I'm always wrong. I've got used to that. But if you can't be good, be very good at being bad? Lol.
Im just saying Mike, let's say I want to prove that I am being bullied by you.
I make a deal with netflix. I make a programme and both me and netflix make a shit load of cash. And I'm aiming all my hate at you.
Now, for the average Joe out there who doesn't know vital villa. Would you say my new netflix show would be a reliable source of information? Would you feel happy about people taking my new show as gospel?
It's always better being naughty mate lol
Again, I take the point which is why I'm looking at them in a wider angle and taking account of the whole press coverage - not just what Harry and Meg have said. It makes what they have said believable (even allowing for them misreading 'some' innocent comments because they have bunkered and are on the defensive).
As other posts have found common ground I think on reading, the truth is definitely in the middle, but in accepting that, it means a lot of what has been said has to be true by default.
You're also forgetting the right of response in your accusations at me in your scenario, I have the chance prior to publication to dispute them - even if I decide to give no further details other than saying 'that recollection is inaccurate.'
Harry is truly the only one to bite back on that front as he understandably (at points maybe wrongly) saw old Mum trends coming back both in the family and in the press, but I remember Wills took his own action (was it the Mail again?) when they published age old photos of Kate where the implication was she was a good time girl.
The press backed off, they never did and never have with Meg. Add that to their coverage of him being an affair child where Charles said nothing, neither did the family - I can see why he's always felt like a spare wheel on a mental front and totally digged in when he saw his own future (Meg and kids) under attack.
I'm in no way saying they are 100% right in what they are now saying, I'm just saying I can 100% see their side. Harry acted out enough when younger and we know that because of how his privacy was invaded, I also remember him being criticised (because he had to be Hewitt's son) when he bailed on an interview whilst on military duty because the sirens went off.
He grew up - but with all the structure around him, I half think he is now truly having a teenage rebellion against the family, but for the right reasons.
We'll never know properly, but just as I won't take their words as gospel, I won't take the press speculation as the same either - even though it clearly comes from leaks and is angled to more than suit their bias that Harry is the brother they can abuse and the fact he has a non white missus is gold dust for clickbait.
As for Wit's point on bullying.
I have a few takes and I'll totally remove the media here and other claims.
Ignore the assumption has to start with her knowing he was a Royal, and not a good looking lad - I don't even know how they met, I might be disproved - and it was a deliberate attempt to step into a world she was utterly fucking clueless about.
Newbie not used to that world as said with structure and dictation - that ticks the box. Being told what to do constantly with no deviation, the Family looks after papers, passports, your itinerary, contacts, tells you what you do and where you go and you're free time is supposed to be charity work or building the family. Institutional bullying is still a thing even if there is no personal malice.
The fact her servants left - who selected them is my first option. If she felt under attack and they were selected by the Family wouldn't that explain animosity mate. She didn't sack them all or not all resigned by your own words (again I don't know so might be disproved) so it makes perfect sense to me in that mental state.
It does not mean however I dismiss the chance she is a Priti Patel, she could well be, but both can be true at the same time.
Equally, could it not be a case of her wrongly acting out in frustration when she was alone with her aides?
As above, we'll never know - I'm looking at the Family's wider behaviour as I judge as I find genuine reasons for Meg and Harry feeling as they do.
Doesn't make me right, doesn't make anyone else wrong. But what is wrong is tagging Meg as the total bastardisation of the the Family where clearly she has been given a bad hand, even if it's not as bad as they claim.
And my final thought for the night.
I've spent way too much time on this thread lol
