The Sussexes ....again

Yes, I think William was right. He advised Harry to wait a while, as we all know from what H has said.

And all because Harry decided to marry a woman who - in William's words - was difficult, abrasive and rude. Which despite the pretty smiles and clingy behaviour, I can believe.

Oreo

I think one thing we can all agree on, that Harry won’t be allowed to take on any royal duties and that once KC is no more then William will cut him out, root and branch.I would bet money on it.

That's the saddest thing about this sorry story. The sibling rift.

Oreo

I think one thing we can all agree on, that Harry won’t be allowed to take on any royal duties and that once KC is no more then William will cut him out, root and branch.I would bet money on it.

I think that's what Harry's finally realised as well, and he's panicking 😕

But
Glorianny said,
Pity he didn't offer his younger son the same service.

Is that more insider knowledge?
I just wondered how she knew. Or is that stating opinion as fact?

Mark Bolland, he would surely know the royal family never sue

So would I. And I wouldn’t blame him.

I think one thing we can all agree on, that Harry won’t be allowed to take on any royal duties and that once KC is no more then William will cut him out, root and branch.I would bet money on it.

Mollygo

Callistemon21

Glorianny
I don't know, I hope, I wouldn't be surprised, if, perhaps, I would have thought. . .

So, in actual fact, I can surmise from that, you don't know anything at all, Glorianny 🤔
It's all supposition. Or imagination?

🤣🤣🤣

No the employment of Mark Bolland is well documented. He worked for Charles (and so for Camilla) for 5 years. He is credited with managing their acceptance and with providing press coverage of many other royal events.
This article (from 2003) tells how he changed the timeline on Harry and the drug taking episode so that Charles came out as the caring father
www.theguardian.com/media/2003/oct/27/mondaymediasection.themonarchy

Callistemon21

Glorianny
I don't know, I hope, I wouldn't be surprised, if, perhaps, I would have thought. . .

So, in actual fact, I can surmise from that, you don't know anything at all, Glorianny 🤔
It's all supposition. Or imagination?

🤣🤣🤣

Oh Dear.T he belief people have in PR.

The public forms its own opinions on what it hears and sees and is not nearly as stupid as highly paid 'influencers' like to insinuate.
There comes a time when people are judged on what they are doing now, and their past actions lose importance.

Glorianny

Casdon

I don’t follow your logic Glorianny. Are you saying that in addition to what you pereceive as waste of public resources by the royals on PR, that the public purse should also pay for the PR of a multi millionaire member of the royal family who has chosen to walk away?

I don't know whose money Charles used to employ Mark Bolland who revamped Camilla's image. I hope it wasn't public money, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was. And if it can be done for a woman, only relevant because she was the P of Wales squeeze I would have thought doing it for his own flesh and blood was the very least he could do.

I don't know, I hope, I wouldn't be surprised, if, perhaps, I would have thought

So, in actual fact, I can surmise from that, you don't know anything at all, Glorianny 🤔
It's all supposition. Or imagination?

this thread keeps gransnet 'alive' not a lot else gets so much attention!
all fired up over this thread.

I thought you thought that all the money the royals have is the state’s?
If you deem Charles’ personal fortune to be private, and that was used to support his wife (who didn’t possess a private fortune of her own) don’t you deem Harry’s personal fortune to be a fair wayto pay for his own PR, particularly as he explicitly said he didn’t want financial help? Surely adult children are expected to stand on their own feet, and anybody’s ongoing financial support is to your husband/wife?

Casdon

I don’t follow your logic Glorianny. Are you saying that in addition to what you pereceive as waste of public resources by the royals on PR, that the public purse should also pay for the PR of a multi millionaire member of the royal family who has chosen to walk away?

I don't know whose money Charles used to employ Mark Bolland who revamped Camilla's image. I hope it wasn't public money, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was. And if it can be done for a woman, only relevant because she was the P of Wales squeeze I would have thought doing it for his own flesh and blood was the very least he could do.

I don’t follow your logic Glorianny. Are you saying that in addition to what you pereceive as waste of public resources by the royals on PR, that the public purse should also pay for the PR of a multi millionaire member of the royal family who has chosen to walk away?

Charles spoke to both his sons and his siblings to tell them about his cancer diagnosis, or so we were told.

I assume Harry probably said “I shall fly over to see you, Pa”, but maybe didn’t say when?

Hence he arrived as Charles was planning to leave for Sandringham, so the visit was a bit rushed?

Glorianny
Pity he didn't offer his younger son the same service.
Is that more insider knowledge?
🤣🤣🤣🤣

eazybee

There certainly was criticism of Charles and Camilla, me included, but they settled down together, didn't plead for pity, and are working very hard. Beatrice too has undertaken royal duties, again without whingeing about her press.
I don't think there was criticism of Harry's visit until his interview was announced, followed by suggestions from the ubiquitous 'those close to', 'an insider' and 'friends' intimated he had offered to help out the royal family. This has been discredited, so now he can assume his preferred role as victim.
And Syracute, you need to come out with something more original than Gleaning there (sic) so called facts from the tabloids
You have used that comment several times, and the last time I looked the Telegraph was not a tabloid, but a broadsheet, and BBC news and Radio 4 are neither.

Well Camilla had the very best PR advice, paid for by Charles who used Mark Bolland to revamp his own image
British Journalism Review explained: "The alchemy he once performed for Charles [was] raising his popularity rating from 20 per cent after Diana's death to 75 per cent, and rendering the prospect of a remarriage palatable to the British public
Pity he didn't offer his younger son the same service.

I never criticised Charles and Camilla,

There certainly was criticism of Charles and Camilla, me included, but they settled down together, didn't plead for pity, and are working very hard. Beatrice too has undertaken royal duties, again without whingeing about her press.
I don't think there was criticism of Harry's visit until his interview was announced, followed by suggestions from the ubiquitous 'those close to', 'an insider' and 'friends' intimated he had offered to help out the royal family. This has been discredited, so now he can assume his preferred role as victim.
And Syracute, you need to come out with something more original than Gleaning there (sic) so called facts from the tabloids
You have used that comment several times, and the last time I looked the Telegraph was not a tabloid, but a broadsheet, and BBC news and Radio 4 are neither.

I think the question that’s not been answered but is one of the most important is whether Harry spoke to his father over the phone before he came to see him. If he did there’s no issue, if he didn’t there is.

Would you have given a tv interview?

If my Dad had had a cancer diagnosis when he was alive I would have hopped on a plane to be with him. Even if we had had our differences. Give the man a break.

Sarah could not have been criticised here , she divorced in 1996