PR Disasters thread 16.

[HoldMyWine]

Meghan and Harry the grift that keeps on grifting. Long may they continue. Better than any soap opera on the telly.

It’s like the ghost of threads past…

I wouldn't want to assume she hadn't, TBH
After all it was Meghan who claimed she'd "found" a load of old diaries when clearing Nottingham Cottage - as if she'd ever have let them out of her sight - and IIRC this was around the same time as the "I haven't signed anything" remark

Both basically threatened blackmail. I reckon that's probably why they are still on the RF website and can prance around doing temu style Royal tours.

I don't see how spilling their guts could work for them again though. If they do spill when KC is dead, it's a very bad look for them

Whether a post was removed at some point has nothing to do with the point I made.

I wasn't ignoring anyone. I had a busy weekend, wasn't on my phone much, and there are still notifications I haven't worked through yet. A delayed response isn't the same thing as being ignored, and nobody is entitled to an immediate reply.

More importantly, the issue isn't what I was doing. The issue is that someone accused me of deliberately ignoring them when they had no idea why I hadn't responded. Making assumptions about someone's intentions without any evidence is what I consider rude and I won't engage further with people who will start making it personal.

If you'd like to address that point, feel free. If not, there's not much more to discuss.

Still can’t answer the question of H&M’s hypocrisy, then?

This is why I side-eye all the pro-reconciliation posts.

William and Catherine have no reason to expose their kids to "Uncle Scar". All the "blackmail" material ends in W&C's generation as H&M have nothing on the Wales kids.

And pretty much nothing on Catherine if lipgloss-gate is the best H&M can do...especially given H&M's choice to make their other accusations and insinuations via proxy to give H&M what they think is plausible deniability.

There’s a lot to discuss, your views on their hypocrisy in particular, but for some reason you won’t engage, funny that.

I agree. They have also done absolutely nothing other than keep a dignified silence and get on with the job. There has been no two way dispute requiring any reconciliation on the Wales’ part. The fight is a one way street, and I suspect the Wales’ know nothing will make Harry happy, because this is who he is: a bitter man who will find victimhood in anything and everything, including in one of the most privileged existences in the history of the human race.

Besides which, if you ask me, William looks so much happier since he has been unburdened by the Harry shaped albatross around his neck. Why would they want him and his wife’s drama in their inner circle, and, as you say, inevitably having their children dragged into the Sussex mire? That will happen at a distance anyway, via the tabloids the Sussexes love to brief. There’s no need to invite that sort of evil in, when they do enough mischief right where they are situated - out in the cold.

Exactly they have been starved of oxygen/ammunition for any of their future ‘memoirs’ whether their recollections vary or not. Same goes for their DCs. Frozen out. Zero access. No trust. No opportunities for lies / spins / moans / gripes / slights etc. They are not ‘emotionally safe’ people to have around children as they would say on the Stately Homes thread when people explain how they are NC with a relative but worry they are doing their DC a disservice due to (irrational) feelings of obligation.

Sorted.

I’m not entirely convinced that having a post deleted because personal attacks are against guidelines, should be glossed over so glibly ( removed at some point) , and I’m definitely not convinced how it furthers whatever point is apparently being made! 🤷‍♀️

Interestingly, as Shauna Kay has pointed out, when Harry attended his very first Warrior Games way back when, the planning and organisation of ‘Invictus’ was already well underway.

That he came back home with ‘an idea’ and ‘founded’ Invictus is just a flattering origin story the palace gave to Harry, to try and give him some purpose. He wasn’t supposed to merch it and disgrace it.

Yes, it was from the Royal Foundation (Wiliam and Kate) and the MoD.
Something for Harry to get engaged with, a positive endeavour.

It means me saying my post was ignored is "making it personal". Is it worse than a full throttle and rather nasty personal attack against the character and motivation of a poster resulting in deletion? Of course it isn't, and I am sure the victim of that post didn't write lengthy essays in response to the nastiness directed at them. Where have we seen this type of unbalanced value judgment and disproportionate response before? Actually, it is never far from a discussion about H&M with their supporters.

Meanwhile, the salient matter that poster brought up about agency over levels of privacy, and the responding point that H&M invade everyone else's privacy and give them no agency over the column inches their victims have to endure, a point raised by a number of posters, remains unanswered. And will probably remain unanswered, because there is no answer, other than admitting a level of rather evil and calculated hypocrisy on the part of the Sussexes.

And amyl nitrate. Recreational poppers I recall being on sale at the Hot Shots gay club in Newcastle included (I kid you not) Throb, Ram and Liquid Gold. The UK Government also notes the popularity of Thrust and Rock Hard in its latest report.

I think you get the gist.

Although I have no idea of what Prince Handsy may have been up to, obviously, and it would be very wrong of me to speculate.

Indeed! , don’t know why your direct question was ignored, yet my post that didn’t tag them was in need of an essay convoluting apples with bananas?! 🤷‍♀️
still at least they are now dispensing with the pretence that they are not a ham supporter.

I saw The Vintage Read's video you refer to yesterday, and she was showing a statement that may be evidence towards the theory that the Royal Foundation was working with the International Paralympic Committee and the US Olympic Committee to create a games for veterans at least 9 months-1 year before the alleged lightbulb moment for Harry, which had been claimed to be his going to the Warrior Games in May 2013. The statement she's found is from the International Paralympic Committee, dated 13 March 2013 states:

"The United States Olympic Committee and the Royal Foundation have been working together since last year on our shared mission to develop sustainable community programs in both the US and the UK for people with physical disabilities, including our wounded veterans and service members. Prince Harry is personally committed to help expand these programs, and we are honored to have him participate in the event."

I don't think this is quite the smoking gun TVR thinks it is, but I do think it is evidence that the men in grey (and possibly even William) may have been tasked to keep Harry occupied by the Queen, and they allowed Harry to be credited with a concept that was never his. They may well have sent him to the Warrior games with the purpose of creating the "origin story" that he was inspired to recreate it through Invictus. TVR points out that the only reason TIME would put him on their 100 Sports VIPs list is on the basis of his alleged conceptual/foundational role for Invictus, not his mere patronage of someone else's idea.

Yes, exactly, being planned with advice from the then organisers/committee of the Paralympics.

ETA: crossed with @Indianrollerbird’s much better post above.

"With admiration "

Has he ever given credit to anyone else for the creation of Invictus?
I also think it's terrible how Meghan turned it into a fashion show. The worst example being when she led the march of the veterans in sliders and floppy shorts. Unbelievable.

I think we may find once William ascends the throne he may deal with the issue of titles. Working Royals or those retired get/keep them
non working royals don’t.
deals with the Yorks and Sussexes in one fell swoop.
if I was him I’d go one step further and make it that only first born heir is HRH at birth. Clear distinction going forward unless they then become working royals as they get older.

Personally I think HRH should only be for born royals and not those who marry in ! Obviously this would not apply should that person become queen.

Like a certain other Prince, perhaps he was told he’d had a jolly good idea and believed it.

Either that or he’s a duplicitous shit who knew he was being dressed up in a lie to make him look better, and then slagged off the MIGS who handed him the honour.

The latter, I suspect.
What a selfish, duplicitous man.

Absolutely. I do suspect that he'll do that.

The tiny shorts. It was a horrendous look for that particular occasion.