Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Harry and Meghan offered royal accommodation

325 replies

SparklingXmas · 20/06/2026 08:47

Will they stay at Royal Lodge? I really hope it all works out for KC and to see his grandchildren would be lovely.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yzlmkl7zzo

Harry is wearing a baby blue linen shirt and a black 'Invictus Australia' baseball cap. Meghan is wearing a darker blue and white striped shirt.

Harry and Meghan offered royal accommodation during UK visit

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are set to visit the UK with their children next month, for the first time since 2022.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yzlmkl7zzo

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
NotTalkinBoutTheLinen · Yesterday 12:36

They want to be seen and treated like William and Catherine. I’ve come to believe recently that this is all it’s been about the entire time.

Meghan’s extreme envy of Catherine which helped to bring out feelings Harry either never had or kept in check his entire life.

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:36

LivelyGreyShark · Yesterday 12:30

Ravec is made up of representatives from Home Office, the Cabinet Office, the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, the Metropolitan Police Service, and the Royal Household. The palace have at least one member of staff sitting on Ravec, used to be the Queen's secretary not sure who it is now and that is on the UK gov website so not been debunked.

That one person does not make the security decisions.
It is based on collective intelligence.

noonames · Yesterday 12:38

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:35

How very dare you! 🤪

LIES! ALL LIES I TELL YOU!

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:38

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 12:29

I know! , it’s quite tedious at this point!
must we yet again rehash the court case because Harry lied about offering to pay?
must we point out yet again that security is nothing to do with Charles and is handled by an independent board!
must we continue to point out the actual security the royals receive while working and what they don’t receive!
🙄

I think some people believe the Sussexes lies.
There is a rep from the RF, but that's to do with diaries and contributions to collective security.
It's been explained. Many, many times.
Harry has an appropriate level of taxpayer funded security.
He seems ok knocking on random doors in London, so he's obviously not that worried.

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:39

noonames · Yesterday 12:38

LIES! ALL LIES I TELL YOU!

What more LIES!!!? 🙀

IdaGlossop · Yesterday 12:42

HoraceCope · Yesterday 12:17

dont security over here have guns?

The police can be armed. That's part of Harry's bind. His security can't be armed in the UK. RAVEC won't give him police security. He wants armed protection. Hence the tantrum.

He thinks we're stupid. RAVEC have access to risk assessments. If there were current threats, they'd grant security outside Royal premises. The reputational damage to the Royal family if a threat assessment identified risks but no security were given is not a gamble they would take.

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 12:42

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:38

I think some people believe the Sussexes lies.
There is a rep from the RF, but that's to do with diaries and contributions to collective security.
It's been explained. Many, many times.
Harry has an appropriate level of taxpayer funded security.
He seems ok knocking on random doors in London, so he's obviously not that worried.

Happy Jeff Goldblum GIF by Spotify

So true @PoppysAunt!
it has been explained so , so ,so ,so , so many times! 🥱

HoraceCope · Yesterday 12:43

he has a security team,
other people come over here with their security team without guns, why doesnt he?

Totallyfedupnow · Yesterday 12:43

I have a theory - the other reason Meghan wants to bring the kids (as well as the hope, unlikely to be realised, that she gets a photo op with the King) is that she’s boxed herself into a corner by blotting out her kids faces - it makes it that much harder to monetise being a mother as other “influencers” do. However, once they’ve made some public appearances in aid of charity in the UK then it will obviously become pointless to carry on with the privacy charade - perfect excuse.

noonames · Yesterday 12:44

LivelyGreyShark · Yesterday 12:30

Ravec is made up of representatives from Home Office, the Cabinet Office, the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, the Metropolitan Police Service, and the Royal Household. The palace have at least one member of staff sitting on Ravec, used to be the Queen's secretary not sure who it is now and that is on the UK gov website so not been debunked.

Charles has made it very clear that he has no involvement in security decisions, as it should be. The only evidence of any interference from the RF is a letter from QE2 when Harry left, saying she would like them to be safe.

And the thing you mention about the Met police guy and credible threats - he said that in 2022, and was talking about the past even then. So don’t pretend these credible threats are a relevant argument for the level of security required for this trip.

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:44

HoraceCope · Yesterday 12:43

he has a security team,
other people come over here with their security team without guns, why doesnt he?

I agree .We can't have rogue gun toting overseas security people with guns on the streets of the UK!
He can bring non armed security personnel.
Sorry, originally phrased incorrectly.

NotTalkinBoutTheLinen · Yesterday 12:45

HoraceCope · Yesterday 12:43

he has a security team,
other people come over here with their security team without guns, why doesnt he?

Depends on his security team but I’d venture to say American security without experience elsewhere would not know what to do without guns.

Look how they cocked up New York City with their 10 MPH “car chase”.

Mylovelygreendress · Yesterday 12:45

HoraceCope · Yesterday 12:43

he has a security team,
other people come over here with their security team without guns, why doesnt he?

Because he is Harry ! Don’t you know how important he is ??

NotTalkinBoutTheLinen · Yesterday 12:48

Have there been any recent incidents besides the one Sussex Squad member who previously traveled with them to Nigeria showing up at court and then being described as a stalker?

That felt a bit like your Aunt Dot showing up unannounced for tea at a friend’s house and having the police called on her.

HoraceCope · Yesterday 12:48

NotTalkinBoutTheLinen · Yesterday 12:45

Depends on his security team but I’d venture to say American security without experience elsewhere would not know what to do without guns.

Look how they cocked up New York City with their 10 MPH “car chase”.

cowboys!

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:53

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 12:42

So true @PoppysAunt!
it has been explained so , so ,so ,so , so many times! 🥱

🤣

NotTalkinBoutTheLinen · Yesterday 12:54

HoraceCope · Yesterday 12:48

cowboys!

If they screwed up NY that badly it’s hard to imagine how they’d navigate Heathrow. They’ll be driving around in circles trying to get out for hours, singing “To the left, to the left”. “Oops, No this isn’t the M4, it’s Terminal 5. Oh god, we’re in the bus lane.”

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:54

So he asks Anne or Edward what company they use for private security when they're not working. They're obviously efficient.

NotTalkinBoutTheLinen · Yesterday 12:55

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 12:54

So he asks Anne or Edward what company they use for private security when they're not working. They're obviously efficient.

I’m not sure they are taking their calls, either.

Chimneyissues · Yesterday 13:27

This doesn’t bode well for Invictus does it. It’s clear they aren’t going to fund security when he is just representing himself and not the RF, which is what’s happening this time.

HoraceCope · Yesterday 13:35
College Accuse GIF

now we are talking lies

Rhaidimiddim · Yesterday 13:37

IdaGlossop · Yesterday 11:19

Tom Sykes issues his Substack for free on a Sunday. I have just read it. Summary: the media received a detailed operational note on Friday about all the engagements H & M would be fulfilling whilst in the UK. It included a reference to them not having security via RAVEC. Then yesterday, the lack of security became the story, pushed by Harry. Tom Sykes' theory is that H has seen this visit all along as a way to emotionally manipulate his father into intervening with RAVEC. Now he is effectively saying: 'I cannot reconcile with my father and he can't meet his grandkids because my father won't intervene to get me and my family security.' Meanwhile, palace officials have arranged accommodation and charities have invested time in preparing. Now, they don't know whether H will be bringing M or not. All because Harry can't be told 'no'. Sykes thinks Harry is having an attack of paranoia.

Is all this plausible? I think so. If what Sykes says is correct, Harry has effectively blown up any chance of reconciliation with his father, who he has made look like a prize fool. Invictus needs to boot him out before Birmingham next year to save its reputation.

Typo

Edited

I've just read that substack.

Sykes is hissing mad. He has been championing "Megxsin" - very recently arguing that the king was damn-well going to have the Sussexes back in, regardless of what W , the media or the population of the UK thought, and the up-coming visit was proof of that.

Never mind blowing up chances of reconciliation with his dad, H has blown up a relationship with an important ally.

On another aspect of all this, I think in retrospect, we'll see that BP have played a blinder again. They have said very little officially - only confirming that the King has a standing offer to H to stay in a royal residence, and denying that the King had offered to pay for beefed-up security on this visit. Other than that, they've let the Sussex PR knock themselves out with ever-more detailed claims and statements, which they're now rowing back on.

IdaGlossop · Yesterday 14:08

Rhaidimiddim · Yesterday 13:37

I've just read that substack.

Sykes is hissing mad. He has been championing "Megxsin" - very recently arguing that the king was damn-well going to have the Sussexes back in, regardless of what W , the media or the population of the UK thought, and the up-coming visit was proof of that.

Never mind blowing up chances of reconciliation with his dad, H has blown up a relationship with an important ally.

On another aspect of all this, I think in retrospect, we'll see that BP have played a blinder again. They have said very little officially - only confirming that the King has a standing offer to H to stay in a royal residence, and denying that the King had offered to pay for beefed-up security on this visit. Other than that, they've let the Sussex PR knock themselves out with ever-more detailed claims and statements, which they're now rowing back on.

New information provides a new perspective! My PR-trained mind is wondering which journalists received the operational note he refers to. He's made a mockery of every journalist, not just Tom Sykes. Providing reliably accurate information over time really matters if you want positive coverage. All those communications directors who lost their jobs and whose advice was ignored, and now H & M are doing it themselves. That's working out well.

I do enjoy watching the palace's restraint. Time and time again, it proves to be the sensible and dignified approach. The clever courtiers and William must now resist saying 'I told you so,' to Charles.

An additional piece of information from Rebecca English at The Daily Mail: Palace sources confirm there was no specific invite to stay on Royal premises. So Harry made it up.

Lifestooshort71 · Yesterday 14:17

Lifestooshort71 · 17/06/2026 20:19

I don't understand why all the news outlets are saying that MM and the children WILL be joining Harry - how can anyone possibly know that? How do they know that H will be happy that the security arrangements are flashy/dramatic enough adequate for his family? How would H&M ensure that there aren't any identifying photos on social media? I think they are trying to back KC3 into a corner but he won't agree to anything that's a bad move for The Firm so there'll be a last-minute U-turn and they will, 'with the greatest regret, be forced to stay away because their safety cannot be guaranteed' (not because KC3 hasn't played ball). I could be wrong.

I posted the above on the17th June on PR Disasters....back of the net ⚽️?

Rhaidimiddim · Yesterday 14:23

IdaGlossop · Yesterday 14:08

New information provides a new perspective! My PR-trained mind is wondering which journalists received the operational note he refers to. He's made a mockery of every journalist, not just Tom Sykes. Providing reliably accurate information over time really matters if you want positive coverage. All those communications directors who lost their jobs and whose advice was ignored, and now H & M are doing it themselves. That's working out well.

I do enjoy watching the palace's restraint. Time and time again, it proves to be the sensible and dignified approach. The clever courtiers and William must now resist saying 'I told you so,' to Charles.

An additional piece of information from Rebecca English at The Daily Mail: Palace sources confirm there was no specific invite to stay on Royal premises. So Harry made it up.

Rebecca English on Twitter/X today:

"After a weekend of claim/counter claim/reverse ferreting and suggestions about what individuals may think, as regards reports Prince Harry has accepted an offer of accommodation on the royal estate…no such overture is understood to have been received by The Royal Household "