Ham pr disasters 38! Ailing king? Or heartless son?

[jeffgoldblum]

Continuing the criticism…still interested, still not bored….

LOL.

Do we think there will be a clap back? 🍿

Basically, it seems the call was to make it clear that the King has no objection to Uganda attending the IG

I don't imagine Charles ever had the least objection to Uganda attending, @IcedPurple, but I'm not sure where a "misunderstanding" comes into it when their spokesman placed no blame on him for their withdrawal - indeed, the reverse

Either Harry's a private citizen or he isn't, and if it's the second it seems to me totally inappropriate for his father to use his public position to indulge him like this, Commonwealth or not

I thought @My2cents1975 summed it up perfectly, but can't say this development comes as any surprise

On their website he claims to be an environmentalist...

Grinding and gyrating🤮

Yeah, he's claimed a lot of things!

I don't imagine Charles ever had the least objection to Uganda attending, but I'm not sure where a "misunderstanding" comes into it when their spokesman placed no blame on him for their withdrawal - indeed, the reverse

That's not true.

This is a quote from the BBC article in the main Uganda thread.

Uganda is pulling out of the Invictus Games, a sports event for wounded military veterans run by the Duke of Sussex, only two months after the country said it would join.

General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, chief of defence and son of the president, made the announcement in a social media post on X.

He said the decision to withdraw from the games was "in order not to be construed as being opposed to His Majesty King Charles III".

Also.

A report in The Times newspaper quoted the general's concerns about the "Harry-Meghan nonsense", suggesting this was the background to the decision.

"In order not to be construed as being opposed to His Majesty King Charles III of the United Kingdom, whom we deeply revere, Uganda hereby withdraws from the Invictus Games," said the general in an overnight post.

"We shall not participate in anything that does not have His Majesty's approval."

So the statements very clearly referenced King Charles. As such, Charles' response is quite appropriate. I don't see it as 'indulging' Harry at all, rather just making it clear that he has no objection to Uganda being involved in the IG. As other posters have remarked, he'll likely have had guidance from the Foreign Office about this too. Had he not responded, it might have been assumed that he did indeed object to Uganda's involvement.

Little to do with Harry. More to to with international diplomacy, something neither he nor his wife have a clue about.

100% agree - Murdoch was 25 years older than Jerry Hall - similar age difference with Jackie Kennedy and Onassis….

Both of these were much higher social status than MM - so she would be lucky to get anyone in their 70s at her current age - as the more power and wealth these men have the younger their pool of partners.

Absolutely and completely agree!!! Why is KC getting involved? He lets Harry get away with everything!

Agree. The term ‘Disney Dad’ springs to mind - an infrequent, one dimensional relationship based on entertainment. I doubt he is there for the hard domestic yards, feeding, soothing, disciplining, organising etc which is where real, deep parent / child relationship connection is grown and where emotional development is supported and moulded.

It just makes Charles look weak.

I'm not sure I believe his "love" of Africa &/or conservation, wasn't it said that he hadn't been back to South Africa or any other of the nations (apart from his infamous third date with his now wife for years, not even to visit his charity? Plus there's those Big Game Hunting pics, he had all the chances years ago while with C.D. who's family own a reserve so I think it was probably another thing spun to make him feel/look caring & normal

Happy to be corrected

It does. Fixing the Uganda thing is just cringeworthy. Stop caving to H's tantrums and just ignore him.

Cringeworthy or not, it was probably more important to fix the diplomatic issue caused than to be concerned with “caving” to Harry’s tantrums. I agree it is infuriating that it appears that Charles is reacting to the fact that Harry says it’s his father’s fault that the Ugandan leader reacted this way and now it appears that Charles is trying to appease Harry, but it is more likely that the Foreign Office wanted the King to make it clear that Harry’s behaviour was not an obstacle to the Ugandans competing, which is what their leader claimed was the reason behind them withdrawing

It just makes Charles look weak.
It does. Fixing the Uganda thing is just cringeworthy. Stop caving to H's tantrums and just ignore him.

He didn't do it for Harry. He did it because the Ugandans used his name in connection with something which is nothing to do with him and he wanted it made clear that it's nothing to do with him. Not everything is about Harry.

This 'Charles is weak' is beginning to look like a narrative that's being pushed from somewhere. It's reminiscent of the Sussex tactic - hope that if you repeat something often enough people might begin to believe it, even if it's blatantly untrue.

I agree with most of this. However he will never be a WRF member again.

However BP will have to consider how much of a liability he is to the Monarchy and The State and I agree that they will adopt a strategy of ‘managing’ him - it will always be an arms length family relationship where everyone knows the assignment - I expect W&C will be excused from having to play along. It will be a balance of PH not realising he is being ‘thrown a bone / managed’ to keep him out of mischief but also at a distance sufficient that there is no info and boundaries are rigid.

I suspect that a scheme to keep him busy and out of trouble will be found eventually but that is likely once MM has flounced off the pantomime stage.

Keep him busy and out of trouble? Dear lord he's a man in his 40s, not a toddler!

It's like the "William is lazy" assertion, frequently used on here. From certain quarters.

it is more likely that the Foreign Office wanted the King to make it clear that Harry’s behaviour was not an obstacle to the Ugandans competing, which is what their leader claimed was the reason behind them withdrawing

But why is it up to the Foreign Office or Charles to tell the Ugandans what is and isn't an obstacle to them competing, smilesy?
I rather got the impression they'd decided that for themselves, and isn't that what Commonwealth nations are supposedly encouraged to do?

If they'd been talking about withdrawing from the Commonwealth itself, or if Charles had weighed in about Invictus in the first place, that might be a different matter, but since the event's being fronted by a "private citizen" no amount of spin convinces me that it was appropriate for Charles to get involved

FWIW - whilst I understand that it could be seen as giving into tantrums I don't think SCA's response is. BP said anyone unclear as to how to treat H&M should apply to BP directly. All I think has been done , really is to clarify KC is happy for Uganda to participate if they want to.

I do rather like though that the "Harry and Meghan nonsense" as a phrase won't be forgotten. A little like in courtroom dramas where the judge says , the jury will disregard that last remark , even though he or she knows they can't unhear it 😊

Oh he's totally lazy! He's a bit of a good luck charm for the Villa, and hasn't been turning up at matches nearly enough, the slacker!

😂😂 I know! Imagine wasting his time with Suicide Prevention, homelessness, Earthshot, supporting people isolated in Dartmoor, and running the Duchy of Cornwall!
Get to a Villa match, Wills!

Exactly, shocking behaviour! 😂

Well I don't think William is lazy but I do think KC has handled the whole Harry thing terribly. I don't care that is must be hard for him. Lots of family have shit stirring rels but you don't let them call the shots, you don't let them release all kinds of garbage gossip books then invite them to tea.

He needs to just ignore him. I think Uganda were new to IG, if they hadn't attended so what really.

Well it’s still a diplomatic incident that needed clearing up and would be an embarrassment to the government. It makes the King look as if he has political influence over Uganda’s actions, rightly or wrongly. The main issue here in reality is that the Ugandan leader is, shall we say, an unusual person , who had decided to take offence on the King’s behalf. This is a political stance, so it needed pointing out that it was not necessary. It’s all a bit silly really and as I say, it’s infuriating that it looks like the King has had to give in to Harry’s posturing. All the more reason to find ways to rein that idiot in

It's a pity that someone as busy as a Head of State has to "handle" a 42 year old son.