On and On About Harry & Meghan Part 4

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Oh no, not scooters and bicycles, it's like Mad Max Fury Road all over again. 

We all experience things differently. I would be scared if a bunch of people were chasing after me, even if the worst they were intending to do was take a picture. But then adding in the trauma Harry experienced would only magnify it. 

Like why can't we all agree that following someone, for whatever reason, is wrong and the person being followed is not the villain here? I get some of you hate these two. I find them both to be boring. But why are they the bad guys for just trying to get home, especially when neither was driving? This is insane.

[Varysblackfyre321]

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Like why can't we all agree that following someone, for whatever reason, is wrong and the person being followed is not the villain here? I get some of you hate these two.

Eh I agree with you generally but it’s unfair to frame all of the posters giving this bizarre take as just being insanely  hateful of them.

 

[Zorral]

4 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

You lot must never have had anything remotely bad happen to you to be getting so heated about something so low level happening to someone else that you've never met. I get it, the press are scumbag cunts. But people were trying to take their picture. It's about as traumatising as stubbing your toe or getting a paper cut. 

[BigFatCoward]

31 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

We all experience things differently. I would be scared if a bunch of people were chasing after me, even if the worst they were intending to do was take a picture. But then adding in the trauma Harry experienced would only magnify it. 

Like why can't we all agree that following someone, for whatever reason, is wrong and the person being followed is not the villain here? I get some of you hate these two. I find them both to be boring. But why are they the bad guys for just trying to get home, especially when neither was driving? This is insane.

As i said previously, I think paparazzi should be crimanized and even the most megolamanic media whore should be free to live their private life in private. 

They are the bad guys IMO because they put their privacy before public safety. And they weren't just trying to get home, they could have got home within 30 mins of the 2 hour 'chase'. 

Honestly, if any of you felt you were being chased what would you do, continue to be chased or go home and be safe?  

Edited May 19, 2023 by BigFatCoward

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

20 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Eh I agree with you generally but it’s unfair to frame all of the posters giving this bizarre take as just being insanely  hateful of them.

 

It's hard to explain otherwise. As is most of the takes on the two. Again, they're actually pretty boring people who just happen to be famous. 

22 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

As i said previously, I think paparazzi should be crimanized and even the most megolamanic media whore should be free to live their private life in private. 

They are the bad guys IMO because they put their privacy before public safety. And they weren't just trying to get home, they could have got home within 30 mins of the 2 hour 'chase'. 

Honestly, if any of you felt you were being chased what would you do, continue to be chased or go home and be safe?  

You can get somewhere in NY in 30 minutes? It took me that much time to walk to my friend's wedding and it was only a few blocks from where I was staying. I wanted to visit an old friend and he told me it would take about two hours to get to his place when he was like 10 miles away. It's not like most places. 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

1 hour ago, BigFatCoward said:

Oh no, not scooters and bicycles, it's like Mad Max Fury Road all over again. 

Cool to know you’re fine with people endangering their fellow motorists and pedestrians.

oh, and Diana’s driver was driving like a dickhead, and they still chased them. Or was it “following”? These loaded terms hurt my brain so much. Anyway, they got some cool snaps of her as she lay dying in the wreck of the Mercedes. Model fucking citizens right there.

 

[polishgenius]

35 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Honestly, if any of you felt you were being chased what would you do, continue to be chased or go home and be safe?  

 

I mean, if I thought they were gonna hassle me or my family at home I absolutely would try to lose someone chasing me first. 

Like, I get what you're saying for the most part. I just don't agree that the victims of harassment- no matter how low-stakes or low-danger it is- can possibly be blamed for the behaviour of the harasser. If the photographers really were driving recklessly, I do not see any way in which it's reasonable to hold Harry and Meghan responsible for that. Just seems absolutely wild to me.

 

3 hours ago, Spockydog said:

 

Exceeding the speed limit and endangering the lives of other road users if you're trying to escape kidnappers or assassins? Absolutely justified. 

Doing the same because you don't want your picture taken? GTFOH. 

 

You keep saying 'exceeding the speed limit' and I don't understand why because there has been no indication whatsoever that they did. Even the papper organisation - and I don't know why you'd take their word for anything - only claim that one of their security detail did at one point. 

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

Just seems absolutely wild to me.

That's cuz it is.  As is this repeated suggestion that they should have just "allowed" the paps to photograph them and then, apparently, what?  The paps would pack up and go home?  There's absolutely no logic to these arguments and it's laughably naive of how the paparazzi operate.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

Um, I live very close to where they were going and had I been there I would have been REALLY pissed about the dangerous driving by everyone.  Freaking Carlyle (not that they were actually staying there) - every time there is some celeb thing going on it’s impossible to get my kids to and from school because of paparazzi blocking the surrounding streets.  

BFC - I spend a lot of time in London as well.  While the cities are in some ways very similar in feel, housing and the traffic is very different.  One of the huge differences between the two places is that Manhattan does not have alleys over most of the city (Incidentally that is why there are piles of trash on NYC streets, whee!  Major design flaw.  I digress.).  Also, most buildings and brownstones open directly onto the sidewalk, sometimes with a stoop/gate, sometimes not.  So it means that there is no driving into an alley and getting out of a car more securely and into a back entrance.  (Several mob hits in the 1980s were based on the premise - look up Sparks Steakhouse).  The grid design of the city above 14th St. with the mainly predictable one way streets also limits alternatives.  It’s just a bit different. 

[Spockydog]

55 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

You keep saying 'exceeding the speed limit' and I don't understand why because there has been no indication whatsoever that they did. 

Once again, I would like to remind people that I am generally well disposed towards these two. But sometimes they do not help themselves.

Initially this was described, presumably by their people, as a high-speed chase where two people were nearly hit. But that story seems to have changed beyond measure. 

So, what was it?

A high speed chase where people's lives were endangered?

Or were they just followed by wankers with cameras?

We all know the paps are cunts. But, also, they are just another head of the beast that will be keeping these people in $30m houses and yacht holidays for the rest of their lives.

Harry sold his soul, this is part of the payback.

Not saying it's right, just that it's the way things are.

Now, Harry must realise that. He must also realise that he has absolutely no control over where paps can hang out stalking him. If he's on a public street, he's fair game. This shit is Faustian.

He also has no control over whether or not a bunch of those wankers jump on bikes to follow him. Not to hurt him, or his wife, mind. Just to get a picture. 

In those circumstances, shitty as they are, the only thing Harry has control over is whether or not to put himself and his wife at risk of injury or death in a horrific fucking car crash. Like what happened to his mum.

In those circumstances, surely the best thing he can do is instruct his driver to get them safely to their destination. Wherever that may be. If his car has tinted windows, as it fucking well should, then who gives a toss how many paps are in pursuit? And, perhaps at the moment they arrive at their destination, Harry gets out of the car, walks open-armed towards his pursuers, allowing them as many snaps of him as they like, while his wife gets safely inside.

I mean, that's what I would fucking do.

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by Spockydog

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

Several mob hits in the 1980s were based on the premise - look up Sparks Steakhouse

Didn't think this thread would lead to a Castellano/Gotti/Gravano reference, but it's pretty awesome it did.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

44 minutes ago, DMC said:

Didn't think this thread would lead to a Castellano/Gotti/Gravano reference, but it's pretty awesome it did.

I’m here for you.  

I’d say “I’ve got your back”, but in context, it’s both untrue and cruel.  

[Wall Flower]

2 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Once again, I would like to remind people that I am generally well disposed towards these two. But sometimes they do not help themselves.

Initially this was described, presumably by their people, as a high-speed chase where two people were nearly hit. But that story seems to have changed beyond measure. 

So, what was it?

A high speed chase where people's lives were endangered?

Or were they just followed by wankers with cameras?

We all know the paps are cunts. But, also, they are just another head of the beast that will be keeping these people in $30m houses and yacht holidays for the rest of their lives.

Harry sold his soul, this is part of the payback.

Not saying it's right, just that it's the way things are.

Now, Harry must realise that. He must also realise that he has absolutely no control over where paps can hang out stalking him. If he's on a public street, he's fair game. This shit is Faustian.

He also has no control over whether or not a bunch of those wankers jump on bikes to follow him. Not to hurt him, or his wife, mind. Just to get a picture. 

In those circumstances, shitty as they are, the only thing Harry has control over is whether or not to put himself and his wife at risk of injury or death in a horrific fucking car crash. Like what happened to his mum.

In those circumstances, surely the best thing he can do is instruct his driver to get them safely to their destination. Wherever that may be. If his car has tinted windows, as it fucking well should, then who gives a toss how many paps are in pursuit? And, perhaps at the moment they arrive at their destination, Harry gets out of the car, walks open-armed towards his pursuers, allowing them as many snaps of him as they like, while his wife gets safely inside.

I mean, that's what I would fucking do.

 

As I understand it, they were staying at the private residence of a friend and didn't want to lead paps back there or have them camping out there. While plenty of photos were taken at the event, the paps were after shots that the mainstream media didn't have, bigger money earners for them, which was why they were so dogged in pursuit of the couple.

The Sussex's statement didn't refer to the chase as high speed, that was added in by other people. It also made no reference to concerns for their own safety but alleged that the paps were engaging in risky behaviour like running red lights and getting up on sidewalks that created a danger to other drivers, the police escort and pedestrians.

Anyway, happy anniversary to lucky couple. I'm sure a card from Piers is in the mail.

[BigFatCoward]

7 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Like, I get what you're saying for the most part. I just don't agree that the victims of harassment- no matter how low-stakes or low-danger it is- can possibly be blamed for the behaviour of the harasser. If the photographers really were driving recklessly, I do not see any way in which it's reasonable to hold Harry and Meghan responsible for that. Just seems absolutely wild to me.

 

In this whole scenario my sympathy goes Harry and Meghan >>>>>>>>>>>press>>>>>>>>>>>>Royals.

They were fine to try and get away. But once it became clear it wasnt happening, they were partialy responsible for it carrying it on for far too long. The press are 90% to blame, but they should have made a more responsible decision.  

The level of (extremely low) risk to them in no way justified continually putting innocent bystanders at risk IMO.

Edited May 20, 2023 by BigFatCoward

[Heartofice]

6 hours ago, Wall Flower said:

The Sussex's statement didn't refer to the chase as high speed, that was added in by other people. It also made no reference to concerns for their own safety but alleged that the paps were engaging in risky behaviour like running red lights and getting up on sidewalks that created a danger to other drivers, the police escort and pedestrians.

Their spokesmen described it as a ‘near catastrophic car chase’. Now maybe he spoke out of turn but its their responsibility for what he said. Those words do not appear accurate, and certainly allude to situation that didn’t happen.

They also said "I have never experienced their vulnerability as much as I did last night. They were incredibly scared and shaken up’ so not sure what statement you read.

But then the taxi driver who drove them said he wouldn’t describe it as a chase, and police reports tend to counter the Sussex’s position.

The thing is, being followed by paps is hardly unusual, it’s almost standard behaviour for celebs, it can hardly be the first time it’s happened. Didn’t they move away from the UK to get away from these things.

Youd think if they didn’t want press attention they wouldn’t consistently seek it.

[Spockydog]

12 hours ago, Wall Flower said:

As I understand it, they were staying at the private residence of a friend and didn't want to lead paps back there or have them camping out there. 

So what? It's okay for Harry to risk the lives of others just to protect the privacy of his chums? Is that what you're saying? 

Also, in my view, there is a world of difference between 'chased' and 'followed'. 

If you're still observing the highway code, you're being followed.

If you're doing 60mph in a residential street, you might be being chased, but you are still a fucking menace to other road users. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

13 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

So what? It's okay for Harry to risk the lives of others just to protect the privacy of his chums? Is that what you're saying? 

He wasn't driving. 

[Fragile Bird]

32 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

So what? It's okay for Harry to risk the lives of others just to protect the privacy of his chums? Is that what you're saying? 

Also, in my view, there is a world of difference between 'chased' and 'followed'. 

If you're still observing the highway code, you're being followed.

If you're doing 60mph in a residential street, you might be being chased, but you are still a fucking menace to other road users. 

Look, doggy, you’re making my head hurt now. All you folks sneering at the description of what happened given by H&M have basically called them liars who lie, that their description was grossly exaggerated, nobody was in danger, and everything was their fault because they didn’t go home and close the curtains.

Now they risked the lives of others????

That’s the problem with the whole H&M topic. They’re just liars who lie so you can twist any comment or action and say, “oh, they’re liars who lie, this is probably what really happened” and gleefully snatch fanciful explanations out of thin air.

I guess it’s actually quite similar to what conspiracy nuts do. 

[Spockydog]

JFC. They got involved in a car chase, which by nature, endangers pedestrians and other road users. 

Or they were followed. 

Pick one. Because there's a huge difference. 

And as for their story. Initial reports described a high-speed chase with two near misses. 

This story did not do so well when placed under scrutiny. So now it has changed and nobody really knows what actually happened, other than it wasn't what was first described. 

Edited May 20, 2023 by Spockydog

[Heartofice]

29 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Look, doggy, you’re making my head hurt now. All you folks sneering at the description of what happened given by H&M have basically called them liars who lie, that their description was grossly exaggerated, nobody was in danger, and everything was their fault because they didn’t go home and close the curtains.

Now they risked the lives of others????

That’s the problem with the whole H&M topic. They’re just liars who lie so you can twist any comment or action and say, “oh, they’re liars who lie, this is probably what really happened” and gleefully snatch fanciful explanations out of thin air.

I guess it’s actually quite similar to what conspiracy nuts do. 

That would be a good comment if it the Sussex’s didn’t actually have a history of lying and their version of events in this case wasn’t disputed by pretty everyone else on the scene.

What’s more interesting is the fanatical defence some people have of them, almost certainly because they view it as a matter of taking sides, and well, if the wrong people don’t like H&M then surely they must be innocent.

At least Spocky here has used reason to not just automatically jump on one side here and respect to him for that!