Current Affairs Harry and Meghan Part 3: I can't think of a snappy subtitle

[Tubey]

This is something that can be proved to be true or not and hopefully will do in a court of law.

Somebody saying they felt suicidal can not be proved either way, therefore you apply sympathy to the situation and don’t call that person a liar infront of millions of people.

Bit of a daft comparison.

You can question the motive.

Andrew has a criminal motive to his excuses. Meghan has financial and reputational motives.

They are similar in that regard. They are also both high profile royals undertaking a high profile, entirely optional interview.

Ask yourself why they wanted to do it. Not agreed to it; wanted to. Then perhaps you'll understand why it's valid to doubt them both.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

This is a very high profile woman who stands to profit to the tune of millions by painting herself as a figure of sympathy.

It's a very different situation to Joe Bloggs on a forum posting anonymously.

lol Sure they have plenty of cash streams, without having to resort this.

 

[Tubey]

Why would we want to prove that someone is lying of suicidal thoughts?

I can understand that people want to catch potential criminals though.

For the same reason she'd want you to believe her and the sole reason that interview happened - the financial and reputational gain she stands to make.

As I said earlier, fair play to her, she's milking the rich and gullible for every quid. Can't blame her, she's smart.

But my opinion, on balance, is she's lied through her teeth to get it. Can't prove it (apart from the laughable "we didn't think about money" claim which is just a blatant lie), just like no one can really prove she hasn't, but that's my view.

 

[Tubey]

lol Sure they have plenty of cash streams, without having to resort this.

Then why do it?

If they were happy and truly wanted to get away from the press and enjoy privacy, they could.

Instead, they went as big and public as possible.

Her motive is clearly fame and money.

 

[Marius57]

Where has this thought that Meghan is only in it all for the money? She is the daughter of a social worker (so good chance she has been taught to speak out about things that she feels are wrong) and she has been treated pretty awfully and is sharing her story. She just has a bigger platform than we do and we tell our own stories to people around us everyday.

None of us know her, people only believe she is in it for the money because that's what they have read somewhere in the media.

She may be, but we have no evidence to actually back it up. She may just be doing this optional interview to call out injustice.

 

[Tin-Tin]

Yes I do, as said woman chose to do a completely optional high profile public interview and is therefore a valid target for discussion and critique.

She has no automatic right whatsoever to be believed.

Wow

 

[Tubey]

Wow

What the hell is "wow" about that? If she claimed the moon landing was fake in that interview would I have to believe her?

She's a human and capable of lying and she chose that public platform, willingly. She's obviously a valid target for critique.

 

[Tin-Tin]

Is there a reason only her claim of mental health issue are being questioned, not Harry's claims?

 

[Charro]

You can question the motive.

Andrew has a criminal motive to his excuses. Meghan has financial and reputational motives.

They are similar in that regard. They are also both high profile royals undertaking a high profile, entirely optional interview.

Ask yourself why they wanted to do it. Not agreed to it; wanted to. Then perhaps you'll understand why it's valid to doubt them both.

I fully understand, thanks.

I also understand mental health, which you clearly don’t and know it can impact everyone no matter their standing in life and know any talk of struggling needs to be taking seriously and to voice your opinion to millions of people that she’s lying about her mental illness struggle is abhorrent and needs to be addressed.

If you doubt it, then fair enough. You’re choosing to take a dangerous stance but it’s a stance you’re entitled to take, but understand your words have consequences when you’re on mainstream Tv and to say somebody is lying about being suicidal, especially after the Caroline flack affair is extremely dangerous.

 

[Tubey]

I fully understand, thanks.

I also understand mental health, which you clearly don’t and know it can impact everyone no matter their standing in life and know any talk of struggling needs to be taking seriously and to voice your opinion to millions of people that she’s lying about her mental illness struggle is abhorrent and needs to be addressed.

If you doubt it, then fair enough. You’re choosing to take a dangerous stance but it’s a stance you’re entitled to take, but understand your words have consequences when you’re on mainstream Tv and to say somebody is lying about being suicidal, especially after the Caroline flack affair is extremely dangerous.

lol

OK mate x I'll just go back to being the unpaid carer of someone who has had severe mental health issues for nearly two decades and leave you to it.

 

[LostLegend]

For the same reason she'd want you to believe her and the sole reason that interview happened - the financial and reputational gain she stands to make.

As I said earlier, fair play to her, she's milking the rich and gullible for every quid. Can't blame her, she's smart.

But my opinion, on balance, is she's lied through her teeth to get it. Can't prove it (apart from the laughable "we didn't think about money" claim which is just a blatant lie), just like no one can really prove she hasn't, but that's my view.

It's proper sociopathic behavior to say you can't see why there are lines when it comes to certain subjects.

Morgan was rightly critisised for his "Man up and grow a pair" comments when speaking about mens mental health issues, so he has form for this.

You must know the stigma surrounding mental health issues and while it's your right to decide whether to believe her or not, the difference is you don't have an audience of millions listening to you. Maybe consider those watching who are themselves struggling and seeing someone of his influence dismiss her claims of mental health struggles with a wave of his hand.

This isn't "Cancel Culture" as you said earlier. It's "Consequence Culture"

 

[Mr. White]

If you have mental health issues, you speak to a doctor. Or a close friend. Or family (bridges burned). Or the Samaritans. She chose Oprah Winfrey. And got paid lots of money to do so.

She had a vested, financial interest to make the interview 'dramatic', so I don't trust a single word she said. No class, no dignity. She belongs on the Jeremy Kyle show.

 

[coollino]

Getting concerned this will be @Tubey in a few years time over this issue:

 

[Tubey]

It's proper sociopathic behavior to say you can't see why there are lines when it comes to certain subjects.

Morgan was rightly critisised for his "Man up and grow a pair" comments when speaking about mens mental health issues, so he has form for this.

You must know the stigma surrounding mental health issues and while it's your right to decide whether to believe her or not, the difference is you don't have an audience of millions listening to you. Maybe consider those watching who are themselves struggling and seeing someone of his influence dismiss her claims of mental health struggles with a wave of his hand.

This isn't "Cancel Culture" as you said earlier. It's "Consequence Culture"

She chose the platform. She was the one who literally chose it. If she speaks about that subject on a platform as big as that, right of reply exists.

That's the consequence of what she chose to do. If Morgan turned up on GMB and apropos of nothing started ranting about Meghan being a liar who faked thoughts of killing herself, that's a different story, but that's the key - this WASN'T apropos of nothing. It's the polar opposite.

 

[tsubaki]

You can question the motive.

Andrew has a criminal motive to his excuses. Meghan has financial and reputational motives.

They are similar in that regard. They are also both high profile royals undertaking a high profile, entirely optional interview.

Ask yourself why they wanted to do it. Not agreed to it; wanted to. Then perhaps you'll understand why it's valid to doubt them both.

TBF I think Andrew's motives are much more likely to be financial - he isn't going to ever get his collar felt over that, but there are people (much more important people than him) who would and its in their interests for that whole investigation to be derailed by a focus on him.

I mean - its not from him that Epstein got his money, his political protection or his influence yet for some reason he's the one they are waiting to get.