Tom Bower – an unwelcome spotlight on Meghan & Harry

52 thoughts on “Tom Bower – an unwelcome spotlight on Meghan & Harry”

1. One of the sites say it was 14th September 1862. So I might be a year out. But looking through the census of various people, date of birth isn’t exactly constant.

2. Marjorie, an interesting thing that took place 10 years after the Whitechapel murders. A woman called Emily Woods walked into a police station claiming to have been stabbed by a police constable . They thought she was drunk and were going to arrest her, until the police doctor noticed she was bleeding from her lady bits.

   Constable William Smith, admitted seeing and speaking to the woman, but denied stabbing her, when she saw him, she remembered seeing him, but that it wasn’t him that stabbed her..

   She went into hospital and was there for nearly 3 months. She died in March 1900. Anyway, he was a witness on the death of Elizabeth Stride where he gave a description of her companion. He also lived practically on top of where Catherine Eddowes was murdered.
   The police poo-pooed Emily Woods testimony and also said that her injuries weren’t that great. This is despite the length of time she was in hospital.

   I know Constable William Smith was born in 1863 in Oxfordshire, though I don’t remember the date. I will look and see if I can find it. Anyway It would be interesting to know if his charts show him to be a murderer.

3. I used to think that Harry and Meghan would be together for a long time, but lately I am beginning to wonder.

4. Most insightful comments, well said and SPOT ON from Josie, BELLE, Liz, Morena and Sounh. You all have the intellect, talent and perception to see through things that muddle most people, with Astrology as your guiding star! Keep it up.

5. Marjorie – can you give your thoughts on what the ‘correct’ way to approach having a Leo North is?

   It seems to me that MM has done very Leo things. She’s forthright, she wants to be a leader without taking account of what others think, she thinks her self to be special, to be worthy of special treatment. Yet it’s these things that seem to be her problem.

   • Probably being a bit Leoy here – making this all about me and trying to get attention – I have a Leo NN but it’s in the 12th. I don’t see myself as a leader of anything, frankly.

   • The worst side of Leo is wanting power or at least status and attention without responsibility. Diana, whom Meghan wanted to be like, put in years of legwork to build up to the point where she was a global figure.
     Meghan seems to have delusions of grandeur – keen to step straight into a superstar slot without having slogged her way up the ladder or even being capable of so doing. Six down the cast list of a post-prime time TV series doesn’t make her Julia Roberts or similar.
     She was mid thirties when getting acting roles is trickier – Harry was a stepping stone onto a bigger stage. His Eton-lout friends would be a nightmare so I don’t blame her remotely for shuddering at their none-pc crass jokes.
     A Leo NN hates having their style cramped, rarely takes advice, can lack control early on.

     • I think she came into real prominence with the marriage around her second nodal return which is interesting. She is also moving through her mid life transits. Pluto square for that big upheaval of married life, closely followed by neptune square which could well have made it seem the impossible was possible with the break from the RF, replaced with a tougher reality as it faded. Uranus opposition to come but the eclipses that have already happened on her Uranus could point to what that opposition will bring. For me, before and after these midlife points are quite pivotal in terms of character. Excellent book on the nodes is Jan Spiller, Astrology for the Soul. Game changer for me on discipline with my virgo NN (she says, lounging on sofa with an iced coffee utterly unproductively).

       • I have the Leo North/Aquarius South nodes myself. Mine are on the 2nd/8th axis, though. I’m American, so not fully immersed in the intricacies of the royal family. What her nodes say to me is the need to step out from/not hide behind the marriage partner and be seen as an individual in her own right. She picked a doozy of a lesson! I can relate to the hatred that gets thrown at her, as being denigrated and minimized by others is quite a particular feature of my own experience with these nodes. And, granted, you can make your mark with dignity and elan. That would be the best expression of the Leo NN in my view.

       • Thanks for the book tip Louisa. I just found it on kobo. NN is Taurus is my fun to work with.

       • Louisa – her Pluto square Pluto occurred in 2019. Remember that comment in the Oprah interview where she said something like “I felt like I wanted to die” … that’s exactly how I felt during my own Pluto square Pluto – it was like death warmed up. For me, at least that didn’t mean I wanted to commit suicide just that it was a very tough period like no other I can describe.

         Thanks for the book suggestion.

     • Thanks Marjorie.

       I’m the other way round with Aqua NN / Leo SN. Three Leo planets too and I have none of the craving for attention or grandeur. I struggle to identify with most of my Leo friends who have so much pride about what they achieve or others think of them.

       I have been a leader, like to be playful and try to make things enjoyable but it’s never for my own benefit. I’m happy to be a team player and only take charge when no-one else is stepping up.

       I did have to learn a lesson about not being too autocratic when handed a leadership position and checking that everybody else wants to go in the direction that seems obvious to me.

   • I too am a NN Leo and SN Aquarius. It was my understanding that the NN represents what we are born with and the SN represents what we are supposed to become. At the very least it is about balancing the opposites.

     So my take on Meghan is that she already is as you and Marjorie describe her but her life’s work is to learn to be of service to others: to be aware of the needs of others and work with them rather than against them. Perhaps it starts with Harry but projecting everything onto one person won’t be useful in the longer term. Better for them to be equal partners standing side by side – but that might be too big an ask where Meghan is concerned.

     • You’ve got it backwards Liz. SN is what you’re born with, NN is what you have to develop. In MM’s case that should be easier because she has Leo planets pulling her towards it and nothing on the SN holding her back.

       • Yes I have. My apologies. The SN is our comfort zone and the NN is what we are drawn to, what we strive to be in this life.

         Trouble is, Meghan does not appear to have been born or raised with service in mind ie being aware of others and their needs. Maybe she was but she is now 40 years old and presents as you suggested at the beginning of this thread. Perhaps she still has to find a balance between what she once was and what she has become; perhaps the rejection of her family and Harry’s family is symptomatic of her inability to integrate the various traits and factors.

         I don’t know the woman and it is a bit uncomfortable treating her as an astrological case study but she did open the door to criticism when she trashed the Royal Family – especially when her husband’s grandfather was dying. Philip reportedly said no good would come of the Oprah interview – he has been proved right.

6. seems to me meghan is a sun leo woman who radiates health and beauty which attracts negative feelings from others who may benefit from looking into their own charts to find how best to address personal issues

   • I would have to own a growing dislike of the ‘false persona’ which can be a Leo – and indeed is always a Hollywood – fault. Bower in the book describes a photoshoot in which Meghan acted like a petulant diva beforehand. But once on camera ‘transformed into a warm and glamorous icon’.
     A journalist also had a glorious description of Meghan at the last Royal jaunt – Philip’s memorial – where Harry looked uneasy and nervy throughout – but Meghan had ‘her Mona Lisa game face’ on.
     Never take the public face for the private reality.

     • Indeed, I read a couple of the extracts this morning and it was all very telling. Even if some of it were made-up or exaggerated, there are enough different sources and accounts given by people from a range of unconnected backgrounds to get a sense that she is very hard work and self-centred.

       The story of how when she was first introduced to Harry’s old Etonian friends on a weekend at Sandringham and immediately pushed back on their unPC humour. While that might be the right thing to do, it highlights a lack of social awareness. And she wonders why people turn against her? Nothing to do with envy or her race, simply that she rubs people up the wrong way through her manner.

       I think she will be learning some big lessons when transiting Pluto in Aqua opposes her Leo Sun in about ten years.

       • Hi Gnarly. What can one expect with Pluto in Aq opposite Leo Moon? My son has Leo moon at 1 degree. Issues with our relationship and others? It’s his 7th house.
         Thanks.

         • Leo is all about expressing yourself, wearing your emotions on your sleeve and wanting to be special – like royalty. Wanting to be the centre of attention and have others clap and applaud you.

           Aqua is the opposite. It treats everybody the same (people are unique but not special i.e. entitled). Things are done for the good of the group, not the glory of the individual. It doesn’t react emotionally, often just a blank look – it tries not to get involved or judge others. While lack of hate or negative judgement may seem good, it also tends not to judge things as good or get too excited about them either.

           So you’d expect Leo to feel challenged when it gets a cool, blank dispassionate, lack of applause for its joke or grand achievement. Could feel somewhat crushed by the lack of response. Ultimately Leo wants a reaction – good or bad but Aqua won’t give them it.

       • Journalist here. I haven’t read any of the extracts, but want to say that what a journalist chooses to include — or exclude — can reflect the writer ‘s predetermined viewpoint and outline for the story.

         In a previous career I worked in politics and campaigns. I would get extremely annoyed, angry even, when certain now-prominent journalists would try, when conducting interviews with
         my colleagues, to put words into their mouths that they deliberately hadn’t said. They would try to shape the quotes to fit their chosen narrative. These journalists would get huffy when my colleagues — in both parties — would refuse to go along with what they wanted them to say.

         Once I became a journalist myself I bent over backwards to make sure I portrayed my interviewees’ comments accurately. I never tried to change the narrative by suggesting what they should say. It still makes me angry, 25 years on.

     • Interesting, because Princess Diana was also said to have the same ability. Tantrums and tears in the limo going to venues, but popping out on arrival, looking happy and compassionate.

   • I am new to astrology and to this website but could see straight away that Marjorie is more interested in relationships than in absolutes (whether those relationships are between two people, between a politician and his country, or between natal and current charts etc etc).

     The notion that healthy and beautiful women attract negative feelings is news to me – unless of course the particular woman is flirting with one’s partner or chasing after one’s job. In that case the feelings are more to do with the feared loss/transference of the partner’s affection or the boss’ support. Does anyone really need to look at their own charts to see why they might feel insecure or vulnerable in such circumstances – even for a moment if not long term?

     Meghan’s interview with Oprah was, surprisingly, nothing to do with the two women but everything to do with Meghan and the Crown – the Monarchy as an institution in it’s widest sense. In attacking the Monarchy and the Royal Family, Meghan has now become fair game for any journalist who wants to take pot shot. Oprah herself escaped any opprobrium by simply asking questions and avoiding any personal opinions – though she came close with her ‘whaaaaat’ on the issue of skin colour (which she was at great pains to explain away after the event). A shrewd operator Oprah.

   • It’s clear to me Meghan evokes deep envy in others.

7. Wonder what Harry would have been like, had he married Chelsie. If that is the correct spelling. There seems an air of infinite sadness about the end of their relationship.

   • Much better match. Sad that it couldn’t hold.

     • Could be Chelsea had a lucky escape? Rumours are that he messed her around a bit but in the end she knew at William and Kate’s wedding that she didn’t want to live in the royal goldfish bowl. Who could blame her? She came across as nice and good fun and might have been able to ground Harry and bring out his better qualities? I’ve never had that vibe with Meghan..

8. I don’t understand the venom constantly directed towards these people. While they’re definitely flawed, as we all are, they aren’t evil — like Trump and his cronies, or Boris Johnson or the predatory Prince Andrew — or doing anything designed to harm others. If you don’t like them or are bored by their activities — or antics, if you prefer — ignore them. If you feel their only goal is to draw attention to themselves, ignoring them is the best revenge.

   • I respectfully disagree, my opinion is they are harming Britain & the Royal Family in attempt to lift themselves up & do the others down. But this is my opinion only, others may see it differently.

     I think they are very Trump-like. They are always negative & trying to diminish & inflict harm on others. They have even done as Trump did & set up a fake royal office (like Trump’s fake former-president office). They send out random public letters on subjects they know nothing about (just like Trump) And most egregious they had taken the public platform they have been gifted, that is meant to be for the benefit of the people (President & Royal) and tried to monitize it for their own personal financial gain.

     H&M had an opportunity with Oprah to say that the royal family wasnt for them, best wishes to the royals & the UK, thank you for the opportunity, but they want to do something different. But instead, they went the direction of complaining & b*tching & throwing nasty accusations at others.

     • Interesting perspective, Belle. There are always two sides to every story depending on how you see it. How you see it, however, is who YOU are … not them because you don’t really know them. Besides, there’s always the side the Royal family doesn’t want you to see like the fact they didn’t try to neutralize the negative press on Meghan yet always sent out positive stories on Kate.

       If you had compassion and weren’t bitter yourself, you would see the positive side.

       Best of luck dear.

       • Do try to can the sarcasm, Pluto. The Royal family did not neutralize negative press on Kate’s family early on since it isn’t their way – lofty indifference and it’ll settle down which it did. Does not always work but it is their MO.

       • Pluto – there was a great deal of very positive press about Meghan and Harry at first. Their glamorous wedding was extremely popular on tv, and most people wished them a long and happy marriage. They did have great potential for doing something good in the world.

         There’s been negative press about the Royal Family (and many others) since at least the 18th century. Have a look at the scathing cartoons of the fat Hanoverian kings, or read the endless bile about Queen Victoria’s widowhood and her friendships with male servants and aides…..discussed in Parliament as well as in the Press. As for her louche, charming son, “Bertie”, he was a source of much salacious gossip and scandal for years. Pop over to Revolutionary France in the 18th century, and you’ll find truly awful scandal sheets about Marie-Antoinette, which were widely circulated.

         Also, there’ve been many very negative stories in the past about Kate – ‘Waity Katy’ and her dodgy uncle; Sarah Ferguson – ‘Duchess of Pork’, sex and money scandals; Camilla – marriage wrecker, and so on. It may not be to everyone’s taste, but it’s the way it is. The press magnifies what’s basically village gossip, or office gossip, or social media trending gossip. It magnifies a sometimes unappetising aspect of human nature!

   • Nicole – a high-road response. Thanks.

   • I agree Nicole, the world has bigger fish to fry.

   • I also respectfully fully disagree. I very much doubt Trump, Johnson or PA consider themselves (or are) ‘evil’, just flawed human beings like the rest of us. I don’t know of many people in public life who set out to intentionally harm the institutions they represent or are aligned with, but there are many who do by long standing patterns of greed, ego, extreme or in some way disordered belief systems that fail to see or don’t care about the consequences of their actions (I deserve/am entitled to what I want when I want it, laws are for the little people), and even then they are usually also capable of good deeds that benefit others too – although not always actually altruistic in motive. So yes, it is my opinion, which other may not share, that H&M are, for now, harming others both at a personal and institutional level through their proven lies and misrepresentations, including accusations of racism against their son, veiled and overt attacks on HMTQ as monarch and head of the RF and Commonwealth and doing it while her husband was, literally, dying instead of just saying – we wish you well, not for us, goodbye. And at the same time they too are wounded by others while doing some measure of good with the limited resources they have been able to devote to their charitable work.

9. No one has authored Meghan’s downfall more than Meghan herself. She weaponized the media against her in laws and now it’s coming back to bite her. That Oprah interview, I’m sure historians will one day say, was the biggest mistake of her royal career.

   She portrayed herself as this naive kind woman who married into a cruel racist family that took away her passport and turned her into a prisoner. That was always bound to invite unwanted scrutiny to her. Some one was always bound to go, “Wait a minute, is this woman really who she says she is or is there more to it? And if there’s, how can I monetize it the same way she’s monetizing her eighteen months in the royal family?

   The mornachy might not be as popular as it once was, but there’s plenty of people who’ll go to any length to defend it. Also, Meghan forgot one thing. Most people were hush hush about these rampant stories about her because they knew she had the backing of the mornachy. That’s why, according to Tom Bower, her agent name dropped the Queen when demanding for changes in the Vanity Fair. They knew the backing of the mornachy could shake people up. But now she doesn’t have that anymore. If anything, I’m sure the palace is, right fully so, enjoying watching her getting torn to shreds.

   “Meghan stole designer shoes at a photoshoot.” Would you have imagined reading such a headline two years ago? But now it’s all over twitter.

   Forget the Kardashians, this is the best reality show on the planet and one needs not to even to subscribe to a streaming service to access it.

   All Hail, Meghan and Harry.

   • They renewed the lease of their UK home, sending his cousin packing. Real housewives of Frogmore cottage, might be in the cards.

10. Let’s see Prince Charles takes buckets of cash in a suitcase for his charity use from an arab politician –
    he cheats on his first wife- Diana – then marries his mistress and when Diana dies the royal family make the children a major part of the funeral which most likely still haunts both boys …

    Harry falls in love – she is not English but a professional bi racial woman who is immediately the target of the press – her dysfunctional family is not any help either …. I do not think anyone in the FIRM really tried to help them …

    Yes they made mistakes but they are minor to Charles and Andrew …

    But the tabloids and writers are making a lot of money off them …including Bower

    • There is a book about Charles by Bower too.

    • Your problem seems to be that she is bi-racial.

11. I must say I feel a sense of quiet satisfaction that Prince and Princess Harry are getting their comeuppance – as at the end of an old movie or book (Jane Austen springs to mind) where the protaganists are rewarded and the antagonists are punished. Or maybe a Greek tragedy where the hero/heroine sows the seeds of his/her own downfall – the which being charted throughout the play.

    Is the netflix and spotify money really worth the heartache they have caused to family (on both sides), staff and former friends? If they think it is then they really are more worthy of pity than derision. No amount of wealth or fame (notoriety!) can compensate for the indifference to those who loved them – and who apparently love them still despite the anguish and the pain.

    Definitely a moral tale for today.

12. “I’m sure they both mean well” Very charitable of you Marjorie! I used to think that of Harry but no longer.
    He seems resentful and full of bitterness and the Oprah interview was outright cruel to the Queen when Prince Philip was dying..
    Both now seem motivated by money. Marrying into royalty has raised Meghan’s profile beyond her wildest dreams but I don’t see anything concrete emerging from her so called philanthropy and charity work..

    • Well said. Completely agree. Thanks.

13. These two are getting way too much publicity.

14. It’s sad Bower made his life profession obsessing about other peoples reputations to further his own.
    I don’t think Meghan had bad intentions on marrying Harry and being in the royal family. She certainly wants attention and loves the limelight but don’t we all to some extent. We all want to be seen and heard, but it’s the intention that shows character and I think she sincerely wanted to use the Royal platform to help create positive change, with of course bolstering her own image. I am all for helping people feel best and putting them in the spotlight if they have intentions to help others, especially society at large. It’s gotten annoying to read negative headlines about her. The media is so quick to judge and bring others down, as if it makes them feel better about ourselves when doing so. The world would be a much happier place if we read positive headlines!

    Bower has a deep need to be seen and heard himself, unfortunately at the expense of bringing down other peoples reputations. I feel bad for his next victim that’s coming up. Victim is a good word to use, Marjorie, as he certainly feels a sense of achievement and proudness in wanting to bring out the worst of others.

    I wonder if he will experience the same pain he has caused to people he has written about?? I kind of hope so!! Although based on next few years, it seems to be the opposite.

    • Well said. Envy is the thief of joy.

    • Absolutely spot on Pluto! Well said.

    • I don’t think an ambition to be president (or prime minister in the UK) is entirely to do with altruism – power and control is very heady for some people.

    • Pluto – couldn’t have said it better!

    • If her intentions have been pure, well and good. She could not do their good work being in the royal family, well and good. But why leave the royal family and speak badly about them. The press is defaming her, but why is she defaming the royals. Arent they family. It is hypocritical when she talks about kindness, and be unkind to your own family – be it her father or her in-laws.
      Harry may have reason to use his connection with the royal family (he was never prepared or trained to be outside the royal household). But, Meghan … why? Cant she use her own image and influence and be independent. She even spoke with a Senator introducing herself as “Duchess of Sussex” … Why ?

      These dont scream good intentions.

15. Rich people and their ego’s and vices. While most of us are trying to navigate inflation and just making it through the day, they whine moan and complain.

    Does money, title and privilege bring you happiness?

    • Along with poor people and their ego and vices.