The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #661  
Old 08-15-2019, 01:25 AM
Dalriada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 336
Looks like the Miiror glibly reports to the taxpayer about the private jet trip to Ibiza with normal security team and the hiring “of five local escorts who know the local area” as-
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'take Baby Archie on secret holiday to Ibiza' - https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...paign=sharebar
__________________

  #662  
Old 08-15-2019, 01:31 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Would only be breaching privacy if photos were taken at the villa. If they were in public they woukd be fair game. We see the royals on holidays plenty.

If they flew in privately it would probably not be too hard for them to remain incognito in public.

But these Holliday stories pop up all the time who knows what is true.

In fandom circles it's: "pics or it didn't happen" when it comes to sightings of their stars. Works good with Royals as well.
__________________

  #663  
Old 08-15-2019, 01:32 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,679
Yet another piece straight from a tabloid and not worth the time to even give it a glance.

My opinion is that if they went to Ibiza for a vacation as a family, on their own time and on their own dime, more power to them and I hope they had a fantastic time in the sun and Archie got to get his little toes squishy in the sand and then wiggle them in the water.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #664  
Old 08-15-2019, 04:33 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Yet another piece straight from a tabloid and not worth the time to even give it a glance.

My opinion is that if they went to Ibiza for a vacation as a family, on their own time and on their own dime, more power to them and I hope they had a fantastic time in the sun and Archie got to get his little toes squishy in the sand and then wiggle them in the water.
> I broadly agree. I do not see why anybody should have a problem with Harry and Meghan spending a few days on Ibiza on a private break.

> As regards private planes, it is really up to them how they get there. The tax payer will not be paying, so it is probably the plane of a friend.

> Where it could get tricky is if, as H&M try and develop the focus areas of their charitable work, and choose to focus on environment issues. That is where an argument for double standards could come into play.

The obvious counter-argument that Prince Charles flies privately, despite his environmental campaigning will not fly as the security services took a view after Sep 11 that Prince Charles could not fly commercially.
  #665  
Old 08-15-2019, 10:45 AM
Zaira's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: A, United States
Posts: 1,199
The Cambridges in Mystique, Sussexes in Ibiza. I think I too need a beach holiday stat!

But its August, a lot of people go on holiday this time of year. I hope they enjoyed it!
  #666  
Old 08-15-2019, 03:47 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
> I broadly agree. I do not see why anybody should have a problem with Harry and Meghan spending a few days on Ibiza on a private break.

> As regards private planes, it is really up to them how they get there. The tax payer will not be paying, so it is probably the plane of a friend.

> Where it could get tricky is if, as H&M try and develop the focus areas of their charitable work, and choose to focus on environment issues. That is where an argument for double standards could come into play.

The obvious counter-argument that Prince Charles flies privately, despite his environmental campaigning will not fly as the security services took a view after Sep 11 that Prince Charles could not fly commercially.
Yes to all of this. If they took a beach holiday on their own dime and paid for all of their own accommodations, travel, etc. then good for them and I hope they had a fabulous time. However, if they somehow didn't pay for those things themselves and instead somehow billed them as a "working" or "research" trip, etc. then I agree that the taxpayer has a right to know what they were doing.

I do, however, see and agree that it comes across as hypocritical and very "do as I say and not as I do" if they did indeed get to that privately funded holiday on a private plane. Even on private and privately funded time the BRF are still very much public personalities and while we shouldn't expect to see pictures of their privately funded holidays, they shouldn't expect to be immune from criticism and accusations of hypocrisy if they very publicly preach about conservationism, saving the plant, reducing carbon footprint, etc. and then hop on a private plane when commercial travel is readily available. Sidenote: this only applies if their security teams have not determined that there is any credible threat to them traveling on commercial transportation. If there have been credible threats or reasons to believe that they are in danger then this no longer applies. Some will argue that there's always a threat and I suppose that in some ways that's true but I think there's a difference between a security-determined and highly credible threat vs. the general "this person is famous and I'm crazy" type of threat that happens every single time a famous person, be they royal or just famous, is in public.
  #667  
Old 08-16-2019, 06:15 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
Yes to all of this. If they took a beach holiday on their own dime and paid for all of their own accommodations, travel, etc. then good for them and I hope they had a fabulous time. However, if they somehow didn't pay for those things themselves and instead somehow billed them as a "working" or "research" trip, etc. then I agree that the taxpayer has a right to know what they were doing.

I do, however, see and agree that it comes across as hypocritical and very "do as I say and not as I do" if they did indeed get to that privately funded holiday on a private plane. Even on private and privately funded time the BRF are still very much public personalities and while we shouldn't expect to see pictures of their privately funded holidays, they shouldn't expect to be immune from criticism and accusations of hypocrisy if they very publicly preach about conservationism, saving the plant, reducing carbon footprint, etc. and then hop on a private plane when commercial travel is readily available. Sidenote: this only applies if their security teams have not determined that there is any credible threat to them traveling on commercial transportation. If there have been credible threats or reasons to believe that they are in danger then this no longer applies. Some will argue that there's always a threat and I suppose that in some ways that's true but I think there's a difference between a security-determined and highly credible threat vs. the general "this person is famous and I'm crazy" type of threat that happens every single time a famous person, be they royal or just famous, is in public.

I have yet to see proof that Harry was in Sicily and in Ibiza - there are no pics to prove it. Just the claims of tabloids and just the fact that someone travelled on a rented private plane from a small airport in Hampshire to Ibiza and back. But who that was and how the plane was payed for? No info - just the name and phone number of a DM representative to sell infors. Then there are claims that because they had to have their police officers with them and the taxpayer pays for them, all their travels are in the public domain and need to be justified. But that's not how the system works.



While William and Catherine and their kids were in the Caribbean (and transfered from the public airport on St. Lucia to Mustique in a private plane) and noone says anythings besides: hope they enjoyed their holidays.
  #668  
Old 08-16-2019, 07:20 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,922
If you’re going to use the ‘no pics so it didn’t happen’ excuse then you have to be consistent. There’s been no pics of the Cambridges in Mustique for years. So how do you know they were there?
  #669  
Old 08-16-2019, 07:53 AM
Tarlita's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Near Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 1,946
I don't get why a very private couple would fly to a holiday island hotspot just crawling with Brit holiday makers. And other Europeans on holiday there who would easily recognise them. They wouldn't be able to go for a casual stroll anywhere without being recognised.
Nope I recon they may have gone somewhere very private that we haven't heard about or perhaps stopped back at Balmoral.

Must never forget how often these stories are made up, and then turn out to be untrue.
  #670  
Old 08-16-2019, 07:58 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 460
To be fair I think private plane transfer is the only way to reach Mustique. Just saying.
  #671  
Old 08-16-2019, 09:10 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 20,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
To be fair I think private plane transfer is the only way to reach Mustique. Just saying.

Doesn’t belong in this thread but, normally you’d fly into a neighbouring island (St Lucia or Barbados) and then flight private/small plane to Mustique. But you are correct.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #672  
Old 08-16-2019, 09:19 AM
carlota's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 8,092
[...]
in the meantime, it seems that H&M relocated permanently to frogmore cottage. have they given up their cotswolds house? i remember there were concerns regarding security following some papps taking photos of the house. i wonder how they dealt with frogmore cottage security as from memory the only pictures that surfaced from the outside seem to be taken from a public footpath just outside... (maybe i am wrong, and they were taken from a more protected location inside the grounds of frogmore, which is not open to visitors most of the year anyway)
__________________
The Humane Society of the United States is the nation’s largest and most effective animal protection organization.
https://www.humanesociety.org
  #673  
Old 08-16-2019, 10:01 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,858
I mean didn’t William fly into Davos on a private plane to interview a man about the effects of climate change? They are all hypocrites in a way. That said, I have no issue with any of them going on holiday. Not sure what people expect of them. It’s their money. Excluding security which will always be with them, it doesn’t affect the tax payers. So this faux outrage by some is silly.
  #674  
Old 08-16-2019, 11:02 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,165
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
I mean didn’t William fly into Davos on a private plane to interview a man about the effects of climate change? They are all hypocrites in a way. That said, I have no issue with any of them going on holiday. Not sure what people expect of them. It’s their money. Excluding security which will always be with them, it doesn’t affect the tax payers. So this faux outrage by some is silly.
I take your broader point that often those that preach don't always follow what they preach, and I think that is the main thrust of the argument that is being made against H&M.

As regards William flying to Davos, a few points:

>As he is in the direct line of succession, there may well have been security implications to consider. We are not aware of the advice that KP may have received from the government.

> He may well have shared a plane with a minister or the PM flying to Davos. They do often share planes when travelling to the same location. These details would never be disclosed.

> William was travelling for work, not pleasure
  #675  
Old 08-16-2019, 11:35 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: many places, United States
Posts: 1,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarlita View Post
I don't get why a very private couple would fly to a holiday island hotspot just crawling with Brit holiday makers. And other Europeans on holiday there who would easily recognise them. They wouldn't be able to go for a casual stroll anywhere without being recognised.
Nope I recon they may have gone somewhere very private that we haven't heard about or perhaps stopped back at Balmoral.

Must never forget how often these stories are made up, and then turn out to be untrue.
Agree, they just might not want us to know where or for how long they will be away [remember their honeymoon] Plus actually none of our business. It is not as if they are future Monarchs. No one cares where Edward and family holidays or even Anne and Tim. All their private plans are really none of our business. They want privacy, give to them and their small family.
__________________
Forgiveness is the fragrance the violet shed on the heel that crushed it - Mark Twain
  #676  
Old 08-16-2019, 12:45 PM
Zaira's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: A, United States
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
I take your broader point that often those that preach don't always follow what they preach, and I think that is the main thrust of the argument that is being made against H&M.

As regards William flying to Davos, a few points:

>As he is in the direct line of succession, there may well have been security implications to consider. We are not aware of the advice that KP may have received from the government.

> He may well have shared a plane with a minister or the PM flying to Davos. They do often share planes when travelling to the same location. These details would never be disclosed.

> William was travelling for work, not pleasure
I don't think it's a security matter as Harry has often had higher security levels than his brother or father because security isn't really related as much to position as it is to threat level, position and threat level just often times coincide. And indeed, several reporters have commented on the higher levels of security for the Sussexes overall compared to other royals. You can perhaps imagine why.

And William and Harry (and their respective families and spouses) have both flown commercial many times before for both private time and for official work.

Perhaps, security is such that their RPOs felt it best they fly privately to Ibiza, perhaps not. My bet is that when a royal flies private its mostly down to their preference more than security issues tbh.

And while I really personally don't give two figs if Harry or any royal flies private (because at the end of the day private planes are not what will make or break climate change), I do agree that *optically* it isn't smart even if there are myriad of logical reasons for it.
  #677  
Old 08-16-2019, 01:04 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Doesn’t belong in this thread but, normally you’d fly into a neighbouring island (St Lucia or Barbados) and then flight private/small plane to Mustique. But you are correct.
You are correct it probably is the wrong thread but I was responding to a previous poster who commented on negative reports of the Sussexs travelling by private plane but no comments were made about the Cambridges using private plane to Mustique .

So I was trying to offer balance to the conversation.
  #678  
Old 08-16-2019, 01:22 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaira View Post
I don't think it's a security matter as Harry has often had higher security levels than his brother or father because security isn't really related as much to position as it is to threat level, position and threat level just often times coincide. And indeed, several reporters have commented on the higher levels of security for the Sussexes overall compared to other royals. You can perhaps imagine why.

And William and Harry (and their respective families and spouses) have both flown commercial many times before for both private time and for official work.

Perhaps, security is such that their RPOs felt it best they fly privately to Ibiza, perhaps not. My bet is that when a royal flies private its mostly down to their preference more than security issues tbh.

And while I really personally don't give two figs if Harry or any royal flies private (because at the end of the day private planes are not what will make or break climate change), I do agree that *optically* it isn't smart even if there are myriad of logical reasons for it.
Very much agreed. Private jets alone won't make or break the issue of saving the planet but they are part and parcel of the whole package that will. And yes, optically, it does have a bad look to it.

I'd also agree that it more often that not probably is down to personal preference and I suspect that we'll see that personal preference continue no matter how back the optics. That being said if they are going to continue to use that method of transport both for work and private events, then they're going to need to get used to the accusations of condescending behavior, hypocritical behavior, elitist leanings, etc. because they really won't have a leg to stand on with the argument that it's somehow acceptable to not practice what they preach.
  #679  
Old 08-16-2019, 03:50 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
I take your broader point that often those that preach don't always follow what they preach, and I think that is the main thrust of the argument that is being made against H&M.

As regards William flying to Davos, a few points:

>As he is in the direct line of succession, there may well have been security implications to consider. We are not aware of the advice that KP may have received from the government.

> He may well have shared a plane with a minister or the PM flying to Davos. They do often share planes when travelling to the same location. These details would never be disclosed.

> William was travelling for work, not pleasure
I don’t disagree.

I would apply security to all of the royals. We really have no idea about any of that stuff. And as for work, it highlights it the more to charter private when the topic of your work in that case is the planet’s health and what we can do to protect it.

The same talking points about Google camp were made about Davos with the many private plane there. So overall I completely agree that a lot of public figures are hypocrites especially the royals.

The issue is that people pick and choose when they want to be faux offended. If you mad toward one then apply it to all.
  #680  
Old 08-16-2019, 04:22 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
I don’t disagree.

I would apply security to all of the royals. We really have no idea about any of that stuff. And as for work, it highlights it the more to charter private when the topic of your work in that case is the planet’s health and what we can do to protect it.

The same talking points about Google camp were made about Davos with the many private plane there. So overall I completely agree that a lot of public figures are hypocrites especially the royals.

The issue is that people pick and chose with they want to be faux offended. If you mad toward one then apply it to all.
I agree with all of this. I think Harry, William and Charles need to be careful about how their actions--in this case we are talking about use of private planes--tie in with their causes. I've criticized all of them in the past for the "do as I say, but those standards aren't for me" optics, and I think it is something that really weakens their very important message concerning environmentalism. I think the term "optics" can be overused, but I think it is perfectly applied in this case. Not a good month for optics for the Sussexes.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
archie mountbatten-windsor, duchess of sussex, duke of sussex, meghan markle, prince harry


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 9 (0 members and 9 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
aristocracy armenia belgian royal belgian royal family birthday celebration charles of wales chittagong cht countess of snowdon cover-up crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife cyprus denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex duke & duchess of cambridge; dutch history dutch royal family dutch royals felipe vi future games germany haakon vii henry v hill house of bernadotte house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau jumma kent list of rulers lithuania lithuanian palaces mailing marriage mbs monaco christening monarchism nobel prize norwegian royal family official visit pakistan palestine popularity prince charles prince daniel prince harry princely family of monaco princess elizabeth pronunciation queen paola romanov family rown royal tour shakespeare snowdon spain spanish royal startling new evidence state visit sweden swedish history thailand tracts united kingdom unsubscribe usa videos


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:33 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×