Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Youngian wrote: ↑Fri Jan 06, 2023 5:26 am I’ve already got the message despite never having seen a full interview with Harry. Time for him to wind his neck. If you want to be a ubiquitous interviewee that doesn’t become boring you need you need a stack of amusing showbiz anecdotes. He’s no Kenneth Williams or Barry Cryer.

I'm not sure whether this counts as a colourful showbiz anecdote

I caught a bit of Witchell on BBC Breakfast earlier. Is new line of defence for the royals seems to involve pointing out what is not included in the book. According to him there is no evidence of racism included in the book. I would hazard a guess that the book probably doesn't include racism allegations because they will be more appropriate when Meghan gives her account of events.

It'd be a strange strategy to not mention it at all, so grasping at straws by Witchell etc relies on the assumption that the couple are monumentally stupid. Somehow I suspect that's not the case.

Maybe this will be the reign when our monarchy is quietly sidelined.

Preserved to entertain tourists and domestic loonies.
Not no longer a dominant force in news and politics.

Aye, but he says he's partial to the Beak. At least he will think he's interesting.

I dare say The Sun will now be trying to jdentify Harry’s cherry-plucking cougar.

Lady Harriet Fuckpig-Smythe or someone similar, I suppose.

I mean yeah you can't invoke privacy when you've told the whole world that you had a frozen knob at your brother's wedding.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:50 pm I mean yeah you can't invoke privacy when you've told the whole world that you had a frozen knob at your brother's wedding.

The whole point in privacy law is that the decisions do not lie with the tabloids, rather their victim. Not a million miles away from the thankfully corrected absurdity "contributory negligence" and rape.

kreuzberger wrote: ↑Fri Jan 06, 2023 10:42 pm

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:50 pm I mean yeah you can't invoke privacy when you've told the whole world that you had a frozen knob at your brother's wedding.

The whole point in privacy law is that the decisions do not lie with the tabloids, rather their victim. Not a million miles away from the thankfully corrected absurdity "contributory negligence" and rape.

Does that apply to other people though? I mean he's revealed that William is circumsised for example.

https://pagesix.com/2023/01/05/prince-h ... SocialFlow

Prince Harry, 38, revealed in his bombshell “Spare” memoir that, despite rumors of the contrary, both he and his brother, Prince William, are circumcised.

A timely review of the monarchy

That is quite excellent. John Oliver does some brilliant work.

A tribute to Prince Harry



More background here.

https://pagesix.com/2023/01/05/prince-h ... SocialFlow

I'm starting to think Harry might have been badly advised.

Huge if true

Youngian wrote: ↑Sat Jan 07, 2023 5:49 am A timely review of the monarchy
...

Die Kreuzette has been in Bayern for a couple of days. Back tomorrow.

I'm half-tempted to show this to her in a beyond horrifying game of Bottom Trumps.

Reverting to type after one tidy reign:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Aristocrats

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 08, 2023 12:47 pm Reverting to type after one tidy reign:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Aristocrats

Eric Idle explained why I wasn’t getting this joke; its means nothing to British people as you’re describing stuff they think aristocrats get up to.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sat Jan 07, 2023 11:35 pm Huge if true

Unfortunate if he was dogging in Huddersfield.

Dan Wootton, Angela Levin and Carole Malone are all losing their shit on twitter because they think that Tom Bradby is not giving Prince Harry a proper grilling.