[NSC] The Interview of the Century

[drew]

Their story on that conversation directly contradicts in terms of timeline (Meghan - " it was when I was pregnant". Harry - "it was when we first got together"). Meghan came out with her version first and was more specific about when it happened, without Harry being present. Harry then shambles in and errs on trying to side with more discretion, and then elects to shut it down by refusing to answer any questions on the subject.

I think Meghan either lied or embellished a conversation to deliberately play the race card, leaving Harry stuck in the middle to mop up a floor full of piss she'd left him, which he carefully stepped back from.

There would have been two conversations. The first was Harry and whomever raised the subject of skin colour and the second is when Harry told Meghan. He might not have told her straight away and only when things were apparently getting worse and she was already pregnant.

If you look at the transcript, her answer starts off around the references to the fact that Archie wouldn't be made a prince when Charles becomes king, and therefore not have the protection that comes with that, which she says was around the time she was pregnant and then comes the remark about skin colour. You say she's lying but you don't know when Harry told her about that comment.

If you were Harry and someone senior in the family, for arguments sake let's say Charles, said that to you when you were courting, would you immediately tell Meghan at the time she is trying to be accepted into the family or would you try and resolve it with Charles?

 

[drew]

It’s not ‘their’ story, it’s Harry’s. She said it was a private conversation between another Royal and Harry, which Harry then told her. Now Harry may well have waited until she was pregnant to tell her of the conversation he had, but Harry may well have had the conversation before then.

I’m actually completely the reverse of you, I think Harry has had an axe to grind and he’s sending his wife out to front it all up because he hasn’t got the balls to do it himself. Because ‘Daddy’ may cut him off.

I agree re your first paragraph but not the second.

Harry clearly stated that there are issues with his dad, eg Charles stop taking his calls and that he was financially cut off from him, that doesn't put Charles in a good light as a father but it shows what you state 'may' happen had already happened.

 

[beorhthelm]

If you look at the transcript, her answer starts off around the references to the fact that Archie wouldn't be made a prince when Charles becomes king, and therefore not have the protection that comes with that, which she says was around the time she was pregnant and then comes the remark about skin colour. You say she's lying but you don't know when Harry told her about that comment.

If you were Harry and someone senior in the family, for arguments sake let's say Charles, said that to you when you were courting, would you immediately tell Meghan at the time she is trying to be accepted into the family or would you try and resolve it with Charles?

she's lieing. the transcript shows this. she says its against protocol, there is no explanation for not having prince title, then she's talking about George V convention. so there was a explanation and it is following protocol. then the loaded question... placed at this point of the conversation infer a racial reason. but later Harry says that conversation was had at the beginning (and no more, so little on this), so it had no bearing on the title. because it couldnt, the protocol for titles was established in 1917, with an exception made for William's children in 2013. they are expecting a change to protocol to make Archie a prince now, not wait until Charles ascends the throne and he becomes a prince.

 

[Bold Seagull]

...

 

[vegster]

Prince William has said that the Royal Family is not racist and that he would be talking to his brother Harry.... After the revelations Sunday/Monday I'm genuinely surprised that hasn't happened already.

 

[Bry Nylon]

Prince William has said that the Royal Family is not racist and that he would be talking to his brother Harry.... After the revelations Sunday/Monday I'm genuinely surprised that hasn't happened already.

Sadly, given the tight bond that appeared to exist between them through their childhood and teenage years, I sense there isn't a huge amount of trust remaining.

If I was William I would be very cautious about talking to to Harry about private matters right now, given that Harry feels liberated to talk to the media in a way that simply isn't possible for William. Harry has made his bed and I reckon William has been advised to simply let him lie in it for the time-being. Sad, on a human level.

 

[drew]

she's lieing. the transcript shows this. she says its against protocol, there is no explanation for not having prince title, then she's talking about George V convention. so there was a explanation and it is following protocol. then the loaded question... placed at this point of the conversation infer a racial reason. but later Harry says that conversation was had at the beginning (and no more, so little on this), so it had no bearing on the title. because it couldnt, the protocol for titles was established in 1917, with an exception made for William's children in 2013. they are expecting a change to protocol to make Archie a prince now, not wait until Charles ascends the throne and he becomes a prince.

My understanding of the convention is that the grandchildren of the monarch become princes or princesses. In other words, when Charles becomes King, which MM referred to, Archie should become a prince as he is a grandchild of a monarch. I guess her interpretation of what she was told was that he wouldn't become a prince when Charles becomes king. If that's not the case, then why were Eugenie and Beatrice each given the title of princess?

Here's the extract from the transcript:-

Meghan: But the idea of our son not being safe, and also the idea of the first member of colour in this family not being titled in the same way that other grandchildren would be . . .  You know, the other piece of that conversation is, there’s a convention — I forget if it was George V or George VI convention — that when you’re the grandchild of the monarch, so when Harry’s dad becomes king, automatically Archie and our next baby would become prince or princess, or whatever they were going to be.

So that suggests to me she is referring to when Charles becomes King, not when Archie was born.

 

[drew]

Sadly, given the tight bond that appeared to exist between them through their childhood and teenage years, I sense there isn't a huge amount of trust remaining.

If I was William I would be very cautious about talking to to Harry about private matters right now, given that Harry feels liberated to talk to the media in a way that simply isn't possible for William. Harry has made his bed and I reckon William has been advised to simply let him lie in it for the time-being. Sad, on a human level.

If Harry wanted to put the knife in he would have divulged who made the skin colour comment. When talking about his relationship with William at the moment, he did say for the time being they needed space.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

 

[beorhthelm]

My understanding of the convention is that the grandchildren of the monarch become princes or princesses. In other words, when Charles becomes King, which MM referred to, Archie should become a prince as he is a grandchild of a monarch. I guess her interpretation of what she was told was that he wouldn't become a prince when Charles becomes king. If that's not the case, then why were Eugenie and Beatrice each given the title of princess?

Here's the extract from the transcript:-

Meghan: But the idea of our son not being safe, and also the idea of the first member of colour in this family not being titled in the same way that other grandchildren would be . . .  You know, the other piece of that conversation is, there’s a convention — I forget if it was George V or George VI convention — that when you’re the grandchild of the monarch, so when Harry’s dad becomes king, automatically Archie and our next baby would become prince or princess, or whatever they were going to be.

So that suggests to me she is referring to when Charles becomes King, not when Archie was born.

yep. and that is some way off in the future, expect that will happen. nothing to do with security now, and near future. unless the claim is Charles said he's not going to allow Archie to become a prince in the future, a much bolder and unsubstantiated statement. i dont see why security would have come up as a discussion as they'd be protected all the time in UK on the payroll. its all about the title really.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

If Harry wanted to put the knife in he would have divulged who made the skin colour comment. When talking about his relationship with William at the moment, he did say for the time being they needed space.

He did put the knife in. He made an unsubstantiated allegation against the entire family. Making the claim and not naming the person casts a cloud over all of them. Totally indefensible behaviour.

 

[RossyG]

He did put the knife in. He made an unsubstantiated allegation against the entire family. Making the claim and not naming the person casts a cloud over all of them. Totally indefensible behaviour.

Yes, anyone who says “one of that small group of people did this but I’m not saying who” is being a wanker, treating it like a game of Cluedo.

“Was it Prince William in the library with the candlestick?”

No, it was Prince Harry on TV stabbing his own family in the back.

 

[drew]

yep. and that is some way off in the future, expect that will happen. nothing to do with security now, and near future. unless the claim is Charles said he's not going to allow Archie to become a prince in the future, a much bolder and unsubstantiated statement. i dont see why security would have come up as a discussion as they'd be protected all the time in UK on the payroll. its all about the title really.

How do you know that will happen? She refers to when Charles becomes king the grandchildren become princes or princesses but she claims she was told that wouldn't happen. So she knows it is not now but when the Queen dies.

Also, I'm not sure it is some way off in the future. In all likelihood, within the next 10 years. As for your last comment, she wasn't on the payroll. That was made clear when she asked for help with her suicide feelings and was told she wasn't on the payroll so they couldn't help.

 

[Originunknown]

Timeless

 

[drew]

He did put the knife in. He made an unsubstantiated allegation against the entire family. Making the claim and not naming the person casts a cloud over all of them. Totally indefensible behaviour.

Fair enough but he did confirm after the interview it was neither the Queen nor Philip. I think reading between the lines, it was either his brother or his dad. My money would be on the latter but that's just an opinion.

 

[Giraffe]

Fair enough but he did confirm after the interview it was neither the Queen nor Philip.

And in doing so, left the question of who it was. Had he not done so it could have been just an official or something, but by not saying it was the Queen or Phillip he imemdiately left open it was one of the family. Clever and calculated.

 

[METALMICKY]

Yes, anyone who says “one of that small group of people did this but I’m not saying who” is being a wanker, treating it like a game of Cluedo.

“Was it Prince William in the library with the candlestick?”

No, it was Prince Harry on TV stabbing his own family in the back.

Spot on! I see today that when pushed William said he hadn't spoken to his brother yet but he will be doing so. One hopes that chat involves giving him a slap for being so gutless, led by his manipulative wife and airing private family issues in front of the world.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

How do you know that will happen? She refers to when Charles becomes king the grandchildren become princes or princesses but she claims she was told that wouldn't happen. So she knows it is not now but when the Queen dies.

Also, I'm not sure it is some way off in the future. In all likelihood, within the next 10 years. As for your last comment, she wasn't on the payroll. That was made clear when she asked for help with her suicide feelings and was told she wasn't on the payroll so they couldn't help.

https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/how-archie-harrison-could-be-set-free-from-his-royal-burden-when-prince-charles-becomes-king.html/

This backs her claim but it's not new news. Charles has gone on record that he wants to slim down working Royals and save money and to modernise their roles. The son of the brother of the future heir is exactly the sort that shouldn't have an entitled life insomuch as paid by the tax payer.

It is something that the Royals have been blamed for with so many hangers on, Charles has stated he agrees and wants to reduce them. Some could say he can't win.

 

[beorhthelm]

This backs her claim but it's not new news.

i'd say it makes the claims more murky, suggests it was discussed at their request.

 

[drew]

i'd say it makes the claims more murky, suggests it was discussed at their request.

Not quite sure why you reach that conclusion. Charles talked about slimming down the monarchy and the consolidating jobs some time ago but since then Philip has stopped duties, Anne is into her 70s, Andrew is all but locked away in a cupboard under the stairs and now Meghan and Harry have stepped back from Royal duties. So the monarchy has slimmed down already.

Notwithstanding that, Charles plans were to scale down the monarchy to just his close family their wives and children, ie Harry and Meghan's children. If that's the case then why did someone tell MM that Archie won't become a Prince when Charles becomes King? Trouble with a lot of these things is that we don't know whether it was a member of the family that made these comments or senior members of the household staff!!