Britain spurns the Harry and Meghan pity party — – Latest News
What a rotten week Prince Harry has had.
First he came upon that British taxpayers wouldn’t be footing the security invoice for his journey to the UK.
This meant Meghan and their two youngsters, Archie and Lilibet, needed to keep home in Los Angeles as “H” jetted round Britain to advertise his Invictus Games.
Sorry, Your Highnesses, however we Brits have higher methods to spend our hard-earned money than on bouncers for 2 preening ex-royals.
If we will dine out with out government-funded heavies watching our backs, so are you able to.
Then Harry was refused a room at Buckingham Palace as a result of, palace officers stated, he responded “too late” to their invitation.
Oof — issues should be tough between King Charles and his prodigal son.
Buck Palace has 775 rooms and not one might be spared for the ginger whinger, as our tabloids call Harry.
Then got here the prince’s most devastating blow: He misplaced his long-running legal battle with Associated Newspapers, publishers of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday.
And he misplaced in spectacular fashion.
Harry and some celeb pals had accused the Mail newspapers of gathering details about them “unlawfully.”
But the decide threw out each one of their claims, ruling they’d categorically didn’t show their “suspicions” that the Mail had hacked their telephones and bugged their properties.
Harry and his friends have been left with an eye-watering $67 million legal invoice.
And he received’t even have the ability to drown his sorrow at the drinks cupboard in his dad’s sprawling palace.
But don’t really feel sorry for him.
His courtroom humiliation is a momentous victory for freedom of the press — and a brutal defeat for the tyrannical self-pity of movie star narcissists like Harry and Meghan.
The prince famously hates the British press, partially as a result of of what he sees as its “hounding” of his late mom, Princess Diana.
He had been making ready his case in opposition to Associated Newspapers for years.
When it lastly got here to the High Court in London in January, the BBC hailed “Harry’s war” on the tabloids.
The woke leftists of the cancel-culture mob cheered him on, hoping this high and mighty prince would clip the wings of the “gutter press.”
But it’s Harry’s wings that had been clipped.
Get opinions and commentary from our columnists
Subscribe to our every day Post Opinion publication!
Thanks for signing up!
In a 436-page judgment, Mr. Justice Matthew Nicklin dismissed all 97 claims of “unlawful” journalism made by Harry and his gang, which included Elton John and his husband David Furnish, actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost and a couple of UK politicians.
All claimed to have been bugged, adopted and pestered by the Mail newspapers.
Hurley dramatically wept in the dock as she claimed the Mail had surreptitiously gathered intel about her paternity battle with US businessman Steve Bing over their son.
Harry turned as pink as his hair with anger as he insisted the papers had used “unlawfully gathered information” in 14 articles about him
But Justice Nicklin was skeptical — as a result of the luminaries didn’t offer any info, solely “suspicions” that they had been spied on.
It was a “magnificent vindication” of its journalism, Associated Newspapers proclaimed.
Indeed: Though sneering social-justice warriors dream of muzzling newspapers that take them to job, it’s fantastic to see one of the highest courts in Britain take journalists’ aspect.
And the course of fantastically uncovered Prince Harry’s hypocrisy.
Paul Dacre, Associated Newspapers’ editor-in-chief, identified that Harry himself has poured each sordid element of his life into the public realm.
He wrote a “sad book,” stated Dacre — referring to Harry’s self-pitying memoir “Spare” — wherein he “boasted about his killing of 25 Taliban, his drug-taking and, in cringe-making detail, how he lost his virginity.”
“There isn’t a laundry in the cosmos big enough to wash all the dirty linen he has aired about his own family,” Dacre stated.
It’s the Harry and Meghan means: They moan about the press invading their privateness, then invite Netflix into their home to movie their each transfer.
It’s not us hounding them, it’s them hounding us. Leave us alone!
Everyone is sick of these wealthy, grifting royals taking part in the sufferer — as when Meghan moaned about the horrors of palace life to her billionaire chum Oprah Winfrey whereas carrying a costume that value more than most people earn in a month.
We can solely hope the verdict will lastly curb this obnoxious pair’s aristocratic self-pity.
And with the courtroom’s resounding endorsement of press freedom, Harry’s loss is liberty’s gain.
Brendan O’Neill is chief political author for the British online magazine spiked.
