Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They already registered the domain names for the second baby before the birth, which leads me to think that the story of them asking the queen as soon as she was born doesn’t line up. Harry stating he would have chosen a different name if the Queen wasn’t pleased doesn’t hold water - sounds like they were going ahead with the name full speed.

Especially to monetize it. Cue Megs launches baby clothing line called Lilibeth

[Anonymous]

Meghan has great fashion sense!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of queen elizabeths grandchildren are not princes/princesses. What is the big deal if it is the same for Charles (if Harrys kids don't get the titles)?

Totally agree. It’s so not big a deal, none of them should have the titles. That’s how not big a deal it should be. Now Charles and William should actually follow the rules they have dictated and make it equal and fair for everyone, not just apply them to the second born and his mixed race family.

Although reports were out that Charles wanted to have a trimmed down monarchy way before Harry even met Meghan. He is not just applying them to Harry's mixed race family by design, he planned to do it far before Harry had a family and will just proceed as planned.

What rules are not being applied equally amongst all the grandkids? Eugenies son has no royal title no do Zara’s kids or peters. The Queen issued a Letters Patent giving Charlotte and Louis a royal title. If Charles does issue this letter, then their kids would have no royal titles. Only George’s kids would have titles. I agree with PP, the writing has been on the wall for the royal titles for a while.

Harry's children are the grandchildren of the (future) monarch. Eugenie's and Zara's are not; they are the great-grandchildren so a generation further removed from the line of succession.

But looking at the current generation as a point of reference: not All of queen elizabeths grandschildren are princes/ princesses and they are the grandchildren of the CURRENT monarch! For instance Princess Annes and Prince Edwards kids are not prince/princesses and they are Queen Elizabeths grandchildren. This is similar concept to Archie and Lili once prince charles is the monarch. No one is complaining on Oprah about this!

That was because Anne and Edward refused the titles for their children. The children were entitled to them and would have been granted them if not for their own parents' decision. Andrew, of course, insisted his children get the titles, hence Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Meghan is correct is saying that Archie would be the first grandchild affected by the change in policy.

Anne's children technically weren't eligible for the titles being the children of a daughter and not a male. But the queen made Anne an offer of a courtesy title, which she refused. They have all said they were better off without the titles, so it's interesting that Harry and Meghan so desperately want something other royal grandchildren and their parents didn't. And for now, Harry's kids are only the great grandchildren of a monarch, so not technically eligible, at this point.

True, as Meghan said in the Oprah interview.

I'll take your word on the correction about Anne. It does makes the contrast between Archie's treatment and the other grandchildren even greater, though.

Harry of all people should realize he's the future Andrew. He has been ridiculous all his life pretending to be more important than he is and demanding his daughters be titled. Harry and William are on different paths, their children are different and will be treated differently. Harry of all people should know this.

All the more reason to strike out on his own. Harry is a better man, husband, and father than Andrew because he chose to leave and make his money and not rely on scraps and the generosity of his brother. Charles is going to cut Andrew and his daughter's off the dole as soon as he gets the okay. No need for Harry to stick around and face the same fate by William.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of queen elizabeths grandchildren are not princes/princesses. What is the big deal if it is the same for Charles (if Harrys kids don't get the titles)?

Totally agree. It’s so not big a deal, none of them should have the titles. That’s how not big a deal it should be. Now Charles and William should actually follow the rules they have dictated and make it equal and fair for everyone, not just apply them to the second born and his mixed race family.

Although reports were out that Charles wanted to have a trimmed down monarchy way before Harry even met Meghan. He is not just applying them to Harry's mixed race family by design, he planned to do it far before Harry had a family and will just proceed as planned.

What rules are not being applied equally amongst all the grandkids? Eugenies son has no royal title no do Zara’s kids or peters. The Queen issued a Letters Patent giving Charlotte and Louis a royal title. If Charles does issue this letter, then their kids would have no royal titles. Only George’s kids would have titles. I agree with PP, the writing has been on the wall for the royal titles for a while.

Harry's children are the grandchildren of the (future) monarch. Eugenie's and Zara's are not; they are the great-grandchildren so a generation further removed from the line of succession.

But looking at the current generation as a point of reference: not All of queen elizabeths grandschildren are princes/ princesses and they are the grandchildren of the CURRENT monarch! For instance Princess Annes and Prince Edwards kids are not prince/princesses and they are Queen Elizabeths grandchildren. This is similar concept to Archie and Lili once prince charles is the monarch. No one is complaining on Oprah about this!

That was because Anne and Edward refused the titles for their children. The children were entitled to them and would have been granted them if not for their own parents' decision. Andrew, of course, insisted his children get the titles, hence Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Meghan is correct is saying that Archie would be the first grandchild affected by the change in policy.

Anne's children technically weren't eligible for the titles being the children of a daughter and not a male. But the queen made Anne an offer of a courtesy title, which she refused. They have all said they were better off without the titles, so it's interesting that Harry and Meghan so desperately want something other royal grandchildren and their parents didn't. And for now, Harry's kids are only the great grandchildren of a monarch, so not technically eligible, at this point.

True, as Meghan said in the Oprah interview.

I'll take your word on the correction about Anne. It does makes the contrast between Archie's treatment and the other grandchildren even greater, though.

Harry of all people should realize he's the future Andrew. He has been ridiculous all his life pretending to be more important than he is and demanding his daughters be titled. Harry and William are on different paths, their children are different and will be treated differently. Harry of all people should know this.

DP. I kinda suspect that Harry used to understand this. But then he met Meghan, and she convinced him that he was selling himself short. It seems like she’s convinced him that he and his family deserve better than what they were getting from the BRF.

If that's true, she was right. Why limit yourself to other's expectations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They already registered the domain names for the second baby before the birth, which leads me to think that the story of them asking the queen as soon as she was born doesn’t line up. Harry stating he would have chosen a different name if the Queen wasn’t pleased doesn’t hold water - sounds like they were going ahead with the name full speed.

Especially to monetize it. Cue Megs launches baby clothing line called Lilibeth

Doubtful, as the kid’s name is Lilibet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of queen elizabeths grandchildren are not princes/princesses. What is the big deal if it is the same for Charles (if Harrys kids don't get the titles)?

Totally agree. It’s so not big a deal, none of them should have the titles. That’s how not big a deal it should be. Now Charles and William should actually follow the rules they have dictated and make it equal and fair for everyone, not just apply them to the second born and his mixed race family.

Although reports were out that Charles wanted to have a trimmed down monarchy way before Harry even met Meghan. He is not just applying them to Harry's mixed race family by design, he planned to do it far before Harry had a family and will just proceed as planned.

What rules are not being applied equally amongst all the grandkids? Eugenies son has no royal title no do Zara’s kids or peters. The Queen issued a Letters Patent giving Charlotte and Louis a royal title. If Charles does issue this letter, then their kids would have no royal titles. Only George’s kids would have titles. I agree with PP, the writing has been on the wall for the royal titles for a while.

Harry's children are the grandchildren of the (future) monarch. Eugenie's and Zara's are not; they are the great-grandchildren so a generation further removed from the line of succession.

But looking at the current generation as a point of reference: not All of queen elizabeths grandschildren are princes/ princesses and they are the grandchildren of the CURRENT monarch! For instance Princess Annes and Prince Edwards kids are not prince/princesses and they are Queen Elizabeths grandchildren. This is similar concept to Archie and Lili once prince charles is the monarch. No one is complaining on Oprah about this!

That was because Anne and Edward refused the titles for their children. The children were entitled to them and would have been granted them if not for their own parents' decision. Andrew, of course, insisted his children get the titles, hence Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Meghan is correct is saying that Archie would be the first grandchild affected by the change in policy.

Anne's children technically weren't eligible for the titles being the children of a daughter and not a male. But the queen made Anne an offer of a courtesy title, which she refused. They have all said they were better off without the titles, so it's interesting that Harry and Meghan so desperately want something other royal grandchildren and their parents didn't. And for now, Harry's kids are only the great grandchildren of a monarch, so not technically eligible, at this point.

True, as Meghan said in the Oprah interview.

I'll take your word on the correction about Anne. It does makes the contrast between Archie's treatment and the other grandchildren even greater, though.

Harry of all people should realize he's the future Andrew. He has been ridiculous all his life pretending to be more important than he is and demanding his daughters be titled. Harry and William are on different paths, their children are different and will be treated differently. Harry of all people should know this.

All the more reason to strike out on his own. Harry is a better man, husband, and father than Andrew because he chose to leave and make his money and not rely on scraps and the generosity of his brother. Charles is going to cut Andrew and his daughter's off the dole as soon as he gets the okay. No need for Harry to stick around and face the same fate by William.

Harry is a better man than Andrew because he is not a pedophile who sleeps with young girls trafficked by Epstein.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of queen elizabeths grandchildren are not princes/princesses. What is the big deal if it is the same for Charles (if Harrys kids don't get the titles)?

Totally agree. It’s so not big a deal, none of them should have the titles. That’s how not big a deal it should be. Now Charles and William should actually follow the rules they have dictated and make it equal and fair for everyone, not just apply them to the second born and his mixed race family.

Although reports were out that Charles wanted to have a trimmed down monarchy way before Harry even met Meghan. He is not just applying them to Harry's mixed race family by design, he planned to do it far before Harry had a family and will just proceed as planned.

What rules are not being applied equally amongst all the grandkids? Eugenies son has no royal title no do Zara’s kids or peters. The Queen issued a Letters Patent giving Charlotte and Louis a royal title. If Charles does issue this letter, then their kids would have no royal titles. Only George’s kids would have titles. I agree with PP, the writing has been on the wall for the royal titles for a while.

Harry's children are the grandchildren of the (future) monarch. Eugenie's and Zara's are not; they are the great-grandchildren so a generation further removed from the line of succession.

But looking at the current generation as a point of reference: not All of queen elizabeths grandschildren are princes/ princesses and they are the grandchildren of the CURRENT monarch! For instance Princess Annes and Prince Edwards kids are not prince/princesses and they are Queen Elizabeths grandchildren. This is similar concept to Archie and Lili once prince charles is the monarch. No one is complaining on Oprah about this!

That was because Anne and Edward refused the titles for their children. The children were entitled to them and would have been granted them if not for their own parents' decision. Andrew, of course, insisted his children get the titles, hence Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Meghan is correct is saying that Archie would be the first grandchild affected by the change in policy.

Anne's children technically weren't eligible for the titles being the children of a daughter and not a male. But the queen made Anne an offer of a courtesy title, which she refused. They have all said they were better off without the titles, so it's interesting that Harry and Meghan so desperately want something other royal grandchildren and their parents didn't. And for now, Harry's kids are only the great grandchildren of a monarch, so not technically eligible, at this point.

True, as Meghan said in the Oprah interview.

I'll take your word on the correction about Anne. It does makes the contrast between Archie's treatment and the other grandchildren even greater, though.

Harry of all people should realize he's the future Andrew. He has been ridiculous all his life pretending to be more important than he is and demanding his daughters be titled. Harry and William are on different paths, their children are different and will be treated differently. Harry of all people should know this.

All the more reason to strike out on his own. Harry is a better man, husband, and father than Andrew because he chose to leave and make his money and not rely on scraps and the generosity of his brother. Charles is going to cut Andrew and his daughter's off the dole as soon as he gets the okay. No need for Harry to stick around and face the same fate by William.

So why whine about it endlessly? If anything Charles did them a favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I imagine it is so painful for Harry to have a dad who has essentially rejected him. I am not a huge fan of H&M because they come across as money greedy but the news that Charles plans to create a monarchy where he excludes Harry’s kids is terrible and feels racist. He may want a smaller monarchy but he only has two kids and their mother was killed in a horrific way. He has zero sensitivity. He should be trying to fix things instead of creating more space. A smarter person would say okay if you want the titles/security then you need to agree that they spend a certain amount of time in U.K. etc.

They wanted everything on their own terms. Exactly what was Charles supposed to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of queen elizabeths grandchildren are not princes/princesses. What is the big deal if it is the same for Charles (if Harrys kids don't get the titles)?

Totally agree. It’s so not big a deal, none of them should have the titles. That’s how not big a deal it should be. Now Charles and William should actually follow the rules they have dictated and make it equal and fair for everyone, not just apply them to the second born and his mixed race family.

Although reports were out that Charles wanted to have a trimmed down monarchy way before Harry even met Meghan. He is not just applying them to Harry's mixed race family by design, he planned to do it far before Harry had a family and will just proceed as planned.

What rules are not being applied equally amongst all the grandkids? Eugenies son has no royal title no do Zara’s kids or peters. The Queen issued a Letters Patent giving Charlotte and Louis a royal title. If Charles does issue this letter, then their kids would have no royal titles. Only George’s kids would have titles. I agree with PP, the writing has been on the wall for the royal titles for a while.

Harry's children are the grandchildren of the (future) monarch. Eugenie's and Zara's are not; they are the great-grandchildren so a generation further removed from the line of succession.

But looking at the current generation as a point of reference: not All of queen elizabeths grandschildren are princes/ princesses and they are the grandchildren of the CURRENT monarch! For instance Princess Annes and Prince Edwards kids are not prince/princesses and they are Queen Elizabeths grandchildren. This is similar concept to Archie and Lili once prince charles is the monarch. No one is complaining on Oprah about this!

That was because Anne and Edward refused the titles for their children. The children were entitled to them and would have been granted them if not for their own parents' decision. Andrew, of course, insisted his children get the titles, hence Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Meghan is correct is saying that Archie would be the first grandchild affected by the change in policy.

Anne's children technically weren't eligible for the titles being the children of a daughter and not a male. But the queen made Anne an offer of a courtesy title, which she refused. They have all said they were better off without the titles, so it's interesting that Harry and Meghan so desperately want something other royal grandchildren and their parents didn't. And for now, Harry's kids are only the great grandchildren of a monarch, so not technically eligible, at this point.

True, as Meghan said in the Oprah interview.

I'll take your word on the correction about Anne. It does makes the contrast between Archie's treatment and the other grandchildren even greater, though.

Harry of all people should realize he's the future Andrew. He has been ridiculous all his life pretending to be more important than he is and demanding his daughters be titled. Harry and William are on different paths, their children are different and will be treated differently. Harry of all people should know this.

All the more reason to strike out on his own. Harry is a better man, husband, and father than Andrew because he chose to leave and make his money and not rely on scraps and the generosity of his brother. Charles is going to cut Andrew and his daughter's off the dole as soon as he gets the okay. No need for Harry to stick around and face the same fate by William.

Exactly, so do it and shut up about everything already. Stop with all the complaints and sob stories.

[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:Many of queen elizabeths grandchildren are not princes/princesses. What is the big deal if it is the same for Charles (if Harrys kids don't get the titles)?

Totally agree. It’s so not big a deal, none of them should have the titles. That’s how not big a deal it should be. Now Charles and William should actually follow the rules they have dictated and make it equal and fair for everyone, not just apply them to the second born and his mixed race family.

Although reports were out that Charles wanted to have a trimmed down monarchy way before Harry even met Meghan. He is not just applying them to Harry's mixed race family by design, he planned to do it far before Harry had a family and will just proceed as planned.

What rules are not being applied equally amongst all the grandkids? Eugenies son has no royal title no do Zara’s kids or peters. The Queen issued a Letters Patent giving Charlotte and Louis a royal title. If Charles does issue this letter, then their kids would have no royal titles. Only George’s kids would have titles. I agree with PP, the writing has been on the wall for the royal titles for a while.

Harry's children are the grandchildren of the (future) monarch. Eugenie's and Zara's are not; they are the great-grandchildren so a generation further removed from the line of succession.

But looking at the current generation as a point of reference: not All of queen elizabeths grandschildren are princes/ princesses and they are the grandchildren of the CURRENT monarch! For instance Princess Annes and Prince Edwards kids are not prince/princesses and they are Queen Elizabeths grandchildren. This is similar concept to Archie and Lili once prince charles is the monarch. No one is complaining on Oprah about this!

That was because Anne and Edward refused the titles for their children. The children were entitled to them and would have been granted them if not for their own parents' decision. Andrew, of course, insisted his children get the titles, hence Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Meghan is correct is saying that Archie would be the first grandchild affected by the change in policy.

Anne's children technically weren't eligible for the titles being the children of a daughter and not a male. But the queen made Anne an offer of a courtesy title, which she refused. They have all said they were better off without the titles, so it's interesting that Harry and Meghan so desperately want something other royal grandchildren and their parents didn't. And for now, Harry's kids are only the great grandchildren of a monarch, so not technically eligible, at this point.

True, as Meghan said in the Oprah interview.

I'll take your word on the correction about Anne. It does makes the contrast between Archie's treatment and the other grandchildren even greater, though.

Harry of all people should realize he's the future Andrew. He has been ridiculous all his life pretending to be more important than he is and demanding his daughters be titled. Harry and William are on different paths, their children are different and will be treated differently. Harry of all people should know this.

All the more reason to strike out on his own. Harry is a better man, husband, and father than Andrew because he chose to leave and make his money and not rely on scraps and the generosity of his brother. Charles is going to cut Andrew and his daughter's off the dole as soon as he gets the okay. No need for Harry to stick around and face the same fate by William.

Harry is a better man than Andrew because he is not a pedophile who sleeps with young girls trafficked by Epstein.

NP. The comparison with Harry and Andrew here is obviously made regarding their positions within the BRF's hierarchy (which are the same, one generation apart). Try to keep up.

[Anonymous]

Let me just say that Charles is truly a terrible father. There are reports that he is refusing to see Harry. We all know that he escaped to Scotland when Harry was there last time. This tells me that he truly is a selfish narcissist and always was. This was surely beyond hard growing up with a dad that is so selfish.
If all of this was a cry for help from Harry and Meghan, well he might be worse than that applying excuse Meghan has for a father.
I have no doubt that he messed up Harry totally. In fact, kudos to Harry for being an ok person with such a messed-up dad and family.

[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:Many of queen elizabeths grandchildren are not princes/princesses. What is the big deal if it is the same for Charles (if Harrys kids don't get the titles)?

Totally agree. It’s so not big a deal, none of them should have the titles. That’s how not big a deal it should be. Now Charles and William should actually follow the rules they have dictated and make it equal and fair for everyone, not just apply them to the second born and his mixed race family.

Although reports were out that Charles wanted to have a trimmed down monarchy way before Harry even met Meghan. He is not just applying them to Harry's mixed race family by design, he planned to do it far before Harry had a family and will just proceed as planned.

What rules are not being applied equally amongst all the grandkids? Eugenies son has no royal title no do Zara’s kids or peters. The Queen issued a Letters Patent giving Charlotte and Louis a royal title. If Charles does issue this letter, then their kids would have no royal titles. Only George’s kids would have titles. I agree with PP, the writing has been on the wall for the royal titles for a while.

Harry's children are the grandchildren of the (future) monarch. Eugenie's and Zara's are not; they are the great-grandchildren so a generation further removed from the line of succession.

But looking at the current generation as a point of reference: not All of queen elizabeths grandschildren are princes/ princesses and they are the grandchildren of the CURRENT monarch! For instance Princess Annes and Prince Edwards kids are not prince/princesses and they are Queen Elizabeths grandchildren. This is similar concept to Archie and Lili once prince charles is the monarch. No one is complaining on Oprah about this!

That was because Anne and Edward refused the titles for their children. The children were entitled to them and would have been granted them if not for their own parents' decision. Andrew, of course, insisted his children get the titles, hence Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Meghan is correct is saying that Archie would be the first grandchild affected by the change in policy.

Anne's children technically weren't eligible for the titles being the children of a daughter and not a male. But the queen made Anne an offer of a courtesy title, which she refused. They have all said they were better off without the titles, so it's interesting that Harry and Meghan so desperately want something other royal grandchildren and their parents didn't. And for now, Harry's kids are only the great grandchildren of a monarch, so not technically eligible, at this point.

True, as Meghan said in the Oprah interview.

I'll take your word on the correction about Anne. It does makes the contrast between Archie's treatment and the other grandchildren even greater, though.

Harry of all people should realize he's the future Andrew. He has been ridiculous all his life pretending to be more important than he is and demanding his daughters be titled. Harry and William are on different paths, their children are different and will be treated differently. Harry of all people should know this.

All the more reason to strike out on his own. Harry is a better man, husband, and father than Andrew because he chose to leave and make his money and not rely on scraps and the generosity of his brother. Charles is going to cut Andrew and his daughter's off the dole as soon as he gets the okay. No need for Harry to stick around and face the same fate by William.

So why whine about it endlessly? If anything Charles did them a favor.

Who is whining endlessly? They gave one joint interview, and I believe Harry gave two separate smaller interviews (via the Dax podcast and his Apple series). None of those things were even "whining", just recounting his own version of events. Funny because Charles himself (and others in the BRF) have raised the very same critiques that Harry has, but y'all are acting like he's the first one, and that that should make him the devil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me just say that Charles is truly a terrible father. There are reports that he is refusing to see Harry. We all know that he escaped to Scotland when Harry was there last time. This tells me that he truly is a selfish narcissist and always was. This was surely beyond hard growing up with a dad that is so selfish.
If all of this was a cry for help from Harry and Meghan, well he might be worse than that applying excuse Meghan has for a father.
I have no doubt that he messed up Harry totally. In fact, kudos to Harry for being an ok person with such a messed-up dad and family.

Remember, it was discovered that Charles had planted a story of Harry using drugs during his adolescence so that a sympathetic story of him reprimanding his son would circulate. He was never a good father -- to Harry, at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I imagine it is so painful for Harry to have a dad who has essentially rejected him. I am not a huge fan of H&M because they come across as money greedy but the news that Charles plans to create a monarchy where he excludes Harry’s kids is terrible and feels racist. He may want a smaller monarchy but he only has two kids and their mother was killed in a horrific way. He has zero sensitivity. He should be trying to fix things instead of creating more space. A smarter person would say okay if you want the titles/security then you need to agree that they spend a certain amount of time in U.K. etc.

The monarchy is a separate entity from the family, though. In order to survive, the monarchy has to be managed as a business, which I understand is hard when family dynamics are involved. But it's not racist. British taxpayers support the BRF and they don't want to pay for security, etc., for more members than a small core group. If Archie and Lilibet are extended titles and full working royal status, they'll expect the same for their kids eventually. Where does it end? Harry is #7 in line at this point; he was always meant to have a scaled-back role after William had kids (see Andrew, Edward, and Anne - they're not equals in title or status to Charles, nor should they be). I think the fact that he was allowed to essentially have co-equal status to William as a senior royal until after he was married is a good indication of the fact that the BRF has been lenient and generous with Harry (possibly too lenient and generous, given the tremendous level of entitlement he seems to have now) - probably because, in part, of his mother dying when he was so young. As the future head of the institution, Charles needs to be clear-headed about making strategic decisions, because poor ones might take down the whole thing. I am somewhat sympathetic to the situation on a personal level, but it's really not personal.

Also, let's be clear that they weren't excluded from royal titles and privileges. If they had cooperated with the BRF's expectations and stayed in the UK, they still had a luxurious, rent-free royal residence (Frogmore Cottage) that was theirs for life, status as "senior royals", taxpayer-funded security (which seems to be extremely important to them), and secondary titles (at minimum) for their kids. Archie is technically styled as the Earl of Dumbarton, H&M just chose not to use it. The problems with this arrangement appeared to be that (1) it depended on H&M being a "secondary" couple in status to W&K, which Meghan (and possibly also Harry) couldn't stand, and (2) they wanted to monetize their royal status by doing high-profile commercial deals and become global celebrities in their own right, which is fundamentally incompatible with being a senior royal. So when they were told that they had to choose between staying in the BRF and striking out on their own, they chose the latter. But to now complain and whine about how they voluntarily quit the BRF and moved abroad and have now been (as a totally foreseeable consequence) cut off from the perks that the BRF enjoys is absurdly entitled and frankly, just stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Brits really think that tourists visit their country to try to see the Queen.......? Approx. 99% of the people I know who visit the UK barely even have a passing interest of the royals.

well, I don't know enough people to have this finding be statistically significant, but I do know people who want to go to London and Buckingham Palace and the Tower of London are on their list, which likely would not be if there weren't a live Queen fomenting their level of interest.

Isn’t there a pic of a young Meghan in front of Buckingham Palace? (This was years before she wrote about William and Kate’s wedding on her blog.) I wonder why she wanted to visit there.

She was planning how she would marry the spare and them lure him back to America. The conniving upstart!

This is how you attack a 13 year old teenage girl. Wow