Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21

But why writing about it at all and popularise it to the global audience? It is exactly the same as Meghan quoted a derogatory knick name of Kate in Oprah interview. You can say it was only quoting. It was not. It was putting these people down again by spreading it again in a disguise of contempt of the origins, when it should be r.i.p. and forgotten.

You really don't see that what was only locally in tabloids was spread all around the globe? Is it really fair in your eyes?

It is spreading the same gossip on a much larger scale but not taking responsibility for it.

They dated briefly. Spare was akin to an angry drunk text per the BBC review. Score settling. My guess is that Harry was aligning his brief dating of Flack in order to score points against Dan Wooten, a former Sun editor (now with GB News) and no fan of the Sussexes in order to validate their leaving the UK since the same was happening to his wife. Harrys argument is that Wootens particular zeroing in on Flack during her arrest ultimately contributed to affecting her mental state and resulted in her suicide.

It was an attempt to prop up the idea of Meghan contemplating suicide as well due to excessive media attention. Negative tabloid coverage can mean suicide.

The description of Caroline as a bit rough was to me an example of classism in british media/society i.e. The middle class girl dating His Royal Highness. How very dare someone "rough" get notions about someone clearly above her station kind of thing. Not of good stock darling type BS. The kind of misogynistic message that Harry must just be sowing his wild royal oats with a bit of "rough" but worry not dear readers he will surely come to his senses and marry properly in time.

The same thing happened with the infamous Straight Outta Compton article. Oh no dear readers, our Royal Prince is dating a girl from the ghetto and she is an American actress too! That's going to last eh? Lol. Fnarr. Fnarr <sarcasm/waits for it to inevitably end since you date actresses not marry them>. I don't think the coverage was initially racist at all but primarily class/snobbery driven as it always is. It flipped when it transpired they were serious and Meghan enjoyed a wave of positive coverage i.e. this is great for the monarchy, a strong outsider shaking up or "modernising" the archaic institution.

The same kind of classist snark happened with Kate and her family e.g. the Middleton family always went abroad on holiday but would do so during off peak times i.e. careful with money because they don't have much and certainly not (Harry Enfield reference) much richer than yow. Pearl clutching that someone middle class could end up marrying a future King.

I also don't see everything Harry does through contemptuous eyes. I simply use common sense....

A very white scene? A white family is, shock horror, white? I’m sensing race baiting there. Similar to the Bridgerton actress Anjoa Andoh on ITV during the coronation coverage saying the balcony was terribly white when compared to the diversity of the Abbey part of the day. Cue Ofcom complaints. White family is, shock horror, white. She apologises, re-iterates the context of the remark (contrasting the abbey versus the balcony) and the world moves on. I think what reared its head during the wedding was the optics of Meghan only having her mother there from her family. What would have instinctively been sympathy since everyone has a family and families can be problematic subsequently swayed towards wondering why everyone else wasn’t there.

Didn’t go down well with royal traditionalists? Who are the ultimate royal traditionalists? The royal family. Everything involved would be included under collaboration but their ultimate approval.

Dismissive of suicide? Not at all. I just maintain that Harry included Caroline Flack because to the wider (target) audience of America she and the circumstances of her death wouldn’t have been as well known. I do think Harry included that to compare and contrast Meghans mental struggles with those of Carolines. The message being that the British press is so utterly toxic that it has resulted in someone (once associated with Harry) taking their own life. So it happened to someone he dated and it would lend weight to the idea that Meghan went through the same and was very lucky to come through that. When you have Flacks ex-husband saying Wooten has blood on his hands then Harry re-iterating that sentiment is not unbelievable. Would Harry seek to use Flacks death in order to aggrandize his wife? Would Meghan use Flacks death to manipulate Harry into stepping down? Who knows. It is all speculative. I’ve been over this before but if Harry said his wife felt like killing herself then it would automatically induce sympathy since we’re all aware of how toxic and aggressive those tabloids can be and how much they were constantly in the public eye. The logical fallacies from the context however, for me, point to it all being used to throw the men in grey suits/the hug averse family/the not asking if I am ok crew under the bus. Using a sensitive topic to encourage sympathy in order to torpedo a target i.e. the royal family/institution on Oprah, Dan Wooten as the de facto standing example of what tabloid editors get up to in Spare. You’ve said yourself that this collective all wanted Meghan dead.

Talk about conflating a few things.

1. I have no idea whether Meghan was suicidal; how could I know? If she was, then Harry could have called for help from a pool of probably the best possible psychologists and/or psychiatrists in the UK. I know that in a similar circumstance (which I have thankfully never been in) I would have moved heaven and earth to help my partner.
2. I suspect she wanted to leave because, despite all the intelligence gathering she had apparently undertaken, life in the RF with its millennium of history, a clear line of succession, centuries of protocol etc, it wasn't what she expected. Possibly, she assumed she would be able to change a thousand years of tradition. That's just delusional. (In fact, Meghan reminds me of a very lovely exchange student we hosted a long while ago. She was from Chicago. We took her to Warwick Castle for the day. As we walked in she looked at the signage which - IIRC - said that the origins of Warwick Castle go back to 914 AD. She said, "Wow, 1914, that's old!" The student could easily be forgiven - she was 14 years old. Meghan's not 14 years old and should have had a bit of good old "cop on") Whether you agree with a monarchy or not, they have a long established way of doing things and a pecking order. Meghan wanted to join the RF, but didn't want to follow the "company rules and policies" - or do any unpaid work. She wanted to be the same as Catherine, wanted to walk in front of Harry, wanted to be the first to greet a visiting dignitary - you get my drift?
3. I'm English and Brexit was, in my view, the most stupid thing the UK has done in living memory.

It was your last sentence that caused me to spill my tea. I needed a good laugh, and that comment delivered

Omid Scobie has named Jason Knauf (who works for William & Kate and recently honoured by William) in court as the person he spoke to about the book. It was not Meghan & Harry as continually claimed by the Daily Mail (in court) and their haters. It would be interested to get Knauf up on the stand and get him to answer a few questions.

It is possible. Can't know for sure. Initially it was suspect because she said she went to HR and got fobbed off. A bad look. Who goes to HR about their mental well being? Remember this is someone with the wherewithal to get US senators personal numbers. She was pregnant at the time and she would have been asked by law about her mental health from actual professionals. My wife was asked about it at every care visit during her pregnancies. Anything said in confidence would have resulted in care provided for. Then there was Harry saying in his book that he had his (confidential) therapist on speed dial during that time but, strangely, when his wife told him she was suicidal he was in institutional mode (i.e. needed to attend that evenings event instead) and it never occured to him, even in the days after, that his therapist might be available to help.

That you're trying to suggest I am a cold/insensitive type dismissing someones suicidal thoughts suggests the power of using that as a manipulation tool as well as its attractiveness to those who may use it for whatever purpose or agenda they have in mind. It looks like it worked on you. You think they all wanted her dead. This isn't Days of our Lives. In short, the mere statement of Meghan saying in public that she had such thoughts was more than enough. However, the explaining of how it all happened and the logical fallacies from it, to me, suggests there might be an agenda at play. Who knows.

So Knauf was telling the truth. If Harry and Meghan sent Knauf to Scobie then do you think they were involved with Scobie in some capacity albeit via a proxy? That was their argument.

They didn't send Knauf. He suggested he speak to them and they oked it (and the emails concerned that are available). Knauf advised them that he should speak to Scobie. Knauf was working for William & Kate all along. William has rewarded him well.

Royal aids have to respond to all requests from the media. I know Camilla is as thick as a thief with Clarkson & Morgan, but in most cases they usually keep their distance.

Photographer of hiking Meghan says it wasn't arranged.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CsHS1sqPnso/

Clint brewer's words:

she did not call me, I was going for breakfast as they drove pass me.

In Prince Harry's legal case against the Home Office about security, it seems that Sir Edward Young, the Queen's Private sec. (and now Charles') didn't pass on the information to Ravac that Harry had offered to pay for his security. Sir Edward stepped down today after 19 years service to King & Queen. He is also likely to be the one who prevented Harry from visiting his grandmother when they had privately arranged for Harry to visit just before she died. Harry referred to him as the Bee in Spare.

Could be that he is taking the hit for the Royal Family when it comes to Harry's security. No doubt it will be claimed that they knew nothing about the offer to pay.

There’s a lot more people deserving of a racial inequality award than MM- the thing about awards is that they can be manufactured for all sorts of reasons - looks like her PR campaign is in full flow

Home Office tells Prince Harry police officers are NOT for hire as 'private bodyguards for the wealthy':

Good - the British public have enough money worries with tax bands expected to increase and a lot more people like nurses expected to pay more tax- stick your hand in your pocket Harry- just like your uncle Andy, you’re a non-working Royal - pay your own way- your choice to move to one of the most exclusive areas to live on EARTH-,FACT!

No. It is the idea that police protection is for sale only when there is a public interest necessitating it e.g. mass gatherings such as football matches where the cost of policing is covered in part by (sold to) football clubs so that people can congregate at (and their non attending families presume they are safe at) such gatherings because policing needs to be in place. The kind of thing you happily pay your taxes for even if you have zero interest in the sport in question. What is not in the public interest is assurance for them that a Prince of their realm visiting the country in a private capacity is kept safe i.e. he will not be on official duty so he must dig into his own pocket for security instead of expecting resources reserved for public tax payers to be at his service.

Sorry but I just don’t get it - how exactly does she merit an award again?