Harry and RAVEC - claims he was trapped by RF

[smilesy]

Okay. So first of all thanks to everyone on the last thread for a really civilised discussion about Harry and his security. The Telegraph has an exclusive article where Harry claims that his security was removed to “trap” him in the RF. I’m really sorry but for some reason I am unable to archive Telegraph articles at the moment. Could anyone help?

How foolish that he thought it was up to them! If only he informed himself.

It’s not though is it? It’s propaganda.
Do you not see the hypocrisy of Harry briefing the press and planting these stories? Do you not feel manipulated? It was a pathetic stunt using genuine victims of war as pawns in his game. Absolutely disgraceful.

So you are interested in him shining a light on how ravec works? That's what he is implying no? Well, he may be correct and must therefore keep pursuing this case.

No. He doesn't need to "shine a light" on anything. He's no expert or social justice warrior.

No, the courts of law do not exist to enable a bitter, bored expat to pursue personal vendettas at taxpayer expense.

"his truth" via the Daily Mail of all places.

Regardless of the outcome, the Duke will hope that by drawing attention to the way the committee operates, the system might change and become more transparent.”

This is a very odd thing to say. Many people agree with the idea that the press should have more integrity and be more transparent, because they see its effect on ordinary people's lives. Likewise many people feel injured service personnel deserve support and opportunities to shine. These are causes that can gather popular support and empathy. But it takes a special kind of blindness to your own position not to work out that the problem of how very rich people get their very expensive security funded by the masses is not a problem that the population buy large can empathise with. Nor is it one where there is clear injustice against people who can't fight back and are obviously suffering as a result, so that transparency is needed to make all that apparent. How has Harry become convinced that this is a moral crusade that he can get the general public on board with?

He's off his rocker!! Safer in a war zone?? Pull the other one Harry!!

All the stunts he pulled about leaking to the press - and here he is leaking like a sieve to the hated Daily Mail??? He's a total prick.

I don't feel one bit sorry for him. He dashed at this like a bull at a gate. Yes, they were hampered to some degree by Covid but the wise man would have used that time to research and plan. Why on earth would he think he could get the security he was used to when he was a working royal, when he is a private (although titled) citizen now!?

Not a brain cell between them.

The trouble is, god forbid what if Harry or one of his kids got kidnapped? His relatives might not care anymore but you can’t tell me that something like that happening to the King’s son wouldn’t be a major diplomatic incident and pretty bad for the UK?

Whether we like it or not, he’s not just any old celebrity. Common sense would suggest he is at a much higher risk for something like that happening than your average movie star.

He chose to walk away….i don’t blame him after all the click bait…but he can never remove his Royal shackles and that’s not his fault, he didn’t choose to be born into it but he is always going to be at a higher risk because of it.

Harry wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit him in the arse!

How many times does it have to be repeated that Harry and his family's security needs are under continual review and provided he cooperates with the relevant authorities, they will be given whatever security is deemed necessary according to the latest risk assessments?

It's getting really tiresome now.

Canadians were pissed off when they learned that their tax dollars were paying for RCMP to provide security for H&M. There was a petition as no one wanted to pay for them. They are not popular in Canada.

I said yesterday there is a way to save us all money: the courts could declare Harry a vexatious litigant: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/vexatious-litigants. The courtiers might even persuade pa it is a good idea, on the basis that H's thoughtless squandering of public resources in a tattered and run-down country is not a good look for the monarchy. There is a disadvantage though. Having to seek permission from the judiciary to take a case to court would give H yet another strand for his victim mentality.

It's baffling, @IcedPurple .

It's almost as if some people preferred not to acquaint themselves with the basic facts.

A bit like Harry.

Bullshit, he's "shining a light" on nothing but his own, selfish, entitled dick of a self!!!

I don't actually GAF how Ravec works. It has no impact on my life whatsoever!

The fauxmoi subreddit on Reddit banned me, because I am on another subreddit that they don't like, the amount of people on a thread there on this topic that were saying that King Charles should be stepping in and giving him security, and it's all his fault, oh and William's too, is scary, I commented that he does get security, it never stopped, was banned straight away, because of another subreddit I am on. Make of that what you will.

He was mollycoddled firstly by his Mum, then by his whole family once she died. I think he genuinely thought none of his family would have the balls to stand back and let it all happen this time, and his rage/fightback is in response to that.

From his perspective, his mind is probably completely blown by the “change” in his family, and as a previous poster mentioned, his behaviour since indicates he is not mentally well.

I don't think anyone wants that in any shape or form. Certainly his father won't want it, and even though his brother is very angry too, he won't wish him and his family ill. I'm NC with one sibling, entirely their decision and not one that gives me any pleasure. I don't know my DNs at all. Even then I wouldn't wish any harm on any of the family, why would I?!

He chose to walk away because TLQ wouldn't give the petulant fool the opportunity to do royal duties which they would then have merched for money. She was a wise woman!

Click bait, my backside! The one who got the worst of that was Camilla!! By a long long way, still does! Did she walk away, did she hell! She stuck it out and worked hard and resurrected her public image. She's doing a sterling job as Queen too.

The whole concept of 'bespoke security' is that the risk is assessed every single time Harry wants to come to the UK. I have no idea what he is whinging about. He can't have the same as he had when he was a working prince. That's just not how it is!

Some people are just nuts!

Camilla didn’t have it worse that’s total nonsense. She got bad press because she was actually doing something wrong.

I do have agree with @IcedPurple here .

I think his family do care for a start. Of course they don't want to see him in real danger (obviously I don't know but common sense would tell me that) - but it is not their choice - it's up to the Govt to decide.

But this " How many times does it have to be repeated that Harry and his family's security needs are under continual review and provided he cooperates with the relevant authorities, they will be given whatever security is deemed necessary according to the latest risk assessments?" (from Icedpurple)

How much more does Harry expect? He will get the best security based on current assessments. No-one but no-one is saying otherwise. If he is deemed when visiting to be at higher risk than "your average movie star" what he has been offered will give him appropriate protection.

Unless I am being hard of understanding I think he has what he wants. I don't quite see what having that initial RMB assessment would add. He will get security input to devise his security needs every single time he visits, given he cooperates with those having to give him that security. But the court will decide .

It's a good thread with interesting comments and views , many well informed as could be from experience or actually listening / reading about the actual court case. & for which Thank you @smilesy 😁

Edit - I didn't read @wigsonthegreenandhatsforthelifting before posting but I agree also - I've repeated some of that

Truthiness is the belief in what you feel to be true rather than what the facts will support.

"Truthiness" was coined by US comedian Stephen Colbert and this word perfectly captures the modus operandi of H&M and their super supporters.

In the world of truthiness inhabited by H&M and their squaddies, facts do not matter. Processes, policies and procedures do not matter. Truth does not matter. If H feels wronged, then by the standard of truthiness, H has been wronged.

I suspect that H is determined to cling to this world of smoke and mirrors because he lacks the courage to admit that his problems are the consequences of his own actions.