"Prince Harry" : I didn't air any dirty laundry in public

[ThatAvidViewer]

“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”

I didn't air any dirty laundry in public - my conscience is clear, says Prince Harry during visit to Ukraine: Duke reveals he wants to spend more time in the UK in the next year as 'the focus really has to be on my dad' | Daily Mail Online

It’s the pigeon chess player back in town again.

Don’t engage with their attempts to derail the thread. Let’s get back to the topic of the thread title. So much more entertaining than wrestling with a metaphorical pig.

It's a good point.

And it's hard to see how the dirty linen Haich ("Harry as I call him") brandished in public was correcting any stories out there:
"It was 8 Hour Cream not Vaseline I smeared on my todger while thinking of Mummy..."
"I lost my virginity to a friend of a similar age not an 'older woman' which makes it sound like some sedructess out of Jilly Cooper..."
"I was told my grandma had died when I was all alone at Eton ... or some random old rellie, I dunno, Auntie Mags was it? Didn't like her either..."

social media is not the same as the press.

I would have agreed with this whole heartedly up until the tabloids started using content from their own comments sections, and forums like this and X and Tik Tok, as content for their articles. Reporting what has been said by ‘Mabel’ or ‘Joe’ in their own pages and constructing yet another negative, or occasionally positive, article about around the Kate, Harry or Meghan. ‘Bad’ news does sell better.

The articles continue whether Kate or Harry or Meghan are out and about or quietly on a break somewhere. What has become obvious is that people want to read about Meghan Kate and Harry no matter what. It’s a soap opera like Bold and Beautiful, consumed each day and commented on and wait for the next episode to do it again. But they really don’t want to read much about the rest of the family as shown by less interest in the form of fewer responses —> less articles about them.

Unless there is something like a state visit or a bit about Charles health status.

You're not using this tiny little corner of the internet as a microcosm of British society are you?

I agree about this Forum being a tiny corner of the internet.

If you only read this forum you would think most of the British people really dislike Meghan and Harry. But the wider internet paints a very different picture.

If you only read this forum you would think most of the British people really dislike Meghan and Harry. But the wider internet paints a very different picture.

Do you have any stats to illustrate / back up your this point?

No I haven’t forgotten. I made mention of it in another post on this RF forum on the same day.

I can’t put every point in the one post.

I remember the years Kate was treated like Diana - absolutely awful media behaviour. I did mention in the other post she was badly treated back then. The worst hounding ceased when she married William although BBC the papers still criticised her mightily until Meghan arrived on the scene about 8 years ago in 2017 .I think it was.

There is some criticism of William at moment
(The British media currently don’t like his attitude to the day to day work they have come to expect from the royals and still get from Charles and Anne and quite frequently Sophie). But for Kate, media criticism has pretty quiet since she announced she had cancer about 18 months ago or thereabouts. As a couple, the worst criticism, that I have seen at the moment, is that they are boring.

I hope I’ve been clear enough for you.

Ha Ha Amanda PLATELL plays the part of the villainous off screen narrator in a Royal Soap
opera. Begs for forgiveness and then she eviscerates.

Also, the third commenter cracked me up “ We will forgive you Amanda….” 😂😂

Unless Vermeer, Rembrandt, Rubens, Raphael and Caravaggio used a lot of gold leaf in their paintings I think Kate’s Art History knowledge will be thoroughly wasted on Trump.

Do you have any stats to say the opposite?

I haven’t made any statements claiming their popularity or otherwise amongst the British population so why would I need stats - you however have indicated a that a very different picture exists via the internet - so interested in seeing your evidence for your claim.

Looking forward to seeing your stats from a veritable source to back up your claim@AGroundhogYear

yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52737-royal-family-favourability-trackers-august-2025

screenshot

Yes because these are two very different situations. PA is a vile sex criminal who needs locking up. I have contributed to many threads on PA over the years and continue to follow developments closely. But you will try to artificially conflate these two issues because it suits your H&M denial stance to derail with distraction. But we see you and know your MO

I don’t comment on PA outside of his greed, and only when the latest book about him was being discussed. The Epstein connection I just won’t go there. I don’t even watch documentaries about it or read about it. It doesn’t take much imagination to understand what was going on and that what’s in the public domain is only the tip of the iceberg. The man is vile and I do hope he gets what he deserves but until then I’ll be quiet on the subject.

I didn’t linger in the book thread either after I voiced my opinion on the author doing what they did, and PA being a victim of Child sexual abuse if what was said was true. As the grandma of boys the same age as he was when its said to have happened I was silenced by the horror it, also by the author using him the way he did and I sincerely hope he’ll also get what he deserves for it.

Keeping your own counsel doesn’t mean apathy or that you approve of a persons behaviour and posters like @Gingersky1234 would do well to remember that.

@Gingersky1234 there's something very wrong with your thought process in your post of 21.18 yesterday. Do you really not understand that on the RF board you will find a concentrated number of threads on a particular subject or people?

I’m surprised at the poll. Polls aren’t something I check.

Then I don’t understand the fascination. Why is Meghan the best money maker of the Royal Family members in regard to the British tabloids?

What does this say about the people who don’t like her but consume news and gossip about her to the extent that they do?

I can understand wanting to read and talk about Trump for example, because his decisions affect people on a global level. His decisions have incredible power over the lives of many.

I saw a clip of Ted Serandos (Netflix) talking to someone about Meghan Markle only yesterday. He said she has incredible influence and that everything she wears consistently sells out. He talked about how her scenes in the Netflix documentary were broken down by people ‘frame by frame’ in order to study and investigate her. In order for people to then talk about her. Someone else said it is forensically examined. Every tiny little detail noted and talked about.

Yet according to that poll people don’t like her? It’s seems very strange to me.

With regards to Andrew whom I think the majority think is an awful person. It is interesting that Harry has never commented on him isn't it? I mean he talked about the awful stuff his father, brother, sister in law, step mother did but Andrew barely mentioned.

Weepixie I take your point about keeping counsel but I am not referring to PA’s association with Epstein but his dubious financial activities while acting as trade envoy.

** Also that the RF and those that work for them have allegedly known about PA’s activities for over a decade and have allegedly turned a blind eye to him breaking corruption laws while acting as trade envoy and that no one seems to be particularly interested that the monarchy seems to consider themselves above the law because it doesn’t suit their narrative that the rest of the family can do no wrong but H&M are evil incarnate!

** Despite the above, the majority of posters still prefer to bang on about Meghan and Harry in a way that is completely disproportionate to anything they have done. At least Harry has been honest and open about making certain mistakes; something the rest of the family rarely admit to.

* I am mentioning this on a thread about H&M and addressing the two issues together because no one has satisfactorily answered the question as to why* this might be the case and why, yet again, the monarchy can do anything it wants and everyone will meekly accept it and not rock the boat while H&M take all of the flak? You don’t need to be a particular fan of theirs to be baffled by this!

** One example among many would be that there have been lots of incidents surrounding Michael Fawcett and Charles that have all been reported in the papers that allegedly involve bullying, racism, NDAs, and bags of cash and yet everyone goes “ok nothing to see here let’s move on”. Yet if M&H are accused of similar wrongdoings, all hell breaks loose!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/sep/05/michael-fawcett-former-royal-aide-charles-once-called-indispensable

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/25/prince-charles-is-said-to-have-been-given-3m-in-qatari-cash

* They are very much not* separate issues because it’s evident that H and M act as a very useful distraction to pull public attention away from what is actually going on in the RF eg that most of them are engaging in HIHO to one degree or another and profiting from sponsorships and sweet commercial deals on the side for which they don’t have to be accountable publically or pay the same taxes that ordinary citizens do and all of this is hidden by a convenient smokescreen of “don’t look over here, look over there”. When people accuse me of being an H&M lover it makes me laugh because I am far more interested in what all of the false outrage about them is actually hiding and why people continually buy in to it?

None of them comment on it ever.

I’d be more interested in Charles addressing it than Harry.

PA is looking to be a blight on that whole family.

Their wholesale protection of him is worrying if what we’ve read about him is true.

H&M may be, like all of them, entitled, with clumsy PR but they are not working members of the RF any more and yet thread after thread still appears about them and if you dare disagree or challenge what a poster says about their inner thoughts or motivations, you attract a lot of flak and it makes no sense to me at all. Surely we should be more concerned about what is happening at the heart of our monarchy and whether they are acting in the UK’s best interests? And whether they are serving us or themselves?

A concrete example of the above is everyone with the exception of one poster agreeing that Harry’s comments about focusing on KC for the next year is definitely related to health and post after post takes this as actual fact and lots of comments follow about how despicable it is that Harry is revealing private information.

Yet quite a few royal commentators out there in the wider world have said it’s absolutely not related to KC’s health and it’s more about the agreement struck up during the balcony meeting between the two PR teams that Charles’s activities would be prioritised in the coming year and the Invictus Games the year after that.

Both are equally possible as none of us know for sure and yet, sure as eggs are eggs, everyone goes for the “let’s blame Harry” when he could have just been parroting what he had been told to say!

At the heart of this issue though lies a basic problem that there are just too many members of the RF with separate offices and staff, all of whom have different allegiances and work in opposition to one another, as opposed to having one single accountable head of state, singing from one single hymn sheet. The current set up creates a toxic atmosphere at the Palace and was one of the main reasons why Harry said he was leaving.

Why is it up to Harry to comment when he’s no longer a working royal?

Why isn’t King Charles , our head of state commenting?

Why does no one object to the fact that Charles is not commenting?

They are very much not separate issues because it’s evident that H and M act as a very useful distraction to pull public attention away from what is actually going on in the RF eg that most of them are engaging in HIHO to one degree or another and profiting from sponsorships and sweet commercial deals on the side for which they don’t have to be accountable publically or pay the same taxes that ordinary citizens do and all of this is hidden by a convenient smokescreen of “don’t look over here, look over there”. When people accuse me of being an H&M lover it makes me laugh because I am far more interested in what all of the false outrage about them is actually hiding and why people continually buy in to it?*

@Gingersky1234

This is something that interests me too.

I’d not realized how often distraction is used until I started following the politics about Trump this year. It’s a powerful tool. And I think you are right about Harry and Meghan. They are being used as distraction from the goings on of other Royal Family Members.

My point is Harry is happy to comment on many things the other Royals won't and don't comment on. I think it is interesting that he has never commented on Andrew who has committed seemingly the most heinous actions.

He’s slagged off his father and brother, Camilla and ‘The Institution’ but never mentioned his disgusting Uncle or his antics, or his hanger on ex wife. It is strange.

Charles is the king. His activities will be prioritised every year. He is hardly going to step back from his actual work.to allow Harry's vanity projects to shine. This is as deluded as Harry graciously offering to collaborate with the late Queen.

Well, quite.

The Commonwealth is Empire 2.0, but no mention of the cover up.over his uncle?

Thanks AGroundhogYear

Very relieved to hear that I am not the only one!