Prince Harry in Edinburgh today says call me "Harry"

[arista]

1232619485653237762


Yes thats the way to go
tell your Lady that , as well.


[The Duke of Sussex has asked to
simply be addressed as Harry during
his first public engagement
since returning to the UK.
He is currently in Edinburgh
to launch an event for his new
ecotourism company Travalyst.
Harry had been out of the country
for a while, and had flown to Canada
on 20 January to be with wife
Meghan and son Archie following
a summit with the Queen.]

https://news.sky.com/story/call-me-harry-prince-shrugs-off-his-title-as-he-returns-to-the-uk-11943562

[Niamh.]

Yes thats the way to go
tell your Lady that , as well.

Bit weird for people to start calling her Harry though

[arista]

Yes thats the way to go
tell your Lady that , as well.

Bit weird for people to start calling her Harry though


Yes he is getting used to being a Ex-Royal


I am Talking back to him
telling him what to say
back in Canada/USA

[Livia]

Pretty soon we won't have to call him anything, because with a bit of luck we won't have to see him or his Mrs on TV or in the news ever again.

[Saph]

I've supported them and their decision but ngl they're quite annoying

[Zizu]

Too confusing ..

Many will think of Harry Styles..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Beso]

Ginge will do; thank you

[Liam-]

Man in ‘use my name’ shocker

[jet]

Ginge will do; thank you

The pair of them can be Ginge and Cringe.

[Niamh.]

Man in ‘use my name’ shocker

:laugh:

slim pickings

[jet]

Pretty soon we won't have to call him anything, because with a bit of luck we won't have to see him or his Mrs on TV or in the news ever again.

Here's to hoping....


Prince Harry looks glum as he returns to UK for final royal engagements:
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/prince-harry-looks-glum-returns-21577416

Meghan will be joining him in a few days to honour their final UK engagements
until mid March.

February 26: Travelyst conference in Edinburgh (Harry)

February 28: Invictus Games choir (Harry)

March 5: Endeavour Fund Awards (Harry and Meghan)

March 6: Silverstone Experience (Harry)

March 7: Mountbatten Music Festival (Harry and Meghan)

March 8: International Women's Day (Meghan)

March 9: Commonwealth Service (Harry and Meghan)

[Marsh.]

Omg, he literally told them he no longer wishes to be referred to by the "Prince" term and people are still getting huffy. :joker:

[Crimson Dynamo]

"We want to hear truths and perspectives from across the industry," he said.

What a dick

"

[jet]

"Call me Harry". He has never asked to be called just 'Harry' before; that was probably a passive aggressive dig at the Palace/Queen for taking away their Sussex 'Royal' brand.
Because of course he is still 'Prince' Harry, no change there. Yes, what a dick. Harry, Harry Harry, what are you doing! :facepalm:

[Marsh.]

"Call me Harry". He has never asked to be called just 'Harry' before

He hadn't stepped down from being an "official Royal" before so why would he have in the past? :shrug:

[arista]

I've supported them and their decision but ngl they're quite annoying


Thats not a WORD

[Marsh.]

Too confusing ..

Many will think of Harry Styles..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Human has the same name as another human shocker?

[Ammi]

...the artist formerly known as prince...

[bots]

if he was a man of the people he would have asked to be called Arry

[rusticgal]

Yes thats the way to go
tell your Lady that , as well.

Bit weird for people to start calling her Harry though


Well she does wear the trousers :laugh:

[Beso]

For someone that was anti all the attention and drama surrounding him and his wife and the red tops...why ****ing even mention it?


Aww poor parmy...nobody ever replies to him when he has a point.

[jet]

For someone that was anti all the attention and drama surrounding him and his wife and the red tops...why ****ing even mention it?


Aww poor parmy...nobody ever replies to him when he has a point.

He knew it would get attention and drama, and sure enough the TV news, social media etc are talking about it....some not too kindly, the pair of them often seem to want negative attention, its weird...

[Marsh.]

Really don't see how asking someone to call him by his name is inviting purposely negative attention.

Maybe some people just want to provide them with negative attention no matter what they do.

[Livia]

Harry, a big fan of the private jet, was talking to the travel industry about making travel sustainable for the future.

And in other news... Kate was helping with a Sport Relief event and William was visiting a homeless charity.

The only interesting thing about Harry and Meghan now is how far they fell.

[jet]

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2020/02/canada-cutting-prince-harry-meghan-s-security-as-couple-dumps-royal-family.html

Canada cutting Prince Harry, Meghan's security as couple dumps royal family.


.....The Canadian Government has announced that when the couple transitions from their current status, set to happen on March 31, taxpayers will no longer foot the bill for security.
.....But a statement on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's website makes it clear they will "require effective security to protect them and their son". No further details are provided for safety reasons.

Paying for the Duke and Duchess' security was deeply unpopular in Canada, with several polls showing the vast majority of Canadians thought it was an inappropriate use of tax money. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation delivered a petition to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with 80,000 signatures on it - calling for the pair to not receive money.

British tabloids have recently reported that the UK Metropolitan Police is struggling to meet the pair's demand for double the amount of security that they have now. That could cost a staggering $40 million a year, according to the Express.

Former protection officer Dai Davies said their current plans are "unworkable."



The Canadians are nobodys fools. :flutter:

[thesheriff443]

Despite what I think about them, they do deserve the best security and that should be paid for by the uk.

[Marsh.]

Harry, a big fan of the private jet, was talking to the travel industry about making travel sustainable for the future.

I don't really understand, what's wrong with wanting to make travel sustainable? That's in everyone's benefit. To allow us all to travel, whilst lessening the environmental impact. :shrug:

[GoldHeart]

Why do people keep moaning about Harry & Meghan , just leave them to it . It seems they can't win no matter what they do :rolleyes:

Some seem to resent them stepping down from Royal duties and moving away, and others seem to want them to disappear off the face of the earth.

Well news flash they will always be in the media because of who they are and I don't see the issue with it :idc: .

[jet]

Despite what I think about them, they do deserve the best security and that should be paid for by the uk.

They definately need good security, no denying that, but I think they should contibute to the pot to bring costs down. Their security costs are estimated to spiral up to 40 million a year due to their reported intentions of travelling a lot, especially between Canada and the USA.
Labour MP Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) has brought the subject up in the Commons saying...

I’m fully respectful of their right to choose a different path themselves, but the royal couple, Harry and Meghan, I understand there are some quite serious concerns being raised about the spiralling costs of policing and protection for them which could be apparently spiralling into tens to hundreds of millions of pounds.

“I find that deeply concerning because when we’re looking at some of the challenges faced in our own communities, people will rightly ask ‘where’s the money for our police officers? Should we be funding that security overseas?’

“And I think that’s a very reasonable question to be asking.”

Police budgets are already stretched to the limits, so he is right to be concerned.

[Marsh.]

Good thing the Royal Family have an income which is three times that of their expenditure.

[thesheriff443]

They definately need good security, no denying that, but I think they should contibute to the pot to bring costs down. Their security costs are estimated to spiral up to 40 million a year due to their reported intentions of travelling a lot, especially between Canada and the USA.
Labour MP Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) has brought the subject up in the Commons saying...



Police budgets are already stretched to the limits, so he is right to be concerned.

If they start to generate the large sums of money thats been talked about them I think they should contribute.

But being a high security risk comes from being a senior member of the royal family and it’s not harry’s Fault.

[Cherie]

They should pick up the tab for the extra costs for security this move will entail, they want normality, its normal to pay your own bills

[thesheriff443]

They should pick up the tab for the extra costs for security this move will entail, they want normality, its normal to pay your own bills

Being a security risk because you where born into the royal family is not normality.

[Cherie]

Being a security risk because you where born into the royal family is not normality.

No, but they chose to leave and they want to support themselves, I am sure they will be happy to pick up the portion of the bill incurred by their move

[arista]

At least they know Canada Police
are no longer going to be there in a few weeks
as they are not Royals.

Time to fit Cameras High on Tree's

[thesheriff443]

No, but they chose to leave and they want to support themselves, I am sure they will be happy to pick up the portion of the bill incurred by their move

Well I don’t think they will be happy about it, who likes paying bills.

I’m sure they will pay towards the extra security costs if this move into the unknown is successful.

Because I can’t really see what they have to offer

[thesheriff443]

At least they know Canada Police
are no longer going to be there in a few weeks
as they are not Royals.

Time to fit Cameras High on Tree's

They will have a royal protection team still with them that has not stopped because they have been in Canada it’s just a matter of who is paying for it.

[Cherie]

They will have a royal protection team still with them that has not stopped because they have been in Canada it’s just a matter of who is paying for it.

:facepalm: of course they will have a protection team with them, but the fact is the cost of that team will increase as they travel more for work? as they earn their own money its only fair they pay a portion. As it stands you and I will be paying for it while they earn millions for themselves and appear not to want to pay a penny, maybe that is not the case time will tell

[Marsh.]

"Appear not to want to pay a penny"

Says who?

[thesheriff443]

:facepalm: of course they will have a protection team with them, but the fact is the cost of that team will increase as they travel more for work? as they earn their own money its only fair they pay a portion. As it stands you and I will be paying for it while they earn millions for themselves and appear not to want to pay a penny, maybe that is not the case time will tell

I can’t see how they are going to make millions? What is the big draw?

Are they going to do a spice girl tribute act, Meghan as Mel b, harry as ginger spice in a Union Jack dress and Archie as baby spice and the nanny as Mel c.

[Cherie]

"Appear not to want to pay a penny"

Says who?

They have already said they expect their security to be paid for, I can't be bothered to look for a link, I think they said they would pay some IF they become commercially successful whatever that means

[Cherie]

I can’t see how they are going to make millions? What is the big draw?

Are they going to do a spice girl tribute act, Meghan as Mel b, harry as ginger spice in a Union Jack dress and Archie as baby spice and the nanny as Mel c.

I think they will do very well tbh, people a lot less well known than Harry get tons for after dinner speeches, and I would imagine Meghan would be well paid to return to acting even if just for one movie

[thesheriff443]

I think they will do very well tbh, people a lot less well known than Harry get tons for after dinner speeches, and I would imagine Meghan would be well paid to return to acting even if just for one movie

Maybe, can’t see it myself.

[AnnieK]

Certainly for the foreseeable they will be hot property. A Prince who has divorced himself from the Royal family AND is Princess Diana's son is going to be in demand for various charities, brands etc. Meghan has contacts and will do the rounds of the American talk shows. They will not be unemployed imho.

[jet]

I think they will do very well tbh, people a lot less well known than Harry get tons for after dinner speeches, and I would imagine Meghan would be well paid to return to acting even if just for one movie

Yes, Harry got paid $750,000 recently for talking about Diana dying and his subsequent mental health problems at a JP Morgan conference and is in talks with big bankers Goldman Sachs for more of the same. IMO he's profiting from his mothers death here.

[thesheriff443]

Certainly for the foreseeable they will be hot property. A Prince who has divorced himself from the Royal family AND is Princess Diana's son is going to be in demand for various charities, brands etc. Meghan has contacts and will do the rounds of the American talk shows. They will not be unemployed imho.

Yes I can see them making money in the short term, but every thing has a shelf life.

If Harry started fighting in the ufc then he would break all records.

[Marsh.]

They have already said they expect their security to be paid for, I can't be bothered to look for a link, I think they said they would pay some IF they become commercially successful whatever that means

Interesting.

[jet]

I can’t see how they are going to make millions? What is the big draw?

Are they going to do a spice girl tribute act, Meghan as Mel b, harry as ginger spice in a Union Jack dress and Archie as baby spice and the nanny as Mel c.

:hehe:

The Nanny wouldn't be there long enough to learn her part. How many have they gone through now I wonder lol

[Cherie]

Yes, Harry got paid $750,000 recently for talking about Diana dying and his subsequent mental health problems at a JP Morgan conference and is in talks with big bankers Goldman Sachs for more of the same. IMO he's profiting from his mothers death here.

cough up 10% towards your security for every fee paying event, it's not difficult :shrug:

[jet]

Why do people keep moaning about Harry & Meghan , just leave them to it . It seems they can't win no matter what they do :rolleyes:

Some seem to resent them stepping down from Royal duties and moving away, and others seem to want them to disappear off the face of the earth.

Well news flash they will always be in the media because of who they are and I don't see the issue with it :idc: .

Well, if they stopped being hypocrites; stopped making digs at the queen and treated her with the respect she deserves; stopped expecting the tax payers to fund their massive security bills without contributing themselves; stopped wanting their cake and eating it and stopped playing the victims, then we would gladly leave them to it. :hee:

[Marsh.]

Making digs at the Queen. :joker:

Funny how the "tax payers dosh" is only an issue when it comes to anything relating to Meghan.

[Glenn.]

Well, if they stopped being hypocrites; stopped making digs at the queen and treated her with the respect she deserves; stopped expecting the tax payers to fund their massive security bills without contributing themselves; stopped wanting their cake and eating it and stopped playing the victims, then we would gladly leave them to it. :hee:

Or maybe just leave them to it. The entitlement is hilarious.

[jet]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8055521/Anger-mounts-Prince-Harry-Megan-Markles-security-bill.html

'THEY should pay!' British taxpayers' fury as £20m bill for Prince Harry and Megan Markle's security bill falls entirely on UK after Canada refuses to pay it after Megxit.

As recently as last Friday, when they updated their personal website, the Sussexes were adamant they are legally entitled to year-round police protection.

'There are two options now for them and us: that the Met will carry on guarding them and footing the bill, which is unacceptable to many, or they agree a system where they make a contribution to the costs personally.

'But their statement doesn't seem to suggest they would wish to do that. With budgets straining at the moment, this is a huge problem that the Met will have to get a grip on and quickly.'



How can they expect British taxpayers to fund them when they are no longer working for the Royal family, want to be 'finanically independent' and don't even live in the country? The self entitlement this pair keep displaying is never - ending.:crazy:
It seems they are going to be forced to contribute - I expect a statement soon from them that they will, hopefully without the usual thinly veiled dig attached...
The only Royals who get full time taxpayers police protecton are senior Royals who carry out duties on behalf of the Queen.
For example, Beatrice and Eugenie have full time jobs and have their own charities which they work for and support. Their security is paid for by their father, supplemented infrequently when needed by the Palace purse.

[Beso]

Making digs at the Queen. :joker:

Funny how the "tax payers dosh" is only an issue when it comes to anything relating to Meghan.

Well she is foreign.

[Marsh.]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8055521/Anger-mounts-Prince-Harry-Megan-Markles-security-bill.html

'THEY should pay!' British taxpayers' fury as £20m bill for Prince Harry and Megan Markle's security bill falls entirely on UK after Canada refuses to pay it after Megxit.



How can they expect British taxpayers to fund them when they are no longer working for the Royal family, want to be 'finanically independent' and don't even live in the country? The self entitlement this pair keep displaying is never - ending.:crazy:
It seems they are going to be forced to contribute - I expect a statement soon from them that they will, hopefully without the usual thinly veiled dig attached...
The only Royals who get full time taxpayers police protecton are senior Royals who carry out duties on behalf of the Queen.
For example, Beatrice and Eugenie have full time jobs and have their own charities which they work for and support. Their security is paid for by their father, supplemented infrequently when needed by the Palace purse.

Careful with those straws. They're close to snapping.

[Marsh.]

Well she is foreign.

I agree Parm, her being foreign is a part of what's caused her backlash. True.

[Glenn.]

The daily mail now a royal correspondent?

[Marsh.]

The daily mail now a royal correspondent?

"Respected" Royal correspondent I'll have you know.

[jet]

The daily mail now a royal correspondent?

No, its a newspaper.
When I'm referencing a royal correspondent, I'll say so (as I usually do) just so you'll know the difference.

[Marsh.]

You don't say so very often so that makes most of your research tabloid fodder tbh.

[Glenn.]

No, its a newspaper.
When I'm referencing a royal correspondent, I'll say so (as I usually do) just so you'll know the difference.

A newspaper isn’t a credible source for information. It’s sensationalism. Something that’s helped fuel the unnecessary hatred directed at them.

[jet]

A newspaper isn’t a credible source for information. It’s sensationalism. Something that’s helped fuel the unnecessary hatred directed at them.

Of course the DM often uses sensationalism, usually in their headlines to sell the paper, that doesn’t make what they say automatically untrue. There is nothing in that DM quote I posted which is a lie, the info referred to comes directly from the Sussexes own website. Any newspaper quote I post I always make sure it’s not just rubbish.
If you believe the quote isn’t credible, then give your evidence to refute it. You never do, all you use is hollow words with no substance.

I don’t think you have a clue as to the multiple reasons why many people have gone off Meghan and Harry. You even thought she was Canadian, and called people who correctly said she was American stupid! Lol
If you don’t know something as basic as where she is from, well, that says it all really. Unless you can refute anything that is being said as nonsense your responses, while you are free to make them, have no value whatsoever.

[Crimson Dynamo]

A newspaper isn’t a credible source for information. It’s sensationalism. Something that’s helped fuel the unnecessary hatred directed at them.

Really what is then?

[Glenn.]

Of course the DM often uses sensationalism, usually in their headlines to sell the paper, that doesn’t make what they say automatically untrue. There is nothing in that DM quote I posted which is a lie, any newspaper quote I post I always make sure it’s not just rubbish.
If you believe the quote isn’t credible, then give your evidence to refute it. You never do, all you use is hollow words with no substance.

I don’t think you have a clue as to the multiple reasons why many people have gone off Meghan and Harry. You even thought she was Canadian, and called people who correctly said she was American stupid! Lol
If you don’t know something as basic as where she is from, well, that says it all really. Unless you can refute anything that is being said as nonsense your responses, while you are free to make them, have no value whatsoever.

https://i.imgur.com/rinIEKH.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/5S4EpAM.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/gzPwDVI.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/o2sdAE5.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/o2sdAE5.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/KjwsLtG.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/dkI0vHp.jpg


Just a handful of headlines from the Mail. A handful of headlines on page one of 179
The majority of today’s newspapers do not report accurate news, many do not have credible sources and of course appeal to the demographic they want to sell too. The obsession with pulling Harry and Meghan is unreal. Swallowed by gullible people like you. You ask me why I defend them yet you have failed to give me any concrete reasoning for your childish disdain for them apart from providing news reports from the Mail? The level of hatred you have for them and everything they do is not natural. Considering you don’t know them and only have the ‘news reports’ to rely on then I am going to question you on why you hate them so much.

You say there are a ‘handful of reasons’ people don’t like her, so if that’s the case by all means please share them.

I’ll give you that I mistakenly thought Meghan was Canadian. I genuinely thought she was so I’ll take that comment back. That being said there are far more ignorant and moronic people who were commenting on that article so I don’t take back the stupid people comment completely.

[Glenn.]

Really what is then?

That’s just it isn’t is, there isn’t anything else really. Which makes it worse when the tabloids do what they do.

[Crimson Dynamo]

That’s just it isn’t is, there isn’t anything else really. Which makes it worse when the tabloids do what they do.

the FT, the Telegraph and the Times are not tabloids. why not read a decent paper?

[Marsh.]

There is nothing in that DM quote I posted which is a lie

Erm...

[Glenn.]

the FT, the Telegraph and the Times are not tabloids. why not read a decent paper?

I don’t read newspapers :shrug:

[jet]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/readers-poll-should-taxpayers-fund-harry-and-meghans-security-if-they-live-abroad-dk207s9qg

Readers’ poll: should taxpayers fund Harry and Meghan’s security if they live abroad?

Based on 20,835 results.

Yes 11%

No 89%

:think:

[Marsh.]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/readers-poll-should-taxpayers-fund-harry-and-meghans-security-if-they-live-abroad-dk207s9qg

Readers’ poll: should taxpayers fund Harry and Meghan’s security if they live abroad?

Based on 20,835 results.

Yes 11%

No 89%

:think:

The poll would be similar, if not more heavily in the No had the question been "Should taxpayers fund ANYTHING for ANY members of the Royal Family?"

Most people's reactions to a clickbait headline and question.

[Twosugars]

We pay for security of all former prime ministers.
We paid for security outside Thatchers room at the Ritz while she was sat inside with her trotters up for years.
Harry is a senior royal, any attack on him abroad would be an embarrassment for the country. We should pay.

[GoldHeart]

We pay for security of all former prime ministers.
We paid for security outside Thatchers room at the Ritz while she was sat inside with her trotters up for years.
Harry is a senior royal, any attack on him abroad would be an embarrassment for the country. We should pay.

Exactly wasn't Thatcher's funeral also paid by the public tax payers as well??

[Beso]

Exactly wasn't Thatcher's funeral also paid by the public tax payers as well??

She earned it..

[jet]

We pay for security of all former prime ministers.
We paid for security outside Thatchers room at the Ritz while she was sat inside with her trotters up for years.
Harry is a senior royal, any attack on him abroad would be an embarrassment for the country. We should pay.

Of course they should have security. The point is, their security costs have rocketed since they decided to leave the Royal family, so they should contribute to the costs.

[Beso]

Of course they should have security. The point is, their security costs have rocketed since they decided to leave the Royal family, so they should contribute to the costs.

No.they should pay all the costs.

[jet]

No.they should pay all the costs.

When they continue to get paid mega bucks for speaking at big bank conferences and attending gala's I would agree the time has come to stop sponging off a country they aren't living in or working for.
They are rich enough NOW to pay for their own instead of taking money off people struggling here in the UK, but I'm being generous - for now. :smug:

[Marsh.]

Of course they should have security. The point is, their security costs have rocketed since they decided to leave the Royal family, so they should contribute to the costs.

Don't believe everything you read.

[Marsh.]

When they continue to get paid mega bucks for speaking at big bank conferences and attending gala's I would agree the time has come to stop sponging off a country they aren't living in or working for.
They are rich enough NOW to pay for their own instead of taking money off people struggling here in the UK, but I'm being generous - for now. :smug:

You really don't understand how the Royal expenses work.

They're not taking money from any struggling people. Stop taking clickbait headlines as fact.