The Duke & Duchess of Sussex with Oprah III - Post-Interview, March 9th 2021 -

[Heavs]

yes, but why should he? Harry is a grown man. he and his wife wnated to leave the RF TO MAKE MORE MONEY. If they do that, then they cannot expect Charles to fund them indefinitley. Harry's apparent belief that someone should pay his bills forever makes him look ridiculous....

Think of it this way. If Beatrice or Eugenie said in an interview that they expected their father or grandmother to fund their security indefinitely whilst also paying for their celebrity lifestyle in the US there would be outrage. Especially if they also bitched about the taxpayer not paying for their protection since they were 18 in the first place. Especially if they also attached everything about the family in the process. Or cry sexism because they didn't get titles on their wedding days.

The thought process that they could leave and do and say whatever they want, including talking politics and bashing the family and Charles should pick up the tab for them indefinitely is absurd. So he pays for the "necessities" in a highly expensive place in California where their neighbours are billionaires whilst they're free to spend the rest on living that lavish lifestyle? That's not how life works.

And UK/Canadian/US taxpayers most certainly don't want to pick up that bill.

Even parents who help out with a house or grandkids schooling aren't *expected* to do it. And those parents are usually working at least one job each.

Harry and Meghan: We want to leave because it's toxic and we hate it! We want to be free to live our truth! Also we want you to pay for everything and keep those toxic, hierarchical titles. And have one for our son. That guarantees more public interest in him and more public complaining about the way he's living his life.

In what way does that make sense?

 

[Denville]

Think of it this way. If Beatrice or Eugenie said in an interview that they expected their father or grandmother to fund their security indefinitely whilst also paying for their celebrity lifestyle in the US there would be outrage. Especially if they also bitched about the taxpayer not paying for their protection since they were 18 in the first place. Especially if they also attached everything about the family in the process. Or cry sexism because they didn't get titles on their wedding days.

The thought process that they could leave and do and say whatever they want, including talking politics and bashing the family and Charles should pick up the tab for them indefinitely is absurd. So he pays for the "necessities" in a highly expensive place in California where their neighbours are billionaires whilst they're free to spend the rest on living that lavish lifestyle? That's not how life works.

And UK/Canadian/US taxpayers most certainly don't want to pick up that bill.

Even parents who help out with a house or grandkids schooling aren't *expected* to do it. And those parents are usually working at least one job each.

Harry and Meghan: We want to leave because it's toxic and we hate it! We want to be free to live our truth! Also we want you to pay for everything and keep those toxic, hierarchical titles. And have one for our son. That guarantees more public interest in him and more public complaining about the way he's living his life.

In what way does that make sense?

it doesn't. Harry clearly has a big resentment against his father.. but i wonder if this is to do with Diana or if it is simply that Charles (Foolish IMV) was soft with him as a kid growing up and never really restrained him or told him no. So now that Harry has been told a big NO from his grandmother and Charles and very likely William as well, he's in a temper.. encouraged by Meghan who is probably also telling him that the family "owe it to him" to pay his security and to give Archie a title.. (though he has one and they don't use it...) and that in the interests of equality that he should have everything that William has...
I thought that it was wrong and foolish for William to look so chily at Harry and Meghan at the serivce last year.. and I still think it was wrong, because it looked bad.. but if this is the way H' has been going on since he and Meg got married (and Im sure it has been) I can understand William losing pateince.

 

[texankitcat]

Nobody is saying that Charles should totally fund Harry's life in the U.S. Harry and Meghan reached lucrative deals with Spotify and Netflix. But the security being taken away from Harry and his family is a sore spot. Harry said it happened suddenly and he had no idea that it was going to be taken away. A major part of the interview was Harry and Meghan talking about security. My opinion is that Charles ignores the depth of Harry's feelings about this and his feeling of being let down by his father at his own peril. He will be estranged from his son forever.

Not true that security was taken away suddenly. The security issue was discussed from the time they ran off to Canada where it was debated as to who should foot the bill for their security. The UK, Canada or Charles. It was a hot issue and by no means was it sudden. Canada didn’t want them there permanently and Harry knew what was coming.

Why is it that Harry’s and Meghan’s “feelings” are more important than everyone else’s? What about the tremendous hurt they have inflicted or the damage they have done to their own relationships? They have left a trail of absolute destruction in their wake and there appears to be no end in sight and yet everyone should feel sorry for Harry and Meghan?

The only thing Charles should buy Harry is a pair of big boy pants.

 

[Denville]

Not true that security was taken away suddenly. The security issue was discussed from the time they ran off to Canada where it was debated as to who should foot the bill for their security. The UK, Canada or Charles. It was a hot issue and by no means was it sudden. Canada didn’t want them there permanently and Harry knew what was coming.

Why is it that Harry’s and Meghan’s “feelings” are more important than everyone else’s? What about the tremendous hurt they have inflicted or the damage they have done to their own relationships? They have left a trail of absolute destruction in their wake and there appears to be no end in sight and yet everyone should feel sorry for Harry and Meghan?

The only thing Charles should buy Harry is a pair of big boy pants.

It seems though that Harry was surprised by every time someone says to him "no, we're not going to pay for this or that". Perhaps he and Meg would have stayed in Canada longer if the Can govt had gone on paying but when they didn't he seems to have gotten into a fit of angry upset and dashed off to LA which is much more expensive.. and then expected his father to provide money for all his needs there....

 

[amaryllus]

It’s no secret Diana was closer to Harry her charming cheeky baby and felt bad because he would be the “Spare” so in that regard her coddling, protecting and indulging him far more than is healthy is pretty likely.When she was gone the family continued the pattern out of guilt... who can easily discipline or say no to a suddenly motherless 12 year old?

 

[Denville]

It’s no secret Diana was closer to Harry her charming cheeky baby and felt bad because he would be the “Spare” so in that regard her coddling, protecting and indulging him far more than is healthy is pretty likely.When she was gone the family continued the pattern out of guilt... who can easily discipline or say no to a suddenly motherless 12 year old?

I thinks that Harry is not very smart and perhaps because of that the family DID over indulge him.. and he got ideas that he was really something special. There certainly seems to be a lot of anger at the whole RF and particularly his father..
but I think Charles, partly because he was a busy man and partly because he did feel for H losing his mother so young was too soft with Harry in his teens and 20s and didn't come down hard on him over anything.. and it would have been better if he had had stricter guidance and didn't get to think he can do anything he liked...

 

[Moran]

It's interesting to hear the reports that the Queen's approached Harry for peace talks. If I were her, I'd be sorely tempted to have him clapped in the Tower of London for treason (before anyone takes that literally, it's meant sarcastically), but here are a 94-year-old woman and a sick 99-year-old man, who are probably frightened that they'll never see their grandson or great-grandson, or meet their new great-granddaughter, again. Let it never be forgotten that, after all the bitter family rifts, the Queen went to visit the Duke of Windsor when he was dying of cancer.


I hope Harry and Meghan are pleased with themselves for all the upset they've caused his grandparents. For the sake of Archie and the new baby, I hope that the family rifts can be healed, but I would think that Charles, William and Kate are very, very angry, and justifiably so.

Where are these reports coming from, though? If I remember correctly, there was much talk (and resentment) over the Bank of Dad funding them indefinitely, no matter how much mud they threw at the RF. Turned out Charles had closed the account. Personally, I didn't see the olive branch others insisted was so clear in the message. I just saw a classy put-down, refusing to engage with the Sussexes at their level.


Old The Queen and Prince Philip might be and they might be desperate to see their grandson but said grandson made clear that he only thought of his family as sources of things that were owed to him. At some point, coddling and indulging him comes hand to hand with showing blatant preference to him than the others who quietly do their duty without complaining. Let alone the fact that indulging him in the same manner that led to this devastating situation in the first place isn't good for him either, keeping him in his "once upon a time, in a faraway land" reality.


This far, I've seen no signs that this is the case. What I see is hardening the tone towards the Sussexes. Perhaps leaving the door open on a personal level but for a very, very distant future. Harry and Meghan managed to cast shadow on everyone right now.

 

[stellam]

I found reading the comments on these pages more entertaining than the actual interview. Thank you to all who contributed. I can't wait for this issue to be resolved if it will be, or disappear off the media pages. Now I wish Harry will grow some watchmacallits and take his family and go quietly and live the 'private' life they so long for.

 

[Denville]

Where are these reports coming from, though? If I remember correctly, there was much talk (and resentment) over the Bank of Dad funding them indefinitely, no matter how much mud they threw at the RF. Turned out Charles had closed the account. Personally, I didn't see the olive branch others insisted was so clear in the message. I just saw a classy put-down, refusing to engage with the Sussexes at their level.


the case. What I see is hardening the tone towards the Sussexes. Perhaps leaving the door open on a personal level but for a very, very distant future. Harry and Meghan managed to cast shadow on everyone right now.

It was a limited olive branch.. ie saying "we're sorry you were unhappy... albeit we dont think that you are remembering rightly.. and we will look into legitimate concerns." And they're leaving the door open but I think it will be accompanied by a certain amount of "look we're still pretty disappointed at the way you behaved, it isn't acceptable.. and if you come back for visits etc it will be on the understanding that you keep a civil tongue and stop asking for money and sulking when you dont get it..."

 

[Alison H]

Where are these reports coming from, though? If I remember correctly, there was much talk (and resentment) over the Bank of Dad funding them indefinitely, no matter how much mud they threw at the RF. Turned out Charles had closed the account. Personally, I didn't see the olive branch others insisted was so clear in the message. I just saw a classy put-down, refusing to engage with the Sussexes at their level.

There are press reports about it - as with most things in the press, they may be accurate or they may just be rumours.

Prince William has just spoken to Sky News:

"We are very much not a racist family," he said after a question from Sky News.

And when asked if he had spoken to his brother yet, the Duke of Cambridge replied: "I haven't spoken to him yet but I plan to."

 

[iceflower]

The Duke of Cambridge has made some comments during his first official engagement after the interview:

Being asked "Is the Royal Family a racist family, sir?" he answered:

"We're very much not a racist family". And that he replied he had not spoken to his brother since the interview "but will do":

See here: ** dailymail article **

 

[Denville]

The Duke of Cambridge has made some comments during his first official engagement after the interview:

Being asked "Is the Royal Family a racist family, sir?" he answered:

"We're very much not a racist family". And that he replied he had not spoken to his brother since the interview "but will do":

See here: ** dailymail article **

That sounds ominous. Im sure William is really furious - I'm sure they all are. but William will probably say more than his father or the queen. I must say that Im a bit surprised that Charles DID stop taking H's phone calls and I think it indicates that he too was really finally fed up to the back teeth with Harry and that Harry was really making ridiculous demands....

 

[Alison H]

How horrible for William to have journalists - and this was the royal reporter from Sky News, not someone less reputable, for lack of a better way of putting it - shouting "Are the Royal Family racist?" at him.

 

[Denville]

How horrible for William to have journalists - and this was the royal reporter from Sky News, not someone less reputable, for lack of a better way of putting it - shouting "Are the Royal Family racist?" at him.

I think its a fair question, thanks to what Harry said, (which is presumably why he said it to tar the RF with this brush...)

 

[Fem]

I am sick to death reading about the Letters Patent of 1917 from George V. So what? Times have changed. Both William and Harry's children are all great-grandchildren of the Monarch. William's children would not have been titled if the Queen had not stepped in. If Harry's children can wait until Charles becomes king then William's children could have as well and should have. The Queen should not have done it for one brother's children and not the other. Had it been done when Archie was born, this so-called royal family crisis may have been averted. And before anyone says it, I don't care about who is where in the line of succession.

Technically, as it's been pointed out, only the eldest son of William would be titled. So George yes, would still have the HRH, Charlotte and Louis - no.

I think it's telling that the only great-grandchildren of the monarch that have titles are the children of the "heir to the heir". And while I do understand that to some "who is where in the line of succession" does not matter, to the royal family it matters greatly. When there is such a strict hierarchy in the family and that hierarchy depends on who was born first, there'll never be true equality. The LPs were issued for William's children because he's the future king. Harry is not, so it was not needed, and now we see how very much it was not needed.

And I wouldn't call it a "family crisis", just... two self-centered people who didn't get what they thought they should get causing a scene. The only difference is that they chose to make that scene in an interview with Oprah.

I find it interesting that the Sussexes complain about feeling unsupported.

These 2 haven’t proven to be great at communication.

Off the top of my head:

Harry didn’t talk to his family about Meghan’s mental health issues.

The supposed racism comment that was so upsetting that they had to broadcast a vague version of the story to millions apparently wasn’t worth discussing with the person who supposedly said it.

Meghan’s stories about being unprepared with basics- like how to greet his grandmother. That falls on Harry.

There are more examples, I’m sure.

But just how are people supposed to help you if your communication skills are this poor?

This puts everything in an interesting light. They weren't supported enough, but somehow they expected everyone to what, read their minds?

I too think that there is a lot of Harry's fault in Meghan being completely unprepared. Her claim that the palace did not help her in any way with that (so, no "princess lessons" for the future Duchess of Sussex) is also interesting, as I think some formal support needs to be in place for the newest (future) member of the family. Maybe they
a/ didn't think that Harry will rush the relationship so much
b/ it was something Harry actually had to request from the palace.
Because I can't imagine the KP staff saying "no, we will not help" to HRH Prince Henry of Wales.

 

[QueenMathilde]

Does anyone know if Beatrice and Eugenie still have private security anymore? I know Prince Andrew paid for it when they were younger but do we know if this is still the case? Because it might be entirely possible they also no longer have security paid for by their father.

As for paying for something just because your child is not happy I'm sorry but that's a poor excuse to pay for anything, especially when they're a grown adult with a substantial fortune of their own. Diana's estate when she died was worth $31.5 million dollars. Harry got a substantial amount of that as well as money from the Queen Mum. He has money.

Harry is free to believe anything he wishes, he is free to feel he is entitled to anything he wishes. His father is equally entitled to tell his son that he is a 36 year old man who wanted his financial freedom and part of that is providing for his own security. Harry is of course, allowed to feel upset and hurt by his father's refusal to pay, he can rant and pout all he wants. But that does not mean that Charles then has to cave to his demands. Harry is not entitled to his father's money.

Andrew has paid for Beatrice and Eugenie's security for years now. As I recall he kicked up a fuss but it was decided that those farther down the line didn't get security paid for by the pubic. I think Archie would fall into that category. The public didn't want to pay for lesser members of the royal family. As for them being in the spotlight they're the ones fighting to stay there.

 

[rominet09]

It was a limited olive branch.. ie saying "we're sorry you were unhappy... albeit we dont think that you are remembering rightly.. and we will look into legitimate concerns." And they're leaving the door open but I think it will be accompanied by a certain amount of "look we're still pretty disappointed at the way you behaved, it isn't acceptable.. and if you come back for visits etc it will be on the understanding that you keep a civil tongue and stop asking for money and sulking when you dont get it..."

So well said ! You summarize it brilliantly !

 

[Denville]

Andrew has paid for Beatrice and Eugenie's security for years now. As I recall he kicked up a fuss but it was decided that those farther down the line didn't get security paid for by the pubic. I think Archie would fall into that category. The public didn't want to pay for lesser members of the royal family. As for them being in the spotlight they're the ones fighting to stay there.

Archie's security would be based on need.. as a child Since Harry had security as a senior royal and a former soldier, his children would share in that security while still small. Meghan is talkng nonsese, she is trying to imply that A's security was dependent on his having a title.. of prince and that he would not get it because he was mixed race. Probably at the age of 18, even if H stayed in the RF, Archie would not have security.

 

[Alison H]

For the last 20 years or so, things have been moving in the direction of cutting costs and reducing the number of "top level" titles. Arguably it goes back nearer 30 years, to the row over who should pay for the repairs to Windsor Castle after the fire.

We've also seen this in Sweden, where the children of Victoria's younger siblings are no longer part of the royal house. So it's not even unique to the British Royal Family.

Edward and Sophie's children don't have the title of princess and prince - even though, unlike Archie, they were entitled to. Beatrice and Eugenie had their security funding withdrawn.

It's a process that's been going on steadily for some time. Harry and Meghan seem to want not only to put it into reverse but to go in the other direction, creating additional titles.

None of this is directed at them or at Archie personally, and it's certainly nothing to do with racism. It's just the way things are. Maybe it's not fair, but a lot of things in life aren't fair. What it isn't is personal, and they don't seem to get that. Either that or they're just saying that don't, given that they said themselves that they didn't want Archie to have the title of Earl.

 

[Denville]

For the last 20 years or so, things have been moving in the direction of cutting costs and reducing the number of "top level" titles. Arguably it goes back nearer 30 years, to the row over who should pay for the repairs to Windsor Castle after the fire.


It's a process that's been going on steadily for some time. Harry and Meghan seem to want not only to put it into reverse but to go in the other direction, creating additional titles.

None of this is directed at them or at Archie personally, and it's certainly nothing to do with racism. It's just the way things are. Maybe it's not fair, but a lot of things in life aren't fair. What it isn't is personal, and they don't seem to get that.

I dont think either of them are smart, particularly Harry but I can't believe that they dont know the rules and that it is simply NOT TRUE what they've said about Archie not having a title or protection....
And Harry knows that the RF don't generally "rush to defend" a member because, if they did, their press office would need a thousand staff... and they'd be worn out.
I can't quite understand whether they DO know that much of what they have accused the RF of, simply isn't true...but are pretending that it was all a horrid shock to them and very unfair, because they know that their fans in the American market wont know any better and will believe them.. or maybe they really ARE that dumb and DO think that they should have whatever titles they want, as much security as they want, and to be able to step in and out of royal work when they choose.. and still have Dad or the Brit tax payer paying for them.
Harry's sudden saying that it wasn't the queen or Phil who made the racist remark suggests that perhaps he realizes he went a bit too far in attacking his queen... and has a little bit a sense of self preservaition...(of course it also gets a bit of a dig in at his father and brother who will be the next suspects)....

 

[RoyalNight]

For the last 20 years or so, things have been moving in the direction of cutting costs and reducing the number of "top level" titles. Arguably it goes back nearer 30 years, to the row over who should pay for the repairs to Windsor Castle after the fire.

We've also seen this in Sweden, where the children of Victoria's younger siblings are no longer part of the royal house. So it's not even unique to the British Royal Family.

Edward and Sophie's children don't have the title of princess and prince - even though, unlike Archie, they were entitled to. Beatrice and Eugenie had their security funding withdrawn.

It's a process that's been going on steadily for some time. Harry and Meghan seem to want not only to put it into reverse but to go in the other direction, creating additional titles.

None of this is directed at them or at Archie personally, and it's certainly nothing to do with racism. It's just the way things are. Maybe it's not fair, but a lot of things in life aren't fair. What it isn't is personal, and they don't seem to get that.

Exactly. Royal Families are "ruthless" this way. One day you're a the top as a child of monarch and the next day you're "a distant cousin".


In Sweden no one screamed racisim when grandkids were stripped of their titles. In UK everything now will be racisim just beacause Meghan happens to be biracial, and Charles doesn't have other children to treat equally as he treats Sussexes.

 

[mary mary]

Prince William responded:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1369973118538809346

 

[texankitcat]

That sounds ominous. Im sure William is really furious - I'm sure they all are. but William will probably say more than his father or the queen. I must say that Im a bit surprised that Charles DID stop taking H's phone calls and I think it indicates that he too was really finally fed up to the back teeth with Harry and that Harry was really making ridiculous demands....

I think what is really needed at this point is for Princess Ann to step in and address Harry and Meghan behavior and entitlement. Now THAT would be amazing! If she could take on a kidnapper with a good tongue lashing, she could certainly deal these two. She would have Harry clutching his pull ups and Meghan putting those curtsying lessons to good use within minutes.

 

[UglyAmerican]

I am sick to death reading about the Letters Patent of 1917 from George V. So what? Times have changed. Both William and Harry's children are all great-grandchildren of the Monarch. William's children would not have been titled if the Queen had not stepped in. If Harry's children can wait until Charles becomes king then William's children could have as well and should have. The Queen should not have done it for one brother's children and not the other. Had it been done when Archie was born, this so-called royal family crisis may have been averted. And before anyone says it, I don't care about who is where in the line of succession.

If it's wrong to do it for the children of one brother differently from the children of another, that would end with every single descendant having royal titles. That's exactly what they were trying to avoid when they rolled it back. William's oldest son would have been titled at birth regardless. As others have explained, the laws of succession were changed shortly before George's birth, before the gender was known. Had the firstborn been a girl, she would have grown up to be queen. But under the letters patent, her younger brother would have been a prince while she herself was not a princess. That's why the queen declared in advance that all William's children would be titled.

The Queen could have just granted a title to William's oldest child rather than all of them, but that would have created another problem. If the oldest child was a girl, then she'd have a title, and so would the oldest boy. But if William had one boy, one girl, and then additional children, it would have worked out so that the oldest boy and oldest girl were titled, but the others weren't. That wouldn't have been fair because the oldest boy wouldn't have been the direct heir, so there would be no reason to give him a title while denying it to his brothers and all but the oldest of his sisters. That problem would be avoided by changing the letters patent to refer to the "oldest child" rather than "oldest son" of the heir-apparent grandchild, but that's not something the Queen can do single-handedly. All she can do is use her discretion to try to work around it, and I think what she did here was reasonable for that situation.

Moreover, there was never the expectation that Archie would grow up to be a working royal. None of the children of Charles's younger siblings were given that option, so why would Harry expect it for his children (the next generation of children of the spare)? Harry and Meghan knew all of this. They didn't like it, and maybe they had good reasons for not liking it, but that's not the same as not knowing it until Meghan was pregnant, or believing it was because of race. They're just lying about that.

You may not care who's where in the line of succession, but it's the entire point here. Just because a few racists think the rules shouldn't apply to someone of a different race doesn't mean a 1000-year-old institution is just going to throw out the rule book.

 

[QueenMathilde]

I know that when Harry and Meghan moved to Canada Trudeau said the Canadian government would provide security. The Canadians made a stink and he said they wouldn't.

 

[American Observer7]

You know I am still so angry over this interview, that I can barely think of anything else.

But, I do want to put into context one of the things they said: The comment about the color of their children's skin. I think it was a passing comment such as after being introduced to Meghan and chatting and then wondering aloud oh I wonder what shade of skin color the children will have? I think it was meant as a comment and NOT as a racial dig as Meghan is now making it out to be. Even Hsrry seemed uncomfortable with the fact that had come out. The BRF may have their faults but I have never seen them behave in any racist way before, and having a bi-racial member of the family was a wonderful addition to their working members.

Meghan, and Meghan alone, has chosen to make everything about race and most of what she uttered on her interview was a lie, and can be proven to be so. I sincerely hope that the family can recover from this and that H & M fade rapidly into the proverbial sunset.

How is she suppose to respond when she hears that someone in the BRF expressed concern about Archie's skin color prior to his birth? And what kind of thing is that to say anyway? And then to be told he would not be titled and not granted security. He is an innocent child and a part of that family!

 

[camelot23ca]

How horrible for William to have journalists - and this was the royal reporter from Sky News, not someone less reputable, for lack of a better way of putting it - shouting "Are the Royal Family racist?" at him.

Maybe, but I’m sure he knew some variation of the question would come sooner rather than later, and it did give him a chance to respond directly to at least one of the allegations. I also liked his answer to the question about whether he’d spoken to Harry. The Royal Family’s public response to this situation has been very sensible and measured.

 

[Denville]

How is she suppose to respond when she hears that someone in the BRF expressed concern about Archie's skin color prior to his birth? And what kind of thing is that to say anyway? And then to be told he would not be titled and not granted security. He is an innocent child and a part of that family!

she knew perfectly well that he would not be titled..and that he would not get security after the age of 18....

 

[UglyAmerican]

How is she suppose to respond when she hears that someone in the BRF expressed concern about Archie's skin color prior to his birth? And what kind of thing is that to say anyway? And then to be told he would not be titled and not granted security. He is an innocent child and a part of that family!

By acting (she's good at that, remember?) like an adult and addressing the comment with the person who made it. She chose not to give enough information to allow others to make a real judgment about whether it was racist or not, but either way, that's how grown-ups handle things when relatives say things they find offensive.

 

[ACO]

William stating the BRF are not racist will land very well... I am sure. I think it was an unfair thing to toss at him. Not like he could really ignore it though.