Birth of Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor: June 4, 2021


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Biset said:
Are they serious?
Click to expand...

Evidently. I wonder if the queen will get dragged into it. Odds are that if she was asked, she didn't disagree because she knew that they would do what they want to, anyway....
I remember at their wedding, thinking that the queen looked very tired and tense... and I wonder if it was partly because (Philip had been ill but he was up and about).. but partly because she had been experiencing the "Never satisfied" behaviour from H and Meghan.. that no matter what they got, they always wanted more and that as H put it "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets"...
 
Last edited:
Denville said:
Evidently. I wonder if the queen will get dragged into it. Odds are that if she was asked, she did'nt disagree because she knew that they would do what they want to, anyway....
Click to expand...

I think Harry and Meghan have a different grasp of reality than others. I could imagine him telling the queen "By the way we're naming her Lilibet" and she said "How lovely". What was she going to do? Tell him no? I'm sure in Harry's mind, that's asking for permission.?
 
Heavs said:
Yes but are the BBC going to get into the name did they/didn't they debate unless they have a good source? And not a footman.

The Sussexes have open lied about a lot of things in the last few months. They also very publicly launched their Half In, Half Out manifesto claiming they had permission, hoping to make it a fait accompli and turns out it was a complete lie.

It's clear BP/the family had no idea the birth announcement was coming or it wouldn't have taken over an hour to release a statement and more for social media congratulations. And then the official statement was short and didn't mention the name.

Then there are all the reports that suggest HM did know they wanted to name the baby after her but "Lilibet" wasn't discussed it wouldn't be the first time a spokesman had twisted that sort of thing either.

Of course the unnamed source might just be trying to stir something up but the Sussexes word is worth absolutely nothing either.
Click to expand...
I agree. If Harry had told HM that “we want to name the baby after you,”. ANYONE including HM would assume they meant “Elizabeth.” I cannot see Harry asking “may we name her Lilibet?”

And I also disagree with those who think that she wouldn’t say “no” so that she wouldn’t hurt their feelings. I think she would say something to the effect of “I’d rather you use Elizabeth to honor me.”
 
Emily Andrew's current take on all this. She said she absolutely believes that the Palace (on HM's behalf) ie not aides that hate the Sussexes briefed the BBC and that "shared that they were hoping to name their daughter after her" does not equal asking for permission to use Lilibet.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1402582026948124678
 
Biset said:
I think Harry and Meghan have a different grasp of reality than others. I could imagine him telling the queen "By the way we're naming her Lilibet" and she said "How lovely". What was she going to do? Tell him no? I'm sure in Harry's mind, that's asking for permission.?
Click to expand...

Its very hard to understand them. I think at times that they are genuinely surprised when there are bad reactions to what they say.. ie " why are people saying we're in the wrong to say that we got married 3 days before the wedding. Why are people saying we are attacking the RF just because we have said that they are racists and heartless"...
Maybe they just thought there will be a lot of talk about the baby's name if we call her Lilibet rather than Elizabeth - and thats good. Now they are getting people complaining and they're saying "but we DID ask for permission". I agree that the Q probably said "have you got a name for her yet" and them replying "Oh yes, we're going to go for Lilibet" and the queen sighing internally and silently thinking that its better NOT to make a fuss, so not making any negative remark...
 
The clashes between the Palace sources, Sussex spokesperson and BBC are getting very messy right now :eek: :ohmy:

This kind of reminds me of the aftermath of the Oprah's interview, the Archie's birth certificate gate, bullying/mistreatment of staff allegation and the "service is universal" (after the removal of the Sussexes' royal patronages) fiasco.
 
Osipi said:
I sincerely believe that what we're seeing with the naming of the Sussex child and the name being used of "Lilibet" is a classic example of "never complain, never explain" and it's working.

This is why I believe all the congratulations from the British side of family have been very generic and and frankly, quite stark and straight to the point. No matter what the reactions and the feelings and perhaps a whole lot of other emotions that are bouncing off palace walls these days, none of it will or should make it into the public domain. The BRF are above playing silly reindeer games for the sake of the entertainment world.

Harry and Meghan very well could have thought that with the recent "truth bombs" they've exploded into the public domain, they would really start up what would be known as the prize fight of the decade. What is actually happening with the way the BRF and the "Firm" are handling things resemble "Suppose They Gave A War And Nobody Came". ;)
Click to expand...
I think you have an excellent point! Why give the Susssexes any more oxygen?

I thought it telling that the Cambridges referred to the baby as Lili in their congratulations and not her full name. I also thought the same thing about them saying congrats to Harry, Meghan and Archie instead of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex - which the royals always do when posting birthday wishes.

Looking back at the announcement I laughed when I saw they’d released it with the monogram. And the spine of Megan’s book didn’t even include the title. Literally every book I’ve ever seen (with the exception of very old books) has the title of the book written in large font with the author’s name in smaller font. It is blatantly obvious that they care very much about their titles and connection to the RF that they’ve been bashing for months. I guess nobody ever told them “don’t bite the hand that feeds you.”:D
 
Is there clarification on which statement(s) in the BBC article the Duke and Duchess's lawyer alleges to be false? As Mbruno said, the claims of the anonymous palace source and of the couple's spokesperson do not strike me as being mutually exclusive. "The Queen was not asked by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex about naming their daughter Lilibet" and "During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name" could both very well be true.
 
Tatiana Maria said:
Is there clarification on which statement(s) in the BBC article the Duke and Duchess's lawyer alleges to be false? As Mbruno said, the claims of the anonymous palace source and of the couple's spokesperson do not strike me as being mutually exclusive. "The Queen was not asked by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex about naming their daughter Lilibet" and "During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name" could both very well be true.
Click to expand...

probably it IS true, in that they said they wanted to call her Lilibet and the queen thought it wasn't worth saying anything and that it mgiht well just provoke a bad response if she said that she'd rather the baby was called Elizabeth than Lilbet. Years ago, a royal wish was tantamount ot a command - in most cases but H and Meg are not working royals any more and were never very easy to deal with.. so I expect teh queen did not disagree but wasnt that happy
 
Heavs said:
The fact that it's the BBC that broke the "absolutely not" story gives it more credibility to me than if it was just the ever updated and contradictory DM stories on this issue. Especially with them treading on eggshells over Bashir.

I don't believe for one second the ridiculous stories that they continually happily zoom with HM and she's the first to know everything whilst they keep trashing everything she's work for for 70 years.

Even the "we definitely asked" stories leave a lot of wiggle room "well we asked if we could name the baby after her..." "she knew we wanted to use her name..."

The Sussexes have now updated "their truth" to include that Lili is a "sweet nod" to Doria who used to call Meghan "flower". The fact that this was not included on the press release whereas the other details about the name *were* and indeed Doria was not mentioned at all until there was backlash tells me "this truth" happened for them in the last couple of days.

I don't believe the palace knew of the birth before hand because otherwise they'd have had a statement read to go and not just a few lines over and hour later that didn't even mention the name.

You don't have to believe "Palace sources" are always correct to also realise "Sussex spokespeople" and Omid Scobie are most certainly not reliable either.

It really is sad that there's so much controversy over a name for a baby though. And once again, this doesn't at all reflect on her in the slightest.
Click to expand...
I agree with all you said. I thought it was her dad who called her “Flower”. Perhaps I’m wrong but they needed something to fit the narrative of “sweet nod to Doria.”
 
Royalist.in.NC said:
I think you have an excellent point! Why give the Susssexes any more oxygen?

I thought it telling that the Cambridges referred to the baby as Lili in their congratulations and not her full name. I also thought the same thing about them saying congrats to Harry, Meghan and Archie instead of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex - which the royals always do when posting birthday wishes.

Looking back at the announcement I laughed when I saw they’d released it with the monogram. And the spine of Megan’s book didn’t even include the title. Literally every book I’ve ever seen (with the exception of very old books) has the title of the book written in large font with the author’s name in smaller font. It is blatantly obvious that they care very much about their titles and connection to the RF that they’ve been bashing for months. I guess nobody ever told them “don’t bite the hand that feeds you.”:D
Click to expand...

Of course they are, how else are they going to make money?
 
I've never heard these days of a book which doesn't have the title on the spine but just the authors name. but I guess they think people will see "Meg and Duchess" and buy the book....
 
Denville said:
I agree. I think that if they'd gone for her proper name Elizabeth, she would have been fine with it.. but even then it must seem odd to find that her grandson whos been calling her whole family monsters, wants to name his child after her. but she would have stilfed any feelings about that, and accepted the naming.
Click to expand...

Can I ask, most everyone here seems very confident that the Queen disapproves of the name but what exactly is there to suggest that she isn't fine with Lili being named Lilibet? Apart from random people with no relation to her's personal assumptions, dubious "royal" sources and people over-analysing photo captions?

Why is the default line of thinking that she disapproves?
 
I would have liked it better when the parents announced: "Her names are Elizabeth Diana. We call her Lilibet."


When the late Prince Claus registered his firstborn to the Mayor of Utrecht he litterally said (as was broadcast on TV): "His names are Willem-Alexander Claus Georg Ferdinand. We call him: Alexander".


By doing so it would be more stylish, it would have had more cachet, after all we are talking about a future Princess of the blood royal, no matter she will use her rightful title or not. "HRH Princess Lili of Sussex" is really too Barbie-esque.
 
Last edited:
Archduchess Zelia said:
Can I ask, most everyone here seems very confident that the Queen disapproves of the name but what exactly is there to suggest that she isn't fine with Lili being named Lilibet? Apart from random people with no relation to her's personal assumptions, dubious "royal" sources and people over-analysing photo captions?

Why is the default line of thinking that she disapproves?
Click to expand...

As I just said, I'm sure she was bewildered to find that the Sussexes wanted to call the baby after her, when they have made it clear that they feel they were so cruelly treated by the RF of which she is the head. IF they had said they wanted to call her Elizabeth as a second name, I think seh would have tried to be charitable and believe that they meant the name as an olive branch.. but to use a private name that only a few call her, as the given name, could only be some odd decision to focus public attention on her and their relationship iwht her.
 
Archduchess Zelia said:
Can I ask, most everyone here seems very confident that the Queen disapproves of the name but what exactly is there to suggest that she isn't fine with Lili being named Lilibet? Apart from random people with no relation to her's personal assumptions, dubious "royal" sources and people over-analysing photo captions?
Click to expand...

If you mean the unidentified palace source cited by the BBC report, she/he did not state that the Queen disapproved or was unsupportive of the name.
 
Gotta love how the UK media and palace staff making it known they don’t want Lili named after the Queen. Poor thing will grow up knowing that. Probably wise she is born and raised in America.

The palace should just issue a statement at this point because briefing the BBC is pretty funny especially due to recent events.
 
Mbruno said:
Palace source denies that Harry and Meghan asked the Queen to use Lilibet name.



https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57408163



Sussex spokesperson claims, however, that the Queen was the first member of the Family to be informed of the chosen name and was " supportive ".



The two statements are not necessarily mutually exclusive or contradictory.
Click to expand...



That’s true.
 
Tatiana Maria said:
If you mean the unidentified palace source cited by the BBC report, she/he did not state that the Queen disapproved or was unsupportive of the name.
Click to expand...

No but I suppose the thinking is that if she approved of the name then "Palace sources" would not leak that she did not give permission.

Even the Sussex spokesperson worded it in such a way that the words "we specifically asked her permission to name our baby Lilibet and she said that she was delighted" were never stated.

There's a lot of parsing and loop holes and "our truth" in there.

I think it's highly possible she was told that Harry wanted to name a daughter after her but that she wasn't specifically asked about Lilibet. Or that they just told her and didn't give her a chance to say "I'd really prefer if you used Elizabeth or Lily".

I don't think "Palace Sources" are always true but I don't think the BBC would have got involved in the "controversy" over the name if they didn't have a *good* source. And neither do the RRs.

And quite frankly the Sussexes have no track record when it comes to the facts either.
 
Good grief. Here we go with the threats and the lawsuits and the almost immediate clapback delivered through Scobie per the usual from these two. Funny how that whole "we don't pay attention to the noise" stuff just keeps being thrown out the window. But anyway, their newest war and threats appear to be aimed at the palace, the BBC, etc.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ueen-naming-daughter-Lilibet-source-says.html
 
Duc_et_Pair said:
I would have liked it better when the parents announced: "Her names are Elizabeth Diana. We call her Lilibet."


When the late Prince Claus registered his firstborn to the Mayor of Utrecht he litterally said (as was broadcast on TV): "His names are Willem-Alexander Claus Georg Ferdinand. We call him: Alexander".


By doing so it would be more stylish, it would have had more cachet, after all we are talking about a future Princess of the blood royal, no matter she will use her rightful title or not. "HRH Princess Lili of Sussex" is really too Barbie-esque.
Click to expand...
I agree that this would have been classier. But they plan to call her Lili not Lilibet.
 
Heavs said:
The fact that it's the BBC that broke the "absolutely not" story gives it more credibility to me than if it was just the ever updated and contradictory DM stories on this issue. Especially with them treading on eggshells over Bashir.

I don't believe for one second the ridiculous stories that they continually happily zoom with HM and she's the first to know everything whilst they keep trashing everything she's work for for 70 years.

Even the "we definitely asked" stories leave a lot of wiggle room "well we asked if we could name the baby after her..." "she knew we wanted to use her name..."

The Sussexes have now updated "their truth" to include that Lili is a "sweet nod" to Doria who used to call Meghan "flower". The fact that this was not included on the press release whereas the other details about the name *were* and indeed Doria was not mentioned at all until there was backlash tells me "this truth" happened for them in the last couple of days.

I don't believe the palace knew of the birth before hand because otherwise they'd have had a statement read to go and not just a few lines over and hour later that didn't even mention the name.

You don't have to believe "Palace sources" are always correct to also realise "Sussex spokespeople" and Omid Scobie are most certainly not reliable either.

It really is sad that there's so much controversy over a name for a baby though. And once again, this doesn't at all reflect on her in the slightest.
Click to expand...



Excellent points.

It’s interesting that they’ve updated “their truth” to say that Lili is now a nod to Doria too. Funny how they didn’t make the initial release that was complete with a royal monogram, reference to Diana as THE Princess of Wales, etc. It was all about royal connections.

Good point about the Bashir interview being a reason for the BBC to be VERY careful about what they say right now. Especially if it involves royals.

I hadn’t thought about the time lag in responses to the birth. That does speak volumes about communications. I remember the Sussex communication even had the whole “embargoed until x” on it. It was certainly carefully timed.

Agreed There’s lots of wiggle room about what the Sussexes say regarding talking to HM about the name versus what actually happened.

This is all sad.
 
Royalist.in.NC said:
I thought it telling that the Cambridges referred to the baby as Lili in their congratulations and not her full name.
Click to expand...

The Cambridges know from the parents that their niece is to be known as Lili. Was it equally "telling" that the RF wasted little time in rebranding her father as Prince Harry?

There is so much fodder for discussion of Sussexes & Cambridges, but the attempts here and elsewhere to concoct a “Lilibet-gate” controversy seem unusually small-minded and petty.
 
Last edited:
Addapalla said:
The Cambridges know from the parents that their niece is to be known as Lili. Was it equally "telling" that the RF wasted little time in rebranding her father as Prince Harry?

There is so much fodder for discussion of Sussexes & Cambridges, but the attempts here to concoct a “Lilibet-gate” controversy seem unusually small-minded and petty.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that we created it here. Have you looked at the BBC today?
 
If only they had listened to me and named her ‘Lily Diana’…..

Or, ‘Lili Diana’ if they must.
 
_Heather_ said:
Good grief. Here we go with the threats and the lawsuits and the almost immediate clapback delivered through Scobie per the usual from these two. Funny how that whole "we don't pay attention to the noise" stuff just keeps being thrown out the window. But anyway, their newest war and threats appear to be aimed at the palace, the BBC, etc.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ueen-naming-daughter-Lilibet-source-says.html
Click to expand...

I mean why wouldn't they response? Their little girl's name is being thrown all over the media. They are protective of their kids and people are in a way attacking her. She 5 days old has had the most vile crap said about her.

The fact the palace is briefing against an infant is pretty wild to me but here we are in another drama between the Sussexes and the palace over a baby's name.

It was inevitable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JessRulz
  • Locked
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 5: June-July 2021
48 49 50
Replies
1K
Views
192K
JessRulz
JessRulz
Sun Lion
  • Locked
Royals At War, The Untold Story of Harry and Meghan's Split with the House of Windsor
3 4 5
Replies
128
Views
16K
Marengo
Marengo
A
  • Locked
Birth of Lady Louise (November 8, 2003) and Christening (April 24, 2004)
9 10 11
Replies
314
Views
82K
corazon
corazon

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom