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.

@mathanxiety all countries , especially at the moment have enough problems of their own and maybe we all need to look closer to home at the problems before we worry too much about how another country looks .
We have a worldwide pandemic , something the world needs to actually work together on and that is affecting the vast majority of us in some way or another .

H+M removed the claim they were Internationally Protected Persons from their website within 24 hours of posting it, when it was confirmed they did not meet the criteria according to the UN convention.

To meet the criteria, they would have to be on 'official business' of either the head of state or a government, or be family members travelling with a person conducting 'official business'. The same convention applies to diplomats.

Once it was confirmed they had stepped back and were no longer conducting official royal engagements, the Internationally Protected Persons status could not be applied to/by them.

The RF is now a racist clique consisting of people who live in another century, and whose culture is completely alien to that to which the US aspires, in the minds of many Americans.
I don't think the US is known for its inclusiveness either , its not had good press in this regard
Like I said all countries have their own issues and maybe need to look closer to home and fix those before
Plus I won't loose sleep over it , even if the monarchy was dissolved again it won't majorly affect my life really
Personally i judge a person not a whole country based on one or two people I have met from that country

They seem to have seriously misjudged security issues. Or else were badly advised.

You mean the republicans have got an axe to grind are grinding away? yes they are. Some people may be swayed, most people in real life here in the UK think H&M are a pair of twonks. Won't be aware of that though will you, if not in the UK? That's why history of the constitution is only one part - we here in the UK are looking to the future and we don't want a large extended royal family of Princes like Harry thinking they're entitled to anything they want.

You may get the noisy H&M supporters here on MN but it isn't real life here is it.

Anyway speaking of sleep , early start as bins out early and can't do now as too windy and be down the street
What an exciting life I lead

People have lied about them, they feel wronged, so are going to want to clear up things. What's not clicking?

It was the press not the RF that lied. Why “clear things up” (again) They wrote a book. They are out it. What they could have done was prove their future worth instead of raking over it all over again. I’m glad they got it off their chests, hope it was worth it.

the presidents children are they given security for life ? Or the grandchildren

No, because unlike the Royal family, the children and grandchildren of a president are not in line by dint of blood to a throne located in the White House.
Also, for the most part they are anonymous and not well known.

The US doesn't just provide security around the clock for former presidents and their spouses and minor children while at home or abroad. It also provides offices and pays for staff for those offices, plus security for the offices, and funds for travel. Pensions for former presidents are set at the present at $200,000 each/year.

These perks are considered to support the notion that there is a dignity attached to the office of President. It seeks to avoid situations where a former president would be reduced to doing Pizza Hut ads for a living.

The RF seems to want to encourage the belief that there is something innately special and superior about the blood line while at the same time denying that specialness and all it entails to H&M despite the blood line. If you think the specialness isn't noticed by terrorists, you are wrong.

It may be different if we are talking about royals with no money and no way to fund their own , but that isn't the case
It should be different because a terrorist attack on a member of the RF has the capacity to affect us all, and the fact that apparently security coverage even for all the prominent members isn't affordable should be seen as a big problem, not something to shrug about.

A terrorist attack can result in suspension of habeas corpus for everyone, as seen in NI during the Trobles. It can result in significant changes to the legal system - for instance, to requirements for citizens to carry photo identification, or regulations forcing travelers to undergo x-rays as part of security protocols at airports. It can result in less freedom of speech and association, in more censorship, in camera surveillance of streets and public spaces.

What a pity the UK has been so reduced into poverty that basic precautions against potentially devastating attacks are not affordable.

modern security works on intelligence. I'd save your pity.

A resurgent IRA are going to travel to LA and kidnap Archie and that will affect air travel to the UK?

And you’re worried about us in Britain having more security cameras as a result? But you don’t live in the UK yourself?

I don't think the US is known for its inclusiveness either , its not had good press in this regard
The bad press America has got has done its job, no?
You are aware of the problems facing the US?
What should that tell you about bad press?

Like I said all countries have their own issues and maybe need to look closer to home and fix those before
Yes, quite...
However, it's far more natural and more fun to indulge instead in a good evening of head nodding and tut-tutting at the expense of a traditional bogeyman, in this case the descendants of George III and the culture of their home.

Plus I won't loose sleep over it , even if the monarchy was dissolved again it won't majorly affect my life really
Personally i judge a person not a whole country based on one or two people I have met from that country.
Except America, a country not known for its inclusiveness?

oneglassandpuzzled

A resurgent IRA are going to travel to LA and kidnap Archie and that will affect air travel to the UK?
Speaking of obtuseness...

And you’re worried about us in Britain having more security cameras as a result? But you don’t live in the UK yourself?
Yet more obtuseness.

Did I say I was only worried about the UK?

They said they wanted to step out of the limelight etc. So were treated accordingly. If they weren't going to be in the public eye. The logic is any threat would quickly fade and they would eventually be left alone.

That would have happened if they did what they said. I n the mean time Charles took over the security bill privately.

The fact that they felt under more threat than the security experts thought they were. Is neither here or there. As new parents of course they were worried about Archie's safety but Charles was already sorting that. They then decided to go to the states and that friend of a friend would foot the bill. Again there own choice.

Ha Ha! Bogeymen.... it's you that said the UK are ruined around the world and we're all doooooomed (to quote Dad's Army)!

Shame nothing in US lived up to Washington's dream.

Ron Howard's recent Beatles film has a young black girl (now woman) saying the Beatles refusing to play to a segregated audience enabled her to have her first experience of shared fun with people of any colour and was a life changing experience for her. The Beatles had never heard of the idea of segregating and refused to play.

The US can faux worry about us in the UK, but the US has a much more recent and brutal legacy to deal with in race relations.

They will not get into a slanging match. They never have and never will.
With Harry’s and William’s promotion of mental health issues it is hard to believe he couldn’t have got her help. It’s as hard to believe that Harry couldn’t explain the line of inheritance to Meghan and why Archie was not going to be a Prince. The claim it was because he was “black” doesn’t stack up. As for not seeing a friend surely she could have entertained them in their lovely home. Or maybe we are not hearing the whole story. Diana and Catherine used to go out and about. Hmmmmm!

Harry and Meghan are looking backwards and expecting royal treatment in a world where there won't be any.
Harry and Meghan are looking at the insanity of the refusal to give them security protection and wondering what changed about them as prominent people just because they are no long 'working members of the RF' (an oxymoron if ever there was one, but heyho).

They are still exactly as well known as they were before. The advent of Meghan was widely trumpeted as a breath of fresh air that would lend credibility and relevance to the notion of the Commonwealth, and coverage of her and Harry, sanctioned by the RF, was extensive. before her relationship with Harry became public she was virtually unknown. It was apparently fine to exploit her when things were good, and security was necessary. Now she and Harry are nobodies as far as the family are concerned, and a terrorist attack is therefore unlikely to happen? Not so fast.

H&M asked the relevant question, which was, 'Has the threat level changed?' The answer they got was, 'No'. But they warranted security up until the day they were told they no longer had it.

Terrorist attacks happen when a weak link in security is exploited. Not because the RF decides someone is no longer a target. I don't know why this fact is so hard to grasp here.

As I said I think US and EU etc struggle to grasp - it isn't about history,
That's nonsense. The entire claim to legitimacy on the part of the Saxe Coburg Gotha / Windsor family is based on history.

The only reason there is a Royal Family is the appeal to continuity through history despite multiple shenanigans back in the mists of time. Shenanigans including dynastic war, civil war, and the establishment of constitutional monarchy by act of parliament. Through it all up to very recently, there has been the practice of primogeniture.

...it's about the future, adaption, survival of the monarchy
So sayeth the man who wanted at one point of his life to spend his days as a tampon.

I have a sneaking suspicion that it's utterances such as that one that will come back to bite the monarchy on the bum have an effect on the dignity of the monarchy, and not the great supermarket openings he performs as king.

and Harry won't be brining it down as the last thing we want is a US presidential system here and having a Trump swinging into town. Harry is not very bright and has clearly missed all this happening now (not history) NOW.
Well. Where to start with that?

Camilla narrowly dodged the honour of bringing down the monarchy thanks to heroic PR. (See tampon man comment).

A presidential system as proposed for the UK has nothing whatsoever to do with the American model. It would be more like the very successful Irish model, with a directly elected president as head of state along with a parliament, political parties, prime minister, etc.

Maybe also a Senate consisting of elected and appointed representatives, to replace the House of Lords.

Or a Swiss system with a committee instead of a single head of state.

math since you seem so knowledgeable about it all, who would have provided the security to the family in LA?

before her relationship with Harry became public she was virtually unknown

That's bollocks

Or a Swiss system with a committee instead of a single head of state

Oddly enough I can see that would work; after all the British like committees (we must do, we have enough of them ...)

As someone once said, "Minutes kept and hours lost"

Impatiens she knew very little about Harry or Royal Family.

So why is it bollocks that many would not know who an actress from a Canadian TV series was.

I admit i knew of Suits, although I couldn't tell you much about it or anything about the cast members. 1st time I think I saw Meghan was at the Invictus games with Harry.

The logic is any threat would quickly fade and they would eventually be left alone.
You mean like the threat to Louis Mountbatten?
Do you honestly believe that they would fade into obscurity, in the SM age?
Did that happen to Diana even in the pre SM era?

That would have happened if they did what they said. I n the mean time Charles took over the security bill privately.
When was this?

What H&M said was that while in Vancouver they were told on short notice that their security was being cut off, and according to H, financial support was over by the time they moved to CA in early 2020. Hence the provision of security by Tyler Perry. Are you suggesting that a self made billionaire is a fool?

The fact that they felt under more threat than the security experts thought they were. Is neither here or there. As new parents of course they were worried about Archie's safety but Charles was already sorting that.
They asked in early 2020 if the threat or risk level had decreased and were told no.
They correctly concluded that the risk level that had necessitated security up to the day it was cut off remained.
Not sure why this is so hard to grasp, frankly.

They then decided to go to the states and that friend of a friend would foot the bill. Again there own choice.
They left Canada because they had no security there and because that fact had been broadcast. This elevated their level of risk considerably. It was a choice born of necessity. The threat/ risk level hadn't changed, remember?

They moved to CA in April. Articles on their whereabouts appeared in May. They did not know Perry when they moved into his house. They were connected by Oprah Winfrey.

Suits was very popular in the US and UK so a lot of people would have known her.

Shame nothing in US lived up to Washington's dream.

Ron Howard's recent Beatles film has a young black girl (now woman) saying the Beatles refusing to play to a segregated audience enabled her to have her first experience of shared fun with people of any colour and was a life changing experience for her. The Beatles had never heard of the idea of segregating and refused to play.

The US can faux worry about us in the UK, but the US has a much more recent and brutal legacy to deal with in race relations.

@Marmaladeagain
I hope the very evident African American pride in this article will help you to understand what happened last Sunday night on American TV.

www.buzzfeed.com/hannahmarder/tyler-perry-home-meghan-markle-prince-harry

I’ve been so good about not commenting!

But please don’t take one person’s word regarding what the US media is writing about this nor how Americans feel about it.

The tone in the media along with feelings of Americans is as broad and varied as it is in the UK.