jaidit
Ruby
Posts: 18,111 Likes: 299,800
|
Post by jaidit on Jul 29, 2020 5:30:44 GMT -6
M&H changed their fondation name to MWX (from the Sussex fondation). Sources are saying it may stand for Markle Windsor? What are your thoughts?
|
|
jaidit
Ruby
Posts: 18,111 Likes: 299,800
|
Post by jaidit on Jul 29, 2020 5:35:22 GMT -6
Letizia is rocking a jumpsuit today. I like it!
|
|
betches
Platinum
Posts: 2,305 Likes: 20,831
|
Post by betches on Jul 29, 2020 6:14:23 GMT -6
M&H changed their fondation name to MWX (from the Sussex fondation). Sources are saying it may stand for Markle Windsor? What are your thoughts? Yikes. I hate the new name but more than that they really need to figure out and streamline their branding and mission. I know some of it is covid related, but it seems like there’s been more announcements for new foundations/initiatives and name changes than there’s been actual explanation of goals or plans, much less actual work done. It just reminds me of group projects in school when you’d spend the majority of the time coming up with a team and never really got around to the assignment
|
|
betches
Platinum
Posts: 2,305 Likes: 20,831
|
Post by betches on Jul 29, 2020 6:25:26 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 6:26:01 GMT -6
M&H changed their fondation name to MWX (from the Sussex fondation). Sources are saying it may stand for Markle Windsor? What are your thoughts? What happened to Archewell?
|
|
jaidit
Ruby
Posts: 18,111 Likes: 299,800
|
Post by jaidit on Jul 29, 2020 6:34:32 GMT -6
M&H changed their fondation name to MWX (from the Sussex fondation). Sources are saying it may stand for Markle Windsor? What are your thoughts? What happened to Archewell? I think this will be their UK-based one, and maybe archewell is a US one? Who knows.
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 6:50:29 GMT -6
Meghan's attempt to keep her friends' identities secret in her battle with the Mail on Sunday On Wednesday, the Duchess is arguing that her friends “have not waived their right to anonymity - quite the contrary”. But the newspaper argues that their interviews to People magazine is central to this case because one of them - known only in the public documents as “Friend B” - referred to the existence of Meghan’s letter in the course of her interview. The Mail on Sunday maintains that following the People magazine interviews ”neither the existence nor the contents of the Letter were confidential”. Friend B arranged the interviews with the magazine and the four other women as she was a good friend of People’s editor. But Meghan insists she had no knowledge of the interviews in advance and would not have condoned them if she had been aware. Her lawyers told Mr Justice Warby in Court 38 of the High Court today that she “had no knowledge in advance that any reference would be made to the letter still less any knowledge that the interview was going to take place". The names of the five friends are in the private section of the court documents - and the Mail on Sunday is seeking to have them named in the public documents. But the Duchess’ legal team argues: “The fact that the Claimant has named the friends in a Confidential Schedule … does not entitle the media to treat their names as publicly reportable.” Meghan’s lawyers say that forcing her to disclose their identities would be “an unacceptable price to pay for the right to pursue her claim for invasion of privacy” against the newspaper. www.itv.com/news/2020-07-29/meghans-attempt-to-keep-her-friends-identities-secret-in-her-battle-with-the-mail-on-sunday
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 6:58:10 GMT -6
Prince William jokes with Peter Crouch about using mock snipers in football The Duke of Cambridge has joked about getting a protection officer to pose as a mock sniper during a football game as a child on Peter Crouch’s podcast. Recorded before lockdown at Kensington Palace, BBC Radio 5 Live show That Peter Crouch Podcast saw the future King regaling the ex England striker with tales of kickabouts when he was at school – and using alternative methods to ward off a troublesome player. William said that when he played ‘everyone wanted to break my legs’, before revealing his tactic for getting one up on an opponent. He laughed: ‘A long time ago, I got one of my policemen to take a laser pen out with them. And I got him to red mark, red dot one of the players. ‘I kept saying, “see, see what happened to you.” I was about 15 at the time I said, “see, he’s following you, following you.”‘ Crouch, laughing, responded: ‘Pretending to have a sniper on him?’ and William confirmed: ‘Exactly… it put him off for about, you know, 10 minutes.’ However, the duke admitted that his talents on the field were somewhat limited, referring to his defending style as a ‘fat knacker running around at the back, panting’. metro.co.uk/2020/07/29/prince-william-13051822/
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 6:58:41 GMT -6
Why is "everyone wanted to break my legs" making me laugh so much?
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 7:00:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 7:01:24 GMT -6
I'd watch the shit out of this.
|
|
|
Post by Sweetjane on Jul 29, 2020 7:05:28 GMT -6
M&H changed their fondation name to MWX (from the Sussex fondation). Sources are saying it may stand for Markle Windsor? What are your thoughts? I can't imagine she would perpetuate the Markle name considering her riff with her dad. I get that it's her professional name but she could definitely drop it and it won't matter (as far as recognition goes). I don't have any guesses though.
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 7:08:35 GMT -6
Meghan Markle and Harry's 'dig' at Queen's Megxit statement - and 'hidden meaning' Meghan Markle and Prince Harry thought the statement the Queen released after they revealed they were quitting the royal family "lacked warmth" and had a hidden meaning, a new book has claimed. The Sussexes announced their plans to step down on Instagram, reportedly giving their royal relatives very little notice. Insiders claim the life-changing decision caused a lot of upset behind Palace walls, and the Queen was forced to release a short statement shortly after the news broke. But according to new book Finding Freedom, the couple felt her words "lacked warmth" and believed it showed she wasn't happy with their choice. Authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand write: "[Meghan and Harry] had seen a draft of what Buckingham Palace planned to put out in a statement that would follow theirs and its "lack of warmth" was a clear sign that not everyone supported their decision." www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markle-harrys-dig-queens-22429219
|
|
Eagles
Opal
Posts: 8,390 Likes: 43,088
|
Post by Eagles on Jul 29, 2020 8:01:11 GMT -6
I assume the M is Mountbatten.
|
|
willow
Ruby
Posts: 19,618 Likes: 125,181
|
Post by willow on Jul 29, 2020 8:39:38 GMT -6
Oh I am not usually much of a jumpsuit person but I love that jumpsuit on Letizia.
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 8:46:01 GMT -6
Prince William Reveals the Worst Gift He's Ever Given Kate Middleton "She was looking at me going... 'what’s going on?'" “That was early on in the courtship that was. I wrapped them. They were really nice," William said, per People. "I was trying to convince myself about it. I was like, ‘But these are really amazing, look how far you can see!’ She was looking at me going, ‘They’re binoculars, what’s going on?’ It didn’t go well. Honestly, I have no idea why I bought her a pair of binoculars." www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a33456124/prince-william-kate-middleton-worst-gift-binoculars-quote/
|
|
|
Post by meowmaps on Jul 29, 2020 9:20:48 GMT -6
I’m not sure why binoculars would be a terrible gift. Isn’t she outdoorsy?
It’s not like he gave her a vacuum or something.
|
|
|
Post by angelashly on Jul 29, 2020 9:43:18 GMT -6
This is the problem with picking apart particular events in isolation. We can argue all day about the shopping, but if it was a pattern of behavior (in this case basically shunning/giving MM a cold shoulder), then the particulars of that one thing are not important. This is classic gaslighting and it’s super shitty.
|
|
|
Post by angelashly on Jul 29, 2020 9:47:24 GMT -6
I assume the M is Mountbatten. same
|
|
|
Post by angelashly on Jul 29, 2020 9:48:52 GMT -6
Meghan's attempt to keep her friends' identities secret in her battle with the Mail on Sunday On Wednesday, the Duchess is arguing that her friends “have not waived their right to anonymity - quite the contrary”. But the newspaper argues that their interviews to People magazine is central to this case because one of them - known only in the public documents as “Friend B” - referred to the existence of Meghan’s letter in the course of her interview. The Mail on Sunday maintains that following the People magazine interviews ”neither the existence nor the contents of the Letter were confidential”. Friend B arranged the interviews with the magazine and the four other women as she was a good friend of People’s editor. But Meghan insists she had no knowledge of the interviews in advance and would not have condoned them if she had been aware. Her lawyers told Mr Justice Warby in Court 38 of the High Court today that she “had no knowledge in advance that any reference would be made to the letter still less any knowledge that the interview was going to take place". The names of the five friends are in the private section of the court documents - and the Mail on Sunday is seeking to have them named in the public documents. But the Duchess’ legal team argues: “The fact that the Claimant has named the friends in a Confidential Schedule … does not entitle the media to treat their names as publicly reportable.” Meghan’s lawyers say that forcing her to disclose their identities would be “an unacceptable price to pay for the right to pursue her claim for invasion of privacy” against the newspaper. www.itv.com/news/2020-07-29/meghans-attempt-to-keep-her-friends-identities-secret-in-her-battle-with-the-mail-on-sundayThis has got to be the dumbest thing ever. Just because she told her friends a letter existed and possibly let them read it doesn't mean that it wasn't the letter wasn't confidential to THE WORLD
|
|
frlcb
Gold
Posts: 938 Likes: 5,166
|
Post by frlcb on Jul 29, 2020 11:30:57 GMT -6
I’m not sure why binoculars would be a terrible gift. Isn’t she outdoorsy? It’s not like he gave her a vacuum or something. For someone in their early 20s I imagine this is probably equivalent to vacuum, especially coming from a Prince.
|
|
addymac
Emerald
Posts: 12,710 Likes: 54,183
|
Post by addymac on Jul 29, 2020 13:12:15 GMT -6
This is the problem with picking apart particular events in isolation. We can argue all day about the shopping, but if it was a pattern of behavior (in this case basically shunning/giving MM a cold shoulder), then the particulars of that one thing are not important. This is classic gaslighting and it’s super shitty. New face who dis
|
|
|
Post by angelashly on Jul 29, 2020 13:21:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by ArielMermaid on Jul 29, 2020 15:23:01 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by ouijabored on Jul 29, 2020 19:38:22 GMT -6
So the book is reviving the story about the wedding day tiara drama. Originally it was reported that Meghan was the one throwing a tantrum over it but the excerpt makes it sound more like something Harry instigated, which is easier for me to believe.
Anyway, I’m just curious about what tiara it could be. Any thoughts? The excerpt mentions emeralds and some controversy about where it came from, which is why Meghan couldn’t use it. I remember people speculating at the time that it could be the Vladimir tiara because its provenance is somewhat murky (smuggles into England after the Russian Revolution) but doesn’t that seem too OTT, even for a royal wedding? I feel like that piece is only appropriate for the actual queen to wear, lol.
|
|
|
Post by pitchslap on Jul 29, 2020 19:45:38 GMT -6
I thought there was something about the tiara Meghan wanted to wear had to be saved for Eugenie instead?
|
|
|
Post by beesquared on Jul 29, 2020 20:33:22 GMT -6
2 meters! 6 feet! That’s all I can see in this picture. Cover your damn face.
|
|
|
Post by firelight1210 on Jul 29, 2020 20:34:55 GMT -6
2 meters! 6 feet! That’s all I can see in this picture. Cover your damn face. I think it said earlier it was recorded/filmed before quarantine?
|
|
Eagles
Opal
Posts: 8,390 Likes: 43,088
|
Post by Eagles on Jul 29, 2020 20:43:49 GMT -6
2 meters! 6 feet! That’s all I can see in this picture. Cover your damn face. I think it said earlier it was recorded/filmed before quarantine? Yes, this part was pre rona and the second part was via zoom, I believe.
|
|
Eagles
Opal
Posts: 8,390 Likes: 43,088
|
Post by Eagles on Jul 29, 2020 20:48:17 GMT -6
God, tiaragate. I don't know if it was the one Eugenie had already chosen, or another one with shady provenance, or if the Queen was just like "Eug already picked an emerald, pick one of these other five."
I thought Meghan's tiara suited her dress and veil perfectly. I know her hair was starting to fall a little but I chalked that up to her stylist maybe not accounting for the weight of it shifting.
If I had my choice, I'd take the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland in a heartbeat.
|
|