I don't know if I really buy the idea of her trying this or that to be Diana 2.0. There are some big holes of not following the script. And, the alternative doesn't come off as: but I did this better alternative because I could.
Like the showing off the babies on the steps of the hospital.
Why miss that chance to be linked with Diana? because Catherine did it first? Doubtful.
It's weird, no? A deliberate choice not to recreate that classic pictures around the world? It would have immortalized her look as being part of the Family and pulled out periodically when the kids were mentioned in print. Especially after how they left soon thereafter when there were not as many photos of her as part of the family.
The walk through the Palace (in a white dress right after birth) isn't even close to being similar or a one up. When they are asked to show the baby, it is as if they turn the baby away from the camera. Less visible.
Whole thing is a big hole.
Another is the very limited photos of the kids.
They control photos every which way. Some have said it was in hopes of a big check to come their way. I don't know. To accept money in exchange for the exclusive first real photos of the kids - that kind of sounds like a half in and half out play. That it didn't happen may be less to the gray suits and more to that kind of payday seems to have come and gone. Or both.
By not allowing what would be everyday photos of the kids, people learn to tune out the photos they've seen many times as they can get bored by not new. People pour over the Wales kids and notice who lost a tooth.
As for the body parts/not a face, people get tired after they see this once or twice. By this time (years now) the public may be thinking there is something seriously wrong because there is no reveal other than a different way to not see a face. Any number past twice closely spaced is coming off as a red flag.
Another thing is being in public.
What we aren't seeing is a whole lot of the Montecito kids doing fun kid things (let alone how to be royal since real royal tours aren't on the H&M agenda). We don't see Archie surfing with his dad at the wave tank but we know he did attend surf camp according to photos. We see her shopping at a toy store but we don't see either kid shopping for a birthday gift for their sibling. We see her and an assistant going for burgers but we don't see them taking the kids along. We may see them at a pumpkin patch but there isn't another kid or family in sight. Nor do we ever hear of a kid going to a birthday party for a neighbor kid or graduation from nursery school. School - hmmm. Well, there was that time she did the school run while pregnant. And, never again. When we do see the kids, it always looks and acts very staged. Exists for a nano camera second and then disappears immediately (like the 4th of July parade).
Public exposure of the Wales' kids is very different. We get to watch them not only grow up but watch as they learn how to be royal at events (and still be a wiggly kid). So we see them once in a while in public, with a parent or two, sibling or two but that's it. Nice level of how much, how frequently we get to see them. A good balance.
What is interesting is to contrast it to the photos of William and Harry growing. Think of Diana taking them to an amusement part - I immediately think of the one with water splashing and laughing. I feel that yes they tended to be in public, as family, lots and lots of fun experiences but perhaps less learning how to be royal in public. That could have been because they were separated or then, she was gone.
Three different approaches and results. William and Catherine seem to come off having a good balance between it all for their kids.
One final thought about the photos of the kids - it isn't just that isn't that level of money to pay the adults for a first baby shot or that there is less and less interest in the what these kids look like but that photos of other people are a hotter commodity. Someone on the radio was talking about how there aren't photos of Taylor and Travis right now (this was during the honeymoon). But the during the lead up, the photos were everywhere.
Comments
This blog may or may not be the blog you are looking for. If not, we wish you well and hope you find what you are looking for.
Nutty and us Mods strive as much as possible to make this a welcome and
Guidelines for this blog is as follows:
-Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Posters who are disruptive will not have their posts posted.
-Anonymous or unknown posts are not allowed.
-We know that some of this is not family friendly. It can be a fine line sometimes on the topics such as sex and sexuality. Try to lean towards family friendly (thanks).
-Profanity has not traditionally been a problem, so let's keep it that way.
-We never encourage vindictive or other harmful actions. Nothing you would not mind having your name associated with on the front page of the local paper, above the fold.
-Please try to keep the conspiracy theories down.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject. (please drop us a message that someone is treading on your last nerve so we can be aware that this is a problem).
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-Posts which may be deemed too many flat statements/too provocative or mean spirited may not posted on the blog.
-Remember that not every one who reads the posts is happy about what is posted here. Please do not give out personal information. Be safe.
-Your privacy matters.
-Remember that certain sites require prior approval for reuse such as Harry Markle. Please respect their request on how to handle it. Links to share is a great alternative.
Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families (and laundry) to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
Moderation is still on. x
Firstly and most importantly, why does he think these people would be civil to him if they had negative views of his mother?
Secondly, Hairy thought they would do this all for free, again see point #1.
As for not showing the children, * is protecting their privacy, which makes them more important than they are. She doesn't seem to realise that backs of heads, heart emojis on top of faces is getting really boring.
Yes, 'Three different approaches and results' but the Sussex children are not royalty. William and Harry were destined for royal life - at least William now - and so are William's children. Other parents, such as Sophie and Edward or the now disgraced Andrew & Fergie, let photos of their children be published when at royal events. The thing is, after the Sussexes flounced off to Canada, then the US, there was no royal role, so no possibility of having the children shown with their parents at some function, e.g. the Royal Windsor Horse show, the first day of school, a visit to a zoo etc. With the duo, we get zilch. Is this to spite the Brits and the RF? To make the whole family more special/interesting/(add your own adjective)?
Perhaps * doesn't want to be like Diana but to be Diana. Let's hope that now back on British soil - how it must grate! - she won't be able to do exactly as she pleases, even though they're not back in the fold.
I don't believe that those tots are from the baroness born! And if they are not even from her eggs born she is going to hate them. Lady C says that * hates her African heritage and I believe she is right because the hatred in her face when she said that "most people didn't treat me as a black woman" before she came to the UK.
* is a narcissist, Big Time, so no one can be more important than she is and the children are always important for many people, in this case for they are Harry's children (?) and therefore of royal blood. Something * is not and will never be.
And if the girl is pretty and white * will hate her even more for that is what a narcissist does. I know, my mother truly hated me and used me as her personal slave for she never did any work at home. To take care of our family of six was my work from my childhood to the day I moved out to my own life.
* will use those children and destroy them because she is incapable of loving them or their father. Narcissists do not love themselves and that only increases their hatred to other people but that is an other question.
If they divorce and she wants seriously hurt Harry she may say that the kids are not hers but neither are they Harry's. If it was she who organized the children to this world she may have done that too because she is not mentally sound.
At this point, I am only really interested in how much financial support, if any, they're getting. Or rather, who is providing it. Because while I don't think the marriage was some kind of nefarious plot to bring down the Monarchy, I do think there are those with lots of money and that very agenda who have long sensed an opportunity.
I think Henry is spiteful enough to do it, albeit not smart enough to see it coming. I don't think Rachel would want to lose her royal status, but I do think she is egotistical enough to think it's the BRF who are blocking their abity to make ions, and for that, she might be willing to be a party to it. She also certainly hs spite to spare.
COMT gene mutations affect how the body breaks down key neurotransmitters like dopamine, epinephrine, and norepinephrine, which are essential for mood, cognition, and stress response. A common variant, Val158Met, alters enzyme activity, leading to either high or low dopamine levels and impacting mental and emotional health. These mutations can cause a range of symptoms, including anxiety, mood swings, poor focus, memory issues, fatigue, and increased sensitivity to stress. They may also contribute to detoxification problems and hormonal imbalances, particularly estrogen-related issues in women. COMT mutations are typically diagnosed through genetic testing, such as DNA methylation or consumer DNA tests, which provide insights into enzyme activity, neurotransmitter balance, and potential health risks. Management focuses on personalized approaches, including dietary adjustments (rich in B vitamins, magnesium, and antioxidants), targeted supplements, stress reduction, regular exercise, and proper sleep. Avoiding triggers like caffeine, high-sugar foods, and processed or high-catecholamine foods can also help manage symptoms. Overall, COMT mutations play a significant role in mental health and stress regulation, but with proper lifestyle changes and targeted support, their effects can be effectively managed.
https://trumelabs.com/blog/comt-mutation-symptoms
There's lots of info about it on the internet. True diagnosis can only be made with DNA testing, but the treatment is rather simple - avoid certain foods and take B vitamins and magnesium, for example.
King makes clear Harry and Meghan remain non-working royals https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20lpevv7jlo
I don't think they are considering what they are doing to their innocent children with this sick play acting with the "security".
'Royal officials have made clear it is sent in 'full accordance' with the Sussex family's stated wishes to remain private citizens while in the UK'. I read this as this is what you wanted so don't complain. They've been publicly reminded of their station in life. * won't like it.
We'll see how this works out when * is on her next project: 'Meghan markle is Narrating starring in and releasing A princess diana documentary'.https://www.facebook.com/100063998775372/videos/meghan-markle-is-narrating-starring-in-and-releasing-a-princess-diana-documentar/1979258896112450/
https://youtu.be/C13tDSQEtCo?is=c9p508C5C68_bLN7
hilarious
In a statement issued to the media, the couple's spokesman struck a confrontational tone and claimed they had not been told in advance.
In a statement issued to the media, the couple's spokesman struck a confrontational tone and claimed they had not been told in advance.
Palace sources have told the Daily Mail that this assertion is 'incorrect', insisting Harry and Meghan had received the letter before it was released publicly, although they were not consulted on its contents.
And so it continues. Instead of keeping a dignified silence, they have to go on the attack. Woe is me, again. They shouldn't be surprised, they are not working royals but perhaps they didn't realise it (sarc). And now they're victims again. Plus ça change...
Two weeks in the UK and they're showing us their true colours. They cannot be trusted, as all it took was 14 days for them to start complaining about securitay and trying to pretend they're royals at charity events.
But I bet that the King may look towards the Tower with a longing suck.
Megasux had to overshadow that as well.
I didn't realise there was anything to clarify and that they had to respond to the letter. They've obviously never heard of a dignified silence. I'm thought the message was crystal clear. The more they whinge about it, the worse they're making it for themselves. They need to realise there is no mileage in playing the victims.
I am however very nervous and suspicious, because they both still feature on the royal website, he is still in line of succession (God forbid) and Counselor of State, and though they are HRH they are told the HRH is in abeyance.
Why did the proclamation say treat them AKIN to private citizens? It does not actually state that they ARE private citizens.
Plus, when has a previous carefully worded beat-down of any sort ever before stopped those two from doing exactly what they want, when they want? Thus, I predict claiming titles are in abeyance means zilch.
I still personally believe this is all just theatre of the absurd, to calm and assuage the masses. My suspicions and predictions have proven true too many times before.
Which made me remember Harry's bitter words about his nephew forcing him to shadows one day when he grew up.
But Harry is not helping himself. He is fat and looks unkempt for he clearly does not take care of himself like William does. He was always sporty so that would be a way to stay relevant in his OWN life.
. . . In particular, the Sussexes seem to have taken issue with the statement that they should not be treated like royalty.'
. . . 'The Sussexes prefer the term "public figures", and would have liked an acknowledgement that, on a personal level, they remained members of the Royal Family, despite no longer receiving public funding.'
So public figures, in the public eye, but private? Charles was preempting future problems when he sent his letter to 'Harry's team, government departments, military officials and Lord Lieutenants'
'The letter was revealed before a reported meeting this week of the executive committee for the protection of royalty and public figures (Ravec), which is responsible for making decisions about royal security.'
There was a revealing sentence in the DT yesterday. 'The Duke is convinced that his protection was withdrawn as some kind of punishment for quitting royal duties.' He's feeling hard done by and has been for a long time and so does *. He's also got a very big chip on his shoulder. I hope the loathsome duo don't get any security but if so, they'll blame Charles even though he cannot influence Ravec. This will never end or else it will end badly. There's nowhere for them to go, although I hear Portugal is very nice this time of year.
I worked with a guy who had given notice at a place. Nothing changed in the two weeks. On the last day, the place was stunned that he would no longer show up there.
Asked by The Times why he made the announcement, General Kainerugaba said: 'I have factions in the Ministry of Defence that support that Harry-Meghan nonsense. I had to quash it straight away. I support the monarch. Period.''
I wonder if other countries will follow suit. The Harkles are not getting the welcome and support they expected, but then they are delusional.
We haven't heard from you for a while. I hope you're ok.
I don't know why for Diana was a gorgeous blonde with heavenly blue eyes, beautiful body with long shapely legs and she moved like the gifted dancer she was. She had such warmth and understanding for human suffering, such mischievous sense of humour and such sophisticated manners and elegance with her dress. I could go on but you know what I am trying to say.
The baroness has absolutely NOTHING of those things, NOTHING. She is now 45 so her youth is totally behind her and she is living her middle-aged years with her envy, her jealousy and her stupidity and all those negative things show on her face. She has become ugly, I am sorry but that is the truth.
My empathy is for William and his children. If Harry and his wife go on with this "monetizing Diana program" it all becomes filthy and degrading and ridiculous and that is not right to any of Diana's family for there are her sisters to think of too. But Harry seems to be on a path of no return so he will not give up while he has dollars and pounds in his sights.
I do wish we could remember Diana as she was at her best, remember the good she did and then let her rest in peace.
Sadly, I don't have a smartphone nor did I understand the language of the instructions. EE promised an engineer visit for Tuesday which did not happen (I'd cancelled a choir meeting and stayed in all afternoon.) Got thro to my old ISP yesterday and they fixed a different engineer for today - problem solved!
Had been feeling lonely and abandoned, longing to catch up with reaction to the King's edict. Have got a lot of catching up to do.!!
Whether its significance and implications ever penetrate the extraordinarily thick skulls of Citizens H and M remains to be seen. It'd be nothing short of miraculous, were they to pipe down and keep their noses clean - we can but hope.
How swiftly time passes.
Ransom and Defiler
Sorry dear boy
listen carefully to Pa
Give up now
your Coup d’nah
The public figures you’re
no longer needed
Megxits edict you signed
seceded
I know you’re a bit slow
so I’ll keep it plain
No fatted half ‘n’ half for
Citizen Cain…
I saw this as an unprecedented move
and well delivered
I don’t believe the King will risk
the Monarchy for an errant, erratic
idiot
@GWAH
Unbelievable but true !!
Desdemoana
Sack cloth and ashes
ain’t good enough
She’ll alway be known as
Hazs bit of rough
That twat of rough
went a long way
The pole got stuck
re-entering UK…
Secondly, instead of a observing a period of silence for at least a few weeks, Harry is doubling down with the announcement of 'a string of pseudo-royal appearances in the UK and US as he and Meghan labelled the King’s description of them as 'private citizens' unrealistic.
The Duke of Sussex will support charities on both sides of the Atlantic in what his team described as his 'September public engagements'.
The programme includes a major awards event in London later this month before he flies to New York to appear at the annual Clinton Global Initiative meeting alongside former president Bill Clinton, his wife Hillary, Chrissy Teigen and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman during the United Nations General Assembly week.'
Private citizens do things quietly without the need to make announcements. MSM is not helping, they need to stop reporting on these two. Deprive them of the oxygen of publicity.
From your lips to God’s ears…
I think she aught to concentrate to sell her jams as soon as possible before they start to rot in her warehouses. I mean there is not big money in the charity work when a whole nation is going to follow the accounting and financial statements of the charities.
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/prince-harry-meghan-could-leave-uk-christmas-1819129
How about this display of pure brass neck from les deux citoyens: `Sources close to the couple have also said they prefer to be described as public figures.'
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1wdet3c/harry_and_meghan_have_only_been_back_for_two/
`Harry and Meghan have only been back for two weeks and their return is already a pure farce. This is the lesson they still refuse to learn': JAN MOIR
If they reconnect with their charities, surely this means they want to slip back into their previous roles, which is what the Queen forbade. Yahoo News said 'According to The Times, Meghan wants to "rekindle" relationships with British charities. A source said she wants to support causes she previously backed. She is also considering new causes to support in Britain. Her activities are expected to develop gradually.'. I wonder if said charities will need Charles' edict re the Harkles. They should have nothing to do with the gruesome twosome. After all, they are private citizens, like you and me.
https://apple.news/AXgP_pDqVMNmEzmxpd3RspA
That said, I suspect that he, under the guidance of his wife, would love to have it to give it to her and tea is right about that.
As for the dress - yeah it is up at auction and I doubt Sotheby's would let her be with it unsupervised. Does he have the money to buy it would be a more interesting question given that they have OG, maybe something in Portugal, looking for something really OTT in the UK plus school for kids in addition to all the daily life money sucks like food, cars, gas, koi and staff like gardeners.
Kim K got a boatload of flack about damage to the Marilyn Monroe dress. As an authority figure used to end his (sermon style) advise announcements to us kids: Let a word to the wise be sufficient. (yeah, we mocked it to each other when someone was about to do something they ought not to)
Then the Harkles have money to burn. And why would * want a 'revenge dress'? Revenge from what? She'll only make herself look ridiculous (not for the first time).
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/new/?page=1
`Back
Go to SaintMeghanMarkle
r/SaintMeghanMarkle
•
2h ago
InspectorGreyson
I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this 💰
`Well, this is interesting. In his latest vid (11 minutes) HG Tudor features this sub and a lengthy comment posted by our Second Hand Coke. He finds SHC's comment regarding the reason for KC3's Letter of Clarification credible'.
Yes, interesting and very credible, spoiled though by the frequent interuptons by adverts.
This lengthy video, with appalling subtitles, is quite a corker. Whether it is true, or if it contains truth, is debatable. What was entirely predictable is that there would be a stumbling block when it came to verifying the children's identities, thanks to the pig's ear of their documents. Weren't there problems of this nature when it came to getting Archie into his US school?
In the UK, individuals have to constantly to verify their legal identities - for eg whenever you go to a solicitor over a new matter, you have to produce an official ID (eg driving licence) and up-to-date evidence of your address, regardless of how long the solicitor has known you or how often they have acted for you. It started with legislation focussed on money laundering but clearly has value in child protection.
All loose ends have to be tied off properly - when my husband died a few months ago and I went to register the death, I couldn't say if he would be buried or cremated - I was in shock and couldn't think straight. Weeks after his eventual burial, I received a letter from the General Register Office wanting to know what I had done with the body.
This should not have happened - the parish office dealing with the administration of the graveyard were legally obliged to notify the GRO/original Registrar of the burial within 4 working days of it taking place. It was a shocking oversight and I await an apology - I caused me even more work on top of dealing with the normal bureaucracy of a death.
Yes, as Girl with a Hat said, truly appalling and it just adds to your grief. I think you'll be waiting for an apology for a long time.
Re the video, the narrator says that Harry mentioned Diana - doesn't he ever? - and that 'she would have her grandchildren walking on English soil'. A strange thing to say, I think. The video also mentioned the children had been kept away from Britain for 6 years. It makes it sound as if they were kept prisoners, her there was nothing to stop their parents taking them to the UK.
We don't really know if the children are now attending school. Funny how William and Catherine have managed to enrol their children in the schools of their choice without any apparent fuss.
(Lady Colin Campbell today)
Doubt the emojis are enough to sway much after the new article about how Q Camilla was the one driving the letter. She has been around for a long time to see how things work at the palace and what doesn't work. Blaming her (in a non UK/HW source) comes off as a little clumsy.
I could see that she would be able to point out the difficulties that it all had the potential (by not responding promptly) to be giving the appearance of the half in/half out to play out in the UK. That is one more person pointing out another piece of the problem rather than insisting that the king take action.
If there was any truth to the story that various former patronages were contacted and told that the palace would be coordinating this for the couple - perhaps then there is truth that the various organizations, by asking for verification would be a more reasonable explanation as to why this came so quickly.
Avid Gardener gives her analysis of a recent piece on Radar On line, as she believes that it's H's way of communicating. The news may be bad. And who is Ellie Hall?
'The Duchess of Sussex has been granted her first government-backed security review since quitting royal duties, The Telegraph can reveal.
Both the Sussexes will receive an official risk assessment imminently, following their relocation to the UK.'
The couple have been asked by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) to provide full details of their new daily routines.
The committee chairman wrote to the Duke of Sussex last week confirming that in light of their changed circumstances, it had commissioned a new risk assessment for him and a separate one for his wife.'
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16130877/Duke-Duchess-Sussex-security-reviewed-Britain.html
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex removed Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet after just two days.
It said they are now 'starting somewhere new' after Harry and Meghan 'discussed the practicalities with their security team and it was decided they needed to change school'.
The seven and five year olds, who grew up in America, only came to live in Britain a few days ago. Now, they have been taken out of their prep school for security reasons, according to ITV News.' (DM)
I wouldn't put it past these two to have engineered some incident in order to force Ravec's hand. What sort of a life is it for the children?
It sounds like what ever goodwill there was about the thought of the kids at that school has evaporated if any of this has some truth to it.
What's really sad to me is that it is/was the two kids tossed about before you add in any amount of how kids talk to a new kid. Some are friendly. Some are not.
https://x.com/entylawyer/status/2099586442834202706
um, as an observer and thinking, that could be an issue about teaching the kids how to be safe, have good relationships (recognize who is a good friend versus one who is not). How is any of this teaching them how the real world works?
A number of critics are describing the convoy incident as reminiscent of the great NYC pap chase.
The vulgar attitudes of Harry's wife are going to harm badly his children and he aught to know it and stop it. But I guess he has no say in anything under his own roof so his tots are going to pay dearly and some day HATE their parents.
So if, somehow, they did get the security for the kids, how could/would that play out in the day to day school run where there are limited places for the other cars to pull off to the side, get out of the way as notified by the cops on motorcycles? You would have to have pretty much the whole distance closed off (start to end point is how far), right? because if you didn't close it off, allegedly some bad agent could pull off and lie in wait. I don't know what roads, how large, how many intersect but would that be logical? This being that the school would still accept them back.
Given the security issues, had the kids had exposure to the British education system, it would have made some sense to board the kids instead of being day students. But, for the sake of the kids, that would be a really rough intro and not particularly kind to them after everything else they have lost or changed.
sigh. It wasn't cheap to move, it's not cheap to stay and it's not cheap to keep going back and forth.
Each council has a child protection and safeguarding department. In addition. There is the NSPCC, National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. Their phone numbers are easy to find.
As for the children being in a new school, this happened surprisingly quickly. I wonder what will happen to the school fees if the term was payable in advance to secure a place. No refund? I still think it's a case of much ado about nothing to try and get taxpayer funded police protection.
Monday the baroness' Instagram: HALLOOO WE ARE HERE, LOOK AT MY PHOTOS!!
Tuesday the papers: HARRY AND HIS WIFE ARE AFRAID! THEY NEED SECURITY!!
Wednesday the baroness' Instagram: HALLOOO WE ARE HERE, LOOK AT MY PHOTOS!!
Thursday the papers: HARRY AND HIS WIFE ARE VERY AFRAID! THEY NEED SECURITY!
Friday the baroness' Instagram: HALLOOO WE ARE HERE, LOOK AT MY PHOTOS!!
Saturday the papers: HARRY AND HIS WIFE ARE VERY AFRAID! THEY NEED SECURITY!!
Sunday the baroness' Instagram: HALLOOO WE ARE HERE AND WE ARE SO HAPPY AND VERY AFRAID! WE NEED SECURITY!!! BUT LOOK AT MY PHOTOS!!!!
Monday (rinse and repeate)
'Former head of royal protection Dai Davies also told LBC radio: 'If you keep a low profile, most people outside the school wouldn't know where you are, what they're doing, and all the rest of it.'
.
'Do they really need to go in convoy with two little children on the school run? If they only just kept a little quieter, kept a lower profile, they'd be a lot safer in my view.'
Precisely. The children were 'sitting ducks'. No one cares about them, this is just faux indignation and manipulation. The problem is * is incapable of keeping a low or even lower profile.
She is a disgusting lying grifter!
THAT made me laugh! Yes a proper announcement would be needed!!
We don't have school buses like the big yellow ones in the US. Children travel free with a photocard on public transport buses in London. Elsewhere, it depends on the distance to the school etc but free transport is provided by local councils. You must realise that public transport is for plebs, not [pretend] royalty.
They scream about `security' but, as we saw with boat rides, they don't give a tinker's cuss about safety - here's further evidence:
Riding a quad bike lacking roll bars and not wearing helmets:
https://archive.ph/q2Krv
https://www.hse.gov.uk/treework/areyou/quad-bike.htm
And then they talk about security! Should messages not be sent to their security team, for instance? The phone number was leaked so this is the excuse to cry about security and force Ravec's hand. I very much doubt the phone number is her personal one, if the Harkles are so worried about their secur, then * must have a phone for school matters as well as her personal one. Not buying it.
My warm emphaty is with the young woman who died 29 years ago and who has no possibility to save the story of her own life or her memory from a greedy younger son, a greedy brother or a bitter ex-husband's "memories".
I wish she could rest in peace.
And we have these royals and aristocrats bickering and slandering each other over their enormous privilege.
It's not just the King and Camilla who get armed security 24/7 but also William and Kate, and this must be a sore point for the Harkles. Harry is the King's son so he thinks he should get equal treatment. That's not how it works but Harry is stubborn and can't see it that way, especially as * will be pushing for it. Even if the duo had stayed as working royals, they'd only get police security if they were on RF 'business', like Princess Anne and Edward and Sophie.