GB News is losing the plot!

[LimeBiscuit]

I really don’t think there is a ‘contest’ other than in the minds of parts of the media. One brother will be King in time and the other brother wants to leave a meaningful legacy in his own right. So far both are doing a great job in carving out their own lives. I hope the brothers come to a point in time where they can be friends again. Life is too short to hold on to anger. The media doesn’t help by embroiling itself in their relationship - or lack thereof currently. I think many people in many countries would love to see a sense of family togetherness again with all of the current King’s grandchildren getting to know one another. It would show how a public facing family can overcome its own difficulties if KCIII could bring both brothers into line again. It’s time to stop painting Harry as the black sheep of the family. It hasn’t worked, it just drives more dissent and anti monarchy feeling in the younger generation. If we are to have a King William and a King George then the younger generation do need to see the institution as worth holding onto. As Harry is clearly active on the world stage harnessing his global appeal would be an advantageous move by the current King.

https://www.gbnews.com/royal/kate-middleton-prince-william-news-meghan-markle-prince-harry-contest

Your first link requires a DM subscription which I don’t have, however, I see you have now attached a ‘free to all’ version👍🏻

@Toastbuttermarmaladetea I had forgotten about the body parts reference😮.

@lazybrownfoxagree it’s likely a plant from camp Sussex. If I remember correctly a similar tactic was used very shortly after the Nigeria trip when the ‘Harry could go to Balmoral to reconcile with Charles ’ story popped up.

So, @LimeBiscuit you are back. Care to answer my question on why these comments aren't an invasion of his brother's privacy ?

@IAmATorturedPoet - Harry and Meghan seem to be constantly feeding the press these stories, or at least their PR people are.
They're getting desperate.

So many nasty things in that book, weren't there, @RobinStrike .
I genuinely don't know why people are still their fans

@LimeBiscuit I see you have ignored my last two posts asking for sources to your claim. Since you haven't responded I can only conclude you lied in your original response to me and I was right all along.

@PoppysAunt I agree. I haven't read the whole book, just seen the extracts and comments in the media but I was horrified by how cavalier he was at talking about his family and their private lives.
It's unbelievable that he expects them to ever want to have a conversation with him again, knowing that at any point in the future their words can be selectively repeated to their disadvantage. I've no doubt Charles loves him, I can't imagine ever not loving your child, but he also has the knowledge that conversation can be damaging for him, William and the monarchy generally.

Read it, @RobinStrike , seriously. The level of hypocrisy is astounding.
The way he talks about his family is just awful, and there's a whole level of pettiness that I wouldn't have believed.
After I read it, I thought - he's determined to blow up every bridge, and bury the rubble.

Although I'm dubious of the sources behind the articles stating Charles's wish for reconciliation, I don't doubt he is a man of faith and a father who still loves Harry and would like things to improve.

Charles isn't Harry's main issue. William is. I'm not seeing any optimistic pieces about them burying the hachet, from even the most starry eyed Sussex fans. It's sad and a great shame, but can't blame William, at all.

I haven't read the whole (Spare) book, just seen the extracts and comments in the media but I was horrified by how cavalier he was at talking about his family and their private lives

Personally I have, @RobinStrike, and though excerpts without context aren't really to be relied on you're not wrong about the cavalier attitude to the privacy of others - and not just the family's

It's very noticeable that those who raise questions about this are rarely answered, though occasionally there's a childlike "Why shouldn't he?", so perhaps there isn't an answer except to acknowledge that Harry's a complete hypocrite?

I think Harry has a long history of the Palace leaking stories about him to the press. So he simply wrote about everything that the Palace knew and that they might leak. It removes their power.

No he doesn’t. What stories? This is always trotted out and there is never any evidence 🤷‍♀️

Read about Harry's court case.

Which one?

How does that explain writing all the vile stuff about other people?.
He can write all sorts of stuff about his drugs, bad behaviour, whatever. All the other stuff about the family? Horrible

@Nadeed does this justify all the stories about people's private lives he disclosed?

You think the Palace were ever going to leak a story about him losing his virginity? What could they have to gain from leaking the scuffle with William during the Dog Bowl Incident, if it happened as he said (big if, I know)

Only 2 examples.

The Palace don't have to leak stories, they just have to threaten Harry that they will leak a story.
And the attack by William could easily have been leaked by the Palace with a very different spin.
The first rule of PR is if you think someone is going to leak a story about you, you give your version first.

You said that there was a long history of stories being leaked by the palace. You then referred us to his court case. I asked which one. Now you are saying they only “threaten” to leak stories? Which is it? And I still would like to know which court case you are referring to. Presumably one over leaked stories? 🤷‍♀️

No I did not say what you are claiming.
I said there is a long history of the Palace leaking stories. Read about Harry's court case. I am not going to do the work for you if you do not read ordinary newspapers which have covered this.
I said the Palace have leaked stories, and that the Palace do not have to leak all stories, they can just threaten Harry that they will leak a story. The two actions are not mutually exclusive.

I think we can add the whole frozen todger/Elizabeth Arden cream/his mum to the list of things that wouldn’t have been leaked by the palace.

Your post at 13.51. The first line:

I think Harry has a long history of the Palace leaking stories about him to the press

And I’m quite happy to read about Harry’s court case and find it myself, but I don’t know which one you mean. He has several on the go

Why are you quoting that line?
Yes the Palace have a long history of leaking stores to the press. That includes about Harry.
And I argued that the Palace does not have to leak every story it knows about Harry, simply threaten Harry that they will.
Do I really have to write a pedantic thesis to be understood?

So what’s the explanations for him repeating in great detail the private conversation he had with William and Charles after Philip’s funeral? Or the content of text messages between Catherine and Meghan then? Other than making a unilateral decision to make these public.

No need to get snippy. I asked you which stories were leaked. You don’t answer but referred me to an un named court case. You then said that the palace didn’t need to leak stories, just threaten to do so. That sounds like backtracking to me so I questioned it. If you were referring to them no longer needing to leak stories, that was not clear to
me. And I would still like to know which court case refers to the palace leaking stories, please. It is one where it was found to actually be the case they were leaking as well, not just where Harry claimed they did so, I presume. Otherwise you wouldn’t be using it as evidence

Which conversations? Which text messages? Please be more explicit.