Prince Harry

[20togo]

I'm apathetic which is a valid position. Believe it or not we don't have to take entrenched binary positions on every single issue.

Of course, but I think it reasonable to have thought when you say you "don't care" for the King that I interpret that the way I did. Just for the record and I know it's not particularly relevant to this topic but me and bifster have had many many long drawn out debates and arguments on here over a long period of time on a variety of subjects. It is what it is. I'm sure he'll acknowledge that.

 

[20togo]

Though it is still classed as Treason and carries s life sentence.

I don’t deny you have forthright opinions… I just think you struggle to engage authentically and with proper openness and honesty at times.

mmm... yesterday it was that I go along with the popular or majority opinion. Not sure how that equates to "forthright opinions". Neither do I get your point regarding openness and honesty.I'd suggest my forthright opinions means I'm very much open and honest. But if you really think otherwise then nowt I can do about it.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

mmm... yesterday it was that I go along with the popular or majority opinion. Not sure how that equates to "forthright opinions". Neither do I get your point regarding openness and honesty.I'd suggest my forthright opinions means I'm very much open and honest. But if you really think otherwise then nowt I can do about it.

You have a natural propensity to completely miss the point…

Yesterday (same as today)… you consistently accuse me of being contrary and you emphasise this by suggesting that I like to ‘go against the grain’… So my comment relating to your ‘opinion’ was a clear pushback … So asking whether you form your opinions based upon the majority viewpoint!!

I’m talking about honesty, in terms of being prepared to be authentic and vulnerable, rather than guarded, cagey and inauthentic.

 

[TheRealKingKenny]

Of course, but I think it reasonable to have thought when you say you "don't care" for the King that I interpret that the way I did. Just for the record and I know it's not particularly relevant to this topic but me and bifster have had many many long drawn out debates and arguments on here over a long period of time on a variety of subjects. It is what it is. I'm sure he'll acknowledge that.

I don't think saying you don't care is particularly venomous, especially when compared to some of the things said about M&H on this thread!

 

[Bloodtangerine]

@Bloodtangerine classic run chase, I'm concerned about your indifferent form of late! You've gone down the order to a tail ender. AVFTTs very own Phil Tufnell

Zzzzzz

 

[20togo]

I don't think saying you don't care is particularly venomous, especially when compared to some of the things said about M&H on this thread!

I don't think I ever suggested it did. And I don't think, I may be wrong, I've said anything against Meghan on this thread. There's parts of what Harry says in the various programmes that i can agree with. But the angle where I'm coming from in this is all to do with him dissing his family, pretty much solely for the dollar and he somehow thinks that the more he has to say about the family will somehow help a reconciliation.

There's a programme on now[US based] and he's pretty much trotting out more and more of the same stuff. He's said his peace, how many times does he have to say it? Do you seriously believe he's helping himself with all this. Especially when he refers to his own mental health issues. He's making it a feeding frenzy and yet so many on here seem to justify it.

 

[20togo]

Some great comments from him. He'd never leak anything against his family. What the fuck does he think he is doing?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Some great comments from him. He'd never leak anything against his family. What the fuck does he think he is doing?

He’s stating stuff publicly from his own mouth…

Leaking is when you hide behind the cloak of anonymity, rather than being forthright.

 

[Wizaard]

It's over 50 years[ yes I looked it up] since the last hanging. Safe to say that it's unlikely to happen ever again. Pretty weak point that, tbh.

Treason was still a hanging offence until Labour came to power in 97 and repealed it.

Treason is French for betrayal and High Treason betrayal of the Monarch. As such, adultery with royalty was previously a hanging offence.

Still a life term, technically.

 

[20togo]

So then bifster, a very brief synopsis of the relevant key points in our recent exchanges.

I said it was about taking sides though you said it wasn't. I used the term contrary Mary because that's what you are. It's a tag I've labelled you with before and it's an accurate one. Why? Because you openly have admitted that you can deliberately take a pov opposite to the majority one.

You said you are open to changing your mind if a convincing argument is put forward.

I said no you're not, you never change your mind based on what others say on here.

You then said you weren't anti monarchy.

I then provided pretty damning evidence to suggest otherwise.

You then linked in numerous posts of yours defending pretty much the right for the country to mourn the Queens death.

There you go. BUT..

Not one of those posts has anything to do whatsoever with some-one changing your opinion by a convincing argument on AVFTT. They were all to do with you being your contrary mary self. So which is it, bifster, are you anti monarchy or are you a contrary mary? The answer based on evidence is not NEITHER.

So, hoist by your own petard bifster. You tightened the noose on yourself and I'm simply the hangman opening the trapdoor.

My learned friend Mex may wish to re-evaluate his post #526. No open mind from bifster at all.

 

[20togo]

Treason was still a hanging offence until Labour came to power in 97 and repealed it.

Treason is French for betrayal and High Treason betrayal of the Monarch. As such, adultery with royalty was previously a hanging offence.

Still a life term, technically.

like I said, a pretty weak point.

 

[ElBurroSinNombre]

So then bifster, a very brief synopsis of the relevant key points in our recent exchanges.

I said it was about taking sides though you said it wasn't. I used the term contrary Mary because that's what you are. It's a tag I've labelled you with before and it's an accurate one. Why? Because you openly have admitted that you can deliberately take a pov opposite to the majority one.

You said you are open to changing your mind if a convincing argument is put forward.

I said no you're not, you never change your mind based on what others say on here.

You then said you weren't anti monarchy.

I then provided pretty damning evidence to suggest otherwise.

You then linked in numerous posts of yours defending pretty much the right for the country to mourn the Queens death.

There you go. BUT..

Not one of those posts has anything to do whatsoever with some-one changing your opinion by a convincing argument on AVFTT. They were all to do with you being your contrary mary self. So which is it, bifster, are you anti monarchy or are you a contrary mary? The answer based on evidence is not NEITHER.

So, hoist by your own petard bifster. You tightened the noose on yourself and I'm simply the hangman opening the trapdoor.

My learned friend Mex may wish to re-evaluate his post #526. No open mind from bifster at all.

I don't really want to get involved in this but what you are saying here is, perhaps unsurprisingly given your record, incorrect.
Here are two examples of BFC changing his opinion on here based on new information (or a reconsideration) which involved myself;

During the COVID crisis BFC made an incorrect post about a newspaper report into vaccine development. When it was pointed out to him that his assumptions were wrong he changed his view.
On another occasion (Wills and Kate's wedding) he changed his opinion after much debate on misogynistic stuff posted on the internet about Kate

Things are rarely as black or white as you would like to cast them. Your own half-hearted acknowledgement that adultery is probably a bad thing whilst supporting our own adulterous king demonstrates that very well.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

So then bifster, a very brief synopsis of the relevant key points in our recent exchanges.

I said it was about taking sides though you said it wasn't. I used the term contrary Mary because that's what you are. It's a tag I've labelled you with before and it's an accurate one. Why? Because you openly have admitted that you can deliberately take a pov opposite to the majority one.

You said you are open to changing your mind if a convincing argument is put forward.

I said no you're not, you never change your mind based on what others say on here.

You then said you weren't anti monarchy.

I then provided pretty damning evidence to suggest otherwise.

You then linked in numerous posts of yours defending pretty much the right for the country to mourn the Queens death.

There you go. BUT..

Not one of those posts has anything to do whatsoever with some-one changing your opinion by a convincing argument on AVFTT. They were all to do with you being your contrary mary self. So which is it, bifster, are you anti monarchy or are you a contrary mary? The answer based on evidence is not NEITHER.

So, hoist by your own petard bifster. You tightened the noose on yourself and I'm simply the hangman opening the trapdoor.

My learned friend Mex may wish to re-evaluate his post #526. No open mind from bifster at all.

I thought this post was about Prince Harry…

Yet it’s ended up in you targeting me and desperately trying to justify yourself.

If it makes you feel better to label me as contrary, that’s cool… and it’s likely pretty accurate.

If doubling down on your desperate search of historic posts, rather than having the strength of character and humility to recognise integrity and respond in kind, when you see it is the way you choose to go… that’s cool too… As I said you struggle with authenticity, that much is plain.

Now how about we at least try to get back on topic…

Maybe we could start by reviewing the actual subject matter and perhaps seeing where we agree, rather than disagree and from that we can maybe hone in on why we disagree…

So …

Having listened further to Harry last night… Do you now have a better understanding of where he is coming from?

Can you see that much of his ire is aimed at the press?

And that the fundamental issue he has with his family is not their ‘interpersonal relationships’ , but rather that his family have essentially’ thrown him and his wife under the bus in order to cement and improve their own popularity ratings..

Can you then perhaps understand why he feels that he has a right and is motivated to set the record straight ?

 

[20togo]

I thought this post was about Prince Harry…

Yet it’s ended up in you targeting me and desperately trying to justify yourself.

If it makes you feel better to label me as contrary, that’s cool… and it’s likely pretty accurate.

If doubling down on your desperate search of historic posts, rather than having the strength of character and humility to recognise integrity and respond in kind, when you see it is the way you choose to go… that’s cool too… As I said you struggle with authenticity, that much is plain.

Now how about we at least try to get back on topic…

Maybe we could start by reviewing the actual subject matter and perhaps seeing where we agree, rather than disagree and from that we can maybe hone in on why we disagree…

So …

Having listened further to Harry last night… Do you now have a better understanding of where he is coming from?

Can you see that much of his ire is aimed at the press?

And that the fundamental issue he has with his family is not their ‘interpersonal relationships’ , but rather that his family have essentially’ thrown him and his wife under the bus in order to cement and improve their own popularity ratings..

Can you then perhaps understand why he feels that he has a right and is motivated to set the record straight ?

No desperation at all. You acknowledge that you are contrary, a label I've tagged you with previously. And of course historic posts is a way of proving that. Really don't see why you think it's wrong to do that. You said you weren't against the monarchy and I provided pretty damning evidence to suggest you thought otherwise. Personally, I would have thought that some-ones anti monarchy stance would harden rather than soften following the death of the Queen but you seemingly again go against the grain on that.

As I've said previously, my focus on this is about how he thinks by doing all this media stuff, the book etc, thinks it will help him reconcile with his family? And I'm comfortable with myself looking at it from that pov, as are many other people. I make it pretty clear that I believe he's doing it for the money, something which I think you've acknowledged. And that is the angle I'm coming from whereas your angle seems to be more focused on his ire is with the press, something which he is using himself to hit back at his family. You seem to want to apportion blame on everyone but him as if he's completely innocent in all this. And whether you like it not, him telling previously unknown incidents to the press whether he's fronting it up or not isn't doing him any favours. Even if you don't want to call it "leaking".

There is only one winner here and it ain't him, it ain't Meghan, it ain't his brother, his brothers wife and it ain't his father or Camilla. It's the media!. Harry is fighting a fight he can never win. His family, the Institution know that because it's pretty much always been the case and that's why they are maintaining a [dignified] silence.

 

[20togo]

I don't really want to get involved in this but what you are saying here is, perhaps unsurprisingly given your record, incorrect.
Here are two examples of BFC changing his opinion on here based on new information (or a reconsideration) which involved myself;

During the COVID crisis BFC made an incorrect post about a newspaper report into vaccine development. When it was pointed out to him that his assumptions were wrong he changed his view.
On another occasion (Wills and Kate's wedding) he changed his opinion after much debate on misogynistic stuff posted on the internet about Kate

Things are rarely as black or white as you would like to cast them. Your own half-hearted acknowledgement that adultery is probably a bad thing whilst supporting our own adulterous king demonstrates that very well.

If you don't want to get involved then don't. Suffice to say, I already realise that your view of the monarchy doesn't come from a neutral standpoint. That's your choice and that's fine. I don't do half hearted acknowledgements either. I say what I think, and that adultery has been a common occurrence in mankind no matter whoever the subject matter might be.

 

[ElBurroSinNombre]

If you don't want to get involved then don't. Suffice to say, I already realise that your view of the monarchy doesn't come from a neutral standpoint.

Neither does yours does it?

So is adultery generally wrong then?
And don't just repeat that it happens, we already know that and it is fence sitting at it's worst - ironically the same thing that you often accuse others of.

And of course, you have nothing to say about being shown to be wrong about BFC changing his mind.

I'm out anyway.

 

[20togo]

Neither does yours does it?

So is adultery generally wrong then?
And don't just repeat that it happens, we already know that and it is fence sitting at it's worst - ironically the same thing that you often accuse others of.

And of course, you have nothing to say about being shown to be wrong about BFC changing his mind.

I'm out anyway.

Of course it doesn't, I think I've made that pretty clear numerous times.
Fence sitting? Yep, done that enough. Not hard to find especially when it came to views of our football manager. As for my views on adultery. Well I've said on here it's not for me to be judge and jury and I stand by that. You talk of black and white and perhaps the best I can say is that it's grey because perhaps of so many different factors. So no, I'm not gonna be one that casts the first stone on the subject.
As for BFC changing his mind. Well he acknowledges that he is contrary and yes, there may be an odd occasion where he's changed his mind but is that based on hard and fast evidence, ie factual or some-one elses convincing argument? There is a difference you know. And my comments have always been about the latter.

 

[ElBurroSinNombre]

Of course it doesn't, I think I've made that pretty clear numerous times.
Fence sitting? Yep, done that enough. Not hard to find especially when it came to views of our football manager. As for my views on adultery. Well I've said on here it's not for me to be judge and jury and I stand by that. You talk of black and white and perhaps the best I can say is that it's grey because perhaps of so many different factors. So no, I'm not gonna be one that casts the first stone on the subject.
As for BFC changing his mind. Well he acknowledges that he is contrary and yes, there may be an odd occasion where he's changed his mind but is that based on hard and fast evidence, ie factual or some-one elses convincing argument? There is a difference you know.

So you are fence sitting on adultery.

On BFC changing minds, the first example I gave of him changing his mind was based on incorrect assumptions (factual) and the second example was based on the content of the argument (he was able to change his view after listening to a different perspective). So he has done both on here in interactions concerning myself that I can recall. Are you now going to retract the incorrect statements you have made in this thread?

That is definitely my last post on this subject

 

[20togo]

So you are fence sitting on adultery.

On BFC changing minds, the first example I gave of him changing his mind was based on incorrect assumptions (factual) and the second example was based on the content of the argument (he was able to change his view after listening to a different perspective). So he has done both on here in interactions concerning myself that I can recall. Are you now going to retract the incorrect statements you have made in this thread?

That is definitely my last post on this subject

yeah right, we'll see. Wow, whoopeedo, there may be the one occasion where bifster has changed his mind, something I've acknowledged in my previous post so nah, no need to retract anything. The principle remains the same, he's a contrary mary. No offence bifster.

 

[ElBurroSinNombre]

yeah right, we'll see. Wow, whoopeedo, there may be the one occasion where bifster has changed his mind, something I've acknowledged in my previous post so nah, no need to retract anything. The principle remains the same, he's a contrary mary. No offence bifster.

So despite the clear evidence to the contrary that you acknowledge, you were right in confidently and damningly stating the opposite all along!
For all his waffling at least BFC can evaluate evidence and change his view, unlike your good self.
Toodle pip!

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

No desperation at all. You acknowledge that you are contrary, a label I've tagged you with previously. And of course historic posts is a way of proving that. Really don't see why you think it's wrong to do that. You said you weren't against the monarchy and I provided pretty damning evidence to suggest you thought otherwise. Personally, I would have thought that some-ones anti monarchy stance would harden rather than soften following the death of the Queen but you seemingly again go against the grain on that.

I don’t think you’re wrong… like I say, whatever you want to do is fine with me. I’ve said it how it is.. I’m not ‘anti-monarchy’… It’s really that simple.

I’m not sure why you would expect my views to harden either… I have a lot of time for King Charles.. despite him being a bit of a pompous arse, I share some of his views and can relate to him as a character…

In addition, I think the funeral and associated pageantry was a wonderful display of Britishness , it brought back memories of my youth, the Silver Jubilee in particular and made me feel a sense of pride and a reconnection with my country…

You’re certainly not wrong about me seeming to go against the grain. I do like to challenge the accepted norm and challenge myself when it comes to opinions… It’s important for me to validate my own opinion though discussion with others etc… I don’t like being constrained by my ego or how Me or others feel obliged to think or even if I’ve been invested in thinking or even promoting the opposite viewpoint previously.

Like I say… however you prefer to frame it is entirely up to you really… I’m cool with whatever

So turning to Prince Harry..

I’m going to insert your quotes to make it easier to read, as this will be a long post, no doubt

As I've said previously, my focus on this is about how he thinks by doing all this media stuff, the book etc, thinks it will help him reconcile with his family?

OK so let’s look at he idea of reconciliation first…

Are you saying that you take issue with him, because you believe that he is seeking a resolution / reconciliation , but then inflaming it by writing a book about his life story and appearing on TV?

And I'm comfortable with myself looking at it from that pov, as are many other people. I make it pretty clear that I believe he's doing it for the money, something which I think you've acknowledged.

OK, I’m not sure I’ve acknowledged anything of the sort. I’ve asked you why it would be a problem if it was just about the money though.

I have absolutely no doubt that the financial incentive will have played a part in this, but when set behind the backdrop of the pending court cases with the media and the very obvious themes which run throughout the book and the Netflix series, it seems very obvious that this is about much more than money…

So are you saying that Harry has no right to write his life story?

That he should have excluded parts of it or kept them secret?

That he should have been dishonest or sugar coated parts of it because it might upset the Applecart?

And that is the angle I'm coming from whereas your angle seems to be more focused on his ire is with the press, something which he is using himself to hit back at his family.

I’m saying that his ire is aimed at the British Press (The Tabloid News, the people he sees as responsible for his mothers death), not all forms of media… And more specifically than that, he objects to the relationship between that Press and the Palace and how that manifests and has impacted his and his families lives negatively… and of course how his family have been complicit..

As he has said, he has railed against it, tried desperately to encourage his family to challenge and change this behaviour, but to no avail.. in fact, despite moving away from the U.K., the lies and negative headlines have continued ‘aided and abetted by close members of his family’…

It’s become abundantly clear that private conversations he has had with his brother & his father have been leaked to the press … So he knows that only the individuals concerned could have put that information out there…. The trust has already been broken, which is now why he feels forced to speak his own words for himself, so that they can’t be twisted or misconstrued…. Yet of course the Press continues to try and distort everything…You only have to look at the reporting of sections of his book, which bear little resemblance to the headlines.

You seem to want to apportion blame on everyone but him as if he's completely innocent in all this. And whether you like it not, him telling previously unknown incidents to the press whether he's fronting it up or not isn't doing him any favours. Even if you don't want to call it "leaking".

I’m not sure I’m apportioning blame to anyone… And I’m certainly not suggesting that Harry is blameless, I doubt he is.

What I’m saying is that his motivation is reasonable and that the portrayal of him and his wife (as well as the acceptance of that by large section of the public) is completely out of order.

I’m also saying that the Press are driving the anti-Harry / anti-Meghan agenda and that people need to open their eyes to that and recognise what is going on, rather than buying it hook line and sinker…. People need to reflect on how this has played out, how they have been complicit in the nastiness and downright evil treatment of Meghan and why it needs to stop.

I think there is a very clear distinction between an individual who is prepared to stand behind their words / insults etc.. than someone who operates under the cloak of anonymity… In fact you have made that very same distinction when referencing your self and other ‘faceless’ users on here…

One is an honourable way to behave, the other is dishonourable.. Again, it’s that simple !

There is only one winner here and it ain't him, it ain't Meghan, it ain't his brother, his brothers wife and it ain't his father or Camilla. It's the media!. Harry is fighting a fight he can never win. His family, the Institution know that because it's pretty much always been the case and that's why they are maintaining a [dignified] silence.

You might be right here, but also you might not… I really don’t think it’s possible to say with any certainty… None of us knows where this might end up….

It also depends on how we might define ‘winning’…I suspect Harry might feel he has won, if his family are motivated to simply leave him out of their collective muck raking, in the future. They’ve had a massive shot across the bows, it’s up to them how they respond.

As for this ‘maintaining a dignified silence’… had they done that, then I doubt very much we would even be here…

 

[20togo]

Jeez, I'll just cover the first part of your post for now. Not even read the rest of it yet.

I mention the view about opinions hardening, not particularly just about your opinion either, but from the point that it was the Queen who was the glue that seemingly held the family together, and btw, I think the evidence of what is happening right now, is evidence of that and that i sort of doubt if she'd still been alive we would yet be hearing all about Harrys revelations.

I of course agree with you about all the pageantry etc. It was a marvellous occasion if marvellous can be an appropriate word. Sadly or not perhaps, I was out of the country at the time of her death and her funeral so missed a lot of it. Not that there wasn't blanket coverage of it anyway. So yes, I'm pleased that it gave you a chance to re-connect with your country and brought back memories of your youth.

And finally on this part, thanks for acknowledging you like to go against the grain. Something you realise I was fully aware of and why I tagged you contrary mary. In an affectionate, non offensive way of course. It was just a way to make my point.

That's it for now, I'll digest the rest of your post later and no doubt will have plenty to say on it. Oh and by the way, can you entice EBSN back to the thread. I'm sure he'll want to acknowledge the general gist of my comments said to you had some [plenty of] validation. Cheers.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Jeez, I'll just cover the first part of your post for now. Not even read the rest of it yet.

I mention the view about opinions hardening, not particularly just about your opinion either, but from the point that it was the Queen who was the glue that seemingly held the family together, and btw, I think the evidence of what is happening right now, is evidence of that and that i sort of doubt if she'd still been alive we would yet be hearing all about Harrys revelations.

I of course agree with you about all the pageantry etc. It was a marvellous occasion if marvellous can be an appropriate word. Sadly or not perhaps, I was out of the country at the time of her death and her funeral so missed a lot of it. Not that there wasn't blanket coverage of it anyway. So yes, I'm pleased that it gave you a chance to re-connect with your country and brought back memories of your youth.

And finally on this part, thanks for acknowledging you like to go against the grain. Something you realise I fully aware of and why I tagged you contrary mary. In an affectionate, non offensive way of course. It was just a way to make my point.

That's it for now, I'll digest the rest of your post later and no doubt will have plenty to say on it. Oh and by the way, can you entice EBSN back to the thread. I'm sure he'll want to acknowledge the general gist of my comments said to you had some [plenty of] validation. Cheers.

So you’ve chosen to focus the content of your post around me instead of Prince Harry (again!!)

You couldn’t make this shit up

And we all thought Karl Oyston had a fragile ego!

 

[20togo]

So you’ve chosen to focus the content of your post around me instead of Prince Harry (again!!)

You couldn’t make this shit up

And we all thought Karl Oyston had a fragile ego!

I've simply addressed the points you made in the first part of your post. After all, the first part of your post was pretty much all about you.

Have you not read the part of my post where I said I'd get back to you later on the remaining stuff in your post. It was the first line after all. It seems not. No need to apologise btw if you haven't.

 

[Wizaard]

So despite the clear evidence to the contrary that you acknowledge, you were right in confidently and damningly stating the opposite all along!
For all his waffling at least BFC can evaluate evidence and change his view, unlike your good self.
Toodle pip!

Seen fewer last posts at cenotaphs.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I've simply addressed the points you made in the first part of your post. After all, the first part of your post was pretty much all about you.

Have you not read the part of my post where I said I'd get back to you later on the remaining stuff in your post. It was the first line after all. It seems not. No need to apologise btw if you haven't.

Of course I read it…

I look forward to your reply….with baited hook breath

 

[20togo]

right here we go.

your 1st quote. It's about how we word things. "take issue with him". I wouldn't say it like that. More that I disagree with how he's going about it. Call it splitting hairs if you want. I'd question if he is being genuine when he talks about reconciliation because for me and for the reasons I've mentioned numerous times before he's going about it the wrong way.

your 2nd quote. Well he's the first to do it, isn't he? Excluded or kept secret? Well I've pretty much offered my opinion on this enough times already. He's doing his dirty washing in public. For me, he's not interested in reconciliation at this point in time. It's all about attack, attack attack and he knows full well that he's distancing himself from his family even more. For what? Money. My previous points pretty much covers your third question.

your 3rd quote. Well his ire isn't aimed solely at the press is it? It's very much aimed at his family too and he's doing it through the press and the media. He's railed against it but as I've said and the Institution have said, for me it's a war he has no chance of winning. It's futile taking them on. But he's clearly not prepared to listen and he'll just end up digging the hole deeper and deeper. He's already been called out and rightly so for his attack on the press with regards to photographs taken and the timing of when he said they were taken. If he wants to try and take on the press in that manner, then the least he should be is honest about when they were taken. He's basically lied and has now been exposed as a liar for doing that. does beg the question what else has he lied about or even how much of a lot of what he saying is being exaggerated for effect. And the reasons for that are pretty obvious.

your 4th quote. Well firstly, I'm not sure I'm on board with your claim that you believe Harry isn't blameless. Your pretty stoic defence of him suggests otherwise. But whatever. I also won't buy into your claim that everyone criticising Harry is gullible as opposed to everyone that defends him 'gets it' Words to that effect anyway. And yes, your final point I can fully buy into. But we are not the monarchy, we're just little old AVFTT users aren't we Darren, and yes I'm Pete. So I'd suggest the distinction between the two is massive even if the principle is the same.

your 5th and final quote. Well firstly I'll mention that I deliberately put the word "dignified" in brackets as clearly some people will have the opinion that there is nothing dignified about it. I don't think it's a battle he is capable of winning and as I've said countless times before, the longer it drags out the less likely of any reconciliation for a significant length of time. And like I've said a reconciliation would be my main focus. If he, or you think it's a batle he can win and what your interpretation of winning is then that's to you? Is getting millions of dollars but ostracising himself from his family and pretty much everything that comes with that lifestyle a price worth paying? Maybe he thinks it is, yet somehow he still seems to think he's entitled to some of the trappings that go with it.

So to sum up, for me, if he wants to live this quiet lifestyle he claims he craves, then he needs to shut the fuck up. And the sooner the better. Chances of him doing that? Remote.

 

[Loco]

KC seems pretty tame compared to this lot

English and British royal mistress - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

right here we go.

(1) your 1st quote. It's about how we word things. "take issue with him". I wouldn't say it like that. More that I disagree with how he's going about it. Call it splitting hairs if you want. I'd question if he is being genuine when he talks about reconciliation because for me and for the reasons I've mentioned numerous times before he's going about it the wrong way.

(2) your 2nd quote. Well he's the first to do it, isn't he? Excluded or kept secret? Well I've pretty much offered my opinion on this enough times already. He's doing his dirty washing in public. For me, he's not interested in reconciliation at this point in time. It's all about attack, attack attack and he knows full well that he's distancing himself from his family even more. For what? Money. My previous points pretty much covers your third question.

(3) your 3rd quote. Well his ire isn't aimed solely at the press is it? It's very much aimed at his family too and he's doing it through the press and the media. He's railed against it but as I've said and the Institution have said, for me it's a war he has no chance of winning. It's futile taking them on. But he's clearly not prepared to listen and he'll just end up digging the hole deeper and deeper. He's already been called out and rightly so for his attack on the press with regards to photographs taken and the timing of when he said they were taken. If he wants to try and take on the press in that manner, then the least he should be is honest about when they were taken. He's basically lied and has now been exposed as a liar for doing that. oes beg the question what else has he lied about or even how much of a lot of what he saying is being exaggerated. And the reasons for that are pretty obvious.

(4)your 4th quote. Well firstly, I'm not sure I'm on board with your claim that you believe Harry isn't blameless. Your pretty stoic defence of him suggests otherwise. But whatever. I also won't buy into your claim that everyone criticising Harry is gullible as opposed to everyone that defends him 'gets it' Words to that effect anyway. And yes, your final point I can fully buy into. But we are not the monarchy, we're just little old AVFTT users aren't we Darren, and yes I'm Pete. So I'd suggest the distinction between the two is massive even if the principle is the same.

(5) your 5th and final quote. Well firstly I'll mention that I deliberately put the word "dignified" in brackets as clearly some people will have the opinion that there is nothing dignified about it. I don't think it's a battle he is capable of winning and as I've said countless times before, the longer it drags out the less likely of any reconciliation for a significant length of time. And like I've said a reconciliation would be my main focus. If he, or you think it's a batle he can win and what your interpretation of winning is then that's to you? Is getting millions of dollars but ostracising himself from his family and pretty much everything that comes with that lifestyle a price worth paying? Maybe he thinks it is, yet somehow he still seems to think he's entitled to some of the trappings that go with it.

So to sum up, for me, if he wants to live this quiet lifestyle he claims he craves, then he needs to shut the fuck up. And the sooner the better. Chances of him doing that? Remote.

1) When he talks about ‘reconciliation’ he’s talking about it in terms of expecting an apology and his family acknowledging they have been out of order….

To that extent, his motivation (in part at least) appears to be reclaiming the truth and setting the record straight.

Assuming that his family have leaked information to the press and failed to correct lies (which all the evidence seems to suggest) and participated in the issues that have contributed to him feeling the need to leave, how could they then take issue with him for simply telling the truth? That would be ridiculously hypocritical surely ?

2) I’m unclear where you are coming from…

The point here relates to money… You raised a point that he was doing it for the money…

So let’s just assume for a minute that he is doing this solely for financial gain… Why is that a problem?

a) His book is about his life story
b) It’s not illegal
c) His ability to earn a living (aside from through his celebrity status) is limited
d) His story is of massive interest and has huge financial value
e) He has an opportunity to clear up lies that have been printed and get things off his chest

So what’s the problem? Loads of famous people do autobiographies.

3) I didn’t say his ire was aimed solely at the press. He’s clearly very frustrated by how his family and in particular his Brother (who he hoped he could rely on above everyone else) are throwing their lot in with the Press, instead of supporting each other and him and his wife.
In terms of his own story, he’s ‘doing it’ through carefully controlled media sources and specifically in his own words. That’s very different to simply throwing it out to the mass media an letting them do their worst.
I’m not sure what you mean in terms of ‘photographs taken’ and lies, you will need to be more specific as this is completely new to me.

Though I suspect any lies pale into insignificance when compared to the disgusting manner in which the press have conducted themselves …

As for being futile, I disagree… As the saying goes “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph in the world is that good men do nothing”

Harry isn’t alone right now in his efforts to bring the press to book and he’s in a very unique and privileged position to be able to challenge them on a sound footing…..Futile or not, I admire him for doing so. All positive change has to start somewhere .

4) What is the point of me offering my thoughts and opinions for you to say something as ridiculous as you don’t believe me

Just because I take issue with him and his wife being badmouthed, with the way the press twist his words, because I have some understanding and sympathy with him, doesn’t mean I think he hasn’t played his own part in some of his issues… I suspect he would acknowledge himself that both he and his wife have made errors of judgement or rubbed other family members up the wrong way or whatever… That doesn’t mean they deserve the way they have been mistreated and abused.

And I don’t think Harry is beyond criticism either… I do however think he and his wife (and anyone else for that matter) are beyond the lies and abuse and the rest that gets printed in the tabloids .

Yes, we are just Darren & Pete, but the point of principle and honour only magnifies with public status surely. To that extent, it is even more important to behave honourably, to own your own words and not to snidely and sneakily contribute to the press hounding of your struggling family members.

5) We can only speculate as to where it might go… Time will tell

What I do find very interesting is that you say that your main focus would be reconciliation…

You’ve also said on here on many occasions that if someone had a go at you, that your going to come back at them harder…. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen you seek ‘reconciliation’, but rather you are like a rabid dog with a bone..,

I put it to you, that if you were in Harry’s shoes, there’d be a lot more than a bit of poison pen-work being aimed at the press and the offending family members. I doubt very much whether you would be forced out of the Country you love, your wife and kids subjected to daily and sustained abuse, your home intruded upon etc… and take it lying down … I know I wouldn’t (Prince or no Prince).

As for the chances of him shutting the fuck up any time soon…I suspect their more chance of him shutting the fuck up, than there is you

 

[20togo]

Jeez, even I'm starting to get bored of all this now. I'll have a look later but to me it seems were pretty much going round in circles and whereas we might agree on a bit we fundamentally disagree on a lot.

 

[Wilburrabbit]

Crikey is this still going on???

I admire the stamina of some on here but really?

 

[20togo]

Crikey is this still going on???

I admire the stamina of some on here but really?

not really, it's just par for the course when bifster gets on a roll.

 

[Mexboroseasider]

Being pegged by the Duchess of Cholmondley, less common I would imagine

I beg to differ.

It’s the Marchioness not Duchess.

I also don’t understand why it’s spelt like that but pronounced Chumley.

(More importantly it probably isn’t her who is the pegger. But someone else. There’s also doubt about who the peggee might be although I agree Willy is the favourite).

 

[Mexboroseasider]

not really, it's just par for the course when bifster gets on a roll.

Pot and kettle.

 

[20togo]

Pot and kettle.

of course but any opportunity you know.

 

[Recidivist3]

I beg to differ.

It’s the Marchioness not Duchess.

I also don’t understand why it’s spelt like that but pronounced Chumley.

(More importantly it probably isn’t her who is the pegger. But someone else. There’s also doubt about who the peggee might be although I agree Willy is the favourite).

I bow to your greater knowledge , Mex. Mind you, I even got pulled up for spelling Meghan incorrectly the other day so I really must do better

Chumley because the first Marquis ??? didn’t like almonds apparently but was partial to a bit of dog food now and then

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Jeez, even I'm starting to get bored of all this now. I'll have a look later but to me it seems were pretty much going round in circles and whereas we might agree on a bit we fundamentally disagree on a lot.

I’m not sure 20’s…

Maybe we could just argue about one point each day… We could get another week out of it

 

[Mexboroseasider]

I bow to your greater knowledge , Mex. Mind you, I even got pulled up for spelling Meghan incorrectly the other day so I really must do better

Chumley because the first Marquis ??? didn’t like almonds apparently but was partial to a bit of dog food now and then

That reminds me of a little ditty my daughter and all her mates used to sing aged about 8 and dressed in their pretty party frocks.

“Diarrhoea, Diarrhoea
Comes out your bum
Like Pedigree Chum
Diarrhoea….”

Sweet.

 

[Archibald Knox]

Of course BFCx3 will change his mind in the face of irrefutable facts. That’s what sensible people do.
For example, I am sure he is very willing to acknowledge now that Aldi and Lidl produce far better quality produce at much better value than Tesco’s in the fight against the rising cost of living.

Or was that MacSeasider? I forget...

 

[Wilburrabbit]

not really, it's just par for the course when bifster gets on a roll.

I admire your staying power.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Of course BFCx3 will change his mind in the face of irrefutable facts. That’s what sensible people do.
For example, I am sure he is very willing to acknowledge now that Aldi and Lidl produce far better quality produce at much better value than Tesco’s in the fight against the rising cost of living.

I’m still a fully paid up member of the Tesco ‘Clubcard’ association AK, but I must admit I think you have a point. Tesco do now do an Aldi Price Match on lots of items

I can’t get on with the set up in either store (although have used the Aldi in Carmarthen quite a bit)… My Mrs does get veg from there and it does seem to have a longer life than the Tesco stuff…

Maybe I need to get with the program and give them another chance as clearly I judged them a bit harshly

 

[20togo]

So when he talks about reconciliation you acknowledge it's about what he wants and what he expects. And all perhaps to be played out in public. I hardly think that demanding what he wants is really the right way to go about achieving reconciliation. His way or the by-way! Perhaps you could suggest the King bow down in public to him and grovel?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

So when he talks about reconciliation you acknowledge it's about what he wants and what he expects. And all perhaps to be played out in public. I hardly think that demanding what he wants is really the right way to go about achieving reconciliation. His way or the by-way! Perhaps you could suggest the King bow down in public to him and grovel?

I think when he talks about reconciliation he is talking about a need for acknowledgement and accountability from everyone concerned. In fact he's made that quite clear that it is pretty much a pre-requisite as far as he is concerned. As for the book, the series and what have you, I think he views his writing and the series in different terms than you and with the benefit of a clearer understanding of his own family and how they will respond than anyone else.

I'm not suggesting that the King bow down and grovel no... I'm suggesting that Charles the man & the father, might start behaving like a Father (take hsi lead from his youngest son) and start protecting his family, instead of using them as cannon fodder to pep up his publicity ratings.

 

[20togo]

I think when he talks about reconciliation he is talking about a need for acknowledgement and accountability from everyone concerned. In fact he's made that quite clear that it is pretty much a pre-requisite as far as he is concerned. As for the book, the series and what have you, I think he views his writing and the series in different terms than us and with the benefit of a clearer understanding of his own family and how they will respond than us.

I'm not suggesting that the King bow down and grovel no... I'm suggesting that Charles the man & the father, might start behaving like a Father (take hsi lead from his youngest son) and start protecting his family, instead of using them as cannon fodder to pep up his publicity ratings.

You mean accountability from everyone apart from himself. Re your last para, well i do agree with you. However, it's hard to not realise that Charles was perhaps brought up in a manner by his own father and even mother which isn't perhaps conducive to the family life as we know it. It is what it is sadly, and I'm sure on that issue we agree that Harry is perhaps a different kettle of fish.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

You mean accountability from everyone apart from himself. Re your last para, well i do agree with you. However, it's hard to not realise that Charles was perhaps brought up in a manner by his own father and even mother which isn't perhaps conducive to the family life as we know it. It is what it is sadly, and I'm sure on that issue we agree that Harry is perhaps a different kettle of fish.

No I don’t mean that… And he was quite specific in saying that he has asked his family to point out what they feel he and his wife have done wrong and is willing to acknowledge and apologise if needed…. He says they’ve ignored him and then leaked the private content of his letters & emails to the press. (Not hard to understand why he might be pissed off with that is it really ?)

If her stoic and relentless lifelong commitment to her duty was the Queen's biggest success, then Charles (and his siblings) are probably her biggest failures IMHO…Unfortunately abuse (and I would go as far as to say that the way these kids are brought up is emotionally abusive) tends to run in families and someone needs to break the chain. Charles has evidently been a pretty self-absorbed individual who really didn’t take to family life in any sense of the word.. That said, he can still make amends and be a force for change … And with William also taking a front seat, there’s a real opportunity here.

It’s 2023 and if they intend to be relevant, then they need to be setting a clear example… This aloof and emotionally detached style is simply not going to cut it.

 

[Threepeaksphil]

I think when he talks about reconciliation he is talking about a need for acknowledgement and accountability from everyone concerned. In fact he's made that quite clear that it is pretty much a pre-requisite as far as he is concerned. As for the book, the series and what have you, I think he views his writing and the series in different terms than you and with the benefit of a clearer understanding of his own family and how they will respond than anyone else.

I'm not suggesting that the King bow down and grovel no... I'm suggesting that Charles the man & the father, might start behaving like a Father (take hsi lead from his youngest son) and start protecting his family, instead of using them as cannon fodder to pep up his publicity ratings.

How is making the awful comment about killing Taliban like chess pieces protecting his family?

 

[Loco]

not really, it's just par for the course when bifster gets on a roll.

It takes two to tango

 

[20togo]

No I don’t mean that… And he was quite specific in saying that he has asked his family to point out what they feel he and his wife have done wrong and is willing to acknowledge and apologise if needed…. He says they’ve ignored him and then leaked the private content of his letters & emails to the press. (Not hard to understand why he might be pissed off with that is it really ?)

If her stoic and relentless lifelong commitment to her duty was the Queen's biggest success, then Charles (and his siblings) are probably her biggest failures IMHO…Unfortunately abuse (and I would go as far as to say that the way these kids are brought up is emotionally abusive) tends to run in families and someone needs to break the chain. Charles has evidently been a pretty self-absorbed individual who really didn’t take to family life in any sense of the word.. That said, he can still make amends and be a force for change … And with William also taking a front seat, there’s a real opportunity here.

It’s 2023 and if they intend to be relevant, then they need to be setting a clear example… This aloof and emotionally detached style is simply not going to cut it.

I get the sentiments of your second para, but I do think you seem to blow hot and cold on your opinion of Charles as shown by various posts in this thread. You know the phrase.

As for your last para, is it not a case of what you mean by relevant?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I get the sentiments of your second para, but I do think you seem to blow hot and cold on your opinion of Charles as shown by various posts in this thread. You know the phrase.

As for your last para, is it not a case of what you mean by relevant?

I don’t blow hot and cold, I said previously that I can relate to him and share some of his views. That doesn’t mean I like everything about him… I’m addressing some of his character flaws here, specifically as a father… Like everyone else he also has some qualities too.

When I say relevant, I mean up to date… representing attitudes and values that reflect a modern first world country.

How is making the awful comment about killing Taliban like chess pieces protecting his family?

I wouldn’t wish to comment on a section of the book that has been taken out of context then sensationalised by the Press for dramatic effect, without having understood the full context and read it for myself.

In principle, I don’t see him describing his personal experience during wartime as a particular issue. Plenty have done so before him…

The threat of a terrorism attack or of any nutter trying to harm him and his family is just a routine part of his daily life I would have thought.

 

[20togo]

I don’t blow hot and cold, I said previously that I can relate to him and share some of his views. That doesn’t mean I like everything about him… I’m addressing some of his character flaws here, specifically as a father… Like everyone else he also has some qualities too.

When I say relevant, I mean up to date… representing attitudes and values that reflect a modern first world country.


I wouldn’t wish to comment on a section of the book that has been taken out of context then sensationalised by the Press for dramatic effect, without having understood the full context and read it for myself.

In principle, I don’t see him describing his personal experience during wartime as a particular issue. Plenty have done so before him…

The threat of a terrorism attack or of any nutter trying to harm him and his family is just a routine part of his daily life I would have thought.

so why does he need to "flee the country" for security reasons if it's a just routine part of his daily life? He claims to want to live the quiet life yet what he is doing really only brings more attention on him!