Prince Harry stopped by during his Caribbean tour to see Jack Warren the Queen’s racing manager. This was off-book, but I found the article on a thoroughbred racing online mag and posted in November 2016. Zara was hired to train horses and guests at JA wedding were a who’s who of online gambling.
I shot the article over to Richard Palmer at the time and he gave to the sports section. Dropped the ball.
Rumors were swirling about the Canadian diversion never happened, Markle was already on the island. The grocery store pap stroll was done in advance to throw everyone off.
Smoke and mirrors. It implies that the royal family is investing in the Pearl.
Thank you anon
Wrong again as usual
The radar article? Yep, burst their cash bubble 😣
Thank you anon
What article? Do you have a link anon?
Yep, I know it’s weird.
You never know, they did talk to one another up to the divorce from Trevor, and she went Hollywood, too big for her britches.
Thank you anon
MEGHAN Markle’s wedding to Prince Harry at Windsor Castle was watched by fewer people than Prince Edward’s marriage to the Countess of Wessex according to shocking new figures that have emerged following the nuptials.
Laura Kennedy: Prince Harry’s new wife has sacrificed her freedom and her career
At a time when so much of the way we interpret reality is funnelled through gender and race, Meghan Markle’s inclusion in the British royal family is bound to draw comment. That she is an American, a divorcee and a biracial person born into an ordinary family (whatever that means) would seem to disqualify her, at least historically, from marrying a British prince. Markle seems very likable – she certainly looks and behaves like a princess – and the bond between her and her new husband appears genuine and tender. In a world often characterised by hardship and unkindness, the wedding was a lovely story. In feminist terms, however, it is more complicated. So when I put down my slice of Victoria sponge I noticed some inconsistencies in people’s reactions.
Little is less progressive than marrying into aristocracy and living a cave existence that suffragettes died to pull women out of
Feminists approach women’s choices from different perspectives. According to one of them, there are feminist choices – those that empower – and nonfeminist choices – those that disempower, based on complicity in what the patriarchy dictates women should do, such as stepping away from a career in favour of staying at home and focusing on motherhood. But every form of feminism considers the world primarily in terms of power structures, and the goal is always to subvert the patriarchy as the movement interprets it.
Most friends I spoke with were intrigued by the royal wedding, and described it as progressive, which surprised me. They described Markle, as she describes herself, as a feminist, and considered the marriage a progressive triumph.
Surely, if you believe in the concept of nonfeminist choices, this marriage would be a problem. Little is less progressive than marrying into aristocracy and living a cave existence that suffragettes died to pull women out of: a life of domestication where you are not free to express your opinion, must change your appearance as “modesty” dictates, and have at least your public persona defined almost entirely by your relationship with your husband and in-laws.
Sure, Markle will do philanthropic work stemming from her marriage to a prince. She will do so, she says, in the mantle of feminism and equality. The irony of this, coming from a woman who has sacrificed her freedom and her career for marriage, and chosen to marry into one of the most conservative, classist and wealthy families on the planet, seems lost on both feminists and the media. The choice to sacrifice career in favour of marriage and motherhood is not considered acceptable in modern feminism. Markle’s choice to marry is, with luck, a source of great personal joy. But it is not progressive.
Their completely uncritical fascination with the royal wedding suggests that many women, despite their beliefs about gender and class equality, still want to be princesses. The notion of being saved from harsh reality by an exorbitantly wealthy man, and sheltered in a private estate or castle, while being admired for very traditional characteristics such as beauty, grace and elegance is clearly still intoxicating to many. These women dream of marriage as a ticket out of the ordinary lives they have worked to build for themselves.
This seems incompatible with any respectable form of feminism. Yes, the wedding was lovely, but it was not a triumph for equality. To marry into an ivory tower yet claim to represent equality is madness. To make such a marriage is to condone inequality in the most public and fundamental sense.
After marrying Prince Harry, Meghan Markle is now apowerful figure with a voice that can draw the world’s attention to any humanitarian or charitable cause she chooses, but many in Meghan’s family aren’t so lucky!
RadarOnline.com exclusively learned that Meghan’s mother Doria Ragland, 61, is “miserable” after being silenced by the Royal family.
“Doria can’t eat, speak or otherwise open her mouth about Meghan unless she clears it with the Royal family,” a source close to the new Duchess of Sussex explains to Radar. “They’ve silenced her and made her sign a non-disclosure agreement.”
Doria’s close friends back home in Los Angeles watched the spectacle on television. Some anxiously tried getting her to give them details about the lavish ceremony as they were excited to know more about Meghan’s special day but it was to no avail.
“Her friends are asking how the wedding was, how the food was, asking how happy Meghan is and all Doria did was shrug her shoulders. She didn’t say a word. It’s so sad. The poor lady looks and feels miserable.”
There was a lot of misery surrounding this wedding. As Radar previously reported, just days before tying the knot, Meghan’s father Thomas Markle contacted her on at least two separate occasions asking for some cold hard cash.
“Meghan refused,” another source told Radar exclusively. “She didn’t give a reason as to why not, she just said no.”