Harry and RAVEC #2

[Baital]

To continue...

The BBC don't want one of their own challenged for being a shite, ineffective, uncritical, uninformed interviewer

But again what does it matter, @RandyRedHumpback? After all the BBC's contained enough of them - even some outright frauds - and cushioned as they are by the mandatory licence fee there's not a lot to prevent them doing exactly as they like

Does he actually believe that’s not what happened here? He really does suffer from poor mental health.

Can't warm to royal family really. Think Charles and William are stuck up twats the way they behave. If one of our family doesn't agree with the rest we talk it through as a family and support each other not hang them out to dry. I feel sorry for Harry. His children are gorgeous.

You mean the backs of their heads are gorgeous lol? Is it supporting each other to spend years publicly slating the rest of your family because you didnt get your own way? Its harry who has hung them out to dry, not the other way around

'I thought I could rely on my family keeping me safe'

I.e. I can be as obnoxious as I want to them, and they should just suck it up and humour me, and step outside their constitutional role on my behalf.

I'm not sure how any of that is relevant to a judicial decision on security?

I thought that rose blocking Archie's face in that recent photo was really lovely.

The 1970s?

...and stump up limitless cash, even though I made $millions invading their privacy, sharing their confidences and lying about events.

I think the senior legal teams always factor in how the person's children look when you see them on Instagram.

Why can't he grasp that his family have no power over these decisions? The late Queen wrote and asked for his security to continue, it didn't. A few years ago the system of assigning protection officers changed and quite a few royals were unhappy, it didn't change back.

Why were none of these incorrect ramblings by an intellectually challenged individual allowed to not only stand but actually broadcast??
why was the truth not at least mentioned afterwards?
we all know that many people will believe this rubbish!
afterall we now find ourselves in a position where people quote the crown as a legitimate source of historical facts.

Yes, when arguing for full taxpayer funded security, it's vital only to post pictures showing the back of your child's head at its most appealing angle.

That interview room looks like a flat rented by students, where on earth were they?

Is Hazza a TRA? For a minute I couldn’t remember where I’d heard a similar post court case level of entitlement recently.

It bothers me that they play the racism card. Show me a person in the UK back in the May 2018 who wasn’t thrilled for Harry when he married Meghan. They’re a pair of Neckbeards. We are well rid of them.

The living room Monteceito??

....even though I made $millions invading their privacy, sharing their confidences and lying about events....

...insulting my father's dearly loved wife, throwing a tantrum on the day my grandmother died....

Right. Is that what barristers advise? I thought perhaps when you went to the High Court it was important to claim that someone pushed you into a dogbowl and it broke. That always sways them.

.... Harry's garden shed in Montecito?

.... sharing details about my brother's genitals and entire passages about my own todger 🤮

Normally I find the humour in all these going on’s but I’m afraid it’s deserted me entirely now !
the lies , the false accusations, it’s the Oprah interview all over again ( with a hint of Netflix sprinkled on for elevation!)
the bbc is no longer fit for service and if they can’t relay the truth to the U.K. viewers then they should no longer be allowed to force us to pay for their propaganda.

My question is - will MM now stop using HRH (private correspondence only!) in solidarity with H and what must be the final rift with his family. Or is it something she really couldn’t bear to give up.

[Honestly, this has knocked poor old David Beckhams 50th birthday straight off the front page hasn’t it. Who cares if Brooklyn and Nicola have had a falling out with David and Victoria when there’s a better family row on the front page tonight. Maybe David will get his knighthood as an apology for ruining his special day.]

This ⬆️ . As you say, there are people who believe The Crown is factual. There are people who believe that Oprah, Netflix and Spare were factual. The BBC has a duty to challenge this. They ought not to broadcast any of his wild claims and bizarre conspiracy theories. It's not anywhere near a decent standard of journalism.

Questions I would ask if I were interviewing Harry.

You currently have a special arrangement whereby your security needs are under continual review and any protection needed will be provided. Can you explain what is wrong with that?

Are you aware that a Constitutional Monarch cannot interfere with the workings of the government or judiciary?

It was fully explained to you at the Sandringham Summit that your security would be downgraded if you chose to leave Britain as a private citizen. Yet you did. Do you accept responsibility for your own decisions?

Members of your family who, like you, were children of a Monarch have also had their security downgraded. Why do you think you are more deserving than them?

You and your wife have willingly visited several countries which are considered unsafe, leaving your children several hours flight away. How do you reconcile that your supposed paranoia over your security?

There are no doubt more but I can't think of them just now.

Indeed!!!
are we now dependent on the daily mail and gb news to broadcast the truth??!!!