The Royal Mega Thread, Part II

[kittylady]

Dec 18, 2022 13:05:08 GMT Sarzy said:

It wasn't Camilla's party, she was a guest. But Jeremy Clarkson is absolutely vile for saying that. Can't believe anyone agreed to print it.

It's The Sun. There is nothing that is below the level that it would stoop to. I'd go so far as to say that Fox News is more reliable and truthful.

[Sarzy]

Dec 18, 2022 20:08:09 GMT kittylady said:

Dec 18, 2022 13:05:08 GMT Sarzy said:

It wasn't Camilla's party, she was a guest. But Jeremy Clarkson is absolutely vile for saying that. Can't believe anyone agreed to print it.

It's The Sun. There is nothing that is below the level that it would stoop to. I'd go so far as to say that Fox News is more reliable and truthful.

True! The Sun really is the bottom of the barrel. 

[kittylady]

Dec 18, 2022 20:22:57 GMT Sarzy said:

Dec 18, 2022 20:08:09 GMT kittylady said:

It's The Sun. There is nothing that is below the level that it would stoop to. I'd go so far as to say that Fox News is more reliable and truthful.

True! The Sun really is the bottom of the barrel. 

The Sun is what you get when you've hit the bottom of the barrel, carried on digging anyway, hit a sewer pipe, dug some more and found yourself in a medieval plague pit. And that's on a good day.

[no1novice]

Bill goes to ex-gf's wedding



No news on who the female in pink is.

The chap in front could be the groom George Gemmell



The bride Rose Farquhar

[lindsaywhit]

Rose? That you?

Stay the course, honey - you never know. I mean, who would have ever thought there'd be a Queen Camilla?

There is a little difference you might want to be aware of, however. Kate is no Diana - she's got a core of steel, and she's worked very diligently to be exactly where she is.

[MsDark]

So he digs fugly chicks with overbites from hell named Rose?

Got it.

Look, the main offense H&M committed was being more popular than Bill and Cathy. Let's be real here.

[Sarzy]

Prince Andrew's armed protection police are being replaced by private security officers who are only allowed to use Tasers.

King Charles may now personally pay the £3million a year bill for his brother's new team of bodyguards, it's been reported.

It comes a year after The Duke of York, 62, was stripped of his official roles and HRH title after settling a sexual abuse case with accuser Virginia Giuffre.

He made no admission of liability and has consistently and vehemently denied the allegations.

Buckingham Palace refused to comment to the Sun On Sunday when asked whether Charles would now cover the cost of Andrew's armed protection using his £24million-a-year income from the Duchy of Lancaster.

The palace decline to comment on all security matters.

As a working royal, Andrew was entitled to a taxpayer funded security detail made up of armed police officers who accompanied him on all visits outside of Windsor, Berkshire.

The prince was said to be 'furious' when reports first emerged that he would be stripped of the entitlement.

Former Home Office minister Norman Baker said yesterday: 'Armed protection has always been a status symbol for the likes of Prince Andrew.

'Of course he should pay it himself and not burden the taxpayer because he is a private individual and carries out no public duties.'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11553441/Prince-Andrews-armed-protection-police-replaced-private-security-officers.html

Why should Charles even pay for it? If Andrew wants security he should pay. 

[no1novice]

I'm guessing because Andrew has been living beyond his means for many years & is actually now broke.

Since they recorded H&M's even in the UK they should have recinded the Prince Pedo's much earlier.

[charmedhour]

I finished up the Harry & Meghan Netflix doc last night. I have to say, I was surprised to see Eugenie come for a visit. I think she has balls (in a good way), cause you know she probably received and will receive shit from family and the press for that visit.

[lindsaywhit]

Gack! Never in a million years did I think I might kinda agree with Pedo Andy about anything, but I'm confused about the security issue. I get that working royals have a need for more security, but Harry is the son of the king and Andrew is the son of the late monarch and the brother of the king. Shouldn't they be afforded some level of security paid for by the taxpayer (or better yet, the extraordinarily wealthy king)?

If Harry was targeted by terrorists or just nutso individuals, whether kidnapped or murdered, isn't that a direct result of his birth, and not something he could opt out of? The same applies (with great reluctance) to Andrew.

Genuinely asking the question here - it's just something I don't understand.

[Sarzy]

I'm confused now as to how it all works as this article from last year said Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie are guarded only on official duties and engagements. I thought working Royals always were

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9346083/Meghan-Markle-interview-Members-Royal-Family-dont-police-protection.html

Edit - Also I didn't even think private security guards are allowed to carry tasers in the UK? 

[sputnik]

Dec 19, 2022 14:49:19 GMT charmedhour said:

I finished up the Harry & Meghan Netflix doc last night. I have to say, I was surprised to see Eugenie come for a visit. I think she has balls (in a good way), cause you know she probably received and will receive shit from family and the press for that visit.

same. forgot to mention that in my comment. i remember the visit to LA being reported somewhere and i think there were even photos so it wasn't totally out of the blue but i was (pleasantly) surprised she agreed to be in the documentary. i think she and harry are very close and she lived at frogmore after the sussexes left the UK, and it might be her way of signaling that not all the royal family agrees with how the situation was handled. i heard there might also be drama between eugenie and william and kate because apparently eugenie was going to move into the house the cambridges ended up deciding to move into, so that might have played a part as well. 

[no1novice]

I think that Bill & Cathy looked at a few places just because they could but in the end they moved to a 4-bedroomed Adelaide Cottage.

Their live-in nanny & housekeeper live in a different property. The nanny has been with them since George was small.

I am sure that they could have found a more-bedroomed place without having to go 20-bedrooms like the Kensington Palace "apartment" or the 10 bedroomed Abner Hall in Norfolk.
After all the Crown Estates made £312m Net revenue account profit in 2021. Three hundred and twelve million pounds sterling.

[loftybike]

'Top Gear' Host Jeremy Clarkson Condemned for 'Deeply Misogynist' Comments About Meghan Markle
Media personality Jeremy Clarkson is under fire after penning an article for The Sun about his "hate" for Meghan Markle.

More than 6,000 complaints have been made to press regulator Ipso about Clarkson's piece, which according to the BBC. The article was taken down from The Sun's website on Monday with the message: "In light of Jeremy Clarkson's tweet he has asked us to take last week's column down."

Published Friday by the U.K. outlet, the Top Gear host said in the article that he hated the Duchess of Sussex "on a cellular level."

"At night, I'm unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, 'Shame!' and throw lumps of excrement at her," he wrote, referencing the famous scene from Game of Thrones.

Clarkson also wrote that he hated Meghan more than Rose West, referencing the notorious English serial killer who — with her husband, Fred West — tortured and murdered numerous young women as well as her stepdaughter in the 1970s and 1980s.

First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon, who was also named in the article as someone that Clarkson "hates," called what the presenter said "deeply misogynist and just downright awful and horrible."

"I think what he said about Meghan Markle was deeply misogynist and just downright awful and horrible," she said, according to The Times. "My overwhelming emotion about guys like Jeremy Clarkson is pity. I mean, what is it that makes somebody so distorted by hate that they end up writing these things? I think that possibly gives an insight into Jeremy Clarkson and the kind of person he is. So maybe he just needs to take a step back from things and just think about life a bit more."

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan condemned the article via Twitter, writing: "As Jeremy Clarkson should well know - words have consequences. The words in his piece are no joke - they're dangerous and inexcusable. We are in an epidemic of violence against women and girls and men with powerful voices must do better than this."

Clarkson's daughter Emily also added to the backlash. "My views are and have always been clear when it comes to misogyny, bullying and the treatment of women by the media," she wrote on her Instagram story. "I want to make it very clear that I stand against everything that my dad wrote about Meghan Markle, and I remain standing in support of those that are targeted with online hatred."

Clarkson responded on Twitter Monday, saying he was "horrified to have caused so much hurt."

"Oh dear. I've rather put my foot in it," he wrote. "In a column I wrote about Meghan, I made a clumsy reference to a scene in Game of Thrones and this has gone down badly with a great many people. I'm horrified to have caused so much hurt and I shall be more careful in future."

A spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to comment.

Clumsy? He's never, not even for once been clumsy when it comes to using language.

This "apology" adds insult to injury. I like that even his own daughter slams him for this, he fully deserves the backlash. I hope that this will finally lead to him getting less opportunities to spread racism. He had it coming for a long time.

[no]

"I'm horrified to have cause so much hurt"


"I'm horrified that I'm actually getting slammed for what I said so here's my shitty apology"