The Harry and Meghan fuss

oldius said:
You have been asked, repeatedly, why you are fixated on this issue against the enormous backdrop of evidence of her mistreatment, but you refuse to answer. Your question has been answered, but you cannot snip 10 words from a multi-hour interview to make a point.

I respect the fact that you have defended your beliefs, but I cannot help having my opinion confirmed that fans of the monarchy will not hear a word said against it, despite swathes of evidence, over hundreds of years, of abhorrent behaviour.
Click to expand...
I’ve answered you several times on that question haha!!!!

I just answered the question on “what has she done wrong” with she played the race card, and like a bunch of anti establishment scousers, I was jumped on by you all for daring to criticise Meghan.

I’ve just responded to back my own claim up.

It’s nothing more than that.

And there we have it “despite swathes of evidence, over hundreds of years, of abhorrent behaviour.”

The Queen hasn’t behaved abhorrently, this isn’t about past monarchs.

All countries have had world leaders who have behaved abhorrently, including our Prime Ministers.

Doesn’t mean we should get rid of it.
 
Octavian said:
Wrong again Kaz.

Oprah asked the below and this was the full response to that single question:

“Oprah: You certainly must have had some conversations with Harry about it and have your own suspicions as to why they didn’t want to make Archie a prince. What are . . .  what are those thoughts? Why do you think that is? Do you think it’s because of his race?

Meghan: But I can give you an honest answer. In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time . . .  so we have in tandem the conversation of ‘He won’t be given security, he’s not going to be given a title’ and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.”
Click to expand...
"And also....."

So a separate issue as we keep fucking telling you!
 
M18CTID said:
"And also....."

So a separate issue as we keep fucking telling you!
Click to expand...
Your level of English is shocking mate.

She’s saying we have *this conversation* and also *this one* in tandem.

Meaning both are going on at the same time, and this is in relation to why he wasn’t given titles.
 
Octavian said:
I’ve answered you several times on that question haha!!!!

I just answered the question on “what has she done wrong” with she played the race card, and like a bunch of anti establishment scousers, I was jumped on by you all for daring to criticise Meghan.

I’ve just responded to back my own claim up.

It’s nothing more than that.

And there we have it “despite swathes of evidence, over hundreds of years, of abhorrent behaviour.”

The Queen hasn’t behaved abhorrently, this isn’t about past monarchs.

All countries have had world leaders who have behaved abhorrently, including our Prime Ministers.

Doesn’t mean we should get rid of it.
Click to expand...
Again, context - there are two separate strands to my post. One does not have to be anti-establishment to criticise the behaviours of the establishment. I gave you a specific example of Queen Elizabeth II, and the exemptions that were sought, under her watch, to compliance with sex and race discrimination policy - you did not respond.

You were not jumped on for criticising Meghan. You were questioned because of your support for the monarchy, who could easily have stepped in to defend her, supporting her against the bias of the press, but they chose not to and, therefore, condoned it. There are obvious parallels with other incidents under the Queen's reign.
 
oldius said:
Again, context - there are two separate strands to my post. One does not have to be anti-establishment to criticise the behaviours of the establishment. I gave you a specific example of Queen Elizabeth II, and the exemptions that were sought, under her watch, to compliance with sex and race discrimination policy - you did not respond.

You were not jumped on for criticising Meghan. You were questioned because of your support for the monarchy, who could easily have stepped in to defend her, supporting her against the bias of the press, but they chose not to and, therefore, condoned it. There are obvious parallels with other incidents under the Queen's reign.
Click to expand...
Heaven forbid I criticise a famous person in their thread!

You want the Queen to step in and defend Meghan in the press?

You’ve not followed the Queen’s behaviour over the years have you?
 
M18CTID said:
Ha ha - fuck off!
Click to expand...
Oprah: why wasn’t Archie given titles, was it racism?

Meghan: There were conversations around titles and his skin colour going on at the same time


Now you fuck off!
 
lloydie said:
And yet the Tory party without him as leader continue to to use this whole charade to further their cause. Go figure.
Click to expand...

We have to remember that POLITICS as a whole is a charade now, the Tory pantomime or the Labour mini series it's our choice but will be the same shitshow of a result.
 
Octavian said:
Oprah: why wasn’t Archie given titles, was it racism?

Meghan: There were conversations around titles and his skin colour going on at the same time


Now you fuck off!
Click to expand...
She never said that though did she? This is what she said and you yourself posted the quotes:

"But I can give you an honest answer. In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time . . .  so we have in tandem the conversation of ‘He won’t be given security, he’s not going to be given a title’ and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.