DebbieH
LightNews LightNews
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
DebbieH
@harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
1K followers 1.2K following 1.4K posts
American UK transplant. ❤️Harris/Walz. Siberian Husky mom. Mom of one-eyed rescue Irish kitty. She/Her. Trans Rights Are Human Rights. Film lover. Brazen hussy. ❤️Meghan Markle & Prince Harry. Sussex Squad. SPN fandom.
Posts Replies Media Videos
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽. An excellent article. Well said.

William is STILL that little boy who was jealous whenever his younger brother got attention.🙄
This is not the behaviour of a man at peace with himself. It’s the behaviour of someone who feels eclipsed. Harry has found purpose. He speaks openly, loves fiercely, and has built a life outside the gilded cage. William, meanwhile, remains trapped in a role that demands silence and the suppression of any finer feeling. His rage at Harry is not just about family. It’s about freedom. Harry took it. William didn’t. And he cannot forgive that. And yet, William could be free. He could walk away. Abdication is not exile; it’s choice. But to choose freedom would mean relinquishing the palaces, the private jets, the taxpayer-funded security, the deference, the power. It would mean living with “only” tens of millions in the bank, without the machinery of monarchy to shield him from scrutiny or consequence. And William, for all his posturing, does not have that kind of courage. He daren’t try to live as scary a life as “ordinary” millionaires live.
September 10, 2025 at 9:31 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
I hope that NATO countries will quickly provide some patriot missiles to Ukraine. At the same time I don’t necessarily trust Trump to quickly replace those to those countries quickly. Like, he might slow down the replacement as a favour to Putin in order to keep Europe weaker.🤔
WAR German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has urged Washington to speed up the delivery of replacement systems. "We expect NATO to approach the U.S. and make clear to the manufacturer that countries donating their Patriot systems should receive new ones within a few months," Pistorius said. He has also repeatedly emphasized that Germany can only transfer more Patriots from its arsenal if they are quickly replaced by U.S. deliveries.
August 19, 2025 at 11:59 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
“We should be proud we have such a President.”
Sure, Marco. Taco Trump is an idiot, a traitor and a felon. We’re real proud. 🙄

Trump is the only POTUS willing to be Putin’s little bitch. Just like Li’l Marco is Trump’s bitch. 📌
How come every time Trump has a summit with Putin, he ends up looking like a 4-year-old boy just released from time out? Putin’s little bitch. Trump, unable to look Putin in the eyes, is looking disheveled, passive, like he just got spanked by Vladimir Putin, who is shaking his hand and looking extremely smug.
August 19, 2025 at 11:31 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Yet trans people exist and they do matter, so deal with it.

Ask yourself why TF are people putting so much time & energy pushing anti-trans ideologies and policies? And why is GN adding fire to what isn’t a fucking debate, but a made up rightwing culture war.
• skyview.social Walker Bragman 19d Don't cater to bigots. It's very simple. Trans kids deserve respect and most importantly a childhood! Leave 'em the fuck alone and let 'em be kids. Walker Bragman 19d To just put a fine point on it: Parents do not, in fact, have legitimate concerns about trans kids playing sports. Just because they believe bullshit doesn't make it legitimate. Fuck anti-trans bigots. Pat Nason 19d Agree. No Dem who is wrong on equity for trans people will even get consideration from me in a primary.
August 17, 2025 at 5:15 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
My opinion of him was overall positive, but wtf? Punching down on trans people? Nope. He’s legitimising faux culture war bs when HE should be shutting it down.

YOU can’t fix it. GN needs to fix it. He needs to answer those gotcha questions like Hunter Biden did.
Not like Mayor Pete did.
Walker Bragman 19d Don't cater to bigots. It's very simple. Trans kids deserve respect and most importantly a childhood! Leave 'em the fuck alone and let 'em be kids. Walker Bragman 19d To just put a fine point on it: Parents do not, in fact, have legitimate concerns about trans kids playing sports. Just because they believe bullshit doesn't make it legitimate. Fuck anti-trans bigots. Pat Nason 19d Agree. No Dem who is wrong on equity for trans people will even get consideration from me in a primary. If they are the nominee, I will hold
August 17, 2025 at 3:13 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
He took a transphobic stance, then double-down on it.

Based on your stance, both voting rights for Blacks and gay marriage were merely “fringe issues” to be ignored & sorted out “later”.

That Pew study also showed that 55% of Dems do NOT agree with discriminating against trans athletes.
Graph which shows that most Democrats support trans rights across-the-board, including trans athletes. Unsurprisingly, this graph shows a slight decrease following years of mainstream media’s amplification of the right wing’s culture war on trans people. These shifts reflect changing views among both Republicans and Democrats. For example, 79% of Republicans now support making it illegal for health care professionals to provide medical care for a gender transition for minors. This compares with 72% in 2022. On the same question, 35% of Democrats now express support, up from 26% in 2022. (These figures include independents who identify with or lean toward each party.) As was the case in 2022, there are wide partisan gaps in views of trans issues. Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to express support for policies that limit protections for trans people (by margins of 43 to 50 points). In turn, Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to support policies that safeguard trans people (by margins of more than 30 points).
August 17, 2025 at 12:32 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
“I've often wondered why a group of men didn't see Pam's beauty when we were boys. I don't have the definitive answer, of course, but I can't help but wonder if some of the way we perceived her is because, on a weekly basis,… the most popular funniest guy on the show telling us Pam was ugly.”🤔🙁
I revisited Martin as an adult in my 20s and I laughed at those jokes again. Martin still holds up as one of the funniest sitcoms on TV. I also remember having a conversation with a few guys who were around my age, who were also revisiting Martin and we all, to a person, said some version of "Yo, I didn't realize Pam was that fine until now." We spent the rest of the conversation talking about Tichina Arnold, her talent and how she was a true star in the show. I've thought about that conversation a lot over the years, even before Lennox spoke up. I've often wondered why a group of men didn't see Pam's beauty when we were boys. I don't have the definitive answer, of course, but I can't help but wonder if some of the way we perceived her is because, on a weekly basis, perceived her is because, on a weekly basis, we were fed jokes that she was undesirable. As kids who were beginning to form our own preferences and ideas about beauty, it's perfectly reasonable that we'd be swayed by the most popular, funniest guy on the show telling us that Pam was ugly. And for Lennox, it's absolutely valid that the same constant joking about Pam's looks impacted her self-esteem. At the very least, Lennox's feedback deserves some interrogation. And yet, the general reactions have been flippant accusations that viewers are too sensitive and we can't take jokes anymore. Complaints about snowflakes and the fact that we have to "think piece" everything instead of just enjoying it.
August 5, 2025 at 9:27 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
🎯📌
Banning abortions is just the beginning for these Christofascist fuckers. Next comes undoing Griswold’s legal access to contraceptives.
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to use contraceptives without government restriction.[1] The case involved a Connecticut "Little Comstock Act" that prohibited any person from using "any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception". The court held that the statute was unconstitutional, and that its effect was "to deny disadvantaged citizens ... access to medical assistance and up-to-date information in respect to proper methods of birth control." By a vote of 7–2, the Supreme Court invalidated the law on the grounds that it violated the "right to marital privacy", establishing the basis for the right to privacy with respect to intimate practices. This and other cases view the right to privacy as "protected from governmental intrusion".[2]
July 16, 2025 at 6:28 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
“This isn't normal criticism. It's psychological torture designed to break someone's spirit. And the worst part? These aren't random acts of cruelty. They're coordinated, monetized, and amplified by people who profit from Meghan's pain.” 🎯📌
Meghan revealed she was "the most trolled person in the entire world" in 2019 while pregnant with Archie. She's spoken about how the harassment drove her to thoughts of suicide. A pregnant woman was pushed to the edge of despair by people who found entertainment in her anguish. The recent dance video illuminates this persecution perfectly. Here's Meghan, trying to induce labor, sharing a funny, intimate moment millions of mothers can relate to. Within hours, it became Exhibit A in the conspiracy theorists' case against her. They zoomed in on her moving belly, claiming it proves she wore a prosthetic. They analyzed her IV line, suddenly becoming medical experts. They took a moment of joy and transformed it into a weapon. This isn't normal criticism. It's psychological torture designed to break someone's spirit. And the worst part? These aren't random acts of cruelty. They're coordinated, monetized, and amplified by people who profit from Meghan's pain. YouTube channels devoted entirely to "proving" Meghan's pregnancies were fake, generating millions of dollars. British tabloids have built entire business models around tearing Meghan apart, knowing that her name on a negative headline guarantees clicks and sales. Social media influencers discovered that attacking Meghan drives more engagement than any other content they produce. Hatred hasn't just become a business model; it's become an entire industry, with Meghan's suffering as its most profitable product. Meghan revealed she was "the most trolled person in the entire world" in 2019 while pregnant with Archie. She's spoken about how the harassment drove her to thoughts of suicide. A pregnant woman was pushed to the edge of despair by people who found entertainment in her anguish. The recent dance video illuminates this persecution perfectly. Here's Meghan, trying to induce labor, sharing a funny, intimate moment millions of mothers can relate to. Within hours, it became Exhibit A in the conspiracy theorists' case against her. They zoomed in on her moving belly, claiming it proves she wore a prosthetic. They analyzed her IV line, suddenly becoming medical experts. They took a moment of joy and transformed it into a weapon. This isn't normal criticism. It's psychological torture designed to break someone's spirit. And the worst part? These aren't random acts of cruelty. They're coordinated, monetized, and amplified by people who profit from Meghan's pain. YouTube channels devoted entirely to "proving" Meghan's pregnancies were fake, generating millions of dollars. British tabloids have built entire business models around tearing Meghan apart, knowing that her name on a negative headline guarantees clicks and sales. Social media influencers discovered that attacking Meghan drives more engagement than any other content they produce. Hatred hasn't just become a business model; it's become an entire industry, with Meghan's suffering as its most profitable product.
June 19, 2025 at 11:34 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Re int’l peacekeeping: “…we’re coming to the moment when we have to say those things don’t work anymore. There actually hasn’t been a UN peacekeeping operation since 2014. There aren’t any UN projects to end any current wars. I mean there’s no international involvement in Gaza that matters.” 🥺📌
Re int’l peacekeeping: “…we’re coming to the moment when we have to say those things don’t work anymore. There actually hasn’t been a UN peacekeeping operation since 2014. There aren’t any UN projects to end any current wars. I mean there’s no international involvement in Gaza that matters.”
June 18, 2025 at 2:46 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
former DEA officials expressed concern over Trump’s decision to nominate Cole to head the DEA, due to his alleged association with “a botched operation by a US-vetted Colombian police squad that left 10 local officers dead, and a cartel’s brutal retaliation in small Mexican town that killed dozens
• archive.is New York Post Reporter Suspended After Accusing Editor of Killing Story About Trump Nominee A 16-year veteran reporter at the New York Post was suspended from the newspaper this week after he accused editor-in-chief Keith Poole of killing his story about one of President Donald Trump's nominees. Reporter Josh Kosman was reportedly pursuing a story on Trump's nominee to lead the Drug Enforcement Agency, Terry Cole, when he was informed his article had been "spiked" by Poole, according to the Breaker newsletter. After his article kept getting delayed for publication, Kosman reportedly received an email from the New York Post's political editor saying, "There's no good way to say this, so I'll just say it: KP (Keith Poole] spiked the story."
May 28, 2025 at 6:49 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
OMC! William really flips over game boards in anger when he loses and we’re supposed to find that aggression funny & charming (according to the royal rota)?! That makes me sad for Kate & hope she’s alright. Reminds me of this.
Angry King Charles when his pen doesn’t work… https://images.hindustantimes.com/img/2022/09/11/1600x900/king_charles_iii_1662917964333_1662917975593_1662917975593.jpg
May 24, 2025 at 9:46 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Very sweet piece. 💕
With a bite😏:
‘And yet, you know what’s coming. Some palace suit, deep in a velvet armchair, will anonymously brief the Telegraph that Meghan’s mid-air etiquette was “a breach of protocol,” because it didn’t involve a gold coach. Or a motorcade running over a Granny.’ 🫢🎯
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/GMA/News/royal-family-member-deeply-saddened-after-woman-dies/story?id=99567953 May 24, 2023, 3:04 PM Woman dies after being hit by motorcycle in royal motorcade A motorcycle escorting Sophie, the Duchess of Edinburgh, hit the woman May 10. The sister-in-law of King Charles III is speaking out after a motorcycle in her motorcade recently struck a woman, who later died. Sophie, the Duchess of Edinburgh, who is married to Charles' brother Prince Edward, said she is "deeply saddened" by the death of Helen Holland, whose death was announced Wednesday by her family.
May 24, 2025 at 9:30 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Here’s why. It’s vindictive payback because the Biden’s shunned him after Hunter told Tapper off for Jake’s behaviour while Beau Biden was dying…

bsky.app/profile/harm...
The actual Original Sin began in May of 2015, with Beau Biden at Walter Reed National Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland and the family rallying around during the final days of his life. Tapper called Hunter repeatedly on his cellphone, according to three people familiar with the situation. Those calls went unanswered. But then Hunter received a call from a blocked number. So he did pick up. It was Tapper, who allegedly asked Hunter to call him when Beau died. "Go Fuck yourself Jake," is what those who were present at the time recall Hunter telling Tapper. When Puck's Dylan Byers reported on this situation last week he included a statement from Tapper who called the accounts "a patently false lie. "At no point in my life have I ever called Hunter Biden - I've never even had his phone number-and I would never have contacted a person's immediate family during such a challenging and personal time." (A statement Tapper repeated to us). When we reached Hunter he told us: "It would be impossible to forget or misremember something that upsetting and out of line during one of the toughest moments of my life. It happened. I was furious. And I told him so the next time I saw him, which was at the Super Bowl." At that game Tapper approached Hunter to shake his hand. But Hunter responded that he was still so enraged about what had happened at Walter Reed that he would knock him out if they were not in a public setting. We are told Tapper would later demand an apology from Biden for his son's behavior. A spokesperson for Tapper doubled down. "The idea that Jake could do something so heartless-and yet the Bidens would subsequently offer him multiple sit down interviews as well as agree to him moderating the debate, all without anyone hearing about it until now— completely defies logic." It's rare for the two protagonists of a story to disagree so profoundly, so we dug into the details. We found, for example, that Tapper did in fact cover those drug allegations. According to two other people who spoke with Hunter directly after the Walter Reed incident Tapper did call. "It was obviously transparent niceties and then right to business as if the one thing Hunter is thinking about as Beau is dying is let me give Jake Tapper an exclusive," a person who was with the Biden family at the time told Breaker. "He was furious about it." It also defies logic that the campaign, rather than CNN, would get to choose who moderated a debate. And we can only find one instance where Tapper interviewed Biden when he was President. Those in the Biden world note Tapper had long been frustrated with the Bidens over a lack of access. Just before Biden's 2024 State of the Union address (as is customary) a number of network anchors were invited to the White House for an off-the-record briefing from the President. As the speech was to be centered around the economy, CNN's Erin Burnett was picked over Tapper. According to two people familiar with the matter, Tapper had a "meltdown" and called numerous people in the White House to vent his anger at the decision. "He was raging I'm Jake Tapper and this is my network," according to a person on the receiving end of one of Tapper's calls.
May 23, 2025 at 9:38 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
bsky.app/profile/harm...
May 23, 2025 at 9:31 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
archive.ph/3LIad
Jake Tapper is a lying, petty, unprofessional, vindictive jackass. 📌
Hunter Biden threatened to knock out CNN’s Tapper amid long-running feud: ‘Go f*** yourself, Jake!’ Two years after Jake Tapper apparently enraged the Biden family by trying to get the scoop on Beau Biden’s death, Hunter approached him at the Super Bowl and said he’d ‘knock him out if they were not in a public setting’ Years before Jake Tapper decided to write a buzzy tell-all about Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, the CNN anchor had a long-simmering feud with the former president’s son Hunter that featured a heated confrontation at a Super Bowl and threats of violence. Amid Tapper’s non-stop promotional tour for Original Sin, the explosive behind-the-scenes exposé he co-wrote with Axios correspondent Alex Thompson, Biden-world has had the knives out for the veteran journalist – especially over damning accusations of a “cover-up” to hide the ex-president’s fading mental acuity. At the same time, though, there appears to be another reason the Biden family is none too pleased with the CNN star. Hunter Biden says Jake Tapper repeatedly called him when Beau Biden was dying to get the scoop on his brother’s death. (Getty) Last week, Puck’s Dylan Byers reported that there had been a tense face-to-face between Tapper and Hunter Biden at Super Bowl LII. Sources told Byers that the incident stemmed from Tapper repeatedly calling Hunter when his brother Beau was dying from brain cancer in hopes of getting the scoop on the time of death. Tapper, meanwhile, told Byers that it was a “patently false lie” and that he never tried to contact Hunter during that time. “At no point in my life have I ever called Hunter Biden—I’ve never even had his phone number—and I would never have contacted a person’s immediate family during such a challenging and personal time,” he told Puck. Well, Hunter decided to go on the record this week to refute Tapper’s account, telling media newsletter Breaker that the author did indeed try to source him up during his brother’s final days. He also confirm…
May 23, 2025 at 9:26 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
He is extremely good. 🩷🐾

This is my one-eyed Bandit. He’s an extremely naughty cat.
He is perfect.
Recently escaped one-eyed tuxedo house-cat looking over the fence daring someone to try and catch him…
May 6, 2025 at 10:02 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Good for you. But many of us are glad that Harry had the guts to stand up against the out of control toxic British media barons who, by the way, helped create the climate where he needs effective, armed security for his family when visiting the UK.
all WiFiCall? 13:04 72% 0 Harry failed to persuade a different judge last year that he should be able to privately pay for London's Metropolitan Police force to guard him while he is in the U.K. after a government lawyer argued that officers shouldn't be used as "private bodyguards for the wealthy." Harry has been a regular in British courts in recent years, challenging both his security arrangements and tabloid newspaper publishers for allegedly hacking phones and using private investigators to snoop on his life for news stories. Rupert Murdoch's company, News Group Newspapers, agreed to pay "substantial damages" to Harry after settling a long-running legal battle. NGN admitted that between 1996 and 2011, staff on The Sun newspapers used unlawful methods to dig up private information about Harry and his late mother, Princess Diana. The duke is also among a group of celebrities suing another publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), which prints the Daily Mail, accusing it of lawbreaking in its attempts to gather information on them. The trial is due to ctart neyt wear
May 4, 2025 at 12:54 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Well, the late Queen disagreed and wisely pointed out that by virtue of his birth into the royal family, his high profile military career, plus the Sussexes being targeted by racist extremists means he’s entitled to effective security, whether a full-time working royal or not.
Judemsat similar to now. Of course, a number of these patronages have been granted to them by Her Majesty, and which they will continue actively to fulfil. Her Majesty may from time to time invite The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to attend national Royal occasions in their private capacity, and Her Majesty is likely to invite The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to participate in family events in keeping with other non-Working members of the Family. Security You will understand well that ensuring that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain safe is of paramount importance to Her Majesty and her family. Given The Duke's public profile by virtue of being born into the Royal Family, his military service, The Duchess's own independent profile and the well-documented history of targeting of the Sussex family by extremists, it is imperative that the family continues to be provided with effective security. And, of course, the family is mindful of tragic incidents of the past. The discussions to date, including with [the former Chairman of RAVEC]. have been useful in making sure that the parameters of the RAVEC process are well understood. Of course, Her Majesty and her family recognise that these are independent processes and decisions about the provision of publicly funded security are for the UK Government, the Government of Canada and any other host Government..." The letter did not refer to the Sandringham offer. On 10 February 2020, the Claimant emailed Sir Mark Sedwill to raise his concerns NEW: The late Queen wanted Prince Harry to have "effective security". After the 2020 break-up summit at Sandringham, Queen Elizabeth's Private Secretary wrote to government saying it "is of paramount importance" to her that Harry and Meghan get protection
May 3, 2025 at 5:00 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Just a reminder to you two bright bulbs - the Palace pulled Harry’s security for him and his family long before any interviews, and years before the documentary or his book came out.

So the theory that an alleged betrayal by Harry caused this is horseshit. Also Spare is not slander. It’s lovely.
These discussions were happening in January 2020. The only thing Prince Harry and Meghan had done at the time was go against UK tabloids like The Daily Mail, The Sun & The Mirror. "Senior members of the family wanted them back after the transition period and were ready to continue playing dirty to make this happen. They never thought the trial period would work and tried everything to make it fail, starting with the removal of security and then signing off on a 12-month assault by the UK press on Harry and Meghan and everyone in their orbit. "As far as the institution of the monarchy went, the Sussexes had either to be safely in the tent in Britain or cast away and castigated as comprehensively as possible in order to reduce the threat
May 3, 2025 at 12:16 AM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
That’s not how it works or how it happened, ffs.

Disgusting behaviour by palace to interrupt Harry’s security protection. Plus Harry offered to pay for effective security for his family but was turned down. That’s why he sued. The late Queen wanted him to have the proper security.
NEW: The late Queen wanted Prince Harry to have "effective security". After the 2020 break-up summit at Sandringham, Queen Elizabeth's Private Secretary wrote to government saying it "is of paramount importance" to her that Harry and Meghan get protection The judgment in Prince Harry's case notes the palace dictated terms regarding Harry's security *to* RAVEC. Interesting.
May 2, 2025 at 11:07 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Not true. First: Threats against the couple started way before Harry or Meghan spoke publicly about the RF’s behaviour.
Second: The only reason Harry sued in the first place was because he was prevented from paying himself for the effective security that was taken away by the palace.👀
"Senior members of the family wanted them back after the transition period and were ready to continue playing dirty to make this happen. They never thought the trial period would work and tried everything to make it fail, starting with the removal of security and then signing off on a 12-month assault by the UK press on Harry and Meghan and everyone in their orbit. "As far as the institution of the monarchy went, the Sussexes had either to be safely in the tent in Britain or cast away and castigated as comprehensively as possible in order to reduce the threat These discussions were happening in January 2020. The only thing Prince Harry and Meghan had done at the time was go against UK tabloids like The Daily Mail, The Sun & The Mirror. Judemsat similar to now. Of course, a number of these patronages have been granted to them by Her Majesty, and which they will continue actively to fulfil. Her Majesty may from time to time invite The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to attend national Royal occasions in their private capacity, and Her Majesty is likely to invite The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to participate in family events in keeping with other non-Working members of the Family. Security You will understand well that ensuring that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain safe is of paramount importance to Her Majesty and her family. Given The Duke's public profile by virtue of being born into the Royal Family, his military service, The Duchess's own independent profile and the well-documented history of targeting of the Sussex family by extremists, it is imperative that the family continues to be provided with effective security. And, of course, the family is mindful of tragic incidents of the past. The discussions to date, including with [the former Chairman of RAVEC]. have been useful in making sure that the parameters of the RAVEC process are well understood. Of course, Her Majesty and her family recognise that these are independent processes and decisions about the provision of publicly funded security are for the UK Government, the Government of Canada and any other host Government..." The letter did not refer to the Sandringham offer. On 10 February 2020, the Claimant emailed Sir Mark Sedwill to raise his concerns NEW: The late Queen wanted Prince Harry to have "effective security". After the 2020 break-up summit at Sandringham, Queen Elizabeth's Private Secretary wrote to government saying it "is of paramount importance" to her that Harry and Meghan get protection The judgment in Prince Harry's case notes the palace dictated terms regarding Harry's security *to* RAVEC. Interesting. The claimant and his family relocated from Vancouver, Canada to California, USA on 14 March 2020. An email of 18 March 2020 from [A] to Fiona Mcilwham described a meeting he had had with the Home Office. UK police support would involve a process whereby the claimant's Private Office, with support from the Royal Household, would provide events/function detail for review. This would be an electronic submissions process, working to a 28 days' notice schedule, to allow sufficient time for the necessary assessments to be made. [redacted text). [A] said that he was "confident that it will work, but less certain or clear on what outcomes can be expected ... Doing some test cases... would be a good way to stand up the necessary data flows and agree templates etc". A short formal letter detailing these arrangements was sent by [redacted text] to [A] on 20 March 2020. This letter was not seen by the claimant. This was because the Royal Household requested stronger language to be included so that, according to Sir Richard Mottram, there was greater clarity on the future approach. This resulted in a letter of 23 March 2020 from [redacted text] to [A]. The foot of the letter records that [redacted text] was writing as "Secretary of RAVEC". Although the letter was not signed, it appears that the letter was forwarded by email on 23 March by (A] to Ms Mcilwham. The letter says that, as discussed, in cases where augmented publicly funded security arrangements were being sought for specific engagements in Great Britain, the RAVEC Secretariat would require notification from the Royal Household no fewer than 28 days in advance. The Secretariat would then consider that request, consulting with other parts of government where appropriate and in consultation with the Chair of RAVEC where applicable. Requests would be considered on the basis of the parameters set out in…
May 2, 2025 at 10:34 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Certainly. He has offered to pay in order to have effective security for his family. And it was declined. Hence the lawsuit.
The late Queen wanted Prince Harry to have "effective security". After the 2020 break-up summit at Sandringham, Queen Elizabeth's Private Secretary wrote to government saying it "is of paramount importance" to her that Harry and Meghan get protection
May 2, 2025 at 8:17 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Ah. So this is you “wishing for a kinder world 🌍” is it?

The LAST thing Harry’s wife is is “vacuous”. Unlike your comments... 😂
Writer of hateful and ignorant comments (about Prince Harry and his talented, biracial wife) unironically describes self as “Wishing for a kinder world 🌍” in profile.👀
May 2, 2025 at 7:44 PM
harmoniouslvn.bsky.social
Because when the security was withdrawn and Harry tried to replace it by offering to pay for it himself, he was refused.

Her Majesty the late Queen had always intended for Harry & his family to always have proper security. But the Firm intervened on RAVEC to leverage his security. Disgraceful.
These discussions were happening in January 2020. The only thing Prince Harry and Meghan had done at the time was go against UK tabloids like The Daily Mail, The Sun & The Mirror. The judgment in Prince Harry's case notes the palace dictated terms regarding Harry's security *to* RAVEC. Interesting. Let this sink in: "a successful attack on Prince Harry would not significantly disturb the British public." Let's hope the Invictus Games are NEVER held in the UK. Meghan as well as her 2 children need to stay away from the UK. Of course, a number of these patronages have been granted to them by Her Majesty, and which they will continue actively to fulfil. Her Majesty may from time to time invite The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to attend national Royal occasions in their private capacity, and Her Majesty is likely to invite The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to participate in family events in keeping with other non-Working members of the Family. Security You will understand well that ensuring that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain safe is of paramount importance to Her Majesty and her family. Given The Duke's public profile by virtue of being born into the Royal Family, his military service, The Duchess's own independent profile and the well-documented history of targeting of the Sussex family by extremists, it is imperative that the family continues to be provided with effective security. And, of course, the family is mindful of tragic incidents of the past. The discussions to date, including with [the former Chairman of RAVEC]. have been useful in making sure that the parameters of the RAVEC process are well understood. Of course, Her Majesty and her family recognise that these are independent processes and decisions about the provision of publicly funded security are for the UK Government, the Government of Canada and any other host Government..." The letter did not refer to the Sandringham offer. On 10 February 2020, the Claimant emailed Sir Mark Sedwill to raise his concerns NEW: The late Queen wanted Prince Harry to have "effective security". After the 2020 break-up summit at Sandringham, Queen Elizabeth's Private Secretary wrote to government saying it "is of paramount importance" to her
May 2, 2025 at 5:29 PM