Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’re only hearing one side here about the alleged comment on the baby’s skin color. Which means we have no idea of context nor intent. The narrative serves Meghan well. But suppose the comment was actually excited speculation on what the baby would look like? Those words, taken out of context, sure would look racist. But the context and intent might proved that they weren’t.

Agreed. Also I don’t even think Meghan was involved in the conversation at all. So it was relayed by Harry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A DIVORCED American actress was the concern and how fast it happened and moved forward.

Omg this is so true.

100%

Their relationship was lightning quick...and since she had a 'past' they were all very concerned.

I was 39 when I met DH. He was 40yoa. We met in November, engaged in March, and married in August. We have been together 17 years, much longer than friends who dated for years and then married. If you are older and lived life, you should know what you want and do not want by the time you reach 35. They were not concerned. That's BS.

Yes but, were you also married before and have your first marriage end after 2 years? It is a pattern for Meghan. Might last longer since she is pregnant and they have an "us against the world" outlook. But, it might change in a few years.

[Anonymous]

So to the people saying that we wouldn’t be against her if this was just in the family forum and not discussing the royal family..yes we would. She had a petty grievance with her sister-in-law. Big whoop. She’s upset that she told the family she didn’t want to be a part of it but they won’t continue to give her money. She would be getting flamed in the family forms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, well, well. I didn't know this. Did anyone else know this?

OUCH

\
Camilla was not the home wrecker. Why do we always blame the women?

Camilla was cheating on her husband with Charles before even got married to Diana. Charles was cheating with her from start-to-finish. Homewrecker. And she made damned sure to give him a nice sending off gift the day before the wedding so he didn't become too fascinated with his 19-year-old wife in bed.

[Anonymous]

To recap, in the 21st century a woman should keep her head down, endure, and keep quiet?
Like Kate did? In order to win over the public opinion and the press and be a good sport working royal?
And if she is a Black woman, she should keep her mouth shut, never complain, have no opinion of her own, and understand that it was a joke that her kid might be a darkie?
And that she should not have married into a racist family and called them out on it, cause... well that is her fault too?

[Anonymous]

It’s hilarious watching a bratty entitled American married to a bratty entitled Brit have a spat with a family of bratty entitled royals over useless titles that allow one to play dress-up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no chance self-made Oprah has any respect for this spoiled conniving mentally ill common opportunist.

Oprah used this lying woman and she’s too dumb to see it.

Oprah did not buy it. Her mannerisms and tone were telling that she was not buying it.

Human Resources? Really? That was when it had completely flown the coop.

My 15-year old son said "she went to see Toby?". I spit my drink out on that one. We had just finished the entire Office series.

So you are listening to a 15 year old regarding the process of someone seeking assistance. Wow. HR is the FIRM, DUMMY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm convinced not only did the Royals not want the biracial/black one to have a child in the first place (they were itching to write 'she's barren' articles but she got pregnant too quickly) but they wanted to punish Meghan for duping them - so they tried to take the only thing they could - the baby's security and HRH.

If he was old enough to school they would have refused to pay for it.

This is bullshit. Archie is the great grandchild of the Monarch. No great grandchildren have princely titles. That is how it is. When they become grandchildren of the monarch - when Charles ascends to the throne - they will get security.

Williams children do

George is currently third in line.

And what are Beatrice and Eugenie? Andrew? Like 10 15?

Currently Beatrice is 9 and Eugenie is 10. Probably will change.

[Anonymous]

I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A DIVORCED American actress was the concern and how fast it happened and moved forward.

Omg this is so true.

100%

Their relationship was lightning quick...and since she had a 'past' they were all very concerned.

I was 39 when I met DH. He was 40yoa. We met in November, engaged in March, and married in August. We have been together 17 years, much longer than friends who dated for years and then married. If you are older and lived life, you should know what you want and do not want by the time you reach 35. They were not concerned. That's BS.

Yes but, were you also married before and have your first marriage end after 2 years? It is a pattern for Meghan. Might last longer since she is pregnant and they have an "us against the world" outlook. But, it might change in a few years.

Harry will get sick of US living and of Meghan’s drama in a couple more years. I give it less than 5 yrs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

The problem with having a monarchy - once you give them $90 million pounds a year how they use it is at their discretion. Including stripping crucial security from a f**king newborn.

That entire family is going to hell.

[Anonymous]

I can’t see how you could’ve watch that and take away from anything other than how petty she is. They defend Kate but not me, Kate has security but not me, me, me, me. Maybe the person in the family who suggested she lay low was actually trying to protect her? She seems to suspect everyone of ill intent unless they are fawning all over her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To recap, in the 21st century a woman should keep her head down, endure, and keep quiet?
Like Kate did? In order to win over the public opinion and the press and be a good sport working royal?
And if she is a Black woman, she should keep her mouth shut, never complain, have no opinion of her own, and understand that it was a joke that her kid might be a darkie?
And that she should not have married into a racist family and called them out on it, cause... well that is her fault too?

She knew what she was getting into, yes, they are a royal British stiff upper lipped family. I wouldn’t have the balls to attempt to change a family like this. She has balls, this Meghan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know how this stuff works but can someone explain how the BRF can just deny support for Harry's child when they're literally protecting williams kids?

This wouldn’t be an issue if they stayed in the UK.

They can’t support these people and protect them long term if they aren’t working royals living in the US.

No worries: they’re earning plenty from Netflix and Spotify. They can pay for security.

[Anonymous]

Americans love grifters apparently. First Trump now Markle.
SAD!