Ham pr disasters 36! The clap backs continue!

[jeffgoldblum]

A continuation of our continuing discussion of our favourite private citizens! 😁

The RF are not ‘subsidised by the taxpayer’.
The only thing we pay for is their security.

With regards to Edward’s home (sorry for the derail @jeffgoldblum ) a large upfront payment was made to the Crown Estates in lieu of annual rent. This bought a lease for XX number of years -a bit like buying a flat in Chelsea with 70 yrs left on the lease. If the lease does not prohibit sub letting outbuildings then they really haven’t done anything wrong. I expect a property like that costs a fair bit to run so renting out the unused stables seems rather sensible to me.

But we'll all realise when the reflection in the door shows a smiling M as she films it.

Persistent high levels of cortisol ( often known as the stress hormone) is known to increase cancer risk both in initial tumour growth and ongoing development.

I absolutely believe Harry has played a part in damaging KC and Catherine’s health.

I have stage 4 cancer myself and this is to me is the very worst aspect of H&M’s behaviour.

They have cared not a jot for father/fil or their sister in law.

H&M demand enormous sympathy for the supposed slights and reported effect on their “mental health” but actual fucking this will kill you cancer in their family members is clearly far less important.

Ditto M’s poor father having his leg amputated.

If M lies sobbing on the floor about whatever crap she claims happened how would she react if faced with genuine catastrophes?

But KC, Catherine and her father are all meaningless to her.

In fact I see no evidence either of them cares at all for anyone except themselves and, to a degree, their children as off shoots of themselves.

The hypocrisy of visiting hospitals whilst persecuting and/or ignoring family members suffering from very serious ill health is off the scale.

Then, worst of all, H had the disgusting, scum like, sub human shamelessness and cruelty to speculate on tv about how long KC has left to live.

I was so, so angry when I watched him wailing about his cunting security using his father’s illness as emotional blackmail in that pathetic “interview” that I almost threw my crutch at the telly.

I would be utterly distraught if anybody I knew was publicly speculating on my imminent demise, let alone with the added twist of using my oncoming death as leverage to get what they want.

If I believed in such concepts I would hope there is a special place in hell for him purely on this count and if I was KC I would certainly cut him out of my will.

Far from any thought of reconciliation, if I was William or Camilla I would happily buy the biggest dog bowl I could find and smack it into his mangy and pouchy face for hurting my loved one.

Can you tell this touches a nerve?!

Good thing I don’t live in the Cotswolds because I certainly would not be polite if I bumped into either of them in Waitrose.

Nor does Zara merch her outfits whilst carrying out her charity work. Most of which would appear to take place without photographers present. Maybe Harold could try that approach?

Just to re-empathize this issue about the difference between Zara and Harry.

I’m sure lots of people shmooze the Tindalls, Margaret’s children, the York sisters and their husbands (before the recent York disclosures) because they are hoping for a ticket to the Royal Enclosure at Ascot or a Windsor dinner party, or access to the aristo crowds for business networking.

The danger with Harry is as the King’s son and the way he is conducting himself as some kind of geopolitical statesman is foreign interests schmoozing him because they hope to gain access to the UK government in some way.

It’s a no brainer why Chinese spies were targeting Andrew and not Princess Margaret’s son.

No, I'm saying that even if you are not part of the Working Royal Family, there are opportunities to attend some royal events just as family. The issue is that H has burnt a lot of bridges with his family (and the general public) and so they're unlikely to want to socialise with him.

As I understand it, he is welcome to pursue personal commercial and charity interests but he can't do it under the pretence of representing the Monarchy.

Harry doesn’t just want to support charities though. He wants to behave like a ‘world statesman’ -with all of the security that a high level ambassador would get.

This, with bells on.

@PrivateCitizenI totally agree with you.

I agree with this totally, I do think though that meeting MM seemed to bring out the very worst side of him, which the general public had never seen before.

I thought it was a piss take too.

But c’mon private of course he didn’t pay! He’s very important dontcha know. In fact they’ve probably paid him to attend ;)

From what I understand, the working royals are not "subsidised by the taxpayer", but simply have certain expenses paid for them as part of work they do representing the state. I'm not quite sure exactly what you are trying to say, but I think you have confused quite a few things about royal finances.

Yes, it is about character. If you are like Harry or Andrew and do not have the right character for the job then just get out of the way - you are not needed and are doing more harm than good. Hence, they are both gone from royal life.

You are also confusing royals with politicians. I'm surprised that you don't believe that character, honour and integrity are essential for anyone in public life. Also weird that you assume a written constitution would not require character, honour and integrity from public officials, whether royals or politicians. So, if we had a written constitution we can dump character, honour and integrity and have a bunch of corrupt, lying louts instead?

A written constitution wouldn't actually change much as regards the royal family.

Sounds like you are the one who is confused.

for you @Ratherhaveacupofteaandabiscuit.

My cancer diagnosis came 6 months into being off with severe burnout, following several years of arguing for my unit with unhelpful management. I'm still not sure what role the stress had in that diagnosis.

If Harry was in the cabinet as minister for laughs and resigned and left for America he wouldn’t have gotten to ride the government jet after he left, also Harry could come pack and say ‘I’m in for the minister of laughs again’ and the government is entitled to say no thanks and no government jet for you.

From what I understand, the working royals are not "subsidised by the taxpayer", but simply have certain expenses paid for them as part of work they do representing the state. I'm not quite sure exactly what you are trying to say, but I think you have confused quite a few things about royal finances.

That's correct.

Security is paid via the taxpayer.

Other expenses are paid via the Sovereign grant, which comes as a percentage of Crown Estate profits paid to the Treasury, so not from the taxpayer.

We are, however, continuing the derail.

They’d bring him back fairly quickly, AND pay for the RF to take him off their hands.

No worries blue! , I’ve given up! , might come back later.

Referring to your last paragraph - isn't that exactly what the king clarified? That Harry, as a private citizen, is free to support charitable ventures as he wishes?

Nor does she have a Royal title. She certainly doesn’t go on faux Royal tours to dangerous and corrupt countries, have we ever seen Zara in a situation like this? It’s naive and biased to claim Harry is being hard done by in comparison to Zara.

The Daily Mail detailed the securityH&M had in Colombia

• 1 police Black Hawk helicopter
• 1 drone
• 1 police anti-terrorist / nuclear / bio terror van
• 1 ambulance
• Ballistic briefcases, ie Kevlar bullet-proof shields
• Estimated 3,000 police
• Military checks of the venue beforehand
• Roadblocks

Back to Invictus: I’ve done a bit of research. It appears that the local Invictus Birmingham Board (led by chair Gosling & CEO Helliwell) is answerable to the main Invictus Board of Trustees chaired by Lord Allen of Kensington. The main Invictus organisation grants the local organisation a legal entity licence to operate.

Charles Lamb Allen is a Labour Party peer, and is a capitalist big hitter. His business instincts, looking at his record, have always been to grow, expand, force connections and agreements, and increase turnover.

It looks like this has been the wrong model for Invictus and its wider landscape. Endless expansion is not sustainable. Allen as Chair has failed to give net longterm benefit to veterans, failed to be a careful political caretaker, failed to rein in PR liability Harry, and failed to understand the significance of the rapid shift of the public’s attention from TV/MSM to social media including YouTube.

https://members.parliament.uk/member/4304/experience

3,000 police?!

Zara turns up and supports the charity

Harry turns it into a will they won’t they turn up drama, arguments about expenses, security and who will say how wonderful they are, followed by a word salad speech about themselves , followed by a hefty bill.

Which to choose

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g0e92dp6ko

😂

My god this article is delicious and very insightful! Highlighted some things I hadn’t realised.