The Duke & Duchess of Sussex with Oprah II - Interview, March 7th-9th 2021

[Kellydofc]

According to the Daily Mail headlines, palace officials have prepared a statement, but the Queen has asked for extra time before she signs it.

If that's true then that's really something because I don't recall the royal family ever making a statement about another member not even after the Diana interview. Of course I take everything the Daily Mail says with a grain of salt.

 

[AC21091968]

If that's true then that's really something because I don't recall the royal family ever making a statement about another member not even after the Diana interview. Of course I take everything the Daily Mail says with a grain of salt.

Did the Palace also released a statement after Andrew's car crash interview with BBC? Or is it much later when the Palace announced that he is no longer a working royal?

 

[Lee-Z]

Can fully imagine the skintone comment was a rude, offhand, but jokingly meant remark, made to Harry in an intimate private setting, by someone who thought Harry would think it funny (after the all, Harry once did find it funny to party in a nazi outfit).
Every family has blunt people in it, and the Windsors are imo no exception.

When the time came that H&M were actually pregnant and H in a jolly way remembered the comment, maybe even embellished it a bit to make it even jollier, he probably was shocked that it (understandably) upset M so much, and only then realized that it wasn't just funny.

Maybe that's why H seemed angry in the interview, he deep down knew it was an offhand remark, and wished he'd never told M in the first place, and he realized that now it got out in the open, it will always linger in people's minds as a "where's smoke there's fire"

 

[Lucy Scot]

Well, Beatrice & Eugenie were also "born into this position" and inherited risk, same as Harry but they still got their publicly-funded security cut off. It's disingenuous for Harry to present it like "this has never ever happened before in the history of the BRF!" which is kind of what it sounds like. Uhm, no. Not that I would expect Oprah to have called him on that line of "woe is me" from Harry.

As I said, it has nothing to do with what happened to Beatrice and Eugenie and their public-funded security being cut off. They are not the children of Charles. How Andrew handles his family's security is a separate issue. Harry is looking at HIS family and I include Charles in this. He believes Charles should pay for his security. Personally pay for it. And he is hurt because his father isn't.

 

[Nico]

LOL Thanks for the laugh. Maybe he gave her a mug with that written on it, too.

Well maybe he gave her the poster as well, but at the end of the day she obviously didn't get it. Or more didn't want to get it ...

 

[Kellydofc]

As I said, it has nothing to do with what happened to Beatrice and Eugenie and their public-funded security being cut off. They are not the children of Charles. How Andrew handles his family's security is a separate issue. Harry is looking at HIS family and I include Charles in this. He believes Charles should pay for his security. Personally pay for it. And he is hurt because his father isn't.

Harry might be hurt but he said he wanted to be financially independent. He decided he didn't want to be a working royal. He's a 36 year old man. Did he really think his dad was going to keep footing the bill when he walked away? If so he's either incredibly naïve or incredibly entitled. Either way going on tv and throwing his father and brother under the bus isn't going to get his dad to pay for his security and will in fact probably end his relationship with his father and brother for all time. Maybe this is the ultimate case of be careful what you wish for because Harry's sure got his freedom and independence now.

 

[Queen Ester]

Archie and his little sister will become HRH Prince Archie of Sussex and HRH Princess ______ of Sussex the instant their grandfather becomes King - under the 1917 LP. Charles would then have to take those titles away with a new LP. Even if Charles intended something of the sort, or thought he and Harry had an agreement about it, I can't see that happening now. The optics would be absolutely horrible.

The optics would be horrible either way. If the Parlament does not remove their titles, the Palace looks at the very least impotent, at the worst, complicit or the public might assume that there is truth to these allegations and Palace is afraid that there is more dirt on the Royal Family that the Success have as a trump card. I think at this point the RF must bite the bullet and revoke the titles(unless, of course, we are all wrong, and there is something Palace is hiding)

 

[Lilyflo]

Re: the security - I hadn't really considered this fully before but given the risk level to H&M and Archie, I think they should have their security covered. It's not the same situation as others in the BRF who don't have 24/7 security because those others don't have the same high risk, which has been confirmed remains the same for H&M as when they were here. Given that Harry has stepped back and removed his family from the UK, it wouldn't be acceptable for the British tax-payer to fund it but the Queen (and the next monarch) can easily afford to fund it so they should and not be afraid of what the press might say about that.

 

[Lucy Scot]

Harry might be hurt but he said he wanted to be financially independent. He decided he didn't want to be a working royal. He's a 36 year old man. Did he really think his dad was going to keep footing the bill when he walked away? If so he's either incredibly naïve or incredibly entitled. Either way going on tv and throwing his father and brother under the bus isn't going to get his dad to pay for his security and will in fact probably end his relationship with his father and brother for all time. Maybe this is the ultimate case of be careful what you wish for because Harry's sure got his freedom and independence now.

I don't think it's unusual for wealthy families to financially support their children.

 

[Claire]

Harry might be hurt but he said he wanted to be financially independent. He decided he didn't want to be a working royal. He's a 36 year old man. Did he really think his dad was going to keep footing the bill when he walked away? If so he's either incredibly naïve or incredibly entitled. Either way going on tv and throwing his father and brother under the bus isn't going to get his dad to pay for his security and will in fact probably end his relationship with his father and brother for all time. Maybe this is the ultimate case of be careful what you wish for because Harry's sure got his freedom and independence now.

I think what was pretty much said was that Harry is very much aware that he is entitled to the same protection, lifestyle and manner of address as William. I think if they try to take the title from him - they are likely to go to court over it.

They should have just given them everything they wanted. In a way I feel the royal family is been held hostage and blackmailed here.

 

[Alison H]

Re: the security - I hadn't really considered this fully before but given the risk level to H&M and Archie, I think they should have their security covered. It's not the same situation as others in the BRF who don't have 24/7 security because those others don't have the same high risk, which has been confirmed remains the same for H&M as when they were here. Given that Harry has stepped back and removed his family from the UK, it wouldn't be acceptable for the British tax-payer to fund it but the Queen (and the next monarch) can easily afford to fund it so they should and not be afraid of what the press might say about that.

If Meghan had said that, I would have understood it. Instead, she claimed that Archie wasn't having his security paid for because he was "the first person of colour" in the Royal Family. That is a lie. Full stop. Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and James do not have their security paid for either.

 

[Queen Ester]

Is anyone else getting frustrated that the royal family is not even defending themselves? A lawyer has told me that this would be thrown out as testimony, why dont the royal stand up?

What do you thinkk the Royals should do? Sue them for defamation of character? I think they should, but then H&M get more time in the limelight.

 

[AC21091968]

There are some twitter users from the UK (including James Jordan, former Strictly Come Dancing professional dancer) comparing this Oprah's interview to the Jeremy Kyle show. Some have even called for Harry & Meghan to have a lie detector test.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1369035304695390213

https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity...Harry-Oprah-interview-Jeremy-Kyle-news-latest
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-interview-ITV.html

 

[crm2317]

I watched the interview last night with my husband and sister in law. We all agreed that regardless of whether you believe them or not, Meghan came across better than Harry. He couldn’t help but throw in catty remarks and came across as a spoiled petty brat complaining that his money train had been cut off so he had to get a job!

 

[Hallo girl]

I think what was pretty much said was that Harry is very much aware that he is entitled to the same protection, lifestyle and manner of address as William. I think if they try to take the title from him - they are likely to go to court over it.

I do not think they will take the titles or the place in the succession away from Harry, it would just give the pair of them more ammunition and excuse to go on the attack again.

The part re Charles not taking his calls, was that until this day or was that over a certain time period and are they back speaking. I just felt that they were throwing in grenades and walking away without Oprah asking them for a fuller explanation. Poor journalism ,it was all sensationalism.

I am finding it difficult to process what is accurate, I am not saying they are lying but I believe they are wording things to suit their own narrative. Are certain things taken out of context.

Could Charles not taking his calls be because the two of them always ended up arguing, and Charles wanted to keep a distance for a period of time for cool heads to prevail.

Saying the did not blindside the palace with their decision to leave, detailing how many meetings or conversations had taken place, but the palace has always said it was the announcement they were caught out with not the intention of leaving. It was complicated and required time to sort out, but the couple were not prepared to wait.

I also found it interesting the questions that were not asked or the stories they could have clarified but didn't, for example the Tiara story or' What Meghan wants Meghan gets '. The relationship with the Markle family or even her mothers family, why were they all excluded from the wedding.
The early conversation with William that caused the rift.

They only wanted stories that put others in a bad light, not put themselves under the spotlight.

 

[Alison H]

What do you thinkk the Royals should do? Sue them for defamation of character? I think they should, but then H&M get more time in the limelight.

It's very awkward. I don't think they want to get drawn into mud-slinging. I would like to see them issue a statement explaining why Archie was not entitled to be a prince or to have his security paid for.

Regarding the racism allegation, you can't really sue without a name. If you go to your boss and claim that a colleague has said something racist, the boss asks who it was and what they said, and you say "I will never share that conversation", there's not much they can do. Then this spreads round the office, and everyone starts saying "Oh, I bet it was Jane on reception," "No, I think it was probably Brian in accounts," "You're both wrong, I'm sure it was Fred in HR" ... etc etc. That's what's happening now. It's horrible.

 

[yukari]

There are some twitter users from the UK (including James Jordan, former Strictly Come Dancing professional dancer) comparing this Oprah's interview to the Jeremy Kyle show. Some have even called for Harry & Meghan to have a lie detector test.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1369035304695390213

https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity...Harry-Oprah-interview-Jeremy-Kyle-news-latest
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-interview-ITV.html

Nope, the Sussexes would not survive that show. And if, hypothetically speaking, they appeared on that show, guaranteed they'd sue the producer (and everyone there) even before the show was over.

 

[RoyalNight]

As I said, it has nothing to do with what happened to Beatrice and Eugenie and their public-funded security being cut off. They are not the children of Charles. How Andrew handles his family's security is a separate issue. Harry is looking at HIS family and I include Charles in this. He believes Charles should pay for his security. Personally pay for it. And he is hurt because his father isn't.

If Charles pays for security of one son why shouldn't he pay for the other son and his own? That would freed up a lot of public money to by used elsewhere.
Security is a lot of money. Especially when Sussexes will need it for four individuals in different places. H&M decided to live the way they want to so three arwę consequences. They're no Pinger eligible for protection. Two adults nearing 40 ahould be ale to take care of their family on their own. They can afford a nasion, do they ahould be able to find money for security.

 

[Scarebaby]

Looking for clarification and thoughts on two things. First, Meghan said that she was up in the middle of the night googling the British National Anthem. Given that she lived in Canada for seven years as an adult working there, would she not have been exposed to that anthem many times? I'm not sure about the answer to this, would love to hear from some Canadians.
Also, she said her passport was taken away, but I recall her going to New York, on her own, for a fairly lavish baby shower. Is it possible royals don't actually need passports, or how would that work? Thanks.

 

[Hallo girl]

I don't think it's unusual for wealthy families to financially support their children.

Do you think they should be supported throughout their lives, at the end of the day they wanted freedom and independence. They were told it was difficult to achieve but wanted it anyway, now they are complaining that the gravy train was halted.

He has private trust funds from his family, he has the money from his mother, and no doubt at some time in the future he will receive money from his fathers private wealth. Posters have told us on here how independently wealthy Meghan is . He is moaning about no money, people in the uk are living on furlough wages, with no guarantee of a job when things improve, some have already lost their jobs. We have seen the film of the homeless in L.A.

Last week they issued statements about compassion and do a good act on International Womens Day, they showed compassion to his grandmother alright didn't they.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

Looking for clarification and thoughts on two things. First, Meghan said that she was up in the middle of the night googling the British National Anthem. Given that she lived in Canada for seven years as an adult working there, would she not have been exposed to that anthem many times? I'm not sure about the answer to this, would love to hear from some Canadians.
Also, she said her passport was taken away, but I recall her going to New York, on her own, for a fairly lavish baby shower. Is it possible royals don't actually need passports, or how would that work? Thanks.

The British National Anthem is "God Save the Queen", the Canadian is "O Canada". I'm from Australia and we have 'Advance Australia Fair". Like most Canadians and Australian, most do not know the British National Anthem.

The passport question is interesting - because she travelled to New York twice - once for her baby shower and the second for Serena Williams US Open Finals

 

[Dalriada]

Meghan’s father appeared on British TV this morning and commented on interview.
“Speaking to ITV's Good Morning Britain, Mr Markle said: "This is actually the first time I've heard her speak in four years.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...le-prince-harry-oprah-interview-latest-vn/amp

 

[Heavs]

Looking for clarification and thoughts on two things. First, Meghan said that she was up in the middle of the night googling the British National Anthem. Given that she lived in Canada for seven years as an adult working there, would she not have been exposed to that anthem many times? I'm not sure about the answer to this, would love to hear from some Canadians.
Also, she said her passport was taken away, but I recall her going to New York, on her own, for a fairly lavish baby shower. Is it possible royals don't actually need passports, or how would that work? Thanks.

I can't answer about Canada, although I know it is one of their anthems, I don't think it's something that she would necessarily know, at least off by heart. I don't think this is a big deal, we all have to google info on places we're considering moving to or dating someone from.

As to the other, well she/they went on many private trips abroad that we know about and maybe more that we don't don't. So if she didn't have access to her passport then it obviously didn't stop her from going anywhere she wanted. This isn't a "kidnapped princess" situation.

It's one of the many things that are "hang on...!" about the interview.

I watched the interview last night with my husband and sister in law. We all agreed that regardless of whether you believe them or not, Meghan came across better than Harry. He couldn’t help but throw in catty remarks and came across as a spoiled petty brat complaining that his money train had been cut off so he had to get a job!

Well it's never edifying when a man in his mid 30s complains that the Bank of Dad has stopped paying out. Especially if he has recently stormed out of the family business under non amicable circumstances because he and his wife wanted to do things their own way.

Especially when they have trust funds from elsewhere and choose to spend it on other things.

I get their security concerns but we don't know what made Charles reach potential breaking point. It's ridiculous to expect him (or the tax payer) to fund security for a mansion in California indefinitely. There were rumours that he was bankrolling everything in 2020 and Duchy money isn't unlimited.

 

[Claire]

Looking for clarification and thoughts on two things. First, Meghan said that she was up in the middle of the night googling the British National Anthem. Given that she lived in Canada for seven years as an adult working there, would she not have been exposed to that anthem many times? I'm not sure about the answer to this, would love to hear from some Canadians.
Also, she said her passport was taken away, but I recall her going to New York, on her own, for a fairly lavish baby shower. Is it possible royals don't actually need passports, or how would that work? Thanks.

Yep - those nice jailers must have let her out for the tennis game and Baby shower and holidays to Europe. Also they must have let Ellen, Hillary Clinton and all those other celebrities in. Yep royals need passports. I have been told that the passport isnt removed from them - it is kept by the private secretary so that it is never forgotten when they travel. If they wanted it back they could have asked for it.

The problem with the British Anthem is eveyone in the world knows the first verse and only a very small percentage of the UK knows pass the 2nd verse.

 

[Hallo girl]

Looking for clarification and thoughts on two things. First, Meghan said that she was up in the middle of the night googling the British National Anthem. Given that she lived in Canada for seven years as an adult working there, would she not have been exposed to that anthem many times? I'm not sure about the answer to this, would love to hear from some Canadians.
Also, she said her passport was taken away, but I recall her going to New York, on her own, for a fairly lavish baby shower. Is it possible royals don't actually need passports, or how would that work? Thanks.

The national anthem is one verse, the tune would be familiar to her but not the words, it shouldn't take an actress long to learn the lines. I am sure the passport was held somewhere where the PA who organised travel etc could put their hands on it when required, it would have been somebody's job to ensure the paperwork for travel etc was in order. It is called organisation.
Other than the queen, passports are required, although I don't think they need to stand at passport control.

Simple explanations for most things, as a result maybe the more powerful genuine stuff could be lost , I do not think they have done themselves any favours.

 

[Hallo girl]

Yep - those nice jailers must have let her out for the tennis game and Baby shower and holidays to Europe. Also they must have let Ellen, Hillary Clinton and all those other celebrities in. Yep royals need passports. I have been told that the passport isnt removed from them - it is kept by the private secretary so that it is never forgotten when they travel. If they wanted it back they could have asked for it.

The problem with the British Anthem is eveyone in the world knows the first verse and only a very small percentage of the UK knows pass the 2nd verse.

They don't sing the rest because it talks about hammering the Scots.....

 

[Heavs]

The problem with the British Anthem is eveyone in the world knows the first verse and only a very small percentage of the UK knows pass the 2nd verse.

I know the "Knavish tricks" verse off by heart because we had to learn it for a Scarlet Pimpernel production at school.

I've heard the five verses one somewhere which isn't ever sung for some understandable reasons. But I do like this:

Lord make the nations see,
That men should brothers be,
And form one family,
The wide world o’er.

 

[AC21091968]

Yep - those nice jailers must have let her out for the tennis game and Baby shower and holidays to Europe. Also they must have let Ellen, Hillary Clinton and all those other celebrities in. Yep royals need passports. I have been told that the passport isnt removed from them - it is kept by the private secretary so that it is never forgotten when they travel. If they wanted it back they could have asked for it.

The problem with the British Anthem is eveyone in the world knows the first verse and only a very small percentage of the UK knows pass the 2nd verse.

I think this applies to Australia as well, where most people know the first verse of Advance Australia Fair, but not so much on the 2nd verse. When I was at primary school, we sang both verses, but in high school, we hardly sang our national anthem (let along the second verse).

They don't sing the rest because it talks about hammering the Scots.....

I think the second verse is (according to the Official Royal Family website)

Thy choicest gifts in store,
On her be pleased to pour;
Long may she reign:
May she defend our laws,
And ever give us cause,
To sing with heart and voice,
God save the Queen!

https://www.royal.uk/national-anthem

Also in Last Night of the Prom, as arranged by Benjamin Britten, both verses of God Save The Queen were sung. I found this arrangement very moving. This video below has the words as the subtitle, perhaps Meghan should have watched this video

 

[Claire]

I know the "Knavish tricks" verse off by heart because we had to learn it for a Scarlet Pimpernel production at school.

I've heard the five verses one somewhere which isn't ever sung for some understandable reasons. But I do like this:

I am beginning to believe I was the only one taught all verses at school - I sang the whole song in a Scottish accent as my uniform was a kilt. I figured in was appropriate. The nuns must have really dislike my little 11 year self.

 

[Roslyn]

Looking for clarification and thoughts on two things. First, Meghan said that she was up in the middle of the night googling the British National Anthem. Given that she lived in Canada for seven years as an adult working there, would she not have been exposed to that anthem many times? I'm not sure about the answer to this, would love to hear from some Canadians.
Also, she said her passport was taken away, but I recall her going to New York, on her own, for a fairly lavish baby shower. Is it possible royals don't actually need passports, or how would that work? Thanks.

I have a feeling - and it's only a feeling - that her passport and keys symbolised her identity and freedom. After marrying in she was probably issued with some sort of diplomatic passport she used for travel and a special driving licence.