#meghan and omid are the real racists

[trexalicious]

Another person, British actress Hannah Waddingham, discussed on Late Night with Seth Meyers what a mean girl TW is from personal experience...

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

What examples did Scobie give that point ti William and his staff being bullies?

Ok, so you have to remember that this is Scobie/Harry's perspective of William and his staff.

William and his team, specifically Christian Jones, using the power of William's position to silence the press about the Rose Hanbury affair. (You can tell Scobie believes he thinks the affair happened and he walks you right down his evidence but stops short of saying those words specifically.)

Kensington Palace using Harry's mental health, or William's concerns of Harry's mental health, to bury negative stories about him and Kate being lazy in the aftermath of Megxit.

Kensington Palace excluding Scobie from their events, press releases, and briefings because he was spending more time reporting on Harry and Meghan.

William not talking to Harry, despite all of Harry's attempts to talk.

William not apologizing to Harry or making amends.

William not inviting Harry on the private plan to Balmoral when The Queen was dying. William refusing to answer Harry's calls, take his calls, or return his messages on that day.

Jason Knauf stepping into, and interfering with, Meghan's lawsuit against the Daily Mail over Thomas's letter. Scobie claims Knauf did this at William's request.

Kensington Palace leading the smear campaign to kick the Sussexes down a notch after the "successful" Australia tour.

Christian Jones hyping up the Cambridges' visit to see Baby Archie and making it sound like it was an hours-long visit when really it was a drive-by at William's request to make the Cambridges look better.

Kensington Palace leaking about Megxit and the Sussexes' plans.

William not investigating, or taking seriously, Harry's concerns about Christian Jones's connection to The Sun.

William awarding Christian Jones for his smear campaigns against the Sussexes by promoting him from 'Head of Communications' to private secretary.

William recommending Knauf for the RVO and doing his investiture.

Kensington Palace aides being sympathetic to the royal reporters who were being called racist by Sussex Sugars in their DMs/on social media.

The palace protecting Melissa Toubati instead of Meghan. (This one is interesting - I'll give you the quote at the end of this list.)

Kensington Palace pressuring ITV to remove Scobie's comments about how William was using Harry's mental health to create positive press for himself from a documentary they were making. The KP complaint was that Scobie's comments were defamatory. Scobie insists they were not. ITV did what KP wanted take these comments out of the broadcast and Scobie is still upset about it.

KP's involvement in a superinjunction about something involving Christian Jones and Dan Wootton/The Sun. (Quotes too, below. This one is weird.)

Melissa Toubati:

When I wrote in detail about [Melissa Toubati]'s departure in Finding Freedom, it was intriguing to see how quickly and thoroughly the Palace defended her, from the Palace's positive briefings all the way to a call I received in March 2021 from a senior Buckingham Palace communications aide, after I reported details of the Sussexes' side of the story on air. 'Omid, I need you to remember that there is a human being at the other end of these claims,' they said. 'Melissa has been very upset...Please remember that words have very real consequences.' Words do indeed have consequences, but it felt slightly rich coming from the same institution that tacitly permitted cruel nicknames and did little to protect one of their own from a deluge of hateful and damaging reporting.

There have long been rumors that Melissa Toubati's departure from the Sussexes' service involves a NDA and possibly a payout. The palace coming down this hard on Scobie for having written about her does give credence to yes, there really is a NDA in place and the terms are serious enough that Buckingham Palace (not Kensington Palace, not Clarence House, but Buckingham Palace) was concerned that Scobie writing about what happened - or whoever his source was - treaded dangerously close to violating it and Buckingham Palace was trying to reel that line of investigation back in to avoid the NDA being nullified.

In other words, Buckingham Palace was stepping in to protect the Sussexes but Scobie is so far up the Sussexes' ass that he missed the forest for the trees.

The Superinjunction--

In the lead-up to the quote below, Scobie is talking about how Christian Jones was offering Dan Wootton exclusives from Finding Freedom, which would lead to Wootton promoting Scobie and endorsing the work, in return for Wootton standing down on the Rose rumors. Scobie says Jones made this offer four times, he shut it down each time, and finally:

It was soon clear my book was not the only carrot Jones would dangle in front of his pal at The Sun. In late June the paper suddenly pulled reporters after the hunt and then dropped digs into the story entirely. "Christian helped make it end," one high-level courtier told me. Curiously, Wootton and the paper--which does not have a reputatino for giving up on potential scoops--shifted their focus to a series of revealing stories about the Sussexes. For Prince Harry and some other Palace staff, including one who was confiding in me at the time, the timing of this shift was dubious. And those suspicions reached fever pitch when, a year later, a report was published by a grassroots news outlet run by a team of media lawyers and former Fleet Street journalists that focuses on the activities of Britain's newspapers. Strict U.K. laws prevent me from repeating the details contained within it.

Why mention the superinjunction in the first place? There's no reason to, unless Scobie is trying to drop hints that he feels Kensington Palace is involved in it somehow. The way Scobie writes this section feels like he wants us to say those specific words so he doesn't get accused or sued.

*******

So some of these are legitimate complaints and I can see how one would think it's bullying, like using the power/prestige of the office to censor criticism (i.e., the 'bully pulpit'). But some of them -- particularly the ones centered on the interpersonal relationship between William and Harry (like William not taking Harry's calls) -- seem petty.

[sassyfrassboss]

Of course Meghan collaborated with Scobie & his book and of course Catherine was their target. Scobie hates that William has essentially barred him from the royal rota & we all know why Meghan hates Catherine. And it’s obvious it’s all fake. There was no mention of 2 racists during the Oprah interview, it was 1 family member & let’s be real, if it were Catherine, MM would have named her there & then. And the only reason they didn’t mention KC was they were still holding out hope for funding.

Oh man is Omid bitter about being kicked off the rota!

He is acting as if William is throwing a temper tantrum by not allowing Omid access...guess Omid forgot the part where he essentially called Catherine a vapid breeding machine.

[celticcrossanon]

Hi Celta, I hope you don't mind me asking, but I'm very interested to hear your thoughts on the book that Omid ( ably assisted by the Harkles, IMO,). I can't believe it was allowed to be published, honestly. Is there more to it than we realise?

Hope you're feeling better x

Hi NZCarol,

I was feeling a lot better and planning to come back and start blogging again this weekend.

Then I got covid (thank you family members) and now I am a miserable mess.

With respect to the book:-

I believe the writing and structure is dreadful, which explains why his first book had a co-writer.

It is very clearly Meghan and Harry speaking through the author, Meghan moreso than Harry imo (although Harry is by no means blameless).

it is also very clearly an outpouring of spite and hatred against the BRF, specifically the King and the Prince and Princess of Wales. The contents are apparently a repeat of all the gossip from social media, so old news and stale news.

I think the three people involved in writing the book (Harry, Meghan and their mouthpiece) wrote it to vent their spite and hatred, and that it was designed to cause as much trouble for the BRF as possible.

I also think that those three people grossly underestimated the ability of the general public to see through their bullshit and to understand exactly what they are doing.

The only real point of interest that has been picked up by the media is the naming of the so-called royal racists as King Charles and The Princess of Wales, which is a) unbelievable given the named people's past history of behaviour b) clearly an attempt to boost sales and c) not to be believed as that story has changed its details every time it was repeated, right from the start with two version being given in the Oprah interview. With both the author and Meghan being proven liars in court, it is difficult to take anything they say with any degree of veracity.

@emmashouldbewriting has explained that the agents handled the English version rights, but the author themself handled the foreign language rights, which means that the version with the names that was translated was supplied by the author

I think the author saying the names was a mistranslation is a lie. That is not how translation works. I think including the names of the royal racists was deliberate, to boost sales and to cause problems for the BRF. I also think that by blaming the translators the author has done a lot of harm to two innocent people.

I think the book is a targeted and deliberate attack on Charles, William and Catherine, and it is designed to make Charles look like a bad king. I have no idea why someone would write this apart from spite and malice. From the title and the blurbs, the author clearly thought that this book would take down the monarchy and finish it for good, but to do that the book needed several things it is sorely lacking, such as coherence, an organised structure, and truly shocking information about corruption backed up by proof instead of stale gossip that has done the rounds many times before appearing in the book.

I think the book was a definite attempt to undermine and discredit the British Monarchy, I think it has failed, and I think that Harry and Meghan will now scramble to disassociate themselves from the book with more lies, if they have not already done so.

The question now is how will King Charles respond to this collection of obvious hatred. Any reaction will be twisted by the author and Harry and Meghan into more publicity, so there is a case for ignoring it (continuing the grey rocking), but there are also the questions of how far is too far and when do you have to take steps to protect yourself and your family.

By itself, I believe the book is nothing more than an incoherent jumble of opinion mixed with old and tired gossip, seasoned with a liberal does of spite and malice, but it is part of a bigger pattern, one of continual malicious attacks on the BRF by Harry and Meghan. Is it time to shut the couple down for good, and if so, how would you do it so it is both decisive and effective? I think those are the questions facing King Charles and his response with either fix the situation for good or male it much worse.

[royaltyspeaking]

The endgame gossip is funny because it’s like is this messy? Yes lol but it also shows how modern monarchies like the BRF are solely there for gossip and as a status of power and colonialism. Harry but especially Meghan leaving is a godsend. And while I do not care if they leak and brief back at the RF, I am excited for them to really get projects and more work going in the new year.

I love when the British press do this thing where they feign outrage over something written about the royals so they devote hundreds of articles analyzing it, when if they actually cared about these supposedly slanderous remarks, they wouldn't give them any coverage. They did the same thing with the Tatler article about Kate. They aren't allowed to cover certain royal stories due to their relationship with BP, but they can cover someone else covering it. It's all intentional. A couple of papers have the naming of Charles as the royal racist in the Dutch edition on the front page of tomorrow's paper, except they can't actually say that Charles was named, so they are making it seem like the story is about Omid fucking up when they really just want to bring up that story again. It's a really interesting thing to watch the power dynamic between the press, the royals, and the public play out in real time.

People can call the Sussex's irrelevant all they want. The fact is that many royal biographies were written this year, yet this is the one that has the entire establishment up in arms. It only further proves that Harry and Meghan will always live rent free in their minds.

[harry-sussex]

She really said "let them sue" as if Meghan and Omid didn't have to backtrack in court under threat of perjury and as if Harry himself never said that the family wasn't racist and that Meghan never said so in the interview 😭😭 Let's be real here pls

Can someone send me a screenshot? I could use a good laugh lol. This is hilarious - the lack of critical thinking is absolutely outrageous and outright comical

[queen-susans-revenge]

Book reviews: Spare and Endgame

At the rate royal "bombshells" drop, one might imagine Buckingham Palace a smoking crater of charred ruins.

But after years of drama, not only do all the grand old piles in the British royal family’s vast portfolio of real estate still stand, but the royal machinery that sustains them isn’t even dinged. And that's because all the smoke and dazzle is part of a calculated strategy, a show cooked up in concert between "the Firm" and the tabloids that profit from royal clickbait. The gossipy headlines generate profit for the papers, sustain public interest in Britain's royal family, and provide a useful way to punish members who don't toe the institutional line.

Prince Harry's biography Spare became the fastest-selling nonfiction book of all time and generated countless media headlines. Omid Scobie's Endgame is currently providing chum for another tabloid feeding frenzy.

But ironically, both books are packed with stories the tabloids won't repeat, because they illuminate too much of the "invisible contract" between palace and press.

In probably the best coverage of Spare, Zeynep Tufekci wrote for the New York Times: "Any close follower of the British media should not have been surprised that after Prince Harry fell in love with Meghan Markle, the biracial American actress, years of vitriolic, even racist coverage followed. Whipping hatred and spreading lies — including on issues far more consequential than a royal romance — is a specialty of Britain’s atrocious but politically influential tabloids.

"People like me, uninterested in celebrities, shouldn’t dismiss the brouhaha around Harry’s memoir as mere celebrity tittle-tattle. He has made credible, even documented claims that his own family refused to stand up against their ugly, sustained attacks against Meghan. In other words, it appears that Britain’s most revered institution, funded by tens of millions in taxpayer funds annually, plays ball with one of its most revolting institutions.

"At the very least, it seems clear by now where some senior members of the royal family position themselves in all this."

Endgame goes even farther than Spare in detailing the often sordid workings of the invisible contract between journos and courtiers. Scobie details how Christian Jones, Prince William's communications secretary, fed negative stories about the Sussexes to Dan Wootton at The Sun in exchange for burying another story that might have been highly damaging to the heir: reports of private dinners and a "rural rivalry" that hinted at an affair between Prince William and Rose Hanbury, the Marchioness of Cholmondeley.

No proof or confirmation of that royal affair was ever provided, because after Jones' intervention, those stories were comprehensively scrubbed from The Sun's website. Instead, the paper was allowed to break the story of what it would call "Megxit": Harry and Meghan's desire to separate themselves from the Firm.

According to both Endgame and a report by the Byline Times, when Harry pursued legal action against The Sun, he was punished by the withdrawal of his official security. (It's worth noting that the disgraced Prince Andrew is still covered by taxpayer-funded security, despite having a much lower threat profile than Harry.) Scobie quotes a source as saying: "I have never seen the Palace circle the wagons like they did with Christian." Byline Times also quotes a source: "They threatened the removal of the funding to try and protect the royal household from a potential courtroom scandal with Jones and Wootton very publicly at the centre."

Why would the Firm pull out all the stops to protect a courtier, even if it meant putting the monarch's own second son in real and immediate danger?

Because Jones is merely a flunky for Prince William, and it's hard to imagine that Jones's press machinations were conducted without the approval of his "principal." Indeed, he wasn't William's only communications secretary to openly collude with the tabloids against Harry and Meghan: another highly placed aide, Jason Knauf, gave testimony on behalf of the Daily Mail in a case brought against it by the Duchess of Sussex, regarding the leak of a private letter. (Despite the attempted sabotage from William's camp, she won that case and was awarded a front page correction and a large settlement.)

The details of all this sordidness — the sacrifice of Harry and Meghan on the altar of tabloid drama, with obsidian knives wielded by Harry’s own closest kin in an attempt to secure more favorable coverage for themselves — forms the narrative backbone of both books. And William isn't the only one implicated in the matter: Queen Camilla emerges as a canny and ruthless operator, buying the rehabilitation of her own image with the coin of gossip leaked against both her stepsons.

"In a funny way I even wanted Camilla to be happy," Harry writes. "Maybe she'd be less dangerous if she was happy."

It's pretty hard to tell if anyone's happy in Britain's royal family. Endgame tells us that Charles is jealous of William, that William is jealous of Harry, and that Harry will probably never get any of the remorse he'd like to see for the way he and his wife were thrown to the wolves. Hating Harry — and even more so, Meghan — has become its own lucrative, self-sustaining industry. Literally hundreds of negative articles are published about the two every day. It's a relentless, often racist onslaught of character assassination that exploits the same culture-war fissions that drove Brexit.

Spare mostly comes off as a good-faith effort from a deeply weird person to explain to the rest of us why he's like this. Endgame isn't as well-written or compelling, but it backs up a lot of what Harry puts into generalizations with names, dates, and specifics. Together, they paint a very damning portrait of two rotten institutions propping each other up at the people's expense.

But by and large, you won't read about that in the press.

[mermaidsirennikita]

where is this kate is a racist stuff coming from, did i miss something?

I mean, technically, the entire concept of the BRF is racist, buuut

Kate and William took part in this whole debacle, which, I'm gonna be really fucking real... you can get educated after this all you want, but you can't tell me that this isn't actively racist behavior. I don't super care who organized it or why, but you would not be able to drag me into this shit.

There have always been rumblings, due to clips of Kate passing by people of color in to shake the hands of white people, etc. However, the big recent deal is that a Dutch translation of Omid Scobie's recent book (and to be blunt, Omid gets info from Harry and Meghan ALLEGEDLY ALLEGEDLY) named Charles and Kate as the royals who asked about Archie's skin tone before he was born, which Meghan mentioned during the Oprah interview. This was apparently an error, as it's not in the English translation, but uhhhh seems unlikely that it's an error that came out of nowhere.

I also think it's pretty clear that she didn't just magically decide to dislike Meghan and be complicit at min in the campaign to distract from bad press about her and Wills by deflecting to MM, so. She took part in big picture racism and small details racism.

[guadalupehesus]

Dear Harry,

I am very concerned about the situation regarding Kate, and let me tell you what the royal family, especially William, should have told you. Apparently, this mission fell to me, because... I'm the only one who can call shit 'shit' while everyone else calls it bad-tasting brown mush for the sake of Protocol. I hope you're eating while reading my post, Harry.

There are rumors in the press that Meghan and her mother resort to black magic, namely, the cult of voodoo. Voodoo is the true reason for the backwardness of the African continent, for the Lord orders us to avoid this sin, because it steals the joys in life, health, happiness, and even life itself, which belongs to another person. The real reason for black magic is envy. Harry, if voodoo was the solution to problems, then why didn't Doria cast a spell on her daughter's moral behavior to protect her from, say, bunga-bunga? If all these rumors about voodoo are true, then, Harry, Kate's problem will not only be your wife's sin, but also your sin. Your fault! Despite prohibitions and warnings, it turns out that you brought witchcraft (called Meghan) to the royal family of Britain, knowing about roumors of black magic of your woman. I hope you won't fall asleep tonight from reading the letter.

Only a weak man is not able to admit his guilt. Therefore, I write at the risk of being branded a racist. For the sake of Meghan's whims, you sacrificed not only the peace of the British nation, but also your Brother's heart. Doesn’t remind you of anything, my Cain? If you don’t care about William, then why did you sacrifice the interests of the Motherland, which literally slavishly bowed to you to the ground, even if all you were capable of was drugs and sex when you were young?*

You wrote in your book that the war reminded you of shooting games.

Hmm... Have you noticed that in American war films, brutal war veterans remember the war in nightmares and then even drink themselves to death. This is how real Men react to murder. Believe me, the same thing happens to Russian soldiers.

Remember who you were in Britain. The guy with the balls, Harry. Next to Meghan you now look like a pathetic person who injects himself with female hormones, manipulating American slogans like “whites are all racists” or even better “give rights to Epstein’s friends in the White House.” The media say that Epstein's yacht was Astagfirallah three times. If BRF were really racist or sexist in the 21st century, then they wouldn't let your wife get within gunshot range!

Harry, your grandmother placed the tiara of great families on Meghan's head. What kind of racism are you two talking about? I wouldn’t even be surprised if these two women in your family ruined the life of Samantha out of envy. But it’s convenient for you to remain silent under your wife’s thumb. I know, Omid will speak for you.

Sincerely Yours,

Asel

*Sorry for my English🙏.

P.S. Your brother needs your courage. Fix everything you've messed up, Harry. Come on, remember how much fun you three had in your youth. You, Will and Kate... These were the simple joys of life.

P.P.S. But actually, these were the precious joys of life.

[royal-confessions]

“If someone in BRF really had concerns about Archie's skin color and made remarks then Harry and Meghan should name them, the fact they are letting entire BRF be branded as racist and clearly not attacking that person directly in order to not be fact checked, proves they are lying.” - Submitted by Anonymous

“The more time passes the less I believe the Sussexes claims of “racist comments” regarding their children. N°1 reason: the fact they didn´t name names. And please, that whole “we won´t mention it because it could be very damaging” is absolute bs. By not mentioning any name they did great damage by casting suspicion on the whole family and managing to drag the Queen into it (despite M&H´s haste to clear her of all charges) forcing her to make a statement seeing how she is head of the family. And the Sussexes knew it would happen this way. Naming the “culprit” would not only have brought the focus solely on that person but also not attracted that much attention if it turned out to be a low member of the fam, as it could most likely be because if it had been Charles or William, does anyone doubt Harry would have fly into a rage straight away and leave the family? Would you put up with your father or brother making disparaging comments about your children and still show up for photo ops etc? But it paid better to have Omid out there suggesting the future kings could be racists and keeping the actual conversation unrevealed by just giving vague details and assumptions in order to make the whole thing look bad. Oh and the “receipts”? Please it’s been months and nothing has been shown in order to prove anything. It was just a lie in order to allow their “supporters” to maintain their claims are real because “they have receipts”. And last but not least: the fact that it was not their intention to quit working for the BRF. If they have given them what they wanted in their initial statement, would they have kept quiet then? Would they have gone to Oprah anyway? Would they have felt it necessary to reveal all the mistreatment etc? Or would they have been able to “heal” in silence if the BRF had said yes to their plans? Were they going to be hypocrites then?” - Submitted by Anonymous

[snifflesthemouse]

This morning, I read an article titled “I went undercover in the sinister world of Meghan Markle hate accounts" posted to Refinery 29. The title gives the impression of a journalist disguising one’s self as a “Meghan Markle hater” for the sake of getting to the bottom of something. However, the content of the article is nothing like its title.

Before I go further, let me stress the importance of perspective. My post isn’t an attack on the article’s author. I’ve never even heard of the author before now, and I’ve no right or reason to attack a perfect stranger because I vehemently disagree with the content of their work. Making assumptions about someone solely on what they write is lazy and sloppy in my opinion. I may be lazy and sloppy, but a hypocrite I try not to be. Therefore, go forward remembering my issues are with content, not creator.

The article starts out explaining the origins of the term “Megxit”. It continues with other hashtags, conspiracy theories, and so on. The article even mentions various media platforms “attacking" the Duchess, as well as crude posts witnessed by the author.

Then the name dropping begins. First with Murky Meg, then Sue Blackhurst, then According2Taz, then Skippyv20 on Tumblr, then Yankee Wally. Eventually, names of Royal Rota journalists are dropped. Then people like Angela Levin and Omid Scobie get mentioned, with interviews from the latter. Instead of an undercover sting, we get a “Who’s Who" of Megxit, a few anonymous Sussex Squad quotations, and Omid trying his best to be fair.

What this article accomplishes is very little when it comes to objectivity. The title is a misconception, and the content essentially paints targets on the backs of the people the author carelessly considers “Meghan Markle Haters". The article reduces anyone who disagrees with Meghan’s behavior as racist, misogynist, conspiracy theorist nutters. So, not only is the content of the article sloppy and lazy, it also lacks originality. We’ve all heard this sad song-and-dance number a million times.

I guess at face value, it becomes very easy, effortless really, for outsiders looking in to reduce an entire group of people with similar views to the basic stereotypes as old as time. It takes very little thought, consideration, or critical analysis, to assume things because they seem to correlate. But correlation is not causation. Just because some people opposing of Meghan Markle’s behavior happen to be racist doesn’t mean every single opposing person is also racist. Again, lazy and sloppy.

Just like assuming every single Meghan Markle fan is also vegan, anti-monarchy, feminist, woke warriors is downright sloppy and lazy. This author has personally interacted with and found common ground with Sussex Squad people many times. Some even became social media friends. They believe what they do, and I believe what I do. We do not agree with most things regarding Harry and Meghan, but we do agree to disagree and be civil.

So, contrary to the article, not all people “hate" Meghan Markle just because they detest her behavior. It’s important to remember extremes exist for all spectrums. Every topic, especially those politicized or made popular by media platforms, have extremes. There is no denying the fact that there are people who hate Meghan Markle because of her ethnicity. Those extremists who hate Meghan for her ethnicity ironically do not discriminate, though. If they hate her for her ethnicity, they hate ALL people of that same ethnicity.

On the flip side of this coin, is the other extreme. The face is the same on each side because the face represents extremism. There is no denying the fact that there are extremists who see anyone opposing Meghan as racists. Extremists who, by default, view every issue in the world through the lens of racism. While racism is a serious problem that deserves no place in society, assuming racism is the root cause of every conflict is also lazy and sloppy. And the same could be said that these extremists do not discriminate, either. If they see race as the only issue for why people “hate" Meghan Markle, they see race as the only issue for most everything.

The problem with both extremes is when everything and everyone is reduced to racial identity, racism only continues to exist. A racist using skin color as a disqualifier perpetuates racism. Assuming racism is the only reason behind disdain for someone only perpetuates racism. Focusing on race or racism allows no room for content of character.

Especially when people defend Meghan Markle being the victim of racism with a racist rule. When opposing critics say “I didn’t even know she was Black" or suggest her physical features, her Hollywood CV, or past involvement with Black causes were nonexistent before she became a duchess or stepped down from being a working royal, the extremists on the other side often resort to the One Drop Rule.

Which means their defense for calling Meghan Markle “haters" racists, even though they might have never knew she was mixed race, is a form of racism. The One Drop Rule was borne from the Reconstruction Era post-Civil War. The “rule" essentially said anyone who appeared to have Black features were considered Black.

The One Drop Rule was the precursor and eventual backbone to Jim Crow Laws of the South. It was used to oppress and segregate Americans based on physical appearance. Considering most people who never heard of Meghan before Harry came along were ignorant to her mixed heritage, it seems grossly negligent to assume race is the real issue. How can one be racist toward Meghan when they didn’t know she was mixed race? This author wasn’t aware of Meghan’s ethnicity prior to it being pointed out (by her and Harry. Repeatedly.), mainly because this author didn’t care.

Like so many, when I first saw Meghan and Harry together for the engagement interview, I was more excited about a fellow American joining the Royal Family. After learning she was biracial, well it was even better. It represented change and progress. Does that mean I saw the Royal Family as racists beforehand? No. It means I saw them as exactly the opposite. Had they been racist, she’d not be a duchess. Her being American and divorced was more a shock to me than being mixed.

The point of all this is there are extremists on every spectrum. For a journalist to say they went undercover, when in fact they did not, to expose the true motives behind Meghan Markle “haters", only to find they did very little to really understand the other side was disappointing. Not surprising, just disappointing. This could’ve been an excellent opportunity for someone to take the reigns and make bridges between two very passionate factions. Instead it became nothing more than a hit piece.

The article fails to acknowledge the possibility – no, the probability – that most people who object to Meghan Markle do so because of how she behaves. The article only considers one possibility behind this “hate". And by calling the objections “hate", the article in turn defines all criticisms as hate speech. Again, unoriginal, sloppy, and lazy.

So here we have it, yet another article grouping and stereotyping anyone who disapproves of Meghan and Harry as racist haters. Yet again, another article name dropping people “deemed racist haters", essentially painting even bigger targets on the backs of those people. Like they didn’t already have enough hate mail. Yet again, another sloppy, lazy, article that never digs below the surface to understand why instead of assuming it.

This isn’t new, it’s just another slop drop from the sensationalism machine that has replaced fair, legitimate journalism. It would be different if there weren’t so many questions surrounding the births. It would be different if Meghan Markle actually lived by the example she so vehemently preaches. It would be different if Meghan Markle would make amends with her own family before telling the world how they should treat people. It would be different if Meghan Markle were a strong woman instead of claiming to be one.

But it’s not different. She hasn’t spoken to her father since two days before her wedding three years ago. She denies the family connections that existed before her fame. She ghosts people once they are no longer of benefit. She preaches equality and universal service while using her title every chance given. She and her husband criticize the “family she never had" while naming their second child after that family’s Matriarch. All of those are behaviors that incite strong emotional responses. Behaviors. And behavior has no racial identity.

A final note… hypocrisy is the main reason people have issues with anything. When one group of people tells another group to stop attacking a public figure, while using assumptions as their crusade call, it’s hypocrisy. One cannot say “if you can’t take the heat, then shut up!” to another without being a hypocrite. When that happens, don’t be surprised when the same exact thing is said back. If Meghan or her fans can’t take the criticism, they shouldn’t participate in it. We all have the right to choose. Just like if I couldn’t handle the criticism, I’d not be writing this.

Life is not fair. The world is a dark, cruel place. When we expect the world to bend to the will of a few, we are setting ourselves above the majority. A strong woman would know this. A strong woman fighting for others would also know that the only person responsible for how one feels is one’s self. External feedback isn’t responsible for internal turmoil. Internal feedback is. That is all.

REFERENCE:

Amoako, A. (2021 June 11). I went undercover in the sinister world of Meghan Markle hate accounts. Refinery29. Retrieved from: https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/2021/06/10518195/megxit-meghan-markle-anti-fandom

[trexalicious]

The Grinch Prince and Duchess Krampus complete with her claws...🤣

[the-empress-7]

Lol Meghan is probably so angry that Oprah or Beyonce or Obama don't get in and continue her racist nattative for her fighting the brf, I'm sure she thought she'll ghost Omid by now and upgrade, ruling Hollywood. she's stuck with a plastic clown and herself (a rushed mini tour) yet she's a cowerd so she can't do much fearing a lawsuit. Sucks when you have no friends and everyone can see how vile you are....her real karma

"I used to think the worst thing in life was to end up all alone. It’s not. The worst thing in life is ending up with people who make you feel all alone” Robin William

[ingek73]

Stifling, Toxic and Racist—Duchess Meghan Never Had a Chance at The Palace

Royal editor-at-large Omid Scobie sounds off on the outdated practices and attitudes within the royal family that left the Duke and Duchess of Sussex forced to make a change.

BY OMID SCOBIE

MAR 10 2021, 3:20 PM EST

I remember the feeling of frustration well. My work on an extensive biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom, was coming to an end. After hearing countless stories from multiple people close to the couple about how they felt unsupported and unprotected by the institution of the monarchy, it was time to address the matter with the palace side. A chance for them to respond.

“This is nonsense. … We did absolutely everything [for Meghan],” the senior aide told me over the phone. I asked for examples. “Everybody welcomed her, and she was given all the support she needed,” they continued. I asked again. “They forget how accommodating we were when it came to navigating the duchess through her first steps [as a working royal],” the aide added, somewhat curtly. I had several conversations like this over the weeks that followed—each party, be they from Clarence House, Buckingham Palace, or Kensington Palace, for the most part seemingly baffled by the Sussexes’ grievances. Finally, I took what I had and moved on.

Well over a year has passed since these calls, and the full severity of Harry and Meghan’s situation has finally been laid bare. Sitting in front of Oprah Winfrey, the duchess tearfully opened up about her darkest days as a working member of the royal family. Unprotected, undefended, and left to face a near-daily barrage of hateful commentary and negative stories, Meghan revealed how her circumstances had, at times, seen her virtually stuck indoors for weeks on end. Lunch with friends could have momentarily lifted her spirits, but social outings were dismissed by royal family members and aides who said it would be better to lie low. Her image was “everywhere right now,” they told her. Her isolated existence stood out in particular to her worried mother, Doria Ragland, who during a summer 2019 visit to Frogmore Cottage was surprised to discover that neither she nor her daughter was able to go out into Windsor town to pick up coffees. “You’re stuck in here,” Doria told Meghan at the time, according to a source.

The Oprah interview was the world’s first time hearing Meghan describe the true toll of the palace’s “no comment” policy when it came to dealing with inaccurate press coverage. One report that caused Meghan particular upset was the November 2018 allegation that she’d made the Duchess of Cambridge cry during a children’s bridesmaid dress fitting for her Windsor Castle wedding. Though the palace knew the claims were untrue (and that it was, in fact, Kate who made Meghan cry), Meghan was repeatedly told that it would not be possible to set the record straight, despite it being a story that fed into a stereotype-laden narrative. Other royal family members were often afforded more sympathetic support when it came to dealing with inaccurate press (officials even issued a statement to deny Kate’s use of Botox in July 2019), but both Harry and Meghan felt they did not have access to this same privilege.

The couple’s exasperation came to a head in January 2020, when Kensington Palace urgently requested that Prince Harry cosign a statement against an “offensive” newspaper report stating Prince William “constantly bullied” the Sussexes before their decision to step away. “Well, if we’re just throwing any statement out there now, then perhaps KP can finally set the record straight about me [not making Kate cry],” Meghan emailed an aide, asking why side of the story public image was never considered important to anyone. But, as with many requests made by the couple, her suggestion was ignored. The Duchess of Cambridge, she was told, should never be dragged into idle gossip.

Meghan’s state of well-being deteriorated as the institution refused to defend or protect her during her toughest moments. Talking to Oprah, Meghan revealed that her mental health was so fragile during her pregnancy that she “didn’t want to be alive anymore.” She turned to senior staff—including the palace’s own HR department—but her plea for help in January 2019 was repeatedly shut down. It’s not a good look for the family, she was told. Even friends who wanted to help her or speak up in her defense were regularly reminded by palace aides to keep quiet. As the cruel commentary, racist attacks, death threats, and negative tabloid stories piled up—and the institution continued to ignore the problem—Meghan later likened the experience to a friend as “death by a thousand cuts.” Her reference to an ancient Chinese execution method was no coincidence.

For the millions around the world who watched Meghan share her story, some of the experiences shared were perhaps all too familiar. Princess Diana revealed in several interviews that she considered suicide during her marriage to Prince Charles and spoke candidly about her battles with bulimia and mental distress, both of which were ignored by the institution of the monarchy. Sarah, Duchess of York, was also open about how the pressures and loneliness that came with palace life led to her own struggle with eating disorders.

When Kate quickly found public adoration as the Duchess of Cambridge, the palace would proudly tell members of the press that lessons from the past had been learned. “There has been a concerted effort to ensure that history never repeats itself,” one senior staff member working for the Cambridges told me in 2014. Yet, here we are in 2021, with a very real image of Britain’s oldest and most revered establishment once again engaged in neglect and gaslighting, and dismissing mental health.

When Kate quickly found public adoration as the Duchess of Cambridge, the palace would proudly tell members of the press that lessons from the past had been learned. “There has been a concerted effort to ensure that history never repeats itself,” one senior staff member working for the Cambridges told me in 2014. Yet, here we are in 2021, with a very real image of Britain’s oldest and most revered establishment once again engaged in neglect and gaslighting, and dismissing mental health.

This time, however, race—or more specifically, racism—plays a major role. Harry and Meghan’s revelation that a member of the royal family (not the queen or Prince Philip) had expressed “concern” over how dark the skin of the queen’s great-grandson might be, left many, including Oprah herself, openmouthed. But for those familiar with the institution—which on Sunday celebrated the diversity of the Commonwealth realm’s population of 2.4 billion—it comes as less of a surprise. This is an establishment that only last week briefed The Times of London that Meghan wanted to be royal “the Beyoncé way,” and that the help offered to her included establishing the queen’s Black equerry (a senior attendant, if you will) as a “mentor.” Princess Michael of Kent’s ignorance regarding wearing a blackamoor brooch during her first encounter with Meghan is a reminder that even racial sensitivity can be lacking within the family. An establishment that, as Meghan herself explained, has yet to learn the difference between rude and racist press coverage. The stiff upper lip, no matter how painful the attacks, was expected to remain impossibly rigid at all times.

The palace has continually proven itself to be unable to empathize with any person who crumbles under the pressures of its outdated and unreasonable expectations.

But when does forced silence turn into abuse? Ignoring gossip and drama may fall under the royal family’s famed (but questionable) “never complain, never explain” mantra, but expecting the victim of racism to remain voiceless while sections of the press call her “ghetto,” “straight outta Compton,” and “un-royal” borders on complicit with the attacks. As does refusing to learn how to identify the existence of the very racism that fuels them.

If it’s not considered appropriate to acknowledge racism or racial ignorance when aimed at a mixed-raced senior royal, then how should the 54 countries of the Commonwealth and its predominantly Black, Brown, and mixed population feel about the realm’s figurehead belonging to an institution that claims to celebrate “diversity” but in practice appears to uphold white supremacy? And if the lack of awareness Harry described to Oprah is true, then were race-related public duties, including Prince William recently calling out racism in British soccer and Prince Charles speaking out about racism in architecture in 2000, simply performative? It’s hard to forget that across the full lineup of working royals, all failed to acknowledge last year’s Black Lives Matter movement, which saw just as much protesting across the United Kingdom as the United States.

A brief, 61-word statement shared on behalf of the queen by the palace on March 9 revealed that the family is “saddened” by how challenging recent years have been for the Sussexes. But with the note also admitting that the family are somehow only just learning of the “full extent” of the couple’s experiences, isn’t it all a bit late? With yet another “commoner” leaving the House of Windsor emotionally battered and bruised, the palace has continually proven itself to be unable to empathize with any person who crumbles under the pressures of its outdated and unreasonable expectations. A glass-half-full view is that recent events could perhaps serve as a catalyst for change (and I hope they are). But given Harry’s own admission that his family is trapped within a “system” so fearful of the British press and public that they’re often unable to live up to their own ideals, is it actually time for us to just finally set them free?

[princessmadafu]

That Book (excuse the long post)

I didn't want to jump into the fray without first thinking over the published extracts of FF and the various critiques and synopses in the press. I'd just like to send huge thanks to YankeeWallee and everyone that YW herself thanks for the collated screenshots of the excerpts and RoyahNikkah's review. I'll do what the rest of you do and state here that these are my personal opinions and anything quoted comes under "fair usage", etc. Long live free speech!

My over-riding reaction is, what an absolute pile of lies, lies and more lies. Starting with Scobie's sources, of which he says there are at least two per nugget of information. I believe most of the book has come directly or indirectly from MM herself, and that any "sources" have MM's blessing, sanction or outright order to disclose. FaceTiming in the bath? How would Scobie know? Unless he was in the bath with her, this can only have come from herself or the friend being FaceTimed. There is too much of a highly personal nature for it to be Scobie's own investigative work. So there's the first lie, straight from the weirdly-toothy Sussexy horse's mouth; of course she collaborated!

Some of us had our reservations right from the start of Harry and MM's relationship, but we were prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt and join in the welcome of a biracial, divorced American actress. Right-wing, left-wing, a-political or not-royally-bothered, we all thought, Let's give the pair a chance to see what they can do.

How about this article from Spiked on the engagement of Harry & MM from 2017:

Meghan Markle: Generation Woke's Princess Diana - spiked

"...look no further than the fawning response to the engagement of Prince Harry and American actress Meghan Markle – one of those rare occasions in which both the Telegraph editorial team and the identity-politics set erupted in simultaneous celebration."

How quickly the celebration wore off as the pair of them squandered our goodwill. Another article from Spiked from July 2019, less than two years later, is harsher, when we've all been insulted, preached at and condemned as racists by PH&MM:

Meghan Markle is the worst kind of snob - spiked

"With the possible exception of a few sad social outcasts, no one has a problem with the fact that Meghan’s mum just happens to be black. No, Meghan is criticised for being snobby, elitist, hopelessly out of touch and possessing all the self-awareness of a flea. It’s not Meghan’s skin colour that annoys people, but the fact that she thinks nothing of donning an outfit that costs more than most people in the UK earn in a year and then getting her minders to order the public not to take photos of her. [...] There are heaps of reasons for people not just to criticise Meghan and Harry, but to ridicule their hypocrisy and puncture their pomposity. And not one involves the colour of Meghan’s skin. Meghan comes in for criticism because she is the worst kind of snob who condescends to tell others not just what to do, but also what to think. The fact that she is biracial is completely irrelevant. Of course, there is an obvious solution for Harry and Meghan if they do not like the public attention and criticism. Harry could denounce his claim to the throne. They could give up the titles, move out of the palaces and fund their own lifestyle. I can’t for the life of me imagine why they don’t."

Prescient, no? Six months later and they announce they're off. She played him like a fiddle. The raptures she went into over Botswana and wanting the spend the summer? Did she feed his fantasies of moving to Africa permanently? How strange that Africa became Canada, which then became Los Angeles? Strange my perky little bottom! She had this planned all along. I don't know if PH is with her over there, but she certainly seems to be feeding the illusion that she is now Hollywood Royalty. If she couldn't cut real Royalty, she definitely won't cut the LaLaLand version which is a lot less restrained in voicing its opinions of jumped-up wannabes. Especially the Markly ones who cut, dump, run and show no loyalty or staying power.

The following points, in no particular order, are mostly from an assortment of DM writers and comments from members of the public.

"The book claims the so-called ‘old guard’ tried to undermine the couple and ‘were concerned that the global interest in and popularity of the Sussexes needed to be reined in’." A little self-aggrandisement here, possibly? Global interest, maybe, of the rubber-necking car crash variety, but global popularity? When was that, exactly? Royal staff are all well aware that the purpose of the Royals is to support HMTQ; that is their job. If the Sussexes needed reining in at all, it was because they weren't doing their job properly.

"Harry and Meghan believed ‘few inside the palace were looking out for their interests’ and felt that most courtiers could not be trusted with their sensitive information." Ditto, the courtiers' job is to look out for the interests of HMTQ; PH&MM's job was to look out for the interests of HMTQ, not themselves.

"They believed that these ‘men in grey suits’ were stifling their attempts to launch their initiatives, and when they tried to air these frustrations ‘the conversations didn’t lead anywhere’." I mean, come on! PH is 6th in line. He knows that. There is no "they" involved here - it's all MM again, isn't it, thinking she's more important because she's more popular and she famously gets what she wants... She thought she could snap her fingers and make whatever she wanted happen. She ignored the hierarchy and the protocols, and probably (I suspect) got dimwit Harry believing that she knew best, and that together they could change the world.

"One source said Harry felt that some of the old guard at the palace ‘simply didn’t like Meghan and would stop at nothing to make her life difficult’." I can well believe that staff at the palace didn't like her - she showed her true colours quite early on - but deliberately making her life difficult? I suspect this is what MM told Harry. Twisted the truth, naturally. I'm guessing she made a few ridiculous OTT demands, or wanted some unworkable project, and the staff, knowing their jobs as they do, tried to point out the flaws in her ideas, prevent her making a fool of herself, or otherwise politely protect her from herself. Goodness knows, she made a fool of herself often enough, barging in front and all that...

"The book concludes that Meghan was ‘totally foreign’ to this group of advisers, who ‘could sometimes be even more conservative than the institution they guarded’." They were guarding an institution with over a thousand years of history from someone with neither understanding of nor respect for British history, the Monarchy, or the duties of the RF; and she made no effort to learn.

"Another insider said: ‘The fact is that Meghan was welcomed with open arms and everyone did their best to offer their help about how to navigate such a tricky public role – advice she would often choose to ignore." The arrogance of the woman! And she was welcomed. She just believed that she knew best.

"Omid Scobie said Meghan’s high-profile career as an actress and the fact that she was a divorcee left her ‘ripe for exploitation’." High-profile career, mwah! Actress, mwah! Divorcee, so what? Charles and Camilla are both divorce/es, Anne is a divorcee, so is Andrew, and a whole bunch of other lesser royals. As for being ripe for exploitation, I think we all know how this panned out and MM wasn't the one being exploited! Far from it. She milked every opportunity and opening her new title and her new husband could bring her.

"During one of their final engagements as senior royals, Meghan was ‘purposefully snubbed’ by Kate in front of a global TV audience, the authors claim." Well now, where to start on this one? MM threw a hissy fit because she wasn't allowed to walk in the procession with HMTQ, C&C and DDoC. The DDoC decided to appease MM by pulling out of the procession and taking their seats. Now I don't know what DDoC thought about that but I can just imagine them comparing MM's behaviour with that of their own beautifully behaved kids. I can just imagine them thinking thank God she'll be gone soon! I doubt there was any purposeful snubbing at the service but MM has no manners and no idea how to behave, not even in church. The DDoC are too well brought-up to "carry on" in a place of worship, nor would they lean across seats for a happy little chat, just a quick turn round for a friendly word with Edward and Sophie immediately behind them before the arrival of C&C and HMTQ. Churches are not places to be gossiping and grinning inanely, and you definitely don't push your way through the chairs when the service is over! She is so rude and ill-mannered.

"The book claims Meghan and Kate’s ‘cordial but distant rapport’ was apparent when the pair appeared alongside each other at the King Power Royal Charity Polo Day last summer." I don't remember the dates exactly, but I should think by this time DoC was well and truly fed up with MM's shenanigans; the doe-eyes she'd been pulling at PW, the rumours she and the SS had been fanning about PW and une petite liaison with a long-time friend... Cordial but distant was probably the best MM could hope for at this stage; DoC was hardly about to play Happy Families with the troublemaker.

"The couple were dismayed when no photograph of them and their son Archie was displayed during the Queen’s Christmas speech last year." It was quite clear that the photos on display represented the direct line of succession, from HMTQ's father through to her great-grandson - five generations of the Monarchy. I truly believe that MM wanted to "modernise" the RF to such an extent that PH would be elected King! With MM at his side, dripping in all the jewels she could get her greedy mitts on! I realise it must be hard for PH to get to grips with his status as "Pretty Much Relegated Former Spare", but she must have been really feeding his insecurities if she got him upset about the absence of a photograph.

"Prince Harry was the first to say 'I love you' in his relationship with Meghan Markle, with friends revealing the couple were 'immediately obsessed' with each other, according to the latest extract of a bombshell biography." Oooh, how would Scobie know something as intimate as this? Immediately obsessed with each other, I can well believe; MM with his status, title, money, the palaces, the jewels... and she reeled him into her fantasy world with lies and perfectly posed KamaSutra yoga until he was obsessed with this chameleon woman, at the same time both mother-figure and hot, sexy, adoring, sophisticated, intelligent, humanitarian animal lover. Oh the lies, the lies; "Will you walk into my parlour, said the Spider to the Fly."

"They enjoyed a romantic dinner, with staff taking great pains to ensure their privacy, whisking them in through a staff entrance usually used to bring in fish discreetly." This is their second date at SoHo House, and again, how would Scobie know little details unless MM had told him herself? I like the hint of shade by the writer noting that the entrance was used to bring in fish discreetly - there's definitely something fishy about MM!

How about some comments from DM readers?

"Every single shameless self-serving tabloid "leak" and publicity stunt she has orchestrated has backfired specularly. Hence why Harry has gone from beloved military man and active working Royal to a national embarrassment within two short years! Her efforts at aggressive self-promotion are no match for her lack of talent or perspective in that area. She could have heeded advice from other, more dedicated Royals, but No. Meghan knew better and decided that she was deserving of instant worship fit for her 'celebrity' expectations. The Duchess of Cambridge has earned respect over years with quiet dedication to her causes. Meghan felt entitled to all the glory instantly, and was clearly slighted to learn that respect is not something to be commanded. She is a culture vulture with no respect or understanding of the very people that she promised to represent." [Jace T Adams]

"The narrative of the relationship is laughable. Everyone knows they first met in Canada when Harry was there for Invictus. He needed a girl for the night and Meghan was arranged for him. She must have been impressive as they had a date the next day and the rest is history." [Lady M]

"You can't work with someone you don't trust and these two have proven untrustworthy." [ellegrav]

I have no inside information on any of above, but people better placed than I am are making similar judgments on the contents of FF; people who've spent their working lives following and reporting on the RF.

"The Queen’s former press secretary Dickie Arbiter told the Mail: ‘I think it has their fingerprints all over it. We had a similar scenario in 1992 when Diana swore blind she hadn’t helped Andrew Morton and yet a year later it came out that she had indirectly helped him so history is repeating itself. ‘There are too many things that we have seen in the serialisation that could only come from the horse’s mouth, like deciding to gatecrash Sandringram when they landed from Canada."

And Jan Moir: JAN MOIR on the Meghan and Harry biography that has put ...

What did the pair of them want or expect? Top billing, it seems. What is remarkable is that Harry’s whole life and entire upbringing have been devoted and calibrated to him being a prince. Surely he understands how it works? Surely he could have explained the system to his vexed new bride? Primarily, that being royal is a form of active service, with ranks and a hierarchy so uncomplicated that schoolchildren throughout the realm understand the line of succession and its importance to the Windsors — and to us.

And Robert Hardman: ROBERT HARDMAN: Harry and Meghan are ... - dailymail.co.uk

Yet Finding Freedom is a struggle against protocol and seating plans. It is based on the perceived unfairness of a pecking order which has governed — and preserved — the monarchy for 1,000 years.

We can't all be wrong!

[megandzane]

I wonder if Harry felt guilt because I think it was mostly his choice not to play the game with the tabloids in exchange for better coverage for him and Meghan. There was a new interview with Omid Scobie and he confirmed that Meghan at least entertained trying to invite the Royal Rota for tea, but Harry shut it down. I think he made the right decision for the long run, but I couldn't imagine how he felt when he saw how that decision nearly pushed his wife and unborn child off the edge.

I think he knows there was no winning for them. The fact that they were unwilling to play the game probably didn’t help, but I don’t think it changed much. From the start these right wing outlets made their stance on Meghan clear, they saw her as subhuman. Harry saw those early headlines. Bad press for access and access for positive press has always been their strategy. But that doesn’t always work when someone has been commoditized and dehumanized like Meghan was, or when people just want to hate / be racist. The episodes of GMB where piss was going especially hard on her were their highest ratings. Regardless of what that creepy photographer Arther said , Meghan sitting down with rota would change nothing in her coverage. People wanted reasons to hate Meg without having to admit the real reason.

But again, Harry knows this game doesn’t always work and can be risky. Diana tried that, she gave them access hoping they would go easier on her and leave her alone. She’s mentioned how betrayed she felt when she gave them everything they wanted and nothing changed. They just got more ferocious. Harry decided they wouldn’t be playing this game.

And add on the fact that they were always going to be thrown to the wolves to make the heirs look good regardless of if they played the media’s games or not. That has been Harry’s whole life. Negative stories of him have been used to prop up his brother and father.

He made the right choice keeping them away from Meghan.