Harry and Meghan Appreciation Thread

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

Harry met with a dozen youth leaders working in tech safety, policy and innovation in Brooklyn on Thursday.

Prince-Harry-Youth-Fund-Summit.jpg

GpY3xdvWcAATor4

2025_04_24_RTYPF-Convening_SELECTS_009-750x500@2x.jpg



Harry is such a stand-up guy. I love how he always puts himself in the company of "normal" people and tries to do his best to be charitable. Seems as ifnhe also lives by the Golden Rule. Reminds me of so much of his mom's ethics. ❤️

Blessings to him and Meghan for holding true to their values, despite the disgusting/unfair treatment they've received.
 




View attachment 6166321View attachment 6166323

It breaks my heart that he and his family are forced to endure such painful acts of hate & discrimination, primarily based on the color of his wife's skin.

I am glad he is keeping his dignity/integrity, and exposing the corrupt "royal family" for the thugs that they are.
 
It is amazing to me that pretty much all media got from Harry losing his court case regarding security is his comment about "reconciliation". The reconciliation comment is such a small comment in comparison to the rest that was said in Harry's interview with the BBC and in his statement released on the Sussex website. Harry points out things he knew before the court case happened and also what he has learned through his court case regarding security. Regardless if Harry won or loss the case it is important that his comments are on record and documented in my opinion.

Just some of the more important takeaways that aren't being talked about like the "reconciliation" comment is (and these are just some of the comments he was allowed to say because of the redaction process and national security matters):
- Some people from the Royal Household (staff) were involved in RAVEC and were involved with the security decision in 2020 then retired after the decision.
- In 2017 it was decided that Meghan wasn't going to get security when she joined the royal family until Harry asked who was behind that decision. After Harry's questioning she then received security.
- Since late 2019 Harry has not received RAVEC's annual risk, threat, and impact assessment which confirm the security required for an individual.
- In 2020 he was deemed the highest regarding security risk concerns but then reduced to the lowest
- When Harry's security was stripped other countries were signaled to also not give Harry security when Harry was in those countries (those countries have given Harry security and Harry also has his own security that he and Meghan pay for)
- Harry has attempted to privately cover the costs of security but no one has responded to him directly but they have refused to let him pay for security while he is in the UK
- Queen Elizabeth II wrote/made clear that Harry and Meghan should receive full security
- RAVEC protects private citizens that have never played any role in public office/never will play any role in public service but receive protection because they are at high risk. Harry mentions in the interview he was made a private citizen from the royal household. Harry also mentions how he will never be seen or treated as a private citizen by the media, most people, and the people that are threatening him, Meghan, and their kids.
- If Harry is invited to the UK he receives proper security but for any other reason he receives low security. Which is why Harry has only returned back to UK for funerals, for his various court cases, and when he visited Charles after he was diagnosed with cancer.
 
Last edited:
I just watched the interview. I'm glad he got it all on the record and confirmed with evidence. His decision to speak to the BBC wasn’t random. With no direct communication currently happening between him and Charles, using the BBC, which is often aligned with the royal establishment, was likely the most effective way to make himself heard.

From what Harry shared, it’s clear that the breakdown in communication with his father is closely linked to this court case. He does say that Charles does have the power to stop the issue and seems to make clear, in my opinion, that Charles did intervene as he says that all he asked of him was to not get involved and let the Courts handle the situation. Harry is not desperate to reconcile even if the BBC is mentioning that he said that several times. He wants truth and maybe he wanted the blame removed from him for not contacting Charles.

None of us really know the ins and outs of these people's lives and their feelings. These are complicated relationships within one of the most scrutinized families on earth. Harry seems fearful his dad will die and they never will come to a resolution.

Of course Harry is going to help the tabloids get clicks with this interview. Him mentioning the royals in any negative way is going to reinforce the narrative that he's bitter, resentful, and can't move on from his past life but for good reasons. Harry didn't ask for a favor, he is asking for fairness and truth.

Harry is putting everything on record for accountability. He knows how history can be rewritten when the truth isn’t documented. It’s not paranoia — it’s precaution, born out of lived experience. And the fact that some people still question their need for security or paint them as dramatic only proves how disconnected the public discourse has become from the real, human cost of all this.

And something else that really needs to be said: when the time comes and the King passes, there will undoubtedly be people who try to place blame on Harry — for not reconciling, for being distant, for not "doing more." But the truth is, Harry has made it clear time and again that he is open to dialogue. But you can’t reconcile with someone who refuses to meet you halfway, or who sees any attempt at honesty as a threat.

So no — they can’t blame Harry. He isn’t the one closing the door. He deals in facts. Instead of engaging in backdoor briefings, he’s chosen the legal route — the hardest, most transparent path — to seek justice and protection for his wife, children, and himself. And I think that distinction matters. Public reconciliation is meaningless without private accountability.
 
Harry has to realize that he no longer is working for the Crown. As a result, he is no longer entitled to security that was provided by the crown.
His charity endeavors are appreciated but he can’t expect the US taxpayers and other citizens of the Worldto pick up the tab for his family’s safety.
He has decided for the welfare and the good of himself and his family to become a private citizen. It has its advantages and disadvantages.
One of which is his obligation to provide for his family with his own means and funds.
I have compassion for him as he was not taught to fend for himself but it is not too late for him to learn.
Or he can reintegrate his family and go back to work there.
 
Harry has publicly stated multiple times that he wants to pay for their own security — both in the United States and in the United Kingdom.

In the U.K., the main issue revolves around the decision by the Home Office to deny him publicly coordinated police protection after stepping back from royal duties. Harry made it very clear that he is not asking for British taxpayers to cover the cost — he is fully prepared to pay for it out of his own pocket. What he is requesting is access to official security services that have the necessary intelligence capabilities and legal authority, which private security firms simply do not have in the U.K.

Despite this offer, his request was rejected by the RAVEC committee (Royal and VIP Executive Committee), the body responsible for assigning police protection to public figures. That rejection led him to take legal action, not for privilege, but for the safety of his wife and children when visiting the U.K.

In the U.S., Harry’s security is privately funded — and he pays for it himself.

The situation in the U.K. is particularly frustrating because it’s not about wanting special treatment — it’s about having appropriate protection based on real, documented threats, many of which stem from years of media harassment and extremist rhetoric.
 
Harry has publicly stated multiple times that he wants to pay for their own security — both in the United States and in the United Kingdom
Like other prominent people, it’s as simple as hiring bodyguards/security consultants etc. Not sure why this requires lengthy court battle or even the Home Secretary.

Thousands of billionaires do it every day: get a security team, sign a contract, pay them. Simple.
 
I understand why it might seem like a straightforward issue — just hire private security like other public figures. But in Harry’s case, it’s far more complex, especially when it comes to the U.K.

Harry isn’t an ordinary celebrity or businessman — he’s a high-profile individual born into a royal institution, with unique and persistent security risks tied to his status, history, and global visibility. The threats he faces aren’t random; they’re often targeted, politically charged, and in some cases rooted in extremist ideologies.

The main difference is that private security teams in the U.K. do not have access to classified intelligence, coordination with local law enforcement, or legal authority to carry firearms in many contexts. This makes them fundamentally unable to provide the level of protection required for someone like Harry, who has received ongoing, well-documented threats — not only because of who he is, but also because of his military service in Afghanistan and the highly politicized media coverage around him and Meghan.

So no, it’s not just about "get a security team". It’s about ensuring that when he returns to the country of his birth, he and his family are not exposed to preventable danger.

Only state-backed protection units — like the ones assigned to royals and government officials — have the authority, intelligence coordination, and firearms capabilities needed to respond to high-level, credible threats in a dynamic public environment. No matter how much money you have, you can’t buy access to those resources privately in the U.K.

 
. Deleted

Not sure if it will be on topic
Yes, this topic is fascinating, precisely because it touches on how personal perceptions and emotions shape the way we each see the situation. But none of us live their reality. We can only respond based on the information available.

We can care, discuss, and even disagree — but always with the knowledge that our perspective is limited.
 
Top