adwil said:

Simply an attack on freedom of speech.

People love to tout "freedom of speech" as an excuse to be cruel. 

For the record, her specific complaint was in regard to the damage that he was doing to all those suffering from mental illness being deterred from seeking help for fear they will be treated as Meghan is being treated right now - being presented as an attention-seeking, lying pariah.

Not exactly in the best interests of public health.

But, while we're free to give our opinions, then Piers Morgan is a vile prick.

adwil said:

The whole Diana thing was a total disaster and that was the family's fault.

Yet, the exact same family bears no responsibility for the treatment of her son?

bml00 said:

"it would bring great pleasure to see you as his nemesis appear to haunt him "

I do keep an eye on Polter's forum but rarely comment. B lives in a world of his own. I would only comment directly if the posters there actually believed his ramblings. 

<<Should I apologise if my Great Great Grandfather was a murderer? Don't be silly.>>

"official apologies for the Holocaust are "silly"?  Official apologies for slavery are "silly"?"

Not what I wrote.

"Official" apologies by a country or organisation or entity that participated in an historical wrong are not 'silly'. 

For example, it would be right, sensible and just for Australian State governments to apologise for their complicity in aboriginal genocide because they're the same state entities that turned a blind eye to or encouraged what was happening. 

If any Australian individual who participated in aboriginal genocide is still living, then an apology from them would not be silly because individuals can apologise for their actions in the past.

We are all responsible for what we do in life but we cannot be responsible for what our ancestors did or crimes committed by our relatives and children. 

To me 'apology' is about responsibility for an act personally committed or committed by an entity that existed then and still exists today. I cannot apologise for someone else though I may criticise and regret their actions.

"For the record, her specific complaint was in regard to the damage that he was doing to all those suffering from mental illness being deterred from seeking help for fear they will be treated as Meghan is being treated right now - being presented as an attention-seeking, lying pariah."

It's far too early to know if she was denied help.  

I do not automatically believe people who make allegations against others, especially if it's within a family. 

"Piers Morgan is a vile prick."

You are entitled to your opinion as he is entitled to his. 

Jenifer (Zarknorph) said:

"Yet, the exact same family bears no responsibility for the treatment of her son?"

I really don't know what you're talking about. Be specific. I can't see any similarity between Charles/Diana and Harry/Meghan. 

adwil said:

"Official" apologies by a country or organisation or entity that participated in an historical wrong are not 'silly'.

Then why did you say the calls for the Queen's apology into her family's involvement in slavery silly?  The monarchy is an institution.

adwil said:

To me 'apology' is about responsibility for an act personally committed or committed by an entity that existed then and still exists today. I cannot apologise for someone else though I may criticise and regret their actions.

This was a common misconception during the debate over whether the Australian government should apologise for the Stolen Generation.

If I were to tell you my grandmother died, your first response would be to say "I'm sorry".  Why?  Did you kill her?  Or are you simply expressing the sentiment of regret and empathy.

As a member of an institution that participated in race based atrocities in the past, don't you have an obligation to acknowledge that past?  By owning it, and stepping up to say what happened was wrong and regrettable is an important step towards closure for those still affected, and social reform going forward for all.

The Australian Government did it, the Monarchy needs to do it.

adwil said:

It's far too early to know if she was denied help.

In other words, you say she is lying when she said HR could not get her help because she was not a paid employee of the company?

That's an oddly specific lie to make.

adwil said:

You are entitled to your opinion as he is entitled to his.

Baseless claims that someone who says they were ignored when crying out for help is lying is hurtful.  Your rights to your opinion end when that opinion hurts another person.

You said the Royal Family are responsible for the damage done to Diana.

But when Harry says the Royal Family failed him, he can just take his half-cast wife and fuck off?