Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
+1 why should Charles let him keep a 10 bedroom house they never use? |
| Good for Charles. Why should it sit empty? Harry gave it up - it's not a shrine. |
That includes consequences for Charles for his own actions, right? Everyone is held accountable? |
IF you think providing a previously empty house (abandoned by an ungrateful son) consequence worthy - um sure. I don't but you do you. |
Yes. Charles had to wait to start his job until he is nearly 75. |
Where do you see anyone here defending Andrew? Just because Harry is not a sex offender doesn't mean he needs a home on palace grounds for the three days or so he visits the UK each year. He lives in a $14 million mansion in Montecito, inherited millions, he and Meghan cut a $100m + deal with Netflix, and got a $20m advance on his book. He's doing pretty well making money off his title. Ideally Andrew would be kicked out too, but the attempted downgrade from a 30-room mansion to the 5-bedroom "cottage" is a step in the right direction. |
| forgive me if this is a dumb question, but I read they live in Montecito California in a big fancy house now, so what do they need Frogmore for? I mean, didn't they voluntarily move away from there? |
They have always made it clear that they would like to reside in England for part of the year, which presumably would have been at Frogmore. The issue was security, particularly the Crown’s refusal to let them (or their security team) have information from British intelligence about specific threats to them and their children if they return to England. By taking away Frogmore, Charles is sending the message that he doesn’t want them to come back to England for any reason and will do nothing to help ensure their safety if they do. |
|
Haha from the BBC article, sounds like this area:
“The cottage has a rich and varied history. Queen Charlotte, wife of King George III, had it built in 1792 as a place for her and her daughters to escape the court. At the time it was fashionable for the wealthy to build large homes disguised as idyllic rural cottages.” |
| I truly don’t care one way or the other, but everyone here behaves as if this is the most dysfunctional version of the BRF ever. They probably don’t even crack the top ten. The reason why it is odd is that despite everything, Harry is still the second son of the King of England, still outranks everyone except William’s family, and not having at least a nominal home in the UK is weird. |
There were rumors that Charles is not the biological father of Harry. I wonder if Charles knows that these rumors are true. |
| Not sure how he can publish a tell-all, disparage his family, profit off this betrayal and expect the royal treatment when he returns for a visit. Is he that entitled to expect the taxpayers to continue to pay for him? These are the consequences of his actions. |
Harry is a dead ringer for a friend of Diana's, James Hewitt. He's also a dead ringer for his grandfather, Prince Phillip. Go figure. |
| Don't H&M have (could get) apartments at Kensington? They weren't keen on living down the hall from W&K, so preferred their own place, but it's not like they'd have to get an Airbnb for any visits to England. |
|
It’s so petty. Charles is kicking out his own son—essentially ensuring Harry will never come back to the UK—but letting Andrew and Fergie live there?? Andrew, friend of Epstein and accused sexual offender, and Fergie who has had her own share of scandal in the past.
It’s almost like everything Harry has said about his dysfunctional is true… |