here on DCUM I question whether these defenders aren't being paid in some way. There is no other celebrity/entertainer who has a "Fans Only" thread. Why?

I just saw this quote by Harry: “I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”

The First Amendment. Bonkers.

The more they speak, especially with statements like this, the more they will be ridiculed. Rightfully so.

This^ Coordinated effort to do damage control.

Agree. A coordinated effort has become more and more apparent. It is especially notable when the H&M defenders have no comment over something as egregious as this.

For Harry to be living in the U.S., married to a U.S. citizen, have children who are U.S. citizens, and then boldly claim that our First Amendment is "bonkers" is appalling. Especially when he claims to be all-in for veterans. You know, those people who have sacrificed to protect this democracy and our "bonkers" rights like the First Amendment. Shame on him. I think every person who is a veteran or knows a veteran, and even those who don't, should boycott anything to do with him and be very vocal about it after this quote.

My God, you are delusional as the people in the article. Coordinated effort? On DCUM? To supposedly defend H&M? The self-importance is astonishing. Nobody, literally nobody, is reading DCUM for its pop culture relevance. Nobody actually cares what angry and jealous aging women think about H&M. The idea of some coordinated effort is laughable to anyone rational.

I read this thread periodically. Not regularly. I skip pages at a time. I would frankly rather the entire BRF be retired, but I am not a UK citizen, so if they want to keep paying top tax dollars for lazy pedophile grifters, that's their problem. But when I read, I do it because I despise the racist haters and I don't want racists on DCUM. (And you can stop your whining about fake "racism" about white woman now, I am white myself.) Literally almost every time I open this thread I find a racist post about MM that I report. Every time! And I am not the only one who reports racist posts. Jeff deletes them quickly, too. So that's your coordination right there: a bunch of normal DCUM readers who don't want racists in the DCUM community, and who watch the thread for that.

Miss me with this "we aren't like those insane haters in the Refinery" whining. You are exactly like them.

^Sincere thanks, PP. I appreciate people like you.

[~Black PP who put up a good effort to call out the racism in this thread]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a big space between love and hate. The people in the Refinery article are extreme. There are some posters here who are extreme one way or the other two. What I don’t get is being labeled a hater for pointing out that something is obviously not right with these two. They’re grown adults who went from saying how Meghan couldn’t wait to hit the ground running and Harry’s family would be the family she never had to whining about no one asking how they’re doing on a tour of the most impoverished continent in the world. Then they move into a $15M mansion in the middle of the world’s biggest crisis of our times and whine about how Harry’s dad cut them off. They’ve been caught in numerous lies (the marriage before the wedding, Archie being denied a title he was entitled to, getting the Queen’s permission to use Lilibet), hypocrites (lecturing on environmentalism, then flying private, keeping their titles, accusing the BRF of being mean and racist but naming their child after the head of the institution). Nonetheless, most of us don’t “hate” them. I couldn’t care less what happens to these two. But I don’t have any respect for them and struggle to see how any rational, objective person could have any admiration for these two.

I’m not interested in watching, reading or listening to any of their productions, podcasts or books. I’ve watched Harry grow up and feel sorry for him and sad at how lost he seems. I’m not a “hater” but I’m certainly not a fan. I think this is probably where most people fall on the spectrum.

Agree. There is something seriously wrong with those who have such cult-like blind faith and rabidly defend H&M. It's so odd and so pervasive here on DCUM I question whether these defenders aren't being paid in some way. There is no other celebrity/entertainer who has a "Fans Only" thread. Why?

I just saw this quote by Harry: “I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”

The First Amendment. Bonkers.

The more they speak, especially with statements like this, the more they will be ridiculed. Rightfully so.

This^ Coordinated effort to do damage control.

Agree. A coordinated effort has become more and more apparent. It is especially notable when the H&M defenders have no comment over something as egregious as this.

For Harry to be living in the U.S., married to a U.S. citizen, have children who are U.S. citizens, and then boldly claim that our First Amendment is "bonkers" is appalling. Especially when he claims to be all-in for veterans. You know, those people who have sacrificed to protect this democracy and our "bonkers" rights like the First Amendment. Shame on him. I think every person who is a veteran or knows a veteran, and even those who don't, should boycott anything to do with him and be very vocal about it after this quote.

Particularly with Harry's association with Veterans via the Invinctus Games - disgraceful comments. There are some things worth protecting and the 1st Amendment is one of those things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Queen is standing by the BBC’s story that she wasn’t consulted on the name “Lilibet,” despite H&M’s threats to sue the BBC. Could get interesting.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-war-with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet

Did they really need the Queen’s permission though? This seems like a tempest in a teapot.

They don't need the queen's permission. She cannot have the name disallowed (the way that Elon Musk's DD's name was disallowed). She cannot confine them to a country estate or evict them from their apartment. She cannot threaten to cut them off financially or take their patronages away, etc. But she can refuse to agree to their reality. She can go farther and refuse to see Harry when he returns, but she likes him and probably wouldn't ever do that.

This public disagreement, though, just hurts H&M. They want to remain in her good graces, publicly and privately. From a practical perspective, they need to remain British royalty to keep their fame and their source of income. Unlike Angelina Jolie, who can go back to acting when she needs money, all they have to make money from is their public approval, and that's related to being British royalty.

This isn't who he is suing he is suing BBC. If it gets that far is he really going to try and paint his gran as a liar to win his lawsuit? Sounds like the Queen stands with the BBC reporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harry isn’t a fan of the 1st amendment because he doesn’t think anyone should be allowed to say or write anything remotely negative about him or his family. The irony of course is that he feels entitled to have a platform where he can trash his family and comment on whatever he likes. Even worse: he feels entitled to be considered a mental health expert.

He’s bonkers.

Agree. We had a war to oust the British monarchy and here they are sneaking in through the backdoor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I don't think there's a coordinated effort to defend H&M on DCUM. I think there are a couple white self-righteous posters who feel like calling other posters names improves the internet. And there are a couple other nuts that showed up a couple days ago but fortunately didn't stay long.

Neither of those groups are improving the internet. Despite whatever they think they're doing.

Well, except it's only the haters who have racist posts deleted on the regular. I don't think it is name-calling to say the haters are racist when there are actual racist posts that are deleted. It's factual.

Racist post = anything and every little thing the stans perceive as against Meghan, regardless of merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Queen is standing by the BBC’s story that she wasn’t consulted on the name “Lilibet,” despite H&M’s threats to sue the BBC. Could get interesting.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-war-with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet

Did they really need the Queen’s permission though? This seems like a tempest in a teapot.

They don't need the queen's permission. She cannot have the name disallowed (the way that Elon Musk's DD's name was disallowed). She cannot confine them to a country estate or evict them from their apartment. She cannot threaten to cut them off financially or take their patronages away, etc. But she can refuse to agree to their reality. She can go farther and refuse to see Harry when he returns, but she likes him and probably wouldn't ever do that.

This public disagreement, though, just hurts H&M. They want to remain in her good graces, publicly and privately. From a practical perspective, they need to remain British royalty to keep their fame and their source of income. Unlike Angelina Jolie, who can go back to acting when she needs money, all they have to make money from is their public approval, and that's related to being British royalty.

This isn't who he is suing he is suing BBC. If it gets that far is he really going to try and paint his gran as a liar to win his lawsuit? Sounds like the Queen stands with the BBC reporting.

Yes, they are saying the BBC article is defamatory, implicitly threatening a lawsuit which would basically be calling the queen a liar. There's nothing about that that would help them.

They lost this round. They didn't ever need the queen's permission for the baby name. But they didn't have it and they got in trouble for saying they did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Queen is standing by the BBC’s story that she wasn’t consulted on the name “Lilibet,” despite H&M’s threats to sue the BBC. Could get interesting.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-war-with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet

Did they really need the Queen’s permission though? This seems like a tempest in a teapot.

They don't need the queen's permission. She cannot have the name disallowed (the way that Elon Musk's DD's name was disallowed). She cannot confine them to a country estate or evict them from their apartment. She cannot threaten to cut them off financially or take their patronages away, etc. But she can refuse to agree to their reality. She can go farther and refuse to see Harry when he returns, but she likes him and probably wouldn't ever do that.

This public disagreement, though, just hurts H&M. They want to remain in her good graces, publicly and privately. From a practical perspective, they need to remain British royalty to keep their fame and their source of income. Unlike Angelina Jolie, who can go back to acting when she needs money, all they have to make money from is their public approval, and that's related to being British royalty.

This isn't who he is suing he is suing BBC. If it gets that far is he really going to try and paint his gran as a liar to win his lawsuit? Sounds like the Queen stands with the BBC reporting.

Yes, they are saying the BBC article is defamatory, implicitly threatening a lawsuit which would basically be calling the queen a liar. There's nothing about that that would help them.

They lost this round. They didn't ever need the queen's permission for the baby name. But they didn't have it and they got in trouble for saying they did.

Fallback plan is probably to shop around photos of the Sussex kids. This can't be good PR for anything with Netflix or Spotify in the long run and I doubt they want to be associated with an ugly lawsuit between the Queen, the BBC and the Sussexes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I don't think there's a coordinated effort to defend H&M on DCUM. I think there are a couple white self-righteous posters who feel like calling other posters names improves the internet. And there are a couple other nuts that showed up a couple days ago but fortunately didn't stay long.

Neither of those groups are improving the internet. Despite whatever they think they're doing.

Well, except it's only the haters who have racist posts deleted on the regular. I don't think it is name-calling to say the haters are racist when there are actual racist posts that are deleted. It's factual.

Nah, I should report a lot of the defend posts on this thread. But tbh there are so many attack posts that if I report them all, then Jeff probably will lock this thread and ban Meghan threads from then on.

So y'all can continue your "righteous" attack posts. And pat yourself on the back doing it.

You equate the so-called "attack" posts with the overtly racist posts that are quickly removed? My God. Are you trying to make the case that MM's haters are awful racists? Because you are sure doing a good job of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a big space between love and hate. The people in the Refinery article are extreme. There are some posters here who are extreme one way or the other two. What I don’t get is being labeled a hater for pointing out that something is obviously not right with these two. They’re grown adults who went from saying how Meghan couldn’t wait to hit the ground running and Harry’s family would be the family she never had to whining about no one asking how they’re doing on a tour of the most impoverished continent in the world. Then they move into a $15M mansion in the middle of the world’s biggest crisis of our times and whine about how Harry’s dad cut them off. They’ve been caught in numerous lies (the marriage before the wedding, Archie being denied a title he was entitled to, getting the Queen’s permission to use Lilibet), hypocrites (lecturing on environmentalism, then flying private, keeping their titles, accusing the BRF of being mean and racist but naming their child after the head of the institution). Nonetheless, most of us don’t “hate” them. I couldn’t care less what happens to these two. But I don’t have any respect for them and struggle to see how any rational, objective person could have any admiration for these two.

I’m not interested in watching, reading or listening to any of their productions, podcasts or books. I’ve watched Harry grow up and feel sorry for him and sad at how lost he seems. I’m not a “hater” but I’m certainly not a fan. I think this is probably where most people fall on the spectrum.

Agree. There is something seriously wrong with those who have such cult-like blind faith and rabidly defend H&M. It's so odd and so pervasive here on DCUM I question whether these defenders aren't being paid in some way. There is no other celebrity/entertainer who has a "Fans Only" thread. Why?

I just saw this quote by Harry: “I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”

The First Amendment. Bonkers.

The more they speak, especially with statements like this, the more they will be ridiculed. Rightfully so.

This^ Coordinated effort to do damage control.

Agree. A coordinated effort has become more and more apparent. It is especially notable when the H&M defenders have no comment over something as egregious as this.

For Harry to be living in the U.S., married to a U.S. citizen, have children who are U.S. citizens, and then boldly claim that our First Amendment is "bonkers" is appalling. Especially when he claims to be all-in for veterans. You know, those people who have sacrificed to protect this democracy and our "bonkers" rights like the First Amendment. Shame on him. I think every person who is a veteran or knows a veteran, and even those who don't, should boycott anything to do with him and be very vocal about it after this quote.

My God, you are delusional as the people in the article. Coordinated effort? On DCUM? To supposedly defend H&M? The self-importance is astonishing. Nobody, literally nobody, is reading DCUM for its pop culture relevance. Nobody actually cares what angry and jealous aging women think about H&M. The idea of some coordinated effort is laughable to anyone rational.

I read this thread periodically. Not regularly. I skip pages at a time. I would frankly rather the entire BRF be retired, but I am not a UK citizen, so if they want to keep paying top tax dollars for lazy pedophile grifters, that's their problem. But when I read, I do it because I despise the racist haters and I don't want racists on DCUM. (And you can stop your whining about fake "racism" about white woman now, I am white myself.) Literally almost every time I open this thread I find a racist post about MM that I report. Every time! And I am not the only one who reports racist posts. Jeff deletes them quickly, too. So that's your coordination right there: a bunch of normal DCUM readers who don't want racists in the DCUM community, and who watch the thread for that.

Miss me with this "we aren't like those insane haters in the Refinery" whining. You are exactly like them.

^Sincere thanks, PP. I appreciate people like you.

[~Black PP who put up a good effort to call out the racism in this thread]

I'm PP, and I'm just really, really sorry you have seen their vile racist posts at all. You shouldn't need to go through that. It's terrible. I think I know which posts were yours, and of course you were right. But I'm sorry you had to say anything at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Queen is standing by the BBC’s story that she wasn’t consulted on the name “Lilibet,” despite H&M’s threats to sue the BBC. Could get interesting.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-war-with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet

Be right back getting popcorn. What are the Sussexes going to do? Sue and get the Queen up there on the witness stand? Such a bad look.
There are rumors swirling from blind items that these two are in trouble with one of their sponsors (not sure if it's Netflix or Spotify) but apparently they are not churning out the content they signed on to do. The naming controversy might have been an attempted olive branch to get back into the RF good graces before they lose some of their deals and we have seen that olive branch backfire spectacularly.

Links?

You can’t see them? They’re in invisible font, and only visible to the most sophisticated and intelligent people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Queen is standing by the BBC’s story that she wasn’t consulted on the name “Lilibet,” despite H&M’s threats to sue the BBC. Could get interesting.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-war-with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet

Did they really need the Queen’s permission though? This seems like a tempest in a teapot.

They don't need the queen's permission. She cannot have the name disallowed (the way that Elon Musk's DD's name was disallowed). She cannot confine them to a country estate or evict them from their apartment. She cannot threaten to cut them off financially or take their patronages away, etc. But she can refuse to agree to their reality. She can go farther and refuse to see Harry when he returns, but she likes him and probably wouldn't ever do that.

This public disagreement, though, just hurts H&M. They want to remain in her good graces, publicly and privately. From a practical perspective, they need to remain British royalty to keep their fame and their source of income. Unlike Angelina Jolie, who can go back to acting when she needs money, all they have to make money from is their public approval, and that's related to being British royalty.

This isn't who he is suing he is suing BBC. If it gets that far is he really going to try and paint his gran as a liar to win his lawsuit? Sounds like the Queen stands with the BBC reporting.

Yes, they are saying the BBC article is defamatory, implicitly threatening a lawsuit which would basically be calling the queen a liar. There's nothing about that that would help them.

They lost this round. They didn't ever need the queen's permission for the baby name. But they didn't have it and they got in trouble for saying they did.

Fallback plan is probably to shop around photos of the Sussex kids. This can't be good PR for anything with Netflix or Spotify in the long run and I doubt they want to be associated with an ugly lawsuit between the Queen, the BBC and the Sussexes.

Imo, given that the Queen is backing the BBC over her grandson, H&M have no choice but to stand down on this one. They can’t risk a direct fight with the Queen if they want to keep their connections to money and power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a big space between love and hate. The people in the Refinery article are extreme. There are some posters here who are extreme one way or the other two. What I don’t get is being labeled a hater for pointing out that something is obviously not right with these two. They’re grown adults who went from saying how Meghan couldn’t wait to hit the ground running and Harry’s family would be the family she never had to whining about no one asking how they’re doing on a tour of the most impoverished continent in the world. Then they move into a $15M mansion in the middle of the world’s biggest crisis of our times and whine about how Harry’s dad cut them off. They’ve been caught in numerous lies (the marriage before the wedding, Archie being denied a title he was entitled to, getting the Queen’s permission to use Lilibet), hypocrites (lecturing on environmentalism, then flying private, keeping their titles, accusing the BRF of being mean and racist but naming their child after the head of the institution). Nonetheless, most of us don’t “hate” them. I couldn’t care less what happens to these two. But I don’t have any respect for them and struggle to see how any rational, objective person could have any admiration for these two.

I’m not interested in watching, reading or listening to any of their productions, podcasts or books. I’ve watched Harry grow up and feel sorry for him and sad at how lost he seems. I’m not a “hater” but I’m certainly not a fan. I think this is probably where most people fall on the spectrum.

Agree. There is something seriously wrong with those who have such cult-like blind faith and rabidly defend H&M. It's so odd and so pervasive here on DCUM I question whether these defenders aren't being paid in some way. There is no other celebrity/entertainer who has a "Fans Only" thread. Why?

I just saw this quote by Harry: “I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”

The First Amendment. Bonkers.

The more they speak, especially with statements like this, the more they will be ridiculed. Rightfully so.

This^ Coordinated effort to do damage control.

Agree. A coordinated effort has become more and more apparent. It is especially notable when the H&M defenders have no comment over something as egregious as this.

For Harry to be living in the U.S., married to a U.S. citizen, have children who are U.S. citizens, and then boldly claim that our First Amendment is "bonkers" is appalling. Especially when he claims to be all-in for veterans. You know, those people who have sacrificed to protect this democracy and our "bonkers" rights like the First Amendment. Shame on him. I think every person who is a veteran or knows a veteran, and even those who don't, should boycott anything to do with him and be very vocal about it after this quote.

My God, you are delusional as the people in the article. Coordinated effort? On DCUM? To supposedly defend H&M? The self-importance is astonishing. Nobody, literally nobody, is reading DCUM for its pop culture relevance. Nobody actually cares what angry and jealous aging women think about H&M. The idea of some coordinated effort is laughable to anyone rational.

I read this thread periodically. Not regularly. I skip pages at a time. I would frankly rather the entire BRF be retired, but I am not a UK citizen, so if they want to keep paying top tax dollars for lazy pedophile grifters, that's their problem. But when I read, I do it because I despise the racist haters and I don't want racists on DCUM. (And you can stop your whining about fake "racism" about white woman now, I am white myself.) Literally almost every time I open this thread I find a racist post about MM that I report. Every time! And I am not the only one who reports racist posts. Jeff deletes them quickly, too. So that's your coordination right there: a bunch of normal DCUM readers who don't want racists in the DCUM community, and who watch the thread for that.

Miss me with this "we aren't like those insane haters in the Refinery" whining. You are exactly like them.

100% THANK YOU. +1 the insistence that anyone who dares not partake in the witch-hunt and cyberbullying of Meghan and Harry must be getting paid by their PR team (the actual literal f*ck?) is seriously deranged behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a big space between love and hate. The people in the Refinery article are extreme. There are some posters here who are extreme one way or the other two. What I don’t get is being labeled a hater for pointing out that something is obviously not right with these two. They’re grown adults who went from saying how Meghan couldn’t wait to hit the ground running and Harry’s family would be the family she never had to whining about no one asking how they’re doing on a tour of the most impoverished continent in the world. Then they move into a $15M mansion in the middle of the world’s biggest crisis of our times and whine about how Harry’s dad cut them off. They’ve been caught in numerous lies (the marriage before the wedding, Archie being denied a title he was entitled to, getting the Queen’s permission to use Lilibet), hypocrites (lecturing on environmentalism, then flying private, keeping their titles, accusing the BRF of being mean and racist but naming their child after the head of the institution). Nonetheless, most of us don’t “hate” them. I couldn’t care less what happens to these two. But I don’t have any respect for them and struggle to see how any rational, objective person could have any admiration for these two.

I’m not interested in watching, reading or listening to any of their productions, podcasts or books. I’ve watched Harry grow up and feel sorry for him and sad at how lost he seems. I’m not a “hater” but I’m certainly not a fan. I think this is probably where most people fall on the spectrum.

Agree. There is something seriously wrong with those who have such cult-like blind faith and rabidly defend H&M. It's so odd and so pervasive here on DCUM I question whether these defenders aren't being paid in some way. There is no other celebrity/entertainer who has a "Fans Only" thread. Why?

I just saw this quote by Harry: “I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”

The First Amendment. Bonkers.

The more they speak, especially with statements like this, the more they will be ridiculed. Rightfully so.

This^ Coordinated effort to do damage control.

Agree. A coordinated effort has become more and more apparent. It is especially notable when the H&M defenders have no comment over something as egregious as this.

For Harry to be living in the U.S., married to a U.S. citizen, have children who are U.S. citizens, and then boldly claim that our First Amendment is "bonkers" is appalling. Especially when he claims to be all-in for veterans. You know, those people who have sacrificed to protect this democracy and our "bonkers" rights like the First Amendment. Shame on him. I think every person who is a veteran or knows a veteran, and even those who don't, should boycott anything to do with him and be very vocal about it after this quote.

My God, you are delusional as the people in the article. Coordinated effort? On DCUM? To supposedly defend H&M? The self-importance is astonishing. Nobody, literally nobody, is reading DCUM for its pop culture relevance. Nobody actually cares what angry and jealous aging women think about H&M. The idea of some coordinated effort is laughable to anyone rational.

I read this thread periodically. Not regularly. I skip pages at a time. I would frankly rather the entire BRF be retired, but I am not a UK citizen, so if they want to keep paying top tax dollars for lazy pedophile grifters, that's their problem. But when I read, I do it because I despise the racist haters and I don't want racists on DCUM. (And you can stop your whining about fake "racism" about white woman now, I am white myself.) Literally almost every time I open this thread I find a racist post about MM that I report. Every time! And I am not the only one who reports racist posts. Jeff deletes them quickly, too. So that's your coordination right there: a bunch of normal DCUM readers who don't want racists in the DCUM community, and who watch the thread for that.

Miss me with this "we aren't like those insane haters in the Refinery" whining. You are exactly like them.

100% THANK YOU. +1 the insistence that anyone who dares not partake in the witch-hunt and cyberbullying of Meghan and Harry must be getting paid by their PR team (the actual literal f*ck?) is seriously deranged behavior.

Also deranged is pretending there’s a “witch-hunt” against H&M. Seriously. No one is punching down by criticizing them, and those of you who defend their every action aren’t heroes of social justice. Get real.