Harry & Meghan - to hope the Royals answer back?

[DontReallyCareBut]

I think the allegations in the Oprah interview are serious enough that protocol should be breached and the Royals should have a voice to give their side too.

[DoubleTweenQueen]

@Impatiens I await, with bated breath, the clamour to get the final word in!

[Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum]

math

[Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum]

.

[Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum]

maths

[Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum]

[quote mathanxiety]@VanillaIce

I am not angry, nor am I American for that matter.

I enjoy reading semi-punctuated, semi-grammatical, poorly-thought-out screeds which make no sense and pointing out the inadequacies of the reasoning and factual evidence in them.

I am also dismayed that someone who has stated that she felt suicidal is being scoffed at.

Plus, of course, I would really like to know where the RF stands on the question of the rape and trafficking of minors.

As a neutral outsider, the spectacle of deference to the institution of the monarchy regardless of everything its members stand accused of, and the barefaced shamelessness of them all, never cease to fascinate.[/quote]
Neutral outsider😂😂😂

[Impatiens]

@DoubleTweenQueen but we're on page 40, the Ref's about to blow and Mx has had to resort to pathetic insults - it's over.

[Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum]

[quote mainsfed]@Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum

The timing was because George Floyd's trial is about to start. The interview being aired and mentioning racism on the same week is no coincidence. It is publishing the couple as America's new darlings or at least that is probably the plan. They have bills to pay after all.

This is sick. Please don’t cheapen George Floyd’s murder like this. The only connection between Oprah, Meghan and George Floyd is that they are all black. But then you knew that.

And it’s not ‘George Floyd’s trial‘, he was a victim and he is dead.

Truly pathetic, people are scraping the barrel to me nasty now.[/quote]
Good way to try and spin my words but everyone knows he was the victim. That hardly needs pointing out.

Meghan and her team are using the current climate around what happened to him and the BLM to try and become like American royalty. That is the sick thing here. Your blindness to why they didn't delay the interview and why what the UK now think of them is bewildering. Meghan and co are the sick ones!

[HmmmmmmInteresting]

As a neutral outsider, the spectacle of deference to the institution of the monarchy regardless of everything its members stand accused of, and the barefaced shamelessness of them all, never cease to fascinate.

Brits love all the bowing and scraping. It's bizarre.

[DoubleTweenQueen]

@Impatiens I fear you may have spoken too soon.

[Aspiringmatriarch]

In all seriousness, there is literally nothing they've said which anyone has any compelling reason to believe is an outright lie. Yes it's their perspective, but do you really think they weren't concerned over security? Or that Meghan's comments about saying their vows several days before the big wedding constitutes an 'utterly devious' lie or some terrible insult? Or that what they said about conversations about Archie's potential skin colour are false and defamatory because the two people likely to know described it in slightly different terms? You'd be less suspicious if they'd read from an identical script, perhaps?

[mathanxiety]

@VanillaIce

I am not angry, nor am I American for that matter.

I enjoy reading semi-punctuated, semi-grammatical, poorly-thought-out screeds which make no sense and pointing out the inadequacies of the reasoning and factual evidence in them.

I am also dismayed that someone who has stated that she felt suicidal is being scoffed at.

Plus, of course, I would really like to know where the RF stands on the question of the rape and trafficking of minors.

As a neutral outsider, the spectacle of deference to the institution of the monarchy regardless of everything its members stand accused of, and the barefaced shamelessness of them all, never cease to fascinate.

[Impatiens]

@VanillaIce

math I was hoping after a good nights sleep you might have calmed your fury on this issue.

Why are you (as an American I think?) so angry on H&M’s behalf?

Luckily the thread is running out so we won't have to put up with another night of mathanxiety's mulish misrepresentations!

[Aspiringmatriarch]

It seems clear that some would rather we swallowed their narrative wholesale believed them, but that's hardly realistic when so much of it was full of holes not what we wanted to hear.

[mathanxiety]

Amen to that @Aspiringmatriarch

YYY to 'an extraordinary number of bigots'.

[Puzzledandpissedoff]

I think there is a pattern of willfully picking apart everything they've said and done and putting a negative spin on it

It seems clear that some would rather we swallowed their narrative wholesale, but that's hardly realistic when so much of it was full of holes

Remembering that nobody forced them to do the interview, wouldn't they have been wiser to iron out the inconsistencies before opening their mouths, or at least to sit together for the whole thing? That way Harry might have known not to contradict what had already been said ... or maybe he'd just have looked even more bemused than he did in the chicken coop

[VanillaIce]

math I was hoping after a good nights sleep you might have calmed your fury on this issue.

Why are you (as an American I think?) so angry on H&M’s behalf?

[mathanxiety]

@pabloescobarselasticband

Andrew is another story all together! The queen pays for his security as hes her son! Why should Prince Charles be held to ransom by a spoilt brat and his equally spoilt wife?
Because - despite rumours to the contrary - Harry is Charles' son?

They CHOSE to step back and knew the consequences of that. Harry is a grown man, he should provide what his family needs. Andrew was forced to step back ( dont get me wrong I think he should be forced to answer the FBI questions) and his mother chose to step in and pay for his security. He is the child of a monarch, harry is not.

Wow.

Didn't Andrew choose to associate with a pedophile, bring his entire family into grave disrepute?
Is he (a grown man) currently choosing not to co-operate with police in the US?
Yet mummy bankrolls his security.

According to your 'logic' Harry will qualify for security once Charles becomes king, so I suppose he can look forward to that.


So many posts here reveal envy, hatred, and unadulterated spite.

[Aspiringmatriarch]

"It will be of little surprise to about half the world's population that a woman's simple statement of experience was met with a tsunami of incredulity, derision and uproar."

Just leaving this here.

[Wakeupin2022]

It might even result in British forces being deployed abroad

Nope. Harry is seriously damaged in the UK. Obviously I would never want anything to happen to either of them, but if they want UK protection they should have remained in the UK as working royals.

[pabloescobarselasticband]

[quote mathanxiety]@lightand
Do you honestly not understand why terrorists target prominent people, and what the effects of terrorist attacks can be?

It is utterly irresponsible of the RF not to provide security for H&M. A successful attack on them could have far reaching results in international relations. It might even result in British forces being deployed abroad.

If you don't understand that, take a look at what happened in Anglo-Irish relations after the killing of Lord Louis Mountbatten in 1979.

Or Anglo-Iraqi relations after 9/11.[/quote]
But Harry and Meghan want independence so why can't they pay for their own security? The royal family owe them nothing after that interview!

[mathanxiety]

@lightand
Do you honestly not understand why terrorists target prominent people, and what the effects of terrorist attacks can be?

It is utterly irresponsible of the RF not to provide security for H&M. A successful attack on them could have far reaching results in international relations. It might even result in British forces being deployed abroad.

If you don't understand that, take a look at what happened in Anglo-Irish relations after the killing of Lord Louis Mountbatten in 1979.

Or Anglo-Iraqi relations after 9/11.

[pabloescobarselasticband]

@mathanxiety

so it's spiteful of the uk public? Not so spiteful when we paid millions for that wedding though were we?

*@pabloescobarselasticband*
Of course it's not spiteful of the British public. The British public has no say in what money goes to the monarch and absolutely no say in how it is spent.

It's spiteful of the RF itself not to provide funds for security. After all, the paragon of virtue Andrew has security which is bankrolled by his mother.

Andrew is another story all together! The queen pays for his security as hes her son! Why should Prince Charles be held to ransom by a spoilt brat and his equally spoilt wife? They CHOSE to step back and knew the consequences of that. Harry is a grown man, he should provide what his family needs. Andrew was forced to step back ( dont get me wrong I think he should be forced to answer the FBI questions) and his mother chose to step in and pay for his security. He is the child of a monarch, harry is not.

[mathanxiety]

The actual experts, the JTAC, not the RF, ie, the intelligence agencies, say that the threat has changed.

Are you referring to this example of complete bullshit?

“The point they were making was stupid,” one source familiar with royal security tells The Times. “A baby that can’t crawl wouldn’t get protection in its own right. It doesn’t need it. The baby doesn’t go anywhere independently, it’s with Harry and Meghan all the time.”
Babies never go out with their nanny .

Furthermore, the news outlet notes that security arrangements for royals are made based on threat assessment conducted by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC). In recent years, there have been cutbacks on tax-funded security and, as such, not every royal will be eligible for tax-funded security.
So does security provision depend on threat level or on funding?

“JTAC do threat assessments for anyone of any note and they obviously know who has targeted who in the past so certain individuals have been targeted by certain terror groups and their threat level is moderate high or very high,” a police source says. “The leading royals all get protection but again done on a threat assessment basis.”
How can threat assessments can be done for H&M in the US? How can any security organisation based in the UK accurately assess threat levels in the US? Exactly what information is used to make the decision not to provide security for H&M?

During the interview, Prince Harry also noted that it was a “shock” to him when his security arrangement was removed after he and Meghan moved to Canada and, subsequently, the United States.

The police insider tells The Times that this was expected for someone who willingly stepped down as a senior royal and moved to another continent.
If this is what passes for an evidence-based security assessment, then God help the rest of them, depending on such idiotic people for their safety.

“If you cease to be a royal, you lose your HRH and you go to another country like America, your threat level is going to reduce quite considerably because basically, who wants to kill you?” the source says. You’re not a royal. It still will exist — there still will be a threat against Meghan and Harry but it won’t be high.”

He has not ceased to be a 'royal'.
He is the grandson of the Queen, and the son of the future king.

Who wants to kill them?
I can list several organisations right off the top of my head, both outside and inside the US.
Then there are all the well-armed weirdos.

Just because certain parties in BP hate H&M doesn't mean they are no longer targets.

[mainsfed]

@Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum

The timing was because George Floyd's trial is about to start. The interview being aired and mentioning racism on the same week is no coincidence. It is publishing the couple as America's new darlings or at least that is probably the plan. They have bills to pay after all.

This is sick. Please don’t cheapen George Floyd’s murder like this. The only connection between Oprah, Meghan and George Floyd is that they are all black. But then you knew that.

And it’s not ‘George Floyd’s trial‘, he was a victim and he is dead.

Truly pathetic, people are scraping the barrel to me nasty now.

[mathanxiety]

so it's spiteful of the uk public? Not so spiteful when we paid millions for that wedding though were we?

@pabloescobarselasticband
Of course it's not spiteful of the British public. The British public has no say in what money goes to the monarch and absolutely no say in how it is spent.

It's spiteful of the RF itself not to provide funds for security. After all, the paragon of virtue Andrew has security which is bankrolled by his mother.