Did They Meet?

I found the following very interesting. It questions whether Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met King Charles recently.

Sentebale: Prince William to the Rescue?

I see one of the new trustees of Sentebale is Iain Rawlinson, who was a trustee and Chair of Prince William's Tusk Trust. Prince William may be necessary to rescue the charity that was set up, at least in part, to honour his mother.

There is an article in the Financial Times adding to what has already become known about what is going on at Sentebale, it reveals that Prince Harry's toxic brand was making fundraising difficult.

https://www.ft.com/content/8fc9561d-c145-4542-a32a-1707573c012b

Edit to add: Sophie Chandauka has recently spoken to Sky News UK:

Catherine, Princess of Wales - Conspiracy Theory

Based on recent events, I'm reverting to my original theory about why exactly Catherine, Princess of Wales disappeared for the first five months of 2024. The most plausible explanation is she went on strike, or downed tools. 

Why do I think that? For starters, for all that time we didn't see much of the children, and Catherine's mother, Carole and other family members were also absent from the public eye. However, since Trooping the Colour when the Princess and her children were present, Carole appeared at Ascot with her son-in-law the Prince of Wales. It seems transmission has resumed.

What, no cancer? I do not believe the reports of major abdominal surgery or the cancer diagnosis. That's because, when Catherine was said to be in hospital, no family were seen visiting her there. Subsequently, she is said to have undergone chemotherapy. However, we all saw her during Trooping the Colour and she looked the same as ever. Anyone who knows anything about cancer will know after months of treatment you do not just look the same. What's more, neither is it necessary to completely disappear from view. 

George Galloway had someone on his YouTube podcast who shares similar opinions to me, that Princess Catherine has 'downed tools'. Have a look at what he had to say months ago, and I think this still stands as a plausible theory.

Prince Harry in London

In the weeks leading up to Prince Harry's attendance at the upcoming Invictus Games ceremony at St Paul's Cathedral in London, speculation has been rife about whether there will be rapprochement between the wayward son and his father, King Charles III and his brother, the Prince of Wales.

I always thought this highly unlikely, and the recent statement from Prince Harry's UK representative was rather telling:

https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a60721383/meghan-markle-prince-harry-rep-king-charles-london-visit-statement/

Their spokesperson said in a rare statement, “In response to the many inquiries and continued speculation on whether or not the duke will meet with his father while in the U.K. this week, it unfortunately will not be possible due to His Majesty’s full program. The duke of course is understanding of his father’s diary of commitments and various other priorities and hopes to see him soon.”

The media have been doing a lot of wishful thinking. Let's get real here, Prince Harry has been a fool. Read those last six words again Harry, I know you're reading this, you're all over social media.

In some quarters, commentators are saying the King should forgive Harry, that the King should show leadership. No, leadership isn't only about warm embraces. Those who step outside the boundary lines can expect to be dismissed. It pays to be firm and decisive. 

Looked at in broader context, consider the way Harry was raised. In his world he was surrounded by sycophants. He was never told a firm no, and every statement he made was likely met with praise regarding the perspicacity and verisimilitude of his utterances, no matter how banal.

Therefore, it is likely Harry has no idea he's considered a laughing stock, or that his ideas are rubbish. Want examples of this? He is reported to have thought he could interview the likes of the Pope and Vladimir Putin about their childhood trauma. No, I'm not joking, he really thought he could pull it off. Another example: he thought it a good idea, telling of his brother's circumcised penis in that book of his. Reflect on this for a minute, Harry talked about the private parts of a man who will be King. 

Harry and Meghan: Busting up?

Those amongst you who follow British Royal Family gossip will be aware that the mainstream media are currently running stories about a rapprochement between the two brothers; William, the Prince of Wales and Harry, the Duke of Sussex. The angle these days appears to be of how Harry regrets, Harry is returning and wishes to reunite with family, Harry has something to offer, Harry this and Harry that.

Reading between the lines, I figure Harry's marriage is coming to an end and the Palace is smoothing the way for his return to England. They've begun the process of rehabilitating him. I always said, that no matter how much money he lost, no matter how much he disgraced himself, the firm would always take him back and warehouse him in one of their palaces. They'd do this, not because they want to, but because they have to. The King and the Prince of Wales cannot have a loose cannon wandering around California making a fool of himself.

As well, it just so happens that Lady Colin Campbell has published an updated version of her earlier book about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. You can buy a copy here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Meghan-Harry-Persecutors-Victims-Updated/dp/1916131786 Significantly, the book calls into question the circumstances surrounding the birth of their children. Lady C is currently being interviewed across social media talking about this, and some of what she has to say is very interesting.

Looking at this broadly, with the above book out, and with just about every commercial endeavour having failed, Prince Harry is left without any other options. And on the other side of the equation sits his wife, a Californian actress. She'll have her own agenda.

What I am surprised about is how long this relationship lasted. On top of that is how long they've survived in California. I'm giving them at least 4.5/10, don't say I'm not generous.

People often say that this kind of gossip is nonsense, but I find there is usually no smoke without fire. There will be some truth behind the speculation. Right now, the internet is 'on fire' and that must be someone or some group fueling it. My guess is the Palace, Harry, his wife and other entities are at work. 

Will the Monarchy Survive?

I hear people saying Prince William and his lovely wife Catherine, along with their beautiful children are the modern face of the British Royal Family. I agree, yes, right now they are.

But hang on, the Queen has died aged 96. She was a link back as far as the 1920's, basically a whole century, impressive. But now we are entering a new phase, returning to normal as it were, with males ascending the throne, all of them old and ruling for 20-30 years before the next takes over. Let me explain:

King Charles is 73, coming up to his 74th birthday in November. Given the age at which his parents died, he has about 20 years at the top to look forward to. After him will come his son William, currently aged 40. When he takes over from his father he'll be 60. If he reigns for 30 years, his son will then come to the throne aged 59. 

Rounding this, failing abdications or unexpected deaths, the next 80-90 years will see a pale, stale, older male on the throne. The twenty-second century will arrive and no female in sight. Male primogeniture may have gone, but it makes no difference in this scenario.

I'm not convinced the British Monarchy can survive, given the direction society has taken and contrasting with the feudal system currently in place.

That Oprah Interview of Meghan Markle

I've seen the Oprah interview of Meghan Markle on CBS, Sunday 8:00pm, the 7th of March EST in the US. It was a cringeworthy affair, and not particularly interesting. I noticed a slight change in the appearance of Meghan Markle, she's now trying to look like a Kardashian. I also noticed she's changing the way she speaks, also sounding like a Kardashian. An example being her pronunciation of sure. The s and u being said with a pronounced sh sound, and the r accentuated - shurrr. 

You don't need to watch it as I've done the work for you, here's a transcript; moan moan moan moan, victim victim victim, racist racist racist, oh woe is me, right right right, moan moan moan, unsurvivable, moan moan moan. Get the idea?

There are laugh out loud moments, especially from Harry who isn't allowed his own face time with Oprah. No, he has to have his hand held by Meghan who can be seen to squeeze it when he either says too much or says the wrong thing. She's obviously wearing the pants in the relationship. I laughed when Harry talked about not being able to ride a bicycle when growing up. I mean, does he have no sense of self? This immensely privileged and grossly spoilt brat had palace grounds to ride his bike around in. He rides polo ponies as a pastime.

And what is it with Harry, he looks almost homeless. He can't pull his socks up and his shoes had holes in the bottom of them. His beard looks shabby. Has this man no pride in his appearance? I find it hard to believe he grew up a Royal, then went to Eton and then Sandhurst. He looks as if he's been dragged through a hedge backwards.

It was very disappointing Oprah did not ask Meghan about her side of the family, you know, the Markle's and the Ragland's. Clearly, there were indeed some interview no-go areas.

My advice to the Queen; throw the pair of them in the Tower. That's what the first Elizabeth would have done. 

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Debacle

The full picture is now emerging and I have to say, I'm not impressed. The deal is the Sussexes will not be using their HRH titles, but they're not being stripped of them either; they won't be taking public funding but they will take funding from Prince Charles' Duchy of Cornwall. They're going to pay back the money spent on Frogmore Cottage, but it's unclear how and when that money will be paid.

I don't think this will work. The reason, too many areas of potential conflicts of interest, real or perceived. The only way for this to work is for Harry to become Harry Mountbatten-Windsor, a normal old Mister. Nothing more than that. 

Why do I say that? Using the Dukedom is a demotion. Harry and his wife become 'Your Grace.' That's got to sting and puts people they deal with in a difficult position, how do they address the pair exactly? Of course stripping away the titles makes the pair far less marketable, but wait, they're not meant to trade off their royal status. So explain, how does this work again?

Looking at the two, I have serious concerns about Harry. Meghan hasn't been part of the royal family for all that long and she's done well on her own, she's a survivor. But Harry has lived in a gilded cage his whole life, he probably thinks he knows what real life is like, but in reality he knows little of it. What is Harry meant to do now he can't be a royal? What can he do? There is nothing in his CV to suggest he can manage outside of the royal family. 

You want evidence of this I hear you say; he inherited a fortune from his mother, Diana, and the Queen Mother. These funds he now has full control of, so why isn't he already financially independent? What's this talk of seeking financial independence, he's only got himself, his wife who is not helpless and one small child. Harry is a fully grown man, what has he been doing with his money all this time?

Then it is reported Harry is considering buying a massively overpriced house in Vancouver, Canada. If he buys such a thing, I'd call that all the evidence anyone needs to prove he's financially illiterate. 

What does Harry know about? Land and horses. That's about it. Sensible is using a large proportion of his money on a farm in England, breeding horses, polo ponies and the like. Buying houses, even thinking about buying houses in Vancouver is simply throwing your money away. Where I see this heading, is in less than 2 years Harry will be back amongst the royals, cutting ribbons but much poorer for the experience of stepping back.

And what of Archie? How is he to be raised and educated? Remember, technically the couple are still HRH, he's seventh in line to the throne right now. When he grows older he may want to work as a royal, in that case he'd start to outrank his father who eschews his HRH status, odd indeed.

The Sussex Royal brand becomes problematic, isn't such a brand effectively trading on royal status? And funding from the Duchy of Cornwall, it's not really private money, this will become a sore point over time and an area where I feel Harry has shown he isn't thinking clearly. He can't be talking about financial independence but still relying on his father for handouts. 

What has been proposed looks rushed. It hasn't been fully thought through.

Royal Family and the Line of Succession

My most successful blog post by a country mile is where I reported the claims of Simon Dorante-Day, an ex-pat Englishman now living in Australia, that he is the first son of Prince Charles and his now second wife, Camilla (I'm not going to use their titles, Duke and Duchess of this and that, simply because it's bloated).

Read this blog post here >> http://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2016/04/did-prince-charles-and-camilla-have.html

I'll be the first to say that this post was not the work of literary genius. Nor is it the work of august constitutional thinking. But it works. Why that is I have no idea. At times this one post can go ballistic, Russia, US, Britain. Everyone seems to want to know about this story.

Now, of course, I have no idea whether Mr Dorante-Day's claims are true. But I have been in touch with him and what I did find out is that he's just a regular bloke. Please understand that when you do get a blog that is as widely read as mine, you will find that it attracts some flakes. That and the downright deceitful and dishonest. Or they're just peddling something, which I'm not totally opposed to, just tell me you have an agenda.

If you look at photo's of Mr Dorante-Day, and check photos of Camilla at the same age, well, they look like peas in a pod. There is that. And Mr Dorante-Day comments that he's been the subject of intense police scrutiny for some time. If a member of the Royal Family is anywhere near where he lives, he gets his house turned over. Why? He's not a danger to anyone. Makes you think, eh.

Here's the idea; why are the Royal Family not subjected to DNA tests that are independently retrieved and analysed? They could then be publicly available for the wider scientific community to inspect. These tests could be compulsory for anyone in the top 10 of the line of succession, and voluntary below that. If the DNA cannot confirm the right to rule, then the person would be disqualified. Other than that they may keep titles and such, but not be in the line of succession.

Think about this some more; the science exists. Why not use it? And do it retrospectively, as of now. Charles must be of Elizabeth and Philip, William and Harry must be of Charles and Diana; George, Charlotte and Louis of William and Catherine. Any break and the line is broken and you move to the next line, and in this case it would be to Andrew and Sarah, through to Beatrice. You could find that Beatrice is the rightful heir. No I'm not kidding.

And to plug my latest novel, Dana Point out now, it does have this kind of idea in it. Everyone is subject to biochemical ranking at birth or at their assimilation into recognised society. This process also involves the curing of all disease, so there is a bonus. If someone is going to rule or be the elite by right of birth, shouldn't we be satisfied that they're qualified?