Lady Colin Campbell says it was Princess Anne who made the comment

[BlackCatShadow]

There was a lot of speculation who made the comment after Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview.

She says it wasn't a racist comment. The family were concerned about Meghan in general and it has been twisted by Meghan and Harry.

I don't think Meghan and Harry are on Lady C's Christmas card list. 😲

@Mummy195

Even after people on various threads and the media have started hundreds of times the security situation and how it all came about.

Various threads based entirely on tabloids, LCC and BG.

A lot showing evidence of royal protocol, how security is provided for all the royal family (who gets what and why), explaining the timeline of the security being dropped etc. Which is way more credible than the 'truth' scenario some people are willing to believe which has no proof and timeline wise doesn't fit in anyway.

None of us know Anne in real life, she comes across as very pragmatic, so of course if she made the comment it’s would feel it didn’t come from a place of racism, but you never know.

I’d also assume it’s possible Anne is happily taking the fall for someone else to end speculation and she said no such thing. And she knows Harry and Meghan are not going to name the person, well not yet anyway. So she’s letting it out it’s her as the palace will know everyone will go “meh”, it also somewhat neutralises the conversation because Anne asking is very different to Charles or William doing so.

I can easily see Anne agreeing to let it be known it was her and not really giving a shit. I can see that more than I can see her asking it.

@Mummy195

The risk is inherent for Archie and H. There is nothing they can do about it. Any loving parent would not want to see their child or grandchild suffer.

It does not matter if they agree with H or not, they should make sure to look after Archie.

If I'm a grandparent worth millions, I would not leave my great/grandchild whom I know is in danger hanging like this. H put his case forward why they want to leave and feel attacked, even if you don't agree, they have their valid reasons. Just concentrate on the fact that they would not have these issues if they were not born into this family. Where is the humanity in all this?

I totally agree about the risk. Though feel the way and where Haz is choosing to live heightens the risk greatly.

At the end of the day the life style they have chosen costs millions a year more security wise (let alone everything else). It is totally up to Charles if he want pay. I would be for heavens sake I don't mind paying but you need to move somewhere cheaper. Else even my millions will be badly hit after a few years. I also think people forget a lot of royal money it from buildings and land. This is a lot of the livelihood too. So difficult to sell for extra cash. Plus George and co will need it as well eventually.

[quote PicsInRed]Oh@Mummy195you're always good for a laugh!
Cut him off with just £30 million to get by?

£30 million won't last long for 4 people to be covered for 24/7 professional security. It was reported that Charles was paying £4 million for their security - in less than 10 years the money would be all gone, but the threat to a mixed race royal family and Harry as an ex middle east combat soldier would continue.[/quote]
I think the money will be gone in less than three years with their current life style plus the security. It is a bloody mess. Hopefully the Netflix etc money is not viewing results dependant or anything. Then at least they have that money to top them up. Apparently the original plan was speaking events. Which pay very well in America. However covid ended that pretty much. I think the interview was them trying to relaunch themselves as public interest was lower. They just got very carried away and it has become a car crash.

@Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum

What is most puzzling is the outright, and quick cut off. Surely, they could have said, OK, we help you for this 1/2/number of years while you gather your bearings.

In the time they go away, it becomes clear that H&M are no longer within the inner circle (proximity), get jobs etc. (like his cousins). The threat will lessen, they will also be able to pay for themselves.

The funds were cut abruptly last year in the middle of media hype exposing where they lived.

I think there needs to be some perspective here. If H had say, killed someone, committed a peado act etc. and got away with it due to his status. I would fully understand. We are talking about someone who just basically demoted themselves to the same level as his cousins, hardly the crime of the century here.

I agree whilst there was a run up to it. Taxpayer funds in Canada to start. Until the met said enough. Then Charles for whatever amount of months (I can't remember of the top of my head). In the end it was abrupt. Which makes me wonder about Haz saying Charles stopped answering the phone etc. I think there was possible a child and parent situation. A friend of Charles has said Haz keep ringing up and asking for more money. However that is just gossip like Lady C. We don't know only they know 🤷‍♀️ It could easily be Charles decided to call their bluff to get them back and they stuck to their guns. Then everything got nasty.

@ Mummy195
I am sure if you do some checking you will see that POW agreed to help fund H and M for their year trial .
The idea that they were immediately cut off financially is nonsense . H had his inheritance from Diana plus an inheritance from the Queen mother who left him more than W as she knew W would one day inherit the Duchy of Cornwall .
I don’t think he will ever have to claim Universal Credit .
The argument about security for Archie is ridiculous. Had they stayed in their well protected home( Frogmore ) they would have been well protected . As Archie is unlikely to be out on his own for years , what was the issue ??
Do you seriously think that U.K. taxpayers should have continued to pay for security for 2 people who have turned their backs on the RF and, indeed , the U.K. ??

I think the point people are making is Haz was now even as a working royal not much different to his cousins. Once George and co came along the spare isn't needed. Then he demoted himself further as you say. Add to that leaving the UK mean even if a security issue the met are not willing to get involved. Charles has future generations to think about. As well as people that live on his land or work there. You can't pay a billionaire life style on a millionaires money. Not if you need to provide for generations to come.

I keep seeing wry-smile references to Meghan calling Harry "Haz".

He's been known by friends as this for years. Control-F "Haz" in this piece from 2006 and you'll see.

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-411841/Friends-reveal-real-Chelsy-Davy.html

Nothing wrong with his mates and the wife calling him Haz. Don't know what that is about

Personally I have done it since the Gayle King thing. That has made me refuse to use either of their real names I am like that and patronising apparently 😂

@Truelymadlydeeplysomeonesmum

Nothing wrong with his mates and the wife calling him Haz. Don't know what that is about

Personally I have done it since the Gayle King thing. That has made me refuse to use either of their real names I am like that and patronising apparently 😂

No there isn't anything wrong with it I agree, but the point is that it seems to be one of the sticks used to beat Meghan on her "otherness", when all she's doing is calling him by the nickname he's had for many years since he was young.

Agree I don't get banging on about the little things like that which are irrelevant

That is why I like mumsnet royal threads at the moment but avoid anything on Twitter. Both sides of the argument are so vile about everything. Some people are very odd. At least with mumsnet you get a mostly decent debate.

@cyclingmad

Isn't this Meghans point about her seeking help, she wanted to go somewhere like a clinic away from prying eyes but was told no. I know lots of people have said she could of had someone visit her etc. But the point I got from her interview was she wanted it away from the firm.

But she didn't want it away from the firm. She went to their HR department and was 'apparently' refused it

I think there needs to be some perspective here. If H had say, killed someone, committed a peado act etc. and got away with it due to his status. I would fully understand. We are talking about someone who just basically demoted themselves to the same level as his cousins, hardly the crime of the century here.

No one's saying it's the crime of the century are they? Only that their behaviour is hypocritical and a bit nasty. The lack of perspective I see is on their defenders who lose their heads at any criticism of these pair.

Got to lol at the idea that their behaviour is nasty.

Talking about names. Neither of them use their real names.

Got to lol at the idea that their behaviour is nasty.

What's lol about it? They've attacked H's family, knowing they can't really answer back, suggisting they are racist and didn't care about Meghan which is untrue and also insulting the public who paid for their wedding and came out to celebrate with them, saying they only did it because it was expected, not because they wanted to. I think that's nasty behaviour.

@ImpatiensI

Got to lol at the idea that their behaviour is nasty.

What's lol about it? They've attacked H's family, knowing they can't really answer back, suggisting they are racist and didn't care about Meghan which is untrue and also insulting the public who paid for their wedding and came out to celebrate with them, saying they only did it because it was expected, not because they wanted to. I think that's nasty behaviour.

Noone knows what the truth is, there are two sides and the truth is usually in the middle.

Some members of the RF are racist, evidenced by their comments from the past. So the truth is some of them are racist.

Considering I'm part of the public, I dont feel insulted by what they have said or done. As a taxpayer I'm more disgusted i continue to pay for those RF members who have made racist comments and are allegedly accused of abusing girls. Paying for a wedding pales compared to that.

I dont find their behaviour nasty.

Some members of the RF are racist, evidenced by their comments from the past. So the truth is some of them are racist.

That's right. But the specific allegation in the interview was that they were racist to Meghan and Archie, with nothing to back it up. They attack their own family in front of the world and even though they say they respect the Queen this is about the most disrespectful thing they could do and must be personally really hurtful to her. That's why I say it's nasty.

I agree if you don't like your family far enough but a public display of bitterness is a bit much. They were also very wrong to not state who made the skin colour comment. If you don't want to give details you don't go public with that type of accusation. Else you have just labelled your whole family which is nasty. Not one person on mumsnet would be happy for that to happen to their own family. Unless they are complete bonkers.

Not one person on mumsnet would be happy for that to happen to their own family.

Exactly - that includes the ppl defending H&M, they would be devastated if their ds/db/gc did it to them.

I just don't understand why Harry thought that he and his family would be entitled to security as non-working royals? Yes, he's the grandson of the monarch but so are his cousins - Zara, Peter and the York girls. They are all non-working royals therefore don't get security.

I know eventually he will be the son of a monarch, and all of the Queen's children receive security (well up until Andrew more recently for obvious reasons); but they were all working royals!!!

As PP said, on top of that them choosing to live in a different country. Did they expect the met to keep providing the security? Or they expect the UK taxpayer to pay for American security services???

@catinbootsx

I just don't understand why Harry thought that he and his family would be entitled to security as non-working royals? Yes, he's the grandson of the monarch but so are his cousins - Zara, Peter and the York girls. They are all non-working royals therefore don't get security.

I know eventually he will be the son of a monarch, and all of the Queen's children receive security (well up until Andrew more recently for obvious reasons); but they were all working royals!!!

As PP said, on top of that them choosing to live in a different country. Did they expect the met to keep providing the security? Or they expect the UK taxpayer to pay for American security services???

Answer.. yes they did. Entitled isn’t he word for it. They thought they could fly back to the UK a couple of times year on a private jet, pop into a couple of charities and be considered ‘working’ Royals and therefore qualify for security in the US.

From the interview, I saw it that they expected protection for Archie only because the threat level had not changed. The threat level being the way it was because of how the media had been spinning stories about them, the whole making Kate cry story that was leaked feom royal sources only increased people's hatred for Meghan and subsequently threats made against them and their baby.

Like it or not had there not been so many ignorant, speculative articles in the press the threat level wouldn't be as high.

Even now post interview, weeks after we still have the press continuing to post articles, why? When the public say they do not care now they are gone

But if they'd just gone away, and lived the quiet life they claimed they wanted - they would have faded in importance and their need for security would have lessened. They are courting the media, which in
turn, is ramping up the interest in them - so their risk remains high. And all that bullshit about they were refusing to protect Archie. Well surely as a minor Archie's security would fall under that of his parents? He's not going to have his own independent security team at the age of 2?

@catinbootsx

But if they'd just gone away, and lived the quiet life they claimed they wanted - they would have faded in importance and their need for security would have lessened. They are courting the media, which in turn, is ramping up the interest in them - so their risk remains high. And all that bullshit about they were refusing to protect Archie. Well surely as a minor Archie's security would fall under that of his parents? He's not going to have his own independent security team at the age of 2?

They never said they wanted a quiet life, they wanted a life where they had more control over their privacy.

Peolle really need to move on from the false bs about them wanting a quiet life that the media have been pushing.

They want a life on their terms, isn't that what most of us want, to life a live the way we can as much as possible, which is what they are now doing so good luck to them.