Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Harry's new interview

1000 replies

Viviennemary · 02/05/2025 17:49

Harry has just given an interview quite a long one. I only heard a snippet and i'm totally incensed. Harry has said he doesn't know how long Charles has left. Who says that on TV for the whole nation to hear. What is the matter with the man. He is an absolute disgrace.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
smilesy · 02/05/2025 22:17

Finally catching up with all this. I heard what Harry is saying, and it sounds like “waaaagh” 🙄

IBelieveinSomething · 02/05/2025 22:18

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:17

You have no idea about the KIng.
He's done masses for Harry over the years. He tried really hard when H was off the rails with drink, drugs, smoking.

Right.

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:18

Zone2NorthLondon · 02/05/2025 22:17

Do you really think your made up quips add gravitatas?
Are you disputing Harry had a dysfunctional upbringing

Millions of people have a 'dysfunctional upbringing ' as we all belong to families.

But not all people turn out like H.

Viviennemary · 02/05/2025 22:18

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:14

I think the best response to this would be not to give him air time. He thrives on it.

Exactly. Even today with these important election results there's Harry with his usual me me me agenda.

OP posts:
Nazzywish · 02/05/2025 22:19

He makes very valid points.
Why is the royal household influencing what should be a seperate committee? Why is it that private citizens get the protections and reviews but he doesn't?
Objectively he is not under less threat than say liz truss who woukd have the higher level of protection given her short stint in office so Why not someone who is very clearly and actively hated to such a high level and at very real risk from harm( just look at this thread for proof of that).
This is power politics very clearly in play and this committee should not be subjected to that , should be independent and partial with some guidelines to follow at the very least!

IBelieveinSomething · 02/05/2025 22:19

IBelieveinSomething · 02/05/2025 22:18

Right.

Why was a child off the rails so badly? Was it because his father was an absolute shit?

IcedPurple · 02/05/2025 22:20

Viviennemary · 02/05/2025 22:18

Exactly. Even today with these important election results there's Harry with his usual me me me agenda.

Nigel will not be best pleased at being knocked off tomorrow's front pages.

hotpotlover · 02/05/2025 22:20

I haven't watched the full interview, but this is a normal thing to say about an elderly parent.

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:20

Nazzywish · 02/05/2025 22:19

He makes very valid points.
Why is the royal household influencing what should be a seperate committee? Why is it that private citizens get the protections and reviews but he doesn't?
Objectively he is not under less threat than say liz truss who woukd have the higher level of protection given her short stint in office so Why not someone who is very clearly and actively hated to such a high level and at very real risk from harm( just look at this thread for proof of that).
This is power politics very clearly in play and this committee should not be subjected to that , should be independent and partial with some guidelines to follow at the very least!

Edited

The decision was not made by the RF.
Where is your evidence of 'influence' by the RF?

Zone2NorthLondon · 02/05/2025 22:20

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:18

Millions of people have a 'dysfunctional upbringing ' as we all belong to families.

But not all people turn out like H.

Just a rebuke? No quips about sausages or who got what wing of the palace? you must mean business

SammyScrounge · 02/05/2025 22:21

Jane958 · 02/05/2025 21:42

Interestingly nothing about the Coronation.
Funerals and court cases only.
So sad, as 10 years ago with Invictus he was really popular and a fun guy.
Cannot think what has happened to him in the intervening years.

Markle happened.

IBelieveinSomething · 02/05/2025 22:21

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:20

The decision was not made by the RF.
Where is your evidence of 'influence' by the RF?

Royal family are no this committee and influence it. You prove otherwise.

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:22

hotpotlover · 02/05/2025 22:20

I haven't watched the full interview, but this is a normal thing to say about an elderly parent.

Not when they are the King and there is ongoing speculation about his health, what type of cancer, is it curable etc etc.

IcedPurple · 02/05/2025 22:23

Nazzywish · 02/05/2025 22:19

He makes very valid points.
Why is the royal household influencing what should be a seperate committee? Why is it that private citizens get the protections and reviews but he doesn't?
Objectively he is not under less threat than say liz truss who woukd have the higher level of protection given her short stint in office so Why not someone who is very clearly and actively hated to such a high level and at very real risk from harm( just look at this thread for proof of that).
This is power politics very clearly in play and this committee should not be subjected to that , should be independent and partial with some guidelines to follow at the very least!

Edited

Why is the royal household influencing what should be a seperate committee?

They aren't.

Why is it that private citizens get the protections and reviews but he doesn't?

Harry is a private citizen, by his own choice.

Objectively he is not under less threat than say liz truss who woukd have the higher level of protection given her short stint in office so Why not someone who is very clearly and actively hated to such a high level and at very real risk from harm( just look at this thread for proof of that).

Unless you have access to the intelligence, you can't possibly know Harry's or anyone else's threat level, so I'm not sure what you mean by 'objectively'. If anyone on the internet is an expert on such matters then why does Harry need the services of expert security professionals?

And has been explained several times already, former PM's play a very different role in national security to the 5th in line who promotes a life coaching app in California.

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:23

IBelieveinSomething · 02/05/2025 22:21

Royal family are no this committee and influence it. You prove otherwise.

The onus is on you to prove they influenced it - not me to prove a negative.

Screamingabdabz · 02/05/2025 22:24

sualipa · 02/05/2025 19:59

£100 million on the Coronation - get over it.

Yeah and did you witness all the global Heads of State who flew in from every corner of the globe to sit silently there in Westminster Abbey on that day? Watching on as a thousand years of British history and majesty was played out before them? Pfff. It was worth every penny of that £100 mill for the global soft power that earned.

Meghan and Harry aren’t worth two bob together.

Snoopy111 · 02/05/2025 22:24

I think there's a bit of a 'be careful what you wish for' element. They wanted to have normal lives and be 'financially independent'. Surely that means that if you feel a need for security you are responsible for providing. I suspect if they got on with living their lives without involving the media they would be left alone to a fe greater degree.

PotolKimchi · 02/05/2025 22:24

@Nazzywish the RF has input (or a rep does) because the only reason RAVEC will be discussing Harry and his security is because he’s a Royal (working or not).

RAVEC is independent. They get risk assessments from different sources but do you seriously think the Met Police would risk their reputation and put his life at risk?!
And he will get security. He just has to get a month’s notice. If he came to visit his family and stayed in a Royal Household and privately met his dad with his kids (without a Netflix crew) of course there would be security. At the residence. For him. For his dad.
What he wants is for the UK taxpayer to foot his security bill wherever he is.

He also wants to be able to come and go and bring his own armed security or pay for it.

When he has come for his court cases he has been guarded by tax payer funded Met Police. Then he’s just given an interview trashing the very institution those police officers work for (and my god, I am not a fan of the police or the RF by any means- I am as ‘woke’ as they come).

CesarSoubreyon · 02/05/2025 22:26

I don't understand what it is about the UK that makes him feel so unsafe? He has never quantified it. And also to (voluntarily) travel to Nigeria, Colombia and Ukraine, all of which are more dangerous places than the UK, but apparently that's fine. Bizarre.

The current RAVEC arrangements appear to be working though, as he looks alive and kicking to me!

Hjsjshsn · 02/05/2025 22:27

wrinklyoldarms · 02/05/2025 22:20

The decision was not made by the RF.
Where is your evidence of 'influence' by the RF?

The Royal Household sits on RAVEC. Prince Harry did not know this before 2020.

Zone2NorthLondon · 02/05/2025 22:28

The Bile and distemper to Harry is palpable
Never see Andrew held to account for his actions. No ire about the civil settlement that his mum paid to a trafficked woman

NattyTurtle59 · 02/05/2025 22:28

He's an entitled idiot. Everything is always about him. I had to laugh when I heard he has "forgiven his family". How can anyone be so self absorbed? He really is clueless.

IBelieveinSomething · 02/05/2025 22:28

I will be honest. I disagree with what I’ve said in some of my posts. Harry has what he needs in the uk. For him and his family.
I dislike his entitlement as much as i dislike the royal family.
Why are any of us paying for them. Any of them.

sualipa · 02/05/2025 22:29

IBelieveinSomething · 02/05/2025 22:21

Royal family are no this committee and influence it. You prove otherwise.

Of course not !!

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/13/prince-charles-black-spider-memos-lobbying-ministers-tony-blair

smilesy · 02/05/2025 22:30

Nazzywish · 02/05/2025 22:19

He makes very valid points.
Why is the royal household influencing what should be a seperate committee? Why is it that private citizens get the protections and reviews but he doesn't?
Objectively he is not under less threat than say liz truss who woukd have the higher level of protection given her short stint in office so Why not someone who is very clearly and actively hated to such a high level and at very real risk from harm( just look at this thread for proof of that).
This is power politics very clearly in play and this committee should not be subjected to that , should be independent and partial with some guidelines to follow at the very least!

Edited

The palace have issued a statement that very clearly states that the King interfering with his government and their procedures would inappropriate. The late Queen wrote to RAVEC to ask that Harry be kept safe but that she understood that it was not her decision. In what way do you the RF are influencing a separate committee? Which private citizens receive security? Harry is making shit up. As many pp have said, ex PM’s have had access to state secrets and have introduced policies that may have been unpopular, so they are important with regard to the sector the Nation. Harry is not, whatever he thinks about the fact that he was born in to the RF. He is fifth in line to the throne and he will slip further down over time. He has chosen to live a North America. These are all his decisions. And they all have consequences

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.