The Battle of the Brothers

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:27 pm

A new book says Prince William cut his household from his brother after an angry conversation over Meghan Markle.

Robert Lacey's book Battle of the Brothers uncovers what may have happened during the brothers' falling out.

A source close to the Sussexes said "William threw Harry out", according Lacey.

It's understood this happened after staff claimed Meghan "played the victim, but was a bully" and William told his friend he thought she had an "agenda". The book also states William told his brother to take things slow.

Staff are quoted in the book saying Meghan "played the victim, but was a bully" and treated staff poorly.

Both Harry and Meghan have denied any claims of bullying.

William was left feeling "hurt" and "betrayed" by the rift, telling a friend his wife Kate "had been wary of Meghan from the start".

The book also said he felt Meghan was "stealing his beloved brother away from him" and that she was "hostile" towards the Firm, planning to leave from the very beginning.

Lacey's book also quotes a Kensington Palace courtier who said: "Meghan portrayed herself as the victim, but she was the bully. People felt run over by her. They thought she was a complete narcissist and sociopath — basically unhinged."

William had to put the monarchy ahead of his brother, and stopped seeing it as his duty to protect the younger sibling, while Harry was equally angered his brother believed the accusations being fired at his wife, the book claimed.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/new-book-claims-prince-william-cut-household-from-harry-over-bullying/L7BO2VAJB3GA37AOUFRIZQ6PAI/

by Maddog Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:03 pm

Sounds like William saw up close, what many have felt to be the truth.

We all have watched friends or relatives get involved in relationships where every bell and whistle was going off. Their new love basically had a red flag popping out of their head that everyone but the person "smitten" could see. Often, they figure it out but then stick around to try to prove they were right about the problematic partner.

I know the bookies in London have bets on almost anything. Is there an over under on how long these two stay married?

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:54 pm

Maddog wrote:Sounds like William saw up close, what many have felt to be the truth.

It is strange how only the black one doesn't belong.

by Syl Mon Jun 21, 2021 4:01 pm

Maybe if the 'black one' hadn't been a bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning....she would have. Wink

by eddie Mon Jun 21, 2021 6:48 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Sounds like William saw up close, what many have felt to be the truth.

It is strange how only the black one doesn't belong.

Diana wasn’t black. She was very white.

Or do you think perhaps she thought like a black and those racist Royals could sense it?

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:23 pm

Syl wrote:Maybe if the 'black one' hadn't been a bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning....she would have.

You are simply restating the question. Why do all 'black ones' get called "bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning"?

BTW, they were less loquacious in the south...they used to just call them 'uppity negras'. But the same point is being made...they really don't know their place. Twisted Evil

by Syl Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:28 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:Maybe if the 'black one' hadn't been a bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning....she would have.

You are simply restating the question. Why do all 'black ones' get called "bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning"?

BTW, they were less loquacious in the south...they used to just call them 'uppity negras'. But the same point is being made...they really don't know their place.

Don't you think it odd that when she first came on the scene she was really well received in the UK? Presumably she was the exact same shade then.

To add...have you noticed that once again it's only you who brings colour into a thread? Even in OP where you quote the article, her colour isn't mentioned, only you seem to think her colour is the reason she is disliked.

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:39 pm

Syl wrote:Quill, you are obsessed with colour.

I didn't start it. Blacks became objects of obsession in 1619, in Virginia, and not to their liking.

https://time.com/5653369/august-1619-jamestown-history/

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/first-african-slave-ship-arrives-jamestown-colony

by gelico Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:54 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:Maybe if the 'black one' hadn't been a bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning....she would have.

You are simply restating the question. Why do all 'black ones' get called "bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning"?

BTW, they were less loquacious in the south...they used to just call them 'uppity negras'. But the same point is being made...they really don't know their place.

not ''all'' quill, just the ones that are

but you are such an extreme racist you wouldn't be able to see that

Evil or Very Mad

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:56 pm

Syl wrote:once again it's only you who brings colour into a thread?

Well, this is after all a conservative site. Racism is not a favorite topic among conservatives.

Yet conservatives - like the royals - tend to single out blacks as persona non grata in their midst. The pattern is clear. Somehow, miraculously, blacks end up 'on-the-outs' in any such setting. And lo...here we are once again.

I'm only raising the subject, but it must be considered to be fair.

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:59 pm

gelico wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

You are simply restating the question. Why do all 'black ones' get called "bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning"?

BTW, they were less loquacious in the south...they used to just call them 'uppity negras'. But the same point is being made...they really don't know their place.

not ''all'' quill, just the ones that are

but you are such an extreme racist you wouldn't be able to see that

Why are you changing the subject to an argument ad hominem? Have you lost confidence in your point?

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 9:07 pm

eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

It is strange how only the black one doesn't belong.

Diana wasn’t black. She was very white.

Or do you think perhaps she thought like a black and those racist Royals could sense it?

Diana had a domestic, marital dispute with a member of the royal family. White people get divorces, too. Do you see a link between her and the troubles of the royal family today?

by gelico Mon Jun 21, 2021 9:08 pm

Original Quill wrote:
gelico wrote:

not ''all'' quill, just the ones that are

but you are such an extreme racist you wouldn't be able to see that

Why are you changing the subject to an argument ad hominem? Have you lost confidence in your point?

lol, i'm not changing the subject. i am very much to the point.

your question was,,,

''Why do all 'black ones' get called "bullying, self-serving, agenda ridden go getter from the beginning"?

and I answered it

pointing out your racism isn't an ad hominem attack

merely an observation that your inherent racism will always cause you to just lump ''all'' black people into one convenient box

hey ho, not my problem, move on

Razz

by Original Quill Mon Jun 21, 2021 9:21 pm

gelico wrote:pointing out your racism isn't an ad hominem attack

merely an observation that your inherent racism will always cause you to just lump ''all'' black people into one convenient box

hey ho, not my problem, move on

Yes, move on indeed. I'm really interested in this book, and the contention that William had issues involving his brother's wife, prompting him to make the break.

by Syl Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:52 pm

Harry has made a big deal of complaining that his brother advised him not to rush into the relationship, that's good advice for any young hot headed man, especially one in the position Prince Harry was in.

That's the sort of advice any caring brother may give.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 3:47 am

Syl wrote:Harry has made a big deal of complaining that his brother advised him not to rush into the relationship, that's good advice for any young hot headed man, especially one in the position Prince Harry was in.

That's the sort of advice any caring brother may give.

Or...he shared his family's belief: a black should not enter into the royal family.

I'm wondering...some royal women have been filmed bare-breasted, one royal man was allegedly in a romantic hook-up with an underaged girl, which is illegal...and a notorious human trafficker...aren't there more important sins than loving a black woman?

No matter...Harry's safe in a friendly community now.

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:10 am

Fuck me that dude is obsessed with people's race.

Give it a fucking rest man.

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:12 am

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:Harry has made a big deal of complaining that his brother advised him not to rush into the relationship, that's good advice for any young hot headed man, especially one in the position Prince Harry was in.

That's the sort of advice any caring brother may give.

Or...he shared his family's belief: a black should not enter into the royal family.

I'm wondering...some royal women have been filmed bare-breasted, one royal man was allegedly in a romantic hook-up with an underaged girl, which is illegal...and a notorious human trafficker...aren't there more important sins than loving a black woman?

No matter...Harry's safe in a friendly community now.

He's safe?

Did that manipulative woman already leave him?

by eddie Tue Jun 22, 2021 9:40 am

Maddog wrote:Fuck me that dude is obsessed with people's race.

Give it a fucking rest man.

by Syl Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:45 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:Harry has made a big deal of complaining that his brother advised him not to rush into the relationship, that's good advice for any young hot headed man, especially one in the position Prince Harry was in.

That's the sort of advice any caring brother may give.

Or...he shared his family's belief: a black should not enter into the royal family.

I'm wondering...some royal women have been filmed bare-breasted, one royal man was allegedly in a romantic hook-up with an underaged girl, which is illegal...and a notorious human trafficker...aren't there more important sins than loving a black woman?

No matter...Harry's safe in a friendly community now.

William and Harry's mum was, by all accounts, in love with a Pakistani man, heart surgeon Hasnat Khan. Do you seriously think that had she lived and they had married William would have disapproved because the man was not white?

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:00 pm

Maddog wrote:Fuck me that dude is obsessed with people's race.

Give it a fucking rest man.

I didn't start slavery. Southerners did. Now you don't want to talk about it? I don't blame you. Wink

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:08 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Fuck me that dude is obsessed with people's race.

Give it a fucking rest man.

I didn't start slavery. Southerners did. Now you don't want to talk about it? I don't blame you.

Meghan is hardly a fucking slave. She has more wealth than everyone on this forum combined.

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:10 pm

And southerners didn't start slavery either. It predates any Europeans being on this continent. Moses was born to slaves you obsessed old bastard.

by gelico Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:13 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I didn't start slavery. Southerners did. Now you don't want to talk about it? I don't blame you.

Meghan is hardly a fucking slave. She has more wealth than everyone on this forum combined.

she also had a very privileged upbringing (courtesy of the dad she no longer talks to)

Cool

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:23 pm

And, the royal fucking family isn't made up of southerners.

‍�

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:30 pm

Syl wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Or...he shared his family's belief: a black should not enter into the royal family.

I'm wondering...some royal women have been filmed bare-breasted, one royal man was allegedly in a romantic hook-up with an underaged girl, which is illegal...and a notorious human trafficker...aren't there more important sins than loving a black woman?

No matter...Harry's safe in a friendly community now.

William and Harry's mum was, by all accounts, in love with a Pakistani man, heart surgeon Hasnat Khan. Do you seriously think that had she lived and they had married William would have disapproved because the man was not white?

One theory says that Diana might have been killed to avoid that decision - ie, by preventing a mixed marriage. I make no such judgments, but it has to be looked into. There are racist elements in the royal family, and there is the possibility that those elements also got to William.

That's why I think that this book is important...it gets us a little bit closer to whence this attitude comes. We now know that the animosity flowed out of the mouth of Will. Where did he get the idea? Was it Kate...a rabbit hole that the book suggests? Or, was it someone of the previous generation?

This whole Meghan was mean to us thing has the smell of an ‘after-the-fact-invention’. Maybe if we get closer to the source, we can have a discussion over the real reason with that person. I think that's a fair approach. Maybe Will thought he was doing the aboveboard thing, but who pushed him? And why?

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:36 pm

Maddog wrote:And, the royal fucking family isn't made up of southerners. �

No. They are Germans...inventors of ideas about racial hierarchies.

by Syl Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:37 pm

Where does it mention Meghan is black or indeed anything about race in the OP which outlines what the book is about?

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:43 pm

Syl wrote:Where does it mention Meghan is black or indeed anything about race in the OP which outlines what the book is about?

It doesn't. The book is conspicuous by its absence...amid the obvious. The book only tells us that, whoever was the source, s/he worked through William.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:48 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I didn't start slavery. Southerners did. Now you don't want to talk about it? I don't blame you.

Meghan is hardly a fucking slave. She has more wealth than everyone on this forum combined.

Slavery was only the start. We now deal with Jim Crow laws, like the one proposed in Texas that would do away with democracy rather than let white supremacists lose control.

The iterations are many, but it's all the legacy of slavery...which I didn't start. Evil or Very Mad

by Syl Tue Jun 22, 2021 4:50 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:Where does it mention Meghan is black or indeed anything about race in the OP which outlines what the book is about?

It doesn't. The book is conspicuous by its absence...amid the obvious. The book only tells us that, whoever was the source, s/he worked through William.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:04 pm

Syl wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

It doesn't. The book is conspicuous by its absence...amid the obvious. The book only tells us that, whoever was the source, s/he worked through William.

It was in the Oprah interview. The royal family doesn't talk about it...why not? Cool

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:12 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:And, the royal fucking family isn't made up of southerners. ️

No. They are Germans...inventors of ideas about racial hierarchies.

Does MeAgain know about her husband's racist lineage?

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:31 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

No. They are Germans...inventors of ideas about racial hierarchies.

Does MeAgain know about her husband's racist lineage?

That's a curious question...one that calls into the discussion whether it's even Harry's lineage. I would also ask about what the Germans have against him, and how they were able to enlist William against his brother??

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 5:46 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Does MeAgain know about her husband's racist lineage?

That's a curious question...one that calls into the discussion whether it's even Harry's lineage. I would also ask about what the Germans have against him, and how they were able to enlist William against his brother??

Maybe MeAgain is part German and she's part of the conspiracy?

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Jun 22, 2021 6:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:Harry has made a big deal of complaining that his brother advised him not to rush into the relationship, that's good advice for any young hot headed man, especially one in the position Prince Harry was in.

That's the sort of advice any caring brother may give.

Or...he shared his family's belief: a black should not enter into the royal family.

I'm wondering...some royal women have been filmed bare-breasted, one royal man was allegedly in a romantic hook-up with an underaged girl, which is illegal...and a notorious human trafficker...aren't there more important sins than loving a black woman?

No matter...Harry's safe in a friendly community now.

Quill, that allegation by Megan that the Royal family had expressed concerns about “the colour of Archie’s skin” continues to be promoted by her friends, aides, advisers, publicity teams et al among her coterie of sycophants as an example of racism because it suits their and her book - or more likely the Hollywood blockbuster that is no doubt already in the planning stage.

One perfectly logical explanation - though one that departs from the publicity-seeking celebrities’ creed of “don’t let the facts get in the way of a nice juicy story” - is that the one who raised the matter was Anne, The Princess Royal and arguably one of the most sensible, diligent and dedicated member of the family.

But she was not talking about the colour of his skin but his nationality, and the potential impact on the future of the House of Windsor and, therefore, the crown and the headship of the United Kingdom state and Commonwealth. Remember the Duchess of Windsor and the abdication?

He is, theoretically at least and in a relatively low position in the order of succession, a contender for Kingship…yet he is, as I understand it, an American. That would never be acceptable to the Constitution or to the vast majority of people of Great Britain.

That is not a racial issue; it is a constitutional issue.

Of course Anne’s reasons and reasoning were totally unacceptable to the Sussex’s publicity machine or, indeed, to both barking mad wokies and our home grown republicans, with the result that they have been suppressed in both the mainstream and social media.

As I said, don’t let the facts get in the way of a nice juicy story.

by Maddog Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:47 pm

This is where MeAgains father's family is from. So ethnically she is part German.

Lampersloch was historically a German-speaking town. In the middle ages it was part of the lordship of Lichtenberg, a small German territory within the Holy Roman Empire. By marriage it later became part of the County of Zweibrücken-Bitsch, another German territory. In 1570 it became part of the County of Hanau-Lichtenberg, which was also a German territory. Immediately afterwards, the ruler, Philipp V of Hanau-Lichtenberg, made the territory officially Lutheran.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 22, 2021 8:49 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Or...he shared his family's belief: a black should not enter into the royal family.

I'm wondering...some royal women have been filmed bare-breasted, one royal man was allegedly in a romantic hook-up with an underaged girl, which is illegal...and a notorious human trafficker...aren't there more important sins than loving a black woman?

No matter...Harry's safe in a friendly community now.

Quill, that allegation by Megan that the Royal family had expressed concerns about “the colour of Archie’s skin” continues to be promoted by her friends, aides, advisers, publicity teams et al among her coterie of sycophants as an example of racism because it suits their and her book - or more likely the Hollywood blockbuster that is no doubt already in the planning stage.

One perfectly logical explanation - though one that departs from the publicity-seeking celebrities’ creed of “don’t let the facts get in the way of a nice juicy story” - is that the one who raised the matter was Anne, The Princess Royal and arguably one of the most sensible, diligent and dedicated member of the family.

But she was not talking about the colour of his skin but his nationality, and the potential impact on the future of the House of Windsor and, therefore, the crown and the headship of the United Kingdom state and Commonwealth. Remember the Duchess of Windsor and the abdication?

He is, theoretically at least and in a relatively low position in the order of succession, a contender for Kingship…yet he is, as I understand it, an American. That would never be acceptable to the Constitution or to the vast majority of people of Great Britain.

That is not a racial issue; it is a constitutional issue.

Of course Anne’s reasons and reasoning were totally unacceptable to the Sussex’s publicity machine or, indeed, to both barking mad wokies and our home grown republicans, with the result that they have been suppressed in both the mainstream and social media.

As I said, don’t let the facts get in the way of a nice juicy story.

That's one theory, Fred. But I don't think it's the real story.

No one is worried about order of succession. That was last a concern during the reign of Queen Anne, daughter of King James II. There is a broader concern.

There is no single focus...the real concern is the tainting of the family. The monarch is nothing anymore, we have ministers and judges who do the real decision-making in government. But the family is an institution, like a monument or the flag.

Germans in the modern era are well aware they are not Tudurs or Stuarts. They are from off-site, as far as royal families are concerned. If they are not English, not Scot, and royal families of the continent are no more, what are they? And, what does mixing in a black mean to this otherwise groundless, country-less royal family?

It's curious that the UK has recently enacted an Act permitting females to have direct succession. Under the old succession laws, dating back more than 300 years, the heir to the throne is the first-born son of the monarch. Only when there are no sons, as in the case of the Queen's father George VI, does the crown pass to the eldest daughter. Now, with the Royal Marriages Act, William and Kate have a daughter who will step in should, god forbid, anything happens to young George.

by Vintage Tue Jun 22, 2021 9:15 pm

Royal families have always been a mix of different nationalities, that was the point, alliances.
I find it odd a lawyer should argue theories 'out of the blue' instead of known facts. There are already children who you would call black in the line of succession to the British throne.
Its not always about race, I am not going to say someone is wonderful when they patently aren't just because they are black and equally I can say the same for someone white. Black or white can be good or bad, the constant 'its because he /she is black' 'white privilege' 'BLM' is really not good enough and is causing division, which seems to be what some people want to happen.

by Original Quill Wed Jun 23, 2021 4:20 pm

Maddog wrote:This is where MeAgains father's family is from. So ethnically she is part German.

Lampersloch was historically a German-speaking town. In the middle ages it was part of the lordship of Lichtenberg, a small German territory within the Holy Roman Empire. By marriage it later became part of the County of Zweibrücken-Bitsch, another German territory. In 1570 it became part of the County of Hanau-Lichtenberg, which was also a German territory. Immediately afterwards, the ruler, Philipp V of Hanau-Lichtenberg, made the territory officially Lutheran.

The issue is not where Meghan is from, or her influence. She is a nobody, and has no power to control anything in Britain. She doesn't care, and she has turned her back on the UK. She only shows up for royal pageantry, for her husband, and otherwise shows no interest. She is American, and can't wait to get back to Santa Barbara.

We have several milestones facing us. Sure, several of you are hoping for a Harry and Meghan break up, but I'll bet that sooner than that Elizabeth II will die. Elizabeth is 95 now, and has just lost her mate; so often the surviving spouse is soon to follow, god forbid.

When Charles is crowned, I believe you will see the real consequence of a German monarch. No longer will it be the quiet patience of a gentle, rational queen, raised by a Scottish mum; rather, some shocking beliefs will come to the surface. There is an unresolved rift in the monarchy, going back to Edward VIII (who detested being told what to do). I know monarchs no longer dictate the course of politics, but they still do determine the tone of the culture. I'll bet the reign of Charles will be interesting.

by Maddog Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:16 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:This is where MeAgains father's family is from. So ethnically she is part German.

Lampersloch was historically a German-speaking town. In the middle ages it was part of the lordship of Lichtenberg, a small German territory within the Holy Roman Empire. By marriage it later became part of the County of Zweibrücken-Bitsch, another German territory. In 1570 it became part of the County of Hanau-Lichtenberg, which was also a German territory. Immediately afterwards, the ruler, Philipp V of Hanau-Lichtenberg, made the territory officially Lutheran.

The issue is not where Meghan is from, or her influence. She is a nobody, and has no power to control anything in Britain. She doesn't care, and she has turned her back on the UK. She only shows up for royal pageantry, for her husband, and otherwise shows no interest. She is American, and can't wait to get back to Santa Barbara.

We have several milestones facing us. Sure, several of you are hoping for a Harry and Meghan break up, but I'll bet that sooner than that Elizabeth II will die. Elizabeth is 95 now, and has just lost her mate; so often the surviving spouse is soon to follow, god forbid.

When Charles is crowned, I believe you will see the real consequence of a German monarch. No longer will it be the quiet patience of a gentle, rational queen, raised by a Scottish mum; rather, some shocking beliefs will come to the surface. There is an unresolved rift in the monarchy, going back to Edward VIII (who detested being told what to do). I know monarchs no longer dictate the course of politics, but they still do determine the tone of the culture. I'll bet the reign of Charles will be interesting.

So having ancestors from Germany, China or Botswana is irrelevant.

Welcome to the 21ist century you reprobate.

by Original Quill Wed Jun 23, 2021 6:34 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

The issue is not where Meghan is from, or her influence. She is a nobody, and has no power to control anything in Britain. She doesn't care, and she has turned her back on the UK. She only shows up for royal pageantry, for her husband, and otherwise shows no interest. She is American, and can't wait to get back to Santa Barbara.

We have several milestones facing us. Sure, several of you are hoping for a Harry and Meghan break up, but I'll bet that sooner than that Elizabeth II will die. Elizabeth is 95 now, and has just lost her mate; so often the surviving spouse is soon to follow, god forbid.

When Charles is crowned, I believe you will see the real consequence of a German monarch. No longer will it be the quiet patience of a gentle, rational queen, raised by a Scottish mum; rather, some shocking beliefs will come to the surface. There is an unresolved rift in the monarchy, going back to Edward VIII (who detested being told what to do). I know monarchs no longer dictate the course of politics, but they still do determine the tone of the culture. I'll bet the reign of Charles will be interesting.

So having ancestors from Germany, China or Botswana is irrelevant.

People from Botswana are hardly irrelevant to Texans. Nor are they irrelevant to the royals in the UK. It is curious that the royals put up with all the antics of Andrew's wife Fergie, or Edward's wife, Sophie...but they are white, aren't they? Then, here comes Megs, and all hell breaks loose. Thank god for Santa Barbara. Twisted Evil

Welcome to the games, redneck.

by Maddog Thu Jun 24, 2021 3:07 am

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

So having ancestors from Germany, China or Botswana is irrelevant.

People from Botswana are hardly irrelevant to Texans. Nor are they irrelevant to the royals in the UK. It is curious that the royals put up with all the antics of Andrew's wife Fergie, or Edward's wife, Sophie...but they are white, aren't they? Then, here comes Megs, and all hell breaks loose. Thank god for Santa Barbara.

Welcome to the games, redneck.

People from China or Germany are not irrelevant to Texas either.

Not that it matters.

by Vintage Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:09 am

What antics? Elaborate please. I don't remember them ' putting up with anything'

by Syl Thu Jun 24, 2021 11:31 am

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

So having ancestors from Germany, China or Botswana is irrelevant.

People from Botswana are hardly irrelevant to Texans. Nor are they irrelevant to the royals in the UK. It is curious that the royals put up with all the antics of Andrew's wife Fergie, or Edward's wife, Sophie...but they are white, aren't they? Then, here comes Megs, and all hell breaks loose. Thank god for Santa Barbara.

Welcome to the games, redneck.

Sarah Ferguson was banished from royal life after her misdemeanours, even today, almost 30 years later, she has never been forgiven by senior Royals and the 'establishment.,

by Maddog Thu Jun 24, 2021 3:15 pm

Syl wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

People from Botswana are hardly irrelevant to Texans. Nor are they irrelevant to the royals in the UK. It is curious that the royals put up with all the antics of Andrew's wife Fergie, or Edward's wife, Sophie...but they are white, aren't they? Then, here comes Megs, and all hell breaks loose. Thank god for Santa Barbara.

Welcome to the games, redneck.

Sarah Ferguson was banished from royal life after her misdemeanours, even today, almost 30 years later, she has never been forgiven by senior Royals and the 'establishment.,

Maybe she's not German enough. MeAgain doesn't have that problem. Rolling Eyes

by Fred Moletrousers Thu Jun 24, 2021 6:18 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Quill, that allegation by Megan that the Royal family had expressed concerns about “the colour of Archie’s skin” continues to be promoted by her friends, aides, advisers, publicity teams et al among her coterie of sycophants as an example of racism because it suits their and her book - or more likely the Hollywood blockbuster that is no doubt already in the planning stage.

One perfectly logical explanation - though one that departs from the publicity-seeking celebrities’ creed of “don’t let the facts get in the way of a nice juicy story” - is that the one who raised the matter was Anne, The Princess Royal and arguably one of the most sensible, diligent and dedicated member of the family.

But she was not talking about the colour of his skin but his nationality, and the potential impact on the future of the House of Windsor and, therefore, the crown and the headship of the United Kingdom state and Commonwealth. Remember the Duchess of Windsor and the abdication?

He is, theoretically at least and in a relatively low position in the order of succession, a contender for Kingship…yet he is, as I understand it, an American. That would never be acceptable to the Constitution or to the vast majority of people of Great Britain.

That is not a racial issue; it is a constitutional issue.

Of course Anne’s reasons and reasoning were totally unacceptable to the Sussex’s publicity machine or, indeed, to both barking mad wokies and our home grown republicans, with the result that they have been suppressed in both the mainstream and social media.

As I said, don’t let the facts get in the way of a nice juicy story.

That's one theory, Fred. But I don't think it's the real story.

No one is worried about order of succession. That was last a concern during the reign of Queen Anne, daughter of King James II. There is a broader concern.

There is no single focus...the real concern is the tainting of the family. The monarch is nothing anymore, we have ministers and judges who do the real decision-making in government. But the family is an institution, like a monument or the flag.

Germans in the modern era are well aware they are not Tudurs or Stuarts. They are from off-site, as far as royal families are concerned. If they are not English, not Scot, and royal families of the continent are no more, what are they? And, what does mixing in a black mean to this otherwise groundless, country-less royal family?

It's curious that the UK has recently enacted an Act permitting females to have direct succession. Under the old succession laws, dating back more than 300 years, the heir to the throne is the first-born son of the monarch. Only when there are no sons, as in the case of the Queen's father George VI, does the crown pass to the eldest daughter. Now, with the Royal Marriages Act, William and Kate have a daughter who will step in should, god forbid, anything happens to young George.

Point of order on the Queen being “nothing anymore” mi’ learned friend…the Monarch could still theoretically refuse to sign the Royal Assent that is a requirement for the final passage of parliamentary Acts. That has never been done in modern times so far as I know, but it is one of statutory rights of a constitutional monarchy and would empower the crown to block the introduction of new legislation.

In practice, of course, it would take the agreement and assent of the Privy Council and would certainly cause a constitutional crisis that would have to go to the Supreme Court and our second, revisionary, chamber the House of Lords. Then we would be back to the days of Cromwell.

I also suggest that you are wrong about no-one being worried about the succession; you underestimate the degree of interest, loyalty and affection for the royal family among we Brits. Just how many republicans (not your sort of Republicans) do you think there are here? A very small proportion of our politicians are abolitionists and the organisation Republican are nothing more than a mouthy pressure group of “activists” who are no more of any consequence that an irritating Jack Russell terrier that has taken an interest in a trouser leg.

by Original Quill Thu Jun 24, 2021 6:53 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:Point of order on the Queen being “nothing anymore” mi’ learned friend…the Monarch could still theoretically refuse to sign the Royal Assent that is a requirement for the final passage of parliamentary Acts. That has never been done in modern times so far as I know, but it is one of statutory rights of a constitutional monarchy and would empower the crown to block the introduction of new legislation.

In practice, of course, it would take the agreement and assent of the Privy Council and would certainly cause a constitutional crisis that would have to go to the Supreme Court and our second, revisionary, chamber the House of Lords. Then we would be back to the days of Cromwell.

I also suggest that you are wrong about no-one being worried about the succession; you underestimate the degree of interest, loyalty and affection for the royal family among we Brits. Just how many republicans (not your sort of Republicans) do you think there are here? A very small proportion of our politicians are abolitionists and the organisation Republican are nothing more than a mouthy pressure group of “activists” who are no more of any consequence that an irritating Jack Russell terrier that has taken an interest in a trouser leg.

I know, Fred. But the UK has been backing out of monarchy and into democracy for so long, that the opening is almost too little, too late. As you say, it would create a constitutional crisis.

This is one of those loose ends that you get when you don't write a contract down - or, that is to say...write a constitution down. However, the British people have lived too long under democracy, to reimpose an absolute monarchy now. The best you could hope for is another civil war...which may be what is facing the US right now.

by Sponsored content