Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are now Americans. (Take vicious shots at Royal Family on Oprah)

[Izzy Goodenough]

Oops again: "Her pair of black sheep in Gloucestershire were named Venus and Serena"

An Ex-Royal Boyfriend Just Made Shocking Allegations About Princess Michael of Kent's Racist Past

Princess Michael of Kent Wore a Racist Brooch to Lunch with Meghan Markle

 

[NyQuil]

Meghan Markle accused of wearing Saudi leader's 'blood money' earrings after Khashoggi death

Buckingham Palace to investigate claims Meghan bullied staff

It's like tennis.

 

[Ceremony]

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

Oopsy doopsy: The 10 greatest controversies of Winston Churchill's career

"I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."

Churchill certainly believed in racial hierarchies and eugenics, says John Charmley, author of Churchill: The End of Glory. In Churchill's view, white protestant Christians were at the top, above white Catholics, while Indians were higher than Africans, he adds. "Churchill saw himself and Britain as being the winners in a social Darwinian hierarchy."

Churchill was born on 30 November 1874 at his family's ancestral home, Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire.[2] On his father's side, he was a member of the British aristocracy as a direct descendant of the 1st Duke of Marlborough.[3]

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

oopa loopa: racism endemic to british society:


Racism endemic to British society, not just to police, says Ashdown

 

[NyQuil]

Five charts that show what systemic racism looks like in Canada

France must tackle ‘systemic’ discrimination, says rights watchdog

German government to commission institutional racism study

America's Long Overdue Awakening to Systemic Racism

Italy, it’s time to confront your own rampant racism

Report on hate crimes and institutional racism in Greece European Network Against Racism - ENAR - HumanRights360

Study reveals racial inequality in Mexico, disproving its 'race-blind' rhetoric

Overcoming systemic racism in Australia | Advocacy & Welfare

We need to talk about systemic racism in Denmark - European Network Against Racism

Sweden’s Shameful Record on Racism Shows Why We Need Black Lives Matter

 

[SirClintonPortis]

I'm not totally free of suspicion that this is some contrived thing made by the Firm to distract the publics of the USA and the Commonwealth by using Charles' already low reputation. Since they said it was not the Queen nor Phillip, the best deduction would be Charles.

Perhaps Phillip actually said it but for the sake of expediency, they let the public deduce for themselves it was Charles. Since it is the public's inference and not Harry and Meghan themselves naming names, it's is the public's fault for thinking whatever they want to think.

Harry and Meghan get a sympathetic boost and gets put into the news cycle and Prince Charles loses nothing since no one likes him anyway.

 

[NyQuil]

I'm not totally free of suspicion that this is some contrived thing made by the Firm to distract the publics of the USA and the Commonwealth by using Charles' already low reputation. Since they said it was not the Queen nor Phillip, the best deduction would be Charles.

Perhaps Phillip actually said it but for the sake of expediency, they let the public deduce for themselves it was Charles. Since it is the public's inference and not Harry and Meghan themselves naming names, it's is the public's fault for thinking whatever they want to think.

Harry and Meghan get a sympathetic boost and gets put into the news cycle and Prince Charles loses nothing since no one likes him anyway.

It's almost worse because the accused isn't identified to confront the allegations.

It's not as if any member can come forward now and say "Yeah, I'm pretty sure she meant me, but I didn't do it."

Phillip would be the obvious person to pin it on, if I was being a Machiavellian. Just look at the laundry list of racist things he's said over the years.

 

[BHD]

She [Meghan] stresses a need for privacy, but has yet to pass on any opportunity to speak in front of the media.

 

[Mrfenn92]

I could really care less about Harry, Meghan and the Windsor family. All seem pretty useless to the world to me.

 

[Ceremony]

I could really care less

So, you care a bit?

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Oopsy doopsy: The 10 greatest controversies of Winston Churchill's career

"I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."

Churchill certainly believed in racial hierarchies and eugenics, says John Charmley, author of Churchill: The End of Glory. In Churchill's view, white protestant Christians were at the top, above white Catholics, while Indians were higher than Africans, he adds. "Churchill saw himself and Britain as being the winners in a social Darwinian hierarchy."

Churchill was born on 30 November 1874 at his family's ancestral home, Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire.[2] On his father's side, he was a member of the British aristocracy as a direct descendant of the 1st Duke of Marlborough.[3]

He was an awful person who helped saved the world.

 

[NyQuil]

He was an awful person who helped saved the world.

America was very suspicious of Churchill, who always kept the UK's imperial ambitions in mind.

He was very adamant that the US support military invasions in Africa and Italy, which he called "the soft underbelly of Europe" (Italy was anything but), but in doing so, opened up the Mediterranean for British shipping in order to maintain supply lines to Britain's colonial holdings all over the world.

The US, for their part, wanted to go into France far sooner. Whether or not they would have been able to do so successfully without the experience gained in other theatres (and raids like Dieppe), remains to be seen.

Some have argued that Dieppe was a necessary (planned?) failure in order to convince the Americans to delay the cross-channel invasion.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

He was an awful person who helped saved the world.

But did he? Save the world?

However, this is pretty funny:

 

[NyQuil]

But did he? Save the world?

Is this some kind of Churchill was as bad as Hitler thing?

 

[spintheblackcircle]

But did he? Save the world?

Well, we know how things played out. If someone thinks that if Europe fell either to the Nazis during WWII or the Russians after WWII, I'd like to hear that argument.

 

[NyQuil]

However, this is pretty funny

I love this bit.

His delivery is outstanding. He does it in his Netflix special and I remember a few little details differently.



They did split up Germany.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

"British troops entered Cuxhaven at 14:00 on 6 May -- from now on all radio traffic will cease -- wishing you all the best. Lt Kunkel," the message read. "Closing down for ever -- all the best -- goodbye."

Last Nazi message decoded by Britain revealed to mark VE Day - CNN

Hmm that's strange I thought it was this:

 

[SirClintonPortis]

It's almost worse because the accused isn't identified to confront the allegations.

It's not as if any member can come forward now and say "Yeah, I'm pretty sure she meant me, but I didn't do it."

Phillip would be the obvious person to pin it on, if I was being a Machiavellian. Just look at the laundry list of racist things he's said over the years.

Well, the Queen and Phillip are publicly absolved as Winfrey said it was not either of them. So the head of state and her husband are publicly in the clear. Everyone else is fair game.

William hasn't made a direct denial but says the family isn't racist; he also can say he married a commoner, and bucked some protocols. Charles is already hated so I doubt he gives damn if people now consider him a racist in addition to being an adulterer and the devil to Diana's public saintliness. Andrew has his sex scandal already. No one thinks about Princess Anne.

The people who want to look better for their intended audience wind up doing so, William builds himself up as the responsible and dutiful one for his country while Harry looks like a noble maverick for the Americans, minorities, and anti-establishment folks. The ones with a risk for reputation damage are already damaged. But the most important people(The queen and her husband) in the monarchy are "safe" as it is stated on the record it is not them.

After all, this is the society that created the fictional character that said "you might think that, but I couldn't possibly comment", Francis Urquhart.

 

[NyQuil]

Well, the Queen and Phillip are publicly absolved as Winfrey said it was not either of them. So the head of state and her husband are publicly in the clear. Everyone else is fair game.

William hasn't made a direct denial but says the family isn't racist; he also can say he married a commoner, and bucked some protocols. Charles is already hated so I doubt he gives damn if people now consider him a racist in addition to being an adulterer and the devil to Diana's public saintliness. Andrew has his sex scandal already. No one thinks about Princess Anne.

The people who want to look better for their intended audience wind up doing so, William builds himself up as the responsible and dutiful one for his country while Harry looks like a noble maverick for the Americans, minorities, and anti-establishment folks. The ones with a risk for reputation damage are already damaged. But the most important people(The queen and her husband) in the monarchy are "safe" as it is stated on the record it is not them.

After all, this is the society that created the fictional character that said "you might think that, but I couldn't possibly comment", Francis Urquhart.

Personally I can't imagine any of this being planned or executed by the Firm, or that they had advanced knowledge of the content of the interview.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

Shola is a beacon:

“Listen, you might learn something. The royal family as an institution is rooted in colonialism, white supremacy, and racism. The legacy is right there. So you’re now surprised that a comment would be made by several members of the royal family about how dark Archie’s skin is? I’m shocked that you’re more outraged that Harry and Meghan had the audacity to speak their truth than you are at the actual outrage of racism.”

Piers Morgan Claims He’s the Real Victim of “Racist Bullying” After Criticizing Meghan Markle

 

[NyQuil]

Now it’s several members?

Piers Morgan was a moron long before this issue ever came up.

One silver lining to this whole debacle is that he’s been fired from his latest soapbox.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

Too much of a good thing:

 

[DoyleG]

An article from the time of the wedding in the Economists "1843" magazine (Paywall)

Can Meghan Markle modernise the monarchy?

Despite the medieval pageantry, their world is in many ways shabbier than that to which Markle has grown accustomed as a successful actor. The £56,000 ball gown that she wore for her engagement photo-shoot from Ralph & Russo, a fashionable new haute couturier, was standard Hollywood fare. But it was out of place among the famously parsimonious royals, who can occasionally be seen with frayed shirt-cuffs and shiny-elbowed jackets. (For her engagement photo shoot, the Duchess of Cambridge wore a £159 dress from a high-street shop. After eight years dating William she was no doubt more attuned to the tribe’s mores than Markle.)

Her activism may allow her to reach parts of the population that her new in-laws can’t, but royals are prized by the government for their diplomatic services precisely because they can be relied on to offend nobody. Her enthusiasm for improving the lot of women will stand her in good stead in her charity work – pretty much the only thing she is allowed to do – but it has also led her to make unfettered statements, such as labelling Donald Trump a “misogynist” and speaking warmly of Paul Kagame, the brutal autocrat who runs Rwanda, on the grounds that he has a lot of women in his parliament. In her new position, such comments may cause international ructions.

In a lot of ways, she may have wanted to carry on with her old life as much as possible, even when she had to give up some of the old trappings. Seems she still wanted to things her own way and not be "trapped" by what is considered to be reasonable protocols.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

Wakie Wakie?