This is quite a satisfying time for people like me who enjoy seeing come-uppances delivered.

Obviously I am most interested in Sturgeon and her SNP bullies. It appears that she may be required to resign, although she’ll probably have to be dragged kicking and screaming to her desk to write her letter of resignation. It is amazing that she has been allowed to get away with allowing Scotland to deteriorate so badly while concentrating on her deluded dream of independence and becoming a member of the EU. It has been obvious for some time that Sturgeon’s ambition is all based on herself, with her desire to become a more internationally recognised leader. Remember all those visits to the EU where only Juncker the drunkard received her, despite her efforts? If she goes – and I still think it might be if and not when – I think Boris ought to get a team of forensic accountants in to check where all the Covid-19 money from the UK went. I suspect it’s in the SNP’s coffers, ready for a massive push for independence. I am not convinced that the cash was spent for the benefit of the people of Scotland. Admittedly there are now so many factions in Scottish politics that it is hard to be sure. One thing is sure, however, is that the price of oil is no longer at $100 a barrel, though that was Salmond’s delusion to begin with. And now Shetland, which still seems to have oil around, does not wish to have anything to do with mainland Scotland. Orkney and the Western Isles may follow suit.

The other come-uppance I am looking forward to is that of Duchess Straggly Hair. It now appears that some facts may be emerging from the servants’ halls of various royal residences, none of them complimentary to Markle. I look forward to learning the full story of the tea throwing in Australia. As one commenter said, Markle hasn’t threatened to sue anyone over it, so it may well be true. Like Sturgeon, Markle wants to go her own way, imposing her own will on all and sundry. It amazes me that as an actress who must have been used to taking direction she was incapable of following royal protocol and taking advice. Both Sturgeon and Markle also seem incapable of speaking the truth at all times and their husbands seem to be afflicted with the same disease and equally uncomfortable in front of the cameras. Reading from script boards is not easy.

We shall see what transpires.

13 thoughts on “Nemesis”

  1. I, too, am enjoying reading about the ‘Battle of the Fishes’. However, I suspect you are right that it it’s still a case of ‘if’ she goes rather than when. Even so, I find it quite depressing to think that the SNP, with or without her, will win the May election. I certainly agree that there should be a thorough audit of her books.

    As for the other person – it seems to me that she might just be beginning to understand how much her status in the RF protected her from the consequences of all the nasty stories now emerging. As one commentator said: ‘be careful when airing dirty linen in public – you are likely to find your own knickers on the line too’.

  2. I suppose I could try to count up how many of Markle’s words one could believe, but counting up “the”, “a” and “and” would be tedious.

  3. Thanks for that Sipu – I think a lot of people might well agree with you!

    Sheona: I thought it was a brilliant comment too!

    I haven’t watched the ‘interview’ and will not when it finally hits Oz.

    I’ve read enough – even tho’ I was determined not to. But it was a bit like an aching tooth that I had to keep prodding! So I kept going back to see what the latest ‘revelation’ was.

    Unfortunately for the main participant, I have known all too well someone who rewrites history and forgets that others remember it as it really was; one who ignores facts and creates a different reality; and who paint themselves as both saint and victim. The problem is they truly believe what they say and are, thus, very convincing.

    I can understand that people who have never met this sort of person can be taken in – because most people are not like that.

    I tend to skim through the articles in the newspapers – because I’m interested in the comments – I was very encouraged by the number of people in the UK, in the USA and elsewhere who called ‘foul’ on so many assertions.

    Going back to your original comments re Sturgeon. I find it amazing just how many Scottish commentators clearly hate and despise Sturgeon and her never ending demands for another referendum – they don’t want to leave the Union. Can you please explain why the SNP keeps getting re-elected?

  4. Sheona:

    Just seen your comment…

    … one could believe anything if one were predisposed to believe.

  5. Boadicea, I can only suppose that it’s because the opposition to the SNP is so fragmented. Ruth Davison was the only politician who seemed capable of standing up to Sturgeon. Pity she resigned. It is interesting to note that certain areas like the Borders and Aberdeen are not SNP fiefs. It’s the old Labour strongholds of Glasgow, Edinburgh and the belt between them that seem to be Sturgeon’s. I wish John Mackie was still around to keep us up to date.

    Sipu, thanks for the cartoon. I have a feeling that if Harry were to try visiting his ailing grandfather, he would get pelted with grapes as soon as he entered the room.

  6. Those of you in the UK may well be glad that Oprah Winfrey’s session with Prince Harry and “Sparkle” (as I call her) Markle doesn’t air there until tonight, March 8. That may spare you from watching something that was more of a two-hour whine and moan session than anything else. We ourselves didn’t watch it but rather recorded it for later viewing on the chance that today’s morning news reports indicated that it might contain something of interest to us. We now feel that the recording, unwatched, may safely be deleted.

    Here’s an especially well-organized summary that appeared in one of the Canadian newspapers:

    Don’t omit to read the readers’ comments at the very bottom of the screen, which are in themselves quite revealing and far more opinionated than the article itself.

    For an opinionated piece of journalism, see Piers Morgan’s piece in today’s Daily Mail. Again, don’t miss the comments.

    The American press – and, I regret to say, the American public – have in general been far more sympathetic, perhaps betraying our lack of knowledge of British institutions and our willingness to accept unquestioned whatever some public figure has to say. Just to pick one hole in her statements, Prince Harry and “Sparkle” were not married three days before the actual wedding except perhaps in her own mind. The ceremony in which they participated was a wedding rehearsal and, among other things, did not take place in a location meeting the quaint but long-established requirements for a wedding venue. She seems similarly ignorant of various other British traditions and customs and appears to have been unwilling to learn them.

    My own feeling on all this remains unchanged: I feel terribly sorry for Prince Harry. He’s not known to be the brightest bulb on the marquee, so to speak, but is by all accounts a very nice guy. How it must distress him to now be deprived of his military affiliations, which gave him great pleasure. Instead, he must now be resigned to being led by the nose, as it were, and may not even realize yet that he is in the clutches of a master manipulator. I can only think that she must give some outrageously good sex!

    I also can only feel sorry for Her Majesty the Queen, who must bear witness to her own grandson’s gullibility.

    One might also wonder when “Sparkle” may decide to move on from her marriage to Prince Harry or when he’ll wake up. Goodness knows she has a splendid track record of alienating her staff, her friends and even some of her own family.

    One thing that will most likely not change in her is her love of fame. Although her attitude toward the British tabloids is not unjustified, it somehow seems odd that she should turn to the media to convey her wish to damage the Royal Family.

    On a far brighter note, I see that someone has given HMQ two young Corgis. Even though she had given up keeping that breed, I expect that she still misses them. Once one gets a dog breed’s characteristics and personalities inside one, I doubt that sort of thing can ever be completely purged. I know that I still miss my Basenjis.

    Sheona: Sorry, but I’m so distanced from Scottish affairs that I can’t comment on Nicola Sturgeon other than too say that, from what little I’ve seen, I don’t think I like her. I agree on autopilot that, once she’s gone, there needs to be careful accounting of all funds sent by the UK to Scotland. As we’ve heard said on many detective shows, “follow the money.”

  7. You’ve gone and done it, haven’t you? Don’t try telling me otherwise; I just knew you couldn’t resist watching that Prince Harry and “Sparkle” thing for yourselves.

    Alright then, what do you think? Just a load of codswallop? More than slightly possibly. That bit about “Sparkle” having suicidal thoughts was no doubt intended to tug at her audience’s heartstrings, but did it really succeed in that? Surely I can’t be the only one who sees such thoughts as a sign of weakness. Of course, now that public focus has shifted from the Coronavirus itself to the mental health issues supposedly arising from lockdown and all that, the great unwashed masses may well buy into it. “Mental health” is certainly becoming something to at least be discussed in the USA. Also in Canada, although up there a lot of the people seem to cope with it by drugging themselves senseless. My own view: if someone is willing to spout such nonsense, then society could do worse than test their seriousness by simply letting them go and do as they wish. I myself say repeatedly that I’m not ready to fall off my perch just yet because there are still too many people I want to irritate.

    This morning all and sundry are jumping all over Piers Morgan for what he wrote in yesterday’s Daily Mail. Why? Since when is it wrong for an intelligent and deep-thinking person to express what he believes to be the truth?

    Typically, the great unwashed masses seem to be getting themselves wound up to expect, if not demand, some sort of response from the Royal Family. Why? Since when is it required that the Royals dignify that sort of thing with a reply?

    Moving on…

  8. No, Cog, I didn’t watch mendacious Markle and her poodle. Any report of the interview really needs to be prefaced with a health warning since Markle is a self-confessed liar. Wouldn’t it be ironic if the family member who asked about the baby’s skin colour turned out to be George or Charlotte with a child’s innocent curiosity. Ask Uncle Harry and he’ll pass it on to Markle who’ll immediately seize on it as another weapon with which to damage the family. Of course we’ll never know the truth since I don’t suppose such a thing ever happened. If it did, it would choke H and M to utter the truth. I quite agree that the royal family should not respond, though they could continue with the inquiry into Markle’s bullying.

  9. No Cog. I didn’t watch it either.

    From reports there was a lot of weeping and wailing about how hard done by they were when the UK taxpayer stopped paying for their security and Daddy cut his financial support so that they were left with only 10s of millions of pounds to live on.

    The ‘facts’ they produced were discredited as out-and-out lies within an hour after the programme ended – and the rest seemed to be intended to inflict as much pain and damage on individual members of the RF as possible with vague and unsubstantiated claims.

    As you say the ‘mental health’ issue was intended to be a big ‘hook’… so I did appreciate Thomas Merkle’s comment that if she truly was suffering what did Harry do about it?

    And, of course, the Race Card had to be played. I loved your possible scenario Sheona!

    The Family’s response was quiet and dignified – although how they can still say the two of them are still ‘much loved members of the family’ is beyond me.

    The bullying accusations have to be investigated – which, I believe, means that all Non-Disclosure Agreements will be null and void. I have no doubt that the press will be following events very carefully and publish every little detail they can find.

    M&H may have said they want this to be an end – and want to move on – but they have very foolishly opened the proverbial can of worms.

    All-in-all a very unsavoury pair.

Add your Comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: