I would agree. I thought that she was finally sort of winding down but, the Balcony scenes didn't raise any flags for me, and I have been a fan my entire life. My mother was born the same year as her and had long since died yet I never transposed that reality onto HLM. Strangely enough it was the use of Prince Philip's walking staff as opposed to a walking stick that first made me sit up and take notice. It was her way of underplaying her frailty and to be honest, there was nothing "little old lady" about her. Her presence filled the room. In short, she was larger than life and so the Liz Truss meeting came as a shock because suddenly she was so frail and yet, from what we saw, the force of her presence still was still the same. But no way did I think her time with us was numbered in days not weeks.
That is very cold, and they were not the subject of this book.
Harry's interview where he stated that he didn't think that questioning the colour of his son's skin was racist is entirely consistent with the way most ordinary people would think. Like in my family, would I inherit the lovely olive tone skin that didn't burn or the pallid white skin the burned if I stuck my head out the door. It's part of normal family life and I think we all either have a family member with no filter or know of one who does. That is family, love them or leave them either way but you can't pick your family.
I have to confess I am dismayed that this dung heap that Scobie wrote was even published but worse, I am tired of people blaming the Sussexes for every little snippet of acid in it. Scobie got more than enough from the research for his first book and didn't need to dip into that well again although I have to admit to wondering if Meghan didn't drop a hint. I actually believe that his scarily baby face fools people into thinking he's a no-nothing kid. Unfortunately, at 40 nothing could be further from the truth, but I think that having underestimated him, they are often indiscreet.
There are many, many books both general and unofficial "biographies" that are critical of the BRF and, if the guest on Piers Morgan's show is telling the truth while soundly roasting him and fellow guest Dickie Arbiter did not contradict her claim that it was an open secret in royal journalism circles as to who made the comment or comments. Taking that to the logical conclusion, they all made their own decisions and did not publish.
Now that is an almost unbelievable situation where royal journalists seemed to either not believe it or not deem it worthy of printing it. In fact, I think a lot of them did not want to harm the monarch or the monarchy. Now that is truly amazing. There is still a very deep vein of 'Rule Britannia' in the very bones of the people in the good old UK. Below is a link to the questions about Omid Scobie (42) himself which are also seriously weird.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/who-omid-scobie-riddle-royal-31444335
Even if the names were 'known' in royal circles how could they publish without proof, or any real context of the conversation, the only version that is out there are two different versions from the couple. So possibly the press had an idea who was involved with the conversation but could not risk a libel case. The 'gossip' I read before on line was a totally different name and version.
A great deal of it came from previous tabloids articles, Scobie admitted it himself.
Piers Morgan has denied having phone calls with Camilla, when challenged on this Scobie said but it has been in tabloid articles how he speaks with her. His sources are questionable.
The other stuff for example nobody spoke in the car going to see the flowers at Windsor, was written in such a way that you needed to be there or did he surmise it, because lets be honest it is a fairly obvious conclusion. On the other hand there could have been a blazing row between the four of them.
He claims he is friends with her friends, although not her, therefore giving the impression of his sources, but to be honest I do not believe Meghans friends would brief on her without her agreement. She does have a track record on this with her fathers letter.
He is saying he went further in to the skin colour row because Meghan and Harry never mentioned it again and he wanted to know why, did he not con sider that possibly as Harry said it was unconscious bias rather than racism or that as a family it had been resolved privately. As Harry has claimed the conversation took place before the wedding why would Meghan ask her future father in law to walk her down the aisle if she was so upset by his words.
It was the only thing to promote the book with if we are honest, plus he repeatedly said he was bound by uk laws.
I am still of the opinion that Harry and Meghan have links to this especially as they have been so quiet but there is always the possibility that all the filler stuff about feelings and who told who to answer the phone and the unlisted number is just that, fluff and filler that he made up, good guess work. This is similar to the stuff in Finding Freedom regarding the night before the wedding and what Meghan was doing.
If he is taking his sources from other articles and gossip but trying to make it look like Harry and Meghan then he is not doing them any favours.
The problem I have is we know from court records that Meghan has co operated before, Finding Freedom and her letter to her own father, she knew who went to the magazine with details of the letter as she asked for their names to be protected.
It all stinks and there is obviously a dislike of Catherine, he has been awful to her in this book, so cruel and nasty. When challenged he said he was only repeating the tabloid reports of her, so in effect he has no clear thoughts of his own he repeats tabloid tittle tattle.
What I do find strange is the overtures to make connections again, the phone calls, Christmas at Sandringham. You do not need to be an investigative journalist to know that this will not happen.
?
