The Harry and Meghan fuss

[Bigga]

And changed by the queen for charlotte

Now THAT is super interesting and dismisses anybody's argument about Harry and Meghan's overall point.

 

[mackenzie]

Now THAT is super interesting and dismisses anybody's argument about Harry and Meghan's overall point.

Not really when you understand the change that Cameron introduced.

 

[Bigga]

Anne declined any royal titles for her children.
As for the interview, I saw snippets but it was obviously completely one sided and I think it's better to always get the other side to get balance.
This is where H and M were safe, as the family were never going to get into a public slanging match.

What are you talking about?

The Firm/ Institution have victimised Meghan for a couple of years as they are the ones that allow the press to print stories.

There's no point in commentating on the snippets you've seen, is there? Watch the whole thing and what Harry has to say, most of all.

Then you can have your judgement with all context involved.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Do we (UK) even have the right to put that sort of protection in place on US soil long term? It's also a fairly hefty ask on the UK taxpayer to mount a permanent operation of that scale abroad - it's not just the armed 'heavies' you may see, but the support staff and infrastructure behind it, along with sufficient numbers for rotation/holidays/sickness etc.

Wasn't the proposal/plan of Megharry to do it in Canada? But they decamped to the USA with aid of their network of celebrity friends once that inevitably fell apart.

 

[Bigga]

Andrews kids are princesses and they are not working royals , it is a confusing system, taking security from them was a spiteful and dangerous move

Wholly agreed and exactly my point!

These 'rules' are whatever the institution behind the royals say they are.

 

[Bigga]

Do we (UK) even have the right to put that sort of protection in place on US soil long term? It's also a fairly hefty ask on the UK taxpayer to mount a permanent operation of that scale abroad - it's not just the armed 'heavies' you may see, but the support staff and infrastructure behind it, along with sufficient numbers for rotation/holidays/sickness etc.

You have a point, but being outcast and given no help forced Harry's hand. Which is basically what he said.

 

[Bigga]

Not really when you understand the change that Cameron introduced.

Okay, so why are there HRH tiles for some and not other non-serving members of the family?

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

You have a point, but being outcast and given no help forced Harry's hand. Which is basically what he said.

Absolutely - but that's families for you etc.

 

[Bigga]

Absolutely - but that's families for you etc.

...??

So, in the interview, Winfrey underlines that there are celebrities and then there's the royal family which is on a whole different scale.

This is not 'just a family', like any other.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

...??

So, in the interview, Winfrey underlines that there are celebrities and then there's the royal family which is on a whole different scale.

This is not 'just a family', like any other.

They all piss and shit and their farts stink too mate - sorry to burst your bubble. Seeing as their hereditary rights and position are based upon knocking some other bloke off a horse and chopping his head of in distant times past I'm not sure the 60p a year we each pay in tax to keep them entitles us to expect more from them in terms of inter-family personal relations. Every family has fall-outs, bust ups, and outcasts with toxicity balanced out by love if we're lucky. The only difference with the royals is they get spied on by the tabloids and wash their dirty laundry in front of a global audience and Oprah, rather than with their mates on facebook and down the pub.