Keeping up with the Markles

deuse said:
I did not know that was a crime.

Oh that's right...it's not...
Click to expand...

Where as Meghan and Harry have committed the crime of what in comparison considering the criticism they are getting?

Oh wait, it’s only fair criticism if it’s a crime if it’s attacking a pedophile Royal who is holding with the firm for his own protection, vs it’s open season on criticism legal or not should someone dare be not fully white and not want to put up with the royal family controlling their life.
 
hurfdurf said:
Where as Meghan and Harry have committed the crime of what in comparison considering the criticism they are getting?

Oh wait, it’s only fair criticism if it’s a crime if it’s attacking a pedophile Royal who is holding with the firm for his own protection, vs it’s open season on criticism legal or not should someone dare be not fully white and not want to put up with the royal family controlling their life.
Click to expand...
No of them have committed a crime, the reason H&M are being talked about is because they chose to do an interview in which they make accusations without any evidence whereas Andrew has keep his head down and not said a thing so in that respect there is nothing new to talk about.
 
Joxeon said:
No of them have committed a crime, the reason H&M are being talked about it because they chose to do an interview in which they make accusations without any evidence whereas Andrew has keep his head down and not said a thing so in that respect there is nothing new to talk about.
Click to expand...

The comparison is there to talk about because H&M are getting a level criticism Andrew did not for actually doing something despicable. He has suffered no accountability for his actions and so it’s still fair to bring him up until he does.
 
dowie said:
That's kind of his choice tbh... they're free to step away from the spotlight if they want to, what they don't get to do is to actively court publicity and then moan about the publicity they don't like/can't control.
Click to expand...

Actually, they do get to do that. Just because they use their celebrity to further their financial interest it didn't give the scum press to print any lies they like. If they (H&M) take exception to a particular press article then they haven't negated their right to complain or pursue legal action just because they did a magazine article previously.
 
hurfdurf said:
Where as Meghan and Harry have committed the crime of what in comparison considering the criticism they are getting?

Oh wait, it’s only fair criticism if it’s a crime if it’s attacking a pedophile Royal who is holding with the firm for his own protection, vs it’s open season on criticism legal or not should someone dare be not fully white and not want to put up with the royal family controlling their life.
Click to expand...


Come back when you have proof and not feelings.

The rest is hear say.
 
hurfdurf said:
Wait you are telling me.. she has the audacity to both be black and they combine that with standing up for themselves and controlling their own lives?! Disgraceful.
Click to expand...

The. Audacity!!

Tombstone said:
They'd have to wait their turn, I can think of a lot of other people I would rather put in the stocks first :)
Click to expand...

Yeah but they're the fun ones to abuse. Not enough ammo for the others.



hurfdurf said:

Just put up with this, try and fight it and boot lickers in this thread will criticise you for it!
Click to expand...

this is why I'm not surprised as to why they've left but I'm also not surprised that people have their opinions on them that they do. The press needs to be held accountable because it's their fault people have this warped view on her/them
 
hurfdurf said:
The comparison is there to talk about because H&M are getting a level criticism Andrew did not for actually doing something despicable. He has suffered no accountability for his actions and so it’s still fair to bring him up until he does.
Click to expand...
He got plenty of criticism after doing his interview if I remember correctly but in terms of accountability for his actions then what should happen as until now he's been accused of something with no proof other than someone's word.
 
hurfdurf said:
Where as Meghan and Harry have committed the crime of what in comparison considering the criticism they are getting?
Click to expand...

Not too much as far as I can see in Meghans case, I guess you could levy racism as the wrongdoing of Harry if a person really wanted to get pedantic about things
 
hurfdurf said:
Where as Meghan and Harry have committed the crime of what in comparison considering the criticism they are getting?

Oh wait, it’s only fair criticism if it’s a crime if it’s attacking a pedophile Royal who is holding with the firm for his own protection, vs it’s open season on criticism legal or not should someone dare be not fully white and not want to put up with the royal family controlling their life.
Click to expand...
Joxeon said:
He got plenty of criticism after doing his interview if I remember correctly but in terms of accountability for his actions then what should happen as until now he's been accused of something with no proof other than someone's word.
Click to expand...

Yep, he did an interview and it went down like a lead balloon.

Except he didn't do that this week so Hurfdurf can't remember.

Funny how you get more attention at the time you do a dumb interview :eek:
 
Hotwired said:
Yep, he did an interview and it went down like a lead balloon.

Except he didn't do that this week so Hurfdurf can't remember.
Click to expand...
Jeffrey Epstein’s friend and alleged co-offender still enjoys the protection of the Firm. As long as you do nothing to expose the inner-workings of the palace machine, you get to stay within the circle. You think him doing an interview that went unsurprisingly badly (because he’s a nonse) was the correct level of accountability for literally being friends with and supporting a convicted pedophile post conviction?!
 
Dolph said:
So you genuinely believe that domestic violence can't happen to successful people, that people in those relationships never rationalise the position to the extent they support and defend it, or that they will never take their partners view in a conflict with their support network?

Because those are the myths you've just repeated as a dismissal.

Don't get me wrong, I hope I'm wrong, I wouldn't wish such a situation on anyone. Also, if I'm not wrong, I don't blame any of them for the situation. Blame isn't helpful, it's about understanding and helping people instead.

The interview is very interesting though, because it's put several clear falsehoods forward, and several further unspecified and unsubstantiated claims that will be subject to much closer scrutiny. It's a real insight into the nature of both of them.
Click to expand...

The more I think about this the more appalling I realise it is that you would attempt to leverage your own domestic abuse and, without any evidence, try and project it onto Harry, who is is protecting his wife the way he wishes someone protected his mother.
 
hurfdurf said:
Jeffrey Epstein’s friend and alleged co-offender still enjoys the protection of the Firm. As long as you do nothing to expose the inner-workings of the palace machine, you get to stay within the circle. You think him doing an interview that went unsurprisingly badly (because he’s a nonse) was the correct level of accountability for literally being friends with and supporting a convicted pedophile post conviction?!
Click to expand...

I think you love saying the word nonce. I think you love calling someone a paedo.

I think you're full of **** if you think media coverage and response is justice. Serial killers have had less coverage than any of this.

Accountability for "being friends with and supporting a convicted pedophile post conviction"?! That's a crime of having no taste in friends and not enough respect for what he represents not a real crime. For that matter he's not allowed to represent anymore.
 
Hotwired said:
There's a trend I've noticed about being unable or unwilling to accuse specific names in the royal family so people such as yourself will go with "they" to keep it nice and vague.

Is it because it's damn near impossible to sell the image of the Queen, the head of "them", talking trash through a red top paper.
Click to expand...

Sorry are you suggesting that the Palace doesn't have an extremely active PR that has great relationships with those that matter in the press? Let alone the members of the royal family themselves. I doubt the Queen would do such a thing but other members, absolutely. Its naïve in the extreme to think they don't and wouldn't.
 
Hotwired said:
I think you love saying the word nonce. I think you love calling someone a paedo.

I think you're full of **** if you think media coverage and response is justice. Serial killers have had less coverage than any of this.

Accountability for "being friends with and supporting a convicted pedophile post conviction"?! That's a crime of having no taste in friends not a real crime.
Click to expand...

And I’d understand, if the criticism Harry and Meghan were getting were in proportion, but it’s not been, in fact, as has been demonstrated, Megan has endured so much abuse she’s genuinely suffered, where as, Andrew is still free and clear despite the very credible allegations levied against him.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
Sorry are you suggesting that the Palace doesn't have an extremely active PR that has great relationships with those that matter in the press? Let alone the members of the royal family themselves. I doubt the Queen would do such a thing but other members, absolutely. Its naïve in the extreme to think they don't and wouldn't.
Click to expand...

You just did it again. You accuse "the palace" and "the royal family" and "PR" all at the same time and simultaneously exclude the queen as I predicted.

It is my commentary on people, such as yourself, being willing to vaguely accuse "them" in "the royal family" for wrongdoing but you can't bring yourself to directly put these claims on the person responsible for the royal family. This is entirely the opposite of bashing any other organisation.
 
Some of the reasoning they've given for leaving do not really make sense in my opinion. The BBC is saying that racism within the media is one of the reasons they left the UK, but surely running off to North America is like jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire in that regard? It also isn't going to stop the UK gutter press from negative bias towards Meghan either.

If they also believe there is institutional racism in the Royal Family, why do they wish to be related to that with keeping their titles? Wouldn't you wish to distance yourself from that? It does dilute their stance in my opinion because it comes across as the value of their titles are worth more than sending out a strong message that they don't wish to be associated with racism. Especially considering Meghan has said there's the family and there's the institution - i.e. you can give up your titles and distance yourself from the institution but the Queen will always be their Grandmother & in-law.
 
Dirk Diggler said:
Yea, because the entire world would have had an opinion on what you said or did and the tabloid press would have hounded you to within an inch of your life. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
They could easily leave the royal family, renounce their titles and stay out of the limelight if they chose to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom