Prince charles

Apparently banned megz from coming up to Balmoral.

Why are they so stupid. It is entirely normal a man wants his wife with him....

Are you talking about when the Queen was dying?  Not unreasonable to not want someone you have fallen out with there at that point in time surely?  I suspect some of them absolutely hate her guts by now... 

Apparently banned megz from coming up to Balmoral.

Probably bollocks but, if true, completely understandable. Why would a man whose mother is dying want someone who has publicly attacked both him and his dying mother anywhere near him?

 I heard the heirs all had to be present at the moment of passing

You heard wrong. HTH 

They were in the UK but had no plans to meet the Queen or his family. Seems like the relationship has broken down.

I have definitely not read any royalty gossip mags but my impression of the general press coverage of it was that it was close (i.e direct family) relatives who went up (apart from Camilla who I think might have gone with Charles to Balmoral).  I am certain from press coverage that Catherine Middleton stayed in London to do the school run or something similar.

So whilst no one knows what happened behind closed doors it seems just as likely that Harry wanted Megan there or at the very least expressly invited so he could have a backer / protector of his very strained position there with him (or Harry was demanding this as an olive branch from his father).

I don't like Prince Charles at all but if Harry had been able to extract the emotion from this (very difficult I guess) he could have presented Megan not coming to Balmoral with him as royal etiquette and it would have been a nothing.

Maybe Charles didn't want Netflix camera pple there. And it's a bit late for them to hurry to Balmoral after keeping their distance for the last couple of years knowing that the Queen was approaching a HUNDRED years of age.  I have a soft spot for Haz and Megz but they don't get to call the shots when her Maj is on her death bed.

The only other grandkid that seems to have been there was William, which makes sense as he's next in line. Her other grandkids probably had a greater claim to being there than Meghan. Where's the outrage for them?

Please don't put things in a sensible context Sizz.

People are trying to say random stuff from their armchair while looking at a situation they know nothing about through the wrong end of a telescope. If you point out their ignorance too suddenly it could be dangerous.

You never know but it could even have been an instruction from the Queen to Charles rather than his decision.

For the hard of thinking what sort of parent calls you to say your grandmother is dying and no you can't bring your wife with you when you come to an emotionally traumatic experience 

I'm with roger. If Harry wanted her there, she should have been allowed to join him. I doubt she would claim the right to sit with the queen or somesuch. She could have just been there in the background. People first. Protocol is nonsense, absolutely irrelevant even. Why is that so hard for the RF?  

The sort of parent who has seen the wife in question go on US television and claim she had been driven out of the family by its racism?

If a dying person tells me that they don't want someone at their death then I'll make sure that person isn't there.  The wishes of the dying are more important than the hurt feelings of the living.

she would 100% have talked about it in detail in an oprah interview

ofc she was banned because she's a dick

Or the sort of parent who was warned time and time again that they needed to take a stance against the blatant media attacks and yes, racism, and didn't. 

Jaysus, I don't even like Meghan but the RF (ALL of them incl H&M) is a bunch of twots who should just take a step back, breathe and listen to each other and then care for each other.

"For the hard of thinking what sort of parent calls you to say your grandmother is dying and no you can't bring your wife with you when you come to an emotionally traumatic experience"

Err this is the British Royal family??

You know, the one which takes state funerals so incredibly seriously that they make a 12 year old Prince Harry march behind his own mothers funeral which was televised to and watched by about 2.5 billion people globally? 

By saying this I am making zero judgment about Harry, zero judgment about Diana etc.  I am just saying it is bizarre if you think Charles is suddenly going to adopt "normal" parenting/approach to being a father if he has put his two sons through that.

bunch of emotional retards

the unnecessary and unkind treatment of Harry may end up destroying the monarchy

It’s not unusual to only want to have spouse and children present at the time of passing. And for those very close family members to want to have privacy away from wider family members.

Why would a relatively recently married spouse of a grandchild think it would be appropriate to attend, especially after slagging off the family in public?

If this is a genuine Montecitio complaint, they are more narcissistic and deranged than I thought possible.

I think as a general rule you should let immediate family-member spouses travel with them for support, even if you don't like them.  Bigger picture and all that.

(I have no idea if the story is true of course).

bunch of emotional retards

the unnecessary and unkind treatment of Harry may end up destroying the monarchy

He walked her down the aisle on her wedding day when her own dad wouldn't show up.

There's no case to answer here.  There was so much to do in the  aftermath of her death, if KC3 didn't think it appropriate for inlaws of the grandkids to come that was his call.  It was a trivial thing on the list of stuff he had to deal with at the time, in addition to, you know, his mum dying.

I don't even know where this claim is coming from, or why I'm answering, but hypothetically if this is sth that's been raised, Charles should just ignore it and get on with kinging. This isn't a Diana death situation, where Di died as the Peeps' Princess and QE2 was criticised for not showing more emotion.  Megz and Harry just aren't popular enough at the moment for most people to care how they're treated.  And in the aftermath of the criticism she received after Diana's death, pretty much all the Queen did (apart from a statement and a walkabout) was get on with queening.  25 years later, she died Our Beloved Monarch.

Also, re destruction of the Monarchy, I think the BRF has shown over the years they are smooth operators.  They know exactly what to do to ensure their own survival: modernise just a wee bit to appease some of the critiques and keep the glam and traditions that keep the folks hooked.

When I got the call to my grandmother’s bedside when my parents thought she was close to death, my wife did not travel with me.

Grandmother survived another 2 years, which was good (and died peacefully in her sleep).

i like megz primarily cos of the rage she induces amongst frothies

but this seems entirely reasonable and actually sensible from his maj, not necessarily malicious

4 the monarchy 2 survive they need 2 maintain the mystique and awe - i think bagehot or some1 sed that - i would adjust that slightly 2 say they need a fine balance between mystique, but also provide insight, normality and openness so they somehow r not remote. close, but mysterious.

and his maj has too often strayed in2 being too open - too human. b the lizard. the more u allow ppl other than close family 2 the deathbed, the more normalised it becomes. 

and megz, 4 all her top work, is liable 2 say too much

I'm torn between being annoyed at Harry and Meg for being such a pair of entitled and tone deaf loudmouths and having empathy for them experiencing what appear to be very toxic families on either side.

I know The Crown is not 100pc historically accurate but it does seem from that that this kind of "institution comes first and fvck the individual who messes with it" attitude is nothing new for the royals 

"He walked her down the aisle on her wedding day when her own dad wouldn't show up."

Well, that totally makes up for then standing back and allowing the press to rip her apart in all but the most egregious circumstances (I think the RF may have made some sort of comment about possibly unhelpful coverage when that bloke got sent down for literally plotting to kill Harry for being a "race traitor", which was mighty big of them), in return for the press turning a blind eye to the pecadilloes of other members of the family.  Pecadilloes which, I think we will all agree, were definitely worse than daring to hold her baby bump in public, or eat an avocado.

Fact is, I think that Meghan was doomed to fail because the doofus that is Harry clearly did not do what was necessary to prepare her for even a scintilla of what life might be like as his partner and that is his fault - one thing I'm sure of is, if he had asked, there would have been resources to help her understand the sh1tstorm she was marrying into.  Also, she is, fundamentally, not very likeable, and definitely has delusions of grandeur, which were never going to fly in the hierarchy of an institution like the royal family, and her lack of experience of a functioning family life can't have helped.  And no question, they have certainly managed to p1ss away a lot of the goodwill that they had at the start (although, some might say that, given the speed with which that goodwill seemed to vanish and the screws applied, it probably wasn't worth sh1t in the first place).

But the royal family made a decision - which, no doubt, the likes of OGR fully applaud on account of that's what Harry gets for muddying the royal bloodline with her part brownness - that they were suitable cannon fodder in the bid to protect more important members of The Firm, and the royal family has fvcked them over, erm, royally and repeatedly.

Yes, literally noone, apart from the tens of thousands of people who felt (and still do) feel the need to post vile sh1t about how "dirty" she is, and how appalling it is that the royal family line is no longer "pure".  Now, given your inability to give a sh1t about anything at all, unless it is in danger of shaking up the general mediocrity of your status quo, you may not think that tens of thousands of people abusing you is anything to be bothered by, but it is not unreasonable that others might take issue with it.

Cru, the BRF doesn't often make comment on news reports made about it and its members does it...? Even so, didn't the palace intervene when they were courting to address racist commentary about the couple? I think that was unprecedented.

In any case, recent press re Megz and BRF seems pretty neutral. The only stuff that seems to come out any more are claims about Megs and Harry being slighted one way or another. It's a shame they can't direct all the attention paid to them to their various projects. that'd be far more interesting that perceived slights and petty family rifts. 

Many of you seem to forget that Harry is due to publish a tell-all memoire in two months. If a family member tried to do that to me, especially when hundreds of millions of people would potentially read it, i’d be absolutely livid. I’m honestly surprised his brother hasn’t lamped him. I think they’ve all been remarkably restrained, especially when Meghan’s lies about the staff departures/bullying came to light, as well as her ostensible ignorance as to Harry’s fame. One thing she is not is ignorant.

I don't tend to agree with most people re team Meghan v team palace.

But the death of a monarch involves weird rituals and careful messaging relating to, err, someone else becoming the new monarch.

The idea that Meghan as Harry's wife was somehow entitled to be there at her bedside is absolutely nuts. As others on this thread have pointed out, no other grandchildren were there other than William and Harry. No spouses at all.

You don't need to go into the fact that she's not very discreet, because it's not even a conversation in the first place.

I suspect these stories have been massively exaggerated by the papers anyway, in terms of her asking to go and the palace saying no.

Sizz - yes, they did eventually and half-heartedly (imo) but given the similarly unprecedented seriousness of the issues they were dealing with - actual racism - and the fact that a significant percentage of their "subjects" experience the same thing, someone might have thought it would do them good to speak up earlier, and a bit more robustly.

Fact is, if I didn't make it clear - neither "side" comes out of this at all well and they deserve each other, they are all as fvcked up as each other in their own different, unpleasant ways.  It just irks me when the narrative seems to ignore that the Royal Family themselves are no slouches when it comes to sh1tty, manipulative, unkind behaviour.

I can't believe I am arguing about this but I really don't see how the "narrative" ignores the Royal Family being emotionally stunted fvck ups (which is hardly a secret).  That is Megan and Harry's whole schtick. Schtick which they have been pushing very hard, very publicly for some time (the last time I saw a figure 50 million people had apparently watched their "Big Interview" with Oprah). I don't think any member of the Royal Family has done anything comparable in terms of personally putting the boot in in public have they?

In all the years that Megx has been a public person, I have literally heard of no one refer to her as ‘dirty’ until Cruella has above.

I genuinely think that she has just made it up.

Donny - no, not publicly from the Royal Family.  But as above, I think their decision (in giving up Harry and Meghan in exchange for protecting Wills and - for as long as they could - Andrew) sent a clear message to Hazza and Megz that they were disposable and could look forward to at least a medium term future of being left hanging as and when necessary - for the "greater good".  I don't think that their ensuing scorched earth approach is the right or clever one, but I'm not sure I blame them for deciding that loyalty shouldn't only go in one direction.

I agree with Madders. It's pretty well documented that they're ruthless and self interested. That's how their ancestors/the institution managed to survive over the centuries.  

My bothered bag is so empty.

If an in-law isn't invited to a person's death - so what?

She was at the funeral next to Harry.  She wasn't banned or put into another pew.  She was there with the rest of the family.

Maybe the Queen's wish was that it was only a select few.  Who knows what happened.  Who cares.

Kimmy - Princess Michael of Kent, aka Princess Pushy.  She has a long and illustrious history of very questionable behaviour generally and for what it's worth is, I think, the very definition of an equal opportunity bigot! I think being offensive is just a reflex for her, and I don't think La Markle was particularly singled out for Pushy's peculiar brand of welcome.

heh - i miss brexitbrexit. he/she provided such honest and interesting insights in2 the brexter mindset

What sails said at 9.31. Harry , nor Megan don't get to decide who should attend. There is no reason why Charles would want here there.