Jump to content

Deadlines? What Deadlines?

Members
  • Posts

    5,881
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Deadlines? What Deadlines?

  1. On 3/2/2023 at 12:55 PM, DireWolfSpirit said:

    I realize the UK has a different legal system than the U.S. but im amazed Charles could evict Harry from a cottage tbat was gifted to him by Elizabeth?

    At a minimum he should have standing to recoup his costly renovations.

    It smells like thievery from afar (on the Royals part).

    Not gifted exactly. QE2 offered it to them as their permanent residence in the UK, but it's still property of the crown. The place had apparently been subdivided into staff living quarters at one point but had sat empty for a number of years. That's why the renovation was so expensive. Empty real estate doesn't age well. Plus the place is 200 years old.

    They probably would have been better off tearing the thing down and building new. It's a historical building though.

    After they left they reimbursed the crown for the renovations and had been paying a lease on the place. And yeah, they should get some of the renovation moneys back now that they're out and Andrew is in. Otherwise "moving out" should involve pulling all the fixtures, basins, appliances, and very millimeter of copper wire out of the place. Tony Soprano style. 

    What's interesting is the amount of press coverage this has gotten. Like, there's a lot of it. Much of it praising King Charles for the "savage burn" or whatever. There's also a tendency among some news outlets to post pictures of Frogmore House (a mansion), and not Frogmore Cottage in their stories. A weird mistake since they've probably photographed the place hundreds of times over the years. 

    The Mail online just ran a story about Tyler Perry visiting them in California. The accompanying photo is literally of a single black suburban turning into a driveway. You can't even see who the driver is. This is beyond parody. 

  2. 15 hours ago, Werthead said:

    Alonso was on fire there. Extremely impressive drive.

    If Red Bull are that dominant all season, it could be a very dull championship. But Ferrari will be worried they're much closer to the Mercedes and Aston Martis than they are to the Red Bulls.

    Williams also made a huge step up there.

    The non-drs pass on Hamilton was pretty impressive. 

  3. 5 hours ago, williamjm said:

    I realise that due to the identity of the team owner it was never going to happen, but it would have been fascinating to have Alonso and Vettel driving together in a competitive Aston Martin.

    In Q1 and Q2 the field looked very close, although Red Bull did pull ahead in Q3. It would have been interesting to see whether Le Clerc could have challenged for the front row if he did another run. Alonso didn't quite manage to challenge for pole but still a good qualifying result for him. Hopefully we have a competitive race tomorrow rather than Verstappen charging off into the distance.

    Vettel in his prime maybe. I think he should have packed it in much sooner than he did.

    It's pretty amazing the longevity of some of these guys. Time was you'd have maybe a decade at the top and you'd be past it. I suspect Alonso's as quick as ever; he just hasn't had the car to show it. 

  4. That Alonso fella is looking pretty race-y.

    My understanding is that along with acquiring Alonso, A-M made several notable personnel changes on the technical side in recent years. It looks like it might be paying dividends.  

  5. On 2/18/2023 at 7:13 AM, Cas Stark said:

    Yes, based on his own words and actions I absolutely believe he would say 'fuck protocol' he's been raging against protocol his entire life.  He has had minders and cleaners handling his BS his entire life, fixing things for him, enabling him, etc.   He has also shown himself to be a petty, jealous, disloyal person and despite what you want to think, I am sure his actions of the last years were very, very hurtful to his grandparents. 

    Based on his own words, he was perfectly fine with "protocol". He literally says so in the book.

    On 2/18/2023 at 7:13 AM, Cas Stark said:

    Harry being a jerk to Angela Kelly is not any kind of story about Meghan being 'uppity', that is pure spin to inject race into a story where it has no legitimate bearing on things.   That spin is only there to paint anyone who doesn't buy into H&M's version of things as a 'hater' and a racist.

    "uppity" and "social climber" have both been terms that have been used to describe Meghan int the English press.

    On 2/18/2023 at 7:13 AM, Cas Stark said:

    ETA...worth noting that it looks to me like Harry did a very poor job of helping Meghan adjust, putting her in bad situations, like failure to follow protocol over the tiara, hosting Will and Kate for the first time shoeless in ripped jeans.  These are pitfalls that Harry easily could have ensured Meghan avoided. He didn't.  He likes breaking protocol and shocking his family, he gets off on it.  

    Fuck his family. You're talking about this stuff like it actually matters. And, I'll say again, protocol was not a problem regarding the tiara.

    It also rebuts the claim that his book confirms the "official" version of events. 

  6. On the topic of wedding dresses (something else I witnessed):

    Princess Charlotte supposedly cried because her wedding dress fit like shit. In the insane wedding I described earlier, my sisters were bridesmaids. Like princess Charlotte, their measurements were taken and phoned-in to the dress makers. A seamstress was on-hand when they went to the dress store to try on their gowns. 

    Guess what; their dresses fit like shit. The seamstress suggested that maybe the measurements were taken wrong. Not bloody likely. My mom took those measurments. Moms knows what she's doing. She's got boxes full of dresses she's sewn herself, for herself, over the years. She has likewise made clothes for my sisters for when they had to dress up for some fancy to-do. 

    Sometimes the dress makers screw up. Sometimes peoples bodies change a little, especially if there's a long lead time between the measurements and the fitting. The seamstress even talked about not taking the dresses in too much because they want to be able to eat at the reception. It's easier to make adjustments if the thing is a little too big instead of too small. Making alterations the day before is totally normal.

    But somehow the tabloids thought this was newsworthy. I don't know what to do with these people.  

     

  7. 2 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

    Harry recounts in the book the conflict with Angela Kelly over Meghan taking the tiara for a hairstyling, and that she told them they weren't following protocol for taking it.  This is fundamentally exactly the same story as was reported in the media.

    Once again, tell me you haven't read it without telling me you haven't read it. 

    Here's an example of how it was reported at the time, though there are various versions of the story:

    https://ca.style.yahoo.com/queen-biting-words-meghan-095607607.html

    The way Harry tells it:

    • His Aunts offered the Spencer family tiara for the wedding. The same one Diana wore
    • The plan was to go with this and Meghan's veil was being designed to suit
    • Later, they get a call from the Queen, offering to loan Meghan a tiara from her own collection. They agree. Harry doesn't speculate that the offer was made to prevent the Spencer tiara from appearing, as has been suggested by some.
    • Palace; the Queens own dressing room; Meghan is presented  with five tiaras, each more beautiful than the last, blah, blah. She tries one on that everyone agrees is perfect. The Queen says She'll put it in the safe until they're ready to retrieve it, she suggests that Meghan should practice wearing it because tiaras can be tricky. The whole affair is very cordial and pleasant and Harry is very happy with how Meghan and Granny are getting on. Angela Kelly is present while this is happening.
    • After a time, he contacts the palace to retrieve the tiara. Kelly tells him the protocol for taking it. He thinks it's a bit much but he agrees. She tells him it can't be done because she's "too busy". Harry is justifiably confused by this, given that she was in the room when the Queen consented to loan it. (In her defense, she may have actually been busy, but her priorities are kind of messed up) This resistance goes on for a time and causes some inconvenience vis a vis the wedding gown fabrication. 
    • He is eventually able to get the tiara and he and Angela Kelly have some words. Angela wants to unload on him and his response is, "Now? Really?"

    And that's it. No "biting words", no mention of Russian diamonds, no, "What Megan want's Meghan Gets!!!" and definitely no Harry getting high handed with the Queen. 

    Anyone who believes that Prince Harry, the Queen's grandson and military veteran, would ever raise his voice to Grandma, Queen of United Kingdom, commander in chief of the British armed forces, is a fucking idiot. but that's the way these jackals reported it. It's not like he hasn't been part of this family for 35 years. 

    And does anyone seriously think he'd say, "Fuck protocol, just give me the tiara!! Oh yeah, this irreplaceable $3 million dollar piece of jewelry; just toss it in the boot and I'll be on my way."

    It sounds trivial, but this was one of many stories that fed into the early narrative of Meghan being "uppity". While this is going on, Samantha Markle is already making appearances as "Princess Pushy's sister".

    Jesus fucking christ I know too much about these people. 

  8. 5 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

    I brought it up to refute the idea that the various 'leaks' had not been substantiated.  That is false.  As I said, the vast majority of those negative rumors have been proven to be accurate.

    Bullshit, I'm familiar with the tiara story as it appeared in the press and how it appears in the book. What I know of the bridemaids dress story, it is similarly distorted to make Meghan look like some kind of monster. "Substantiated"?

  9.  

    5 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

    Hmmm.  As I recall, almost every rumor has been substantiated by Harry himself:  Tiara issue, bridesmaid dress fiasco, no closeness with Kate, bullying accusations, lying about the birth, lying about cooperating with Finding Freedom authors, taking meetings with media companies months before they quit, and on and on it goes.  

    Tell me you haven't read the book without telling me you haven't read the book.

    Seriously, are we still banging on about the fucking tiarra? Take the Queen's tiara collection and thow it into a goddamn woodchipper for all I care. Same for the bridemaids dresses and indeed the bridemades while you're at it. 

    Also,

    Have you never been a part of executing a wedding? It's fucking madness. The last time I had to do it I literally volunteered for a task that I knew would get me the fuck out of there for at least 2 hours*.

    *Collecting the bridesmaids shoes from the retailer, two towns over, who had to dye them because someone thought they were the wrong fucking shade of purple.  

  10. 2 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

    When you want a change in status from your employer, whether it is a family business or not, it will involve negotiation.  That isn't a dirty word.  The world is full of family businesses where 'family' and 'business' are co mingled.  The rf isn't alone in this challenge.

    But we can agree to disagree on H, and his family and who is the victim/victimizer. 

    I'm somewhat less interested in the internal family dynamics because it really comes down to "he-said she-said". Whatever missteps the Sussexes may or may not have made, I think they were genuinely trying to make it work. I think there were others inside "The Firm" who felt likewise. But there were definitely those who weren't. The press leaks and tabloid spin demonstrate this.

    The media phenomenon is far more interesting to me, though it's tough to separate them sometimes.

    2 hours ago, Zorral said:

    Funny, how those who are comparing Harry's behavior with Lady G's, haven't noticed that she too, WAS NOT THERE FOR HER CHILDREN, and she too admits that much of their troubles and sad outcome is because of that.

    That she's asked their permission (though at least one of them, and maybe 2 of them, cannot say, and were not in a situation to give permission -- i.e. funeral referenced above -- might well be doubted -- the Mail etc. better get cracking on this!~

    I need to go back and read the article, but I don't have an opinion on the Lady G thing.

    As far as the disparity in hostility to writing her memoir, that's relatively trivial. The negative bias in the English press toward Megan has been aptly demonstrated and it wasn't even a speed bump for these people.

    What I can't stand is, "Royal Biographers" criticizing the Sussexes for the documentary and the memoir as, "trading on their name", when these same people literally wouldn't have a career otherwise. Does anyone think that ghouls like Angela Levin or Ingrid Seward would have said, "No" if they were asked to participate? Please.

    1 hour ago, Cas Stark said:

    No one is criticizing them for not wanting photos of their children taken.  I am criticizing Meghan for lying, and saying she lived in the UK she would be mobbed by reporters and paps every time she went to take the children to school, as this is patently false.  I further criticize them for complaining about the RF practice of releasing photos of children a few times a year on special events, when they do it themselves, the exact thing that his brother and cousins do is what they do.  No difference.

    Given what happened after they announced the engagement and what Harry's gone through since childhood, Their concerns about press intrusion are more than well founded. 

    And why does anyone think the press would show the same deference to the children of the Spare and his American wife that they would show the children of the future king? Especially when the Firm did little or nothing to quell hostile media coverage of them as a couple.

     

  11. 30 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

    As far as I know, that is an inaccurate representation of what happened.  No agreement had been reached at all, this is why Harry is still angry that he lost his royal [free] protection when he quit as a working royal. 

    None of those details had been addressed at the time of their announcement.  Harry and Meg went ballistic over Dan Wootton, [or a more cynical take would be that they released the version of the deal they wanted as a power move to increase their bargaining power] and so they put out their instagram statement, allegedly giving the palace only 15 minutes notice.  That is pretty close to 'blindsiding the queen'.  

    The mere fact that we're talking about this in terms of "negotiation" and "power moves" demonstrates how dysfunctional this whole fucking mess is. He was right to get the hell out of there. Fuck his "family". 

  12. 12 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

    Ah right, so Harry and Meghan forfeited the ability to shape the rest of their lives in order to prevent Dan Wootten from getting a scoop.  Seems kinda short sighted.

    I could find the bit in his memoir there he talks about this but I'm pretty sure he that, once the thing was agreed to in principal, he was advised by the Queens henchmen to get a statement out before the tabloids went with it. But no, let's go with "Blindsided the Queen!!"

  13. 4 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

    Yes as I said they were never going to get the deal they touted as a 'done deal' when they 'stepped back' via instagram.  Never.  It would have been nothing but an ongoing series of controversies as far as the eye can see.  It is a testament to  Harry's lack of vision/understanding that he didn't see this from the get go and really thought his grandmother would capitulate to the pressure of the 'resignation' being made public before the deal was finalized.

    They went public because that palace staff that you hold in such high regard leaked it to the press. 

  14. 1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

    No, it was a non starter.  Harry and Meg had already shown that they weren't team players by this time.  How could they possibly be seen to represent the queen and the rf, while doing huge deals with netflix, while calling up US Senators and putting out political statements?  It would never have worked.  If it didn't work with bland, nice, harmless Edward, it would never ever work wtih Harry and Meghan.  Again, it's weird that anyone would defend the idea of keeping only the fun parts of being a royal and forgoing all the duty parts so you can make money as if its something noble instead of something incredibly selfish and short sighted.

    The way he tells it he was given five options. He chose "option 3". He was then told option 3 was not possible. If there was anyone negotiating in bad faith, it wasn't him.

    In hindsight, The RF should have made option 3 work. Fuck them if they don't like the result.  

×
×
  • Create New...