Harry & Meghan 8: Time's Most Insufferable

[MomJeans]

I think the issue is that Harry wants Metro protection.

Charles can’t order that.

Harry’s statement doesn’t say that he is unable to pay for better protection, but that only police protection will do.

 

[Coconut Flan]

2 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

What baffles me is why this is even an issue for the public at all.  As a parent, if my kids had security needs because of who I am I'd pay for it if I could out of my own pocket.  Why isn't Charles just taking care of this?  

I know Harry's choices complicate everything and God knows he needs to stop speaking because he comes off as a giant entitled toddler, but Charles knew when he had kids they'd have security needs at least in some situations.  A visit home with a new baby and to see Archie again I can't understand why Grandpa isn't helping him arrange private security for this visit.  

I'm not saying he should be on the hook for security for the rest of his life, because the cost of that depends on H and M's choices so they need to buck up and pay for it or live a quieter life so less is needed.  But knowing the chaos of the press his first visit home with Lilibet as a parent I'd be throwing my kid an assist.

An excellent question.  Charles could definitely afford it and you'd think if he wanted to see his son and grandchildren, he'd offer if it was stopping the visit.  It seems that Harry can afford security, but he wants a specific kind of security one that even Charles can't order.  

Most families I would think would try to work out a reasonable solution.  We don't know what has happened between those two though and whatever it has been seems to have quite soured their relationship.  Possibly it's the palace machine getting in the way.  It's a surprising issue to have made it to this situation.  

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 minute ago, MomJeans said:

I think the issue is that Harry wants Metro protection.

Charles can’t order that.

Harry’s statement doesn’t say that he is unable to pay for better protection, but that only police protection will do.

 

I disagree with his demands, I don't know how it works there but I don't think he should be able to hire official police protection.  I was just saying if I were Charles with all his resources I'd like "look sweetie, we're going to keep you all safe with private security, I'm going to pay for it, and you're going to stop whining to the press implying no one cares about the well being of your family.  Now put Archie on the phone!"

[LilaMae]

5 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I disagree with his demands, I don't know how it works there but I don't think he should be able to hire official police protection.  I was just saying if I were Charles with all his resources I'd like "look sweetie, we're going to keep you all safe with private security, I'm going to pay for it, and you're going to stop whining to the press implying no one cares about the well being of your family.  Now put Archie on the phone!"

Harry doesn't want private security because they don't have the same access to high level intelligence as the Royal Protection Officers. Private Security are also restricted in things like carrying guns. He is specifically demanding the same security that he used to have (at least while he is in the UK), and he has been told that he can't have it because he's no longer a working member of the Royal Family. Harry's argument is that his risk level is exactly the same as when he was a working royal and that therefore he should have the same protection while in the UK, even if he has to pay for it. The Met clearly doesn't agree with him.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

6 minutes ago, LilaMae said:

Harry doesn't want private security because they don't have the same access to high level intelligence as the Royal Protection Officers. Private Security are also restricted in things like carrying guns. He is specifically demanding the same security that he used to have (at least while he is in the UK), and he has been told that he can't have it because he's no longer a working member of the Royal Family. Harry's argument is that his risk level is exactly the same as when he was a working royal and that therefore he should have the same protection while in the UK, even if he has to pay for it. The Met clearly doesn't agree with him.

If palace intel won't share threats that pertain to Harry and family with his private security putting him at greater risk, then that's inexcusable.  I can't understand any parent or grandparent allowing legit info to be withheld, but given Harry's penchant for overreacting to slights real and imagined we don't know the real story.

[Coconut Flan]

Yes, Harry seems to be tilting with windmills again and whining to the press as his way of getting what he wants.  It may be another doomed to failure attempt.  He appears to not accept that actions have consequences. 

He isn't very good at life lessons.  

I will bring up the three types of people in the world and Harry is stuck at type one:  people who never learn.  Two and three are those who learn from their mistakes and three is those who learn from the mistakes of others.  

1 minute ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

If palace intel won't share threats that pertain to Harry and family with his private security putting him at greater risk, then that's inexcusable.  I can't understand any parent or grandparent allowing legit info to be withheld, but given Harry's penchant for overreacting to slights real and imagined we don't know the real story.

LIke some of Harry's previously aired issues, he may be making more of things than the reality.  Do we actually believe that if there was a verified threat against Harry or his family that it wouldn't be made known?  How would the police look if something did happen?  But Harry sees paparazzi following him or waiting for him as a threat or a security failure.  He isn't living in reality in that respect.   As you say, we don't know the real story and Harry is still asking for something that isn't on the books.  He wants or is trying to demand extremely special treatment.

[just_ordinary]

5 hours ago, LilaMae said:

From Harry's statement on the issue-

"Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life.

"He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats."

For life? As soon as the Cambridge children grow up and start having children of their own, Harry falls into irrelevance, particularly as a non-working member of the Royal Family who lives in a different country. 

Regardless, people in the UK, even the rich and famous, are not allowed to purchase police protection. He can hire his own personal security. The statement also mentions that there was a "breach in security" during his last visit to the UK when press chased his car. But that seems like the precise thing that private security does anyway? 

He wasn’t that high up the chain in Afghanistan. Should be pay for extra protection for everyone that did a tour?Or anyone that get’s threatened by Neo-Nazis or other scumbags? (I am actually willing to discuss those points seriously under the idea of a solidarity society and what we should do for our members.)

He can easily step down from the line of succession and forgoe his and his children’s rights to the throne if he actually thinks it makes them too much of a target? It’s not likely he will ever be needed anyway. But of course he is not willing to give up any ties to his claim of fame anyway. They never gave up anything voluntarily, but only ever when they didn’t have another chance or when they were forced/the decision was made for them.

59 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

I see that, but I'm guessing the British security analysis on paper is looking at him in his objective situation which is not going to weigh on his being Diana's son.  Yes, he was born with a job, but one he has left.  No, he can't quit being Charles' son, but he walked away from the responsibilities that normally go with that birth.  He has put himself in an extremely awkward situation and now he's living with the consequences.  That he did not foresee the issues goes to his entitlement and apparently refusing to listen to advisors who could have helped him see what the results of the decisions the Sussexes were making would be.  

That said I'm rather surprised that the people who make these decisions would not provide the son of the future king protection when he's in the country.  I can understand the basis of their decision, but I didn't expect it.  I don't think the Diana issue would make a difference in their assessment, but son of the relatively soon to be king perhaps should.  At least I thought that until I read Anne and Edward only have state paid security when they do official duties.  By that, Harry would only have security for official duties.  He doesn't do official duties, so no security.  It makes sense in a bureaucratic review way which is what they do.  

So, why would Harry ever be more at risk than the children of the current monarch? One hated by the public because the public’s opinion is he is a scumbag, brat, pedophile and rapist. Two working very hard with a pretty high professional standing inside the institution. Non of them get as much as Harry wants for himself, while he is not even the child of the current monarch.

I get that he manoeuvred his family into a situation where they might be more at risk than they have to. But his arguments are lacking. He cannot compare his royal position to his aunt and uncle but there is definitely more drama around his family (apart from Andrew who is wildly disliked).

50 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

What baffles me is why this is even an issue for the public at all.  As a parent, if my kids had security needs because of who I am I'd pay for it if I could out of my own pocket.  Why isn't Charles just taking care of this?  

I know Harry's choices complicate everything and God knows he needs to stop speaking because he comes off as a giant entitled toddler, but Charles knew when he had kids they'd have security needs at least in some situations.  A visit home with a new baby and to see Archie again I can't understand why Grandpa isn't helping him arrange private security for this visit.  

I'm not saying he should be on the hook for security for the rest of his life, because the cost of that depends on H and M's choices so they need to buck up and pay for it or live a quieter life so less is needed.  But knowing the chaos of the press his first visit home with Lilibet as a parent I'd be throwing my kid an assist.

Harry is an almost 40 year old multi millionaire. His family has set him up with tons of money. How long exactly should they be on the hook for security? They had two years to figure this out by now. Especially after this son is part of several multi million dollar business deals, has purchased a multi million dollar mansion, uses the most expensive way of travelling…..

I get the idea of stepping in to help, but I don’t think you need to foot the bill for your multi millionaire son to be able to see your grandchildren? If that’s the case the whole thing stinks. 

Edited January 16, 2022 by just_ordinary

[HerNameIsBuffy]

2 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

He can easily step down from the line of succession and forgoe his and his children’s rights to the throne if he actually thinks it makes them too much of a target? It’s not likely he will ever be needed anyway. But of course he is not willing to give up any ties to his claim of fame anyway. They never gave up anything voluntarily, but only ever when they didn’t have another chance or when they were forced/the decision was made for them.

So, why would Harry ever be more at risk than the children of the current monarch? One hated by the public because the public’s opinion is he is a scumbag, brat, pedophile and rapist. Two working very hard with a pretty high professional inside the institution. Non of them get as much as Harry wants for himself, while he is not even the child of the current monarch.

I get that he manoeuvred his family into a situation where they might be more at risk than they have to. But his arguments are lacking. He cannot compare his royal position to his aunt and uncle but there is definitely more drama around his family (apart from Andrew who is wildly disliked).

Harry is an almost 40 year old multi millionaire. How long exactly should his family be on the hook for security? They had two years to figure this out by now. Especially after this son is part of several multi million dollar business deals, has purchased a multi million dollar mansion, uses the most expensive way of travelling…..

I get the idea of stepping in to help, but I don’t think you need to foot the bill for your multi millionaire son to be able to see your grandchildren? If that’s the case the whole thing stinks. 

The difference is outside the UK most people still know who Harry is and Charles other siblings and Andrew's girls are known to royal watchers but could blend into obscurity if they wanted to in a way Harry never can.

If any royal outside of the queen, Charles, the boys and their wives could show up in my local grocery store and no one would have any idea who they are.  I only know their names and what they look like from reading here and googling out of curiosity.

Even if Harry did all the right things (even though he did the opposite) and truly wanted a private life (which he does not) he would still cause a stir if he showed up at Target.  He has a level of fame none of the more obscure royals can relate to.

He's still acting like a brat and handling things in the worst possible way from a PR standpoint, honestly they both seem like they'd exhaust everyone in their path, but IMO the comparisons to lesser known royals are just apples and oranges the situations are so different.

To the bolded (bolding mine) I agree the whole thing stinks and I specifically wasn't arguing that Charles should be on the hook for all his security.  However it also stinks that he was born into a life where the need for security exists from the moment he was born.  

Maybe parents shouldn't have to pay for security to see their grandkids, but by the same token a child shouldn't have to outlay massive additional funds to visit their Dad.   In a healthy family they could come up with a solution without using public funds or public tantrums.

[MomJeans]

It's the Metro Police that won't share the info, not the Palace.  It's top secret- it's illegal for the Palace to leak it.  And the police do not share that info with anyone who doesn't have clearance.  Not just Harry's security team.  Because it's obtained through sources that will only share if confidentiality is agreed upon, and because sharing will put other individuals at risk.

It's also not likely tailored just to Harry and Meghan but comes in bands "we have specific chatter from X source that a public figure is being targeted, and American sources have similar chatter saying it could be a royal, and our insider in the ___ terrorist cell is claiming it could be a younger royal, but so far his intel hasn't panned out.  MI6 thinks it could be connected to a ___ type of event, but French intelligence has shared that they are seeing chatter only about the Prime Minister's wife . . . . ."  So to share, means sharing info that puts others at risk.

(Now if there is a specific threat against Harry or Meghan, typically protection is provided for that specific threat, as it has been for other private citizens.  "The __ neo nazi group is targeting Harry & Meghan's appearance at the opera tonight."  But in intel, it's rarely that specific.  And Harry's statement is not demanding protection for specific threats only.)

That's why it likely has to be an all or nothing arrangement- either the Metro provides the security, or they don't.  And one of the reasons they likely rejected reimbursement is because in the U.K., Metro security costs for specific individuals is also secretive.  We see a bit more cost info about former Prime Ministers, because some of their costs come out of accounts that are public record.

I really don't think this is something that can be solved by Charles offering to pay.  Again, Harry's own words do not purport that this is a financial issue.  He wants Metro security, or he won't bring his children to the U.K.  I think he's trying to put pressure on the Queen and Charles, but this is a situation that they have no power over.  The royals don't even get to retain or choose their security officers (they were recently upset over losing longtime bodyguards in favor of short rotations).  Security is provided to them- they don't get to pick and choose it.

 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

8 minutes ago, MomJeans said:

It's the Metro Police that won't share the info, not the Palace.  It's top secret- it's illegal for the Palace to leak it.  And the police do not share that info with anyone who doesn't have clearance.  Not just Harry's security team.  Because it's obtained through sources that will only share if confidentiality is agreed upon, and because sharing will put other individuals at risk.

It's also not likely tailored just to Harry and Meghan but comes in bands "we have specific chatter from X source that a public figure is being targeted, and American sources have similar chatter saying it could be a royal, and our insider in the ___ terrorist cell is claiming it could be a younger royal, but so far his intel hasn't panned out.  MI6 thinks it could be connected to a ___ type of event, but French intelligence has shared that they are seeing chatter only about the Prime Minister's wife . . . . ."  So to share, means sharing info that puts others at risk.

(Now if there is a specific threat against Harry or Meghan, typically protection is provided for that specific threat, as it has been for other private citizens.  "The __ neo nazi group is targeting Harry & Meghan's appearance at the opera tonight."  But in intel, it's rarely that specific.  And Harry's statement is not demanding protection for specific threats only.)

That's why it likely has to be an all or nothing arrangement- either the Metro provides the security, or they don't.  And one of the reasons they likely rejected reimbursement is because in the U.K., Metro security costs for specific individuals is also secretive.  We see a bit more cost info about former Prime Ministers, because some of their costs come out of accounts that are public record.

I really don't think this is something that can be solved by Charles offering to pay.  Again, Harry's own words do not purport that this is a financial issue.  He wants Metro security, or he won't bring his children to the U.K.  I think he's trying to put pressure on the Queen and Charles, but this is a situation that they have no power over.  The royals don't even get to retain or choose their security officers (they were recently upset over losing longtime bodyguards in favor of short rotations).  Security is provided to them- they don't get to pick and choose it.

 

Thanks, I appreciate the information.  

[just_ordinary]

@HerNameIsBuffy but the fact that the child of a person of publicly interest is massively well known is not more the fault of PC than in any other constellation. Also- I think people overestimate Harry’s profile. Yes, he is well known globally. But he did. years of work where he wanted exactly that. His charity projects live of his public profile, he did royal tours, they choose the most dramatic exist AND made sure to still have attention drawing public appearances. They choose public business roles in the US that also live of this kind of attention and exposure. 
I would argue that his profile would have been not much higher than Princess Anne’s or even her husband’s at this point if they had decided to be actually private. They choose not to be though.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

11 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

@HerNameIsBuffy but the fact that the child of a person of publicly interest is massively well known is not more the fault of PC than in any other constellation. Also- I think people overestimate Harry’s profile. Yes, he is well known globally. But he did. years of work where he wanted exactly that. His charity projects live of his public profile, he did royal tours, they choose the most dramatic exist AND made sure to still have attention drawing public appearances. They choose public business roles in the US that also live of this kind of attention and exposure. 
I would argue that his profile would have been not much higher than Princess Anne’s or even her husband’s at this point if they had decided to be actually private. They choose not to be though.

By PC do you mean police?  Because I agree he shouldn't get police security.

[EmCatlyn]

3 hours ago, rosamundi said:

The police don't routinely protect celebrities. If there is specific intelligence of a threat, then the police would get involved with protection until that threat is passed, but otherwise celebrities are expected to pay for their own security. By "others who have left public office and have an inherent threat risk receive police protection at no cost to them" Harry is referring to former Prime Ministers and certain other Ministers of State. Off the top of my head:

• Former Prime Ministers
• Former Secretaries of State for Northern Ireland (due to the specific risk associated with that role)
• Former Home Secretaries
• Former Defence Secretaries

They can forgo it if they want to, it's assessed on the specific level of risk relative to what they were dealing with in office. Provision for other former Ministers is assessed on a case by case basis (a lot of even junior ministers in the Northern Ireland Office got police protection for years).

Yes, you are correct, I should have said “public figures” not “celebrities.” 

[EmCatlyn]

3 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

An excellent question.  Charles could definitely afford it and you'd think if he wanted to see his son and grandchildren, he'd offer if it was stopping the visit.  It seems that Harry can afford security, but he wants a specific kind of security one that even Charles can't order.  

Most families I would think would try to work out a reasonable solution.  We don't know what has happened between those two though and whatever it has been seems to have quite soured their relationship.  Possibly it's the palace machine getting in the way.  It's a surprising issue to have made it to this situation.  

The issue is not who will pay for additional security.  The issue is Harry wants police protection. He says he is willing to pay the police himself, but that’s not allowed.

Aside from the fact that Harry is paranoid, part of what is going on is he wants to highlight how unfair it is that he lost police protection.  It’s not so much about the money but of feeling that he has lost something he should have.

[hoipolloi]

7 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

The issue is Harry wants police protection. He says he is willing to pay the police himself, but that’s not allowed.

In some, maybe many, US jurisdictions a local government's police officers can be hired for private purposes -- where I live they're called "special duty officers." Usually, it's something like managing traffic for roadway construction or a parade. They are in uniform, with all their weapons & other tools, and have the full authority of a regular duty PO. Apparently, this is not a possibility in the UK. 

Too bad for Harry, if so, but it's hardly personal and he needs to figure out a reasonable alternative rather than have public tantrums.

 

[DalmatianCat]

3 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I was just saying if I were Charles with all his resources I'd like "look sweetie, we're going to keep you all safe with private security, I'm going to pay for it, and you're going to stop whining to the press implying no one cares about the well being of your family.  Now put Archie on the phone!"

For all we know Charles has said that and Harry responded with: But I want the royal protection officers! It’s the only way I’ll feel safe.

Charles (for the ump-teenth time): Son, it doesn’t work the way. I have no control over who gets a royal protection officer.

Harry: But the danger!

Charles: If there is a credible threat metro police will let your security know and step in. Now I wish you would give this security firm a call…they have excellent recommendations and will be much better than those nincompoops you used last time.

Harry: But maybe Gran…

Charles: She has no control over this either.

Harry: if she would just ask…

Charles: After all the trouble your uncle has caused we’re not doing anything to invite scrutiny. This is nothing we can control. We have laws and guidelines to follow.

Harry: Don’t worry, I have an idea.

Charles: Harry, don’t take this to court…

Harry: I’ve got this…call you back soon!

Charles: Don’t— *click* (to dead phone) sue someone again.
 

Meanwhile the American tabloids are lamenting how uncaring the royal family is and the royal family is sighing and rolling their eyes and grimacing at another round of interviews that have nothing to do with fact, Harry is feeling rather pleased with his non-solution, and an extra layer of awkward has to be worked through on a much anticipated trip that everyone is probably looking looking forward to if certain parties would just keep their mouths shut.

Edited January 16, 2022 by DalmatianCat
Typo

[just_ordinary]

Why even release the statement? He is not a working royal anymore, so police protection was off the table ever since they left. And even before it’s the police that asses the threats and decides who gets what kind of protection or not. He was already complaining then iirc. Nothing has changed. Is it so justify why they won’t come to the UK? Is it to strong arm his grandmother to elevate his status again (which is still no guarantee for police protection anyway)? Is it do throw a dig at the police? 
Or is it to get public attention by playing the victim of real or imagined unfair treatment ONCE AGAIN. Harry really has a problem here, because everything he shows the public is whining, complaining and criticising/lecturing others (social media, the internet, trolls/critics, the press, the monarchy, his family, people for having more than two children, flying extra cheap into their holidays….). It’s a pretty negative picture because he never comes up with a string of positive attention. Why doesn’t he concentrate on the good things to rewrite his public persona? There must be something more than two tours to Afghanistan and Invictus? I haven’t heard about Sentebale more intensively in a long time. What happened to his think tank job? What to his producing gig (video/audio). If being the victim is still all he got after two years, he needs to swap therapists and (pr) manager ASAP. He can be a miserable prick in private all he wants but that’s not a good base to build a successful profile on.

Maybe he should take a look at his wife. I am pretty sure she is just as entitled and feels just as screwed over (even though I think she has at least a point) but at least she is able to appear interested and gets more positive angles into her actions. Not always but at least she has a bit more to offer than whining.

Edited January 16, 2022 by just_ordinary

[Coconut Flan]

34 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

The issue is not who will pay for additional security.  The issue is Harry wants police protection. He says he is willing to pay the police himself, but that’s not allowed.

I think perhaps you overlooked this part of my post that you quoted:

Quote

It seems that Harry can afford security, but he wants a specific kind of security one that even Charles can't order.  

 

[Coconut Flan]

40 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

In some, maybe many, US jurisdictions a local government's police officers can be hired for private purposes -- where I live they're called "special duty officers." Usually, it's something like managing traffic for roadway construction or a parade. They are in uniform, with all their weapons & other tools, and have the full authority of a regular duty PO. Apparently, this is not a possibility in the UK. 

Too bad for Harry, if so, but it's hardly personal and he needs to figure out a reasonable alternative rather than have public tantrums.

I can address this somewhat.  My father was a deputy police chief and yes did some of those jobs.  What happened in their department was someone with a private function would call and ask if they could hire police officers.  What then happened was volunteers were sought if it was approved. They were paid directly by the event and had to do the work on their off time.  Perhaps some other departments have a way of funneling the money through, but then you get into overtime, pension payments, etc.  Parades and similar regular public events were included in their regular work so there was a process to submit for parade assistance and the officers worked their regular hours doing the parade instead of whatever else.  The county clerk had a schedule of charges that were then paid to the county.  

Any private security would have to have been approved by the department, but all arrangements for hours and payment would have been between the officers and the private party.  Any additional employement for officers had to have departmental approval.  

Even that arrangement probably wouldn't work for Harry because he doesn't seem to want off duty officers, but a cadre assigned to him like he had as a working royal.  

Edited January 16, 2022 by Coconut Flan

[MomJeans]

17 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

Why even release the statement? . . . .

Harry's claiming that he "had" to release a statement because a newspaper was about to break the story.  

Of course, it's not so much that he "had" to release a statement, but it's the typical Sussex attempt to control the narrative and paint themselves as victims.  Which usually doesn't work out for them, in my personal opinion. 

If any statement had to be released, it should simply have stated "We believe, after an extensive legal review by our attorneys, that the law provides police protection for our family, given the current serious threat assessment if we enter the U.K.  We are asking for further review by the government, and we are proposing that taxpayer costs will be reimbursed by us personally. We look forward to the government review, as we believe our interpretation of the law is sound."

I also tend to think that the statement was a clear message to Harry's father and grandmother: if we don't get what we want, you won't be seeing the kids.  And though I do think Harry may be given police protection because Charles will be King, I don't support anyone blackmailing the royals or the Police about anything. (It's terrible blackmail anyway, since the Queen can't give him what he wants.)

And it further shows that Harry lacks even the most basic understanding as to how the modern Royal Family functions; it's very delicate relationship with other U.K. institutions; and what rights its non-working members have.  Harry seems stuck believing that these are Tudor times, and the Monarch can demand whatever she wants.

[viii]

9 hours ago, LilaMae said:

For life? As soon as the Cambridge children grow up and start having children of their own, Harry falls into irrelevance, particularly as a non-working member of the Royal Family who lives in a different country. 

Harry is Diana’s son. He is the grandson and eventually son of the most famous monarchy. The world has grown up with him and for the majority of his life, the public has had a fierce protective claim on him. His fame, even if he lives in LA until his dying day, will not fade away. He is always going to be a source of public interest, solely due to who he is. Dislike him all you want, but assuming someday he’s going to be an average person nobody cares about is just dumb. 

4 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

He isn't very good at life lessons.  

Truer words have never been spoken. 

[hoipolloi]

47 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

What then happened was volunteers were sought if it was approved. They were paid directly by the event and had to do the work on their off time.

This is how it works where I live. The POs sign up on a roster for special duty jobs and get the jobs in turn as well as by seniority, etc. It is all separate from official duty hours. Also, if you wish to employ special duty POs, you can't ask for specific individuals -- you have to hire whoever is at the top of the list. None of this counts toward retirement, unlike official overtime. Still, it's good money and many POs participate in this.

 

47 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

Even that arrangement probably wouldn't work for Harry because he doesn't seem to want off duty officers, but a cadre assigned to him like he had as a working royal.  

This is my impression. He won't or can't understand that he can't have what he's asking for. It could be that they've hired special duty officers in LA for security or whatever but that has no bearing on the UK. 

Edited January 16, 2022 by hoipolloi

[just_ordinary]

1 hour ago, MomJeans said:

Harry's claiming that he "had" to release a statement because a newspaper was about to break the story.  

Of course, it's not so much that he "had" to release a statement, but it's the typical Sussex attempt to control the narrative and paint themselves as victims.  Which usually doesn't work out for them, in my personal opinion. 

If any statement had to be released, it should simply have stated "We believe, after an extensive legal review by our attorneys, that the law provides police protection for our family, given the current serious threat assessment if we enter the U.K.  We are asking for further review by the government, and we are proposing that taxpayer costs will be reimbursed by us personally. We look forward to the government review, as we believe our interpretation of the law is sound."

I also tend to think that the statement was a clear message to Harry's father and grandmother: if we don't get what we want, you won't be seeing the kids.  And though I do think Harry may be given police protection because Charles will be King, I don't support anyone blackmailing the royals or the Police about anything. (It's terrible blackmail anyway, since the Queen can't give him what he wants.)

And it further shows that Harry lacks even the most basic understanding as to how the modern Royal Family functions; it's very delicate relationship with other U.K. institutions; and what rights its non-working members have.  Harry seems stuck believing that these are Tudor times, and the Monarch can demand whatever she wants.

Ahhh yes of course, because what they say makes them look that much better than whatever story would have been out there…. He is just not learning from earlier mistakes.

51 minutes ago, viii said:

Harry is Diana’s son. He is the grandson and eventually son of the most famous monarchy. The world has grown up with him and for the majority of his life, the public has had a fierce protective claim on him. His fame, even if he lives in LA until his dying day, will not fade away. He is always going to be a source of public interest, solely due to who he is. Dislike him all you want, but assuming someday he’s going to be an average person nobody cares about is just dumb. 

Truer words have never been spoken. 

Oh come on. As if. Diana is dead for over 25 years. Michael Jackson’s kids seem to be doing ok, and I would argue that’s the same or even more popular level. He is the grandchild of the current monarch. Yes, there will always be some attention. But who really believes that he couldn’t have a MUCH more private life? His choices are to stay in the public light. He chooses to play up his mother’s story for his own gain. He chooses to expose his children and life for public attention. No one forced them to work with a public profile. They didn’t even try to tone it down. I think we have seen as much of Lili as of Charlotte in the same time frame. Just the release of the pictures were at different times. 
People massively overestimate his claim to fame. He could have easily attained a profile like Edward. Boring and mostly forgotten. But people forget that he didn’t want this. They never wanted to quit. They were left no choice (in their minds). They never wanted to give up anything that tied them to the big bad, abusive, mean racist institution/family. They had to stop using Sussex Royal and HRH, they threw a fit when they realised their children won’t get to be Prince/Princess (and rightly so, the public wants less titled hanger ons for decades), he wanted to keep his purely honorary titles- probably just because they sound better than what he actually earned in service……. 
Interestingly, they find a way to turn up in the headlines as victims whenever either no one talks about them anymore or asks what happened to their business ventures. 
So yeah, I don’t believe for a second he could not life a relatively quiet, comfortable and private life if he really wanted to. He doesn’t and as long as he doesn’t try he won’t prove me otherwise. 
 

I often write they, but I actually mostly mean him. I do still have a soft spot for Meghan and think of anyone can claim to have drawn the short stick it’s her.

Edited January 16, 2022 by just_ordinary

[DalmatianCat]

41 minutes ago, viii said:

Harry is Diana’s son. He is the grandson and eventually son of the most famous monarchy. The world has grown up with him and for the majority of his life, the public has had a fierce protective claim on him. His fame, even if he lives in LA until his dying day, will not fade away. He is always going to be a source of public interest, solely due to who he is. Dislike him all you want, but assuming someday he’s going to be an average person nobody cares about is just dumb.  

He’s never going to be “average” but his relevance will continue to fade over time. “The world” who is super attached to Will and Harry because they are Diana’s boys is mainly the over 50 crowd. The younger generations just don’t have the same memories of him or Diana to keep him constantly in the limelight as a national treasure when he’s not actively part of the royal family.

Most people I know under 30 (in America…maybe it’s different in the UK or Europe) have very little interest in the royal family or Harry and feel no sort of protective claim on him. Being Diana’s son is irrelevant to them as they’ve have only heard of the impact of Diana second or third-hand and didn’t get to experience it as it happened. The group who feels attached to Harry because he was Diana’s son will get smaller over time while new royal watchers will become increasingly invested in Will, Kate, and the Cambridge kids because they are the next family in line. 
These conversations about relevance will eventually center around Charlotte and Louie and not even mention Harry.

I think Harry is becoming aware of this, which is why he’s probably anxious to bring his children for a visit before more time passes. He wants to bring them to England while granny is still Queen, dad is still the Prince of Wales, he’s still thought of fondly by aging royal fans as “Diana’s son,” and he still understands how the royal family/palace is being run (of course…how much he understood is up in the air), and the position he had in the family.

Once the Queen passes, he will be the son of a monarch, but it will be a role in which he has no official part to play. William will be the child given all the important roles, Kate will be the wife getting all the attention as the next queen, other special things will be earmarked for George, and when he visits he will be “outside” all the inner workings of the family/palace.

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, Coconut Flan said:

I think perhaps you overlooked this part of my post that you quoted:

 

No, I didn’t overlook it. —-Sorry if it seemed that way.  I thought I was elaborating on your point.  You said, “Charles could afford… “ and “Harry could afford…”  I was emphasizing that not only could Harry afford but he had offered to pay.  So that makes it obvious that it isn’t about money or about what Charles could or could not do.  You were saying this, but I felt I could go further and emphasize that this is more about whatever “British police protection” represents to Harry than the question of how much money is involved or who pays for it.

The offer to pay, the mention of money, is all so Harry can bring attention to the fact that he isn’t getting police protection while other public figures get it.  He wants it known that he should get protection, but he has learned that he will be criticized for costing the taxpayer money.

Discussions of whether or not Charles or the Queen could help pay for additional private security overlook what is Harry’s real issue.  I get the feeling that he feels that the protection is part of his birthright that has been denied him.

Then too, he is paranoid about the paparazzi and any public attention he can’t control.  Frankly, I don’t think very much of any therapy he may be getting, though (to be sure) for therapy to work you have to want to change. 

Edited January 16, 2022 by EmCatlyn