British security pro: why are the Sussexes going to ‘dangerous’ Nigeria, huh??

We’ve reached the part of the Sussex discourse where Sussex-critics are oblivious to the actual arguments they’re making. Prince Harry and Meghan will likely travel to Nigeria in a few weeks, following Harry’s solo trip to the UK next week. The Nigerian government invited them specifically to highlight the country’s Invictus/veterans programs, the Nigerian government announced the trip and there’s every reason to believe that the Nigerian government is guaranteeing high-level security for VIPs of Harry and Meghan’s level. This is in stark contrast to the security on offer in the UK, where Harry has been engaged in a years-long legal battle to simply have access to high-level police security (which he would then pay for). Harry’s legal battle is on its last leg, with the government insisting that they have the right to refuse security for the king’s younger son and they have the right to put Harry’s family in whatever danger they want, thankyouverymuch. Well, now a British “security expert” is shocked and appalled that the Sussexes would go to such a dangerous country like Nigeria!

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s hypocrisy over their security fears surrounding Britain when the couple are planning to visit Nigeria has been laid bare by a former head of royal security. Dai Davies, who was once responsible for protecting the Royal Family, said it was strange the Duke of Sussex constantly raises the risks of coming to the UK, but plans to visit one of the world’s most dangerous countries.

Mr Davies, speaking exclusively to Express.co.uk, said: “It’s strange that he personifies the risk factors here and is willing to go to one of the world’s most dangerous countries. I would want to know the rationale for this visit to what is a very dangerous place.”

He pointed to the Global Peace Index’s measure of safety, security, conflict and militarisation around the world, which places Nigeria 144th out of 163 countries.

Asked how a visit to Nigeria would impact Harry’s wish for improved security in the UK, Mr Davies said: “I’m sure if a risk from various sources and intelligence becomes apparent then he’ll get it. When he visited his father here there was close liaison between the Met and Harry’s security.”

Mr Davies identified several risks in Harry and Meghan’s trip to Nigeria, including a terror attack, kidnap attempt or lone actor targeting the couple. Transportation plans in the African country as well as health considerations would also have to be considered by those planning security for the trip. The former Divisional Commander in the Metropolitan Police said if this were a royal visit, he would insist on thorough background checks on who had invited them, why and where they might go. He added: “I would be highlighting the risk of terrorism, of kidnapping, the levels of violence and danger in the country.”

[From The Express]

So you’re saying that Harry and Meghan are VIPs and potential targets for kidnapping, terrorism and violent racists, yet the British government refuses to give them the kind of security which would protect them from these kinds of threats? Every accusation is an admission – if a security expert is crying about the potential danger the Sussexes could face in Nigeria, certainly that’s an admission that Harry and Meghan should have the kind of British security Harry fought for? Anyway, the Nigerian government wouldn’t have invited the Sussexes unless they were prepared to take care of them and keep them safe for the length of their visit. Which just means that their visit will resemble something like a “royal tour” with full coordination between the Sussexes’ private security team and the Nigerian officials.

Also: the British media tells on themselves constantly, especially when they show their anger at other countries respecting the Sussexes and giving them the kind of security they clearly need. They were mad when the NYPD basically treated the Sussexes like high-level dignitaries last fall. They were mad when Germany did the same in 2022-23.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

63 Responses to “British security pro: why are the Sussexes going to ‘dangerous’ Nigeria, huh??”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. equality says:

    I’m sure H&M have top notch security who have protected people just as wealthy and important as the UK RF. Their bodyguards are probably also allowed to be armed in Nigeria unlike in the UK.

    • swaz says:

      ITS JUST SEEMS THAT H&M NIGERIA TOUR HAS REALLY RATTLED THE UK 🤢🤢🤢THEY’VE GONE GREEN WITH ENVY 😪😪😪

    • SHEILA HIBBERT says:

      I agree , they will have armed security of their own..

    • Aye lwin says:

      The U.S. travel advisory posted since April 25th 2024 pronounced the UK as high risk for terror. So what’s the difference between the UK and Nigeria? Why do Brits think Nigeria is more dangerous?

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        And that’s the crux of it. The UK press want H&M to be put in danger so they can gleefully report on it a la Diana.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Because it’s African; you know, basic bigotry.

  2. So suddenly worried about their security. Well that isn’t any of UKs business seeing that they don’t want to protect them when they visit UK. I’m sure Harry must feel safe going there because the government invited them personally and will be having protection for them. Yes they do out themselves with this don’t they.

    • Mary Pester says:

      @susanCollins 100 %agree

    • Debbie says:

      And the nerve of this so-called security expert to say that someone should explain “the rational for the visit to a dangerous country” to him. Excuse me?! Why should anyone explain anything to this pretentious jerk? Who is he? He’s nothing to the Sussexes, so his opinion doesn’t matter.

  3. Kane says:

    I can’t remember if it was kaiser or a poster but someone wrote that the british media misses the money/eyeballs the Sussexes brought. I totally agree and this article proves it. On that note I believe the press have been trying to force William and Charles to generate more press/stories. Like getting Charles to make an appearance this week.

  4. Jais says:

    It’s a madness and a sickness. The very idea that the sussex family is denied security in the UK. There’s something blood-thirsty about it.

    • Maxine Branch says:

      So agree. The UK consistently show who they value. And we can accurately point out it is not the Sussexes.

    • Christine says:

      Exactly. The level of hypocrisy to list all of the threats Harry and Meghan could face in Nigeria while claiming they don’t need security in the U.K. is astounding. Harry is the son of YOUR KING. Cry harder.

    • Deering24 says:

      Yeah, there is a _lot_ of hateful wishful thinking in this piece. Nice of this “security” guy to suggest horrible things to happen to the Sussexes…🤮

      • Debbie says:

        Yeah, sadly it’s a pretty thorough list. I mean, he listed everything but biting the poisoned apple and Meghan pricking her finger on a spindle and falling asleep for 100 years.

  5. Dee(2) says:

    I would venture to say that Harry’s security team has asked all those questions. The difference is the Nigerian government and military REALIZE the reality of those issues and will work with his team to assuage any worries not gaslight them that they don’t have anything to worry about. So it’s not hypocrisy for them to go to these places. It shows that they are willing to go places that treat them and the risks against them seriously. Stop whining because they won’t go places that won’t do the same. Also I see the BM is going to show their whole racist asses about anything in Nigeria so I better gird myself now from being infuritated.

    • LUCKSTER says:

      Yeah, I was going to say… Is Nigeria really that dangerous, or is this racist fear-mongering about Africa in general?

      • Lulu says:

        I don’t think it matters if one country is ‘more dangerous’ than another. The serious threats to Harry, and Meghan, in the UK have been confirmed. Charles agents’ argument is that ‘it doesn’t hurt the country if something happens to Harry’, when the argument should be ‘Harry is the target of threats BECAUSE he is the queen’s grandson/king’s son. They don’t care about logic.

  6. Mina_Esq says:

    They openly trash a commonwealth country and then wonder why so many of these countries want to leave.

    • Lau says:

      That was my first thought, they’re being so disrepectful for no reason other than their own delusion it’s insane.

  7. Lili says:

    I won’t lie and say i’m not worried. we like to think Boko haram is only in the north, but with all this publicity there is no telling they won’t travel down south. i have some consolation because there is a US airbase in the country that can hopefully mobilise quickly.I have to trust the nigerian military will take care of them. and hope no one has been bribed.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Harry and Meghan will be safer in Nigeria than in the UK.

    • Agnes says:

      Someone from Nigeria on here stated that they would be provided with top-notch if not outright military escort, as that is common with most of the VIPs in the country. I’d be more worried about them in London, where all their real enemies nest in the various royalist/racist viper pits. And what Kaiser said: “Every accusation is an admission” x 1000.

    • Jaded says:

      You’re forgetting that Meghan is something like 43% Nigerian — they’ll worship her (and Harry) there. As @Amy Bee and @Agnes state, they’ll be safer there than in London where they’re denied appropriate security even though they’ve stated they will pay for it.

      • EO says:

        I don’t know about the term “worship” but Nigerian politicians especially are very ass kissy towards foreigners, so even if she wasn’t 43% Nigerian they’ll still treat her and Harry well. I’m sure they are taking note of the issues raised about security and will ensure that they are well protected.

  8. WiththeAmerican says:

    Well that almost read like a threat. I certainly wouldn’t have worded it quite so specifically in public and I doubt as the former divisional commander of the Met he doesn’t know better.

    But whatever, thanks for the confirmation of the threats they face. Too bad the Royal Family and firm actively wants the Sussexes in harms way and is blocking their security.

    • Jaded says:

      Oh he knows better but is spewing the “company” line. In truth the Met has been found to be poorly run, institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic. That starts from mismanagement at the top, personal bias from RAVEC board members (Sir Edward Young being one of the worst), massive underfunding and protection by the Tory gov’t and, by extension, the BRF.

    • swaz says:

      You can just tell that they’re praying for something awful to happen, horrible people.

    • Moniquep says:

      It sounded like a bullhorn to all the would be terrorists, kidnappers and lone bad actors, here’s your chance to go for it. Sigh.

  9. Mairzy Doats says:

    And since this is a safari (snark) there are bound to be all sorts of lions and charging rhinos to protect them from. Oh my!

  10. Flamingo says:

    Seriously, a friend of mine’s 13-year-old son is in Africa this week on a special school trip. And fairly sure they are just fine without high level security and pew pews.

    Mr. Davies is off his rocker or has some kind of weird fetish.

    • Oh come on. says:

      To be fair, it’s highly unlikely a school trip from North America/UK/europe to “Africa” is going to Nigeria. Nigeria truly isn’t safe for ordinary people, let alone for the super-wealthy and famous.

      Your friend’s kid probably went somewhere where tourists can be reasonably safe without extreme security measures, eg Kenya or Tanzania or South Africa or Senegal, if I had to guess.

  11. Mel says:

    The British media will never understand that to the Sussex family they are the Man in the woods and every other country is the Bear.

  12. EO says:

    We have Islamist factions here that have been terrorizing villages/ harming people and taking over their land, but they are in villages! The Sussexes are coming to Abuja ( the capital) where the president and other prominent people reside and it’s super safe! They will be provided with top notch security and the government will ensure nothing happens to them on their watch. These losers are quoting stats and not any thing on ground at all

    • Oh come on. says:

      Right? The British security folks quoted in the article are pretending the security risks in Nigeria are uniform throughout the country and that the risks are the same for royal visitors as for, say, upper-middle-class business owners.

      It’s their undifferentiated view of “Africa” as one “dark” continent that’s all the same. Since they know nothing about “Africa,” they assume there’s nothing to learn about regions or politics or classes or public safety. It’s all the same to them: terrorism, famine, and war.

      And the UK is all safety and daffodils, nvm that several Brits have literally tried to kill Meghan and her kids.

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        This security expert is just vomiting out the latest iteration of British racism. 🤮

      • tamsin says:

        Charles has made several trips to Nigeria, one of them with Diana. The BM are a disgrace.

  13. sevenblue says:

    I am gonna guess (without any data available to me), H&M get more death threats from UK than any other country in the current situation.

  14. Hypocrisy says:

    The British government won’t even share threat assessments with the Sussex’s security team so they are literally flying blind when if and they are in Britain, so anywhere else is safer for them. I recall reading that people they have hired are former government employees, in the states they don’t loose their security clearance and I’m sure they get far more information for the safety of the Sussex’s in every country except Britain. There is a very danger everywhere they go, no one but Ravec says otherwise. That is how you know they are completely corrupt.

    • sevenblue says:

      They have got Obama’s former security agent in their security team. So, I am sure they are very competent and connected to right people in USA. The only country creating risk & no problem solving for them is UK. They were greeted very well in Germany too in terms of security.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        And the reason why they cannot get the security level they need in the UK is solely down to the fact that the BRF does not want them to have it. They effectively want to exile Harry from the country of his birth because they don’t want to be overshadowed on their home turf.

  15. Amy Bee says:

    The lack of self-awareness. The fact that Harry and Meghan are going to get security in Nigeria but not the UK is the real issue here.

  16. Oh come on. says:

    It’s not about whether England or Nigeria is “safer” in general—for ordinary people, the UK is clearly safer— it’s about how safe this trip is for Harry and Meghan.

    In the UK, Meghan, her husband, and her kids face serious, violent death threats and assassination attempts by white supremacists, and the UK govt refuses to provide protection for them. Meghan and her family don’t face such threats in Nigeria.

    In Nigeria they’re more likely at the same (elevated) risk of kidnapping/violence as other famous, wealthy people, like the President and members of government. Uber wealthy Nigerians need and have strong security measures in place for themselves, and are providing similar super-security to H&M because—unlike the UK govt—the Nigerian govt acknowledges the security risks and is serious about protecting them.

    Nigeria would be embarrassed and Nigerians would mourn if H&M were to come to any harm. Nigerian govt is serious about protecting them.

    We know the British tabloid media and BRF are, at best, ambivalent about keeping H&M safe 😡

  17. MsIam says:

    So now they are going to insult Nigeria in order to insult the Sussexes? SMH.

  18. Susie says:

    It’s also a super racist argument. You can tell that man thought Nigeria and imagined huts and boko haram. 1) the Nigerian government will do their best to prevent the Sussexes getting paper cut. Part of the reason they invited them is to help show off their country. Anything bad that happens is counter to the trips purpose. 2) Nigeria is one of the most developed countries in Africa. Many of the middle to rich people can live a life similar to the one they experience in western/white countries. I don’t want to diminish the inequality or poverty but it’s like saying the Sussexes shouldn’t got to America because of the poverty and violence against black people in the Deep South. Many black people suffer greatly in America but the Sussex’s live in Monticeto with high level security. Outside of charity visits the Sussexes will be shown only the very best. 3) I’m a middle class western first Gen (rarely able to come back to Africa cuz it’s too expensive )and I went to my grandmas village for a year in one of the poorest west African countries and I was never stolen from or harmed in any way. Mind you I spent very little time in the city but I went to clubs and markets with no issue. I was def more aware of my safety and pickpockets and western money afforded me a lot but I wasn’t scared for my life. Ironically all the city raised Africans are scared to come to the villages cuz of safety reasons which made the villagers shocked and honestly like me even more cuz I’m fully western born and raised solo woman and I was chill. My own African born mother refuses to go to the market while it was my fav day of the week. Spent time by myself, explored the area and loved it. My family can afford things like solar power and running water and a maid but I didn’t have a driver or security detail (lol) and I was fine. Major cities in Nigeria are wayyyyyyy more developed than where I was. The Sussexes are wealthy gov invited VIPS they will barely feel any difference in their lifestyle except for the heat and amount of black people.

  19. Saucy&Sassy says:

    Do any of the people who write this stuff EVER go back and reread it? I can’t imagine that they do. This article lays out the security issues with the Sussexes, but we are to believe that they only occur in one country? I guess that one last brain cell that was working is going on the fritz.

    I have no doubt that the other Commonwealth countries are paying attention to how the UK bm are describing Nigeria. Perhaps they would be better occupied by learning something about the Country.

  20. GMH says:

    Harry’s security fears are based on specific and actual threats to him and his family in the UK. When last checked, there were so threats directed toward the Sussex family by Nigerians. I don’t think there is a black nationalist movement trying to hurt them for tainting the blood pool. The tabs like to pretend these threats are not real in the UK because there are no penalties for them egging on the crazies and when one of them finally breaks through, they will be first in line looking to blame the police in the UK and wash their hands of any role in the climate.

  21. Caseysmom says:

    Black people will not allow Meghan to be harmed. Harry is safe because he will be with her and he is Diana’s son.

  22. Louise177 says:

    I don’t know if the British is playing dumb or actually is. Do they not understand that when they travel, security is provided and/or works with the Sussex’s security. In the UK, the British won’t provide any security or work with their private security. Considering the media, public figures have openly hoped for violence against them, of course the Sussex’s don’t feel safe in England. Especially the safety of Meghan and the children.

  23. Izzy says:

    The Nigerian government is willing to provide security assistance, likely at least partially at their own cost. The UK government, on the other hand, does not want to give Harry or Meghan any security, even if they don’t have to pay for it.

  24. QuiteContrary says:

    This security expert doesn’t even use the word “personifies” correctly.

  25. vpd4 says:

    These racist bast**ds, they just need to get over it.

  26. kirk says:

    The only useful information in this article is : “When he visited his father here there was close liaison between the Met and Harry’s security.” This just proves that RAVEC / Met Police requiring Harry to give them 30-days notice prior to visiting UK is just solid BS. It also proves that information sharing between Harry’s team & UK security forces is possible, but only when Chuck allows it to happen.

    The rest of the article is pointless because it’s obviously written to trash Harry by cherrypicking nuggets of information from a respected UK security expert who has zero knowledge about Harry & Meghan’s trip to Nigeria.

  27. sammi says:

    Michael Palin in Nigeria on Channel 5 uk is well worth watching. He lost his beloved wife after decades of marriage and is in his eighties! He said that he was discouraged from going but wanted to show a different side to Nigeria from the usual press/media coverage. It is an excellent commentary and filmed series so I hope that it will get a wide viewing audience.
    Please promote it on social media as I am not on facebook or X or pigeon post but have a nature based instagram River Crane Sanctuary!