The Duke and Duchess of Sussex

[Jerboa]

What I do find peculiar about M, is that she has completely cut herself off from her father. Seemingly he pretty much brought her up on his own, as the mother effectively left them.
He is now very poorly and living in the Philippines, surely it would be a good thing to reconcile, and allow him to meet his grandchildren?

Actually he is back living in California not to far from Montecito, but she never went to visit him, even though he has lost his leg and was recovering.
People have reported that she uses people for her advancement, and when they no longer have any benefit, or she got her claws into someone bigger or richer she would ghost them.

[DastardlyDick]

What I do find peculiar about M, is that she has completely cut herself off from her father. Seemingly he pretty much brought her up on his own, as the mother effectively left them.
He is now very poorly and living in the Philippines, surely it would be a good thing to reconcile, and allow him to meet his grandchildren?

The Markel family has raised dysfunctional to a whole new level.

[Vice Admiral]

People have reported that she uses people for her advancement, and when they no longer have any benefit, or she got her claws into someone bigger or richer she would ghost them.

Tom Bower's book Revenge documents this in full detail.  It would not be much of an exaggeration to say that this appears to have been the story of her life.

[Vice Admiral]

It seems to me that there is a important and interesting difference between the Wicked Witch of Montecito and the Ginger Celebrity Traitor.

The Wicked Witch is, quite simply, a horrible person.  Always has been.  Always will be.  No-one reading Tom Bower’s book Revenge could conclude otherwise.  Ruthlessly manipulative, ruthlessly ambitious, ruthlessly self-centred, ruthlessly devoid of decency and kindness, ruthlessly vengeful.  A solipsistic sociopath.

But the Celebrity Traitor has not always been a wrong ’un.  Until he met the Wicked Witch, his good qualities outnumbered the bad.  He was charming, fun and brave, if somewhat silly and not very bright.

The Queen has supposedly expressed her view that Meghan “brain-washed” Harry.  (In a previous post I noted in my chucklesome way that this procedure wouldn’t have taken long.)  But it has been more than just brain-washing.  She has washed out of him many of the basic human decencies which we expect to take for granted among our friends and family.  He has turned out to be shamefully weak and malleable.  She has cast a malign spell, and turned a decent man into a bad man.

It’s very sad.  And actually quite weird.

[Jerboa]

It seems to me that there is a important and interesting difference between the Wicked Witch of Montecito and the Ginger Celebrity Traitor.

The Wicked Witch is, quite simply, a horrible person.  Always has been.  Always will be.  No-one reading Tom Bower’s book Revenge could conclude otherwise.  Ruthlessly manipulative, ruthlessly ambitious, ruthlessly self-centred, ruthlessly devoid of decency and kindness, ruthlessly vengeful.  A solipsistic sociopath.

But the Celebrity Traitor has not always been a wrong ’un.  Until he met the Wicked Witch, his good qualities outnumbered the bad.  He was charming, fun and brave, if somewhat silly and not very bright.

The Queen has supposedly expressed her view that Meghan “brain-washed” Harry.  (In a previous post I noted in my chucklesome way that this procedure wouldn’t have taken long.)  But it has been more than just brain-washing.  She has washed out of him many of the basic human decencies which we expect to take for granted among our friends and family.  He has turned out to be shamefully weak and malleable.  She has cast a malign spell, and turned a decent man into a bad man.

It’s very sad.  And actually quite weird.

The witch must be dam good at giving blowjobs, Harry totally turned into a woke cuck after meeting her.

[catweazle]

The witch must be dam good at giving blowjobs, Harry totally turned into a woke cuck after meeting her.

I did read that not long after they got together Harry said to a friend something along the lines of " she's incredible at sex, let's you do anything you want!"

Definition of being pussy whipped, I think

[Jonestown]

I did read that not long after they got together Harry said to a friend something along the lines of " she's incredible at sex, let's you do anything you want!"

Definition of being pussy whipped, I think

À honey trap perhaps, there was a rumour she was a practitioner of The Singapore Grip” as popularised by the late Duchess of Windsor.

[Vice Admiral]

I did read that not long after they got together Harry said to a friend something along the lines of " she's incredible at sex, let's you do anything you want!"

Definition of being pussy whipped, I think

It's a plausible explanation.  Men often take leave of their senses when they're in the grip of an overwhelming sexual passion – what my conspiracy theorist friend calls “being cunt-struck".

We've all been there.  But luckily the erotic obsession generally wears off before we commit to the folly of marrying the bint in question!

[Vice Admiral]

I can't quite work out the thinking behind this:
External Link/Members Only

Sadly, nothing can stop the Wicked Witch of Montecito* and the Celebrity Traitor from going round Britain glad-handing the public and behaving in a quasi-royal way, so I'm not quite sure what this encyclical achieves.  Perhaps the Palace felt there was a risk that the Sussexes would regard their return to the UK as a licence to return to being working royals, and thought it best to pre-empt this, as a precaution.

In yesterday’s Times, a piece by Polly Vernon examining the Sussexes’ motives for returning included this:

I mean, I definitely believe Harry wants his son to play rugby, but I mainly believe he and Meghan were out of options. If they learnt anything over the course of the six years since they went to California, it’s that making a living is hard; being famous, harder yet. And I don’t think they’re terribly good at either. Podcasts, TV shows, jam… No one really cared. Not enough people bought. All those two have truly got to sell is proximity to the royal family. So: better creep back into the fold! It’s that or get a real job.

(*I had thought that the term "Wicked Witch of Montecito" was my own coinage, but out of interest I put it into Google a couple of days ago, only to learn that it has previously been used on social media.  Damn and blast!  My potential career as an advertising copywriter has gone down the drain.)

[DastardlyDick]

I can't quite work out the thinking behind this:
External Link/Members Only

Sadly, nothing can stop the Wicked Witch of Montecito* and the Celebrity Traitor from going round Britain glad-handing the public and behaving in a quasi-royal way, so I'm not quite sure what this encyclical achieves.  Perhaps the Palace felt there was a risk that the Sussexes would regard their return to the UK as a licence to return to being working royals, and thought it best to pre-empt this, as a precaution.

In yesterday’s Times, a piece by Polly Vernon examining the Sussexes’ motives for returning included this:

I mean, I definitely believe Harry wants his son to play rugby, but I mainly believe he and Meghan were out of options. If they learnt anything over the course of the six years since they went to California, it’s that making a living is hard; being famous, harder yet. And I don’t think they’re terribly good at either. Podcasts, TV shows, jam… No one really cared. Not enough people bought. All those two have truly got to sell is proximity to the royal family. So: better creep back into the fold! It’s that or get a real job.

(*I had thought that the term "Wicked Witch of Montecito" was my own coinage, but out of interest I put it into Google a couple of days ago, only to learn that it has previously been used on social media.  Damn and blast!  My potential career as an advertising copywriter has gone down the drain.)

That reads to me like a long winded version of "No, your not getting any money".
I can't recall where I was it now, but wasn't there speculation that Harry may have been considered an illegal alien? 

[Vice Admiral]

External Link/Members Only

I find the Wicked Witch of Montecito and the Celebrity Traitor as annoying as the next man, but “royal expert” Phil Dampier’s latest comments are pure piffle.

“The important day for the prince, who is second in line to the throne," says Dampier, "was overshadowed by the back and forth from Harry and Meghan regarding their security, the King's message and their return to the UK.”

Yawn.

"We've got Prince George going to Eton today – his first day at Eton – and we've got the anniversary of the Queen's death, and it's overshadowing it all. I think this is what the Royal Family is worried about.”

Yawn again.

I, as it happens, am also a “royal expert”, Phil – and I can confidently state that the last thing that Prince George and his father were thinking about on his first day at Eton was the gruesome twosome’s recent return to Blighty.

Yes, it’s very unwelcome, for all kinds of obvious reasons – but the key members of the royal family aren't obsessed by every column-inch of newspaper coverage the Sussexes get.

Every time Harry and Meghan step out of their front doors, the Palace is supposedly fretting because they’re “overshadowing” Princess Anne opening a new bingo hall in Scunthorpe on the same morning.

Give us a break.

[Vice Admiral]

The former Conservative MP Louise Mensch makes a fair point when she says that the Sussexes’ camp had "no right to be notified" of the Palace's announcement in advance.

She wrote on X: "Nobody wanted [Meghan's] opinion on His Majesty's sovereign decisions. Saying she was 'surprised' is a public protest against those decisions."

When I started this post, I wrote:  “I suppose it's just possible that they will conduct themselves in an appropriately discreet, low-key, and well-mannered way.  But I won't be betting the farm on that outcome.”

Meghan’s comment is not a promising start. 

She always feels the need to put her oar in – as though she’s an equal in the relationship between an ancient monarchy and a solipsistic American tart who’s far too big for her boots.

[Vice Admiral]

A letter in today’s Times has this:  “Harry and Meghan chose to be private citizens when they left the royal family, and they could be living privately by now if they had chosen to do so. But it must be for the King to say who is royal and what that means. If Harry and Meghan reject his authority by arguing against him, but keep their titles, the whole edifice of royalty crumbles. Unless we want a republic, the King must strip Harry and Meghan of their titles and Harry of his place in the line of succession.”

Sadly, the King will never do it, since he presumably has some affection for the Celebrity Traitor and (rather more, one imagines) for the blameless ginger tots.  Also it might look spiteful, and he wouldn’t want to play Little Miss Spiteful at her own game.

But it must be the stuff of Prince William’s dreams!  Imagine!  “Harry and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor.”

That would cook her goose...

[Vice Admiral]

On an episode of The Chase I watched last night, one of the questions asked was, "What relation is the Duchess of Sussex to the King?"  The contestant replied, "Wife."

Now there's something for an alternative universe...

[Jonestown]

It’s been reported that the Sussex children have been removed from their new school after only two days over “security” concerns. Draw your own conclusions as to whether it’s all just a ploy to put pressure on KC3 and the authorities to provide free security.

[Vice Admiral]

It’s been reported that the Sussex children have been removed from their new school after only two days over “security” concerns. Draw your own conclusions as to whether it’s all just a ploy to put pressure on KC3 and the authorities to provide free security.

It does seem a bit odd.  You'd have thought that choosing a school whose location offered as safe as possible a route from the Sussexes' house would have been pretty near the top of the list of things to consider.

Having said that, any "commute" inevitably involves a small element of risk – although the Wales children seem to have managed it without all this hullaballoo.

[threechilliman]

It’s been reported that the Sussex children have been removed from their new school after only two days over “security” concerns. Draw your own conclusions as to whether it’s all just a ploy to put pressure on KC3 and the authorities to provide free security.

Anything to keep them in the news. They're clearly oblivious to how ridiculous they make themselves look.

[Jonestown]

Anything to keep them in the news. They're clearly oblivious to how ridiculous they make themselves look.

You have to feel sorry for the two kids, a stunt like that I’d imagine would have a bad effect on a young child, most of whom desperately just want to fit in.

[Riprock]

Methane fingerprints all over this latest ruse

[Jumping Jack Flash]

Having said that, any "commute" inevitably involves a small element of risk – although the Wales children seem to have managed it without all this hullaballoo.

This is just another PR stunt to keep their name in the media. Last week Prince George started at Eaton, his parents accompanying on his first day and there was coverage across multiple media channels. Surprise surprise, the Sussexes have similar child at school stories this week.

Prince George will have an assigned copper with him at all times and no doubt there are several units of undercover officers positioned around Windsor and around the school. Within reason, he will be free to come and go at Eaton, whereas clearly the Sussex offspring are far more precious.

[Colston36]

Yes.

Harry and Megan have done incalculable damage to the British monarchy, both within the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth, and more widely across the world.  (If it were up to me, they’d be locked up in the Tower of London on bread and water, with no access to social media.)

Perhaps the gruesome twosome have finally decided to shut up and behave themselves.  If not, their presence in Britain gives rise to all kinds of new risks.

Of course some people – republicans and so on – don’t care if the monarchy is damaged.

I do, for three reasons:

1.  Our constitutional monarchy might, objectively speaking, appear to be an absurdity.  You wouldn’t now invent it from scratch.  But it works, and it gives us a centre of stability, which is particularly valuable in an era of much instability.   (I suspect that many of those who would like the United Kingdom to be a republic might, if such a thing came about, very much regret it.)

2.  The extraordinary history of the British monarchy is one of the most remarkable things about our country – and the fact that it has survived into the 21st century when so many other monarchies disappeared during the course of the 20th is more remarkable still.  It gives our nation much splendour in a drab world.  (Personally, I’m not a great watcher of royal pageantry, but I’m glad it’s there.)

3.  Individually, the main members of the royal family are good, hard-working people whom I greatly admire and respect.  (I wouldn’t do their jobs for all the tea in China.)

I doubt they have done incalculable damage, or even any damage. The monarchy survived Windsor who was a Nazi sympathiser. These two are just rather foolish. Nobody who matters will be influenced by their antics.

[Vice Admiral]

I doubt they have done incalculable damage, or even any damage. The monarchy survived Windsor who was a Nazi sympathiser. These two are just rather foolish. Nobody who matters will be influenced by their antics.

This is more or less the same as your post of 21 August, which read:
“I suggest the damage this foolish pair have done is not so much incalculable as minimal. The only person who did real damage in my lifetime was the Duke of Windsor who was a Nazi sympathiser. They are just silly.”

I will repeat what I wrote in reply:
 
The Duke of Windsor’s Nazi sympathies were not known at the time of the abdication crisis, although that crisis certainly rocked the monarchy and the nation.

Then, in October 1937, the Windsors went to Germany and met Hitler, Goebbels and other Nazi leaders.  The Duke gave Nazi salutes and inspected troops.  This was indeed a massive scandal.  But George VI had by then been King for almost a year, and the core royal family was not tainted by this.   If anything, it reinforced the view that Britain had done well to get rid of a wrong ’un.

The difference between the Windsors and the Sussexes is that, whatever the former’s resentments may have been, there were no public pronouncements.

As for the damage the Sussexes did, the worst was the traducing of the royal family as racist because there seems to have been a harmless private remark in passing about what colour the Sussexes’ first baby might be, which was blown up out of all proportion:
External Link/Members Only

Tom Bower’s book Revenge fully documents the considerable damage all this did, particularly in America and among Britain’s minority communities.

See also:
External Link/Members Only

[Vice Admiral]

The Daily Express is not a newspaper I read, but I’ve just come across this, which is AOL’s top story for today:
External Link/Members Only

In the photo accompanying the article, Meghan looks rather masculine.  Perhaps Harry Rotter likes a girl who wears the trousers?  We will have to wait for the publication of Harry Rotter and the Wicked Witch of Montecito to find out.

Anyway, here’s an extract from the piece (with which it’s hard to disagree):

The Express's Associate Editor, James Walker, laid into the couple in its daily podcast The Daily Expresso. He talked with host JJ Anisiobi about the Sussexes moving their children to a different school two days into term time, with reports suggesting that this was because their security team was experiencing difficulties. James said: "It just feels a bit nicely timed though, doesn't it? He's just lost his case to get publicly funded security. This gives the perfect case for it.

"And, to be honest, maybe there is a case of publicly funded security now they're back in the UK. But I think a lot of people in Britain, quite rightly, are going to be like: 'These two made an absolute fortune swanning off and going to be private individuals in America, to then slate the Royal Family, slate the British media, frankly slate Britain as a whole, slate our past, our history, our culture, and then they want to come back, send their kids to really nice schools, probably, with all their millions behind them and then have the cheek to ask us for money to pay for their security.'"

[timsussex]

As a vassal of the duo may I echo Caitlin Moran in The Times
"a great relief to the people of Sussex, who have been without a duke and duchess for some time. Thank God there wasn’t an emergency in Chichester or Midhurst for, without primary ceremonial figureheads around, they might have all simply thrown themselves in a river or started eating dung, then dropped dead.
Of course, as we can all observe, the primary purpose of the duke and duchess now they have resigned from royal roles is for people to gossip about them. In the pantomime of public life, we now boo Meghan and Harry whenever they come on stage"

However she then rather lowers the tone by revealing that quoting Bonnie Blue "I’m going to auction off my baby’s name just so it stays in a higher tax bracket than you" and that got the sub editors attention robbing the duo of the headline

[Vice Admiral]

As a vassal of the duo may I echo Caitlin Moran in The Times
"a great relief to the people of Sussex, who have been without a duke and duchess for some time. Thank God there wasn’t an emergency in Chichester or Midhurst for, without primary ceremonial figureheads around, they might have all simply thrown themselves in a river or started eating dung, then dropped dead.
Of course, as we can all observe, the primary purpose of the duke and duchess now they have resigned from royal roles is for people to gossip about them. In the pantomime of public life, we now boo Meghan and Harry whenever they come on stage"

However she then rather lowers the tone by revealing that quoting Bonnie Blue "I’m going to auction off my baby’s name just so it stays in a higher tax bracket than you" and that got the sub editors attention robbing the duo of the headline

Is moving from Harry Rotter and the Wicked Witch of Montecito to Bonnie Blue "lowering the tone"?  I'm far from convinced.

At least the fragrant Bonnie keeps her mouth shut – although admittedly that's generally because, as a well-brought-up girl, she doesn't talk while her mouth's full.

[Vice Admiral]

It seems to me that there is a important and interesting difference between the Wicked Witch of Montecito and the Ginger Celebrity Traitor.

The Wicked Witch is, quite simply, a horrible person.  Always has been.  Always will be.  No-one reading Tom Bower’s book Revenge could conclude otherwise.  Ruthlessly manipulative, ruthlessly ambitious, ruthlessly self-centred, ruthlessly devoid of decency and kindness, ruthlessly vengeful.  A solipsistic sociopath.

But the Celebrity Traitor has not always been a wrong ’un.  Until he met the Wicked Witch, his good qualities outnumbered the bad.  He was charming, fun and brave, if somewhat silly and not very bright.

The Queen has supposedly expressed her view that Meghan “brain-washed” Harry.  (In a previous post I noted in my chucklesome way that this procedure wouldn’t have taken long.)  But it has been more than just brain-washing.  She has washed out of him many of the basic human decencies which we expect to take for granted among our friends and family.  He has turned out to be shamefully weak and malleable.  She has cast a malign spell, and turned a decent man into a bad man.

It’s very sad.  And actually quite weird.

I still can’t quite work out Harry Rotter.

Montecito Meghan’s character is as clear as day.  No-one can read Tom Bower’s immaculately researched book Revenge without seeing that she is and always has been a nasty piece of work.

And, yes, Charles Spencer’s title may go back to 1765 and he may have been educated at Eton and Oxford, but he is not a gentleman.  To be publicly malicious, vicious and vindictive about a near relation by marriage is the act of a consummate cad.

But Harry Rotter still puzzles me.  What is he playing at?  Is he a scheming hypocrite?  Or just a fool?

The word from Camp Harry is that he’s desperate to reconcile with his father.   

Yet – normally never shy of sounding off about his family – he has made no criticism of Spencer’s book about Princess Diana

On the contrary, according to today’s Sun, Spencer says that Harry is “completely fine” with his book.

Three days ago on the “Earl Spencer / Dartmoor” thread I wrote this:
‘Some well-informed commentators believe that there is an alliance between Shit-Spencer and Harry Rotter, the Celebrity Traitor.  Today’s Daily Express leads with claims from author Tom Bower that the earl is "undoubtedly" working with his nephew, the Duke of Sussex, to "damage" King Charles. The paper dubs the alleged pairing the "Spencer alliance".  It would appear that nothing would give Spencer and Harry Rotter more pleasure than to destroy King Charles, Prince William and indeed the British monarchy.’

I find it hard to disagree with that analysis.

[Vice Admiral]

You won’t often catch me singing the praises of Nigel Farrago, but today’s an exception – for I’ve just found this on AOL:

Nigel Farage has joked that he might consider deporting Meghan Markle if he becomes prime minister.

Discussing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the Reform UK leader described their behaviour in recent years as an "absolute disgrace", but said he now feels sorry for Harry, whom he believes made a "bad life choice" by marrying Meghan. "The behaviour of Meghan and Harry has been an absolute disgrace. Now they're back in the UK living here for who knows how long, and somehow, I can't help it, I almost now begin to feel a bit sorry for Harry because it's the classic tale of the weak man and the strong woman," he said during an appearance on The Benny Show.

External Link/Members Only

You’re a diamond geezer, Nige.  Feel free to join me for a pint of Fuller's Bengal Lancer down at the Dodgy Duck this evening at 6.00!

[Vice Admiral]

In yesterday’s Times, Shane Watson informed us that Meghan Markle is selling an "As Ever" Advent calendar:  “Doing away with the customary Nativity scene and Father Christmas’s reindeer-drawn sleigh in a twinkly night sky, Meghan has chosen a picture ‘inspired by’ the Sussexes’ £11m Montecito mansion, lit up like a cruise liner. It contains 24 hand-crafted sweets from the Los Angeles chocolatier Compartes hidden behind the little doors.”

“As ever” Meghan is tone-deaf to the way she comes across.  Watson adds this comment: “In the season of goodwill, when charity might be at the forefront of the minds of the super rich, this is Meghan marketing at its most exposing. Putting your super-wealthy celebrity self right at the heart of Christmas is something not even we had thought the duchess of lifestyle was capable of.”

Yours for £112, incidentally.

Who on Earth buys such a thing?  I’ve never bought a celebrity-branded product in my life, and nor I hope has anyone I have ever known.  The unbelievable embarrassment!

[DastardlyDick]

Who on Earth buys such a thing?  I’ve never bought a celebrity-branded product in my life, and nor I hope has anyone I have ever known.  The unbelievable embarrassment!

+1 

[southcoastpunter]

Who on Earth buys such a thing? 

Obviously not meghan and harry haters like you and DD but obviously someone does!

[DastardlyDick]

Obviously not meghan and harry haters like you and DD but obviously someone does!

I wouldn't buy one no matter who was selling it.

[Vice Admiral]

I'm not normally in favour of unilaterally deporting people from abroad who have settled in Britain, but I'd make an exception for this ghastly pair, photographed yesterday on a "quasi-royal" walkabout in Nottingham.

(Why?  Even Sir Bex and Lady Posh don't turn up unannounced in English cities and glad-hand the locals.  Nor do Ant and Dec, for that matter.)

Hidden Image/Members Only

[RedKettle]

To be fair it was not unannounced, we have known for a week or two. Which I was surprised about considering how much he bangs on about security. Also they were visiting charities he has a long history of working with.

That all sounds like I am fighting his case,  I will go and sit in a dark corner and think about what I have done.

[Jerboa]

I've seen the footage, approx only about 40 public turned up, there was far more journalists. The barriers were those flimsy plastic used on roadworks, and I noticed they had clear plants, the group that handed Meaghan over £150 worth of flowers, her assistant later walked up to them to thank them and said will sort you tickets. Even though this event was advertised locally for days, not many folk bothered.

[badsin]

Fair play to Harry and Megan, visiting St Anne's in Nottingham isn't for the faint hearted....

[RedKettle]

Fair play to Harry and Megan, visiting St Anne's in Nottingham isn't for the faint hearted....

Better than it used to be, but yes not where I would chose to go for a stroll.