The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -

[shady lady]

I think the only reason people are making a big deal out of their security in Colombia is because the couple has recently expressed security concerns about being in London. As you pointed out, Harry is the King' son and his wife is the King's daughter-in-law, and for a couple so concerned with security, they seem to have no problem hopping off to destinations where their security will be handled by local authorities.

Regarding the Duchess of Edinburgh's visit, just sharing some experience as someone who was once involved in organizing a royal visit to my own country. Such visits, whether official, state, or working, require meticulous planning and coordination. The embassy representing the visiting official typically negotiates rigorously to maximize whatever courtesies the host country extends, which are usually tailored to the nature of the visit and the rank of the dignitary. About a week prior to the visit, an advance team—often comprising security personnel—arrives to coordinate with local security and protocol teams. They conduct thorough inspections of the planned routes and venues, assessing all potential vulnerabilities to ensure the safety and smooth execution of the visit. I wonder if the UK or US embassies (who coordinate closely with their own, and local security) are in any way involved in Harry and Meghan's visit, and if they are not, then I would bet a lot of money that the level of security that the Duchess of Edinburgh had vs Harry and Meghan's won't be on the same level.

Exactly. Thank you

As if the UK would allow the son of the King and said son's spouse to be put at any realistic risk of harm, even with the challenge of dealing with a couple who have, frankly, put themselves in danger on many occasions, as documented previously here.

IMO, PH continues to insult his family and country of birth by complaining and bringing endless and wasteful legal challenges, fuelled by petulance and a nauseating sense of entitlement. He should count his blessings, and consider the tragedy of three little girls in the North of England who were not fortunate enough to have the privileges he has; and then - frankly - put a sock in it.

 

[muriel]

Exactly. Thank you

As if the UK would allow the son of the King and said son's spouse to be put at any realistic risk of harm, even with the challenge of dealing with a couple who have, frankly, put themselves in danger on many occasions, as documented previously here.

IMO, PH continues to insult his family and country of birth by complaining and bringing endless and wasteful legal challenges, fuelled by petulance and a nauseating sense of entitlement. He should count his blessings, and consider the tragedy of three little girls in the North of England who were not fortunate enough to have the privileges he has; and then - frankly - put a sock in it.

Hear, hear! Well said.

 

[Hallo girl]

Well said ,

 

[FigTree]

He wants IPP because then he won’t pay for security at all. The British and Americans will have to cover it between them. If anyone has ever seen the level of security the host country provides when a head of state is even on holiday then you will know the potential cost of such an operation to everyone.

But not to him and that is the point. He currently pays an extortionate security bill which probably doubles their cost of living and let’s be honest they currently don’t have a sustainable long term way of money coming in. They could do without the bill. That’s the only reason he is kicking up about this. By getting it in England, it will have to be universal.

Also to those talking about preparation for trips. A friend of mine was in the EPIC in Dublin before they came and saw two men who she presumed were security receeing it. Let’s just say they were less than impressed they even wanted to go there. Anyone who knows that area will know it’s within an office complex and on the day they came everyone was encouraged to go down and see them because quite frankly on a work day in Dublin no one would. Let’s be honest in the UK when they visit school children and things come to line the streets to greet them. That wouldn’t have happened in Dublin and really no one was there so the offices were asked to send people down.

 

[Mbruno]

Re their employees quitting on them - I assume is because one or both of them refuses to accept guidance or any sort of criticism, and staff stays as long as they can tolerate working for people that just won't listen.

Re their trip to Colombia invited by a Vice President with dangerous enemies herself - I do hope everything goes well, and they get out without any problems. If the Vice President is using them to make a name for herself, she better pack them up with the same security staff. From what I just read, the reason both she and the president are targeted matches the left-wing politics and inclinations of Meghan and Harry.

By inviting Harry and Meghan to get, via them, some kind of clout she also puts them at risk to be seen as supporters of whatever she and the president are doing down there. And Meghan and Harry are probably clueless of the turmoil, and they can't just stop accepting invites of problematic governments.

In some places known for high levels of government corruption, anyone can be bought for the right price to look the other way or to do a chore. And this particular lady vice presidenta has a lot of enemies that are very creative, one of the attempts involved laser beams directed at her from a building (as in the ones used to direct a weapon) and explosives on the road to her home:
Vice-president Francia Márquez avoids another assassination attempt - justice for colombia

I hope they reconsider and avoid temptation of every invite they get to dangerous places.

Wikipedia has a country ranking based on intentional homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Colombia (#18) is slightly below Mexico (#17) and slightly above Nigeria (#20), but all 3 are very violent by international standards. Just as a comparison, the US is #57, Canada is #111, the UK is #142, Denmark is #155, Australia is #166, and the Netherlands is #168. I haven't checked what year the data refer to.

Those figures may refer, however, mostly to crime-related or domestic violence rather than political violence. In the case of Harry and Meghan, there is an additional political violence risk because they will be accompanying the vice president. On the other hand, one would assume that vice president must have considerable state-funded protection.

 

[shady lady]

Wikipedia has a country ranking based on intentional homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Colombia (#18) is slightly below Mexico (#17) and slightly above Nigeria (#20), but all 3 are very violent by international standards. Just as a comparison, the US is #57, Canada is #111, the UK is #142, Denmark is #155, Australia is #166, and the Netherlands is #168. I haven't checked what year the data refer to.

Those figures may refer, however, mostly to crime-related or domestic violence rather than political violence. In the case of Harry and Meghan, there is an additional political violence risk because they will be accompanying the vice president. On the other hand, one would assume that vice president must have considerable state-funded protection.

Interesting info, thank you for posting.

Edited to add: Here is a report that is specific to South America, the Caribbean and Mexico/Central America for 2023 if anyone is interested (InSight Crime, the authors, are well rated in terms of credibility and are used by fact checkers for reference)

https://insightcrime.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/InSight-Crimes-2023-Homicide-Round-Up-Feb-2024.pdf

Briefly, according to this report, and focusing on the countries H&M intend to visit and have visited:

Columbia has the third highest homicide rate in South America out of 12 countries, behind Ecuador and Venezuela (note: Argentina and Bolivia's stats were not available).

Jamaica has the second highest homicide rate in the Caribbean, out of 11 countries exceeded only by St Kitts & Nevis; data for all Caribbean countries was available.

 

[Mirabel]

Coming out of one trip unscathed doesn't mean it, it will have the same outcome if you keep walking along the cliff of 'irresponsible' travels. Almost all visits will have them return unscathed even if they are high-risk, however, there are no guarantees and the risks are higher in some places than in others (Colombia without a doubt much higher than the UK); and as Harry claims to want to avoid such risks, his actions aren't consistent with that point of view. Among other things, Colombia's drug mafia are known for kidnapping...

I can't avoid the suspicion that they are hoping to generate some threats, to reinforce Harry's claim that they need that IPP status! If that should happen, he could go back to court and point to that as a viable threat.

(It wouldn't surprise me if they actually were to stage some sort of threat - remember that "NYC car chase"?)

 

[Ghost]

He wants IPP because then he won’t pay for security at all. The British and Americans will have to cover it between them. If anyone has ever seen the level of security the host country provides when a head of state is even on holiday then you will know the potential cost of such an operation to everyone.

But not to him and that is the point. He currently pays an extortionate security bill which probably doubles their cost of living and let’s be honest they currently don’t have a sustainable long term way of money coming in. They could do without the bill. That’s the only reason he is kicking up about this. By getting it in England, it will have to be universal.

Also to those talking about preparation for trips. A friend of mine was in the EPIC in Dublin before they came and saw two men who she presumed were security receeing it. Let’s just say they were less than impressed they even wanted to go there. Anyone who knows that area will know it’s within an office complex and on the day they came everyone was encouraged to go down and see them because quite frankly on a work day in Dublin no one would. Let’s be honest in the UK when they visit school children and things come to line the streets to greet them. That wouldn’t have happened in Dublin and really no one was there so the offices were asked to send people down.

Always, always look for the money as a first motive for actions. As long as all they are doing is in their own name, every action is motivated by gain.

 

[shady lady]

I can't avoid the suspicion that they are hoping to generate some threats, to reinforce Harry's claim that they need that IPP status! If that should happen, he could go back to court and point to that as a viable threat.

(It wouldn't surprise me if they actually were to stage some sort of threat - remember that "NYC car chase"?)

Yes.

I also have that suspicion.

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

I think the only reason people are making a big deal out of their security in Colombia is because the couple has recently expressed security concerns about being in London. As you pointed out, Harry is the King' son and his wife is the King's daughter-in-law, and for a couple so concerned with security, they seem to have no problem hopping off to destinations where their security will be handled by local authorities.

Regarding the Duchess of Edinburgh's visit, just sharing some experience as someone who was once involved in organizing a royal visit to my own country. Such visits, whether official, state, or working, require meticulous planning and coordination. The embassy representing the visiting official typically negotiates rigorously to maximize whatever courtesies the host country extends, which are usually tailored to the nature of the visit and the rank of the dignitary. About a week prior to the visit, an advance team—often comprising security personnel—arrives to coordinate with local security and protocol teams. They conduct thorough inspections of the planned routes and venues, assessing all potential vulnerabilities to ensure the safety and smooth execution of the visit. I wonder if the UK or US embassies (who coordinate closely with their own, and local security) are in any way involved in Harry and Meghan's visit, and if they are not, then I would bet a lot of money that the level of security that the Duchess of Edinburgh had vs Harry and Meghan's won't be on the same level.

I agree with you - Harry has gone on and on about the lack of security in the UK but now he’s trusting Colombian officials to provide that for them?

I can’t imagine that either the US or the UK embassies are involved - do you think that is likely? The advance team, embassies being involved, security teams coordinating with local security - wow, this indicates the seriousness and thoughtful planning that goes into official visits. Thanks for sharing your expertise and perspective.
Personally, I don’t care what kind of security is provided, I would not visit someplace where kidnapping is something that I’d have to worry about. And what do they really know about the guy who invited them, no matter what his title is? Have they checked with trusted embassies about this guy? Of course, there are crackpots everywhere, but I would never visit a place where my government (US) has a level 3 advisory to “reconsider travel due to crime and kidnapping.” If you read the entire advisory at travel.state.gov - US government employees aren’t allowed to travel by road to most cities, they can’t use motorcycles, use taxis nor public buses. To compare, Ukraine is Level 4 - do not travel; UK is currently Level 2 - “exercise increased caution due to terrorism” due to the current demonstrations. Canada and Australia are both Level 1 - “exercise normal precautions.”

I cannot imagine putting myself at risk at any time but traveling someplace like this having two very young children??? There is no way. I don’t know the details of Sophie’s visit, but embassies were certainly involved there - but I wish she hadn’t gone as well.

Edit: I’ve just read the info upthread about the threats on the VP’s life and a bomb placed near her home - and M &H are hanging out with her

 

[FigTree]

No the embassies would not be involved. These invites are also not vetted or considered. Which leaves you vulnerable for exploitation.

 

[suztav]

Apparently their latest Chief of Staff resigned. According to one source (not re-posting here because I don't think he's a credible source) ... this makes 19 since they arrived in California!

 

[shady lady]

Apparently their latest Chief of Staff resigned. According to one source (not re-posting here because I don't think he's a credible source) ... this makes 19 since they arrived in California!

Here's a report:

Prince Harry staff departure echoes major crisis

Harry and Meghan have parted ways with their chief of staff, echoing past allegations they have a high turnover of employees.

www.newsweek.com

From the article:

"The U.K. newspaper Daily Mail reported Monday that he had quit, though Newsweek understands he left by mutual consent having been hired on a trial basis."

That, I believe, is Sussexish for "He walked"

 

[tommy100]

Prince Harry’s chief of staff quits after just three months

Josh Kettler departs before the Sussexes’ Colombia trip with both sides agreeing he was not the right fit

www.theguardian.com

Another article about their chief of staff quitting- I know some people don’t like the DM so this is from The Guardian.

 

[moby]

I can’t imagine that either the US or the UK embassies are involved - do you think that is likely? The advance team, embassies being involved, security teams coordinating with local security - wow, this indicates the seriousness and thoughtful planning that goes into official visits. Thanks for sharing your expertise and perspective.

My pleasure! I don't think the UK embassy would be involved, though next time I come across a British diplomat, I'll be asking questions about how they handle Harry's visits to their jurisdictions. It must be tricky--he is the son of the King but he is not there as a representative of the said King, but then was invited by a local official. I don't envy the diplomats the headache they'll surely get from the visit because even though it is tough work arranging visits, it is better as an Embassy to have full control over it rather than little control to no control because you never want things to go to hell under your watch. The US would have close to no involvement since Meghan is not an official, though knowing them, they would likely still monitor their activities.

No the embassies would not be involved. These invites are also not vetted or considered. Which leaves you vulnerable for exploitation.

Yes, agree with this. Aside from the security side, in a typical visit, a lot of work also goes behind vetting the people they'll meet, the institutions they'll visit, the statements to be made, etc. You don't want them meeting sketchy characters or endorsing organizations with questionable funding, among other concerns. Most visits of a sociocultural nature from a country like the UK to a country like Colombia would probably focus on the progress of a specific project funded by ODA from the UK, or interesting non-profits founded by UK nationals in Colombia--there is alway that link between the UK and the host.

This made me read the VP's statement on the visit, though this is from Tatler: While there, they will have an ‘exceptional opportunity to engage with elders, youth and women who embody the aspirations and voices of Colombians... and illuminate Colombia's role as a beacon of culture and innovation,’ said Márquez. ‘In addition to these meaningful interactions, the Duke and Duchess will experience the rich heritage of Colombia.’

Contrast that with what the Duchess of Edinburgh did:
The Duchess of Edinburgh also attended a roundtable discussion, hosted by the UK and Canadian Embassies, with women from the Colombian Armed Forces, to hear about their work in support of the Women, Peace and Security agenda, ensuring the meaningful participation of women in peace processes at all levels. The Duchess met an officer who has recently completed the commissioning course at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.

There's always specific reasons behind official visits, and this one seems very general and random, which emphasizes the strange position Harry and Meghan are in. I suppose it is more helpful to think of them as celebrities invited by the VP to visit--another strange arrangement because this usually happens if said celebrity is brought to another country by the UN or an NGO (does Archwell count?) which lends an official status to the visit but that's not even the case here...

 

[Marengo]

Prince Harry’s chief of staff quits after just three months

Josh Kettler departs before the Sussexes’ Colombia trip with both sides agreeing he was not the right fit

www.theguardian.com

Another article about their chief of staff quitting- I know some people don’t like the DM so this is from The Guardian.

Is it known how many people work for Archwell and how much money the charity actually receives and allocates each year? All the job titles in this article make my head spin and wonder about the overhead.

With their 'chief of staff' out, who will be leading this trip? They will be completely in the hands of the Colombian VP office or is there any of the remaining Archwell staff that can join?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Here's a report:

Prince Harry staff departure echoes major crisis

Harry and Meghan have parted ways with their chief of staff, echoing past allegations they have a high turnover of employees.

www.newsweek.com

From the article:

"The U.K. newspaper Daily Mail reported Monday that he had quit, though Newsweek understands he left by mutual consent having been hired on a trial basis."

That, I believe, is Sussexish for "He walked"

tommy100 posted the original report here

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -

Tying into her American Riviera Orchard brand, it would be fun if Meghan wrote a book about recipes for her favorite meals and drinks, along with table/room arrangements for different occasions with fun antecedents about each: I always have this cocktail when I go out dancing with friends, this...

www.theroyalforums.com

 

[shady lady]

tommy100 posted the original report here

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -

Tying into her American Riviera Orchard brand, it would be fun if Meghan wrote a book about recipes for her favorite meals and drinks, along with table/room arrangements for different occasions with fun antecedents about each: I always have this cocktail when I go out dancing with friends, this...

www.theroyalforums.com

He did indeed, thanks for pointing that out and thank you tommy100

The link I posted (from Newsweek) adds the reason as "by mutual consent" which I don't think was mentioned in the original report last night; I should have explained that. My bad!

 

[Somebody]

Is it known how many people work for Archwell and how much money the charity actually receives and allocates each year? All the job titles in this article make my head spin and wonder about the overhead.

Yes, there is a public year report containing that type of information. I discussed it here on TRF some time ago.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Charities and Patronages

Are they really relevant though or are they paying for self promotion? Those are two very different things.

www.theroyalforums.com

 

[Marengo]

Thanks! So there are 3 employees in total and the costs are higher than the amount of money that is actually awarded to causes. In that light the turn over of staff does seem excessive. Even though I imagine people will stay shorter in this type of organisation than would be the case in a larger one, as development within the company will be more complicated. But it leaves 2 people for the Colombia trip.

To leave so shortly before this trip -which must be an important milestone for the organisation- seems rather odd, and perhaps signals an escalation of some sort. It doesn't seem the most logical moment for such a prompt decision.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

[.....]

On one hand, even if the area is more dangerous, everybody within the area would experience the same risks as everyone else. As long as you make the right precautions (and there's no evidence that the Sussexes haven't vetted where they're going in Colombia beforehand), you'll be relatively safe. Plus, you're making money going to this dangerous area, so the risks in this case are worth it, especially since you're not directly targeted.

[....]

So, whether or not going to Colombia is a good idea, I can't say. Many posters have given good reasons for and against it. As for the constant security suits, I don't find it hypocritical that Harry continues to pursue them as his family hasn't receive direct threats from anyone in Colombia or Nigeria, but has in Great Britain.

I wish he would stop, however. The best solution is to never bring his family to Great Britain again.

 

[Mbruno]

My pleasure! I don't think the UK embassy would be involved, though next time I come across a British diplomat, I'll be asking questions about how they handle Harry's visits to their jurisdictions. It must be tricky--he is the son of the King but he is not there as a representative of the said King, but then was invited by a local official. I don't envy the diplomats the headache they'll surely get from the visit because even though it is tough work arranging visits, it is better as an Embassy to have full control over it rather than little control to no control because you never want things to go to hell under your watch. The US would have close to no involvement since Meghan is not an official, though knowing them, they would likely still monitor their activities.



Yes, agree with this. Aside from the security side, in a typical visit, a lot of work also goes behind vetting the people they'll meet, the institutions they'll visit, the statements to be made, etc. You don't want them meeting sketchy characters or endorsing organizations with questionable funding, among other concerns. Most visits of a sociocultural nature from a country like the UK to a country like Colombia would probably focus on the progress of a specific project funded by ODA from the UK, or interesting non-profits founded by UK nationals in Colombia--there is alway that link between the UK and the host.

This made me read the VP's statement on the visit, though this is from Tatler: While there, they will have an ‘exceptional opportunity to engage with elders, youth and women who embody the aspirations and voices of Colombians... and illuminate Colombia's role as a beacon of culture and innovation,’ said Márquez. ‘In addition to these meaningful interactions, the Duke and Duchess will experience the rich heritage of Colombia.’

Contrast that with what the Duchess of Edinburgh did:
The Duchess of Edinburgh also attended a roundtable discussion, hosted by the UK and Canadian Embassies, with women from the Colombian Armed Forces, to hear about their work in support of the Women, Peace and Security agenda, ensuring the meaningful participation of women in peace processes at all levels. The Duchess met an officer who has recently completed the commissioning course at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst.

There's always specific reasons behind official visits, and this one seems very general and random, which emphasizes the strange position Harry and Meghan are in. I suppose it is more helpful to think of them as celebrities invited by the VP to visit--another strange arrangement because this usually happens if said celebrity is brought to another country by the UN or an NGO (does Archwell count?) which lends an official status to the visit but that's not even the case here...

Harry and Meghan do not represent the United Kingdom or the UK government in any official capacity, so UK embassies or the UK Foreign Office have no involvement in whatever visits they make to other countries. Note that, even if the Sussexes are going to Colombia on the invitation of the Colombian vice president, that is still a private visit as far as the UK government is concerned.

The Duchess of Edinburgh's visit was completely different since the UK government in that case would have coordinated program and security details with the government of Colombia.

 

[Hallo girl]

[.....]

On one hand, even if the area is more dangerous, everybody within the area would experience the same risks as everyone else. As long as you make the right precautions (and there's no evidence that the Sussexes haven't vetted where they're going in Colombia beforehand), you'll be relatively safe. Plus, you're making money going to this dangerous area, so the risks in this case are worth it, especially since you're not directly targeted.

[.....]

So, whether or not going to Colombia is a good idea, I can't say. Many posters have given good reasons for and against it. As for the constant security suits, I don't find it hypocritical that Harry continues to pursue them as his family hasn't receive direct threats from anyone in Colombia or Nigeria, but has in Great Britain.

I wish he would stop, however. The best solution is to never bring his family to Great Britain again.

He has already said he does not intend bringing his family here, but who was the one in a televised interview put ideas out in the public domain about ' lone ' actors with knives or acid. Not the British public or media but Harry himself.

 

[Somebody]

It seems some people seem to think that Harry and his family will not get any protection in the UK. This is of course not the case. For each visit, an assessment will be made of the level (and type) of threat and therefore of the security arrangements that he will need. Anything above what is needed will be on him. What he is asking for is maximum protection independent of the risk; that's what has been refused.

 

[Hallo girl]

It seems some people seem to think that Harry and his family will not get any protection in the UK. This is of course not the case. For each visit, an assessment will be made of the level (and type) of threat and therefore of the security arrangements that he will need. Anything above what is needed will be on him. What he is asking for is maximum protection independent of the risk; that's what has been refused.

Thank you and IMO if he had not made such a public fuss about it ,the 28 days would not have came into play either. Anytime he and his family were arriving, security would have been there. He has brought it all out in the public domain so now people are discussing it and the cost to the British taxpayer for court cases and the security.
I as a British tax payer am quite happy for the royal family to receive security, if Harry and Meghan were still here that would include them, I do not mind when they come over to visit either. But myself and a great deal of others are not prepared to stand by and watch our taxes be used to spend money on protecting a couple who want to buy a mansion, hire private jets, then traipse round the world doing ' tours'. They showed Britain , the Royal family , the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the general public absolutely no respect, their stories have more holes than a colander. I used the last sentence to remain polite. Rant over.

I will add on that some pensioners are losing their heating allowance , so any chance we will all sit back and watch millions spent on Harry and Meghans security. No chance.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

He did indeed, thanks for pointing that out and thank you tommy100

The link I posted (from Newsweek) adds the reason as "by mutual consent" which I don't think was mentioned in the original report last night; I should have explained that. My bad!

Thank you for linking and adding the further information!

 

[HenRach Dominion]

Hey, I trust the RAVEC's assessment on how much security the Sussexes need or don't need, and in spite of the threats I believe the Sussexes will be perfectly safe in Great Britain. But what I think doesn't matter...it's what Harry thinks. And if he thinks that the RAVEC's assessment is not enough and has decided not to bring his family back to Great Britain, then so be it. He'll exhaust all possibilities in his security suits soon enough...how much have these lawsuits cost each individual Briton?

Apparently, Jamaica, Nigeria, and Colombia have provided the Duke with enough of his preferred security that he and/or the Duchess feel comfortable going there (or, at least, feel as though the rewards for going outweigh the risks, unlike the UK). Of note, as far as I know, the children have remained in the United States, so there is where the Sussex couple feel their children are safest.

 

[tommy100]

Harry seems to think if they have protection from armed personnel provided by the state inviting them it makes then safer than they can be in the UK where their security is assessed on an ongoing basis.

Personally I’d rather be in the UK with no armed protection but known its a panic button away vs a well publicised high profile trip with armed personnel of a foreign service in an area with known security issues (the fact the VP says she needs a helicopter flight to get to work for security is a red flag to me)

IMO Harry seems to think he is safer with armed people around him, overlooking who that is, their training, background intelligence etc. That is his choice to make but I know which I’d rather.

 

[Alison H]

I couldn't care less if Harry and Meghan never set foot in the UK again, but it seems a shame for Archie and Lilibet to miss out on learning about their heritage. It may also affect other family members: it's being widely reported that Harry does not intend to come to the funeral of Robert Fellowes, which seems rather disrespectful towards the Fellowes family.

 

[shady lady]

It seems some people seem to think that Harry and his family will not get any protection in the UK. This is of course not the case. For each visit, an assessment will be made of the level (and type) of threat and therefore of the security arrangements that he will need. Anything above what is needed will be on him. What he is asking for is maximum protection independent of the risk; that's what has been refused.

Thank you for this; much appreciated

I feel it is worth adding: If the people of the UK were all as bad and as hellbent on retribution on MM and PH as they themselves and some people appear to want everyone to think, then those assessments would clearly say so and it would be very simple - no disagreements or court cases needed - as the advice would be very plain: don't ever come back because we can't protect you. That clearly hasn't happened, ergo they can be adequately protected as things are.

Hopefully that indicates to most people that it is H&M who are the problem here, not the BRF or the people of the UK; they wanted to have their cake and eat it, and it didn't happen. Thus, the only people who are hellbent on retribution are H&M themselves.

Whether it's down to paranoia accelerated by poor lifestyle choices, arrogance, entitlement, some other reason or they just want to be downright awkward for kicks, they choose not to accept this and insult both their family and millions of UK people by doing so.