The Royals
Comments
-
What does being "right on" mean? It makes me imagine this but I can't think that's the intention:
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Trolls gonna troll. It's what turns them on.1
-
I suspect you have a bit of a drink problem.david37 said:the munter has complained to Ofcom because she didn't receive support what an entitled sow.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56379830
0 -
-
Epic0
-
Is that gammon heating up I detect? How dare those furriners poke fun at Betty. Was going to use that Ram Jam band song 'Black Betty' but of course it's the wrong way round...0
-
Good article in The Times today.
Basically it was a crock - when it could have been an epic tale of race reconciliation.0 -
Tbf, I too, took it as poking fun at Betty and thought it rather good. But according to the media, I should be outraged as some things are off limits.orraloon said:Is that gammon heating up I detect? How dare those furriners poke fun at Betty. Was going to use that Ram Jam band song 'Black Betty' but of course it's the wrong way round...
Btw, I don't think there is a definitive origin of the 'Black Betty' song is there?0 -
Seemingly 'black betty' was a term for a moonshine liquor in the days of Benjamin Franklin of USAnian history fame.
Course I could take offence at its clear racist connotations if I were inventive enough and woke enough. Nah, xxxx it, I'll open a beer instead 'n' chill.0 -
shirley_basso said:
Good article in The Times today.
Basically it was a crock - when it could have been an epic tale of race reconciliation.
May be the same one I read, which highlighted that some aspects of the Sussex’s story wasn’t quite as stated (e.g. There was mention that if Harry thought the family had financially cut him off he should take a look at his bank statements and see from whom incomings were originating).1 -
Not that one.
Was by a high profile black journalist - basically saying the interview was full of nonsense and inconsistency and fairly unhelpful to both them and the UK RF.
But it did go on to say what could have been....0 -
shirley_basso said:
Not that one.
Was by a high profile black journalist - basically saying the interview was full of nonsense and inconsistency and fairly unhelpful to both them and the UK RF.
But it did go on to say what could have been....
Ah, ok. I think there is a fair amount of truth to that perspective.0 -
Hope for his job's sake, he stopped short of saying that he didn't believe a word of it.shirley_basso said:Not that one.
Was by a high profile black journalist - basically saying the interview was full of nonsense and inconsistency and fairly unhelpful to both them and the UK RF.
But it did go on to say what could have been....
0 -
He said it was all unsubstantiated and very tone deaf to the UK audience (not necessarily target though).
His final point was that Megan not knowing Harry was pretty useless. When they met he was world famous for a) dressing as a Nazi and b) calling his army colleague a paki.
Just a conversation of how they overcame that could have become a meaningful story of race reconciliation.
Sorry I can't remember the guys name but he knows the RF well as he was the first black board member of one of Prince Charles charties / trusts.1 -
Buckingham Palace have instructed an independent law firm to investigate the accusations of bullying levelled at Megan. Very sensible move to have it investigated independently and not by Palace staff.0
-
Hmm. I'd describe it as "third party" rather than "independent" as someone with vested interest picking up the tab.kingstonian said:Buckingham Palace have instructed an independent law firm to investigate the accusations of bullying levelled at Megan. Very sensible move to have it investigated independently and not by Palace staff.
0 -
It is all a bit of a waste of time unless Meghan and Harry are willing to be interviewed and then be subjected to its outcome.rick_chasey said:
Hmm. I'd describe it as "third party" rather than "independent" as someone with vested interest picking up the tab.kingstonian said:Buckingham Palace have instructed an independent law firm to investigate the accusations of bullying levelled at Megan. Very sensible move to have it investigated independently and not by Palace staff.
1 -
I believe they've already asked for any evidence behind the claims through their own legal reps.john80 said:
It is all a bit of a waste of time unless Meghan and Harry are willing to be interviewed and then be subjected to its outcome.rick_chasey said:
Hmm. I'd describe it as "third party" rather than "independent" as someone with vested interest picking up the tab.kingstonian said:Buckingham Palace have instructed an independent law firm to investigate the accusations of bullying levelled at Megan. Very sensible move to have it investigated independently and not by Palace staff.
0 -
going back to the original point about the Royals. It should be wound down. The monarch has an interest in law making via the Queens Consent which requires the Govt to inform the Monarch of any changes that would impact on the Crowns interests eg money. More on this here.
https://www.legalcheek.com/lc-journal-posts/what-is-queens-consent-and-why-it-matters/#:~:text=Essentially, Queen's consent is the,parliament to debate the bill.&text=Further, royal assent is very,royal assent had been granted.
The Royals have enough houses, money etc to last lifetimes as well as all the connections which ensure nothing is going to change.0 -
So Charles, William and Harry had a conversation a few days ago, and almost immediately one of Meghan’s friends publicly announced both that it had happened and that it hadn’t been particularly successful. I can’t imagine that Charles or William will be particularly impressed at how swiftly word got out.0
-
How thoroughly out of character for her to invade her own privacy again.kingstonian said:So Charles, William and Harry had a conversation a few days ago, and almost immediately one of Meghan’s friends publicly announced both that it had happened and that it hadn’t been particularly successful. I can’t imagine that Charles or William will be particularly impressed at how swiftly word got out.
1 -
So much for guarding their privacy eh?1
-
Yes, all very strange that someone that wants to retain their private life would act this way.0
-
Maybe she is friends with Rebecca Vardy.0
-
Has David the downtrodden white guy been banned yet?
Oh, and for the record, the Queen should be referred to as "Brenda", not Betty
It's just a hill. Get over it.0 -
that's because you're a virtue signalling hang wringing soft lad. Jesus Christ you work for a bank you have ZERO room for credible holier than though credibility.rick_chasey said:
Hmm. I'd describe it as "third party" rather than "independent" as someone with vested interest picking up the tab.kingstonian said:Buckingham Palace have instructed an independent law firm to investigate the accusations of bullying levelled at Megan. Very sensible move to have it investigated independently and not by Palace staff.
0 -
You realise that woke isn't an insult, right? To not be woke would be worse - selfish, emotionally vacant and void of simpathy.0
