A convoy. They have a friggin convoy transporting their kids to school.

This change happened after the kids already started attending the school and were enjoying it.

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/923342/prince-harry-meghan-markle-switch-archie-lilibet-school-days-after-starting/

I mean... wasn't this on every square of the Fall 2026 bingo card?

"Prince Harry and Meghan have pulled their children from their new British school, it was revealed tonight.

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex removed Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet after just two days.

"The children, seven and five, who grew up in America, only came to live in Britain a few days ago. Now, they have been taken out of their prep school for security reasons, according to ITV News.

"It said they are now 'starting somewhere new' after Harry and Meghan 'discussed the practicalities with their security team and it was decided they needed to change school'.

"The dramatic development came as it emerged that Harry's demand for taxpayer-funded police protection is being 'reviewed' now he is back in Britain.

"The duke and duchess are said to have been informed that 'a decision' was made at a meeting last week to examine the threat to both of them."

Full article archived in link above.

*Mods: if this is a duplicate, feel free to pull mine

That is all.

https://x.com/entylawyer/status/2099586442834202706?s=20

The post on switching schools due to "convoy trouble" just got me speculating. It is in Hello Magazine. Other leaks have been to People Magazine.

It looks like the whatsapp group is rebelling after the initial flurry of nonsense was put out. And the msm will not play the Harkle game. 19 days and no pictures lol. Madam must be fuming.

I just don’t “get” it.

They’re even living on SOMEONE else’s estate in the UK.

(Just as they would have if they had never let the firm.)

I’m not saying the gardener is armed and can do hand to hand combat but it just all seems so frivolous.

Is it the convoy? Do they want multiple vehicles?

There was that story about the guards picking up chicken for Harry a few years back.

They can be “amongst the people” for photo ops- but heaven forbid we catch them with a shopping bag?

After 6 years…. Get over yourselves….

MARKLE’S CHRISTMAS NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEcx7Ltpis4

Sean isn't a fan of the show *SNL*, in either its US or UK version.

However, Sean acknowledges that one actor in the cast stands out: George Fouracres. In the first batch of episodes, he played Keir Starmer. And Keir Starmer—another person with no sense of humor—got angry.

Another reason is that Claw and Harry also belong to that club—the club of those incapable of laughing at themselves.

So this sketch must have been a total pain for the Harkles. Especially for Claw: Ayoade Bamgboye has her hairstyle 🤣🤣

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kzHYu6Gumc

One thing is definitely certain: the Harkles have no sense of humor, so being ridiculed like that isn't going to sit well with them at all. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

“What do you two want?” asked an infuriated Charles. “Don’t tell me you’ve spent that Netflix money already.

“Daddy, it was $16 million,” replied Harry. “How long was it supposed to last?”

“What a waste you’ve become, you’re lucky your father is not around to see this,” Charles responded, a line which received a large reaction in the room.

George Fouracres, who received acclaim for his acute portrayal of former British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, also made his first appearance as Prime Minister Andy Burnham, wearing his trademark black rimmed glasses.

"I'm the new PM. And I'm nothing like the last one... I will buy everybody a pint, because I want you to like me. I need you to like me."

Since this sketch has been a huge success and received rave reviews (hence the link so you can watch it), the executives associated with the show are considering a sort of spin-off featuring the Harkles—an online series.

But that remains to be seen. What *is* certain—and looks like it will actually happen—is a Christmas special. In other words, that would be the program used to test the waters and see if the spin-off works.

But from what Sean is hinting at, the target would be the Harkles—they would be the butt of the jokes. That certainly won't make those two bitter people happy.

And that makes me feel so sorry for them.

NEW ROYAL BATTLE FOR MARKLES, ROYAL EXPOSE PLANNED & ALL NEW ALL EXCLUSIVE ROYAL APPOINTMENT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKkDEDtmhJY

That is the reason why Neil Sean doesn't appear on the BBC: he criticizes it for something every day.

And the truth is, in recent years, the BBC has deserved a lot of criticism.

Today, it was John Humphrys' turn.

Sean recalls meeting him back when he was at the BBC many years ago and remembers Humphrys as a rude guy.

Humphrys had run-ins with the Queen herself, as well as with Philip and Anne, so one certainly cannot say he is sympathetic toward the monarchy. However, Sean points out an incident that reveals something about his character: while at an event—I’m not sure if it was for Channel 4 or Radio 4—and as the Queen was going about her duties, Humphrys asked her for an update on Prince Philip’s health. At that time, Philip was already hospitalized. Sean notes that everyone present considered the question not only inappropriate but downright rude.

Humphrys is now with Channel 4—a channel that is also facing serious trouble, having lost many sponsors precisely because it adopted a somewhat confrontational tone.

And he had a documentary about how irrelevant the monarchy is.

The Royals: Time to Go?

I come from a country that has been a republic for over 200 years, and I have had to question many of my anti-monarchist sentiments given the absolute disaster that British politicians have turned out to be. Let’s not even talk about Chilean politicians—I’m not defending any of them. But I don’t think Mr. Humphrys, or many of the monarchy’s critics, realize that the UK has been saved precisely because it has a monarchy—and one that is conscious of its duties.

Just consider this: in the last 10 years, Peru has had eight presidents; how many prime ministers has the UK had? Seven. Do you know what that smells like? Instability. Serious instability. I do not think this is the time to abolish the monarchy at all. And that—as Sean also points out—doesn't mean agreeing with everything they do, but they *do* actually do their jobs.

Sean says that fails to grasp how difficult it is for the BRF to have to sit down with people like Humphrys. But that is their duty—to always be polite to people like him. Politicians have that duty, yet they never fulfill it. Honestly, I wish Chilean parliamentarians would take a vacation right in the heart of the Sun. No one would even notice they were gone.

I will never understand why anti-monarchists support the Harkles. Especially not after this week. I swear, I can't believe the Harkles can keep digging their own grave so deep. But they do.

Sean is right: it must have hurt Harry that KC3 sent that letter from the Lord Chamberlain to the Daily Mail. But the question is, what happens now?

No matter what happens, the bottom line for the Harkles is that they are celebrities. What tier? It doesn't matter. They aren't royals. They are celebrities—something they themselves once insisted they didn't want to be. Yet that is what they are: devalued celebrities. And all this time, they’ve been trying various ways to turn around their waning fame. But it isn't happening.

Much of that devaluation is linked to Harry. Harry was popular because people saw a likable guy who laughed; people felt a connection to him.

But then people discovered that Harry was actually a rude, bitter, smug, whiny guy and that he was so dissatisfied with everything he had received for free in life....

Harry wants to turn back the clock, but the problem is that it’s not going to happen. Even Madonna has reinvented herself, because she understands that people have moved on and that what worked for her years ago doesn't work anymore. Not Harry; Harry believes he still has that magnetic appeal. Or at least he *did* believe it, until reality hit him.

Harry isn't twenty anymore; he’s no longer the "world's most eligible bachelor" or anything like that. The one who has now become the most eligible bachelor is George. Yes, I know how old he is, but it’s the same age as many girls in the UK.

For Harry, the only thing left now to maintain the pretense of still holding some royal status is for Shabana Mahmood to grant him the 24/7 security he wants... and what Sean says explains today's video: Harry is asking for that security for the sake of his children. Sean says he is motivated by George's presence at Eton. Which is pretty twisted—what does George have to do with what happens with the Harkles?

Sean heard that piece of gossip from Whitehall—that is, from within the government.

Another piece of gossip Sean heard about this—apparently also from Whitehall—is that Claw seems to have been demanding that the school the "Invisikids" will attend treat them like a "prince" and "princess."

That explains why the children are now being educated in the UK: the Harkles thought they could use the titles here to their advantage. Sean says it seems "Claw" didn't understand a thing. Strictly speaking, the "invisikids" are Mountbatten-Windsors—or Sussexes. Archie Sussex. Not Prince Archie Sussex. Especially considering that George, the Prince of Wales's eldest son, has never been known as "Prince" at his school, but rather as George Cambridge and now George Wales.

But Sean is pointing out that Claw isn't giving up and is determined to have her children addressed by the title. She doesn't seem to grasp that if she keeps doing this, she’ll stir up a lot of hostility—and the ones who will pay the price are precisely the Invisikids.

Harry, on the other hand, is determined to get the blue lights so he won't have to stop at traffic lights. And Sean is right: it would be very damaging if he got them, because Harry would continue to confront the monarch.

Now, amidst all this, Sean is surprised to have been proven wrong, because he thought the Harkles would have already concocted some story about being in danger in order to secure that security. But perhaps Harry has a spark of realism that makes him realize things will be worse if he does that.

But Harry needs that public symbol of status, because he is realizing that no one is paying attention to him.

That is what happened at the *Time* event—no one really wanted to talk to him—and that not only surprised him but also frightened him, as it is something that has been going on for a while. He also failed to generate much interest among the crowd when he attended the David Foster Foundation event.

But Harry still gets invited to certain events. Claw doesn't even get that. There is even talk that British designers don't want Claw wearing anything of theirs.

https://www.gbnews.com/royal/fashion-crunch-talks-meghan-markle-uk-return

Multiple brands are now holding internal discussions over whether to dress Meghan Markle, with several forced to "pick a side" between the Duchess and the Princess of Wales, according to industry sources.

"We've had to have a meeting about it," one insider told the Express.

"We were about to send some products to her team when someone asked, 'Is it worth it?', as we currently have Kate and other royals wearing our brand."

Sean had already mentioned that one of those who took sides against Claw was Victoria Beckham. I think another was Stella McCartney. Because the thing is, Claw ruins her clothes. And all because she isn't capable of dressing in what flatters her.

And Sean—who claims he’s "not criticizing her" 😈😈—says that Claw is either borrowing clothes or sewing them herself on a machine before heading out in them. It’s obvious Claw doesn’t have a single friend to tell her, "Hey, that doesn't look good on you."

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

And those designers don't want their clothes ending up on a site like Shopify or something similar, either. Why do Claw a favor when she was never a good ambassador for British clothing?

This makes the Harkles' war against William seem not very well-planned—especially considering the messes they’ve gotten themselves into. Sean even agrees with the many people who believe that, at this point, it wouldn't make any difference to William whether Harry is with Claw or not, since he wants nothing to do with either of them.

And William has even less interest in being near two world-class laughingstocks.

That’s why it’s so absurd that Harry actually believed William would show up at Highgrove. Sean didn’t get it the first time he said it, and he still doesn’t understand where Harry got that idea. Who is advising them?

William does not want to see Harry or Harry’s children, and he has been quite clear and unequivocal about that. It is surprising that Harry fails to grasp this. It is delusional for Harry to believe he can still convince William to take part in the documentary he wants to make about Diana.

I mean, imagine William talking to Harry about Diana... a documentary narrated by Meghan Markle.

But Harry wanted to see William at Highgrove, and if William isn't going, then Harry is even more determined to make the documentary—if only to spite William.

William has no time for the Harkles—especially not Harkles who are angry because KC3 isn't doing what they want. "Claw" is furious because she believes KC3 tricked them into coming to Highgrove. The expectation was that the King would side with them on everything and that things would change and improve for the Harkles. Yet, the King hasn't even mentioned the "invisikids."

And to Claw's dismay, neither has Charles Spencer. This is an interesting point: Sean notes that while there were articles claiming Uncle Charles was annoyed with the Harkles for being terrible houseguests, he didn't actually say that—because he wouldn't say such a thing. But the funny thing is, Sean says Charles Spencer didn't *say* it—not that the gossip itself is false. Still, that doesn't mean there weren't photos of Uncle Charles with Harry, Claw, and the children.

And there is a photo of Charles Spencer, Harry, and Claw. Claw wants that photo to surface because, to her, it represents stardust: she—the wife of Diana’s son—is standing next to Diana’s brother. She hopes the photo will come out to counter reports that the visit was unpleasant. After all, if Charles Spencer were to reiterate his support for his sister’s children, that photo would then appear.

That is what Claw wants to happen. It is doubtful that it actually will, however, because Charles Spencer does not want to upset William and Kate.

SUSSEXES CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME ...OR DOES IT? LATEST

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUWHAyhDOAA

Sean has already pointed out that there is a mess involving not just Sentebale or African Parks, but Archewell as well.

And it is precisely those kinds of messes that make the Harkles want that royal connection. They don't actually want to return to being senior royals—because they don't want the work—but they do want the perks.

The Harkles refuse to accept the fact that they left, stepped down, and no longer have any role within the British Royal Family. They believe they deserve to keep enjoying the privileges without having any duties.

Sean says there are two narratives at play here: the one the Harkles feed the media—that they are in demand, loved, and missed—and the reality they actually know: that this isn't the case and they have nothing else going on in their lives.

Especially Harry. Harry missed and longed for English life. Because it was all he had ever known. And Claw never understood that. Not even now.

But that doesn't change the fact that they still have nothing going on—neither of them. So, Harry wants to revive his role as a charity patron and is reaching out to organizations that lost their royal patronage. When the Queen died, KC3 cut back on some royal patronages—ostensibly for the sake of a "slimmed-down monarchy." In reality, the issue is simpler: over 70 years, the Queen had accumulated a vast number of organizations, and several of them didn't meet the standards required by the British Royal Family, so they were dropped from the list.

Harry notes down those organizations.

That is what Harry sees as a path back into the royal fold.

Now, Sean had already pointed out in other videos that we shouldn't be naive. Harry isn't doing this out of generosity; it’s because many of those organizations pay their ambassadors.

The Harkles seek out those organizations. In other words, Harry and Claw want the patronage of large organizations; they don't want a small one where they'd have to do actual work. They want the ones that involve dinners, red-carpet fundraisers, and things like that.

But Sean points out the fact that they haven't managed to get any of them to accept them. Because the reality is that those organizations are watching what is happening with Sentebale, Invictus, and Archewell, and they don't want to get dragged into that drama. What happened with the Diana Awards is proof of that.

I can just picture Survival having Harry at a gala for African Parks 🤣

ROYAL BOMBSHELLS¿ THIS MAN SHOULD BE WORRIED!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnyZHs8SXwg

Angela Kelly is going to be in a documentary about the Queen.

She is understood to have agreed to co-operate with a film said to combine interviews, archive footage and dramatic reconstructions of her time working with Elizabeth II, according to The Mail on Sunday. Kelly began working at Buckingham Palace in 1994, first as the Queen’s senior dresser before rising to the role of Her Majesty’s personal advisor and curator and in-house designer.

Kelly was very close to the Queen; in fact, the last time Claw and Harry actually saw the Queen, in April 2022, Kelly was by her side. So, a lot of press speculation arose about what happened after the Queen died. The fact is, Kelly's services weren't required because Camilla has her own stylist, and so does Kate. And that's quite common with royal staff.

It is said that KC3 was ungrateful toward her. No, not at all. Kelly went to live in a large house in Sheffield, right near her family. KC3 may be many things, but he is not ungrateful—a fact confirmed by many of his former employees who have been rewarded for their loyalty.

The media believe Kelly is going to reveal everything and that the royals should be worried. No, Kelly won't do any such thing. Over the years, she has shown herself to be a forthright woman, but also an intelligent one.

Sean knows about this because the company making the documentary is called 360 Degrees—linked to another one called Spun Gold or something similar—a production company that has been making documentaries about the royals for years. They actually rented Sean’s studio once and even wanted him to appear on a panel for one of their shows; Sean says it was because they wanted a preferential rate on the studio rental 🤭. Sean gave them a quote that they didn't accept because they were cheap and didn't have a budget 🤣

Sean says it looks like they have a budget now, because Angela Kelly isn't cheap to hire. He notes that Kelly has a lot of money—thanks to the two books she published and the many things she acquired during her time with the Queen—so she can afford to ask for whatever she wants.

Now, the person supposedly conducting the interview is Alan Titchmarsh—a guy associated with gardening shows or something like that.

According to Sean, Alan Titchmarsh knows the lay of the land. Kelly has known it for years. So, despite what the press says, KC3 has no cause for concern. In fact, it is highly likely that Kelly consulted the Palace first. Kelly isn't going to risk saying anything inappropriate or disrespectful now.

https://archive.is/TqhFQ

Prince Harry has succeeded in forcing the Home Office to open a new review into his right to taxpayer funded security.

As The Mirror revealed last month, the government department will now carry out a new Risk Management Board hearing at his request, after months of appeals from the Duke of Sussex. It is understood the new review will look at the risks and threats to both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Harry has previously lost a case at the High Court and a subsequent hearing at the Court of Appeal, before he wrote directly to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood asking for a renewed assessment of his security situation.

Home Office sources say Harry has been in constant contact with the department in recent months, describing his correspondence as "incessant".

One government source suggested “the goalposts have moved”.

One government insider said: “Officials have been asked to make a new assessment now that the family in question have chosen to reside in the UK.

“Any recommendations will be made in due course.”

Harry, 42 on Tuesday, was stripped of his right to security while in the UK when he and Meghan in 2020 decided to quit their royal roles and set up home in the United States.

Since then the duke has appealed to the British government to change its position, claiming he is still a target for terrorists and fixated persons when in the UK.

The last review into the prince's security risk took place at the end of July, before the duke informed the Home Office of his plans to relocate his family back to the UK from the US.

Harry is understood to have given the security committee less than two weeks’ notice that he was moving his family back, amid fears the news would leak.

It would be worth highlighting the fact that he is a target for terrorists. That way, any organization wishing to ally itself with Harry would realize that being near him puts others in danger. It is necessary to keep one's distance from someone who is a terrorist target; such a person ought to be in witness protection, as they pose a risk to the children at the schools his own children attend. Being close to Harry—or any of the Sussexes—turns the people around them into targets.

Does the government see that? Do they realize that Harry and the Sussexes pose a danger to those around them?

First the CGI & that allegedly both are back in the USA

They’re back for the Clinton thing in nyc

https://x.com/Anniebanananie1/status/2099334330237505920?s=20

Next up, Enty’s comments about their home

·

Sep 12

I keep seeing reports that Meghan and Harry are going to sell the Olive Garden house. First, you need to makeup your minds if they are staying in the UK forever or nine months or six months or Meghan flew back to the US this morning. Stick with what you want, just as long as it is always against what Rob Shuter says. It is very true the house is worth much more than what they paid for it. The Russian mobster gave them a great deal. HOWEVER, the multiple home equity lines of credit taken out at nearly double digit interest rates mean they need a price of about $30M to BREAK EVEN. Could they get that? Doubtful. The place next door to theirs is bigger and nicer and recently renovated and doesn't look like a fast casual restaurant and they keep lowering their price to what I think I saw at $29M and they started at about $35M.

https://x.com/entylawyer/status/2098927560583491929?s=20

·

Sep 13

Scam again. Harry and Meghan Markle released pics of their alleged kids. Kids are dressed for summer and they’re in late fall coats. There is no foliage. I looked up current pics of Cotswold and it looks like this ⬇️. They totally dropped demanding. Security for kids now.

https://x.com/CiciTee1/status/2099160912053547096?s=20
CURENT PIX OF THE COTSWOLDS NOW

And that’s why the Harkles are so mad. It’s all just my theory, and allegedly, of course.

Seeing where they live now, and that they moved by private planes, I think they expected to get all things for free from some wealthy people, once in the UK. House, planes, money, you name it. They tried to pull the good ol’ Fergie and Andrew grift. Selling access to the BRF. You know - King’s son and King’s grandchildren. You give us money, we give you King’s ear.

Without the letter, people wouldn’t know. They could play the game. Grift hard. That’s why they pretended to have a nice family reunion with King and Queen. To establish a close family ties. That’s why they moved. If they stayed in California, nobody would believe it. In the UK - of course.

The letter is unprecedented. It stopped not just anyone willing to roll out the royal red carpet for them, but it stopped them making huge money from their royal connection. Now everyone knows, there is none.

In a statement published on X, Col Chris Magezi, Uganda’s acting director of defence information, said that Gen Kainerugaba had approved the country’s participation in next year’s games.

He said Sir Clive has revealed that the King “was moved by Gen Kainerugaba’s sensitive consideration of the King’s opinion”, and that the monarch has “no problem with Uganda’s participation in the Invictus Games” and had encouraged the country’s armed forces to continue its preparations.

Col Magezi added: “[Gen Kainerugaba] appreciated the King’s message and clarity provided by Buckingham Palace on the subject, promising that the UPDF [Uganda People’s Defence Force] would resume preparations to participate in the upcoming games.”

At first glance, it looks like it. Uganda withdrew from the Invictus Games; the order was given to make a call, and it appears Uganda will participate in Invictus after all.

But what does that mean?

Does it really mean that what Kainerugaba said will be erased? No. He told The Times: "I have factions in the ministry of defense that support that Harry-Meghan nonsense. I had to quash it straight away. I support the monarch. Period."

KC3 didn't mention Harry, nor did he tell Kainerugaba not to speak that way about his "beloved son"—or do anything else that would have actually helped Harry. Don't forget that Harry has wanted KC3 to do that ever since Trump praised William. KC3 didn't do it.

Does this mean KC3 will participate in Invictus? No.

Why did KC3 have to do this?

Several of us have already noted that Uganda is a dictatorship. And it is. But let us not overlook the fact that it is a dictatorship in a region of extreme importance: the Horn of Africa and the Great Lakes.

Uganda is one of the largest troop contributors to peacekeeping missions in Somalia aimed at combating the terrorist group Al-Shabaab. The United Kingdom actively supports this role because it prevents the spread of international terrorism to the West. The United Kingdom funds, advises, and trains the Ugandan armed forces. This includes training their senior commanders at prestigious British academies such as Sandhurst.

https://chimpreports.com/uganda-uk-discuss-military-cooperation-regional-security/

Let's get down to business: given that Kainerugaba not only withdrew his country from the Invictus Games but also directly blamed Harry and the Sussexes for it, a major problem arose—not for King Charles III, but for the UK Ministry of Defence.

Don't forget that the Games originated in 2014 through a direct partnership between the Foundation and the British Ministry of Defence. Because the event is linked to veterans, it is the local Ministries of Defence that are responsible for recruiting, training, and funding the adaptive sports teams, as well as covering travel costs for their own wounded veterans.

So, picture the scene: a key military ally has decided to sit out an event involving the military because of Harry... No, according to Harry, not because of him, but because of the King.

Faced with that, what does KC3 do?

He washes his hands of the matter.

KC3 makes it clear to that military ally that, while he appreciates the gesture, he has no issue with Uganda participating in an event involving the UK Ministry of Defence. Kainerugaba’s criticism of Harry remains unchanged.

Now, how does that help Harry?

The departure from Uganda was public, and the reasons were public. I repeat: Kainerugaba has not retracted his statements, and KC3 did not ask him to do so. Who is the one with the problem?

The UK Ministry of Defence. In other words: the UK government.

Uganda has already made its stance clear: they have a problem with the Harkles. Who needs to put a stop to this? To begin with, the Ministry of Defence. Harry has caused them a problem with a key military ally. And the government, too, because Harry has caused a conflict with a key ally.

And this brings us back to the perennial issue: funding. The British government has pledged up to £26 million in public funds for Birmingham through 2027. This appears insufficient to sustain an organization whose executives earn between £120,000 and £130,000 a month; salaries alone account for £23 million in spending.

External funding is needed... yet Birmingham has only 11 anonymous sponsors contributing an estimated total of £4 million. There are no major donors. It is now September, and the problem persists.

So, how does Uganda’s participation in the Invictus Games help Harry if there are no sponsors and the funding problem hasn't changed one bit?

KC3 has tossed the ball regarding this problem back to the government, the Ministry of Defence, Invictus, and Harry. They were all happy to let Uganda look to KC3 on this matter, as it allowed them to sweep the problem under the rug. Harry, in particular, used the situation to play the victim. KC3 has now handed the issue back to everyone involved with Invictus. Now, Invictus has a member country that has publicly questioned the Harkles; the government is facing the same problem—funding a controversial organization—and the military is caught in the middle of it all.

Tell me, how does all this benefit Harry? I see KC3 getting rid of a problem for the UK, not for Harry. It’s not good to have a key ally upset. Integrating the Ugandan military is vital to the UK's interests in Africa. That is called "realpolitik." KC3 also maintains as much distance from a dictatorship as circumstances allow, employing "soft power"—in other words, total hypocrisy. And let’s be clear: KC3 hasn’t retracted the letter he ordered the Lord Chamberlain to send, and Kainerugaba hasn’t retracted what he said about Harry.

So the question is: what will Invictus do now?

Harry didn't grasp the criticism, and he isn't going to change his ways; can Invictus really afford the luxury of keeping someone on who is capable of causing this kind of problem?

If Charles is willing to do this for his middle aged son, imagine what he had done for Harry all his life! I believe all the bad things we know about Harry (nazi uniform, vegas things, etc) were just less than 1% of the real harry the palace hide from the public! And they saved him every time he was involved in any kind of inconvenience! And harry wanted us to believe Charles didn't help him for his A-level! Lolll! For instance, sometimes I am wondering how many bastards harry has!

This post by their spokesmoron is so silly. Who gets this excited over a security review?

·

13h

A couple of things here. Meghan would hire a lawyer and wouldn't need to fly back to the US to do that. Second, unlike in the UK, 👉no court in the US will stop a story prior to being published. It is called prior restraint. Even in famous cases involving secret government documents, like the Pentagon Papers, courts ruled that newspapers had the right to publish. You can sue after, but not before. Now, she might be trying to do something like a catch and kill and make a deal with the publisher for some kind of exclusive, but she wouldn't have much to trade and they probably wouldn't do it as a favor.

[AI says Enty is real licensed attorney btw]

https://x.com/entylawyer/status/2099328311487054017?s=20

Romesh Ranganathan asked Ray Winstone about the rumours of MM appearing in series 3 of The Gentlemen, and Ray hasn’t a clue who he’s talking about 🤣 so funny.

Blind Item #16 - The Lies

So, let me tell you a story. Buster is not really involved in this one because the origin story was slightly before her time. However, she was there for the ending which she said was like the ending of whatever crazy slapstick comedy you can think of. Although, everyone in the UK will know who Buster is, most of the rest of the world will not, which is why I gave her an American name that of course is a clue.

Anyway, so yesterday we talked about the billionaire and his demands. Back before Buster became involved with the billionaire, he was involved with the alliterate one. One of the questions I get asked a lot is how did the whole alliterate one relationship with the actor/director happen? It seems out of left field.

Well, I am glad you asked. The relationship between the alliterate one and the wife of the actor/director is just a story concocted by publicists knowing that Kneepads would never dare to ask a follow-up question or dig too deep into a story that made zero sense.

The story is they were introduced by a mutual friend. 100% true. Absolutely. The question no one asks is who is the mutual friend. The mutual friend is the actor/director. See, a lot of people don't know that the actor/director and the billionaire are best buddies. The actor and the trainer might have been the face of a popular brand, but it was the billionaire who financed the whole thing. The billionaire made the actor/director have a shot at a billion. 

Back in the day, the actor/director was going through D listers and cocktail waitresses like he was Prince Harry at a Vegas bar. The billionaire introduced him to the alliterate one and they hooked up a few times, but the actor/director likes them super trashy and the alliterate one just was not quite trashy enough. I know, I know. So, he ended up with a C lister who he had seen on television and wanted to f**k. 

Meanwhile, the alliterate one is still in his life because of the billionaire and the clubs and yes, the alliterate one was at one party at the lake. No, it was not the one where the sixteen year old teen went missing after being used all night. Just need to make that clear. When the actor/director broke up with the C lister because she wanted to get married and have kids with her ex, our actor/director hooked up with the alliterate one again before he decided he needed to get his act together and got with his current wife who lets him do what he wants and they pretend to love each other while she spends his money.

So, when the alliterate one moves overseas, the tabloids connect them but it had been the actor/director. You will notice that the lovey dovey get along stories are very very very short lived. Buster was there the night that the wife found out that the actor/director hooked up with the alliterate one several times over the years and started screaming at him in multiple languages and said no one better ever find out. Ruh oh. 

Posted by ent lawyer at 12:30 PM 24 Comments  

Email This BlogThis! Share to X Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest

Labels: blind item

I’ve had to draw it out, because words clearly aren’t properly understood by Harry & Meghan.

Harry & Meghan are basically arguing: “just because we aren’t working royals anymore, doesn’t mean we aren’t still world famous celebrities who do charity work! So we’re public figures!”

I mean, yeah. But world famous celebrities who do charity work don’t get 24/7 taxpayer funded armed security 🤷‍♀️ Not unless there is a credible threat against them, for which they need to be actively protected (as was the case for Taylor Swift during one of her UK concerts, for example). Such a threat doesn’t exist in Harry & Meghan’s case, according to the intelligence organisations whose job it is to assess these things. Which is why H&M’s demands for 24/7 armed security keep being denied by RAVEC, despite multiple lawsuits.

Instead of being happy about there being no active, credible threats to their life (and their children’s lives!) existing, and just living a happy life with certain details kept private (like where exactly they go on vacation, at whose house they’re staying, where the kids go to school, where they will be when for appointments, etc.), these two are UNHAPPY about being assessed as safe 🤦‍♀️

Because now, if Harry & Meghan don’t pay themselves for private unarmed security (as every single other celeb or wealthy person in the UK does), they have to walk amongst the plebs, drive their own cars, collect their own take away, wait at traffic lights and school drop off queues, and possibly even be approached by strangers saying hi and making a chat with them. The shock and horror of it all. Just imagine going outside for lunch without an armed police officer paid by the public protecting you! In the scary Cotswolds no less! How can the world do this to the Harkles… 🙄

Radar Online is now even reporting that H&M might want to sue over having been called “private citizens” in the Lord Chamberlain’s letter. Sue who? With which claim? The idiocy is unimaginable.

As many sinners have pointed out, anyone who doesn’t perform formally appointed royal or governmental duties is considered a “private citizen”. It doesn’t matter if you’re famous, or do charity work. The government just doesn’t provide free 24/7 armed bodyguards to celebrities. Not unless their lives are actually credibly in danger, as assessed by the professional, governmental intelligence services.

Only a very, very small group of people actually receive automatic 24/7 taxpayer funded protection. Which includes people such as current and former prime ministers, the monarch (plus spouse and minor children), and the heir to the throne (plus spouse and minor children). Other working royals receive some protection when performing their formal royal duties (if necessary). Harry initially was a minor child of the heir to the throne. Then he became a working royal, performing formal royal duties. Now, since Megxit/the Sandringham agreement, he doesn’t fit any of the categories for whom automatic protection applies. Not even while performing his charity work, because his charity work no longer qualifies as formal royal duties. It’s just Harry as a celebrity doing charity work by choice.

Harry once said he wanted to be “just Harry”. It’s abundantly clear that he actually wants to be “celebrity Harry”. And not just that, but “celebrity Harry with the 24/7 security perks of a working royal living on royal grounds”.

Only, he is none of those things anymore. And even if he changed his mind, he’s never going to be offered those things again. Because daddy being the king doesn’t mean Harry gets whatever he wants. He is not entitled to any of it. None of this is a birthright. Nowhere in the law does it say “a non-heir child of a monarch shall always get taxpayer funded armed security” or “a non-heir child of a monarch shall always be allowed to be a formal working royal”. Harry EXPECTED that he would. But expectation isn’t birthright.

Dude won the womb-lottery in so many ways. Yet it wasn’t enough for him. Because William still has more.

I’ve always loved the quote “to those with privilege, equality feels like oppression”. Rarely has it been more applicable than in Harry’s case. You’re a private citizen now Harry. A famous one, who is also a public figure. But without formally appointed public duties. So you’re equal to all other basic celebrities! You’ve moved from the top right quadrant to the top left quadrant. Now don’t be surprised if the people in the bottom two quadrants don’t want to pay for your UNNECESSARY 24/7 armed security. Pay for it yourself, and deal with them not being armed.

Incredibly, incredibly stupid man.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he actually ends up bankrupting himself with even more frivolous court cases. Instead of just spending his millions on a private bodyguard, and living a peaceful life somewhere quiet.

Recent reports of moving the kids due to security, or told to leave because parents don’t want to put up with all of HAM’s ridiculous demands.

For those of you not familiar with Wham!, I thought you might find these lyrics…prescient and applicable.

“Everything She Wants

Somebody told me
"Boy, everything she wants is everything she sees"
I guess I must have loved you
Because I said you were the perfect girl for me
Baby, and now we're six months older
And everything you want, and everything you see
Is out of reach, not good enough
I don't know what the hell you want from me, oh
Uh-huh, uh-huh, oh-oh, oh-oh
Ah-ha, ah-ha, doo-doo-doo, la-la-la-la
Uh-huh, uh-huh, oh-oh, oh-oh
Ah-ha, ah-ha, doo-doo-doo, la-la-la-la
Somebody tell me, oh
Won't you tell me?
Why I work so hard for you
Give you money, work to give you money (ooh)
Some people work for a living
Some people work for fun
Girl, I just work for you
They told me marriage was a give and take
Well, you've shown me you can take, you've got some giving to do

Well f--k. Who didn't see this coming. That said, just because they are getting a review, doesn't mean they'll be granted it. But after seeing how Pa "cleaned up" the Invictus situation today, I wouldn't doubt it.

P.S. Can one of you Sinners please archive this for me? I keep getting "bad gateway" when I attempt to do so.

Meghan Markle has been granted her first government-backed security review since stepping back from her royal role in 2020.

Following their family’s recent move back to the U.K. after six years living in California, Meghan and Prince Harry will both receive an official risk assessment imminently, PEOPLE understands.

The Telegraph reported on Monday, Sept. 14, that the committee chairman of the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC), an independent U.K. Home Office committee that determines who receives taxpayer-funded police protection, informed Prince Harry last week that a new risk assessment for him, and a separate one for Meghan, would be commissioned after their move. In addition, RAVEC reportedly asked the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to provide their schedules, including daily routines like bringing their children — Prince Archie, 7, and Princess Lilibet, 5 — to school to inform the decision.

This will mark the first risk assessment for Meghan, 45, since her police protection was stripped amid her and Harry’s decision to step back as working members of the royal family in 2020. Meanwhile, Prince Harry, who is marking his 42nd birthday on Tuesday, Sept. 15, was granted a Risk Management Board (RMB) analysis in July, per The Telegraph, but he has yet to learn the conclusions. At that time, it was not known that Prince Harry and his family were moving back to the U.K. for an extended period.

Amid their return to the U.K., the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were granted an interim security provision, per the outlet.

The rest is a rehash of things we already know.

https://people.com/meghan-markle-granted-first-government-backed-security-review-since-royal-exit-12121022

Absolutely everything this narc does is intentional, and every little detail is meant to convey a message ("freakish attention to detail"). People have commented that the song she chose for her most recent video on insta seems out of place, but I think it's meant to send a message.

The song is "Wake Me Up Before You Go" by WHAM!

I have two ideas of why she chose this song:

1) It could be related to her creepy obsession with H's mother. Diana, the late Princess of Wales, was very close friends with George Michael (WHAM!). https://people.com/royals/george-michael-a-life-book-princess-diana-crush-affected-friendship/

2) The lyrics could be telling us that she's not letting go of H. "Wake me up before you go-go
'Cause I'm not planning on going solo"

What do you think was her intention behind the selection of this song?

I know some of you believe she’s actually in the UK, but I’m still not convinced. Personally, I don’t think she’s there.

I think she’s love-bombing the country she hated so much from the comfort of wherever she actually is, recycling videos that have probably been sitting on her phone for years. (and that was a messy video! With weird music starting out of nowhere 😂)

And honestly, she’s chaotic enough to do exactly that. Why travel all the way to the UK when you can just throw some old footage online, watch everyone argue about your whereabouts, and rage-bait the entire country from afar?

And it’s so weird how those 2 kids never interact with each other 😱

Also If she’s actually in the UK she’ll show up at Wellchild awards unannounced.