Tag: prince harry

Prince Harry was in the UK from September 8-11. On the 12th (and 13th, I think) he was in Ukraine, then he returned to the UK briefly, just long enough to fly out of Heathrow and get back to Montecito in time for his birthday. Harry’s September visit was widely regarded as a success – he was out and about, visiting charities and doing public appearances, all with his private security in tow. Some people theorized that King Charles “gave” Harry some royal protection for the visit, especially since Harry and Charles met at Clarence House. As it turns out, not so much. As it turns out, British police and the royal protection unit are perfectly fine leaving Harry unguarded, even though he’s in serious danger whenever he steps foot in the UK. Apparently, one of Harry’s stalkers came dangerously close to him TWICE in the UK.

A known stalker came within feet of the Duke of Sussex on two separate occasions during his recent visit to the UK, The Telegraph can reveal. The woman, who may be suffering from mental health issues, entered a “secure zone” at a central London hotel at which the Duke was attending the WellChild Awards on Sept 9.

Two days later, she was spotted within a stone’s throw of the Duke at the Centre for Blast Injury Studies in west London, security sources said. She is said to have previously followed him to Nigeria.A member the Duke’s private staff recognised the woman and “body-blocked” her to ensure that she could not get any closer, despite not knowing if she was carrying a weapon. There was no police presence at the event.

The woman is on a list of fixated individuals drawn up by a private intelligence company for the Duke’s personal protection team. She has a history of following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex all over the world and was seen during the couple’s visit to Abuja, Nigeria, last year. Scotland Yard declined to comment on the two incidents, stating that it did not discuss security arrangements.

The incidents are likely to be used by the Duke as proof of the risk he faces, and which is faced by those around him, as he continues to pursue the right to a full risk assessment of his security arrangements despite losing a legal challenge against the Government.

A friend said the Duke felt “enormous guilt” that his high profile put others around him at risk, citing it as one of the reasons why his visits to the UK are so infrequent.

“It should not be left to two office staff to act as extra eyes and ears or provide a physical barrier,” said the friend. “That should not happen. It is only going to take one motivated, lone individual for this to go south very quickly.”

The Duke has no right to guaranteed state-backed police protection when he visits the UK. Each visit is assessed on its merits by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec). The “bespoke” arrangement has so far resulted in the Duke receiving minimal or no police protection on most visits. Instead of the armed close protection he received as a working member of the Royal family, he has been assigned a liaison officer to contact if anything goes awry – a role police sources admitted was “a suit in an office” who is not security vetted. As such, should there be an incident, his private protection team can only call 999 and hope for a swift response.

[From The Telegraph]

I’ve known for some time that the British media, the British royal family and Britain’s police and royal protection service are all working in tandem to create situations in which harm comes to both Harry and Meghan. They’ve been doing this for years, even when the Sussexes lived in the UK. That’s why every time Harry visits the UK, the press tries to incite hatred and violent rage against him. That’s why Charles and his courtiers have facilitated this lack of police protection in the UK, and why they’ve begged foreign governments to provide zero protection for the Sussexes as well.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

The British media is really mad at Prince Harry. They’ve been mad since 2019, really. Which is when Harry first started suing them. The year before, 2018, was when Prince William and Kate really decided to sell out Harry and Meghan, and W&K have never stopped. Additionally, Harry’s father has always used both of his sons for his own image, and Charles clearly doesn’t give two sh-ts about Harry OR William. All of which to say, Harry’s spokesperson issuing a correction to the Sun’s curious weekend cover story has gone off like a bomb. Even more so because Harry clearly points to the Sun’s “sources” as attempting to “sabotage” his reconciliation efforts with his father, drawing direct lines to both Charles’s courtiers and William’s office. The reaction from the Windsors and the royalist media has been full of gaslighting, hastily rewritten narratives, lies and threats. Now the Daily Mail’s Amanda Platell is saying all of it pretty explicitly: they’re running the “Harry is paranoid, just like his dead mother” play.

What a terrible error of judgment Prince Harry has made. Just days after landing back in California after a triumphant UK trip during which he met his father for the first time in 19 months, the Prince has once again displayed the least attractive quality he inherited from his mother Princess Diana – her utter paranoia.

At least Diana had good reason, having been cruelly duped by the disgraced BBC journalist Martin Bashir who manipulated her into that infamous 1995 Panorama interview by feeding her lies, telling her that even her most trusted courtiers were traitors who were selling untruths about her to the media.

Now, nearly thirty years after his mother’s death, sources ‘close to Harry’ are making the same lurid accusations Diana made – just days after what should have been a game-changing meeting with his Pa. They say that the Palace’s ‘men in grey suits’ were working against Harry and ‘sabotaging his reconciliation with the King’.

As small glimpses of the meeting between Harry and his father began to emerge in the days afterwards, a source close to the Prince claimed he was infuriated with the briefings, stating rather pompously: ‘The relationship between the Duke and His Majesty The King is a matter for the two of them only’, before adding that ‘the men in grey suits should stay out of it’.

The vehement denials that followed surely must have stung Harry as Palace insiders began counter-briefing that Harry ‘would never be allowed to return as a half-in half-out working royal’, that there were ‘no plans now or in the foreseeable future for father and son to appear together in public’ and perhaps most painfully that ‘those inside Team Harry had mistaken a brief tea and a slice of cake for the Treaty of Versailles’. Others claimed that the meeting between father and son had been ‘distinctly formal’, with the duke allegedly describing it as ‘very official, like an official visit’ – a comment his spokesman vehemently denied.

Now, after the latest lurid accusations that ‘men in grey suits’ are sabotaging the Prince, the harsh reality is clear: the only thing sabotaging Harry is his own self-perceived victimhood, a role he continues unhealthily to wallow in – and unforgivably monetise through his memoir, Spare. How paranoid must Harry have felt then when it was reported that Buckingham Palace had been left ‘saddened and perplexed’, increasingly ‘bemused’ and ‘clearly not a little irritated’ by Harry’s ‘wild, conspiracy theories’.

Even more upsetting for Harry is that the latest comments have been met with ‘disappointment’ by friends of King Charles, with a royal source adding: ‘The reality is that senior aides have been working behind the scenes to improve what is a delicate but important private family relationship.’ At which point, we should point out that in refined royal circles, the word ‘disappointment’ is equivalent to a nuclear warhead going off.

Harry’s obsession with conspiracy theories has horrible echoes of his mother’s bitter and collapsing marriage to Charles – and her completely out-of-kilter state of mind back then….it’s the paranoia that Harry shares with his late mother that is most troubling. For it was not only Diana’s least attractive characteristic, but the one that led to much unhappiness…. Diana never did stop manipulating the media or blaming the men in grey suits for her unhappiness. She was so paranoid that she cancelled her official Scotland Yard protection detail, believing they were loyal not to her but the palace. And look how that ended.

[From The Daily Mail]

That last sentence is the explicit threat to Harry: if you continue to correctly call out the people harming you, you’re going to wind up like your paranoid mother. Diana was “paranoid” and she had every reason to be paranoid, because people were actively harming her and plotting against her because they saw her as an existential threat to the monarchy. They still mock Diana years after her death – “Diana was so paranoid, she thought she would die in a car crash organized by her ex-husband and the institution which protects him!” And look at that. The “paranoid Harry” talking point doesn’t even hold up because Platell explicitly details that the courtiers WERE BRIEFING AGAINST HARRY after he met with his father! Jesus.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Tom Sykes has been doing the most to promote his Royalist Substack, and this weekend, he was full of drama over Prince Harry’s clapback on The Sun. Harry’s spokesperson drew a direct line between The Sun’s exclusive cover story and the courtiers hellbent on sabotaging King Charles and Prince Harry’s reconciliation. Sykes did a live video in which he explained the connections between what Harry wrote about in Spare and how many institutional factions are anti-Sussex. For what it’s worth, I think a lot of people are missing the fact that Prince William’s office has posed as “sources close to the Sussexes” to spread lies about Harry and Meghan’s moves and motivations for years. Whenever a story pops up with some really shady quotes from “sources close to Harry,” you can assume it’s from Kensington Palace’s workshop. Now, did the Sun’s exclusive come from KP? Eh. I think the detail about Harry giving his father a photo was what set off Harry. It was the kind of thing which could have only come from Charles’s inner camp, imo. Which is why Harry was so forceful in pushing back.

Well, on Sunday, the palace saboteurs responded to all of this melodrama by declaring that King Charles was “saddened and disappointed” by Harry’s spokesperson’s statement. I feel like it’s notable that the reaction wasn’t a full, screeching hissy fit – the response was weak and vague, because Harry hit his target accurately and showed that he’s perfectly capable of calling them out publicly. But, according to Sykes, “Harry’s Enemies in King Charles’ Court Have Lured Him Into Their Trap.” Sykes now believes that “Harry… needs to stop reacting every time his enemies prod him if he is to preserve his fragile reconciliation with his dad.”

I said in my Live yesterday—recorded in the admittedly unsatisfactory lighting conditions of the gloaming outside Slane Castle in Ireland and with way too many ‘ums’—that I believed that the palace had set a trap for Harry when insiders planted a story in the Sun saying that Harry’s meeting with his father was a distinctly chilly affair, more like an official audience than a father-son reunion.

I noted that I felt Harry had walked right into its jaws by taking the bait, and issuing one of his trademark angry outbursts at palace operatives, accusing the “men in grey suits” of leaking “pure invention” to the media with the aim of “sabotaging any reconciliation between father and son.”

I suggested that Harry was pointing the finger at his great foes in Charles’ office, Sir Clive Alderton (“the wasp”) and Tobyn Andreae.

I also said that having provoked a response, anti-reconciliation courtiers would now be able to say that Harry had betrayed his promise not to re-escalate tensions with the family or stoke controversy around the September 10 meeting which saw Harry meet the King for “a private tea” at Clarence House, the first time that the King had met with his younger son for 19 months.

And lo! The trap just snapped shut. My point has been proven (rather quicker than I anticipated, I must confess) by a wounding story in the London Times saying that “the palace” (the Times’s careful choice of words) has been left “saddened and perplexed” by Harry’s claim that “the institution” (more careful syntax) is “sabotaging” his attempts to reconcile with the King.

[From The Royalist Substack]

A few things…it looks more like the courtiers fell into Harry’s trap by leaking the highly specific detail about the photo. “Anti-reconciliation courtiers would now be able to say that Harry had betrayed his promise not to re-escalate tensions with the family or stoke controversy around the September 10 meeting.” Those are the same courtiers who A) leaked the sh-t in the first place and B) have consistently failed to rein in Prince William, who had a loud, messy nervous breakdown over the meeting and hasn’t shut up about it for weeks. Some of you rolled your eyes about my belief that Harry and Charles agreed to not leak details of any conversations and meetings. You guys are wrong – there absolutely was an agreement, and it was one of Charles’s few prerequisites. Harry has maintained his side of the bargain, Charles has not.

Here’s more from Sykes:

Having previously all ganged up to denigrate Harry’s book ‘Spare’, Sykes now compares the courtiers to the Deep State & says they yield a lot of power & pursue their own agendas. Duh … that’s exactly what Harry told us in his book & you all said he was lying. pic.twitter.com/pWlEcqrYTo

— Zandi Sussex (@ZandiSussex) September 27, 2025

Here’s Tom Sykes admitting, in his latest ‘Live’, that William & Clive Alderton (the wasp) want to undermine the reconciliation between Harry & Charles & are the ones briefing & leaking lies to the British press. He calls them the “Harry Foes”. pic.twitter.com/EUV5FA0d2I

— Zandi Sussex (@ZandiSussex) September 27, 2025

King Charles is on his deathbed and William is indeed making his last year’s miserable. pic.twitter.com/vhdB5jnZrs

— Coyote Fan (@Coyoteband2) September 28, 2025

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, The Sun.

As we discussed, on late Friday/early Saturday, the Sun published a curious exclusive. Originally, they claimed that “insiders” told them that Prince Harry was surprised with the formality of his September 10th meeting with his father inside Clarence House. The sources quoted by the Sun proclaimed to have insider information about both Harry’s manner and King Charles’s manner, and even had details about what was discussed, what food was served and what father and son gave to each other. The Sun originally said that Harry gave his father a photo of himself, Meghan, Archie and Lili. Well, within hours, Harry’s spokesperson responded to the story, and then the Sun responded as well:

“Recent reporting of The Duke’s view of the tone of the meeting is categorically false,” Harry’s spokesperson said in a statement to PEOPLE on Sept. 27. “The quotes attributed to him are pure invention fed, one can only assume, by sources intent on sabotaging any reconciliation between father and son. Presumably, those same sources have also chosen to disclose that gifts were exchanged.”

The spokesperson also confirmed that Harry presented his father with a framed photograph, but clarified that it did not include Harry or Meghan Markle. “While we would have preferred such details to remain private, for the sake of clarity, we can confirm that a framed photograph was handed over, however, the image did not contain the Duke and Duchess,” the spokesperson added. The statement suggests instead that the picture featured only the King’s grandchildren, Prince Archie, 6, and Princess Lilibet, 4, whom he has not seen in more than three years.

In a statement to PEOPLE, a spokesperson for The Sun said, “In his statement, Prince Harry confirms the exchange of gifts, including a family photograph. The office of the Duke of Sussex was given full right of reply yesterday in advance of publication and opted not to give a response to The Sun’s carefully sourced account of the meeting. We have today updated the online article to include his new statement.”

[From People]

The more I think about it, the more I wonder which camp is really behind it. Harry’s statement indicates that he believes the courtiers – mostly his father’s courtiers? – are the ones behind this particular story. But… The Sun is owned by NGN (the Murdochs) and Kensington Palace gives so many stories to both the Sun and the Times. Plus, we know that Prince William and his staff love to “forge” Harry’s signature, and I believe they consistently position themselves as “sources close to Harry,” and they spread lies and smears about the Sussexes as they pose as “friends of the Sussexes.” You see what I’m saying? The actual story feels like it’s from Charles’s camp, but the M.O. is pure Peggy. Saboteurs are in both royal courts though, so your guess is as good as mine. Meanwhile, the Daily Mail had an exclusive in which “sources” also blame the palace courtiers.

Prince Harry last night lambasted ‘men in grey suits’ at Buckingham Palace, accusing aides of trying to sabotage his reconciliation with the King. The Duke’s furious broadside is an extraordinary echo of his mother Princess Diana’s criticism of shadowy royal courtiers – who she also derided as ‘the men in grey suits’ and accused of undermining her. Harry is understood to be infuriated at what he sees as a concerted campaign by unnamed Palace officials to torpedo his efforts to strike a rapprochement with his father by giving hostile briefings to newspapers.

‘The relationship between the Duke and His Majesty The King is a matter for the two of them and the two of them only,’ a source close to the Duke told The Mail on Sunday. ‘The men in grey suits should stay out of it.’

The increasingly bitter war of words between Harry’s camp and Palace officials erupted after this newspaper revealed last weekend that talks were under way between aides to gradually bring the King and his younger son together in a public show of unity. The MoS disclosed that as part of cautious plans to foster a reconciliation, the Duke might take part in more public events in Britain, though not as a working member of the Royal Family. But within hours of the MoS publishing its story, insiders began briefing journalists that Harry will never be allowed to return as a ‘half-in, half-out’ working royal – despite such a claim not appearing in this newspaper’s report. In a waspish comment about the significance of the Duke’s meeting with Charles, one unnamed source suggested those in Team Harry had ‘mistaken a brief tea and a slice of cake for the Treaty of Versailles’.

[From The Daily Mail]

“In a waspish comment” – many believe this is the Mail pointing to Clive Alderton, Charles’s private secretary, who Harry described as “The Wasp” in Spare. As in, Harry believes that Charles’s courtiers, including Alderton, are sabotaging his reconciliation attempts with his father, and the Daily Mail is suggesting in their special way that Harry is correct. Now, about this: “But within hours of the MoS publishing its story, insiders began briefing journalists that Harry will never be allowed to return as a ‘half-in, half-out’ working royal.” I still don’t even know how much of this is just Charles vs. William, with Harry as collateral damage. I’m really glad that Harry issued a statement though, and that he’s pushing back on the past three weeks of insanity.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, The Sun.