Harry & Meghan biography

There are some new pictures and video of baby Archie, now he has passed his 1st birthday. He looks a dead ringer for Harry now, can't see much of Meghan in his looks, but children do change. Anyone else seen the pictures?

Grany
A short article written by Paul Flynn, a Labour MP for The Guardian, is hardly conclusive proof that the royals are or are not helpful in supporting charities. Many people on the left, and I think we can assume that a Labour MP is left leaning, would like to see the monarchy replaced by a republic, therefore an article written by a Labour MP is unlikely to say anything at all in support of the royals. This article is merely a muted attack on the royals, and unsurprisingly printed in The Guardian, well known for it’s support of the left. In other words, the article is biased and does nor present a balanced view.

Bridgeit
I would hope that Harry, along with any other newly weds, is happy. However the expressions we have seen since his marriage suggest otherwise. What would have happened if he had not married Meghan we will never know, but we do know that William warned his brother to take his time since Harry hardly knew Meghan. I’m sure you will be familiar with the expression marry in haste, repent at leisure.

"If some posters are considered ‘rather catty’ for criticising Meg, the very same can be said of those who criticise posters ."

No, Anniebach it is completely different. Those who criticise the posters on here are seeing direct opinions, first off. There are some horrible, nasty attitudes coming across on here. Criticising "Meg" - in fact absolutely slamming her on her, really horribly - is about slating a woman you only get to know about via the biased press, a woman you know so very little about. I think a lot of you need to have a serious word with yourselves. Remember Caroline Flack? So very little time ago? Whatever happened to "Be kind"?

Bugger - "expressing" opinions, not "seeing."

Oops, no, as you were - "seeing" is fine!

Paul Flynn. ? ? ? ? he referred to Corbyn as ‘our glorious leader’, he was always a republican, I say ‘was’ because
he is dead

It is not 2010,

Aha Annie, thank you, I didn’t notice the ‘proof’ was that old. Makes it even more ridiculous now.

Maddyone, I most certainly am familiar with that saying, and I certainly did for over 20years, did I listen No, do I regret it No, there is no point judging yesterday’s decisions by today’s circumstances. Live it & move on , live on, ( obviously there is a lot of pain involved, pain if you do , pain if you don’t, ‘ ‘choose your poison ‘ as the saying goes.

Well I absolutely agree with that Bridgeit. I’m sorry to hear you had such an unhappy marriage and hope you’re much happier now.

?

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8292509/Meghan-Markle-reads-book-Archie-Save-Children.html

Cute!

Paperbackwriter. Good post. You like me, probably, are ambivalent about Prince Harry and his wife, and like me have no access to inside knowledge of them or their thoughts.
I just don’t get how this viciousness Is so popular on GN.

I would not waste my money or my time on the book. The sheer effrontery of the pair astonished me. They complain about being hounded by the press then flee to a city that is paparazzi central. They are still in the newspaper and on social media. I suspect Ms Markle's plan was Hollywood from the beginning. As for 'Finding Freedom' they haven't escaped a war torn country and traversed the globe. I was hoping a global pandemic would keep them out of the news but nothing will stop the pair in their search for fame and wealth.

Thanks for the link merlotgran, I skimmed through it and found the comment that M's choice of book shows her desire to teach Archie "to see both sides of an argument" astounding!

Again, the star feature is ? Meg

I watched the video to give her the benefit of the doubt, but have to say that the book seemed incredibly confusing for a child, let alone a baby of only one. First it's a duck, then the same picture is a rabbit , and she was posing more for the camera (lots of eye contact with the camera) than connecting with Archie.

I'll probably be shot down in flames but I thought the book was dull as ditchwater for a one year old..........

Lots of eye contact with the camera

Poor Archie. Even his books are 'Woke'

Going back to the OP, there's an interesting comment by Camilla Tominey, who writes about the RF for the Telegraph, in which she says that Omid Scobie, one of the co-authors, may have inadvertently compromised Meghan’s case by telling Good Morning America that she intended the contents of the letter to be made public.

Oops!

Yes, oops

The book is bound to be highly critical of the tabloids but

'If Meghan always intended the letter to be made public, according to the man supposedly writing “her” side of the story, was it ever really private?'

I suppose it’s her right to published it but not her fathers, poor
man

NO.