Harry in UK for funeral

[Viviennemary]

DM is reporting Harry came to the UK for the funeral of his uncle Robert Fellowes. The husband of Diana's sister Lady Jane. Apparently they kept their distance from each other and didn't speak. Looks like William has the Windsor habit of bearing grudges. Don't blame him in this case.

My posts only addressed anger and aggression so I don't know why they were deleted.

Lol anger and aggression.. seriously? I simply asked Serenster to provide proof of what she quoted me saying as I didn't say it or to apologise for lying. I habe every right to ask someone to do that.

She then admits I didn't say it and refuses to apologise for lying about what I said.

Noone else needs to get involved.

I provided proof Spectre8 and have faced your anger and aggressive ever since. I have nothing to apologise for.

Noone else needs to get involved.

I think it's fair enough for people to defend posters who are unfairly accused of lying - you asked Serenster for proof, she provided it. You are making yourself look ridiculous claiming you didn't say it when it's there for everyone to see. And simultaneously calling Serenster a liar and saying "She then admits I didn't say it", which is a lie, is also not a good look.

Serenster provided proof. To keep saying they are lying is dishonest.

She hasn't provided proof, she admits I didn't say what she quoted me to have said. So you don't need to come defend her when she admits I didn't say it. So yes she lied and has admitted it but refuses to apologise. So no you don't need to get involved to defend someone who has admitted they lied

There is a big difference between paraphrasing a poster’s (and other posters), general position on a topic (as I did on this thread) and directly quoting a past post. If I’d intended to directly quote a past post, I would have indicated this with specifics of the past post rather than using the word clamours, which to my mind indicates that this was not a direct quote. Using quote marks to indicate paraphrasing is also perfectly normal.

You are harassing me now on this issue. You’ve already had posts deleted because of your aggression You are not correct.

I know that @Serenster is more than capable of defending herself but I think your aggressive tone is completely out of order and ruining what was an interesting discussion.

I'm ignoring the ridiculous derail of this thread to address this post.

Are you talking about Koo Stark? That poor woman was done a great injustice. She was a real "classy" lady and a promising actress who was reduced to "porn star" by the British press. And she has never, ever blabbed about her relationship with Andrew. The press behaviour in the 80s and 90s was like the Wild West. Nothing like it is today, no matter how much Harry and his acolytes moan about it.

@Serenster Your posts are always interesting and informative, not to mention coherent and measured. P|lease don't get put off from posting.

@Spectre8

You are making yourself look like an idiot and behaving really unpleasantly, please stop it now.

Think about it - what does it tell you when posters are agreeing with Serenster and nobody is defending you, just calling you out on your behaviour?

Thanks, Pineapples, I won’t 😀

I just quickly googled for some examples of the very common written convention of using quote marks when paraphrasing. In case it’s helpful for some.

Here’s two examples from both the UK and the US press talking about Meghan and Harry’s “poor me” attitude. Words I don’t believe the couple have ever said directly, but which summarises a lot of what they have said.

Agreed. @Serenster you have always been one of the wisest voices on these threads. Please don't be intimidated by someone who is clearly spoiling for trouble.

It's a Sussex Squad tactic, isn't it?

If the words were not said verbatim, therefore nothing with that possible meaning can be true. This was played in the "they never accused the RF pf racism" manoeuvring.

It means you are okay about other posters lying that someone said something when they didn't that's what it means.

All I asked for was an apology if you made something up then admit it and say sorry.

I asked her to provide proof or apologise nothing aggressive about that. She admitted she was wrong and refused to apologise. It's an integration between me and one other person, other people get involved for no reason.

Maybe people shouldn't make shit up

Shame this thread has disintegrated, possibly the intention as it doesn't show H+M the admiration and deference their followers seem to require 🤷‍♀️

Ignore and carry on?

Is the low-key trip back a sign that Harry has given up on his RAVEC case?

She admitted she was wrong and refused to apologise

No. I’m not wrong, I have never admitted anything of the sort. I didn’t lie either. As I said, and stand by, I have nothing to apologise for.

Serenster

No. I’m not wrong, I have never admitted anything of the sort. I didn’t lie either. As I said, and stand by, I have nothing to apologise for.

This making statements as if they're true and there's actual proof of them is getting very prevalent and very wearisome.
You're doing well to keep calm and to not let your posts dissolve into a flurry of aggressive typos and bad SPAG

Hughs

Is the low-key trip back a sign that Harry has given up on his RAVEC case?

Well, it certainly doesn't seem that it would help with his case.
He may, I suppose, argue that he chooses to take the great risk of travelling to the UK alone, but wouldn't expose his wife and children to it unless he gets IPP status for himself and them.

I'm pretty sure the derail is deliberate - it would be impossible to have such limited faculties and still be able to type.

Yes you did admit it you said no I haven't not on this thread then go through my posting history to find some proof that wasn't even proof. So either I said it or I didn't and I didn't say it.