Links - 8th February 2020 (1) (Meghan & Harry)

BREAKING: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are moving to Canada - "The Evening Standard has also reported that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has agreed to put the hefty security bill for the couple on Canadian taxpayer’s dime. That has been disputed by Finance Minister Bill Morneau, though, who has denied whether or not Ottawa has made a decision to help cover the bill.The security would demand round-the-clock protection while they stay in the country, which could cost Canada “an estimated £1 million, which would equal out to roughly $1.6 million Canadian dollars...
'we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family... Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives.'"
I guess Canadian public funds don't count as public funds. At least this may be a win for British taxpayers

WATCH: Prince Harry pitches Disney head to give Meghan Markle work - "“You know she does voiceovers, right?” Prince Harry can be heard saying at a red carpet event to Iger. “Oh, really?” Iger responds, looking uncomfortable. “I did not know that.”... Despite Prince Harry and Markle saying they want to distance themselves from the Royal family, they still appear to be wanting to leverage their star power derived from their former titles in order to make money."

Racism is not to blame for Meghan Markle’s behaviour - The Post Millennial - "Ever anxious to find another thing to blame on bias, The New York Times, CNN and other outlets are blaming #Megxit on racism... This latest theory is that the racism inherent in British society and in the royal family itself was so horrific that the couple had to move to a country where the Prime Minister donned blackface for a laugh at parties... There’s a drive in media to control this narrative, to make it about race. So much so that when the BBC declined to do so, that was the story about the story. CNN points out that “As Duchess, she hasn’t made race an issue. Others have.” And that’s exactly what so many outlets are doing."

Meghan Markle And Prince Harry UK Royal Reporters Coverage Compared To Kate Middleton And Prince William - "Here Are 20 Headlines Comparing Meghan Markle To Kate Middleton That Might Show Why She And Prince Harry Are Cutting Off Royal Reporters
Over the years, Meghan has been shamed for the same things for which her sister-in-law, Kate, has been praised."
Even from the headlines and screenshots alone, it's clear that in more than half these cases there are no double standards. Imagine what one would find out going into the details

A woke Wallis Simpson - "They’re going to split their time between the UK and North America – think of all the CO2! – and become more ‘independent’. .. Megxit, as this royal bombshell is wittily being called, is a striking sign of the times. What Harry and Meghan are doing is virtually unprecedented in the history of the royals. They are jacking in their jobs (I say jobs) as senior royals and pursuing a more ‘financially independent’ path that will allow them to earn, travel and – this is important – jabber on about their pet concerns and causes as much as they like.Even leaving aside the fact that they won’t actually be financially independent... still their move is a startling and concerning one.What it fundamentally reveals is the incompatibility of the modern culture of narcissism with the values of duty, loyalty and self-negation traditionally associated with royal life. To someone like Meghan, who sprang from celebville, who sees herself as the embodiment of right-on goodness, and who loves nothing more than advertising her eco-virtue and performing her PC credentials, life in the British monarchy was never going to be a good fit. Yes, the woke agenda Meghan expresses so well shares much in common with the old-world elitism of the monarchical system. Both obsess over inherited characteristics (the woke bang on about race and gender, the monarchy is all about bloodline). Both have a penchant for looking down their noses at the little people. And both have an instinctive loathing for modernity, from Charles’ longstanding conservationism to H&M’s humanity-bashing eco-hysteria.But there’s one big, irreconcilable difference: where the woke value the self over everything else, senior royals are meant, ostensibly at least, to be selfless, to submerge the self into the crown. It looks like this is a deal-breaker for the younger, more celebrity-oriented royals, especially newcomer Meghan but also Harry, too. Their unprecedented ‘stepping back’, and the fury this has allegedly caused in the Palace, suggests the cult of the self that Meghan and other showily virtuous celebs embody and promote, does not work within an institution whose ideal is the Queen: opinion-free, emotions hidden, dutiful, unquestioning and in it for the long haul. Duty is anathema to a new generation whose chief goal is often self-realisation... Indeed, the most striking thing about Harry and Meghan’s bombshell is the way they talk about the royal family as if it is little more than a stepping stone to their self-realisation... Even more startling is the way they talk about the queen. They say they will ‘continue to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen’. Collaborate with? They sound more like Kendall Jenner talking about her adverts with Pepsi than individuals who are meant to devote themselves for life to royal duty and the preservation of the crown... Of course, the Meghan-loving liberal set are responding to Megxit by chastising the British tabloids and, by extension, the riff-raff who read them. You racist shits drove this wonderful woman away – that’s the undertone, and sometimes the overtone, of what they’re saying. It captures how snooty the woke brigade is, where they are essentially reprimanding the masses for daring to criticise their royal superiors. Overlooking, of course, that there was a lot to criticise about H&M, from their moaning about their privileged lives to their hypocritical jetting around the world to make platitudinous lectures about climate change... They’re going to become even more insufferable. And here’s the thing: they will trade on their still existing royal titles to do so."

Piers Morgan says criticism of Meghan Markle is not racist - "Northampton Saints rugby player Courtney Lawes, who is mixed race, also responded to the NYT story, saying: 'Is it any wonder nobody takes the word racism seriously anymore? The misuse of this word nowadays is genuinely embarrassing.'... 'What Meghan's forgotten, or simply doesn't understand, is that she and Harry aren't important royals, they're minor players with no chance of ever acceding to the throne... 'But what genuinely worries me now is that the very future of the Monarchy may be in serious jeopardy if these two renegades have their way and become effectively a pair of rival royals bestriding the globe acting like they're the big dogs, doing what the hell they like and using their royal fame to line their own pockets to the tune of millions like a pair of greedy, grasping hustlers, destroying the royal brand one grubby deal at a time.  'It can't be allowed to happen. Nobody tells the Queen what to do. She's the most powerful, respected person in Britain. And right now, she's facing a direct threat to everything she has worked so hard to maintain.  'Harry and Meghan's astonishingly brazen and selfish antics have left her no choice but to cut them loose and fire them both from the Royal Family. Get rid of these whining, ego-crazed, deluded leeches Ma'am - before it's too late.'... it emerged the Duchess of Sussex had returned to Canada as the Queen and other senior royals took decisive action and ordered their teams to find a 'workable solution' to Harry and Meghan's future roles."

Harry and Meghan have become the petulant 'enfants terribles' of the family firm - "They even pledged to "collaborate" with the Queen, a relationship more akin to Stella McCartney helping to dress a celebrity for the red carpet than the sharing of royal obligations.Make no mistake, the public will interpret this as yet more evidence that Meghan and Harry are the enfants terribles of The Firm, with a remote and tone deaf idea of their role. Instead of supporting their relatives, working for charities, and accepting the privileges and responsibilities that come with it, they have instead chosen to navigate an opaque new course between royalty and celebrity. Their statement roughly translates as “boohoo, nobody loves us”, like a teenager testing his or her parents’ affections. The hope is that the Queen, media and public will beg for their return - “don’t go, Harry and Meghan! We love you really!” - and uncritically accept their woke agenda... Clearly an element of the semi-resignation was meant as payback for the media, whom the Sussexes think have been big meanies to them (clearly they have never seen Sarah Ferguson called “The Duchess of Pork” and missed the furore over Pippa Middleton’s Waitrose deal). The Duchess of Sussex has never really understood that criticism was part of the job, having believed that being on Suits was some sort of immunity badge. The couple are so angry with newspapers, in fact, that they’ve created their own “media” page on their Sussex Royal website, setting out, in Trumpian style, who they will deign to speak to. Top of the list are “grassroots media organisations and young, up-and-coming journalists”, whom they hilariously assume will not scrutinise them. Elsewhere, the royals, with no apparent sense of irony, claim to “believe in a free, strong and open media industry”, all the while trying to micromanage it. Meghan and Harry embody many of the most negative stereotypes of the Millennial age group: that they want everything easy; that they have no sense of duty, commitment or idea of the greater good. A dose of stiff upper lip wouldn’t go amiss. They imagine life as an Instagram story in which they can chop and change the narrative... Stoic and dutiful, the Queen has always embodied the sentiment noblesse oblige. But it is one that her relatives clearly struggle to understand."

Harry and Meghan’s bombshell announcement is a discourtesy to the Queen – and smacks of millennial self-absorption - "It was claimed the Duke had ignored a personal request from the Queen not to go public with his plans until he had properly consulted with his father. The Queen is said to have made it clear to the Duke that he should not reveal their intentions with so many questions yet to be answered – and yet the Sussex’s did it anyway.Not only was this a huge discourtesy to the monarch from whom they derive their titles and public profile, it was hurtful, cruel even, to deal such a blow to a 93-year-old lady who has only recently had to ask her errant second son to relinquish his Royal duties.Faith in the Firm, as the Windsors call the family business, has already been shaken. The last thing the Queen needed, at the start of a new year’s trading, was the defection of two key personnel who seem to be threatening to set up a tacky rival company in north America: Royals R US. If the Sussexes had bothered to show up at Sandringham for Christmas with the rest of the family, witnessing the pressures that the stoical, snowy monarch was under might have inclined them to think again... Do the the ultra-woke Sussexes think the Cambridges are not “progressive” as they go about their boring old duty of supporting the Queen and keeping their political opinions to themselves?Not for the first time, we can thank our lucky stars that it is William who is the elder brother and future King, and steady Catherine who will be our Queen, not Harry the petulant boy and Duchess “I don’t like this new part, let’s tear it up and rewrite it” Meghan. The idea that the Sussexes can cast off their main responsibilities yet retain a place within “this institution” is downright baffling. Royalty is like virginity; you can’t be a bit Royal. When Edward VIII abdicated the throne for Wallis Simpson, he made the error of assuming that he could continue to play a significant role as the new monarch’s brother. The Windsors had other ideas. Remember that Princess Elizabeth spent her formative years with a seething mother who could never forgive her brother-in-law’s betrayal. Today, the Queen will be saddened by the behaviour of the grandson with whom, until his wedding in 2018, she enjoyed an immensely fond and teasing relationship... As one exasperated Palace aide is reported to have said: “People had bent over backwards for them. They were given the wedding they wanted, the house they wanted, the office they wanted, the staff they wanted and had the backing of the family. What more did they want?”What indeed. After that heavenly wedding on a glittering May day just 20 months ago, the Queen made the newlyweds Youth Ambassadors to her beloved Commonwealth. It was a brilliant appointment for Meghan and Harry and displayed great thoughtfulness, affection and respect on the monarch’s part. Shame they couldn’t show the same in return.I’m afraid their bombshell announcement smacks of millennial self-absorption, of values that prize identity, the expression of emotion and personal happiness above all else. The exact opposite, in fact, of the Queen’s wartime generation which believed that you didn’t throw in the towel, you stuck at things through good and bad... Meghan Markle never wanted to be a Royal, she wanted to be Michelle Obama. The mistake was to think she could bend a centuries-old institution to that end... Had he married a different sort of girl, would Harry be stepping away from the Royal family now? I seriously doubt it... You know, I am sure there would have been considerable sympathy if Harry and Meghan had gone to Her Majesty and declared a desire to live more privately abroad, with a scaled-down profile, forsaking family money and privileges. The Palace could have helped draw up a plan. Instead, they have acted with a breathtaking self-centredness, announcing their decision to the public first and clearly hoping to bounce the monarch into accepting their “progressive” new role, which keeps the perks of Royalty while shirking its duties. The Queen doesn’t deserve that. She really does not. Her grandson and his wife may like to style themselves as humanitarians, but it’s hard to detect much humanity in their treatment of a vulnerable nonagenarian who may soon be a widow. With their new freedom, I suppose the Duke and Duchess of Sussex could always audition to play the parts of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in Season 8 of The Crown."

Queen wants rift repaired in 72 hours as Harry prepares to leave the country with no return date - "The Duke of York has courted controversy in the past for insisting his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, could have both careers and quasi-royal roles.In 2011 they were stripped of their 24-hour bodyguards following a row over their living and travel expenses. The Queen’s youngest son, the Earl of Wessex, and his wife, Sophie, were both instructed to give up their jobs following their marriage in 1999 amid criticism that their careers in television and public relations conflicted with their royal interests."
Too bad the others can't blame racism

UK monarchy scrambles for solutions after Harry, Meghan bombshell - "Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, rocked the monarchy on Wednesday with an announcement made without consulting any senior royals from the sovereign downwards... They released their shock statement on a pre-prepared new website, their Instagram account and through Buckingham Palace's email communications system. The mood in the palace was understood to be one of disappointment and even "hurt", according to the BBC, while Thursday's newspapers were full of reports of a family "split" and the queen's "dismay".  London's Evening Standard newspaper said they had "defied clear instructions from the queen" not to go public about any future plans at this time.  It added senior courtiers had warned the couple "will be punished for this".  Meanwhile Madame Tussauds London said it was moving its waxworks of the pair away from other top family figures "to reflect the upcoming change in the royal line-up". Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams said Harry and Meghan announcing this step without the 93-year-old monarch's blessing was "extraordinary"... "They've chosen to... go rogue. The result, therefore, could have very serious consequences."... Royal analysts said the changes were unprecedented for senior family members."

‘Independent’ Royals… really? Why don’t Harry & Meghan go all the way and quit the family? - "They want royal perks and freedom on their terms. (Well, Meghan’s terms. Ex cheeky chappie, happy-go-lucky Harry looks shell-shocked since wedding his pant-wearing feminist wife.) It's like when you go to a fancy buffet: We'll keep the titles and Frogmore cottage, the couple's official residence, which cost £2.4 million of public funding to do up last year, and keep the income from the Duchy of Cornwall, Prince Charles' private estate, but we want privacy when it suits and will avail of security on royal business, which will also be paid for by taxpayers.  The couple will kindly be giving up a slice of the Queen's Sovereign Grant, a payment they get for official duties, which covers the upkeep of their home. But they'll be doing fewer duties, so that's fair enough. It's as independent as Marie Antoinette creating the peasant village of Hameau de la Reine in 1783.  Just like Meghan, she was sick of the perpetual structure and demands of the title, and created a little rustic retreat in the park of the Palace of Versailles in order to feel free and peasant-like.  Marie Antoinette sought refuge dressing up as a milkmaid or a shepherdess, strolling around in peasant garb, milking cows which were cleaned by hired hands, while still enjoying the privileges of royal life and keeping the masses out of the gates... Royal commenter Penny Junor said the couple's actions to not inform members of the Royal Family were "beyond bizarre," stating that they are working for the palace and not self-employed.  You'd wonder why not, if you don't like Royal life, just denounce your titles? As an empowered post #MeToo feminist, why is Meghan seeking special treatment based on an accident of the birth of her husband?... 'Girls with dreams become women with vision,' and she's staying true to her word.  Well – Plan C of her vision. Plan A was to make the royals more woke, which didn't pan out, Plan B was playing the victim in a recent ITV documentary about the couple, describing motherhood as a 'struggle' due to intense media interest. 'Not many people have asked if I'm OK,' she said. That didn't go too well either, what with the castles, the hired help and the privileges the rest of us could only dream about.  Now, there's nowhere else to go but the US to be independent, while keeping her husband's title – what's feminist about that? The self-serving narcissistic hypocrisy is thundering. You can only admire her, though. Most women have to put together flat packs and go Dutch on dinner in the name of female empowerment. The 'Duchess' gets her man to leave the House of Windsor on her terms because the family didn't take to her post-MeToo Hollywood feminism... the question is – do they have the courage to be truly independent or do they just want to conquer and divide?"

PIERS MORGAN: The Queen must FIRE Prince Harry and Meghan - " if I were Her Majesty the Queen, I would unceremoniously strip Harry and Meghan of all their titles with immediate effect and despatch them back into civilian life. These two deluded clowns announced yesterday they were quitting life as senior royals.  In a series of staggeringly pompous statements on their gleaming new Hollywood-style website, they laid down the law to the Queen and to the rest of us about exactly how things are supposedly going to work from this moment on.  To summarise, they want to stop being 'senior royals' with all the tedious duty that entails.  And instead, they now want to be a 'progressive' force within 'the institution'.  In other words, they want to be super-woke celebrities (with all the outrageous 'Do as we say not as we do' hectoring hypocrisy they've already brought to that status) who get to keep all the trappings of royal life without any of the hard, boring bits and the right to cash in on their status however they choose.  So, they want the glitz, the glamour, the splendour and the stupendous wealth….they just don't want to have to actually earn it... In their lengthy list of pronouncements, Harry and Meghan say they will now be spending much of their time in North America, where they've just be lounging on their lazy backsides for six weeks 'much-needed holiday' – a holiday from what, exactly? - at a multi-millionaire's waterside mansion in Canada.  Oh, and they're going to seek to be 'financially independent'.  It's only when you read the details of this 'independence' that you realise what it actually means is they want to live off Harry's dad's money, from Prince Charles and his Duchy of Cornwall – which he only possesses by right of being the Queen's heir... They also, hilariously, laid down their new rulebook for the media, saying they're getting rid of the traditional Royal Rota system and will instead be inviting special favoured journalists to attend their events and only write nice positive things about them.  I chuckled with disbelief as I read this.  Even Vladimir Putin wouldn't pull a stunt to control the press like that... It was shocking enough that Harry and Meghan didn't even have the courtesy to tell either Prince Charles, who they sponge off, or Prince William of their grandiose plans.  But it was absolutely appalling that they failed to notify the Queen.  This woman is not just Harry's grandmother, she's the Monarch for god's sake... How the hell has it come to this less than two years after a wedding that was greeted with global excitement and praise?  Two words: Meghan Markle... I never heard from her again, and when I saw her do the same to her own father Thomas, I realised this is what Meghan does when people are either no longer of use to her or might be 'problematic' to the bigger prize. To put it bluntly, she's an unsavoury manipulative social-climbing piece of work who has inveigled her way into Prince Harry's heart and used his blind love as a platform to now destroy everything he once held so dear.  She's caused a tremendous rift between Harry and William.  She's ruined Harry's reputation with the public as a hugely popular fun, carefree soul, turning him into a miserable-looking, virtue-signalling laughing stock.  And now she's ripped him away from his beloved grandmother, the Queen.  None of this has surprised me.  Meghan's been doing this kind of stuff all her adult life.  She's disowned 99 per cent of her own family.  She's ditched and ghosted numerous old friends.  She got rid of her ex-husband when she tasted TV stardom.  And the former Deal or No Deal suitcase girl has done all this with barely a glance back to her past.  Nothing said more about Me-Me-Meghan than her wedding day when she plonked newly-acquired A-list celebrity friends like Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney up the front where most brides usually put their family... I had lunch with a good friend of Harry's soon after the wedding and he said that he and various other very close mates of the Prince were stunned not to be asked to the spectacular evening wedding party, and even more dismayed when they discovered a load of celebrities had got their invitations instead.  'We realised then that Meghan's calling all the shots,' he said.  And the 38-year-old divorcee has carried on calling them ever since.  As Harry reportedly told courtiers during an argument before the wedding day: 'What Meghan wants, Meghan GETS!'  Well now she wants to have her royal cake and eat it... she doesn't want to get her hands dirty opening a community hall on a wet Wednesday in Stoke-on-Trent. That's for the little royal people, not a superstar Princess like her."

Meghan and Harry's 'threat of a no-holds barred interview' - "Journalist and close confidante of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Tom Bradby has warned that if the Royal couple are left feeling hard done by, they may give a 'no-holds barred' interview which would could further damage the monarchy... Courtiers fear that Meghan would brand the royal household racist and sexist, according to the publication... William 'did try' to make amends with the Duke and Duchess but 'for the moment, at least, things have gone too far to be retrieved.'... The Duke of Cambridge has said he is unable to even 'put an arm round' his younger brother nowadays, after a rift saw them drift apart over the past year.  Harry and Meghan's intention to quit as senior Royals has widened the gulf between the two siblings, with William understood to be 'incandescent' over his brother's blindsiding of the Family... The Queen, who was pictured ashen-faced behind the wheel of her Land Rover today, is also said to be concerned for the mental fragility of her grandson Harry... Growing up, William and Harry's brotherly love seemed unbreakable, with the pair supporting each other in the wake of their mother Diana's death. As they both developed into their roles as senior members of the Royal Family, they became a somewhat double act who would do engagements together. Even when William married Kate, they would often attend events as a trio.  But during the past year rumours of a brewing row between the brothers began to bubble up, eventually boiling over when Harry and Meghan quit the charitable entity they spearheaded with the Cambridges and branched ff to form their own... Meghan and Kate Middleton have not spoken in over six months after ceasing communication on their WhatsApp group... The break-up of the so-called Fab Four, which was cemented when the Sussexes left Kensington Palace, weighed on Harry immensely at the time"
When you let a troublemaker in...

When did criticism of Meghan and Harry become racism? - "that the Duchess of Sussex wouldn’t make the effort (or was too cowardly) to fly in and thrash out a plan with the Queen – but was happy to fly to New York to watch her pal Serena Williams in the US Open finals when Archie was four months old – is a defining fact in a long list of facts that have defined Meghan Markle in my eyes... we sighed, snarked and snorted about silly things, like Markle closing her own car door, the fact that in six months this woman spent five times what any royal in the whole of Europe had on clothes, and various Marie-Antoinette-isms involving things like penning empowering messages on bananas for sex workers... Remember that Saturday, when we welcomed Ms Markle into the fold? I was in the grounds of Windsor Castle. I saw the Brits who had travelled to be there celebrating the arrival of the first African-American member of the Royal family – many of them mixed-race couples (estimated to be 9 per cent of the population in the UK, as opposed to just 4.6 per cent in Wokeville, Canada, and 2 per cent in the US).And what struck me then, as someone who has lived in the US on and off for the past decade, was how blissfully uncluttered and unpolarised we were by racial issues in comparison. How very – to coin Megxit terminology – naturally and unselfconsciously “progressive”: a thought echoed by Trevor Phillips this month, who called Britain “the only country in the world where a sizeable mixed-race population has come about as a consequence of love, rather than coercion or slavery”. It struck me, too, that we were very optimistic about a woman we knew so little about. Over time, that optimism was eroded not by the occurrence of rapid-onset racism, but by Markle’s actions and behaviour. The capriciousness over Frogmore Cottage, Archie’s hide-and-seek christening and the ghastly press, who simply would not pander in the way that they were ordered to.Oh, and the overt whinging about us to everyone from Pharrell Williams (“they don’t make it easy”) to Tom Bradby: “Not many people have asked if I’m OK,” she told the journalist as – in an eye-watering feat of narcissism – she managed to eclipse every cause she and her husband had gone to Africa to highlight, and make it all about her.In toddler tantrum-style, the list goes on, ending only with yesterday’s emergency summit"

It is absurd to blame the Harry and Meghan fiasco on 'British racism' - "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's extraordinary announcement – evening timed for the American audience – may have blindsided the Crown, but the liberal narrative setting in is utterly predictable... This is not only a fundamental misreading of the public’s frustration with Harry and Meghan’s conduct, but also an analysis that suffers from a short memory. When Meghan and Harry announced their engagement, both Middle England and the media fawned over the couple. Faithful monarchists toasted their wedding day in Jubilee-style street parties. The press hailed her as a “breath of fresh air”. But it wasn’t long before the whiff of rot started to seep from the Sussex’s tacit social contract with the country; the secrecy over Archie’s christening did not sit comfortably alongside revelations about the £2.4 million refurbishment of Frogmore cottage. Nor the career shift to heckling the public on climate change while zipping around on private jets.Britain’s frustration with the Sussexes thus centres around their naive hypocrisy and self-destructive determination to have their cake and eat it... the couple seem to live on another PR-oiled, celebnocratic planet... The Middle English instinct is that we should aspire to a colour blind society. This is partly because, unlike America, the UK has not need to find a language of ‘empowerment’ or a legal framework for affirmative action, to cauterise deep wounds from an incendiary race relations history. But also partly because – ironically enough given the royal subject-matter – Britain’s demons are entangled in class rather than race... Such is why that Vogue magazine cover – which featured 15 inspirational women – ruffled so many feathers. The celebration of “black” ballerinas and “Somali” boxers was weightily cadenced poetry to the pious wokeocracy. But to the rest of us, it exposed a lightweight and flippantly tokenistic attitude... one wonders whether the modern phenomenon of victimised narcissism is actually the culprit here. Eyebrow-raising elements to this story – from their discourteous behaviour towards the Queen to the decision to quit their apparently taxing public role after a six-week luxury holiday – all hint at a lack of self-awareness. Relieved of their royal duties, one can only hope they find the time to indulge in some soul searching"
Sadly, the UK is imported the US culture wars

Why the New York Times has got it wrong about the Sussexes and racism - "Ms Hirsch’s narrative conveniently overlooks the overwhelmingly fawning coverage that the Duke and Duchess enjoyed, from their engagement to their wedding day. Her article also neglects to mention that the collapse in support for the pair coincided with a string of bewildering acts of self-sabotage, from banning spectators from taking photos at Wimbledon because the Duchess was present, to sniping at the public about global warming while whizzing around in private jets... the most disturbing aspect to The New York Times’ thesis is that in Britain, there is “a deep correlation between privilege and race”. This statement crumbles on first contact with basic facts – among them that white working-class boys perform the worst of any group in our schools. It also overlooks an intriguing British quirk. Emotional baggage from our country’s legacy of aristocratic privilege has endowed Middle England with the kind of stridently meritocratic values that are a complete anathema to judging people by their colour.But, as these meritocratic principles are also incompatible with the kind of tokenistic multiculturalism that people like Ms Hirsch champion, it is being written off – on both sides of the Atlantic – as racism."

The monarchy already has a model for its continued success: the Queen - " the issue isn’t Harry and Meghan’s desire for independence.It is the way they have gone about it. It was disrespectful to the elders; it was “me, me, me”. And their announcement that they were looking for a “progressive role” implied that the one they left behind was regressive and archaic.They misunderstand how the privileged exercise leadership.The monarchy cannot go around justifying itself: the moment it does that, it becomes political. So instead it proves its worth by what it visibly does.“I have to be seen to be believed,” the Queen famously said. She is active, yet almost silent – and into that silence, we read a great deal. That the Queen doesn’t make a fuss; that she puts duty before self, that Her Majesty isn’t part of this wretched modern culture of falling apart every time you don’t get exactly what you want.

How the royals gave Harry and Meghan everything they wanted - but they still wanted more - "Telling one of the Queen’s most senior aides: “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets”, in the run up to their Windsor wedding in May 2018, the ill-tempered comment is understood to have prompted a rare rebuke from the 93-year-old monarch.Yet ever since that glittering ceremony at St George’s Chapel, Windsor, the royals have been uncharacteristically accommodating of the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ demands - which makes their decision to step down as senior royals without consultation all the more baffling.It started before the couple had even got married when the Queen broke with royal tradition to invite American divorcee Meghan to spend Christmas at Sandringham in 2017, even though she was only engaged to Harry at the time.Recognising that the former Suits star had not just moved to the UK but also given up her blossoming acting career to marry into the Firm, the royals bent over backwards to make Meghan feel as welcome as possible - as did the British public. The Cambridges even allowed the lovestruck pair to stay at Anmer Hall, their private bolthole on the royal estate in Norfolk and the ‘Fab Four’ were famously captured by amateur photographer Karen Anvil walking arm in arm to St Mary Magdalene Church on Christmas morning... When cracks started appearing in their relationship with the Cambridges amid rumours of a rift between the royal brothers - and a tearful incident between the sisters in law at a bridesmaids dress fitting for Princess Charlotte - efforts were made behind the scenes to patch things up... They were allowed to keep the location of the birth secret (until it was later revealed on the royal baby’s birth certificate) as well as breaking with royal protocol by also keeping the identity of his godparents under wraps.And when it came to their first royal tour as a family - following a hugely successful visit to Australia in 2018 - the Sussexes were permitted to take Archie to Harry’s beloved Africa last autumn.Almost everything that Meghan (and Harry) wanted, they got.  And yet it still didn’t seem to be enough. Giving an interview to ITV’s Tom Bradby during the African tour, Meghan hinted at a lack of support from her royal relatives, tearfully declaring: “Not many people have asked if I’m ok.”Harry later issued a statement attacking the press for “bullying” Meghan - without the prior knowledge of the Queen or her successors in a growing sign of what was to come... the couple has never looked more isolated.And not just from their nearest and dearest but their own advisers. Their PR chief Sara Latham now appears to be playing second fiddle to US based master of the dart arts Ken Sunshine, David Beckham’s former publicist Izzy May and talent agent Nick Collins - all of whom now appear a part of the Sussexes’ inner circle amid claims royal aides have been “frozen out”.“The couple have been ignoring the advice of their palace staff,” revealed an insider... The simple truth is, in giving them what they wanted, the royals only succeeded in leaving Harry and Meghan wanting more."

Does Harry really want to follow Edward VIII, says VIRGINIA BLACKBURN - "It’s hard to escape the conclusion that having grown up in a country that considers the Kennedys to be aristocracy, Meghan didn’t understand that being a Windsor is not like being a celebrity. It wasn’t about wearing the latest designer clothes to awards ceremonies. It was about getting on with the job. Meghan might not have known this but Harry did. What was he thinking? Presumably, unless the rift with his brother is an awful lot worse than we’ve been led to believe, he wants the institution of monarchy to flourish as much as anyone. How does he think he’s helping that? Harry was one of its most popular members, adored by all and sundry. We forgave him readily for the Vegas antics. We were even sympathetic during his photographer-punching stage. He was a prince looking for love, just like the rest of us. And now what?"

'We have lost respect for you': Military figures dismayed by Duke of Sussex's behaviour - "One of the Army's most senior former officers urged the Duke of Sussex to "put Queen and country first", as a former officer in the Royal Marines, of which the Duke is Captain General, said he would not raise a toast to him."

Meghan Markle's former aide lands a new job with Cliveden clan - "Since Meghan Markle joined the Royal family she has had three staff members step down.
Amy Pickerill was appointed as Meghan’s assistant last year and is now set to step down from the position... long time staff member Samantha Cohen would be leaving Kensington Palace. Samantha, who is originally from Australia said she would leave the royal household once the new baby had arrived. She had previously worked as Queen Elizabeth II’s private secretary, but announced her resignation from that role in 2017 in order to join Meghan and Harry. Meghan had hope to keep Samantha on her team permanently as she had previously advised her on the jump from Hollywood to royal life. Samantha’s resignation was revealed as Meghan was bombarded by rumours that she was difficult to deal with... PA Melissa Touabti left six months after the Royal wedding and was key during the build up to the event."

Are cracks already beginning to appear in the Sussexes’ North American dream? - "The newly freelancing Sussexes are planning new rules of engagement which will see traditional royal reporters cast aside in favour of “specialist media”, “young up-and-coming" reporters and outlets they consider “credible” (including the Daily Telegraph).Yet how did it come to pass that a prince who has largely enjoyed positive coverage - except the odd occasion when he decided to wear a Nazi uniform, or no clothes at all, has now turned on the very press pack that has helped to propel his popularity?... "Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."It is a sentiment few could fail to sympathise with, yet in persistently tarring the entire media with the same brush, Harry weakens his argument by failing to distinguish between legitimate reportage and online invective. The royal couple have been specific in their suing the Mail on Sunday and its parent company Associated Newspapers for what they claim is the unlawful publication of a letter Meghan sent to her father Thomas Markle.But the action - designed to protect the Duchess’s privacy now looks set to have the adverse effect of prompting Mr Markle to spill all of their most intimate secrets in court. It will be open season for all the press - including those 'game-playing' outlets that he holds is particular contempt... Harry has spent almost his entire life barely able to disguise a visceral hatred of the media - betraying his true feelings in ill-tempered remarks to Sky News reporters who deign to ask him an off the cuff question to joking with baseball players in Harlem that they should aim their shot at the waiting press pack.At one point, the jibes came so thick and fast that aides had to ask the former Army captain to tone it down a bit.With a reputation for not only reading websites like MailOnline but actually scrolling through the comments section, the sixth-in-line to the throne would regularly phone PR advisers, often late at night, to admonish them for what he perceived as negative headlines. “There is something approaching paranoia about his attitude to the media,” said one royal insider. “He believes they are out to get him. And because he can be ill-tempered and petulant and hot headed he would react to stories almost as soon as they broke whereas William would be a lot more considered and sleep on it before forming an opinion.”... What remains to be seen is how Harry will manage his new-found relationship with the global media without the careful guidance of the well-oiled palace spin machine. For someone who has never been particularly good at taking PR advice, it seems a little counter-intuitive for him now to be entrusting his reputation to spinners, lawyers and business managers more concerned with their 10 per cent cut than an allegiance to Queen and country.Since his days at Ludgrove Prep and Eton College, the former Army captain has carefully cultivated a watertight inner circle that has always been impervious to leaks... Now largely cut off from his family and closest friends, Harry will be  entrusting his secrets to the kinds of ‘friends’ who gave gushing interviews to People last February revealing that Meghan had penned her father a handwritten letter. The US magazine this week reported that the Sussexes felt their “hand was forced,” because: “There is so much bad blood in that family — it’s toxic.” It's hardly the sort of stuff HM wants to read over her Tupperwared breakfast cereal. And here’s another dilemma. Having touted his wife for voiceover work with the likes of Disney boss Bob Iger - is Harry certain he is comfortable potentially playing second fiddle to Meghan as they launch their assault on North America?Notwithstanding the problems the Prince of Wales faced when he perceived Princess Diana to be hogging the limelight, part of the reason Harry chose to split from Kensington Palace, the household he shared with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge is because he felt overshadowed by his brother and sister-in-law.Moreover, with former Suits star Meghan a veteran of the red carpet who willingly chose a career in the spotlight, how is Harry going to cope with the paparazzi if, as rumoured, they end up settling in the Duchess’s native LA?... if the couple think they are going to avoid negative publicity by only briefing journalists who have sold their souls to give them sycophantic, one-sided, coverage then unfortunately they may also prove mistaken.Because it isn’t only the regulated, mainstream media that wants a full picture to be painted of high-profile people in positions of immense privilege but also the public - not least when those people are claiming to be innocent victims of their circumstances"

Court documents detail Meghan Markle's deteriorating relationship with her father Thomas Markle - "The defence document lodged on Tuesday in the High Court in London exposes in full their deteriorating relationship while accusing the Duchess of allegedly being - in part at least - an architect of her own breach of privacy. It suggests that when she wrote the letter to her father, she was aware it would likely end up in the public domain... After days of largely excoriating criticism of the Duke and Duchess for wanting to quit as ‘senior’ Royals, the Mail on Sunday’s legal defence is probably the last thing they needed. The newspaper is refusing to back down and has seemingly signed up Mr Markle as its star witness. The court case, whenever it should take place, is likely to be the trial of the century with the Duchess pitted against her father in the witness box. It won’t be pretty and the loser will be facing a legal bill running into the millions. The defence document is quick to point out that the Royal family are public figures supported “largely by public funds”... “The Claimant’s privacy rights do not extend to silencing her father.”...  “The Letter does not appear to contain the Claimant’s deepest and most private thoughts but to be an admonishment by the Claimant of her father for failing to behave as she would have wished.“Amongst other things, she accused him of breaking her heart, manufacturing pain, being paranoid, being ridiculed, fabricating stories, of attacking Prince Harry, and continually lying.”The newspaper alleges that the Duchess had taken “great care over its presentation” adding: “The Letter appears to have been immaculately copied out by the Claimant in her own elaborate handwriting from a previous draft. There are no crossings-out or amendments as there usually are with a spontaneous draft. It is to be inferred also from the care the Claimant took over the presentation of the letter that she anticipated it being disclosed to and read by third parties.”The defence claim goes on: “It [the Letter] rehearses the Claimant’s version of the history of her relationship with her father and her family in a way that strongly suggests the Claimant wanted or expected third parties to read it.”"

Duchess of Sussex moves business interests to Delaware, the US 'corporate haven' beloved by the super-rich - "The Duchess of Sussex has moved her business to a US state used by the super-rich to protect their interests from scrutiny.The Duchess’s company Frim Fram Inc was moved out of California in December and incorporated in Delaware, which tax experts suggest could be done to avoid being hit with tax liabilities in California."

73% of Canadians don’t want to cover costs for Prince Harry, Meghan Markle: poll - National - "The overwhelming majority of Canadians aren’t on board with paying for costs associated with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle living in the country... Only three per cent of Canadians said they would be open to footing the bill for the couple and their son, Archie. Nineteen per cent of respondents said they would be OK with paying some costs, but not all... A former member of the RCMP also said the royals cannot technically refuse security... 47 per cent of Canadians indicated they think of Prince Harry as more of a celebrity; 41 per cent considered him to primarily be a working member of the monarchy.Other members of the family are considered to be working royals. For example, 66 per cent of Canadians think of Prince William as a working royal... All this begs the question of whether Canadians truly see a future for the monarchy — and according to this survey, maybe not.Two-thirds of Canadians said they think the monarchy has lost or is losing relevance, with 41 per cent saying it is “completely irrelevant.” However, 61 per cent of Canadians say they are OK to continue supporting the Queen, including swearing oaths to her, putting her on the currency and recognizing her as the head of state.  The survey points out, though, that Prince Charles would likely not have the same support as king — only 43 per cent would back him. The desire for Canada to be a constitutional monarchy is also fading, the survey noted. In 2016, 38 per cent of Canadians said the monarchy should not continue, but that number is now 45 per cent."

Prince Harry is British royalty, but Canada?s immigration system likely to treat him as commoner - The Washington Post - "“In order to become legal permanent residents of Canada, they would need to apply through our normal immigration processes,” said Béatrice Fénelon, a spokeswoman for Canada’s immigration agency. “However, members of the royal family are not required to seek authorization to come and stay in Canada as visitors.” She did not respond to questions on whether Harry and Meghan could stay indefinitely as “visitors.” As tourists traveling on British (Harry) or American (Meghan) passports, they could stay in Canada for up to six months, but then they’d be expected to leave. And without work permits — which can be complicated to get without job offers — they would have difficulty earning a living... Audrey Macklin, a law professor at the University of Toronto, has “no doubt” the couple could secure permanent residency if they planned to live in Canada over the long term. They could even request it on humanitarian or compassionate grounds — a route available to foreigners working on temporary permits or asylum seekers who have maintained solid work records in Canada... The queen herself isn’t a citizen, he noted. But she does have a status here: She’s “the personification of the Canadian state.”Still, she can’t grant Harry and Meghan citizenship, Lagassé said, because she remains bound by Canadian law, which “is very clear that discretion belongs with the [immigration] minister.” Depending on their plans, Grewal said, the couple have the option of applying through a business immigration program... Moving to Canada could jeopardize Meghan’s chances of getting British citizenship. She will need to have spent a certain amount of time in Britain to qualify."


PIERS MORGAN: Prince Harry's ditched UK for Meghan Markle - "Prince Harry is very sad.In fact, he wants us to know he feels a 'great sadness'... he wanted everyone to be in no doubt who to blame for this:'You looked out for me for so long, but the media is a powerful force.'... Oh, I know, I know…the only accepted narrative, certainly on Twitter, is that the mean, beastly, racist media has driven out poor Harry and Meghan with our despicable antics.We shamefully refused to let them lecture us about the environment AND use private jets like taxis!And we had the audacity to think a $500,000 star-studded, baby-shower party in New York was a tad inappropriate given that Harry and Meghan were busy urging us on Twitter that same week to pay more attention to poor people.Oh, and we shockingly suggested that if you’re going to have the taxpayers fork out $3 million on refurbishing your home, you should probably not hide photos and details of your son's birth or stop the public taking your picture at Wimbledon.Yes, the 'bullying' media's treated them appallingly, and it's all because Meghan has a black mother – despite the fact we all fell over ourselves for 18 months to say how fantastic it was to have a bi-racial woman enter the Royal Family.So, on behalf of the disgusting British media, I humbly and sincerely apologise for holding these two rich, privileged public figures to any kind of accountability. We're a disgrace – and it's only right that they should now be free, as they have indicated, to only invite friendly sycophantic journalists to cover their lives in future... It could just be that Meghan and Harry are a pair of spoiled, entitled, hypocritical brats who decided to hold the Queen and Monarchy to ransom so they could have their royal cake and eat it, and have now had their bluff called and been sent packing... You can't have senior members of the Royal Family living in North America flogging themselves to the highest bidders like grubby tiara-clad second-hand car salesmen... It was going to be their two-faced virtue-signalling way or the highway... You’ve spent your entire married life whining about everything and everyone, and plotting to get out of 'flying the flag'.Harry told the charity crowd: 'Once Meghan and I were married, we were excited, we were hopeful, and we were here to serve'.Yet he then said their decision to quit comes after 'so many months of talks.'Now, I'm not the world’s greatest mathematician but they were married in May, 2018 and it’s now January, 2020.So that’s a period of just 18 months between the pair of them excitedly looking forward to serve - and quitting.And for 'so many' of those months, they’ve been planning to quit.Which beggars the question: how many seconds did they actually excitedly serve before wanting out?... We’ve already seen from the cringe-making clips of him (successfully) hustling the boss of Disney for Meghan for voiceover work, that the only 'service' on their minds is to commercially exploit their royal status and promote her acting career.They’re going to be the royal Kardashians, and no amount of doe-eyed victimhood whimpering can change that cold hard fact.They’re also going to very soon discover what the real world’s like.Despite their constant bleating about the media, Harry and Meghan have actually been afforded huge privacy, protected by new rules of engagement between the royals and British press established after the death of his mother.That’s why not a single photo of them appeared during their recent six-week holiday. But once they become just another pair of grasping money-chasing celebrities, they will find themselves at the mercy of the merciless US tabloid media and paparazzi.Harry’s wish for a new 'peaceful life' is thus utter delusion.As, frankly, is almost everything about his view of all this saga."

The Duchess of Cambridge shows how to wield influence subtly - "Lending your voice as a royal to causes with a political edge is a tactic that can all too easily backfire – as the Sussexes discovered to their peril last year. Yet the Duchess of Cambridge, in her series of moving photographs of Holocaust survivors, walks this tightrope with perfect ease, drawing attention to the lessons of history whilst preserving political neutrality. In one fell swoop, she has shown us that the Royal Family is in safe hands... Kate’s careful use of symbolism demonstrates how she has chosen to show rather than tell. As she reveals her artistic side to the nation, she would surely approve of Anton Chekhov’s sentiment: ‘Don’t tell me the moon is shining, show me the glint of light on broken glass.'Her example paints a clear picture of how the royals can operate in future – lending support to the issues that count in a manner that, rather than seeking to be pejorative, opens up an opportunity for national reflection and discussion"

Meghan Markle's downfall: Why the world turned against the Duchess - "NOVEMER 2018: Swift exit from Kensington Palace
This is the exact moment when things started to shift...
MID-DECEMBER 2018: The staff start to turn...
Whether or not the Sussex's Christmas photo was an intentional snub, there's no denying the press has changed their tune and royal fans are following suit.Just look at this side-by-side image showing the difference in media coverage between Harry and Meghan's engagement, and now...
William and Harry. They may have walked together like they did last year, but the two royal brothers kept their distance with their wives in the middle and did not interact at all. In fact, body language expert Judi James says it's a very different scenario to their normal relationship...
EARLY JANUARY 2019: Another aide quits
Meghan can't seem to escape the theory that she is difficult and demanding, particularly to her staff.That rumour doesn't seem to be dying down any time soon, with yet another royal employee resigning - her female bodyguard... While there are no claims that Meghan and her chief protection officer (who is not being named) clashed, the resignation comes after the recent departure of Meghan's personal assistant, Melissa Touabti and speculation that private secretary Samantha Cohen had also resigned from her duties."
Strange. We are told that the racist British press have always hated her