Page 2 | Prince Harry and Mermaids

peachsquish · 2019-04-24T08:57:04+00:00

Apologies for the Fail link. https://mol.im/a/6954169

VickyEadie · 25/04/2019 14:35

Is this the point at which we need to remind ourselves that Harry's dad Charles was a public friend and supporter of one...Jimmy Savile?

It never ceases to amaze me how the royals - whose every public word and move is supposed to be guided by carefully selected advisors - are inclined to make the same errors time and again.

hoodathunkit · 25/04/2019 15:00

Is this the point at which we need to remind ourselves that Harry's dad Charles was a public friend and supporter of one...Jimmy Savile?

I think that's a bit of an unfair criticism

Lots of well-meaning people who had no idea of Savile's depravity supported him.

You cannot blame people for supporting someone who they have no idea is a predator. It is a similar situation with cults, people praise the cult leader and his depravity and proclivities are hidden from them.

I feel sorry for the royal family as they are human, are vulnerable and, due to their obscene wealth and influence, have been targeted by cults and grifters.

Charles was sent to a boarding school at a tender age, was bullied mercilessly and ended up being vulnerable to cults as a result

www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-33785018

www.thesun.co.uk/archives/politics/1144637/exposed-prince-charless-links-to-scandal-hit-charity-kids-company-and-fundraising-drives-for-its-disgraced-founder/

Unfortunately there is so much worse than Prince Charles' promotion of Camila Batmanghelidjh and Kids Company

One really, really bad thing - Charles endorses Innersound

Another perspective on Innersound

forum.culteducation.com/read.php?12,60845,page=1

There are many more examples of this kind of thing, some much worse than the above

I wish I knew what to do about this

VickyEadie · 25/04/2019 15:03

I think that's a bit of an unfair criticism

You're missing my point - which is that having been groomed by Savile, you'd think the royals might be a bit more circumspect, especially when there has been public criticism of Mermaids for them to consider.

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD · 25/04/2019 15:04

I was a child in the 70s. Even I knew - viewing him through the tv - that JC was one of those horrible men that mum would warn me about. The ones that liked girls too much. I can’t imagine he was different in real life.

WeepingWillowWeepingWino · 25/04/2019 15:23

A friend of mine was in Stoke Mandeville after a car crash and met JS there (this would be a few years before he died). For my friend, who was pretty suicidal when he was there, meeting this childhood icon was a massive boost. He, and indeed I, had no idea, none whatsoever, about JS, even having met him.

Goosefoot · 25/04/2019 15:54

"You're missing my point - which is that having been groomed by Savile, you'd think the royals might be a bit more circumspect, especially when there has been public criticism of Mermaids for them to consider."

I don't know that this really follows. Looking at an organisation is not that similar to looking at a person in most cases. For that matter, even for people who have met creepy weirdos, it is not necessarily that easy to suss out other ones, and sometimes being too careful comes with it's own negative consequences. At some point you have to say, we can only know so much about people.

I think Mermaids is actually protected from people wondering if they are legit because of their association with other rights organisations. They all have had detractors who made accusations. It stops a lot of questioning before it can really have an effect.

hoodathunkit · 25/04/2019 16:05

You're missing my point - which is that having been groomed by Savile, you'd think the royals might be a bit more circumspect, especially when there has been public criticism of Mermaids for them to consider.

Not really how it works though is it?

People who have been taken in by cults, predators and grifters very often learn the error of their ways only to be abused / exploited again by a new set of grifters.

Compulsion to repeat and all that.

I know people who have been exploited by multiple abusive quack psychotherapists, multiple cults, it is just the way the world works.

Charles is vulnerable for a load of reasons, as are other royals here in the UK and in other territories.

India Oxenberg, daughter of the actress Catherine Oxenberg (Catherine is the daughter of Princess Elizabeth of Yugoslavia) was entangled in the horrific sex trafficking torture cult NXIVM.

Catherine's efforts to rescue her daughter were widely hailed in the MSM

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6148349/Catherine-Oxenberg-reveals-hell-rescue-daughter-India-sex-slave-cult.html

Unfortunately it is not just India who is involved in cults.

One of Catherine Oxenberg's websites here

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190125191720/thebodyofbliss.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20190125191720/thebodyofbliss.com/

Her experts page includes some people about whom I have very serious concerns

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20180822224533/thebodyofbliss.com/experts/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20180822224533/thebodyofbliss.com/experts/

One of the experts listed, TJ Bartel is facing multiple accusations of rape while working at Source School of Tantra, an interesting organisation tangentially linked to quack therapists promoting satanic ritual abuse conspiracy theories.

I share your very serious concerns about the British royal family promoting pseudoscience and cult like groups though

What can be done about it though?

theOtherPamAyres · 26/04/2019 10:19

The point is that the Royal Family have (a) a lot to lose for getting it wrong (b) and no excuse for getting it wrong.

Royal family members rely on favourable P.R. from their support for charities. It only takes a Savile or a Kids' Company to make the public question their judgement and the role of the Royals in providing respectability to, and opening doors for, the wrong sort.

The Royal Family have unprecedented access to the best advisers and can call upon Ministers, civil servants, Think Tanks, philosophers, academics, celebrities, pet journalists and whoever they fancy. It's a rare person who turns down a prince seeking information and advice.

Like any other "Firm", the Royal Family has staff to handle emerging stories and risks to their legitimacy or popularity.

With all that the Royal Family have learnt about the damge that can be wrought by their association with a suspect charity, and with all the resources and privileged access that the Royal Family can call upon, Prince Harry has no excuse to be "taken in".

Prince Harry has a

nauticant · 26/04/2019 10:32

Prince Harry is the first royal to successfully make the cross-over into modern celeb culture. (Internet fueled celeb culture as we see it now was before his mother's time.)

Don't expect anyone in that world to come out with any sense. It's all about what plays best with the social media using global audience.

youllhavehadyourtea · 26/04/2019 14:48

Every time I see this thread title it reminds me of the Children's books, Harry and the Wrinklies.

It sounds like a nonsense fairytale anyway - Prince Harry and the Mermaids.

hoodathunkit · 26/04/2019 15:18

But Harry was in an unfortunate position from the start.

His home life were fraught with unfortunate dynamics due to his parents' conflictual relationship.

His father is a well known supporter of quackery, cults and dubious persons such as Camila Batmanghelidjh.

His mother consulted with various "psychics" and was in therapy with Susie Orbach.

His mother died when he was at a tender age and conspiracy theorists promote all kinds of conspiracies about his paternity and his mother's death, which has got to be challenging to deal with to say the least.

He ends up in a friendship with none other than Goldie, a musician who has become a major promoter of the Hoffman Institue (previously known as Fischer-Hoffman Psychic Therapy and Fischer-Hoffman Process aka the Hoffman Process) an extremely controversial new age LGAT considered by many to be a cult. Goldie is to the Hoffman Institute what Tom Cruise is to the Co$

If it is difficult to keep an average young adult away from cults it must be even more difficult when the young adult concerned is a vulnerable royal with a dysfunctional family background and the sense of entitlement that being a royal family member naturally confers.

Cults, grifters and conmen and women target people in positions of influence and people with money, just as water runs downhill.

I suppose the royals never really bothered to read up about Rasputin or perhaps their advisors never told them? Maybe their advisors tried to educate them but they wouldn't listen?

Advisors are advisors can cannot force royals to do what they say.

The strangest and saddest thing about the whole situation is that the royal family are pinning honours to the lapels of various persons who, like Susie Orbach, are part of a network of conspiracy theorists who endorse David Icke's conspiracies about satanic ritual abuse. Some of these conspiracies go as far as to claim that the Queen is a shape-shifting, baby eating, satanic lizard.

There seems to be a lemming like tendency for British royals to give credence to people who do not have their best interests at heart, people like Laurie Matthew OBE.

FWIW I am not a royalist. I do not know anyone in the royal family. I think that the royal family could be an asset to the UK, but that, if they are not careful, things are going to get very difficult for them.