Gransnet forums

Chat

Prince Harry.....latest

(387 Posts)
lemsip Sat 15-Jan-22 23:22:24

Give me back my bodyguards: Prince Harry threatens legal action against the government and demands return of police protection because 'it is not safe for the Sussexes to return to UK for visits'

M0nica Mon 17-Jan-22 17:20:33

Bridgeit I know what you mean, I am one of three sisters and people were often really surprised that we were related. Apart from our dark hair we were very different looking. Yes, we all look like some of our aunts, uncles etc, just not our parents!!

Germanshepherdsmum Mon 17-Jan-22 17:16:13

Spot on Josieann.

Bridgeit Mon 17-Jan-22 17:12:18

Being one such person , I really feel for other folk who have to continually put up with the comments about how Unalike their children are in looks & build.
They all have similar looks to family members from past generations , but not overly similar to each other.
It can become. quite tedious after a while.
.

Summerlove Mon 17-Jan-22 17:10:26

Forsythia

Lucca

NotTooOld

Lucca - I believe the inference is that Harry is (possibly) not Charles' son.

Oh for goodness sake. Ridiculous. Silly gossip.

Is it? Are you certain about that. Did she really have two children by him? Some of you need to read more widely outside of Gransnet. Gain a broader perspective to see what is possibly going on here. Look at Angela Levins twitter account. Scroll down and look at two photos of Meghan supposedly pregnant. Angela Levin is a respected journalist who shadowed Harry for a year. Then come back and tell us it’s all ridiculous and silly gossip.

Could you please point out which tweets we should be reading? Angela Levin seems to be a prolific tweeter.

Are you also suggesting that Harry did not father his two children?

Josieann Mon 17-Jan-22 17:10:21

Good post maddyone at 13.42 though I don't like the word "bashing".
IF Harry had left the UK quietly and spoken kindly, deferentially, even indifferently about his family then he wouldn't be in this silly mess. I'm sure a few eyes would have rolled about asking for police protection, a few groans and even a bit of criticism, but no vehement bashing or knocking of him and Meghan would have taken place. He has brought it all on himself with his own very harsh comments over the past two years, and as someone has just said, stroppy behaviour. Even before the interview was aired, GNs on these threads were counselling him (in our comments) to go away, lie low and shut up, but it seems he was hell bent on doing the opposite. So I understand why people are now cross and critical and expect him to put up with the consequences.

M0nica Mon 17-Jan-22 17:04:44

The Sussexes were not forced to do anything. They chose to walk away from being officially part of the Royal family and then whined when they were cut off from the privileges and funds that went with the job. A bit like handing your notice in and then demanding that your employer pay you even though you no longer work for them.

Andrew has not chosen to leave the Royal family, he has just behaved badly and effectively been sidelined. A bit like being made redundant. he has got redundancy pay, a pension and a few extra bells and whistles.

Everyone I have come across who has had to work or interface with Prince Andrew, describe him as rude, offensive and stupid.

Germanshepherdsmum Mon 17-Jan-22 17:01:39

He’s not very bright trisher, never was.

merlotgran Mon 17-Jan-22 17:01:18

Baggs

I think what's in that video is spot on.

Me too.

trisher Mon 17-Jan-22 17:00:23

karmalady

This video is spot on, Harry is having a legal tantrum and his aim is to smear the queen

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD1C8ulZjTw

Well it might have helped if he had realised the process involved in security provision for the RF. It's absolutely nothing to do with Her Maj or any of the RF it's decided by RAVEC an independent committee www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-terms-of-reference-of-the-royal-and-vip-executive-committee-ravec
Still I suppose it's difficult to accuse soomeone of narcissistic behaviour against a committee

Anniebach Mon 17-Jan-22 16:57:34

Sources say !

Jaberwok Mon 17-Jan-22 16:53:08

Yes of course Elegran, silly me! The thought of coming here on a private, low key visit would not sit well with the Sussex's. Well, they'll just have to stay away then! Sad for the Queen not to see those children, but I doubt she'll lose too much sleep over her petulant, childish grandson and his latest foot stamping strop.

Callistemon21 Mon 17-Jan-22 16:50:57

You'd think he'd refuse it, wouldn't you, as his sister and younger brother don't get security unless they carry out royal duties.
Has he no shame?

Grany Mon 17-Jan-22 16:47:14

The Sussexes were forced to become 100 per cent self-sufficient after stepping back from their royal roles, but Andrew – though a short list of honours worse off – will continue to luxuriate in nearly all of the trappings of royal life.

The Grade II-listed roof above his head in Windsor remains his, as does the taxpayer-funded £300,000-a-year security team that sources say the Queen will ensure he will not lose.

Callistemon21 Mon 17-Jan-22 16:42:54

Elegran

Don't be sidelined into criticising the messenger, just listen to the message.

Actually, I did persevere and yes there were.

However, I doubt that this is a deliberate attempt by Harry to smear the Queen although I'm sure he wouldn't care if other members of the family were villified.
I really don't think he's that clever and think he is so self-obsessed that he wouldn't realise the fall-out from this might affect the Queen.

Anniebach Mon 17-Jan-22 16:35:45

True

Elegran Mon 17-Jan-22 16:34:31

Opinions, like recollections, may differ.

Anniebach Mon 17-Jan-22 16:34:11

He did have full security when they lived here but they moved to America because it wasn’t safe here for his family ,now he wants the security he didn’t feel safe with so he can come back to this country

Alegrias1 Mon 17-Jan-22 16:30:43

Elegran

Don't be sidelined into criticising the messenger, just listen to the message.

Sorry Elegran but the message is c***.

From the very first sentence, which is incorrect. I could make a youtube video and say anything I like. You might agree with me or you might not. But just making a youtube video doesn't mean you have to take me seriously.

Elegran Mon 17-Jan-22 16:27:40

Don't be sidelined into criticising the messenger, just listen to the message.

Elegran Mon 17-Jan-22 16:25:33

Yup! It is "Look what nasty people my family are, they don't care if my family are attacked and injured, they don't want to meet my little daughter, and they won't even let me pay for our security against that happening." Manipulation of the perception by the public of how the RF is treating Harry, Meghan and their family.

Good points in this video.

The Met police force security is for large-scale public order, they only provide paid security for events where a lot of the public need to be protected. They are not for hire by any well-heeled celebrity or foreign magnate who is visiting this country.

When there is a request for their services at a large event, they assess the need and take a decision without consulting the Palace

Non-working members of the RF only have police protection when they are on official engagements - and Harry has opted out of those.

There are many private security firms which he could hire to do the same as the Met would.

Plus - if he is here to see the Queen on her Jubilee, he will have the benefit of being on the fringe of the Royal Security agents who are protecting her

If you ask me, the truth is that he and his family have been out of the limelight for a while, and they feel it is time to appear in the tabloid headlines again. What better than to latch onto the Royal Jubilee and make sure that they get in on that act with some poor-me publicity? - while simultaneously giving the RF some bad marketing by making them appear mean and spiteful?

Alegrias1 Mon 17-Jan-22 16:21:52

Well I don't know about you lot but I don't think he's creepy in any way... obviously as trustworthy as the day is long. shock

Anniebach Mon 17-Jan-22 16:15:26

It made sense to me

seacliff Mon 17-Jan-22 16:11:17

Agreed, Baggs. What he says is correct.

Martha48 Mon 17-Jan-22 16:10:25

I (almost) prefer Harry to that presenter!

Baggs Mon 17-Jan-22 16:07:40

I think what's in that video is spot on.