The Harry and Meghan fuss

[Mr Kobayashi]

@Octavian why are you quoting the first letters patent as a response? I have posted the exceptions that came after this.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

No, I’m saying that you can‘t prove that she implied it. You can argue it, but cannot categorically claim she has done so.

Lots of papers and clicks have been sold based on your insinuation though and clouded a lot of peoples’ judgements.

Isn't there a rule about not posting libellous coments?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

@Octavian why are you quoting the first letters patent as a response? I have posted the exceptions that came after this.

Are you suggesting he hasn't taken the whole context into consideration?

Doesn't sound like him.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Isn't there a rule about not posting libellous coments?

Not sure, but Ric and his servants do bang on about thousands and thousands of pounds from time to time.

 

[M18CTID]

Meghan said the conversations around skin colour happened in tandem with conversations around titles.

I think if the skin colour conversation did happen then it was a separate incident and didn’t affect Archie’s title, that’s my point!

Harry said it wasn’t a member of his immediate family and hasn’t named the person.

It was obviously a minor royal in that case and wouldn’t affect Archie’s titles.

So Meghan bringing that conversation is disingenuous as to why Archie wasn’t a Prince.

There we go, we got there.

Can you please point me to a link where Harry said this? Plenty of rumours - and I stress the word rumours - abound that it was, cough cough, the current King who said it so it'll be interesting to see if Harry has said something that absolves his dad and all other immediate family members.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Are you suggesting he hasn't taken the whole context into consideration?

Doesn't sound like him.

Bit out of character isn't it.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Bit out of character isn't it.

#NotMyEmporer

 

[Octavian]

It meant all of them would be HRH.

If she just wanted to get rid of the bit about sex she would have changed this one word only "save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales"

If it was about gender equality that word would have been changed to "child".

But it was about making her great-grandchildren princes and princesses, and in doing so she ripped up King George's convention and expanded the Royal Family, which rubbishes any claim she couldn't have done the same for Harry's kids.

I might be confused here but what she did was just that, she changed it so the heir to the throne’s children were Prince and Princesses and the reason given was gender equality no?

It makes a lot more sense than giving titles to the children of someone who will never be king.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

#NotMyEmporer

I'd give you a like but you've spelt emperor wrong.

 

[Octavian]

No, I’m saying that you can‘t prove that she implied it. You can argue it, but cannot categorically claim she has done so.

Lots of papers and clicks have been sold based on your insinuation though and clouded a lot of peoples’ judgements.

I’m guessing when Yaya Toure questioned whether Pep had a problem with African players you rushed to his defence and said nobody could prove what Yaya was implying in court?

What a ridiculous argument and stop behaving like a child with Fode, who is a child, you’re in your 50s man.