Prince Harry - AIBU?

[barniee]

Prince Harry saying "we can all do better" has really irked me- aibu?! He has every want and need satisfied while the majority of us and trying to do right by the environment whilst making ends meet. He is becoming very sanctimonious!

The hatred levelled at M&H is fairly ridiculous though, especially given W&K so much of the same stuff and are praised for it.

The two tools of the Meghanistas: emotive language, - stand by for 'bashing', 'attacking' and 'vitriol', usually with direct or indirect accusations of racism: and whataboutery.

If you want to slag off other royals, be my guest and start a thread on them. I'll happily participate. But this thread is about Harry and his enormous, in-your-face hypocrisy. If you want to defend that, fine, but whataboutery and accusing others of 'attacking' poor innocent Haz and Megz is a poor line of argument.

“Megan is just doing what American actresses do but either hasn’t grasped or doesn’t want to grasp what the Royal family is ‘allowed’ and not allowed to do.”

What has she done wrong?

No I don’t think she has been paid £100,000 for her knowledge of house racing. But she is a well respected member of the equestrian world. They are buying her name and it of course doesn’t hurt that she is the queens granddaughter. But as a private citizen not funded by the tax payer then if someone wants to give her £100, 000 to put her name on a letterhead then I have no issue with it.

But this thread is about Harry and his enormous, in-your-face hypocrisy. If you want to defend that, fine, but whataboutery and accusing others of 'attacking' poor innocent Haz and Megz is a poor line of argument

Gosh thank goodness you’re around to dictate what people can and can’t talk about.

Any comment on Will’s big “we can do better” environmental statements. Or do you actually not understand the hypocrisy so you’re intent on claiming?

Fair enough. But she shouldn’t be held up as an example of “how it should be done” then.

IcedPurple

I always find reading a full post helpful before commenting - do try it. Otherwise you look a bit foolish.

I do feel a bit bad for Megan this morning as the papers are saying she jinxed Serena Williams. When in reality Serena is a 37 year old coming to the end of her career against a 19 year old rising star.

Gosh thank goodness you’re around to dictate what people can and can’t talk about.

Talk about what you like - all I'm saying is that it's not a very good line of argument.

Any comment on Will’s big “we can do better” environmental statements.

This thread is about Harry. If you want to discuss Will, why not start a thread?

Or do you actually not understand the hypocrisy so you’re intent on claiming

You mean the time when Will took up the environment as his pet cause, then headed off on 4 private jets - for entirely frivolous - reasons, in under 2 weeks? Not including the private jets he took to Italy to give a 'barefoot' speech about.. the environment? That time?

all I'm saying is that it's not a very good line of argument

arf. And snipping posts to make quotes fit your agenda is?

IcedPurple

Yeah I was correct. You don’t understand.

I mean threads evolve - aren’t you able to follow that?

Bertrand but I think she is a good example of now it should be done.
She is a minor royal not accepting public money and leading her own life without the need to tell us serfs that we need to do better.
Harry is now a minor royal, paid for by the tax paying public yet still thinks he can do what he wants and yet still lecture the serfs who are paying for him.
See the difference?

And snipping posts to make quotes fit your agenda is?

So using the 'quote' function is now 'snipping' posts? If so, you must be guilty of snippery too.

Like I say, if you think it's absolutely fine to pose as an enviromentalist and then take a string of entirely unneccessary private jets, fine. But trying to get round the obvious hypocrisy by whataboutery and emotive language doesn't really help your argument.

So using the 'quote' function is now 'snipping' posts? If so, you must be guilty of snippery too

No. Omitting only FIVE words from the quote which actually are in direct contradiction to the point you think you’re making is snipping. Literally snipping out words that don’t fit the agenda you’re trying to push.

Omitting only FIVE words from the quote which actually are in direct contradiction to the point you think you’re making is snipping.

Those 5 words would have made zero difference to my point, which is that the only way anyone can attempt to defend this blatantly hypocritical behaviour is by 'look dataway' whataboutery and emotive language. My point still stands, and your posts since then only confirm it.

Well no. Those five words were “none of them deserve any adoration”.

Which you didn’t seem to understand. “None” equalling “not any”. Which you then seemed to think indicated I was totes Team Meghan” and a bizarre rant about Meghanistas.

I’m sorry you didn’t understand the word none.

She’s basically has to retire and give up a cushy career to be Harrys wife

I thought she hadn't retired but taken on a new job as a working royal (I'll admit that seems like an oxymoron to me, but not just about MM).
Otherwise, why is she being described as on "maternity leave"?

I would have thought her new job has better perks, better longevity, better pay and a better pension plan than the Suits gig.
Is being a jobbing actor cushier than being a royal?

Re Zara she lied about taking payments for things until confronted with the evidence on paper.

“Harry is now a minor royal, paid for by the tax paying public yet still thinks he can do what he wants and yet still lecture the serfs who are paying for him.
See the difference?”

Sorry.
Absolutely. But singling out Harry as a hypocrite seems very unfair.

Those five words were “none of them deserve any adoration”.

Now, I've never been a Maths whizz, but pretty sure that's not 5 words.

Which you then seemed to think indicated I was totes Team Meghan”

To be frank, I don't care about you personally and whose 'team' you are.

I'm just waiting to see how the Haz 'n' Megz fans actually defend their behaviour over the past few months, other than inane whataboutery and insinuations towards those of us who are quite capable of noticing blatant hypocrisy when we see it, and feel that we are well within our rights as taxpayers to point it out.

I'm not going to continue this dissection of 'snippery' with you, but would be happy to engage with any and all actual arguments from the Haz 'n' Megz fanz. I've a feeling I might be waiting some time.

Only because this thread is about Harry. Give us a thread about another royal and I will happily give my opinion on them.

I think we need clear rules on who the tax payer should pay for in the royal firm.
I don’t think minor royals should get the option to be working royals.
The queen and her children and the direct line of succession only should be able to choose to be working royals.
Once you get bumped down the list then I think you should be cut lose from the firm.

The queen and her children and the direct line of succession only should be able to choose to be working royals.

They've done something along those lines in Denmark. Both of the queen's sons are now taxpayer funded, but from now on, only the direct heir will be. So of crown prince Frederick's 3 children, only the eldest, Christian, will be a 'working' royal. The others will have to make their own way - helped by their royal connections obs.

It has long been said that Charles plans to do something similar, but he's notoriously weak so let's see if it actually happens.

@IcedPurple- I think the entire lot of them including the Queen should be abolished. But, given that isn’t going to happen, I’d love some examples of things that H and M have done that make them more of a waste of tax payers money than any of the others. Thank you.

The only problem with that @dontsweatthelittlestuff is that Harry will be the child of the monarch in a few years time and then will have a bigger role to play. And if William becomes King while George is under 18 then, as the most senior male relative, he’ll have to be on standby as a possible regent until George comes of age, much as the old Duke of Gloucester had to be for the Queen. That’s just how it is in The Firm.

I’d love some examples of things that H and M have done that make them more of a waste of tax payers money than any of the others. Thank you.

I'm not your research assistant. You're a regular on these threads, defending your darlings from any and all criticism, using the same inane tactics I described above. So you know perfectly well what they've been up to.