How can Harry be so deluded?

[HiRen]

The paranoia deepens

I don't really know what to conclude from this other than that Harry must feel the victim of a deep state conspiracy. Being a spoilt brat, and not understanding that he's there to serve his country rather than the country being there to serve him, can't help. Even if he did fear strategic delays, why would he jump to the conclusion that specific individuals have it in for him, rather than that there's a bigger picture to consider?

I just can't fathom the depths of misery and confusion he must experience on a daily basis. He must think his whole life was a lie until he met Meghan. I really do think things with Harry are much worse than they seem. Which puts an entirely different, and much darker, gloss on all of Meghan's utterings of her era of joy.

I honestly wouldn't want to be in their orbit. And I wonder whether those who remain in their orbit are desperate, whether as friends or employees. They're too much.

I don't suppose any comprehensible answer to your questions will be forthcoming, because I don't think there is one.

Which members of the RF ?

It’s obvious we have a new batch of Harry and Meghan fans in today if the 2 current threads are anything to go by. They’re very easy to recognise - they insist on embarrassing themselves and come across as being about 9.

They try so hard bless them.

Prince Harry settled in 2024 with NGN just like his brother in 2020.

Hugh Grant settled because he didn't want to be out of pocket if he failed to beat the Part 36 settlement offer. He could have rejected the offer and ploughed on to trial, and taken the financial hit (which he can well afford) on principle, in order to have his day in court and expose NGN. He chose not to. As did Harry. No dragons slayed, only money pocketed. NGN specifically denied hacking and continue to do so.

William takes legal action and retains his privacy, except it was breached by Harry in his legal action in which we find out like NGN harry too like to lose his emails.

So true Weepixie

Considering how Harry complains about his Royal ties, and now Meghan and her kids being celebrity influencers, this is the time for Charles to follow the lead of the Danish Monarch at the time.

"Her Majesty The Queen wishes to create the framework for the four grandchildren to be able to shape their own lives to a much greater extent without being limited by the special considerations and duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves."

He can do it, will be controversial for a week or two and then everyone will move on.

Why are you being nasty about other posters who don't share the same opinion as you?

I know someone who was - briefly - the nanny to a family where the father was rich, pleasant but not around much and the mother was famous and an absolute horror. (She later found out from her agency that this woman got through about four nannies a year and was about to be struck off their books for being a nightmare.) When the children weren't being sent to auditions they were being sent to acting classes or singing lessons. The mother had them all on strict diets and made the eldest one, an adolescent girl, wear slimming underwear. She sent them to spas and discussed the tweaks they might need in future in front of them. The poor things used to beg the nanny to take them to fast food places or to things that were fun for children.

Apparently the nanny employment cycle went something like this: new nanny would arrive and become concerned about the children's regime; the husband would side with the nanny and his children over some aspect of their treatment; this would send the wife apoplectic and she would get revenge by treating the nanny like Cinderella; the nanny would resign and the children would be in tears. All I will say is that the mother was a model-turned-actress who wasn't that successful at being an actress. The agency was a top agency but not that top agency.

members (particularly background) of the royal family

I'm up for salacious and bastardly royal details background players or otherwise.

Come back, PP. Come back and spill. 🙂

Latest woe is Harry, nasty William piece from People.

https://people.com/meghan-markle-very-business-royal-rift-prince-harry-left-out-exclusive-11747411

”Very business”? Is that American English, or just plain wrong?

That is a strange article from a usually very pro Sussex outlet. It puts pressure on Charles to heal the rift whilst also making it clear that the rift is lack of trust due to Harry's actions. It also indicates an annoyance from Meghan about Harry living in the past.

Hilarious

Just stating the obvious and nothing new.

Because I don't think much of anyone who uses their personal opinion as fact and then insults people who point out the fact. If pointing out facts is "nasty", god help them if they decide that in their opinion gravity or heat doesn't exist, and refuse to listen if they are warned not to jump off a tall building or lean their hand against a hotplate on the Aga.

You must be joking 😂😂😂

Okay, I’ll say it. 🙈☺️

Because I’m in love with you and want to be just like you.

Ahem

It is odd. And it's the first time I've seen super-loyal-Sussex outlet People indicate any sense of Meghan being restless about her husband's fixation on being frozen out of his family of origin.

Out of interest:

1. If Harry's engaging in a successful (?) 'fight' with his family, why does he insist that he desires reconciliation with them above all? To continue the 'war' metaphor, as Sun Tzu (and hundreds of military theorists after him!) have argued, the winning side almost never takes the initiative in seeking a truce with the losing side - because they don't need to. It's the losing side upon whom it falls to seek to make terms - typically when it becomes very clear that they're not going to win, and need to save the resources they have left.
2. If Harry's engaging in a successful (!) fight with the press, then why does he seek out and appear on those media who've done his family (especially late mother) the most damage, i.e. the BBC and CNN? And why's he on the hook to pay legal costs of (I reckon) about £1.3 million?

Doesn't seem like winning to me, but I'm always keen to hear from vocal pro-Harryists, because from them I may learn whether the Sussex PR machine is still working, and who buys it, and why.

It's all PR at the end of the day. Attempts to apply a moralistic veneer to Harry's actions ('I'm slaying dragons' etc) absolutely REEKS of having been dreamt up in a PR messaging workshop (believe me, I've done a few. Dragon metaphors tend to start making an appearance about four hours into the session when more sensible ideas have been examined and discarded. Possibly also after a vinous lunch.)

So, welcome! Let's converse!

I'm always intrigued by Harry's "moral veneer", the claim that he has morals is often made on here by his supporters, and I find it strange. There is nothing morally just about trading your family's privacy for money. Revealing their secrets, blaming them, throwing out nasty accusations, unsubstantiated.
He is seeking validation through celebrity, the sycophantic magazines and chat shows and now the crass social media posts being the answer to his bitterness and petulance about not being equal to William.
He is amoral, and his fans are supporting this lifestyle and mindset.

I wonder if he will set up his own instagram account? Maybe they’ll move into TikTok as well?