Oprah Winfrey royal interview


Recommended Posts

Old but gold, this is how I like to see the Royal family.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sent to me by a friend. An impressive read. Subject: I am not sure who wrote this but it says it all.       On March 29 1941- almost 80 years ago- a young naval officer was in charge of

I'm a little confused about her complaints. It started with objecting to the press coverage despite having spent most of her adult life as an actress encouraging exactly that. We went to a complaint a

When, rather than if, the not very convincing method actress dumps Harry I doubt he'll be able to cope. He seems very fragile, just as his mother was although not as manipulative. Perhaps he should ha

Well that's three (prematurely four) of the flock knocked off the balcony at Buck House. A lot more to go as they're breeding like rabbits in heat.

Look at the savings that could be made if there were far fewer hangers on. More cash for the bottomless pit of the NHS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your generosity of spirit is an inspiration to us all. :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent to me by a friend. An impressive read.

Subject: I am not sure who wrote this but it says it all.
 
 
 
On March 29 1941- almost 80 years ago- a young naval officer was in charge of the spotters on board HMS Valiant, a great battleship in the Royal Navy. Their targets were 3 capital ships from the Italian navy- they had received information from the code breaking geniuses at Bletchley Park. The search was on. In the darkness above the horizon the young officer noticed what appeared to be metal turrets reflecting off the searchlights of the Valiant. He had spotted the enemy and battle commenced. The battle of Cape Matapan was underway. In a fierce engagement 2 Italian capital ships were sunk. The young officer was mentioned in dispatches and commended for bravery. That young officer was a 19 year old Philippos Andreou of Schleswig Holstein- Sonderberg- Glucksberg, Prince of Greece and Denmark. The World knows him today as Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh and consort of Queen Elizabeth.     He will turn 100 in June. He didn’t step down from active royal duties until his late 90s- a total legend!
 
Five months before her future husband was engaged in a life and death struggle off the coast of Greece, a young Princess Elizabeth, aged 14, gave her first broadcast to the commonwealth of nations loyal to the great cause and specifically the children. At that time Britain stood alone- a seemingly hopeless cause. Churchill’s greatness and leadership will be remembered as long as history is faithfully told. He was supported at all times by King George and his indomitable wife Queen Elizabeth ( the Queen Mother). Both the King and his wife flatly refused to leave London- their daughters would stay with them as well. Buckingham Palace itself was very badly damaged in a bombing raid- the Queen said it “allowed her to look the East End proudly in the face”.
 
The young Princess finished her address as follows:
“ We know, every one of us, that in the end all will be well: for God will care for us and give us victory and peace. And when peace comes remember it will be for us, the children of today, to make the world of tomorrow a better and happier place.  My sister is by my side and we are both going to say goodnight to you.  Come on Margaret.  Goodnight children”

From that day in October 1940 the Queen has led a life of total service and sacrifice.     She presides over the commonwealth of nations, comprised of 54 countries with a population of 2.5 billion people. Her commitment to this organisation has had the most profound effect on the wellbeing of these people. Most of these are people of colour. It could well be argued that under her stewardship no family on Earth has done more to improve the lives of people of colour.

This week we have witnessed the slick narcissism of a moderately successful Hollywood actress and her mesmerised and dominated husband perform an act of pure spite and self promotion. Not satisfied with their lot in life, a life of almost unimaginable privilege and wealth, they go on worldwide TV in a futile attempt to discredit the monarchy and by extension the aged and great couple who lead the family. Predictably the race card is played: all the usual charlatans in the media and left wing politics jump on the bandwagon- even the wretched Hillary Clinton reared her awful head!

Their pathetic attempt is doomed to failure. On the day this piece of utter guff was released the Royal family were out doing what they do: visiting hospitals, workers, sick children and various other deserving causes. The British people in their wisdom will have scant patience being lectured to by a couple of entitled and misguided morons who in their spite and cruelty have exposed themselves as appalling spoilt brats.

The great Duke is spending his 4th week in hospital having undergone heart surgery. We wish him well.

The nation will never forget the debt we owe to the greatest generation. Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip are one of the last links we still have. Our gratitude doth overflow!

God save the Queen

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever wrote this has hit the nail on the head, it should be sent the couple to remind , especially Harry exactly what his grandmother is and what she's sacrificed. Well written and thanks for posting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, letsavagoo said:

Subject: I am not sure who wrote this but it says it all.

Letsavagoo, certainly puts everything into perspective. The past is a different Country, and the generation that lived in it are strangers to us if we do not listen.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's three (prematurely four) of the flock knocked off the balcony at Buck House. A lot more to go as they're breeding like rabbits in heat.

Look at the savings that could be made if there were far fewer hangers on. More cash for the bottomless pit of the NHS.

 

With a name like Philippos Andreou of Schleswig Holstein- Sonderberg- Glucksberg, Prince of Greece and Denmark he would have found it difficult to 'sign on'.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presumably you think someone with a name like that or because he was not English would have difficulty joining up.

Perhaps you are unaware there were around 10,000 German and Austrian nationals who served in the British forces.

One of them, Klaus Hugo George Fritz Adam, went on to become a Typhoon pilot and flew low altitude attacks on D day. Eventually he earned a knighthood - Sir Ken Adam

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brew said:

Presumably you think someone with a name like that or because he was not English would have difficulty joining up.

Perhaps you are unaware there were around 10,000 German and Austrian nationals who served in the British forces.

One of them, Klaus Hugo George Fritz Adam, went on to become a Typhoon pilot and flew low altitude attacks on D day. Eventually he earned a knighthood - Sir Ken Adam

 

Strange that you misinterpreted the quotation. I was referring to difficulties with a name like that in signing on for any welfare benefits.

I too served in the mob, what were you in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies' Alpha. you're quite right. I interpreted your comment as meaning he would have difficulty joining up.

 

I was too young (How often do I get to say that now days?), for national service but did apply to join the army. On the day a colour sergeant and major came to my house to sign me up a letter of acceptance came from NU... the rest is history.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brew said:

My apologies' Alpha. you're quite right. I interpreted your comment as meaning he would have difficulty joining up.

 

I was too young (How often do I get to say that now days?), for national service but did apply to join the army. On the day a colour sergeant and major came to my house to sign me up a letter of acceptance came from NU... the rest is history.

Brew,

I would think that NU was the better career option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that whoever wrote that diatribe didn’t mention Harry’s two tours in Afghanistan, or his work with disabled veterans through the Invictus Games.

 

There again, his uncle (who shall not be named) was also a Navy helicopter pilot.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rob.L said:

Interesting that whoever wrote that diatribe didn’t mention Harry’s two tours in Afghanistan, or his work with disabled veterans through the Invictus Games.

 

There again, his uncle (who shall not be named) was also a Navy helicopter pilot.

But since his soldiering days Rob, well in the past 3 or 4 years, he’s been manipulated and taken in by this young woman and we should all be able to see that what Meghan wants Meghan gets and to hell with the British Monarchy.  I’ve noticed that political views seem to dictate which side one supports.  Hillary Clinton has been on American TV in support of the Markles and on UK TV we’ve had the lovely articulate Diane Abbott ranting on.  I don’t normally get into political discussions but just explain why Socialists appear to support those two.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, letsavagoo said:

This week we have witnessed the slick narcissism of a moderately successful Hollywood actress and her mesmerised and dominated husband perform an act of pure spite and self promotion. Not satisfied with their lot in life, a life of almost unimaginable privilege and wealth, they go on worldwide TV in a futile attempt to discredit the monarchy and by extension the aged and great couple who lead the family. Predictably the race card is played: all the usual charlatans in the media and left wing politics jump on the bandwagon- even the wretched Hillary Clinton reared her awful head!

 

Quite frankly I'm stunned that people fall so easily for this piece of blatant right wing jingoistic propaganda.  Can people not see what the author has done here?

 

It is true that the Queen has given a lifetime of service and so has her husband.  Though whether that also constitutes 'sacrifice', given their extreme wealth and privelege is another matter. (Some might wish to look into the basics of 'Organisation Theory' for some clues here)

 

Elizabeth and her sister's broadcast during the war was undoubtedly well meant on their part, but it was also a clearly orchestrated piece of propaganda and almost certainly orchestrated by Govt.

 

The piece then goes on to claim that the Queen has somehow almost single handedly improved the lives of all citizens of the Commonwealth.  That is frankly tripe. On balance I'd say the Commonwealth is 'a good thing', but it is far from perfect and many in the Commonealth continue to suffer from poverty, religious and political persecution, cultural misogyny etc,etc.

 

So.. the author has taken a lot of fact, wrapped it up in a lot of  nonsense and jingoistic Little Englander stuff and used it in an attempt to dismiss the claims made by Meghan and Harry.  But, and far worse.. it goes on the totally dismiss what Meg and Harry have claimed.. without any evidential basis on which to do so. Finally, although I didn't watch more than a few clips from the infamous interview, I watched enough to understand very clearly that neither Harry nor Meghan blamed either the Queen, or her husband for their experiences.  In fact they deliberately and clearly made the opposite point.

 

17 hours ago, letsavagoo said:

Predictably the race card is played: all the usual charlatans in the media and left wing politics jump on the bandwagon- even the wretched Hillary Clinton reared her awful head!

 

'Predictably'? What does that mean exactly?  Oh.. I see, when a woman of mixed race complains about being singled out on the basis of race.. she is 'playing the race card' ?  Really?

'All the usual charlatans in the media'  Well it's difficult to argue with that bit as those self-same charlatans which will pick sides over the guilt or innocence of M and H, are the very ones who first raised the question of Ms ethnicity in their usual slimy way..not by calling her out on her race, but by speculating on how others might react. Still blatant racism.

 

'Left wing politics'

 

The author revealing his/her bias and shallowness of thought.  Before this comment there was no left or right political bias in this issue.  Most of us either don't much care.. or if we do.. would like to know what really happened. 

 

This 'article' does nothing other than 'stroke' the established prejudices of a certain sort of 'Monarchist'.

 

It is drivel.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LizzieM said:

But since his soldiering days Rob, well in the past 3 or 4 years, he’s been manipulated and taken in by this young woman and we should all be able to see that what Meghan wants Meghan gets and to hell with the British Monarchy.

 

Really Liz?  Is it that simple?

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the ratings in the USA 17.1 million people watched the Oprah Harry and Meghan expose.

To put that another way and given that the population of the USA is 327.16 million means that 310.06 million did not watch it

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DJ360 said:

It is drivel.

True, DJ. Sadly the world turns on the money to be made out of it. That discolours the media and scars our opinions. The immediacy of "news" reporting gives none of us time to, as the high court judge would have it, to reflect soberly and at length on the facts before us - having first ascertained that what is before us is, indeed, a fact and not a disguised opinion, and then to present a clear picture of the situation.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DJ360 said:

But, and far worse.. it goes on the totally dismiss what Meg and Harry have claimed.. without any evidential basis on which to do so.

 

True enough but it's par for the course of trial by media, however the amount of evidence is on the same level as the accusation - none.

As things stand at the moment the accusations have been accepted by many as gospel and will brook no criticism or counter argument.

 

Whilst on the subject,  was Piers Morgan right to say he didn't "believe a word she said"? Is he saying something many people believe?

Note he did not say 'they', he said 'she'. Is he being racist or misogynistic by singling out Meghan? I've heard some say he should have kept his opinions to himself but if something is in the public domain can we not reply in the same way? We may not agree with him but does he have the right to say it?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not straightforward. 

 

1. Freedom of speech in the UK is not absolute. It does not allow 'hate speech', for e.g.  Whether piers Morgan's outburst qualifies as hate speech is moot, but he is clearly a self promoting shit-stirrer in the mould of Katie Hopkins..with a similarly low level moral compass.

 

2. Arguably, it depends on the nature of the medium.  For e.g., the UK gutter press, most notably the Sun and the execrable Daily Mail are a law unto themselves and one has to hope that the bulk of readers understand that. 

On the other hand, despite seriously degrading in recent years, the BBC has 'standards' and in general, news readers and other commentators are expected to keep their personal views to themselves. So, when Naga Munchetty expressed her opinion on some issue of race, she got into deep water because ONE viewer complained that she had 'expressed an opinion'.  She survived that experience and went on to make a serious programme about race, shown a couple of days ago.  So, if the original complainant hoped to silence the anti-racist lobbly, they got their eye wiped.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brew said:

Whilst on the subject,  was Piers Morgan right to say he didn't "believe a word she said"? Is he saying something many people believe?

Note he did not say 'they', he said 'she'. Is he being racist or misogynistic by singling out Meghan? I've heard some say he should have kept his opinions to himself but if something is in the public domain can we not reply in the same way? We may not agree with him but does he have the right to say it?

 

 

I'd have to go back and look at the full exchange because he wasn't the only one in the conversation. BUT, he was clearly 'playing to the gallery'.  He is of course entitled to not believe Meg, he's even entitled to say so, but the manner in which he did so was clearly calculated to undermine her by taking advantage of his media profile.  He, like others.. offered no evidence.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

It's not straightforward. 

Actually I rather think it is. All that you say about him may be true, though clearly coloured by your dislike of the man. You accuse hime of taking advantage of the media(?) and his notoriety, but what's that to do with the price of chips? The question was, "does he have a right to say it" the time, place and whether playing to the gallery or not, are irrelevant. In my mind providing he stays within the law we should not have a problem.

 

A foriegn national living in another country is hoping to censor what is said about them on British TV? Even Trump didn't go that far. 41,000 and Meghan have officially complained, on the other hand apperently 200,000 are backing him and want him reinstated.

 

To even suggest that saying you don't believe someone is moot vis-a-vis hate crime is a very slippery slope.

 

Evidence? there is none so far, the whole sorry saga is just rumour and conjecture

Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys can say what you like, but you can't dispute the fact that it's opened a can of worms and certainly made a topic of conversation for members on Nottstalgia.  Personally, I don't give a toss. Nuff said!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...