Carlton Supporters Club

They, not she. "They've had a strong and assertive, but also disruptive impact on an institution lots of people like." They made the decision together. It's not her impact, it's their impact. Men have to accept responsibility too.

In the documentary, it was clearly stated the decision to leave was Harry's as he wanted to protect his wife and children. I'm sure they discussed it together but he was the main driver and takes full responsibility, he was the one negotiating the exit with his father, brother and grandmother. She tried very hard to fit in and do the "right thing" but was largely unsupported and hounded out by the media (influenced by the "institution"). I think I'm correct in saying the worst of the hate and vitriol came after the left.

Observing as I do from a great distance, I'd suggest these ideas have been fermenting in Harry's mind before Meghan. I doubt she was the one who planted them and told him to pack his bags.  If they are indeed a team, they would have discussed, fleshed out, weighed up pros and cons etc. There has to be solid reasons for them leaving, because i can't think of too many advantages for them.

I suspect that what really galls the conservative elements in the UK -- indeed the world -- is Meghan's apparent lack of humility and compliance. How dare a female member of the Royal Family be strong, outspoken and independent - gotta put that bitch in her place. In the US it is more acceptable - except among the further right leaning conservatives.

Not much commentary on the Ardern statement coming from the Harkle boosters, just going to let that slide are we?

Wasn't there a book titled appropriately about this very issue, something like "An Inconvenient Truth!"

Have you read the statement from Ardern's office (not Ardern directly) or just the Sky News headlines?

As PM of a constitutional monarchy, Ardern has to tread a fine line when it comes to matters that may affect her head of state.  Being seen to be neutral in a Royal family dispute is non-negotiable.  Of course, as producers of the series, Harry and Meghan's roles are largely irrelevant when it comes to content, those involved, look and feel, etc.  Ardern's office's statement is aimed at folk who mistakenly think that Harry and Meghan have a more hands on role.

I suspect that what really galls the conservative elements in the UK -- indeed the world -- is Meghan's apparent lack of humility and compliance. How dare a female member of the Royal Family be strong, outspoken and independent - gotta put that bitch in her place. In the US it is more acceptable - except among the further right leaning conservatives.

Now in my mind/world, if I'm the Queen, I tell them all to GAGFed and say "I am meeting my Grandson whether you like it or not".
Instead she didn't so who has the real power in that establishment?

Have you read the statement from Ardern's office (not Ardern directly) or just the Sky News headlines?

As PM of a constitutional monarchy, Ardern has to tread a fine line when it comes to matters that may affect her head of state.  Being seen to be neutral in a Royal family dispute is non-negotiable.  Of course, as producers of the series, Harry and Meghan's roles are largely irrelevant when it comes to content, those involved, look and feel, etc.  Ardern's office's statement is aimed at folk who mistakenly think that Harry and Meghan have a more hands on role.

Therein lies the problem - the Queen and the Grandmother are two different people - one is an institution, the other the matriarch of a somewhat dysfunctional family.  QEII understood that completely and always went to great lengths to ensure those two 'roles' were separate - her family life could not hold precedence over the Monarchy, and the institution of the Monarchy must be protected in all circumstances (in effect, she thought of herself as the 'caretaker' of the Monarch).

Hence, if the Grandmother wanted to do something that would be counter-productive for the Monarch, it would not be done.

Yes I get all that, the irony for me is that if she had in fact sat with Harry, she would have protected the Monarchy, by not doing so, she effectively destroyed it. After all, at the point, Harry was part of it. Its real simple, If you want popularity in 2022, act human FFS.

As for Ardern, I see clearly that she is under political pressure at present -- indeed fighting for her political life -- and her distancing from this entire episode is just politics, not wanting to ruffle feathers and potentially lose a section of her supporter base.

I see, so it suits the Harkle boosters to claim those rules openly known by all commonwealth politicians were largely ignored by Ardern or Ardern's Advisory while making the Documentary, and post-facto are now being used to somehow weirdly explain away / discount Ardern's version of events.

Well, that's a bit arbitrary!

Seriously DJC, you are accusing Ardern of breaking the rules, then crediting Ardern with being prepared to risk that to blowing up in her face to protect a casual acquaintance.

I suggest based on recent statements and activities, it's far more likely Ardern or Ardern's Department has told it as it was, while Harkle has spun things differently to suit their platform.