Popular Post Stevo985 Posted March 9, 2021 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted March 9, 2021 17 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: I want my son to have as normal childhood as possible. Of course in order for that to happen I need him to be called prince and have a 24hr global security detail paid for by the taxpayer. This is a pretty good misrepresentation of what she actually said. She specifically said she wasn't bothered about titles. What bothered her was why it was different for her child, and why things were being changed to MAKE IT different for her child. As for the security, again that was more of a "why is it different for him" situation. They said they had no problem providing their own security, that's why they've moved to LA so they can generate their own income and pay for the security they believe they need. Their issue was why they had to do that when it was originally agreed that security would be in place and why it was taken away so suddenly. 19 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: I also hate publicity and the media so I'm going to move the epicentre of global celebrity, get Elton John on my new podcast and give an interview to the most famous woman in America. Did she say she hated publicity? I don't remember that. She's an actress, funny line of work if you don't like publicity. They said they never planned to move to California, but went because the offer of a house and security was there, and it's easier for them to make their own money there. Their original plan to live in Canada involved still "working" for the royal family so that would have been their income. It's funny how people deliberately misquote stuff to suit their own opinion/agenda. From where I was sat, almost none of the interview was them moaning about not having this and not having that. They actually seemed quite happy to now be living their own independent life and excited about providing for themselves. Their grievances were how they were treated whilst they were in that circle, and why things were so different for Meghan than for other people in the same situation. 13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post villa4europe Posted March 9, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 9, 2021 2 minutes ago, Mic09 said: They talked about media destroying them - why not live in peace in California and how about, I don't know, don't have the most media driven interview in years? That's the problem, they are 2 different things Doing an interview on Oprah, or Netflix, or having a podcast is one thing Having photographers chase you everywhere you go, having headlines laced with racism about eating avocado's and what clothes she wears is something completely different Our media are words removed who are blatantly trying to destroy them and by them I mean her 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted March 9, 2021 Author Share Posted March 9, 2021 18 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: I want my son to have as normal childhood as possible I don’t think they have said that but I assume it’s actually correct. 18 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: Of course in order for that to happen I need him to be called prince and have a 24hr global security detail paid for by the taxpayer. That obviously makes no sense. They want security to stop the nut jobs who send regular death threats from killing them all. Nobody thinks that having security increases normality. 19 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: I also hate publicity and the media Don’t think they said that, they did say they disliked fake stories about them being published (and then the palace doing nothing to correct them). 21 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: give an interview to the most famous woman in America. to put their side of the story out after seeing so many false stories in the British tabloids. 21 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said: I'm going to move the epicentre of global celebrity, get Elton John on my new podcast The podcast gig they had no intentions of doing until they lost their jobs and income and needed to make money to fund things like security. Of course, you’re naturally going to do it as best as you can for the enormous fee being paid. I assume you didn’t watch the interview either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 9, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9, 2021 5 minutes ago, Mic09 said: I can sympathise with the personal struggle and the pain that she went through, if you have £1 or £1million the mental health does not discriminate. But what you summarised is what I have a problem with. They talked about planning this for 2 years - did security not come up in any conversations over 2 years? They talk about stepping down as senior royals - why should we pay for them if they don't represent the Crown? They want their son to be free - why even bring up the royal title conversation? They talked about media destroying them - why not live in peace in California and how about, I don't know, don't have the most media driven interview in years? The royal household has some serious problems, and these issues should be dealt with. But I just don't get the behaviour of Harry and Meghan in conducting this clearly scripted interview caused to build shock rather than to give any context. Did you watch the interview? All of your questions were answered in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 1 minute ago, Stevo985 said: This is a pretty good misrepresentation of what she actually said. She specifically said she wasn't bothered about titles. What bothered her was why it was different for her child, and why things were being changed to MAKE IT different for her child. As for the security, again that was more of a "why is it different for him" situation. They said they had no problem providing their own security, that's why they've moved to LA so they can generate their own income and pay for the security they believe they need. Their issue was why they had to do that when it was originally agreed that security would be in place and why it was taken away so suddenly. Did she say she hated publicity? I don't remember that. She's an actress, funny line of work if you don't like publicity. They said they never planned to move to California, but went because the offer of a house and security was there, and it's easier for them to make their own money there. Their original plan to live in Canada involved still "working" for the royal family so that would have been their income. It's funny how people deliberately misquote stuff to suit their own opinion/agenda. From where I was sat, almost none of the interview was them moaning about not having this and not having that. They actually seemed quite happy to now be living their own independent life and excited about providing for themselves. Their grievances were how they were treated whilst they were in that circle, and why things were so different for Meghan than for other people in the same situation. Nail on the head No one wants to hear the "why are things different for them" question because no one wants to accept what the answer probably is 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 It is interesting to find out who the "firm" they talk about is. Sounds like they are the ones actually running the show not the queen or the royals Only thing with merkal is did she not know that her life would changed dramatically if she moved into the palace? I mean i get she was depressed and that is understandable but surely she cant be that thick to think the royals live normal lives and a sense of freedom that celebs do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 4 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Did you watch the interview? All of your questions were answered in it. I did, but I feel like there are some loose ends that Oprah didn't follow. For example, which I understand is the case now, why are they bothered about royal security if they can organise their own security? Unless it's extremely difficult to do, I never organised VIP 24/7 security so God knows what that entails. I don't know, I just feel that if you want a clean slate, a life away from 'the firm', live a live that you are clearly living now, good on them. Move away from this shit show and leave it behind. I get the interview from the 'racist media' angle - that should be spoken about. I don't get the interview from any other angle, security, royal titles etc. Just leave them to rot in the Windsor and live your life which NOW you are capable of doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 1 minute ago, Demitri_C said: I mean i get she was depressed and that is understandable but surely she cant be that thick to think the royals live normal lives and a sense of freedom that celebs do? I don't blame her for this as much as I blame Harry - you gotta tell the woman you want to spend your life with just how bad it's gonna be. Surely he must know this better than anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 Just now, Mic09 said: I don't blame her for this as much as I blame Harry - you gotta tell the woman you want to spend your life with just how bad it's gonna be. Surely he must know this better than anyone. There is no evidence that he didnt to be fair. I mean im pretty sure any normal person would? I mean she must have seen what palace life was like before they got married no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted March 9, 2021 Author Share Posted March 9, 2021 3 minutes ago, Mic09 said: why are they bothered about royal security if they can organise their own security? Unless it's extremely difficult to do, I never organised VIP 24/7 security so God knows what that entails. I reckon proper Royal security is all tied into official police intelligence etc. Of course there are firms that’ll do it but it’s not going to be quite the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 9, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Mic09 said: I did, but I feel like there are some loose ends that Oprah didn't follow. For example, which I understand is the case now, why are they bothered about royal security if they can organise their own security? Unless it's extremely difficult to do, I never organised VIP 24/7 security so God knows what that entails. I don't know, I just feel that if you want a clean slate, a life away from 'the firm', live a live that you are clearly living now, good on them. Move away from this shit show and leave it behind. I get the interview from the 'racist media' angle - that should be spoken about. I don't get the interview from any other angle, security, royal titles etc. Just leave them to rot in the Windsor and live your life which NOW you are capable of doing. They weren't bothered about Royal security and can arrange their own. They specifically said that they were fine to provide their own now that they are making their own money. Their issue was it was something that was promised to them and then taken away at the last minute and so they felt unsafe. All your other questions were answered in the interview 22 minutes ago, Mic09 said: They talked about planning this for 2 years - did security not come up in any conversations over 2 years? Yes, it came up plenty. And it was agreed security would stay in place. It was then taken away at the last minute 22 minutes ago, Mic09 said: They talk about stepping down as senior royals - why should we pay for them if they don't represent the Crown? We shouldn't. They didn't say we should. They didn't want to step down as royals. 22 minutes ago, Mic09 said: They want their son to be free - why even bring up the royal title conversation? Meghan said she didn't care about titles. What she cared about was why was it different for her child and not others. 22 minutes ago, Mic09 said: They talked about media destroying them - why not live in peace in California and how about, I don't know, don't have the most media driven interview in years? They didn't plan to live in California. They planned to live in Canada and work for the Royal Family and get their income that way (whether we agree with that income or not, that was their plan). Once they were cut off and had to provide their own income the move to California assisted in that. They're giving an interview to put their own story out there and, yes, I'm sure there is an element of exposure in there. But why shouldn't there be? They can't go and get an office job or work at mcdonalds, they're now providing themselves rather than being paid for by the tax payer, we should be happy Like I said if you watched the interview I'm not sure you were paying attention. Edited March 9, 2021 by Stevo985 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted March 9, 2021 Author Share Posted March 9, 2021 2 minutes ago, Mic09 said: I don't blame her for this as much as I blame Harry - you gotta tell the woman you want to spend your life with just how bad it's gonna be. Surely he must know this better than anyone. He probably assumed she’d be taken in like his sister-in-law but it looks far different. He’s ended up cutting a lot of ties to get her out of it. It’s gone sour and he’s taken decisive action to protect his family. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 1 minute ago, Demitri_C said: There is no evidence that he didnt to be fair. I mean im pretty sure any normal person would? I mean she must have seen what palace life was like before they got married no? I'd like to think that she hoped it would be better than it actually ended up. Maybe for someone who did her stint as a Hollywood start on the sunny west coast it was just too much to leave behind for royal responsibilities. And the disgusting media didn't help the cause either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 9, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9, 2021 24 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: It is interesting to find out who the "firm" they talk about is. Sounds like they are the ones actually running the show not the queen or the royals 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 3 hours ago, Genie said: Piers Morgan can give it out but can’t take it it appears. Alex Beresford raises some pretty valid points imo. Piers is such a knob. Stones and glass houses and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted March 9, 2021 Moderator Share Posted March 9, 2021 29 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: They weren't bothered about Royal security and can arrange their own. They specifically said that they were fine to provide their own now that they are making their own money. Their issue was it was something that was promised to them and then taken away at the last minute and so they felt unsafe. Particularly after The Daily Mail, one of the media outlets they'd moved to Canada to escape, PRINTED THEIR LOCATION. Let's not forget, this isn't just Prince Harry, but Prince Harry who served in Afghanistan. If I were the type of person looking to make global headlines for my religious zealots in the Middle East, an unprotected Prince who had fought in the region would seem to be a pretty good target. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 39 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: It is interesting to find out who the "firm" they talk about is. Sounds like they are the ones actually running the show not the queen or the royals It's been a nickname for the senior Royals for half a century. Prince Philip is alleged to have come up with the name as he likened being married to the Queen as being married into a family business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 5 minutes ago, ml1dch said: It's been a nickname for the senior Royals for half a century. Prince Philip is alleged to have come up with the name as he likened being married to the Queen as being married into a family business. I do think though there are advisors/people behind the scenes who might have a lot of power that we dont know about. I think these are the people they may be afraid to talk about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mjmooney Posted March 9, 2021 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted March 9, 2021 3 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 8 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: I do think though there are advisors/people behind the scenes who might have a lot of power that we dont know about. I think these are the people they may be afraid to talk about Maybe. But that's not what "the Firm" is. That's Prince Philip's term for the inner circle of senior members of the Royal Family. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts