Sick of Harry & Meghan?
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 becky  over the moon 10 Mar 21 9.31pm |
   |
|---|---|
|
Possible exchange? "I wonder how black you baby will be? It would be good to have some real diversity in the royal family as a reflection of the modern society we represent" Well, yes, I just had a conversation about how black a mixed-race person's baby could be......... but is it racist? Well, it could be if you didn't have all the quote!
A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
  |
  georgenorman 11 Mar 21 6.55am |
|
|---|---|
|
From the BBC: Edited by georgenorman (11 Mar 2021 7.02am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 11 Mar 21 7.44am |
|
|---|---|
|
So Meghan declared her passport was taken away and she did not leave the house for “months”. The 13 trips she took abroad in that time, including a baby shower in NY do not count? Or perhaps she just forgot about them. Yet another untruth but hey let’s all rally Edited by Spiderman (11 Mar 2021 7.47am) Edited by Spiderman (11 Mar 2021 7.48am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 11 Mar 21 8.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
Megan said she and Harry were married by the Archbishop of Canterbury 3 days before the big event privately. It has been pointed out that if this is true then one of these weddings was illegal. So far the Archbishop has declined to comment which is disgraceful. The courts have made it very clear that weddings are public events there is no right to privacy and no such thing as a secret wedding, this is to protect vulnerable people. So if it took place as Megan described the Archbishop needs to explain how this was legal. If it didn't take place then he needs to clarify that as well. He should not remain silent. My guess is that it was probably the wedding rehearsal and nothing more in which case this needs to be explained to Megan.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 11 Mar 21 9.04am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Megan said she and Harry were married by the Archbishop of Canterbury 3 days before the big event privately. It has been pointed out that if this is true then one of these weddings was illegal. So far the Archbishop has declined to comment which is disgraceful. The courts have made it very clear that weddings are public events there is no right to privacy and no such thing as a secret wedding, this is to protect vulnerable people. So if it took place as Megan described the Archbishop needs to explain how this was legal. If it didn't take place then he needs to clarify that as well. He should not remain silent. My guess is that it was probably the wedding rehearsal and nothing more in which case this needs to be explained to Megan. I thought along the same lines, and the AOC should explain. It seems that anyone that disbelieves her are being held accountable but she has not been challenged on several topics where she has been economical with the truth
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 11 Mar 21 9.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
She lives a fantasy in her head. No wonder she wanted to marry him.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| becky over the moon 11 Mar 21 10.11am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Megan said she and Harry were married by the Archbishop of Canterbury 3 days before the big event privately. It has been pointed out that if this is true then one of these weddings was illegal. So far the Archbishop has declined to comment which is disgraceful. The courts have made it very clear that weddings are public events there is no right to privacy and no such thing as a secret wedding, this is to protect vulnerable people. So if it took place as Megan described the Archbishop needs to explain how this was legal. If it didn't take place then he needs to clarify that as well. He should not remain silent. My guess is that it was probably the wedding rehearsal and nothing more in which case this needs to be explained to Megan. Not only must they be held in a place to which the public have free access (so that any objections can be voiced), it also has to be in a place licensed for matrimony and MUST be held in the presence of 2 witness. So not at all legal on any count......
A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 11 Mar 21 10.42am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by becky
Not only must they be held in a place to which the public have free access (so that any objections can be voiced), it also has to be in a place licensed for matrimony and MUST be held in the presence of 2 witness. So not at all legal on any count...... It’s a two fingers up at the royals and a ‘look how clever we are/ we fooled you/we’re not really into riches and glamour, look at our chicken house. Just make sure they never see how expensive the inside of our home looks.’ Her dress in the interview cost 4 or 5 grand. I’ve always hated Morgan, but fair play for dying on his sword for standing by this being a sham, even if he knows or is confident he’ll be offered more big contracts. I think he probably knew many people didn’t believe it or think they weren’t treated badly like they’ve said.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 11 Mar 21 10.45am |
|
|---|---|
|
People like Megan are always there, especially so in her industry. The real person of blame here is Harry. He has debased and betrayed his firm.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| georgenorman 11 Mar 21 10.50am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
It’s a two fingers up at the royals and a ‘look how clever we are/ we fooled you/we’re not really into riches and glamour, look at our chicken house. Just make sure they never see how expensive the inside of our home looks.’ Her dress in the interview cost 4 or 5 grand. I’ve always hated Morgan, but fair play for dying on his sword for standing by this being a sham, even if he knows or is confident he’ll be offered more big contracts. I think he probably knew many people didn’t believe it or think they weren’t treated badly like they’ve said. Perhaps Morgan had their phones hacked? Edited by georgenorman (11 Mar 2021 11.02am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 11 Mar 21 11.29am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Perhaps Morgan had their phones hacked? Edited by georgenorman (11 Mar 2021 11.02am) Yes, well it’s quite something when the BBS agree with Piers Morgan. It’s mainly naive young people who don’t, or mainly younger female black people who’ve flown off the handle without analysing the individual people and claims.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 11 Mar 21 12.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by becky
Not only must they be held in a place to which the public have free access (so that any objections can be voiced), it also has to be in a place licensed for matrimony and MUST be held in the presence of 2 witness. So not at all legal on any count...... Will anyone pull her up on another fabrication of the truth?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.