Invictus weaponized for Summer Royal Cosplay

2024 Netflix content from WALES & LONDON UK. Not from Canada where the 2025 games need the promotion. Also, what happened to Santa Barbara polo & the pwives?

May 4th- little being little birthday

Sunday, May 5th- start of Met Gala festivities NYC

Monday, May 6th-NYC Met Gala

Wednesday, May 8th clapback service 5pm St Paul's UK The Meghans are both on program as they create "royal" adjacent content for Netflix

June 7th Grovensor wedding UNINVITED

June 15th trooping the colour UNINVITED

June 21st USA Warrior Games

July 11th The Meghans cosplay royals in WALES for golf & formal black tie gala under the Stars w/the stars promo & fundraiser for 2025. Doesn't Canada have golf courses & banquet facilities?🤔

Could it be WALES was chosen because The Meghans are desperate to be associated with "The Prince and Princess of Wales" with every click? They intend to influence the algorithms?

✨⭐ She Commands the Cosmos ⭐✨ (etereshop)

Hermit’s Lair https://t.me/Human_Antithesis

Yhdarl - Demo Session - V - Karnaleïos (Demo) [December 18th, 2011] Country: Belgium Genre: Drone Metal

Everything composed by Déhà

Guest/Session:

Ravec D. - Vocals (Track 2)

Tracklist:

A Thousand Ravens - 10:03

Stone Hole - Black Heart - 19:17

Begotten - 17:36

(link)

But that *is* asking for preferential treatment!

RAVEC looked at the rules, they looked at Harry’s request, and determined that he’s unqualified based on what the rules say. Demanding another review because you say the rules are wrong is, in fact, demanding preferential treatment.

I can't believe I once liked this guy.

Comment in the Standard: How dare Montecito millionaire Prince Harry demand our tax money to cover his legal costs

This subject matter cannot be covered too much for my taste.

Emphasis and comments by me:

Prince Harry’s latest court defeat in his rightly unsuccessful bid to overturn the decision to refuse him guaranteed Met police protection after he pulled out of royal duties might seem like a trivial battle over legal fees.

But in fact the duke’s failed attempt to pass 50 to 60 per cent of the costs incurred by the Home Office in fighting his unmerited claim tells us much about the preening prince and his selfish disregard for virtually anyone other than himself, his equally self-obsessed wife, Meghan Markle, and his children. [No one else matters of course. It is all about them.]

That’s because when the Duke of Sussex, as he still wants to be called despite ditching his royal role, wasted yet more of the High Court’s time in arguing for the taxpayer to fund at least half of the hundreds of thousands of pounds that the Home Office was forced to spend on the case, what he was really doing was trying to pass on a large chunk of the bill to ordinary taxpayers. [Sponging off others is quite on brand.

That’s right: instead of having the decency to accept that he’d have to pay up when he lost, the Montecito multimillionaire, for whom the legal expenses will be loose change, wanted taxes paid by everyone ranging from people on the minimum wage to bus drivers, cleaners and pensioners to cover his costs. It’s frankly contemptible. [Does he think it is his birthright to have the peasants pay for his temper tantrums?]

It's notable too that yesterday’s costs order by the High Court judge, Sir Peter Lane, reveals that Harry, who is so protective of his own privacy (when it suits him), managed to breach a confidentiality agreement made as part of the litigation by emailing “certain information” that was meant to be secret to one his lawyers and the MP Johnny Mercer. The prince might have apologised for the error, but the costs order refers to the “seriousness of the breach” and it was at best a sloppy mistake that added to the Home Office costs that he was trying to avoid. [What were you up to Harold?]

Harry’s whole case was, of course, misconceived from the start and it’s worth recapping why.

He asserted that the decision in 2020 by security experts on the Government’s Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, that he should no longer receive publicly-funded police protection in Britain because of his move abroad should be overturned.

The supposed reasons were that the committee had allegedly failed to take into account the impact of a successful attack on the prince and had also acted unreasonably, unfairly and with a lack of transparency.

It was nonsense for the prince to think that he knew better than a panel of experts informed by the latest security advice from the police and intelligence agencies. [This man has a very high opinion of himself.] The High Court unsurprisingly dismissed Harry’s claim on all grounds, finding that there was no reason to overturn the Ravec panel’s decision. It had in fact left open the possibility of occasional police protection for the prince when in Britain, if there was evidence in future of a sufficient threat to his safety.

An attempt by the prince to persuade the courts that a later offer by him to pay for police protection should have been accepted was also rebuffed. Yet another judge dragged into Harry’s interminable litigation ruled it would be wrong to allow the wealthy to receive a service from the limited pool of specialist Met protection officers that a less affluent person could not afford.

That too was the correct and inevitable decision. Police protection officers are highly skilled specialists, trained at significant public expense, who exist only in restricted numbers and who are required to safeguard those facing the highest risks such as working royals, Cabinet ministers and prime ministers current and former, not others like Harry wanting the comfort blanket of protection they don’t need.

In short, every argument put forward by Harry was flawed and rejected by the courts. It’s a sign of his delusion that even the succession of earlier rebuffs from the judiciary didn’t stop him basing his attempt to get off a big chunk of the Home Office’s costs in fighting the litigation on the fantasy claim that he’d achieved “partial success” in his legal action. [He learns nothing from his experiences.]

Maybe that was how Harry viewed it. After he all, he told the world in his biography Spare that “there's just as much truth in what I remember and how I remember it as there is in so-called objective facts”.

But it simply wasn’t true, as yesterday’s High Court costs order reminded him.

It pointed out that Harry had “comprehensively lost” and that there was “no merit” in his claim of partial victory with his judicial review argument failing “on all of the pleaded grounds.” [Harold is a big loser.]

It was the obvious outcome from the start and the claim should never have been brought. His inevitable defeat was deserved and now it’s time for the penny-pinching prince to pay up.

👉 How dare Montecito millionaire Prince Harry demand our tax money to cover his legal costs | Evening Standard (archive.ph)

post link

author: Von_und_zu_

submitted: April 17, 2024 at 10:53AM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit

disclaimer: all views + opinions expressed by the author of this post, as well as any comments and reblogs, are solely the author's own; they do not necessarily reflect the views of the administrator of this Tumblr blog. For entertainment only.

Misan Harriman has started posting about RAVEC. He’s focusing specifically on the NYPD section and crowing about how it’s proof there are legitimate threats out there.

I think that’s the angle Harry’s going to force his appeal on. All the Sussex associates I’ve seen today are going on about the NYPD piece.

(Dude, you’re Oscar-nominated. Go do the Oscar hype circuit instead of sitting at your computer copypasting Meghan’s Hotmail email into your social media. Prioritize your career instead of flattering this lady’s ego.)

Someone tag Misan in this tweet from Meghan's Mole

It's so hard keeping up with Harry's courta cases, but ... Is this win even a win?? Did Harry reeeeeeeally lose the case!? Because it's not like he was actually going to pay for his security, had the judge ruled in his favor.

If memory serves right, this is how it all went down... -

1. Harry made a big deal about RAVEC decision to take away his RPOs after the trial separation from was over in 2021.

2. Then Harry said how unfair this was and there was a conspiracy against him, because he had already offered to pay for security during Sandringham summit.

3. Then he accused Ed Young of conspiring against him and said he had told Young he would pay for security and Young did not forward that request to RAVEC.

4. RAVEC said it makes independent assessment of each case and that Young was a liason with the BRF, not a deciding member.

5. One of the deciding members was Priti Patel, and she was offended when Harry suggested she/RAVEC had been imflueced by the palace in this decision.

6. Priti Patel and met police (I think?) came forward and said the Met police is not for hire and Harry's offer is stupid.

7. Then home office said Harry had never actually made the offer to pay, either in writing or verbally to anyone. Not even Ed Young (who had notes from Sandringham summit, I think?)

8. Then Harry said he had intended to pay, but didn't actually say it to the home office. But if the option was available he would totally pay. Basically, future faking.

9. Then at some point he also said that he didn't actually have the money to pay to hire met police, but if and when he did have that money he would totally pay.

10. But the met police again said, dude you can't pay because it's not even allowed.

11. And then today the judge said, yes dude the Met Police is right, you can't pay because it's not allowed. And I can't make a new rule up for you. So, no you don't have to pay for anything at all.

I'm confused as to why this was a court case? Like, could someone sit Harry down, give him a sandwich and a fanta and make him understand that you can't pay the police to protect you, it's already their job. And that if you need protecting they will do it anyway.

..

Why is Harry so dumb?

It’s all pr. His lawsuits are just publicity stunts.

Celta, wanted to let you know that on Wednesday, Feb 27th in London, a Judge will make the decision whether to order RAVEC/Home Office to review their decision to deny Harry 24/7 security when he is in the UK. The Judge cannot order RAVEC/Home Office to give back Harry his 24/7 security. If RAVEC/Home Office have to review their decision and still decide a 2nd time to deny Harry 24/7 security whenever he's in the UK— then that means Harry loses. I really hope Harry is denied security a 2nd time!

Hi Nonny,

I just looked for news on this and apparently the judge's decision is imminent, so any time now. I am curious to know what the courts decided as well.

EDIT: Harry lost! To quote from The Daily Telegraph: "The judge found that any departure from policy was justified and that the decision was not irrational or marred by procedural unfairness."

My insomnia has been out of control lately, meaning I have more free time at night so, I decided to read the 51 pages of the judge's decision on the case of el pendejo against Home Office - RAVEC. In the end, I found myself wondering once again how someone can be so useless in this world.

The best way I can summarise the whole case is that, once again, el pendejo demonstrated his inability to understand how things work. His incapacity to grasp the word 'No' and his aversion to being considered inferior to his perceived self-worth were evident.

The case also proved, contrary to what el pendejo believes and has said, that the institution did everything in its power to assist him, especially regarding security. However, it was consistently made clear to el pendejo that this decision was not within the monarch's control.

Now new court documents seen by The Times show that Sir Peter has refused Harry permission to appeal and also that the Home Office has been "penalised" for delaying the release of certain information - dubbed "crucial" by Harry's team - about the workings of Ravec - the committee that arranges security for members of the Royal Family and other VIPs.

Prince Harry was given a 10 percent discount on his legal fees in his High Court battle against the Home Office over his UK security after the Government was punished for delaying the provision of key documents, it has been reported.

The Duke of Sussex took legal action against the Home Office over the February 2020 decision that he should receive a different degree of protection when he returned to the UK after he quit his royal duties.

He lost the case back in February with High Court judge Sir Peter Lane finding that "there has not been any unlawfulness in reaching the decision" to revise his security, adding: "Any departure from the policy was justified. The decision was not irrational. The decision was not marred by procedural unfairness."

According to the newspaper, the Home Office failed to mention three categories of people for whom Ravec provides state protection when it should have legally done so.

The three categories are role-based individuals - like royals - other VIPs and those who need occasional support.

This meant the prince's legal team had not been made aware of the "other VIP" category, which, according to them, was crucial to his claim.

Harry's team initially sought "a reduction of 50-60 percent because of the way in which the documents and information were disclosed" by the Home Office.

Sir Lane said that while the Home Office had not acted in bad faith, "the defendant's breaches are, in all the circumstances, sanctionable".

In court for Prince Harry’s bid to overturn Home Office decision not to pay for security. Case seems to be:

- decision by RAVEC makes ‘no sense’ and beyond its remit - should be made by the Met Police Commissioner - Not given opportunity for Harry to make representations to RAVEC

Shaheed Fatima, representing Harry, told the court about refusal to pay for security: “There was no willingness in RAVEC to entertain any exceptions to the policy or listen to representations. We are not even getting out foot through the door. There is no willingness to listen.” Matt Wilkinson RAVEC previously rejected Harry’s offer to pay for armed security. It it’s skeleton argument, the Home Office state: “RAVEC unanimously decided that an individual should not be permitted to privately fund their Protective Security provided by the MPS”

Justice Chamberlain suggests Harry is “seeking completely different type of policing service, protective security officer who goes with principal wherever they go” compares it to “wealthy neighbourhood” paying for private police patrols. Ms Fatima says there is no “legal clarity”

Yhdarl - Demo Session - V - Karnaleïos (Demo) [December 18th, 2011]

Everything composed by Déhà

Guest/Session:

Ravec D. - Vocals (Track 2)

Hasn't he come to the UK multiple times after the book's publication and his book tours? Why is he over acting now? My suspicions are on 2 things : African Parks + P Diddy scandals. Add on the exposures mainstream media's had been making on his squaddies bullying Princess Catherine in most despicable ways possible and the BRF has cut him off for good especially with the website update. Security risk reason is lame - he was in Jamaica and all over Texas. They couldn't get him there, only in UK?

He’s building a case to back out of going to London and is looking for someone to blame.

Honestly, it does read kind of a trial balloon article to find out which narrative the public would like better. Are people more supportive of “evil court overturning Harry’s lawsuit and bad RAVEC for letting them do that” or are people more supportive of “bad church leaking private information”?

But IMO they underestimated how much of the public understands that Harry did this to himself by writing about things he shouldn’t have in Spare. There’s not much sympathy.

Security was the main essence of their plan from the very beginning. Hence the extreme nature of their war against the govt & RAVEC & they will act with increasing extremism and grifting and hoaxing in desperation now. The Royal Grift's brilliant video. by u/ElectricalAd9212

Security was the main essence of their plan from the very beginning. Hence the extreme nature of their war against the govt & RAVEC & they will act with increasing extremism and grifting and hoaxing in desperation now. The Royal Grift's brilliant video. The brilliant YouTuber The Royal Grift's latest video really gets to the nub of the matter.In essence, Markle and Harry's whole plan depended on having permanent tax payer funded security and this can be seen in their statement when they announced their plans.But most arrogantly and psychopathically, the statement was a typical Markle attempt to bounce the Queen and Palace into giving them everything they wanted.She thought that doing this would manifest it to happen, or force the hand by making the media and everyone else assume it was the case, and if they didn't agree, they could play the hate card of abuse and incitement, that the Palace was racist etc.Essentially, they tried to bully the Queen and Palace in the same way that Markle bullied her staff.from their website:Why do they carry out official overseas visits and who pays for it?The Duke and Duchess proudly carry out official overseas visits in support of Her Majesty The Queen at the request of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), as is the case for all members of the Royal Family. The length and location of these tours are determined by the FCO and the Royal Visits Committee. All Official overseas visits are in support of Her Majesty’s Government’s objectives and paid for by The Sovereign Grant as well as contributions from the host country, when appropriate.Does their future financial autonomy extend to covering the costs of security?The provision of armed security by The Metropolitan Police is mandated by the Home Office, a ministerial department of Her Majesty’s Government, responsible for security and law & order. As stated on gov.uk, “No breakdown of security costs is available as disclosure of such information could compromise the integrity of these arrangements and affect the security of the individuals protected. It is long established policy not to comment upon the protective security arrangements and their related costs for members of the Royal Family or their residences.”​+++++++++​Why are they so desperate, to the extent of waging judicial and legal war on the govt and RAVEC?Because everything about their plans to make money and set up a rival Royal House in America with the sole purpose of making money from the royal name whilst pretending to be philanthropists depended on two things:(1) The British government and Foreign Office asking them to represent the UK overseas(2) The permanent funds from the British taxpayer to fund their lifestyle and allow them to travel as if they were Monarchs or the President of the USA and gain access to money making merchandising and commercial opportunities therein.The Royal Grift rightly points out a couple of things:(a) The New York car chase hoax and everything else -- including the Taliban comment -- was an attempt to force the govt to resume taxpayer funding for them and(b) They will not give up and will become even more desperate and extreme and commit more hoaxes and wage wars of deception and hoaxing in order to try and regain their fundingI agree with the Royal Grift. I expect to see strategic genius Markle and her husband indulge in ever more extreme and desperate attempts to regain working royal status, and funding. In short, they are going to become ever more extreme, lying, deceitful, hoaxing and fraudulent as they become more desperate.We ain't seen nothing yet from this pair of lying psycho grifters ​​ post link: https://ift.tt/QSidF16 author: ElectricalAd9212 submitted: March 02, 2024 at 04:54PM via SaintMeghanMarkle on Reddit

So, arguments have begun in Harry’s case against RAVEC’s decision to strip him of security. One argument made by his team is absolutely non-sensical to anyone with a shred of critical thinking, and another is another example of a Sussex own goal.

Harry pretends to care more about the reputation of the UK than the government, stating their reputation would suffer if he was attacked. His team implies that his mother’s lack of security at the time of her death negatively impacted the UK’s rep. Uh - hello - she was not in the UK at the time and would not have had Met police protection / outriders in Paris. Not that it would have necessarily helped anyway as it was an ACCIDENT. (And - yes I know she turned down security, but the argument is really about having/not having security, not who decided, so I am not considering this). Also, I am old enough to remember the ATTACK on Lord Mountbatten. Seems to me that the UK’s reputation did not suffer greatly - but the IRA’s did.

The own goal argument - Harry deserves protection because he is the SON of the King. But Meghan is not, Archie and Lili are not the children of the King. Is he saying they don’t need security? If so, then why is it okay for him to come to the UK without security (Coronation) but it is not safe for them?

I really hope the courts shut him down. I am so tired of this whole thing.

Anne & Edward were the children of The Queen and get security on as needed basis for royal work. They don't have security when they are just going about their every day lives.

Harry is no longer a working royal but he wants the security of a working royal (William type security), while he is in the UK...

But also, Harry wants to be able to have Met Police escort him around because the Met Police will also have access to information regarding other royals whereabouts for the day. So don't tell me it hasn't crossed Harry or Meghan's minds that they can find out what William and Catherine are doing and try to upstage.

PLUS, the Taliban already let us know they could care less about Harry...so not sure what his argument is there.