Prince Harry Wins Case Against Murdoch Group

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

I don't think you understand there is a court case about this and it's not Charles deciding and being a big meanie about using public funds for Harry's security. An independent committee denied him the protection he wants other than on an ad hoc basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

I don't think you understand there is a court case about this and it's not Charles deciding and being a big meanie about using public funds for Harry's security. An independent committee denied him the protection he wants other than on an ad hoc basis.

DP. I doubt they did that with absolutely no input from him. And frankly could he not pay for Harry’s security the same way that he pays for Andrew’s? Charles has a ton of money of his own.

And before I get attacked I’m not saying he has to but if you look at how much more easily he has kept Andrew under his thumb with money than he has Harry you see the mistake. Doesn’t seem there is real love there on either side because most parents would try and intervene to protect even if they were beefing with their child. So maybe Charles is really actually hoping they get killed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

I don't think you understand there is a court case about this and it's not Charles deciding and being a big meanie about using public funds for Harry's security. An independent committee denied him the protection he wants other than on an ad hoc basis.

DP. I doubt they did that with absolutely no input from him. And frankly could he not pay for Harry’s security the same way that he pays for Andrew’s? Charles has a ton of money of his own.

And before I get attacked I’m not saying he has to but if you look at how much more easily he has kept Andrew under his thumb with money than he has Harry you see the mistake. Doesn’t seem there is real love there on either side because most parents would try and intervene to protect even if they were beefing with their child. So maybe Charles is really actually hoping they get killed?

You doubt that. You clearly have no idea what's going on here.

[Anonymous]

He is actually performing a public service. However the public does not care because all they read were fed by the media he is trying to hold accountable.

[Anonymous]

Harry and Meghan should worry about their security in the US now that Trump is trying to get Harry kicked out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

I don't think you understand there is a court case about this and it's not Charles deciding and being a big meanie about using public funds for Harry's security. An independent committee denied him the protection he wants other than on an ad hoc basis.

DP. I doubt they did that with absolutely no input from him. And frankly could he not pay for Harry’s security the same way that he pays for Andrew’s? Charles has a ton of money of his own.

And before I get attacked I’m not saying he has to but if you look at how much more easily he has kept Andrew under his thumb with money than he has Harry you see the mistake. Doesn’t seem there is real love there on either side because most parents would try and intervene to protect even if they were beefing with their child. So maybe Charles is really actually hoping they get killed?

Agree - King Charles should offer to pay for security when he visits .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

I don't think you understand there is a court case about this and it's not Charles deciding and being a big meanie about using public funds for Harry's security. An independent committee denied him the protection he wants other than on an ad hoc basis.

Ok thanks for correction. You are right that Prince Harry's security protection was made by the "Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures" The decision was made after Harry was forced to step down from his role as a working royal. You are correct that Prince Harry lost his legal challenged to this decision.

I do think that Queen Elizabeth II erred by not allowing them to be part time royals. It could have been a won win for both sides. H+M would have stayed in the UK and raised their kids there and continued their charity work that reflected well on the royal family.

King Charles should either pay for security when they visit or invite them to be working part time royals as they first requested. That would be a win win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

I don't think you understand there is a court case about this and it's not Charles deciding and being a big meanie about using public funds for Harry's security. An independent committee denied him the protection he wants other than on an ad hoc basis.

Ok thanks for correction. You are right that Prince Harry's security protection was made by the "Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures" The decision was made after Harry was forced to step down from his role as a working royal. You are correct that Prince Harry lost his legal challenged to this decision.

I do think that Queen Elizabeth II erred by not allowing them to be part time royals. It could have been a won win for both sides. H+M would have stayed in the UK and raised their kids there and continued their charity work that reflected well on the royal family.

King Charles should either pay for security when they visit or invite them to be working part time royals as they first requested. That would be a win win.

I think that's a lot of wishful thinking about what Meghan and Harry really wanted. Their life today doesn't really suggest they wanted a life of public service and philanthropy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

Yup KC’s pedo brother does much of nothing and has security

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

Yup KC’s pedo brother does much of nothing and has security

Not anymore, Charles got rid of his security.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad he won. I think the press has done him dirty (especially the Royal Rota).

I do think he and Meghan need a good strategist/public relations person to advise them. They jump into political stuff where they should stay quiet and make proclamations like they are of high political status of some sort of American royalty. Stick to real charity work without telling others what to do or think often related to topics they don't even completely understand. Be careful with the photo ops. They need someone to help them come across as more humble and committed to service, not fame.

+1 all of the above!

Yes. There's no reason any of their service work even needs to be publicized.

Or that we need their “spokesperson” to issue statements about their opinions on any major events. Do other celebrities do this? It’s so bizarre and sanctimonious for, what are in essence, two reality stars.

Relax. That stuff isn’t for us, that’s for people back in the UK.

No, they do it in the US for what they believe to be their US fans. But even if it were for the people in the UK that’s even more ridiculous. They are no longer working Royals and they don’t live there, yet carry on as if they do.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are referred to as such on the British royal family's official website. Harry was granted the title Duke of Sussex by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his marriage to Meghan, who then became the Duchess of Sussex. Their children are Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex since their grandfather King Charles III became monarch.

The British press violated Prince Harry’s privacy and dignity over and over again and vilified Meghan for absurd reasons.

King Charles III should be ashamed of himself for icing Harry out of the working royal family and not providing protection for his own son’s family. Any nitwit can see H+M are lightning rods for negative press and do face real danger from mentally disturbed royal fans.

The king has the money but chooses not to prioritize the safety of his son and his family. In 2024, King Charles III’s net worth increased by $12.5 million (£10 million) over the previous year, bringing his total net worth to approximately $772 million (£610 million) according to the 2024 Sunday Times Rich List, which ranks the 1,000 wealthiest people or families in the U.K. Charles ranked # 258 in 2024.

The royal family is extremely important to Britain’s economy and culture. The royal family's history and heritage make the UK a popular tourist destination. The royal family is a global brand that contributes to the UK economy through tourism, trade, media, and the arts. In 2017, Brand Finance estimated that the royal family contributed £1.766 billion to the UK economy.
Brand Finance also estimated that the monarchy's brand contributed £2.5 billion to the UK economy.

I believe the King is diminishing his royal brand by being petty with the safety of his own son’s family.

How are they unsafe exactly? Who is threatening them? Harry seems to be able to travel back and forth without any issues.

They have discussed this at length. Racism sucks.

So, nobody. Just some random bogeyman. Like that "scary" slow chase in NYC.

Are you dumb, dishonest, or racist? They have gotten lots of scary messages, calls, and lurkers.

So? They aren't going to get the level of security they want. They are welcome to pay for what they think they need. Didn't Harry just win an 8 figure settlement? They aren't broke.

I don't follow this too closely, but my understanding is that they want to pay for it themselves, but they need special permission for their security to carry guns and that's whats being denied. That's something that they don't need in the US.

This is what’s so absurd to me. They’re literally not asking for Charles to even pay for it. They just want permission to have extra security. Just makes Charles look like not just petty but grossly vindictive for no reason, especially knowing what happened to Diana and how much of an effect that’s had on Harry. I don’t blame Harry for wanting to go above and beyond in protecting his family, regardless of if there are threats or racism or not.

They did have bodyguards with guns before they left though, because Scotland Yard which provides royal protection is allowed to have guns. Now that Harry doesn't get royal protection (since he's not a working royal), it is a big issue because other private citizens are not allowed armed guards.

What looks bad is having the wealthy buy the police.

They are not though. David Beckham and Elton John can't have that, Richard Branson can't have that. This is special protection for the royal family only. Giving it to Harry would create a precedent and then your point would stand.

I get your point and don’t disagree but all those people, and others like them, chose to be in the positions they are in. They chose careers and fields that brought wealth and fame but also the crazies that come with it.

Prince Harry literally had no choice. He had the world’s focus and attention, good and bad, from the day he was born. Regardless of what you or I think about him or his wife or how they are currently living their lives or how they used to live their lives, his history makes him and his children different.

I disagree. By your logic then the children of the celebrities named above should have protection because they have been in the news from birth, especially the Beckham kids who were targeted by paparazzi relentlessly. They didn't choose it.

I still see a difference between being the son of a successful sports player and pop star and the son of a future king with 1000 years of history, protocol & expectations.

Where do you draw the line? Harry is the son of the king he's not a working royal. Maybe he wants to reconsider and work again and enjoy all the benefits that come with the role.

DP

He wanted to contour as a royal and do his charity work but also develop projects with Meghan.

They had an experienced a great deal of negative press after he married Meghan. Harry had been extremely popular and contributed much to the royal family

Queen Elizabeth declined to let them continue as royals part time. This was not their choice.
Then their security detail was stopped because they were no longer senior royals. However the security risks against them escalated.

The royal family is of enormous value to British culture, heritage, economy, and tourism.

It behooves King Charles III to revisit the decision to cancel their security detail for the sake of reducing this festering wound in the royal family, protecting his son and his family, and encouraging more visits and relationship with the king’s youngest grandchildren.

Queen Elizabeth II (or more likely her advisors) got this one wrong but King Charles can make it right.

Yup KC’s pedo brother does much of nothing and has security

Not anymore, Charles got rid of his security.

Haha good!

[Anonymous]

I don’t think KC is that interested in his children. He has C and her family.
He never was cut out for the role of a single parent. The kids he had were for a reason, and have been used by him to bolster his image in the press.
I think QE was old and senile before her death and not cut out to make a descision that would have such a long lasting impact on the crown.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think the royal family wants him and Meghan back to the UK all the time doing their faux royal tours. Especially not William, whose power is likely growing as his father deteriorates.