Prince Harry not attending Philips memorial

[FlyingGeeseAgain]

It has been confirmed that Prince Harry will not be attending P Philips memorial service. What are people’s thoughts about this? Is the whole security issue a smoke screen for the fact he can’t face his family?

Wasn't he in the army and he got sent on a racism awareness course (or was it two?) Great that he did it but if you are in the army and they send you you don't have much choice do you.

A pity William was not sent, he seems to need it.

I don't particularly care for either. The point is that William's not the one who's attempting to fashion a career out of throwing around racism allegations, including against his own family.

Didn't William campaign about racism in football?

I would have thought that events like the Jubilee and Memorial Service would have security supplied as per the current arrangement so while he says it's about the security, I don't believe that.

I understand why he'd want to avoid the UK and it's probably for the best that he doesn't come or the media will go crazy speculating on who he might have spoken to etc rather than the actual service and PP.

For those who think Prince William is regarded as an anti-racist I’d like to know by whom. I reckon most people of colour regard him as otherwise. So if it’s mainly white people who think Prince William is anti-racist then that is rather an interesting divide.

At least Harry is making amends.

@Skiptheheartsandflowers
Omid seems to be the person authorised to break Sussex news unless it's a legal issue in which case lawyers issue a statement.

@Chilledchablis1

@ Why2why

What’s “ pathetic “ is he felt the need to issue a statement. IF he doesn’t need the RF, they should drop the titles . IF he is done with the U.K. then no need to announce he isn’t coming .
He and M should live their lives where they want , how they want but stop riding on the coat tails of a family they claim is toxic .

Your logic is all over the place.

In any case he released a statement to stop the media from speculating and making up lies. He is in control. Get used to that. He is not your property.

Stick with this dying and irrelevant institution called the Royal Family. A history of violence, racism, ignorance, laziness, dependency on the money of tax payers

@Why2why

His behaviour is shocking because he is not making himself the property of the media and people who hate him 🤣?

His behaviour is shocking because he chose his wife and kids over the media and people who hate them?

His behaviour is shocking because he chooses not to spend his life on taxpayers money waving, cutting ribbons and basically living an unfulfilling and useless life?

His behaviour is shocking because he sees the Institution as irrelevant in this modern age? A symbol of white supremacy and colonialism? Of violence against much of the world, particularly those belonging to people of colour.

Yep, shocking behaviour.

He thinks the institution’s so irrelevant he’s still calling himself all his royal titles and making money off them. The institute is completely relevant to his existence. If it wasn’t no one would be interested in him and his wife would likely ever have met or married him.

The institution is what everything he has is built on.

Personally I don’t mind either way whether he comes or not.

@Fridgeorflight

Last time he was in the UK his car was chased by paparazzi. His mum died due to her car being chased by paparazzi. Security sounds like a valid concern to me.

He wasn't chased at all, the footage of him leaving the event shows there where a couple of paps by the side of the pavement, that's all...no one got near the car.

As he clearly said, he and his wife were treated appalling. What should he have done, stay with his abusers and lose his wife and his own sanity?

The Royal Family and the Firm need to take a long hard look at what they have done

Recollections may vary...

@Why2why

Harry does not need the Royal Family. He is Prince Harry and that can never change.

He has shown time and time again he does not need the Royal Family. Meghan was a millionaire before she met Harry. She does not need the Royal Family. Britain needs the Royal Family. They are a curiosity and tourist attraction, nothing more.

The British media had hoped they would have needed the Royal Family to survive, but powerful people in the US rallied behind them and they are doing just fine.

Wasn’t the media desperate for them to bring Lilibet to be christened? Claiming Harry and Meghan was desperate to have her baptised. I don’t think Meghan would ever want her mixed race children to go through what she did. Meghan is done with all that nonsense. No right think parent would want their children to be subjected to this vile intrusion and abuse.

They are done with the UK. Deal with it and stop reporting on them. Harry not coming to an event was breaking news that knocked Ukraine from the Dailymail on line’s top story. Pathetic.

If you believe that the RF are nothing more than a tourist attraction, then I'd suggest that you require significant education on British history and the constitution.

@Why2why

I'd also suggest that you "deal with" the fact that the UK is a constitutional monarchy, and there's very little prospect of that changing any time soon. Twitter isn't real life; bear that in mind.

Just seen on SM that he's travelling to the Netherlands for the Invictus games (I'm assuming private security) in mid April.

So it's a middle finger to the UK press who hoped to have new stories to punish if he visited the UK.

[quote Yeahthat]@Why2why

I'd also suggest that you "deal with" the fact that the UK is a constitutional monarchy, and there's very little prospect of that changing any time soon. Twitter isn't real life; bear that in mind.[/quote]
That will change with Commonwealth. I care not about the UK keeping its monarchy. It’s irrelevant and an insult to sovereign nations, whose people the Royal Family despise because of the colour they f their skin. Whose wealth and people were destroyed by your monarchy.

The constitutional monarchy is merely a ceremonial, tourist attraction. Irrelevant to the modern world.

He wasn't chased at all, the footage of him leaving the event shows there where a couple of paps by the side of the pavement, that's all...no one got near the car.

It is curious that nobody captured this chase when it was mid- afternoon in London and London has the highest CCTV per capita outside China and plenty of traffic and people with phone cameras.

There was footage of his car driving down a residential street in Kew (the reg of his car is in photos from that day) and it drives along normally too.

If something happened I reckon it's more of the lines of his security telling paps to move further away or something.

@cherryonthecakes

Just seen on SM that he's travelling to the Netherlands for the Invictus games (I'm assuming private security) in mid April.

So it's a middle finger to the UK press who hoped to have new stories to punish if he visited the UK.

I think the papers have got plenty of more important things to report just at the moment.

@Yeahthat, what more is the Royal Family other than a tourist attraction? Do you mean the Queen rubber stamps laws and exempts herself from some of them like the Equality Act? Do you mean cutting ribbons, producing books of photos, begging Saudis for money, etc? What exactly do they bring to the world stage of any importance?

They are irrelevant and the rest of the world are polite and play along with this Once Upon A Time farce.

@Why2why

Constitutional monarchy is the system of government in the UK.

"That will change with commonwealth" - not sure what this means. That it will change in commonwealth countries? It passed relatively unnoticed here when Barbados became a republic recently. It's hardly any skin off anyone's nose or seen as some seismic change. What difference does it make here how any other country wants to choose its Head of State.

[quote Yeahthat]@Why2why

Constitutional monarchy is the system of government in the UK.

"That will change with commonwealth" - not sure what this means. That it will change in commonwealth countries? It passed relatively unnoticed here when Barbados became a republic recently. It's hardly any skin off anyone's nose or seen as some seismic change. What difference does it make here how any other country wants to choose its Head of State.[/quote]
@Yeahthat, do you actually understand what the role of the monarchy is in the “system of government”? What practical purpose the monarchy serves other than rubber stamping laws drafted by civil servants? The only practical purpose the monarchy serves is to fight to have itself exempt from equality laws and other laws that protect ordinary human rights.

So when most of the Commonwealth gets rid of the monarchy as something of relevance and as you say, it all goes unnoticed, then other than small England, who cares about this monarchy other than for a sport of curiosity aka tourism?

Not all Commonwealth countries are former parts of the empire, so what it says is that Commonwealth membership evolves and is positively wanted by its members.

It began to support relations between newly independent countries that were formerly part of the empire, so that they got rid of the monarchy was the original impetus.

@Why2why

That would be, "England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland".

Yes the Queen has limited powers in line with the constitution. Did you misunderstand me and believe that I was calling for a return to absolute monarchy? She is the head of state and her powers are largely ceremonial now (that's a good thing). We still require a head of state and it's very unlikely that the UK will become a republic any time soon. Its not part of any mainstream party's manifesto. She's not head of state for the world, or an entertainer, therefore I'm not interested in what she "brings to the world stage". For example, Spain has a monarchy and I couldn't care less about them. Why would it matter to anyone in the UK whether the rest of the world cares about our monarchy or not? They're not our entry for Eurovision or some sort of global X-Factor. Their job is to perform their limited role in line with the constitution and nothing more.

There's no point in getting heated up about it; firstly because no one cares, secondly because it appears you're not even from the UK.

Why2why you sound very ignorant of how the system works in the U.K.
Commonwealth countries can become republics if they want to and many have.
That will have zero impact on whether the U.K. has a constitutional monarchy as a system of governance or not

@Yeahthat, I’m not sure about the sentiments of the other nations that form part of the UK. England, yes but the rest? Not sure they are so obsessed with monarchy.

England would like to think itself to still be a big player on the world stage and to think that the world thinks highly of its monarchy. People are polite about the Queen. Sadly when she is gone, people are unlikely to play along with this ancient fairy tale whose history is not one to boast about.

It is odd that some pp think we need to care what other countries think of our system of governance here. It’s actually a pretty stable system with a solid line of heirs and a peaceful transition between prime ministers apart from the Twitter arguments.
I was reading the other day that Russia has never had a peaceful transition of power which is pretty extraordinary.
The U.K. doesn’t comment on the Thai king for example or how they set up their affairs or France with their president or any other country for that matter and I am sure they wouldn’t care less what We thought either ( quite rightly)

[quote cherryonthecakes]@Skiptheheartsandflowers
Omid seems to be the person authorised to break Sussex news unless it's a legal issue in which case lawyers issue a statement. [/quote]
Interesting. An apparently independent journalist who works for, and is presumably paid by, specific titles, seeming to be in this role.

And how odd to say 'only trust announcements that come from our person' but then not make it clear who that person is. Archwell has a team of staff. Don't know why they wouldn't name their press secretary and say 'if it comes from them you can trust it, otherwise disregard'. That would make it very clear when it's an authorised statement. Unless of course they want to leave some wiggle room for stories to be aired so that the reaction can be observed before they then confirm, deny or ignore...

@sashagabadon

Why2why you sound very ignorant of how the system works in the U.K. Commonwealth countries can become republics if they want to and many have. That will have zero impact on whether the U.K. has a constitutional monarchy as a system of governance or not

I would hazard a guess that I know a whole lot more about your system of government than you do.

In any case, I’ve never claimed the Commonwealth’s jettisoning of the Queen or king as head of state will affect the Queen or ing being able to rubber stamp laws and exempt themselves as they do choose.

Hi m talking about the dying relevance of the monarchy beyond the shores of little England.