Jeremy Clarkson says he is 'horrified' over Meghan column

[ozimoron]

13 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

All of those things you list are just excuses for her and her followers. Her unpopularity is due to her appalling attention seeking and hypocritical behaviour. And for turning Harry (who used to be very popular) into a p whipped fool. 

99% of the British public (me included) had no idea she had African ancestry until she started telling us about it. 

 

And they made it worse by moving from the UK to make their own living, for us to find out that the 'living' they planned was basically being paid to gossip about the royal family. Of all the good things they could have chosen to make a living from, they chose this. 

The list is very obviously the nub of the problem for H & M. Royal family disdain for Americans and blacks. So far I haven't seen any arguments articulated as to why they hate Megan, other than that she squealed on the royal family. Most people understand this is mostly about racism and forelock tugging. In the bigger picture, most people in Western countries are fundamentally troubled by the concept of inherited privilege.

[Mac Mickmanus]

5 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

All of those things you list are just excuses for her and her followers. Her unpopularity is due to her appalling attention seeking and hypocritical behaviour. And for turning Harry (who used to be very popular) into a p whipped fool. 

99% of the British public (me included) had no idea she had African ancestry until she started telling us about it. 

 

And they made it worse by moving from the UK to make their own living, for us to find out that the 'living' they planned was basically being paid to gossip about the royal family. Of all the good things they could have chosen to make a living from, they chose this. 

Megan had a long running public dispute/ argument with her USA family , the argument was conducted in public through the media with the allegations being headline news and the replies being headline news , was/is an ongoing dispute which has been going on for years with numerous family members involved  .

   A family argument being held in public .

Seems like Megan also wanted a public family dispute with her UK family , but the U.K Royal family do not get involved with that or publicly reply to the numerous allegations .

 

[Credo]

10 hours ago, newnative said:

    Good grief. That old prattle?  What nonsense--trumped up, marginal charges served up by the Palace to show Megan in a bad light.  Worse case, she was a demanding boss expecting competence in her staff--always greatly admired in a man but treated with scorn and condemned if it's a woman.  Look at King Charles and his bad behavior to his staff in public--if that's what he's like with the cameras on, what's he like in private with no cameras rolling?   He gets a pass; Megan is condemned, with no Palace support at all.  Well, no, since the Palace leaked the negative story in the first place. 

    If the staff job is too demanding for you to handle, if you can't take criticism when you screw up, or if you don't like your boss, don't whine, quit and find something else to do.  And, maybe next time act professionally and honor the nondisclosure clause in your employment contract.

     The incident did serve to show the beginning of the end for H&M.  They had become way too popular--junior royals must not outshine senior royals, it's as simple as that.  In short order, out come the negative stories, many from the Palace itself, starting with this one--which the Palace should have squashed from the get go--and would have if it was a senior royal. 

   And, so began negative story after negative story on anything and everything--most of which could have also been spun positively:   How dare she so blatantly flaunt her pregnancy by cradling her baby bump!  The absolute nerve!  Or:  How Adorable!  Look how she is gently, naturally cradling her baby bump!  So loving!   Seriously, you know you're in deep kimchi when something as trivial as that becomes a big, negative story.   Add hundreds more, most made up or seen only negatively, and that was that.  Everything from her baby shower to assisting with the publishing of a cookbook was portrayed in the worst light possible.  As an American, I hadn't been following things that closely but the H&M series has been a real eye-opener.   

      It's interesting that very little in the H&M series has been disputed by the Palace--which they would if they could, as they have quickly done in the past.  The one time they did try to dispute--on whether the Palace was contacted for comment--turned into a train wreck.  First, they said the Palace had not been contacted, then backtracked and said the Palace had been contacted but they didn't know who it was, and, finally, they came clean and said, yes, the Palace had been contacted by the producers.  Makes you wonder what sort of boobs are working there.  In any case, caught in an embarrassing lie on that one.  Not the first time and surely not the last.

Thanks.  It's nice to hear from someone who sees through the fog .... or should I say S***?   The lack of support for Harry & Megan was probably comforting to some in the Royal Family who had their own missteps overlooked as Megan and, Harry to a lesser extent, acted like a lightning rod in a thunderstorm.  

[Mac Mickmanus]

12 hours ago, newnative said:

    Good grief. That old prattle?  What nonsense--trumped up, marginal charges served up by the Palace to show Megan in a bad light.  Worse case, she was a demanding boss expecting competence in her staff--always greatly admired in a man but treated with scorn and condemned if it's a woman.  Look at King Charles and his bad behavior to his staff in public--if that's what he's like with the cameras on, what's he like in private with no cameras rolling?   He gets a pass; Megan is condemned, with no Palace support at all.  Well, no, since the Palace leaked the negative story in the first place. 

   

 

King Charles is the King though and because he's old and the King, he has the right to have a moan at his servants .

   The servants are there to serve the Royal Family and Megan isn't the Queen and it could be argued that Megan is also there to serve a member of the Royal Family , rather than being a natural Royal family member herself

  

[Bluespunk]

15 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

King Charles is the King though and because he's old and the King, he has the right to have a moan at his servants .

   The servants are there to serve the Royal Family and Megan isn't the Queen and it could be argued that Megan is also there to serve a member of the Royal Family , rather than being a natural Royal family member herself

  

Utter nonsense. 

[CG1 Blue]

4 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Most people understand this is mostly about racism and forelock tugging.

Any proof of this? I suspect what you meant was most people you associate with believe this. 

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Any proof of this? I suspect what you meant was most people you associate with believe this. 

Nobody has attempted to articulate any other rationale that isn't trivial.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, Black Ops said:

The former Top Gear presenter has since issued an apology for his comments, which has sparked further outrage from his followers.

He penned on Twitter: "Oh dear. I’ve rather put my foot in it.

I'm not surprised his "apology" has outraged his followers. When Clarkson aplogises for IMO something his thousands of followers agree with it's like the world has gone woke.

 

I read the BBC link and agree with what Clarkson wrote initially.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, James105 said:

At least he didn't ask her where she was from as that would have been racist.   

 

Well done Clarkson for not actually apologising, and well done in advance to Amazon for (probably) renewing Clarksons farm, Grand Tour etc and not bowing down to the mob who love to see people lose their jobs, especially when they have the temerity to make jokes that those without a sense of humour will never be able to understand in this lifetime or the next.    At least he is punching up, can't get much higher up than royalty now can we?

Seems like he apologised to me. Perhaps you see it differently.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, nauseus said:

Well H&M certainly seem to be making a lot of bread out of this circus.

Indeed and all that free publicity. One could imagine that it was all planned in advance to generate views of what seems to be a rather boring expose of one's family.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

15 hours ago, xylophone said:

Agree with you on that and although the late Queen was, IMO, an admirable person, Prince Philip was a racist bigot and the whole family has outlived its usefulness, and as for Charles becoming King, well this was in my local paper and I totally agree with it: –

 "King Charles' pen tantrums expose him as an overindulged man-child.......
There is no escaping that the new King is a man who has been waited on hand and foot his entire life.
But a new video showing the King having – another – tantrum while on the job raises the question, is he something of an overindulged man-child?".

 

In fact I would call him a silly old duffer and that's being kind. 

 

Back on track, I think Meghan has cunningly snaffled herself a Prince who is too silly to understand what she's all about, but on the downside, she didn't realise what she had let herself in for........... Som nam na Meghan.
 

 

I wrote before he became king that I hoped he would decline, or at least abdicate shortly after assuming the kingship. Sadly I am disappointed that he means to serve out his time in the big chair. I stand by my opinion that only William can save the institution, and IMO the longer Charles remains king the less likely there will be an institution to pass on to William ( perhaps just in England ).

I thought that at the least Charles would remember what it felt like to be the king in waiting for so long, but seems that he just wants to be king too much.

[thaibeachlovers]

15 hours ago, Lacessit said:

The Queen was the glue holding the whole Royal shtick together, the rest are overprivileged and spoilt.

Perhaps it's then relevant to understand why the rest are "overprivileged and spoilt". After all she was their mother, as well as queen.

[VocalNeal]

11 hours ago, ozimoron said:

the nub of the problem for H & M. Royal family disdain for Americans and blacks.

What a load of rubbish. 

[VocalNeal]

18 hours ago, Lacessit said:

the rest are overprivileged and spoilt.

...and Paris Hilton is a self made woman????

[newnative]

9 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

King Charles is the King though and because he's old and the King, he has the right to have a moan at his servants .

   The servants are there to serve the Royal Family and Megan isn't the Queen and it could be argued that Megan is also there to serve a member of the Royal Family , rather than being a natural Royal family member herself

  

     Exactly the double standard I was pointing out.  Excuses made for Charles, Megan thrown under the bus.  If the Palace wanted to, they could have protected her, as they fiercely do other members of the Firm, such as Kate.   But, in this case, the ridiculous allegations were leaked by the Palace, itself, right before the Oprah Winfrey interview, timed to cause maximum damage to her.  The staff abuse story was leaked and came out in the newspaper March 4, 2021; the Oprah interview aired March 7, 2021.   

[xtrnuno41]

21 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Could you clarify, has Jerry actually said that and meant it seriously ?

No, i didnt say, Clarkson said that.

It is about his hate and which he hated the most.

From that point, I came with the fictional case of shooting one or the other. To show the hate he must have for Meghan, only as she was mocking about some stupid protocol.

He hates her more for that then someone killing 12 young girls, then you really lost it.

A king, queen are nothing more then "humans" , but were put in a stupid level of "importance". They are not and history tells, lots of people agreed to that and ended that existence.

It is a miracle it even still exist in this time.

However those ones replaced didnt bring up better people in control. 

 

[James105]

42 minutes ago, xtrnuno41 said:

No, i didnt say, Clarkson said that.

It is about his hate and which he hated the most.

From that point, I came with the fictional case of shooting one or the other. To show the hate he must have for Meghan, only as she was mocking about some stupid protocol.

He hates her more for that then someone killing 12 young girls, then you really lost it.

A king, queen are nothing more then "humans" , but were put in a stupid level of "importance". They are not and history tells, lots of people agreed to that and ended that existence.

It is a miracle it even still exist in this time.

However those ones replaced didnt bring up better people in control. 

 

You actually took what he said "literally" and actually believe he genuinely wants to see her paraded down a street naked with excrement thrown at here, rather than a satirical reference to a fictional royal from a fictional book/tv show?   Bless.   

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, James105 said:

You actually took what he said "literally" and actually believe he genuinely wants to see her paraded down a street naked with excrement thrown at here, rather than a satirical reference to a fictional royal from a fictional book/tv show?   Bless.   

This joke / sarcasm defense is a standard playbook item whenever one of their own says something completely egregious. Clarkson is toast.

[JonnyF]

14 hours ago, ozimoron said:

The list is very obviously the nub of the problem for H & M. Royal family disdain for Americans and blacks. So far I haven't seen any arguments articulated as to why they hate Megan, other than that she squealed on the royal family. Most people understand this is mostly about racism and forelock tugging. In the bigger picture, most people in Western countries are fundamentally troubled by the concept of inherited privilege.

Do you realize that calling people racist all the time actually dilutes the meaning of the word?

 

When I used to hear the word racist being thrown around I used to take it seriously. After all, it's such a serious accusation to throw at someone. Now, I just think, "Oh some Wokie somewhere is losing an argument". ????

 

Britain took her in with open arms, knowing she was mixed race. Paid for a multi million pound wedding, waving flags as she passed in a horse drawn carriage. As soon as she started acting like a hypocritical, spoiled, fake, lying, attention seeking narcissist people started to dislike her. So she cried Racist. Harry copied her. Simple as...

[JonnyF]

18 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

This joke / sarcasm defense is a standard playbook item whenever one of their own says something completely egregious. Clarkson is toast.

You clearly don't get British humour. 

 

Oh, and Clarkson is a legend.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Do you realize that calling people racist all the time actually dilutes the meaning of the word?

 

When I used to hear the word racist being thrown around I used to take it seriously. After all, it's such a serious accusation to throw at someone. Now, I just think, "Oh some Wokie somewhere is losing an argument". ????

 

Britain took her in with open arms, knowing she was mixed race. Paid for a multi million pound wedding, waving flags as she passed in a horse drawn carriage. As soon as she started acting like a hypocritical, spoiled, fake, lying, attention seeking narcissist people started to dislike her. So she cried Racist. Harry copied her. Simple as...

People actually camped out to get a good view of the carriage after the wedding. The couple had all the good will of the British people to start with. That they lost it is down to them.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

You clearly don't get British humour. 

 

Oh, and Clarkson is a legend.

The idea that Clarkson is toast for mocking her is so silly that I had a good laugh over that one.

Every time they whine about the royals on US tv they lose British people's support.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, newnative said:

     Exactly the double standard I was pointing out.  Excuses made for Charles, Megan thrown under the bus.  If the Palace wanted to, they could have protected her, as they fiercely do other members of the Firm, such as Kate.   But, in this case, the ridiculous allegations were leaked by the Palace, itself, right before the Oprah Winfrey interview, timed to cause maximum damage to her.  The staff abuse story was leaked and came out in the newspaper March 4, 2021; the Oprah interview aired March 7, 2021.   

Perhaps they knew what she was going to say about them.

 

If anyone deserves throwing under the bus it's the whining couple for attacking their family in public.

[Credo]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The idea that Clarkson is toast for mocking her is so silly that I had a good laugh over that one.

Every time they whine about the royals on US tv they lose British people's support.

You seem to think Americans care about the monarchy.  They don't.  The Royal family has no effect on Americans, so they are up there with the Kardashians and any other Hollywood/social media based entity.  Opinions are not particularly polarizing.  

Look, Americans love the queen. In a YouGov poll taken last year, 68 percent of Americans expressed a favorable view of the queen against the 14 percent who held an unfavorable view. They aren't as fond of the new reigning monarch. Charles only has a 34 percent favorable rating.

https://www.newsnationnow.com/danabramslive/abrams-why-are-americans-so-obsessed-with-british-royalty/#:~:text=Look%2C Americans love the queen,a 34 percent favorable rating.

 

[Bluespunk]

15 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps they knew what she was going to say about them.

 

If anyone deserves throwing under the bus it's the whining couple for attacking their family in public.

That has got to be the most ludicrous comment on this thread so far, and there has been a lot of competition for that accolade (on this page alone). 
 

If the windsors knew what MM was going to say, then what was said must be true, otherwise how would they know. 
 

If it is not true, then how on earth could they know what would be said?

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, Credo said:

You seem to think Americans care about the monarchy.  They don't.  The Royal family has no effect on Americans, so they are up there with the Kardashians and any other Hollywood/social media based entity.  Opinions are not particularly polarizing.  

Look, Americans love the queen. In a YouGov poll taken last year, 68 percent of Americans expressed a favorable view of the queen against the 14 percent who held an unfavorable view. They aren't as fond of the new reigning monarch. Charles only has a 34 percent favorable rating.

https://www.newsnationnow.com/danabramslive/abrams-why-are-americans-so-obsessed-with-british-royalty/#:~:text=Look%2C Americans love the queen,a 34 percent favorable rating.

 

No idea why that is relevant. Only the British can make Jeremy toast.

 

Do you not comprehend that "Every time they whine about the royals on US tv they lose British people's support" has nothing to do with American's opinion of the British royals?

 

[JonnyF]

28 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

That has got to be the most ludicrous comment on this thread so far, and there has been a lot of competition for that accolade (on this page alone). 
 

If the windsors knew what MM was going to say, then what was said must be true, otherwise how would they know. 
 

If it is not true, then how on earth could they know what would be said?

Easy.

 

They could have made a threat. For example, if our children don't get titles then we are going to say x,y, and z. I certainly wouldn't put anything past this lying, machiavellian couple. 

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Easy.

 

They could have made a threat. For example, if our children don't get titles then we are going to say x,y, and z. I certainly wouldn't put anything past this lying, machiavellian couple. 

Ah, TBL has competition. 
 

Ocram’s razor does not equate with your ‘ah but what if’ theories. 

[JonnyF]

37 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Ah, TBL has competition. 
 

Ocram’s razor does not equate with your ‘ah but what if’ theories. 

It's perfectly plausible. 

 

If you don't want the answer, don't ask the question.

[Bluespunk]

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

It's perfectly plausible. 

 

If you don't want the answer, don't ask the question.

No, it’s not. 
 

Not when you consider the alternatives. 
 

But keep telling yourself that if you wish.