Thoughts on Prince William's speech?

[Aspiringmatriarch]

I've been musing on this, I'm not sure I agree with the idea that the Bashir interview created a 'false narrative'. Obviously Diana was lied to, which is appalling, and I'm sure that fueled some of her paranoia but isn't it true that she was spied on at times e.g. with the squidgygate tapes? And she'd already collaborated with Andrew Morton saying many of the same things, and apparently wanted to do an interview after Charles gave his.

I don't know... it just feels odd to me that William is essentially asking for it to be struck from the record. He was apparently angry with her after the Bashir interview and was teased about it at school, which must have been horrible. Is he trying to protect her memory or is there an element of trying to tidy it all away?

@goldierocks

Transparent - most definitely not.

Could they be much more closely scrutinised and investigated by those we vote in to represent us - absolutely yes. Some MP's do this much better than others.

So it’s the MPs fault ? I see ...

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth

he is workshy but no one here actually know what his day is like
That's exactly the point - the general public should know what the future King our taxes pay for does in his day to day life. We certainly know what he's not doing - working - since his work engagements are public record and anyone can look up how is numbers compare to other royals.

He may have had an affair probably because Charles had an affair and upper class men do
That's not why so many people believe he had an affair. I strongly doubt that numerous aristos and broadsheet reporters are spreading that story based on nothing more than "his dad had one so he probably did too."

William's okay, I agreed with his statement about the panorama interview. No one should make money off the back of that interview.

the general public should know what the future King our taxes pay for does in his day to day life

In that case I should know what my MP does in his day to day life because my taxes pay his salary. Not only do I not want to know, I simply don’t care.

And for someone who objects so strongly to alleged lies about individuals @ohforarainyday, you seem very happy to repeat and perpetuate them.

William's own statement where he called his mother "paranoid" twice within two minutes, implied she was manipulated into giving a false statement, and called for his mother's own words to be censored, can be viewed by anyone with an Internet connection and I am perfectly entitled to express an opinion that calling your mother paranoid is "slagging her off." You are putting yourself up as Diana's champion against one of her bereaved sons. Unbelievable

The ONLY person I've seen post truly awful things about MM, is you.

Anyone who's been on Meghan threads longer than ten minutes has seen them. The thread containing the allegation that Meghan hit Charlotte is still up to this day, MNHQ never deleted it.

I've lost track of how many times I've seen certain usernames (to be fair I've never seen amusedtodeath1 do this but plenty of other posters do) posting in threads containing overt racism, gleefully egging on those being racist, then later witnessed that exact same username post "I've seen anyone be racist towards Meghan."

"I've never seen that ever" is a classic stonewalling tactic.

It's pretty awful that you're trying to twist me saying "it's disgusting that Meghan bashers on Mumsnet have accused her of X and Y" into "Rainy said Meghan did X and Y."

'When have any of the Meghan haters ever said one single good word about her?'

I don't 'hate' Meghan and I don't 'hate' Harry. I'm not a sulky teen.

They were happy to continue to be working royals and strangely only launched this blatant getting even via Oprah thing once they were told no, not like that with their ott LA blah website.

I'm not even a big Cambridge fan I just respect people who keep their personal gripes private and get on with the hand shaking and possibly dull visits which is what they are there for.

derxa if you find negative opinions on William's speech so offensive, why are you in a thread titled "What are your opinions on William's speech"?

JaniieJones you're just proven my point.

You claim not to "hate" Meghan yet have posted many hundreds of extremely hateful comments about her and are now using a thread about William to shoehorn in yet another nasty comment about her.

I've made positive posts about Kate and have praised her for projects I felt deserved praise. Point me to one single post you've made that's positive about or praising Meghan?

@ohforarainyday

derxa if you find negative opinions on William's speech so offensive, why are you in a thread titled "What are your opinions on William's speech"?

Strangely enough because I am allowed to post on any thread on MN as long as I stay within talk guidelines.

Dear readers, please be very wary of any attempt to present royal financial affairs as transparent
They aren’t

Indeed

A bit surprised, TBH, to see comments about Charles's finances being up for scrutiny, considering his veto over any law which applies to the Duchy and happens not to suit him
Since he's able to squash even the law, it really doesn't take much imagination to see how he'd be able to squash unwelcome financial probing too

'You claim not to "hate" Meghan yet have posted many hundreds of extremely hateful comments about her'

You say 'hateful comments' when actually they are comments about their hypocritical behaviour. I don't do 'hate'.

I feel sorry for both of them tbh, they need to work on their resilience and develop strategies to help them cope with their resentment. They will only be happy when they accept the past, accept everyone is flawed but trying to do the best they can. Love always wins they themselves said, let's see them demonstrate that.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Dear readers, please be very wary of any attempt to present royal financial affairs as transparent They aren’t

Indeed

A bit surprised, TBH, to see comments about Charles's finances being up for scrutiny, considering his veto over any law which applies to the Duchy and happens not to suit him
Since he's able to squash even the law, it really doesn't take much imagination to see how he'd be able to squash unwelcome financial probing too

@Puzzledandpissedoff, some royal supporters here appear to be naive in the extreme.

I suppose that is the best characteristic to have if want to be a subject and to maintain a publicly funded family in the manner to which they have become accustomed. It’s not even the land and money that I object most to ( though I object strongly) it the power. The unearned, hidden power and influence.
The protection of Andrew being only the most recent case in point.
I know this thread is about William but his speech is relevant to my point about hidden power. Many felt it was an attempt to re write history ( it was all the nasty media, nothing to do with Charles and Camilla) and to pave the way for King Charles. Remember to bow and scrape, loyal subjects and believe all your are told

@Blossomtoes

the general public should know what the future King our taxes pay for does in his day to day life

In that case I should know what my MP does in his day to day life because my taxes pay his salary. Not only do I not want to know, I simply don’t care.

And for someone who objects so strongly to alleged lies about individuals @ohforarainyday, you seem very happy to repeat and perpetuate them.

You vote for your MP Blossomtoes and you can vote them out.

Can I ask, are you very young @Blossomtoes?

Can I ask, are you very young @Blossomtoes?

🤣🤣🤣🤣 No, I’m fucking ancient. Thanks for the compliment, though!

If I voted my MP out, I’d get another one so it would still apply.

I am have a little snigger at PW's main virtue being 'loving his children'. He just needs a bit of fake tan and it could be Mumsnet favourite Peter Andre - now he would make a lovely head of state if we got rid of the royals and he really, really loves his children

Well I’m sorry I assumed from some of your comments that these arguments were new to you.

Your MP is voted in and out, your MP gets a pittance of the money the Royals take, your MP works for her pay , your MP is accountable to you and you can demand their service .

None of the above apply to the royals . I’ll leave it that for you for starters

@CathyorClaire

Diana had form for giving her protection officers the slip to do her own thing years before she dismissed them formally.

Just sayin'

On the odd occasions, not all the time.

@NoIdontwanttoseeyourknob

“Right now the Palace and the press are happy to promote the narrative that Kate's the perfect princess who's never put a foot wrong, “

Yes, we’ve airbrushed out the incidents of her flashing her bare arse “accidentally” when getting in and out of helicopters.

If that's the worst she's done, I don't think we have too much to complain about!

Your MP is voted in and out

I know. I’ve been voting since 1975

your MP gets a pittance of the money the Royals take

The amount is irrelevant, they’re both funded by taxpayers

your MP works for her pay

How do I know this? There’s no evidence he works for it.

your MP is accountable to you and you can demand their service

He’s only accountable at election time and good luck with demanding anything.

None of the above apply to the royals . I’ll leave it that for you for starters

Please don’t patronise me. The principle is exactly the same.

If you believe MPs are the same as the royals I’ve a bridge to sell you

@Taketheredpill

If you believe MPs are the same as the royals I’ve a bridge to sell you

I didn’t say that. I said they’re both tax payer funded. Are you saying that isn’t true?

Actually I do sort of agree with Blossomtoes (shocking!)

Anyone who's seen my posts knows my major bugbear is corruption and lack of transparency amongst the institutions that control this country.

Clearly there's a massive difference between an elected MP and an unelected royal, but there's enough corruption (expenses scandals, Boris' wallpaper, Matt Hancock's unlawful behaviour over Covid contracts and all the cronyism where millions of pounds were given to Tory mates with no experience) and lack of transparency within the government, I can see how there's a comparison to be made with the way the BRF and their finances are run.

@StartupRepair

Sophie has consistently aligned herself with eye health and blindness charities and research all over the world.

Also abuse against women across the world.

Shame some people can only remember the negatives.

There is a greater return to the charity from Waitrose than if Duchy Original production remained 'in house'

Waitrose invested heavily in the brand and went on to expand the range. All the risk and very little of the glory.

On the odd occasions, not all the time

And disaster could have struck on any one of them. The fact she wasn't under royal protection when the accident happened is irrelevant for the purposes of the debate above when she chose to ditch it when it suited.

As for the Duchy of Cornwall its murky status means Charles has all the advantages of not paying corporation tax despite its vast business activities and interests while retaining the ability to label it a public body when it suits him. Happy days.