Latest on Harry and Meghan

I am sad for the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh, that they did not bring Archie. He must have changed so much since they last saw him, I'm sure they must be disappointed as they love Harry, and would take pleasure in seeing his little son.

The Duke is not in good health, and the reality is he will probably never see Archie again. It would have been a kind gesture to bring him this time.

I feel that is cruel, but not unexpected.

The first poster to quote scripture was GracesGran , I did not
bring Christianity or faith into this thread , I did reply with a
quote.

I don't think that having the title Duke or Duchess means someone is royal, maddyone. Having the title HRH does, but they will not use them officially.

I do think they could have given more notice of their intentions, particularly as they probably had appointments scheduled in their diaries for months, possibly a couple of years, ahead.
It seemed all rather sudden and an unexpected move to the family but obviously planned with their new American advisers well in advance.

Annie,
Please don’t worry, most of us know that you are a compassionate lady who has religious faith. And no, you didn’t bring religion into this discussion, but Christian’s are just as entitled to express a view on Meghan’s behaviour as anyone else.
seacliff
I agree with you that it is really unkind to have not brought Archie with them to see both his grandparents and great grandparents. In addition providing security for both Archie in Canada and his parents in Britain has cost an extra £50,000. But why should they worry, they’re not paying for it! The sense of entitlement is truly unbelievable.

Anniebach The first poster to quote scripture was GracesGran, I did not bring Christianity or faith into this thread , I did reply with a quote.
That's what I thought Annie. I was astonished that GracesGran seems to have suddenly had a miraculous conversion and turned all holier than thou after so many personal attacks on other posters in the past.

Thank you

‘It all seemed rather sudden........but obviously planned with their new American advisers well in advance.’

Quite! It was extremely underhand. If they wanted a private life they should not have accepted a very expensive wedding paid for by Prince Charles and the general public. Meghan should not have accepted the title HRH and neither of them should have accepted the titles Duke and Duchess. Duke is a royal title as it can only be conferred on a child of a Prince. They also should not have accepted Frogmore Cottage nor any public funding for renovations. Equally they should not have accepted any royal duties at all. They could have modelled themselves on Princess Anne’s daughter who works for her living and does not perform royal duties. If they wanted to be truly independent they would not avail themselves of daddy’s funding, or security paid for by the state. In fact they are quite wealthy enough to have lived a private life and rarely been seen in public as Princess Anne’s children rarely are. No need at all for cosying up to self important celebrities and giving talks to earn themselves millions, they could have had a truly private life if they had wanted one. Is that what Meghan wanted? To disappear into obscurity? Mmmmm, I think not!

Chestnut
Perhaps the Gracesgran we have on this thread is her stunt double?

Chestnut
I have been truly amazed by some of the comments to posters on the H+M threads, and they have all come from posters who are known for their personal attacks on other posters, usually on political threads.

Not quarrelling maddyone but there are Royal dukedoms and non royal, hereditary dukedoms, like the Duke of Norfolk.

You don’t have to be royal to be a duke or duchess, you just have to own a duchy?

Thanks Eglantine and Callistemon, I genuinely thought a person had to be a prince’s child to be given a Dukedom, I read it somewhere. Anyway you’ve both corrected me, so thanks.
No, no quarrrels. I value the friendship, support, and lively discussion from the majority of posters. There’s always one or two though aren’t there? ???

They both disregarded the traditions of the royal family and
they disregarded the people .They choose to act in a way which draws more attention to themselves.

When there is a new baby born in the royal family people knit,
buy presents for the baby, they wait on pavements for hours outside the maternity hospital waiting for news, waiting to see
the proud parents, the new baby.

Not this couple, we had the announcement that there would be no announcement, followed by a summons to the press to
attend Windsor Castle for an announcement.

Then the first photograph of the baby ? His toe.

I wouldn’t stand for ten minutes to see the royals but so many
do turn out, surely these people deserve to be considered.

GGMK3 I cannot think of any reason why the Sussexes could not have made a graceful and thought through withdrawal from public life. I doubt if their family would have had any objections.

Might you not just contemplate that this could be a lack of imagination on your part rather than joining in the verbal stoning?

I have just seen the photograph of H & M taken last night, the couple look so happy and relaxed. We only know what is fed to us by the media.

I hope they are as happy as they look.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Wow, message deleted, my first!

Congratulations janipat , I admit I am puzzled why it was deleted.

I am particularly enjoying their Insta-worthy photos on the BBC www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51762553

Who is janipats personal comment deleted and Gracesgrans comments allowed to continue.

I can’t see any difference.

Somebody explain please.

Jamipat When dealing with certain people it’s a sign you’ve hit the nail on the head and their only redress is to get the comment deleted or label you an ist or a phobic of some sort. As their arguments don’t stack up they can’t cope with being challenged.

Eglantine they have to be reported. I have stated this several times. GNHQ have told me they DO NOT monitor forums and posts are only deleted when someone reports you - school snitch like. Draw your own conclusions.

Oh , I see. thanks.

I didn't know that tickingbird about posts having to be reported, thanks for the info. I did wonder why GNHQ had found it so heinous, when I thought it was a fairly mild comment, especially compared to lots of others.

Yep, it’s when someone doesn’t like your comment and they complain. I didn’t see your comment so no idea what you said janipat, now I’m intrigued.