Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 3

[Anonymous]

Why does she keep going by "Duchess of Sussex" in America? She is NOT our Duchess nor do we have a Sussex county she is to represent.

Her title dropping is ridiculous and embarrassing. She literally ran into the BRF, grabbed the title and some high profile pictures, and flew straight into LA to play with the big guns in Hollywood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly just think they bring a lot of the hate on themselves. If they stayed out of the press and stopped giving such drama-filled interviews, then no one would have anything to say about them, good or bad.

That's not true and you know it. They were getting unprecedented amounts of hate and "trolling" for years before news of the Oprah interview even broke.

The Sussexes and their supporters always claim this, but it's not true. They got criticism, sure. The vast majority of it was on justifiable and reasonable grounds, such as that they (mostly Meghan) were breaking typical norms that the BRF followed. Some examples (among many others) are: not wearing a hat on an engagement with the Queen when the Queen was wearing one, discussing political subjects in public, refusing to follow the typical royal baby protocol when Archie was born. Yes, she got blasted for all of this, and it's because she married into a family and a role with strict rules, and kept breaking them, presumably purposefully. Their oft-repeated claim that they were regularly subjected to racist treatment in the press just doesn't bear out. There were a couple of high-profile incidents, such as a reporter tweeting a monkey cartoon when Archie was born and the DM running a headline calling Meghan "straight outta Compton," but those were correctly called out as racist in the moment. The reporter who wrote the tweet was fired from his job immediately because of it. It's not true that the UK collectively looked the other way with regard to racist things said about them.

Some people have said that there was disparate press treatment of Kate and Meghan, but of course there was - Kate is a known quantity, the mother of three royal children, and has earned respect and popularity over the 20 years she's been in the public eye (10 of them as a member of the BRF). Meghan hadn't earned any goodwill (despite that, she had some at the beginning), and was an American newcomer. I'm not defending it, but anyone who expected them to be treated the same - at least at the beginning of Meghan's tenure - is delusional. People also forget that Kate herself was subjected to terrible and mean stories about herself and her family for a long time. Also not defending it, but the type of coverage Meghan got was not "unprecedented."

Yes, there were also stupid stories about Meghan eating too many avocados or wearing an ill-fitting outfit or whatever else. That comes with the territory of being a public figure/celebrity, and most celebrities have the good sense to ignore that kind of stuff. There isn't a single public figure who gets uniformly positive coverage, and that's one tradeoff that comes with all the perks. If she were so sensitive to stuff like that, she should have moved on from Harry.

History keeps the record, and it will not remember this particular chapter in royal family history kindly, nor the enablers or apologists who for some reason insist on peddling misinformation and rumors to justify the obsessive level of hate they perpetuate against this woman. Not a "stan" (dumb word), just an observation.

Harry and Meghan will be a minor footnote in royal family history. Their relevance is already limited, and they'll be further sidelined as the Cambridge kids grow up and the public starts becoming interested in their lives. The BRF has weathered a lot and comes out just fine in the end.

The past is not prologue. All of them will be relegated to the dustbin of history as each year more of the BRF fans die and more of those who are apathetic or hostile come of age.

Maybe, maybe not. None of us know. But the BRF’s demise has been predicted many times, and it’s never come to fruition. And interest or disinterest in the BRF is dynamic, not static. Personally, I think that there will be some new and renewed interest, particularly among people who are young now, in ~15 years when George, Charlotte, and Louis are old enough to have interesting lives, romantic interests, etc. We’ll see. But if the institution is dismantled in our lifetime, it won’t be because of Harry and Meghan. They’re unpopular in the UK anyway, and are basically only somewhat relevant here because of their nonstop PR.

It’s not because of Harry and Meghan but because of their failure to contain that situation or to respond to their attacks in an intelligent way. Like it or not if the Sussexes say they are racist people will pay attention to them and having one person say that the family is not racist doesn’t cut it. Like we all know Prince Harry and Prince Phillip have said and done racist things and last time I checked there in the family too. Plus are we supposed to surmise the institution is racist? Or what? They can’t just try and ignore them and hope they go away nor should they try and go tit for tat. They should

You may be right that if they can hold on (again the fact that they have in the past means nothing) until the Cambridge children are of age then they may have some hope IF they aren’t too Windsor-y looking. There’s tons of nepotism models and tik tok stars that are popular with the younger set but they are all good looking. Also that’s what used to make William more popular than Harry when they were younger until he lost all his hair. Big if though that Charles doesn’t run it into the ground. He seems reasonably intelligent but makes all his decisions emotionally. Being a steady hand has really been one of QEII’s strengths. That and her ability to make sacrifices for the crown which none of these men seem able to do.

It's possible that we read different media coverage of the BRF - I tend to read British sources - but I don't think they failed to contain the situation at all. To the contrary, I think they've handled it well. They're moving on and basically starving this of any further oxygen; going tit for tat and responding to everything the Sussexes say dignifies those claims and prolongs the media attention. There does seem to be a vocal minority (many of whom were predisposed to dislike the BRF anyway) in the UK that claim the BRF is racist, but that's not the prevailing view, even after the interview. Maybe it is among the Americans who follow the BRF and are particularly interested in the Sussexes, but those aren't the opinions that matter in the end. In the UK, the interview just tanked their popularity even further. There are growing calls for them to respond more strongly against the Sussexes and to strip their titles.

The BRF is moving on just fine; I don't think their popularity in the UK has been tremendously affected by this. I agree with you that Charles does seem to be a more immediate threat. I think people will be generally disappointed in the transition from Queen Elizabeth to King Charles, and he is definitely less popular than his mother and William/Kate, so I do expect to see more serious calls for rethinking the monarchy than we have seen before. I think in the end it will just be grumbles - the Cambridges are popular, and I think the prospect of William ascending relatively soon, plus the appeal of the kids (people love seeing kids grow up) will help mitigate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly just think they bring a lot of the hate on themselves. If they stayed out of the press and stopped giving such drama-filled interviews, then no one would have anything to say about them, good or bad.

That's not true and you know it. They were getting unprecedented amounts of hate and "trolling" for years before news of the Oprah interview even broke.

The Sussexes and their supporters always claim this, but it's not true. They got criticism, sure. The vast majority of it was on justifiable and reasonable grounds, such as that they (mostly Meghan) were breaking typical norms that the BRF followed. Some examples (among many others) are: not wearing a hat on an engagement with the Queen when the Queen was wearing one, discussing political subjects in public, refusing to follow the typical royal baby protocol when Archie was born. Yes, she got blasted for all of this, and it's because she married into a family and a role with strict rules, and kept breaking them, presumably purposefully. Their oft-repeated claim that they were regularly subjected to racist treatment in the press just doesn't bear out. There were a couple of high-profile incidents, such as a reporter tweeting a monkey cartoon when Archie was born and the DM running a headline calling Meghan "straight outta Compton," but those were correctly called out as racist in the moment. The reporter who wrote the tweet was fired from his job immediately because of it. It's not true that the UK collectively looked the other way with regard to racist things said about them.

Some people have said that there was disparate press treatment of Kate and Meghan, but of course there was - Kate is a known quantity, the mother of three royal children, and has earned respect and popularity over the 20 years she's been in the public eye (10 of them as a member of the BRF). Meghan hadn't earned any goodwill (despite that, she had some at the beginning), and was an American newcomer. I'm not defending it, but anyone who expected them to be treated the same - at least at the beginning of Meghan's tenure - is delusional. People also forget that Kate herself was subjected to terrible and mean stories about herself and her family for a long time. Also not defending it, but the type of coverage Meghan got was not "unprecedented."

Yes, there were also stupid stories about Meghan eating too many avocados or wearing an ill-fitting outfit or whatever else. That comes with the territory of being a public figure/celebrity, and most celebrities have the good sense to ignore that kind of stuff. There isn't a single public figure who gets uniformly positive coverage, and that's one tradeoff that comes with all the perks. If she were so sensitive to stuff like that, she should have moved on from Harry.

Don’t agree that it was fair treatment. As we have seen the BRF will pull negative stories for Kate and Andrew when they feel like it. Meghan was a poor fit and unprotected. Also Meghan was a poor fit because she has a very American view of merit and hard work and positive enthusiasm being rewarded. She’s the only one out of the Cambridges and Sussexes that has ever had a real, can actually pay the bills without parental money job. Kate’s mom is basically a British Kris Jenner who groomed her daughters to marry the highest status man they could.

Don’t agree that Meghan should have expected the BRF’s protection in that way when she basically started making trouble immediately. That’s referring to the reports of being difficult with staff, wedding planning, and regular refusals to comply with royal norms and codes of behavior. I don’t agree with their defense of Andrew, but he’s the Queen’s son and she has a maternal soft spot for him, so that’s why they do it. And Kate dealt with all kinds of unflattering stories for many years, none of which were batted down by the BRF. If they do it now, it’s because she’s earned the goodwill for it by being a pleasant family member and good employee. The BRF was obviously willing to give her some concessions at the beginning, like having Charles walk her down the aisle and allowing her to do engagements with other family members before the wedding.

Yes, obviously Meghan is a poor fit for that reason. The BRF is about as diametrically opposed to a meritocracy as you can get. I don’t think that’s a secret or particularly difficult to understand, so if she didn’t like it, she shouldn’t have married in. She chose to for her own reasons, one of which was almost certainly to raise her public profile. There have been many stories and reports from her former associates that she’s highly ambitious and had been looking for a well-connected spouse (and it’s pretty clear based on the fact that she uses her title at every opportunity, despite her public separation and grievances with the BRF that she’s very happy with it), so calling the Middletons gold/status diggers seems to be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

These are all unsubstantiated rumors, no?

[Anonymous]

I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly just think they bring a lot of the hate on themselves. If they stayed out of the press and stopped giving such drama-filled interviews, then no one would have anything to say about them, good or bad.

That's not true and you know it. They were getting unprecedented amounts of hate and "trolling" for years before news of the Oprah interview even broke.

The Sussexes and their supporters always claim this, but it's not true. They got criticism, sure. The vast majority of it was on justifiable and reasonable grounds, such as that they (mostly Meghan) were breaking typical norms that the BRF followed. Some examples (among many others) are: not wearing a hat on an engagement with the Queen when the Queen was wearing one, discussing political subjects in public, refusing to follow the typical royal baby protocol when Archie was born. Yes, she got blasted for all of this, and it's because she married into a family and a role with strict rules, and kept breaking them, presumably purposefully. Their oft-repeated claim that they were regularly subjected to racist treatment in the press just doesn't bear out. There were a couple of high-profile incidents, such as a reporter tweeting a monkey cartoon when Archie was born and the DM running a headline calling Meghan "straight outta Compton," but those were correctly called out as racist in the moment. The reporter who wrote the tweet was fired from his job immediately because of it. It's not true that the UK collectively looked the other way with regard to racist things said about them.

Some people have said that there was disparate press treatment of Kate and Meghan, but of course there was - Kate is a known quantity, the mother of three royal children, and has earned respect and popularity over the 20 years she's been in the public eye (10 of them as a member of the BRF). Meghan hadn't earned any goodwill (despite that, she had some at the beginning), and was an American newcomer. I'm not defending it, but anyone who expected them to be treated the same - at least at the beginning of Meghan's tenure - is delusional. People also forget that Kate herself was subjected to terrible and mean stories about herself and her family for a long time. Also not defending it, but the type of coverage Meghan got was not "unprecedented."

Yes, there were also stupid stories about Meghan eating too many avocados or wearing an ill-fitting outfit or whatever else. That comes with the territory of being a public figure/celebrity, and most celebrities have the good sense to ignore that kind of stuff. There isn't a single public figure who gets uniformly positive coverage, and that's one tradeoff that comes with all the perks. If she were so sensitive to stuff like that, she should have moved on from Harry.

Don’t agree that it was fair treatment. As we have seen the BRF will pull negative stories for Kate and Andrew when they feel like it. Meghan was a poor fit and unprotected. Also Meghan was a poor fit because she has a very American view of merit and hard work and positive enthusiasm being rewarded. She’s the only one out of the Cambridges and Sussexes that has ever had a real, can actually pay the bills without parental money job. Kate’s mom is basically a British Kris Jenner who groomed her daughters to marry the highest status man they could.

Don’t agree that Meghan should have expected the BRF’s protection in that way when she basically started making trouble immediately. That’s referring to the reports of being difficult with staff, wedding planning, and regular refusals to comply with royal norms and codes of behavior. I don’t agree with their defense of Andrew, but he’s the Queen’s son and she has a maternal soft spot for him, so that’s why they do it. And Kate dealt with all kinds of unflattering stories for many years, none of which were batted down by the BRF. If they do it now, it’s because she’s earned the goodwill for it by being a pleasant family member and good employee. The BRF was obviously willing to give her some concessions at the beginning, like having Charles walk her down the aisle and allowing her to do engagements with other family members before the wedding.

Yes, obviously Meghan is a poor fit for that reason. The BRF is about as diametrically opposed to a meritocracy as you can get. I don’t think that’s a secret or particularly difficult to understand, so if she didn’t like it, she shouldn’t have married in. She chose to for her own reasons, one of which was almost certainly to raise her public profile. There have been many stories and reports from her former associates that she’s highly ambitious and had been looking for a well-connected spouse (and it’s pretty clear based on the fact that she uses her title at every opportunity, despite her public separation and grievances with the BRF that she’s very happy with it), so calling the Middletons gold/status diggers seems to be a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

These are all unsubstantiated rumors, no?

Yes, but given that none of us know these people, reports are all we have to go on. I'm not alleging that they're 100% accurate, but I tend to think that there's some truth to them, since the BRF objectively did extend special accommodations to Meghan at the beginning (suggesting that they offered some amount of goodwill from the beginning) and at some point soon after, began withdrawing their support, at least according to M&H and some posters here. And some of these things happened at public events or have been confirmed by the BRF (e.g., concerns about Meghan's treatment of staff), so they're difficult to dispute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

DP. Harry is arguably the royal who's life is most imminently in danger, minus perhaps Andrew, at this time. And that is in great part BECAUSE of the british media and BRF (and yes also in large part because of their own behavior). At the time, though, H&M were not inviting attention and the BRF basically pointed a loaded gun at them by leaking their location and stripping security.

IMO this is the worst thing they have been accused of. Not because Harry should or should not have taken over his own security, plenty of arguments to be made in support of that for sure, but to do it with no notice, not allow them time to stand up their own team with adequate background checks AND to expose their location, that was just asking for a Diana 2.0 situation to happen and they're frankly lucky it didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

I am just stunned that Harry is suddenly aware of what it means to be the spare. He could have asked his uncles how that works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

DP. Harry is arguably the royal who's life is most imminently in danger, minus perhaps Andrew, at this time. And that is in great part BECAUSE of the british media and BRF (and yes also in large part because of their own behavior). At the time, though, H&M were not inviting attention and the BRF basically pointed a loaded gun at them by leaking their location and stripping security.

IMO this is the worst thing they have been accused of. Not because Harry should or should not have taken over his own security, plenty of arguments to be made in support of that for sure, but to do it with no notice, not allow them time to stand up their own team with adequate background checks AND to expose their location, that was just asking for a Diana 2.0 situation to happen and they're frankly lucky it didn't.

Dramatic much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

DP. Harry is arguably the royal who's life is most imminently in danger, minus perhaps Andrew, at this time. And that is in great part BECAUSE of the british media and BRF (and yes also in large part because of their own behavior). At the time, though, H&M were not inviting attention and the BRF basically pointed a loaded gun at them by leaking their location and stripping security.

IMO this is the worst thing they have been accused of. Not because Harry should or should not have taken over his own security, plenty of arguments to be made in support of that for sure, but to do it with no notice, not allow them time to stand up their own team with adequate background checks AND to expose their location, that was just asking for a Diana 2.0 situation to happen and they're frankly lucky it didn't.

I don't think their security would have been pulled with 24 hr notice. Something is telling me they had advance notice of this and could have made arrangements.

Let's not make up stories about Diana. She had a drunk driver and no seatbelt. That's why she died, not for any other reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

DP. Harry is arguably the royal who's life is most imminently in danger, minus perhaps Andrew, at this time. And that is in great part BECAUSE of the british media and BRF (and yes also in large part because of their own behavior). At the time, though, H&M were not inviting attention and the BRF basically pointed a loaded gun at them by leaking their location and stripping security.

IMO this is the worst thing they have been accused of. Not because Harry should or should not have taken over his own security, plenty of arguments to be made in support of that for sure, but to do it with no notice, not allow them time to stand up their own team with adequate background checks AND to expose their location, that was just asking for a Diana 2.0 situation to happen and they're frankly lucky it didn't.

Do you have a citation for this? I googled and couldn’t find support for the story that the BRF simultaneously leaked their location and pulled their security. What I did find was an article saying that Canada provided them taxpayer-funded security starting in November 2020 and announced in January 2020 that they would continue to do so until H&M’s effective date of resignation from the BRF (March 31, 2020). That would have been two full months of notice to make other arrangements, but H&M moved to California in advance of that date so it was moot. Even if Harry’s life is the most endangered (I disagree), that seems like plenty of time to get an alternate team in place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

The BRF made a fundamental mistake in treating Harry, Meghan, and Archie's security needs according to the same status-driven formula they use for the rest of the family. There are a lot of racist, xenophobic nutters out there. There has been an inordinate amount of vitriol leveled at Meghan from the time their relationship became public, hence the unprecedented statements by Harry (and William, in support, IIRC) at the time. The idea that Zara's children have the same risk as Archie is laughable. This doesn't make the BRF racist, but it shows them clueless at best, perhaps even callously so, in their rigidity.

It's ironic how this family keeps making the same mistakes generation after generation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

Ok, so shouldn't Harry have security too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

DP. Harry is arguably the royal who's life is most imminently in danger, minus perhaps Andrew, at this time. And that is in great part BECAUSE of the british media and BRF (and yes also in large part because of their own behavior). At the time, though, H&M were not inviting attention and the BRF basically pointed a loaded gun at them by leaking their location and stripping security.

IMO this is the worst thing they have been accused of. Not because Harry should or should not have taken over his own security, plenty of arguments to be made in support of that for sure, but to do it with no notice, not allow them time to stand up their own team with adequate background checks AND to expose their location, that was just asking for a Diana 2.0 situation to happen and they're frankly lucky it didn't.

I don't think their security would have been pulled with 24 hr notice. Something is telling me they had advance notice of this and could have made arrangements.

Let's not make up stories about Diana. She had a drunk driver and no seatbelt. That's why she died, not for any other reason.

That something is your bias against Meghan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just stunned that Prince Charles and Prince William would just dump Harry. They did this before Harry left when he was told that his kids would have no title or protection. This is crazy. I think they wanted him to just fade away and they are now annoyed that he is not fading away. He has more of his mom in him then anyone realized. I do think he and Megan need to not be so political because that turns away half your potential supporters. Be humanitarians and make some coin also and force the BRF to have to deal with you.

Why is it crazy that his kids wouldn't have titles or personal security for life? Many of the Queen's grandchildren don't, and are doing just fine. Beatrice and Eugenie, for example, were stripped of their taxpayer-funded security many years ago, and live relatively normal lives in which they work full-time jobs and support themselves. The Queen's other grandchildren don't have titles and have never had security.

The only great-grandchildren of the Queen that have security are the Cambridge kids, because they're the children of a future monarch. The fundamental design of the BRF means that William and Harry have different status and are, correspondingly, entitled to different benefits from the BRF.

The BRF made a fundamental mistake in treating Harry, Meghan, and Archie's security needs according to the same status-driven formula they use for the rest of the family. There are a lot of racist, xenophobic nutters out there. There has been an inordinate amount of vitriol leveled at Meghan from the time their relationship became public, hence the unprecedented statements by Harry (and William, in support, IIRC) at the time. The idea that Zara's children have the same risk as Archie is laughable. This doesn't make the BRF racist, but it shows them clueless at best, perhaps even callously so, in their rigidity.

It's ironic how this family keeps making the same mistakes generation after generation.

Yep. I don't recall Zara or her rugby player husband getting anthrax mailed to them. Or stalked in private appearances with women threatening to tear off her belly. The palace was well aware of all the threats. Including the one serious enough that a man got prison time for saying he would end Harry's life.

Most people don't even know who Zara is because Anne didn't raise her at Windsor with the rest of her siblings' kids and didn't have them trotted out for public events let alone international tours.