Megan and Harry again!

tickingbird thank you

tickingbird

Trisher Instead of advising others to turn off their tv’s or switch channels when H&M appear why don’t you switch/avoid said threads when they appear? You and other ‘non interested /don’t care’ posters seem to dive in en masse practically salivating whenever there’s a thread about them and it’s not to comment on them it’s to attack posters who are interested.

tickingbird is it attacking anyone to advise them to switch channels or turn off the TV when something they find either uninteresting or disturbing comes on?
I assume I am still free to comment on whatsoever I choose to?
As for not caring well I'm afraid I recognise that M&H whatever they do or say will have very little effect on my every day life or indeed the life of most posting on GN. So there are things I care about much more, but that doesn't mean I shall limit my posts in any way.
Amazing that such a simple piece of advice could cause so much offence.

trisher you posted an untruth about Katharine Kent when I posted the facts you ignored them, you are not the fair poster I once thought you to be

trisher

Mind it took the RF driving the Duchess to breakdown for her to get out. She blames returning to royal duties after the death of her child for her experiences. www.thefreelibrary.com/I+lost+my+baby+at+nine+months+..+it+devastated+me%3B+The+Duchess+of...-a061054120 I suppose if Meghan had broken down everyone would be sorry for her.

This is my post Annie and her words are
Until now, most people believed she lost the child when it was a five- month-old foetus, as reported at the time. Only the Duchess's family and closest friends knew the truth - that the longed-for child was a fully- developed baby for whom she had already carefully chosen a name.

The Duchess recalls: "A couple of months later, I had a bad patch.

"I suffered from acute depression for a while. I think it would be a fairly rare individual who didn't cave in under those circumstances.

"The baby was born dead at nine months. It was a horrible thing to happen."

In a bid to escape her grief, the Duchess - whose other children, Lady Helen, Lord George and Lord Nicholas - were then aged between 13 and six, threw herself into her royal duties. But she now thinks that was a mistake.

She says: "It's a fairly natural reaction, isn't it, to want to get back into an ordered pattern of life to stop yourself thinking too much.
It seems to me to be a very damaging thing for a family to do, hide the extent of someone's grief by concealing the true facts and then to allow someone to return to duties without ensuring they are properly supported is asolutely neglect. You may think she wasn't driven to a breakdown by them but they certainly did nothing to help prevent it.

Grammeretto
Are you alone in liking Meghan and Harry.? Your liking based on ?.

trisher Katharine lost two babies, one was aborted at 5 months, one was full term, stillborn named Patrick .

And she was not driven out of the family, she attends family functions and still lives in Kensington Palace

The first paragraph “Until now most people believed..Only the Duchesses family knew.” is what the journalist wrote, not Katherine’s words and was an inaccurate price of reporting.

I do remember both her termination and the still birth. She announced the second pregnancy late, to be sure that all was well with the baby, which led to some people thinking that the pregnancy had not gone to term because of the time scale. Sadly there was a stillbirth.

She has never said that she was made to go back to work or that she was not supported. She has always taken responsibility for her own decisions and has never blamed anybody else.

She has immense dignity and integrity and, frankly, to have her tragedy exploited untruthfully to justify your own prejudices shows a want of fundamental humanity.

So are you saying then trisher that the RF should have disclosed this very personal and tragic time in the Duchess's life?

It was for her and her alone to choose when and if she ever wanted the full extent of what she'd been though known. What could the RF possible have done to prevent her breakdown? Deny her the right to return to her royal duties when that was what she wanted?

You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel, once again on this thread using this to attempt to discredit the RF. You have no idea how much or how little support the RF gave at this time.

trisher didn’t even know there was the loss of two babies, or perhaps did , but chose to combine both and speak of one baby.

And blaming the royal family for a decision made by a 42 year old woman

The information about the abortion performed because of Geman measles is in the rest of the article if anybody cares to read it so yes I did know. The information about the still born child was released as a 5 month miscarriage. Now I may be pretty tough and. I may be pretty inconsiderate but nothing like as inconsiderate as anyone, be they royal, base or from any other situation, who allows a woman to throw herself back into work without proper counselling after such experiences. So saying it was her decision is irrelevant. The RF as so often is quoted calls itself "The Firm" and as such had a certain responsibility towards her. The fact that she attends RF functions has nothing to do with it. She had a breakdown, she was workng for them. She stopped working for them afterwards. She is allowed to do that, and as I said perhaps some of you would be more accepting of Meghan if she had had a breakdown, because that's the only way you can leave the Firm.

Doesn’t work anymore trisher

Waffle anyone?

.... Oh, sorry... I'll come back later...

No thank you NellG had too much waffle today

I assume I am still free to comment on whatsoever I choose to

Trisher As long as you extend that privilege to everyone else and stop trying to stymie all comments you don’t agree with!

I like Meghan and Harry, I hope they and their children live a happy life. I don’t need to know all the details.

I don’t dislike the Royal family, though I would like to see the institution abolished or at the very least considerably reduced. I’m opposed to the idea of a monarchical system.

Blossoming which members of the royal family would you want to see stand down ?

tickingbird

*I assume I am still free to comment on whatsoever I choose to*

Trisher As long as you extend that privilege to everyone else and stop trying to stymie all comments you don’t agree with!

This is weird-page 32 from tickingbird
why don’t you switch/avoid said threads when they appear?

Who is doing the stymiing ?

I thought Megan had left the firm trisher only it's hard to tell because she continues to use her marriage to H as a vehicle for own ends.

She could learn a lot from the Duchess' of Kent beginning with taking responsibility for the choices she has made and the consequences.

I haven't seen anyone post that the D of K wasn't allowed to stop working for the RF. I haven't seen anyone post that M isn't/wasn't allowed to stop working for the RF, not in any of the 33 pages that make up this thread.

It is her and H's behaviour that is questioned, commented upon and criticised not their decision to walk away or as H puts it "step back".

You don't know whether or not the D of K had proper counselling, whether it was offered or the offer was refused.

It adds nothing to your argument to ask other posters if some would be more accepting of M's and H's decision if she'd had a breakdown. She hasn't had one.

Neither Edward the V111 or Wallace Simpson had break downs and both 'left the firm'.

Smileless2012

I thought Megan had left the firm trisher only it's hard to tell because she continues to use her marriage to H as a vehicle for own ends.

She could learn a lot from the Duchess' of Kent beginning with taking responsibility for the choices she has made and the consequences.

I haven't seen anyone post that the D of K wasn't allowed to stop working for the RF. I haven't seen anyone post that M isn't/wasn't allowed to stop working for the RF, not in any of the 33 pages that make up this thread.

It is her and H's behaviour that is questioned, commented upon and criticised not their decision to walk away or as H puts it "step back".

You don't know whether or not the D of K had proper counselling, whether it was offered or the offer was refused.

It adds nothing to your argument to ask other posters if some would be more accepting of M's and H's decision if she'd had a breakdown. She hasn't had one.

Neither Edward the V111 or Wallace Simpson had break downs and both 'left the firm'.

This might make more sense if posters just accepted the status quo and left the two to get on with their lives but they don't. They've left the Firm. They had a right to do so. Leave them alone.
If you don't like them stop watching them. Stop bothering about them.
And the breakdown question is quite relevant H having spoken about his mental health.
You really can't use the Windsors as an example. They were exiled and deliberately isolated. It's entirely another example of how awful the RF can be.

To peddle the idea that the RF should have stopped Katherine Kent from doing what she wanted ie return to duties is so strange. An adult woman deciding her own life choices. Maybe they suggested she should wait a little longer, who knows? Can you imagine the outcry if it was decided Harry and Meghan were too mentally vulnerable to be "allowed" to go to USA and pursue their celebrity careers.

trisher “proper counselling* was practically unheard of when Katherine Kent had her miscarriage/stillborn baby, you are looking at the situation with today’s perspective. Apart from the RF, she had her own family and relations to turn to and we do not know what support she may have had on that side.
It was her decision as she says and pointing the accusatory finger solely at the RF is unnecessary.

As I said trisher Katherine has always taken responsibility for her own decisions and has always said they were her decisions.

This was a thread about Harry and Meghan. You were entirely wrong to bring Katherine’s tragedy into it. And even more wrong to negate her decisions by saying they were not her own.

She doesn’t deserve that contempt for her integrity.

The Duke of Windsor was isolated by the royal family trisher ?

He abdicated , the lot fell to his brother who never expected to be king, who was shy, had a bad stammer , his elder daughter, a child , was suddenly heir,

The Windsors greeted Hitler and you condemn the royal family ? Unbelievable. Waste of time discussing it with you.

Can you post the link from the 70’s where you read there was a cover up of the Kent’s baby?

... They've left the Firm. They had a right to do so. Leave them alone

We are quite happy to leave them alone, but will they leave us alone?
Three front page pictures on the Daily Telegraph, numerous articles inside, an announcement on the radio (in icy tones) that Harry had to leave Britain because his mental health was suffering due to his treatment by the British Press, and a clip of his 'interview with another close friend' James Corden, in the middle of the ten o'clock news.
None of these things do I wish to see, hear or read about but to escape them I have scroll past the pictures and articles, switch off the radio and mute the television, but why should I have to do this?
This from a couple who constantly declare they want their privacy and sue to preserve it, then bombard us with at present daily bulletins about themselves, which presumably will continue for the next week.
The Duke of Windsor behaved badly towards his country and the royal family: 'nothing matters but our happiness,' and his behaviour provoked a constitutional crisis. He left without a backward glance, and my understanding from my parents and their generation was that most of the country was glad to see the back of him; read Chips Channon and Frances Donaldson. When a King abdicates of course he has to live in exile.
He chose his path of action in the same way as the Sussexes have done, but no barrier was put up to prevent Harry from marrying Meghan; he was given everything he wanted but clearly it wasn't enough.
Time for them to leave us alone.

Sorry to detract from the thread for a moment.
Can someone tell why some posters are posting their comments in boxes.?
Personally I find it detracts from the flow of the thread & elongates the thread unnecessarily.
Is there a good & valid reason for this ?