Charles 'told Prince Harry NOT to bring Meghan to Balmoral to see dying Queen'

[John Drake]

7 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

There is a thread about it .

 

I see. Too bad. Under which topic?

[spidermike007]

It appears the days of elegant and gracious kings and queens may be a thing of bygone eras. Elizabeth was a good monarch, an elegant woman, and served her nation well. She will be missed. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

5 minutes ago, John Drake said:

I see. Too bad. Under which topic?

Just had a look and its been locked , although its in the "Forum support desk " forum if you want to have a look

[transam]

Many families have a "black sheep", the Royal family, it seems, is no exception. Its name is Harry, a bloke born into a special position in his country, but shuns it.

I see no problem with that, except he should have done it quietly, but he chose to attack his family and doing so the UK.

 

He teamed up with a second rate American actress, nothing wrong with that either, except she is using him for her own stardom that, in her work, didn't happen.

They are both as bad as each other, to be put to one side and forgotten, but that won't happen, the media are feeding off them. 

 

If I were King, I would send them on their way, which means, no milking the money, make their own way, the USA will feed them for sure....

Sorry if off-topic..????

[scorecard]

5 hours ago, steven100 said:

I think King Charles suggestion was correct in this situation .......   but it's not news worthy imo.

OK, but the newspaper concerned (not very credible) starts with a statement 'Charles told Prince Harry to not bring Meghan". Then buried further in the report they say that they coud not confirm the report. Just troubemaking...

[transam]

6 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

It appears the days of elegant and gracious kings and queens may be a thing of bygone eras. Elizabeth was a good monarch, an elegant woman, and served her nation well. She will be missed. 

Nothing wrong with King Charles and graciousness, far from it. He is just starting the job, don't knock him yet, sunbeam.....☺️

[xylophone]

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Don't forget that his "new wife", Diana, was very familiar with adultery having practiced it herself.

Timelines play a big part in this, because she only decided to seek solace elsewhere after the "tampon loving Prince" told her he had a mistress, and not only that, spent a lot of time with her, so only then did she embark upon her fling or two.

Can't really blame the poor girl as she was out of her depth and had been made to look a fool, so she tried to play him at his game, with tragic consequences.

 

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Camilla has never had the title of, or been referred to correctly, as "Queen Camilla".

However at some stage in the coming weeks and months, as the UK and the world slowly acclimatise to the accession of King Charles III and Queen Camilla, there is one very awkward situation that will inevitably rear its head: Her Majesty's will.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/queen-elizabeth-death-who-will-inherit-the-queens-630m-fortune

 

Whatever happens next, Great Britain will have a doddery old plonker who wanted to become a tampon, as King, and called his mother "mummy" even at the age of 60, and a queen consort, by virtue of her firking capabilities – – you couldn't make it up.

[spidermike007]

7 minutes ago, transam said:

Nothing wrong with King Charles and graciousness, far from it. He is just starting the job, don't knock him yet, sunbeam.....☺️

Well, I always say respect should be earned, and never, ever freely given, regardless of rank or title. Time will tell if he is up for the task and able to do his nation proud, like his Mum. The jury is still out on that one. 

[James105]

44 minutes ago, puchooay said:

Who has told you you need to be interested?

 

Don't like it? Don't read it or watch it. Simple.

It distracts from more important issues.    Since the royal family are just ceremonial figures and are not allowed to do anything of real significance (such as changing laws etc), in order to keep them in the public eye they are reported on incessantly for carrying out the most mundane of tasks that literally any able-bodied human in the UK is capable of doing.    

 

Do the French have to put up with news about the Presidents kids, grandkids, wife's cousin half removed from his sisters fiance etc?  Probably not as they are as irrelevant to the vast majority of peoples lives much in the same way as most members of the royal family are in the UK.   Yet we see our head of states family in the news everywhere in the UK as soon as they are born and throughout their lives, even though the chances of them accomplishing anything significant is no greater than the other 70 million people in the UK.   

[transam]

4 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Well, I always say respect should be earned, and never, ever freely given, regardless of rank or title. Time will tell if he is up for the task and able to do his nation proud, like his Mum. The jury is still out on that one. 

The military is not for you then.....

[Mac Mickmanus]

11 minutes ago, scorecard said:

OK, but the newspaper concerned (not very credible) starts with a statement 'Charles told Prince Harry to not bring Meghan". Then buried further in the report they say that they coud not confirm the report. Just troubemaking...

Harry made a press release that *Megan and himself would be cancelling all appointments and travelling to Balmoral to see the Queen *

    A Public announcement .

Chares TOLD him to leave Megan behind and not to bring her 

[Mac Mickmanus]

14 minutes ago, xylophone said:

 

 

 and called his mother "mummy" even at the age of 60, 

What did/will you call your Mum when you were 60 ?

[transam]

Just now, James105 said:

It distracts from more important issues.    Since the royal family are just ceremonial figures and are not allowed to do anything of real significance (such as changing laws etc), in order to keep them in the public eye they are reported on incessantly for carrying out the most mundane of tasks that literally any able-bodied human in the UK is capable of doing.    

 

Do the French have to put up with news about the Presidents kids, grandkids, wife's cousin half removed from his sisters fiance etc?  Probably not as they are as irrelevant to the vast majority of peoples lives much in the same way as most members of the royal family are in the UK.   Yet we see our head of states family in the news everywhere in the UK as soon as they are born and throughout their lives, even though the chances of them accomplishing anything significant is no greater than the other 70 million people in the UK.   

It's our UK Monarchy, our Royal Family, nobody else's, the UK is not the only country with a Royal Family, others were dumped or killed by the lefty's. Aren't we lucky.....

 

Also, lucky that our Royal Family has roots, links to most of Europe's and other Royal Families, past and present.....????

[steven100]

39 minutes ago, DezLez said:

Our ability to use the forum emojis to express ourselves has been removed.

yes Dezlez,   no one is laughing at you now 

[xylophone]

5 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What did/will you call your Mum when you were 60 ?

Certainly not "Mummy"!!!!

[puchooay]

6 minutes ago, James105 said:

It distracts from more important issues.    Since the royal family are just ceremonial figures and are not allowed to do anything of real significance (such as changing laws etc), in order to keep them in the public eye they are reported on incessantly for carrying out the most mundane of tasks that literally any able-bodied human in the UK is capable of doing.    

 

Do the French have to put up with news about the Presidents kids, grandkids, wife's cousin half removed from his sisters fiance etc?  Probably not as they are as irrelevant to the vast majority of peoples lives much in the same way as most members of the royal family are in the UK.   Yet we see our head of states family in the news everywhere in the UK as soon as they are born and throughout their lives, even though the chances of them accomplishing anything significant is no greater than the other 70 million people in the UK.   

I hadn't noticed. You clearly go looking for the news about them.

 

As an aside. Do you think they enjoy having cameras shoved in their faces? Or, even worse, being photographed from distance by snooping photographers trying to make a fast buck? I doubt it. 

 

To all the naysayers.. is it a job, being Royalty, that anyone here would really want to do? I doubt it very much.

 

So being born into it, with the high ranking royals not having a choice, is probably not such a privilege at all.

 

When one does rebel, Harry, he's raked across the coals for it.

 

Damned if the do, damned if they don't.

[scorecard]

13 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Harry made a press release that *Megan and himself would be cancelling all appointments and travelling to Balmoral to see the Queen *

    A Public announcement .

Chares TOLD him to leave Megan behind and not to bring her 

And as mentioned the newspaper made a headline 'Charles told Prince Harry to not bring Meghan...', then later buried in their newspaper report they say they cannot verify if it's correct. Further, the newspaper concerned is less than credibe, makes big money out of 'salacious / fake / not verified / divisive / misreporting reporting etc.  

 

Nowadays I don't believe most things newspapers etc., print.

[scorecard]

9 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What did/will you call your Mum when you were 60 ?

You need a hobby, like running to Antarctica.

[steven100]

6 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What did/will you call your Mum when you were 60 ?

sorry to jump in here Mac,   but an interesting point .... sadly I lost everyone a long time ago, so I don't have anyone anymore .... they have all died .... aunties , uncles, cousins, family, they are all dead.  

I just called my mother mum .... always just  ..mum ... that's it,   but in the UK it's slightly different as they say mummy sometimes,  and the US they say  ma & papa ...., I think Thai's say mama and papa also.

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, scorecard said:

And as mentioned the newspaper made a headline 'Charles told Prince Harry to not bring Meghan...', then later buried in their newspaper report they say they cannot verify if it's correct. Further, the newspaper concerned is less than credibe, makes big mobey out of 'salacious reporting'. 

 

Nowadays I don't believe most things newspapers etc., print.

It was quite widely reported that it was a gathering for close family members only and the Queen had actually died before Harry got to Balmoral 

[proton]

3 hours ago, 2baht said:

The Poms just don't like the Yank!........But it sells them newspapers and feeds the simple minds that thrive on it and read it!

Her nationality and race have nothing to do with it, nobody likes a narcissistic, social climbing lair.

[sharksy]

4 hours ago, xylophone said:

It is certainly a strange world we live in, where a woman who commits adultery on her husband by having an affair with the then Prince Charles, who in turn commits adultery on his new wife, devastating her, and IMO was a huge insult to a naïve newcomer to that circle of royalty, then becomes Queen Consort, or Queen Camilla as she has also been referred to – – mediaeval stuff and certainly not worthy of the kowtowing to the new king or her.

 

On the other hand Queen Elizabeth was a product of her time, and did her duty as was her wont, and did it well, and I have all respect for her, but she is now gone and it's about time for a shakeup, and I certainly have no respect for Charles, the silly old duffer, and I can't get out of my mind his speech some 10 years ago, when he referred in public to the Queen as "mummy"!!! Speaks volumes.
 

Easy to work out who the upper class are, are they always refer to mum as mummy.

[DezLez]

27 minutes ago, steven100 said:

yes Dezlez,   no one is laughing at you now 

Since there is no "confused" emoji for me to use please explain your comment!

[James105]

18 minutes ago, puchooay said:

I hadn't noticed. You clearly go looking for the news about them.

 

As an aside. Do you think they enjoy having cameras shoved in their faces? Or, even worse, being photographed from distance by snooping photographers trying to make a fast buck? I doubt it. 

 

To all the naysayers.. is it a job, being Royalty, that anyone here would really want to do? I doubt it very much.

 

So being born into it, with the high ranking royals not having a choice, is probably not such a privilege at all.

 

When one does rebel, Harry, he's raked across the coals for it.

 

Damned if the do, damned if they don't.

There is a solution to this problem of not wanting cameras shoved in their faces.... abolish the monarchy.   This way the only people who get cameras shoved in their faces are those who seek it.  

 

Living a life of unearned wealth, status and an adoring public is most definitely a privilege and if I was eligible to apply for a job of a Prince without needing to have any discernible talent (which other than being born into it is the requirement for the current crop of Royals) then I would most certainly do so.   

[steven100]

1 minute ago, DezLez said:

Since there is no "confused" emoji for me to use please explain your comment!

yes,  so now we have to post each other to give our emoji response ' laugh '   

jeeeze .....  it'll take me all day just to reply to everyone.

[Hammerite]

None of the spouses of the children of the

late Queen were invited. So there is no story.

Just the media stirring up sh#t.

Can you imagine Meghan at anyone's .deathbed A horror show ....making herself the centre of attention...

[puchooay]

7 minutes ago, James105 said:

There is a solution to this problem of not wanting cameras shoved in their faces.... abolish the monarchy.   This way the only people who get cameras shoved in their faces are those who seek it.  

 

Living a life of unearned wealth, status and an adoring public is most definitely a privilege and if I was eligible to apply for a job of a Prince without needing to have any discernible talent (which other than being born into it is the requirement for the current crop of Royals) then I would most certainly do so.   

So please confirm.

 

You'd like a job where you have wealth but can't spend it. You have to go places you don’t want to go. Meet and be nice to people you don't like. Have your kids followed to school by paparazzi. Have your face splashed accross the media no matter what you do, good or bad. Have halfwits slagging you off on social media because of who your Mum or granny is. Cannot go out or on holiday without a possi of bodyguards for fear someone is going to shoot you or kidnap your kids. To have to accept this is you forever with no retirement age?

[Mac Mickmanus]

11 minutes ago, Hammerite said:

None of the spouses of the children of the

late Queen were invited. So there is no story.

Just the media stirring up sh#t.

Can you imagine Meghan at anyone's .deathbed A horror show ....making herself the centre of attention...

[Thingamabob]

Kate didn't go either, so not much of a story really.

Meantime, where have the emojis gone ? 

[freedomnow]

Daily mail - must be true then.

 

Quality rag.