OT/MISC Harry and Meghan Return to England (Royal Drama)

library lady said:
The photos they release of their children show two redheads, the daughter with longish straight hair. Allegedly they have blue eyes. It's pretty unlikely--not impossible--but unlikely that both kids only take after their father and don't have any of the features of their maternal grandmother or of their mother (who's had work done).

View attachment 620077
Click to expand...

She's more white than black and Harry is the whitest person in the world. Those kids are darn near white.
 
Royal or aristocratic kids have always been about who gets recognized by nobility as heirs/heiresses. Can't imagine there weren't a lot of sketchy genetics coming "out of the woodpile" back in the day - LONG before there was any real method to prove parentage. And a lot of titles and kingships passed to unlikely persons - some not direct blood at all, but by war or fostering of unrelated children.

There is a legend in one branch of my family tree that says all the kids in the direct line were branded at birth to permanently establish their family tie to the laird's bloodline. The mythical part goes that after so many generations, the kids of that line were born with that distinct birthmark. This hoo-doo was all a thing because baby-swapping by servants, underhanded relatives and enemies was a common practice. Anyway "royal or titled nobility" has always been a hit or miss affair. If mom, pop, and the family head/Monarch recognizes their station, the kids hold it.
 
WalknTrot said:
If mom, pop, and the family head/Monarch recognizes their station, the kids hold it.
Click to expand...
According to Brit law, the kids must have been birthed by the mother, to be in the line of succession.
No surrogates alowed.
There was some hanky panky with Archie's birth certificate.
The wording was altered on it.
That is what originally raised eyebrows and questions.
Recall how Diana appeared on the hospital steps with both kids?
Megan did not.
 
Plain Jane said:
apnews.com

King Charles III clarifies status of Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, after their return to the UK

King Charles III authorized the release of a letter clarifying the status of Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, now that they’ve returned to the U.K.
apnews.com apnews.com

King Charles III clarifies status of Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, after their return to the UK​





By DANICA KIRKA
Updated 1:33 AM EDT, September 8, 2026
Leer en español

LONDON (AP) — King Charles III has reiterated that Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, remain non-working members of the royal family following their return to the United Kingdom.

A letter sent on behalf of the king to senior government officials said the couple will continue to refrain from using their royal titles as they have done since stepping back from official royal duties in 2020. Any charity work the couple undertakes will be carried out in a private capacity, and operational security decisions are matters for the relevant police agencies, the letter adds.

The letter was sent by the Lord Chamberlain, the most senior official in the royal household, to senior officials in the government and military, as well as lord lieutenants, the king’s personal representatives around the country.

“To help avoid doubt or confusion, The King has directed that (this) information be shared,” the letter says.

While the communication simply confirms that Harry and Meghan’s status remains unchanged, the decision to send the letter and release it publicly demonstrates the concern among some palace observers that the couple’s status could allow them to become a sort of parallel royal court, competing with working members of the royal family.

The security question is particularly sensitive because Harry has fought a long-running battle with the government for the restoration of publicly funded police protection, which was canceled when the couple gave up their royal roles.

The decision about whether to restore the couple’s round-the-clock police protection is a matter for a government panel known as RAVEC, or the Royal and VIP Executive Committee.

“Any specific questions from official and State organizations about the courtesies which should be extended to the Duke and Duchess, and particularly where recourse to public funds may be required, should be directed to Buckingham Palace,” the Lord Chamberlain said in his letter.
Click to expand...
Haven't we all suspected that Charles is not his real father? The entire situation is sad. Harry has made it so easy to get booted out. He had to find a home outside of London because he is out.
I do hate to see brothers feuding, though.
 

Prince Harry announces string of pseudo-royal engagements in the UK and the US as he and Meghan hit back again at King for calling them 'private citizens', saying it's 'unrealistic'​


By MARTIN ROBINSON, CHIEF REPORTER
Published: 03:55 EDT, 11 September 2026 | Updated: 03:57 EDT, 11 September 2026
https://archive.ph/P5Dwa#comments


Prince Harry today announced a string of pseudo-royal appearances in the UK and US as he and Meghan hit back at the King again for describing them as 'private citizens', branding it unrealistic because they are so famous.

The Duke of Sussex will support charities on both sides of the Atlantic in what his team described as his 'September public engagements'.

The programme includes a major awards event in London later this month before he jets to New York to appear at the annual Clinton Global Initiative meeting alongside former President Bill Clinton, his wife Hillary, Chrissy Teigen and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman during United Nations General Assembly week.

The confirmation of the appearances is being interpreted as Harry stepping up his public role in Britain amid growing tensions between the Sussex camp and the Royal Household.

Harry and Meghan remain unhappy with King Charles's recent letter of 'guidance', which confirmed they would not be returning as working royals and cannot use their HRH titles.

Sources close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have suggested the King's assessment is unrealistic given their high-profile status.

Speaking to People, the couple's favoured US publication, a source said: 'Members of the public know who they are. The idea that they can live a normal, "private" life is sadly not realistic.'

The latest intervention comes amid the couple's ongoing battle over taxpayer-funded security and claims they are concerned about the safety of Archie and Lilibet on the school run.

Meghan and Harry appear unwilling to accept the King's position, which stated that nothing had changed since 'Megxit', prompting a series of briefings from sources close to the couple.

One source suggested they should be viewed as 'public figures' rather than private citizens.

aec06939e6d7e17d43d2528f982ff6356b520e1b.avif


Harry and Meghan are too famous to be known as private citizens, a source close to the couple has claimed
In a letter of 'guidance' released on King Charles' behalf, the Palace confirmed that the Sussexes have not returned to being working royals and cannot use their HRH titles


In a letter of 'guidance' released on King Charles' behalf, the Palace confirmed that the Sussexes have not returned to being working royals and cannot use their HRH titles


Their spokesman said on Tuesday that the couple were 'surprised' by the King's statement and claimed they were not given enough time to respond before it was circulated.

Team Sussex has suggested that, despite being given just over an hour's notice of the impending release, Palace aides did not give Harry enough time to 'clarify one or two points' in the letter written by the Lord Chamberlain on the King's instruction.

In particular, the Sussexes appear to have taken issue with the assertion that they should not be treated as royalty.

The Duke of Sussex's first public engagements since his return to the UK have now been announced, with Harry set to lead a series of charity events later this month.

Harry will attend the inaugural Invictus Spirit Awards and the launch of the Invictus education programme INSPIRE, as well as taking part in one of his favourite annual occasions, the WellChild Awards.

He will also return to the US to support Bill and Hillary Clinton and their so-called Global Initiative on September 22 and 23.

Harry and Meghan were said to be 'surprised' by the formal letter sent by the Lord Chamberlain under the direction of the King to senior stakeholders in the Government and military, which classified them as 'private citizens'.

The duke and duchess, who are waiting to hear whether they will be given taxpayer-funded security, are reported to prefer the term 'public figures' instead.

Full details of Harry's appearances including the dates have yet to be published.

The events were described by his team as his 'September public engagements'.

His appearances will include the first ever Invictus Spirit Awards which will celebrate individuals, organisations and communities who 'embody the resilience, service and unconquered spirit at the heart of the international Invictus Movement'.

At the launch of the INSPIRE programme, Harry will play pickleball with school pupils and participate in an assembly.

Designed by teachers for learners from early years through to Key Stage 5, the programme uses the Invictus Games and the stories of its competitors to create national curriculum-aligned resources in maths, English, Stem, art, performing arts, sport and PSHE (personal, social, health and economic) education.

Harry has been patron of WellChild – the national charity for seriously ill children and their families – since 2007 and regularly attends the awards ceremony.

The engagement is described as 'continuing his long association with WellChild as the charity's patron', with the awards, which he has attended 15 times, being a 'significant part of his annual programme'.

He will meet this year's winners and their families, carers and health professionals to hear about their experiences supporting children with serious and complex health needs.

Harry and Meghan are 'happy to be back' in the UK, sources said last night in the first comments about the Sussexes' return - despite a swirling row with Buckingham Palace over Uganda's withdrawal from the Invictus Games.

Insiders close to the couple have maintained Uganda's decision to pull out of the 2027 Games was a 'direct result' of a letter written by King Charles which insisted they are 'private citizens'.

They also added that the 'only people suffering' as a result of the monarch's letter are the Ugandan competitors who were set to take part in the upcoming games.

'They made it very clear that the reason they pulled out was a direct result of perceived guidance from the Lord Chamberlain,' they told People, which is widely considered the Sussexes' preferred publication in the US.

'This was an unintended or intended consequence of the letter — and that was always going to happen. Hence the wish not to rush it out.'

Yet despite the swirling row between the Sussexes and Buckingham Palace, sources say getting their children, Archie, seven, and Lilibet, five, settled as they begin a new school year 'has been, and remains, their focus'.

'Everything else will fall into place when the time is right,' the source told People. 'There is a lot to do. They have just moved halfway across the world, and it's been really busy getting the kids settled.

'Their focus has been on that, and will remain on that, for the time being. They are happy to be back.'

It comes after the couple, who left the UK for America in 2020 in a move famously dubbed 'Megxit', are understood to have moved to a non-royal home in the UK last month while also keeping their residence in Montecito, California.

Meanwhile, on Wednesday morning, Ugandan General Muhoozi Kainerugaba said his nation would not participate in any event without approval from Charles, adding that he felt motivated to quash 'that Harry-Meghan nonsense'.

Insiders close to the Sussexes also insisted that getting their children, Archie, seven, and Lilibet, five, settled as they begin a new school year 'has been, and remains, their focus'

The move came less than 48 hours after the King outlined that the Duke and Duchess are still not working royals despite the couple relocating to the UK a fortnight ago.

Meanwhile, PR gurus have claimed Harry and Meghan's swipes towards the King following his letter threaten the future of the Invictus Games.

Mark Borkowski said Uganda's decision to pull out of Birmingham 2027 out of respect for Charles III should serve as a stark warning to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Mr Borkowski said that 'briefing furiously' against the King and portraying themselves as victims does not resonate with the public, yet 'they keep making the same mistake'.

He told the Daily Mail: 'Uganda is the warning. The Sussex soap opera is now damaging Invictus, the one unimpeachable thing Harry created. The brand is beginning to consume the cause.

'Harry and Meghan want the freedoms of private citizens but the power of royalty, and they brief furiously whenever anyone points out the contradiction.'

Uganda's outspoken military chief, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, announced yesterday that the country would not participate in the 2027 Invictus Games because of 'that Harry-Meghan nonsense', adding: 'I support the monarch. Period.'

It came hours after the Sussexes renewed their criticism of the King's decision to classify them as 'private citizens' and make clear they are no longer working royals in a letter released following their return to Britain.

Combative statements and extraordinary claims in briefings by sources close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have dominated headlines since the King released his letter on Monday.

Mr Borkowski said: 'They drive the PR. They keep making the same mistake, with their certainty that the narrative should start to unravel. 'Woe is us', the poor victims of the mighty establishment machine.

'They've confused briefing with strategy. They want the freedoms of private citizens with the power of royalty and brief furiously whenever anyone points out the contradiction.'

Just two months ago, Uganda's defence minister Kiryowa Kiwanuka posed for photographs with a smiling Harry at an Invictus Games gathering in London.

But General Kainerugaba, the president's son, said in a post on X yesterday: 'In order not to be construed as being opposed to His Majesty King Charles III of the United Kingdom, whom we deeply revere, Uganda hereby withdraws from the Invictus Games.

'We shall not participate in anything that does not have His Majesty's approval.'

Asked by The Times why he made the announcement, General Kainerugaba said: 'I have factions in the Ministry of Defence that support that Harry-Meghan nonsense. I had to quash it straight away. I support the monarch. Period.'

The Sussexes then appeared to have blamed Uganda's decision on the King's letter.

Yesterday it was revealed that fewer than one in six Britons want Harry and Meghan to return as working members of the Royal Family now they are back in the UK.

This week King Charles made it clear the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain 'private citizens'. And a major poll reveals a majority of the British public agree it should stay that way.

YouGov asked 4,506 adults whether the Sussexes should become working members of the Royal Family again 'at some point' now they are back in Britain.

Just more than half (51 per cent) said they would rather the couple did not return to official duties.

Less than a sixth (16 per cent) said they should become working royals again, while a third (33 per cent) said they did not know.

The poll was conducted on Wednesday, a day after the Sussexes hit back at Buckingham Palace after it released a letter of 'guidance' confirming the couple were not returning as working royals.
 
Cardinal said:
According to Brit law, the kids must have been birthed by the mother, to be in the line of succession.
No surrogates alowed.
There was some hanky panky with Archie's birth certificate.
The wording was altered on it.
That is what originally raised eyebrows and questions.
Recall how Diana appeared on the hospital steps with both kids?
Megan did not.
Click to expand...
Just like "Michelle" O'Bama? <snicker>
 
library lady said:
Combative statements and extraordinary claims in briefings by sources close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have dominated headlines since the King released his letter on Monday.

Mr Borkowski said: 'They drive the PR. They keep making the same mistake, with their certainty that the narrative should start to unravel. 'Woe is us', the poor victims of the mighty establishment machine.
Click to expand...
This is just the sort of palace intrigue that the Royals try to avoid and these two stir up. I hope that they run out of steam soon. Their poor kids.
 
Cardinal said:
According to Brit law, the kids must have been birthed by the mother, to be in the line of succession.
No surrogates alowed.
There was some hanky panky with Archie's birth certificate.
The wording was altered on it.
That is what originally raised eyebrows and questions.
Recall how Diana appeared on the hospital steps with both kids?
Megan did not.
Click to expand...
I will always remember the day that Archie was presented to the Queen, BECAUSE I thought to myself no NEWLY delivered Mother would DARE to wear a WHITE dress during her first post-partum days. (not trying to be ICKY, but there's a LOT of blood). My suspicions began EARLY.
 
Some are saying that Prince William was the one that pushed for the announcement to go out so publicly and so quickly. If so, that was a good move on his part. And probably shocked the heck out of Harry et al. Proximity breeds even more contempt than distance. Harry and company should have learned that from his stay in the US. They really better take note of the poll as well. Even if it is only slightly bent statistically, it clearly shows the British people have little to no confidence or desire to see any created in Harry and company.
 
I cannot for the life of me understand the American fascination with those two. We fought two wars against those (the British) people, in large part to get out from under the thumb of the royalty nonsense.

Should the unlikely situation come to pass where I would actually meet any of the royals I would certainly be polite, but I would accord them no more deference than I would to the manager or cashier at the local supermarket. I have met any number of famous people in my life and many of them have been interesting, but again, I don't change my basic politeness based on who I happen to be speaking with.

Best
Doc
 
I think that the move will help the children, and that's who I care about at this point. They will get a better education in the UK and maybe a little less crap.

Harry needs a stern talking to and something worthwhile to do, maybe along the lines of organizing more events for wounded/retired soldiers or similar activity. Megan would do best if kept out of the public eye, but that's not going to happen. If I were in charge, I'd find something harmless for her to do, maybe host a series of tourist ads for the UK.

I imagine that Charles will broker some sort of truce between the brothers at some point. Whether it'll hold after he departs this life is debatable.
 
Cardinal said:
Don't catch your reference??
Click to expand...
OK, I'll try to be a little less obtuse.

First, the "O'Bama" reference was to a joke about the Obamas being "Black Irish" (the half-white part).

Next, I was responding to a post where the credibility of Princess Diana actually bearing children was exhibited by her appearing at the steps of the hospital after reach delivery. "Michelle" Obama is rumored to actually be a male (Michael), and therefore could not have borne children - despite what the loonies on the left want you to believe. Therefore, she could not have been pictured departing the hospital after the birth of either of "their children".

Did that help any?
 
Doc1 said:
I cannot for the life of me understand the American fascination with those two. We fought two wars against those (the British) people, in large part to get out from under the thumb of the royalty nonsense.

Should the unlikely situation come to pass where I would actually meet any of the royals I would certainly be polite, but I would accord them no more deference than I would to the manager or cashier at the local supermarket. I have met any number of famous people in my life and many of them have been interesting, but again, I don't change my basic politeness based on who I happen to be speaking with.

Best
Doc
Click to expand...
I would have bowed or curtsied to the late Queen Elizabeth II.

She was thrust into the role unexpectedly at 25; she was tutored in her duties by Winston Churchill among others. She served like any other Brit in the army--as a mechanic-- and never allowed a hint of scandal to touch her in her private life (rare for a royal these days). She managed the decline of the empire into which she was born with dignity. She broke social protocol by waltzing with an black man, an African head of state. She loved horses and the countryside. She lived up the vow she made to her nation as a young girl to serve Britain her whole life as faithfully as she could. She was no saint; but there's no one who's her equal today. She deserved respect for her faithfulness to duty and her dignity.

As an American, I wouldn't bow to any the current royals, there or elsewhere. (Although I like Princess Anne very much. Tough but honest. She should have taken the throne instead of Charles. She'd take care of Harry and Meghan fast.)
 
Last edited:
Meemur said:
I think that the move will help the children, and that's who I care about at this point. They will get a better education in the UK and maybe a little less crap.

Harry needs a stern talking to and something worthwhile to do, maybe along the lines of organizing more events for wounded/retired soldiers or similar activity. Megan would do best if kept out of the public eye, but that's not going to happen. If I were in charge, I'd find something harmless for her to do, maybe host a series of tourist ads for the UK.

I imagine that Charles will broker some sort of truce between the brothers at some point. Whether it'll hold after he departs this life is debatable.
Click to expand...
Maybe fold napkins for a local restaurant! :D
 
Couch-surfing in the Cotswolds?

Moochers Extraordinaire: The Harkles "are now staying indefinitely in a spare house on the land of an extremely wealthy friend on the fringes of the Cotswolds." I think I've figured it out...​


According to Alison Boshoff, “I’m told they are now staying ‘indefinitely’ in a spare house on the land of an extremely wealthy friend on the fringes of the Cotswolds.” (source: Daily Mail, **"**Harry and Meghan's Finding Freedom II: Her demands for her new home revealed... and why he had 'no life' in California: Insiders tell all to ALISON BOSHOFF including how an extremely wealthy friend is supporting them” 28 August 2026)

Billionaire Ian Wace’s estate in Brackley, Northamptonshire fits the bill. Known as Rowler Manor, this massive 727-acre estate “is said to include a manor house, a private lake, a commercial farm, a trout farm, stables, a water-bottling plant and other facilities, as well as its own abattoir [aka slaughterhouse] and a bowling alley disguised as a fake medieval tower.” (source: "Downton Abbey Envy Alive and Well at Banker Country Homes" by Sarah Butcher, 9 January 2013, efinancialcareers.com).

We know that the Harkles recently visited Wace’s private island in Scotland, and according to Page Six, Wace paid for the obscenely large private jet that the family of four + two dogs flew on for the reverse freedom flight to Birmingham a few days ago.

Megs could step up her fruit spread game by filming content on this estate and possibly collaborate with Chef Larry Jayasekara of the Cocochine restaurant in Mayfair, which is co-owned by Ian Wace. Chef Jayasekara sources produce and meat from Wace’s Rowler Estate.

I can only imagine that Megs is working her doe-eyed, come-hither charms on the recently divorced billionaire. He’s a catch.

ETA: It turns out Wace has a significant other, Italian fashion designer Gioia Bini, with whom he purchased an apartment in New York City in September 2025. Hmm...Megs has her work cut out for her!

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1w17qhi/moochers_extraordinaire_the_harkles_are_now
 
library lady said:
I would have bowed or curtsied to the late Queen Elizabeth II.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t have. No offense meant Liberty Lady, but do you know how many men died to keep us from having to curtsy or bow to the royal? Or live by their leave?

I know American stars visit GB often do, but it’s a grave disrespect to all of the people who suffered at the hands of the royals and British aristocracy.

Sure, Briton is our friend and ally, but to bow to their royalty? Absolutely not!
 
Squib said:
I wouldn’t have. No offense meant Liberty Lady, but do you know how many men died to keep us from having to curtsy or bow to the royal? Or live by their leave?

I know American stars visit GB often do, but it’s a grave disrespect to all of the people who suffered at the hands of the royals and British aristocracy.

Sure, Briton is our friend and ally, but to bow to their royalty? Absolutely not!
Click to expand...
It's a personal opinion. I liked her because she kept her vow to serve the public until death. She worked right up to a day or so before she passed. How many other world leaders have managed that?

She represented the Greatest Generation to me, a survivor of the war years and beyond.

It has nothing to do with the the aristocracy. Or with Britain having been an ally in the past. Sometimes there are people who just have class.
 
Harry is basically being told by Charles and William to dump the witch. Dump her and the kids and there might be a space for him.

There is some speculation that Meghan may be a Mossad plant, trying to get hands into the royal power structure.
 
library lady said:
It's a personal opinion. I liked her because she kept her vow to serve the public until death. She worked right up to a day or so before she passed. How many other world leaders have managed that?

She represented the Greatest Generation to me, a survivor of the war years and beyond.

It has nothing to do with the the aristocracy. Or with Britain having been an ally in the past. Sometimes there are people who just have class.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree…as I wrote, no offense meant…I really liked the old gal…she was the best of the bunch…

But in her entire reign, did Great Briton flourish or wane?

They went from a “classy” nation to a filthy, conquered crap hole where it’s citizens get raped and jailed, the heathen invaders get the royal treatment…no pun intended!

I can’t help but think she could have done something about that! She was well loved…on both sides of the pond! People would have listened to her…if she had taken a stand.
 
Knoxville's Joker said:
Harry is basically being told by Charles and William to dump the witch. Dump her and the kids and there might be a space for him.

There is some speculation that Meghan may be a Mossad plant, trying to get hands into the royal power structure.
Click to expand...

I don't think she'll last long in the UK, but I think they're totally out of money and options, so Harry might be finished with trying to make her happy. He's home. He's not going anywhere else. She'll have to divorce him, and maybe she will if she thinks she can get some cash. Or maybe she'll get someone else, although who would want her?
 
One must consider the source, but I saw this posted elsewhere this morning and had to retrieve my eyeballs, as they'd rolled plumb out of my head! This is after Harry has lost lawsuit after lawsuit. Someone ought to clue him in that one can not sue the King.

0UFY9wl.gif


radaronline.com

EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'Eye Legal Fight Over King Charles' Letter'

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly eying a legal fight over King Charles' letter.
radaronline.com radaronline.com

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'Eye Legal Fight Over King Charles' Letter'

Aaron Tinney
Sept. 13 2026, Published 3:00 p.m. ET

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are said to be considering challenging King Charles' description of them as "private citizens," with sources telling RadarOnline.com the Sussexes are determined to resist language they believe misrepresents their public status.

Insiders claim Harry, 41, and Markle, 45, have taken particular issue with the wording of a letter authorized by Charles, 77, reaffirming the terms of their departure from royal duties in 2020.

Sussexes Consider Legal Action Over Palace Guidance

The guidance, distributed to senior government and military figures and other officials, reiterates the couple are non-working royals and describes their position as being "akin to private citizens with commercial and charitable interests."

A source close to the Sussexes claimed: "Harry and Meghan are not prepared simply to accept being characterized as 'private citizens' when the reality of their lives is considerably more complicated. They are internationally recognized people who undertake public charitable work, have patronages and attract substantial media attention wherever they go.

"Their concern is that the King's wording could establish a misleading description of their status that is then repeated by government departments and other official organizations, which they feel could be especially legally damaging in the context of their bids for increased security in Britain."

They added, "The point they are examining is whether describing them in official correspondence as effectively private citizens accurately reflects their position as public figures. If they conclude that the language has consequences beyond Palace protocol, they will consider what avenues are available to challenge or clarify it, whether that will be a legal fight or a public statement."

Inside the Palace Plan to Avoid Confusion

The Palace guidance on the Sussexes' role in relation to the royal family was intended to "help avoid confusion" about how officials should deal with Harry and Markle as they undertake public appearances independently of the monarchy.

It stated about the couple: "Their position is akin to private citizens with commercial and charitable interests."

Sussex sources claimed Harry and Markle were given approximately an hour's notice before the correspondence became public.

A spokesman for Harry and Markle also said: "We were a little surprised not to have been told about this in advance."

Harry is expected to resume public engagements in the coming weeks, including appearances connected to his charities and patronages.

Markle is not expected to immediately join him at public events as she concentrates on settling their children, Archie, seven, and Lilibet, five, into school following the family's return to Britain.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Children Start British School

The dispute emerged as the Royal Family privately marked the fourth anniversary of Queen Elizabeth II's death.

Harry and Markle stepped back from royal duties six years ago following the Sandringham Agreement, having repeatedly complained about intrusion into their private lives.

Charles' latest intervention makes clear the arrangement remains unchanged – but one of our sources stressed: "The Sussexes' objection centers on how their post-royal position should now be defined."

As part of their UK move, Harry and Markle's children are expected to attend school in Britain near the family's reported countryside base.

A palace insider claimed, "This was not about stripping anything else away from Harry and Meghan. It was about drawing a very clear line. They can undertake as much charity work as they wish, but they do so as private individuals. The Palace clearly felt that reminder was necessary before the Sussexes' public activities gathered momentum."
 
thompson said:
A palace insider claimed, "This was not about stripping anything else away from Harry and Meghan. It was about drawing a very clear line. They can undertake as much charity work as they wish, but they do so as private individuals. The Palace clearly felt that reminder was necessary before the Sussexes' public activities gathered momentum."
Click to expand...
Yep, it's getting a bit medieval. Suppose something goes wrong or is "planned" to go wrong when either one of those two are in the public.
 
Sacajawea said:
This is going to be an on-going soap opera, I guess?
Click to expand...

Those two could be given every single thing they demanded, and yes, it would continue to be a soap opera.

Rabbit said:
That boy better be careful; the King might call for a DNA test. Think of your children, Harry.
Click to expand...

I've been wondering if there were DNA samples taken of the children during their visit this past July (surreptitiously, of course, perhaps from hair strands that happened to fall on Charles or Camilla's clothing after a hug). I'm all but certain that was done.
 
Plain Jane said:
Suppose something goes wrong or is "planned" to go wrong when either one of those two are in the public.
Click to expand...

Brings to mind that supposed "terrifying! car chase" in the heart of Manhattan that was reported (by them) several years ago after MeGain received an award (that she undoubtedly obtained through a monetary donation). The driver of the car went on the record shortly after their claim to denounce the Harkle's account of said "chase". Ie, it never happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top