I've been a bit tied up most of the day so only heard about Prince Harry serving in Afghanistan (best headline in tomorrow's papers from the Daily Star: WHEN HARRY MET TALI!) a couple of hours ago. The news emerged via Matt Drudge's website earlier today. I asked myself the question: If I had known about Harry being there would I, as a blogger, have ignored the press embargo. My response took a nano second. No I bloody wouldn't, and Matt Drudge should be ashamed of himself for putting the Prince's life at risk in this manner, not to mention those of his fellow soldiers.
When the original decision was made not to send Harry into active service I argued that it was wrong. He wanted to go. He was prepared to go, and the decision that he shouldn't go effectively made his role in the armed forces redundant. Well done to him for sticking to his guns and having the guts to go where most of us would fear to tread. Makes you proud to be British.
I'll be doing the News 24 paper review at 00.15.
Notice the deafening silence from Guido over Matt Drudge's 'actions'...
ReplyDeleteIt was Australian and German magazines that revealed this but it was back in January and didn't get any media attention until the low life that is Matt Drudge gave it oxygen. Harry must be pulled out not just for his safety but for the safety of the men and women who are serving beside him and who may now face intensified attacks from the Taliban. If there is intensified attacks which seems likely and it results in the death of a soldier or soldiers then blood will be on Matt Drudge's hand.
ReplyDeleteAre we British then ? I have just watched Question with what is usually referred to as ,“mounting disbelief “ in an all Scottish Panel the only non MSP was George Galloway non Scots were entirely absent from what the BBC clearly think is already a separate country …
ReplyDeleteGeorge Galloway , a piece of hard left detritus who plies a trade sucking up to radical Islam and inflaming their self pity still further , lovely . In a packed programme of praising Fidel Castro and blaming the US for his lack of any democracy , this regional knitting circle discussed , for example , the fate of Martin as speaker of a body they have nothing to do with and no say upon ..and yet in a strangely spectral atmosphere all opined . Why?
What will the BBC do next ? Exclude all non English from English based Question Time ….Oh god I hope so and I hope in fact never to see the leering sweaty mean pictish face of one G Brown ever again.
On Prince Harry yes well done indeed a fine chap and while his fate is no more important than the rest of our brave soldiers out there , he makes it real for us all. He is a true Prince .Sadly , thanks to Labour he will probably be shot in a cardboard tank so they can gold plate a couple more bureaucrat pensions .
Good Luck Harry .
This will do Harry the world of good - firstly I think it'll make him grow up a bit. My own personal opinion of him has been raised 100%.
ReplyDeleteThis will also put paid to all the people who accuse the Royal's of being out of touch - Harry's served on the frontline of a war, which is more than most people who criticise the Monarchy.
Good for him, and all the other men and women out there.
"I never thought I'd find myself saying thank God for Drudge."
ReplyDeleteJon Snow, Channel Four.
Which proves he is a tosser. And on the subject of
tossers...
I bet Alex Hilton would have lisped it from the rooftops.
Which proves he is a tosser. And on the subject of
ReplyDeletetossers...
I once overheard Snow at the Almeida in Islington braying on about himself . You have no idea what a complete and total wide moist gaping ....*oh coming dear*
I am second to none in my distaste for Princess Diana and her "emotional intelligence", but there is something eerie about her having been driven to insist that Harry be called Harry and not Prince Harold.
ReplyDeleteWill he, in some way, be the saviour of our country? I've wondered before about that powerful instinct she had. He is certainly a fine man, and a handsome one to boot.
Matt Drudge is clearly unable to distinguish between celebrity gossip and a powerful strand within a nation he doesn't know. Has he ever been outside the US, I wonder? He really should mind his own business.
anon 12:09 am
ReplyDeleteIndeed. Why praise Drudge for a dreadful and pointless release of information kept quiet for good reasons, and implicitly criticise him for the good journalistic work he has been famous for? Oh, of course, he is famous for an item embarrassing a Democrat. Sneering disregard for the Royal Family's safety and the safety of other military personnel fits nicely alongside protection of a Democrat who deserved to be exposed, but does not fit well alongside anything that might reasonable be described as journalistic standards.
Jon Snow should be ashamed of himself too.
Al B - What a stupid comment: "This will do Harry the world of good - firstly I think it'll make him grow up a bit."
ReplyDeleteThis is not something that was done to Harry, imposed on Prince Harry. It was his decision, so your comment has no logic.
The fact that he insisted on going despite the danger - and having had the patience to lie low until the first wave of publicity blew over - indicates to me that Harry is already a grown-up, and an adult we can be very proud of.
What'll "make him grow up a bit", if you please? It was his own decision to go - an adult decision - and his own decision to stay patient until the publicity died down.
Also, people who say "firstly" rather than "first", are always wrong.
Yet more friendly media fire from our US cousins. Why on Earth couldn't Drudge keep his mouth shut? Numpty.
ReplyDeleteJon Snow was a disgrace tonight. Ranting about how the press was colluding with the establishment/royals. Like he and his team were unaware themselves of the situation and weren’t also complicit with the collusion. Hypocrite!
ReplyDeleteThen going on about what else could the press be hiding from the good people of Britain. Well plenty actually.
If he is so morally outraged why didn't he break the story about Blair's family problems from a little while back if his principle is that all stories should see the cold light of day.
I don't think that story should be splashed. I despise Blair as much as the next anarcho capitalist but that would be nothing more than prurient (we can leave that to comments on Guido’s blog). But it is shows Snow up for what he is.
word verification spyip, oh dear I think your tracking me
Cry God For Harry, England and St.George.
ReplyDeleteA timely reminder for our political elites that staying in power, long term, involves leading from the front.
Please note Tony "yes YOU must get your child vacinated" Blair.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1726051.stm
Verity I may have to explain myself. My own personal opinion (shared by a few other people before this news broke I suspect) was that Prince Harry was nothing but a partying Hooray Henry. His behaviour over the last few years seemed to be like a Big Brother contestant - getting drunk, fighting paparazzis, etc.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion is that his experiences on the front line will help him mature and face reality outside of the bubble many Royals find themseves in.
I am an ardent monarchist, but personally didn't think very highly of the younger royals. My opinion - of Harry at least - is changed greatly by this news. The whole country can be proud of this young man, and the other young men and women fighting on the front line.
Mostly Ordinary - Clever!
ReplyDeleteI read the Harry story first on Drudge which is one of my first daily visits on the Net.
ReplyDeleteDrudge may not be particularly likeable but he's brilliant...see his hits/day.
Harry has now 'been there, done that, got the T-shirt'...and all kudos to him for his insisting on his right to fight.
However,it was only a matter of time before some journo would 'out' his Afghan presence.
Such is my experience of human deviousness that it occurred to me that the MOD (or whoever), rather than have a 'British' hack take the credit...and the odium... for the 'now we may reveal' story, sent an e-mail to the hated Mr. Drudge & bundled a probably disgruntled Harry onto the next RAF transport.
Should that be the case, I must say that it was remarkably well done.
"I am second to none in my distaste for Princess Diana and her "emotional intelligence", but there is something eerie about her having been driven to insist that Harry be called Harry and not Prince Harold." Verity
ReplyDeleteHe's actually called Henry.
"...there is something eerie about her having been driven to insist that Harry be called Harry and not Prince Harold."
ReplyDeleteEr, why would anyone call him Prince Harold when that isn't his name? There's nothing odd about HRH Prince Henry of Wales being called "Harry," a nickname with a historical and literary resonance going back at least to Henry V.
Clearly, I don't follow royal christenings with the ardour I ought. I thought Harry was called Harry by his mother,the emotionally intelligent Princess Diana - which is itself a mistake, of course. She was Diana, Princess of Wales. She could not be Princess Diana as she wasn't a princess.
ReplyDelete"There is nothing more exhilarating than being shot at without result" W Churchill.
ReplyDeleteGood luck Harry.
I thought Diana had insisted on him being called Prince Harry. Obviously, I'm wrong. My eyes and ears always tended to glaze over when a quote from Diana was flagged up.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, he's a fine, brave man. And a looker.
It should have been reported or he should not have gone if it was unsafe to do so. For the British media to have volunteared for censorship on an issue such as this shows how poor and weak they have become. Iain you should have blogged it if you had known. Just what are we comming to. I salute Drudge.
ReplyDeleteThe question we should all be asking is 'Who told Drudge?'
ReplyDeleteStop press: Soldier does what he is paid for.
ReplyDeleteHardly news is it?
And Verity, he's Henry not Harold. Calling a prince Harold would not be too bright, considering what happend to the last king of that name.
I absolutely agree with Johnny Norfolk.
ReplyDeleteCornet Wales is a soldier, so he should do as he's bloody well told. He was told he couldn't go to Iraq. So Harry threw a hissy and threatened to resign his commission. Dannatt created a job for him in Afghanistan. The press kept quiet about it; they love a secret involving royals.
In WWII no royal was allowed in the front line. Kent was not killed on active service but flying Hess to Sweden for a news conference to ditch Churchill.
Royals should keep out of politics and stick to finding their amusement at Boujis. Although they naturally want to have it all, someone should have the backbone to give them limits. But don't expect that from our PM and sycophantic press.
Just enormous respect for Harry.
ReplyDeleteDid Jon Snow tell Drudge?
ReplyDeleteThe reason for keeping a Royal out of the front line is not that he might be killed or injured, but that he might be captured. Also knowledge of his posting may endanger his comrades and make life more difficult for his commanding officers.
ReplyDeleteAs to Jon Snow: some journalists are like politicians, in that they move in their own circles, have their own ideas of acceptable behaviour, and do not understand why the public holds them in such low esteem.
I assume that along with the other Westminster reptiles he was quite happy to keep schtum about Charlie Kennedy's alcohol problem.
I might have missed something here, but if the news blackout applied only to the UK how did this mean Harry was safe? Are there no islamic terrorists in the rest of the world who could have read this in the Australian or other country's media?
ReplyDeleteOnly home-grown terrorists still in Beeston or Solihull would have been ignorant of his presence there.
You haven't missed anything Titus.
ReplyDeleteThe tradition continues. Only the British public were kept in ignorance about the Duke of Windsor and Wally Simpson. You had to cross to France to find out. These days Australian women and probably everyone else can know, but not Brits because our journalists still know how to keep a (royal) secret. The difference these days is Matt Drudge.
I thought Iain welcomed this development.
Iain, his life is at risk by simple virtue of him being in the war in the first place. the idea that the taliban would make a a special effort to kill him ther eis insane. he's more at risk when out and about in fulham, ie unarmed and not in camouflage surrounded by dozens of other lookalikey british soldiers. next!
ReplyDeleteWell I think waht Harry is doning out there is really life affirming news.
ReplyDeleteWho know's what he'll be upto next:
Prince Harry Coming at You
The Taliban are already as intense and murderous as can be, adding Harry to the theatre or even the Queen herself will not make the blindest bit of difference.
ReplyDeleteNow, if we could only remember how wars are won, and stop to confuse it with an aid mission and business advice for the poppy grower...
Nice to see the BBC paying deference to the Royal Family again.
ReplyDeletePerhaps they my go on to make some better programmes.
Well said, Cinnamon! We're not in Afghanistan and Iraq to teach them how to sing Kumbaya, sign up for Fair Trade, reduce their carbon footprint and weave peace baskets. The idea is to eliminate them.
ReplyDeleteVerity is clearly no expert on royal titles. Diana, Princess of Wales was only such after her divorce. Before that she was officially H.R.H. The Princess of Wales. The crucial change being that she was no longer allowed to be an H.R.H.
ReplyDeleteI was amazed by Jon Snow’s performance on Channel 4 News. It seems that certain sections of the press and broadcasting are becoming as arrogant as the unions were in the 1970s and we all know what happened to them.
I am a little perplexed, as to why the Army feel that they must withdraw Prince Harry. Surely, the Taliban (or “Terry Taliban” as Prince Harry called them) want to kill or capture any Briton without discrimination, as to rank or title.
I think the army still lives with the trauma of the death of The Prince Imperial. The only son of Napoleon III, Emperor of the French, was killed in the Zulu War of 1879, fighting for the British Army. The Army had tried to make sure that he did not see action but his mother, Empress Eugenie and Queen Victoria had insisted. It later transpired that a Lt. Carey had left him to do all the fighting. Lt. Carey was boycotted by all his fellow officers from then on. There is a statue of The Prince Imperial at Sandhurst.
Significantly, when the Prince of Wales, the future King Edward VIII and Duke of Windsor, served with the Army during World War I, he was deliberately kept out of harms way, much to his chagrin but still awarded The Military Cross. His brother, The Duke of York, the future King George VI, served at the Battle of Jutland in The Royal Navy and consequently, saw real action. Their brother Prince George, Duke of Kent, was killed in a flying accident whilst on active service.
As for Matt Drudge, I am sure that he wouldn’t have done the same to a U.S. President’s son because he might lose his readership. Brits don’t matter. We should all note this fact when we next decide to read “The Drudge Report” and boycott it.
I'd like to see Prince Harry's next posting as a behind the lines black ops assignment to take that piece of tabloid filth Matt Drudge to task.
ReplyDeletethis is why drudge is drudge and you are dale
ReplyDeletem. hristov:
ReplyDeleteThus the famous Disraeli quip; ""A remarkable people the Zulu. They defeat our generals, convert our bishops [Colenso of Natal, who questioned biblical infallibility], and put an end to a great European dynasty."
m hristov - No. I'm not intersted in royal titles. I did know that Diana was never "Princess Diana", but as that's how she's known - despite it being wrong - I went with the flow.
ReplyDeleteMatt Drudge's British readership must be tiny and I doubt that he cares if anyone in Britain reads him or not.
So the journalists have got their story and the Army has lost a good soldier from the front-line.
ReplyDeleteWatch out, in a few years' time, for snide, lefty references to Prince Harry's 'very brief spell of front-line service.'
Respect, indeed.
ReplyDeleteHe's a credit to himself and his family.
Unlike that prat Matt Drudge.
O/T but when the press were all a lather a few years ago to prove that Harry's biological father was really James "The Cad" Hewitt. The claim was based on the fact that he and Harry both had red hair and looked strikingly similar.
ReplyDeleteThen a few years later I saw a documentary on tv about Diana's family and they showed a photo of her father when he was in his early 20s. And guess who looked just like? Not at all like he was at the time of her wedding 20 odd years later - balding, corpulant, rhumy-eyed and permanently sozzled.
Poor thing - she fell for a man who reminded her of her Pa. Not the first I suppose.
so one rule for you Verity and another for everyone else. And I am sure your dear Ma held such high hopes for you when she named you.
ReplyDeleteThe Australian mag that "revealed" this in early January was "New Idea" - an antipodean version of "Heat" magazine. They are normally obsessed with another redhead Nicole Kidman. No wonder no one noticed. I wonder if the Taliban will be scanning the pages of "OK!" now to pick up military intelligence.
ReplyDeleteAnd there I was thinking his absence from the front pages of the tabloids spilling onto the pavement in the wee small hours out of Tahiki/Martini/Tahini was because he was giving his liver a January break.
Go Hazza
and now we have reported "Harry says he doesn't 'like England'". Give the kid a break. Just shows he is more thoughtful than he is normally given credit for. He is what 23? Leave him alone for a few years. Stop treating him like a political figure. He should be given his 20s to make up his mind what he wants to do and occasionally express ambivalence to the life he has been born into. Her Majesty, The Queen, has quite rightly, imho, expressed the belief that all her children and grandchildren need to find their own way in life. She, surely, understands the conflict between duty and a desire to be more normal. She chose duty (I guess with no real choice) and Great Britain has been the better for it and we should be grateful for her decision. She has not only been the most remarkable English monarch of the the last 100 years but possibly all time. With no real power she has nonetheless managed to play an important and significant role in the history of her realm. She is not personally responsible for her Prime Minister's decisions but acts as an unflinching beacon of maternal stability during periods of political turmoil.
ReplyDeleteHer grandchildren should be left alone to make their own decisions and not have reported every remark they make in haste or off the cuff.
I missed Jon Snow but surmise that in his view journalists WERE the story. No surprises there, then.
ReplyDeleteAs for this Drudge herbert, either he is blithely indifferent to the consequences his revelation might have for others, or he is actively hostile to the British Monarchy. That was, after all, the criterion of identity for the USA at its inception.
Cui bono?
Randy Squire said...
ReplyDelete"And Verity, he's Henry not Harold. Calling a prince Harold would not be too bright, considering what happend to the last king of that name."
...And calling a prince Charles?
Let's hope he managed to get some waterboarding in during his short stay there.
ReplyDeletem.hristov wrote; "Their brother Prince George, Duke of Kent, was killed in a flying accident whilst on active service."
ReplyDeleteThis bland, accurate but misleading statement, which is like saying President Kennedy was killed by the discharge of a gun, raises the only important element in the Wales story - the secrecy that royalty commands even today in our sycophantic society that is obsessed with celebrity.
Kent died in August 1942, in a Sunderland painted white on a hillside on the east of Scotland facing Sweden. The colour and the position revealed it was on its way to Sweden and not to Iceland per Air Ministry misinformation. Every scrap of the plane was removed - a unique undertaking that was never explained. The fact that it had an extra passenger on board was never explained. Nothing about Kent's mission that day has ever been revealed or explained after 65 years. The files have been removed from the National Archive and given on permanent loan to the Royal Archive so there should be no slipup.
Secrecy is a British sickness, and the majority who comment here seem content that it should remain so.
We need a revolution in Britain, and hopefully the blogosphere will facilitate it, and that includes Matt Drudge. Jon Snow recognises the problem. What is amazing is that Iain Dale's Blog is not part of the solution but apparently part of the systemic problem.
Am glad someone has criticized Drudge as there was no hint of this on the BBC where the only question was whether it had been right to have the agreement to media silence.
ReplyDeleteTone made me do it - he's a bad influence said...
ReplyDelete"...And calling a prince Charles?"
The last King Charles died of natural causes, aged 54. Not for nothing was he called "the Merry Monarch" - he had 12 illegitimate children.
yes who does prince H look like?
ReplyDeletecome on Iain - actually spend some time on a Friday evening and check some comments thru mate - getting a bit boring you go off for dinner etc.
ReplyDelete"Then a few years later I saw a documentary on tv about Diana's family and they showed a photo of her father when he was in his early 20s. And guess who looked just like? Not at all like he was at the time of her wedding 20 odd years later - balding, corpulant, rhumy-eyed and permanently sozzled."
ReplyDeleteA trifle unfair. Diana's father had a stroke which left him appearing to be permanently sozzled.
Verity:
ReplyDeleteWhen the parents announced that their new prince would be named Henry they also said that he would be known as Harry.
Hope that helps.
I see our brave royal prince got the approval of that pretentious prat Obama. He must beso relieved. In sh'allah!
ReplyDeletesic transit diana - Strange, then, that James Hewitt has said many times that Harry was almost two when he first met Diana. He was a toddler.
ReplyDeleteLike her father, Diana's brother, the Earl of Spencer has red hair. Red hair runs in that family.
Harry's hair seems to have stayed very long during his brief spell at the front line - don't the army have regulations about this and barbers any more?
ReplyDeleteSaw him on TV. He said this had been one of the best times of his life. The guy is a natural soldier not an desk warrior. Let him be one. Risking your life is a traditional part of the kinging business.
ReplyDeleteWhy did John Snow think it was so pressing to disclose Harry's whereabouts even before this tour of duty was completed?
ReplyDeleteCouldn't Snow have survived another 6 weeks before doing his one hour "Special Bulletin"?
BBC R4 the next morning even disclosed Harry's call sign and nickname - what possible reason could they have to do that?
It reminded me of the battle for the Falklands when the BBC broadcast the fact that the Argentinian Air Force bombs were harmlessly bouncing off of the british ships due to incorrect retardation; so the Argentinians made the necessary modifications to ensure hundreds of british servicement were killed and maimed.
They also broadcast the impending attack of the airfield at Goose Green thereby maximising british casualties.
This is the result of people like John Snow and the "fearless seekers after truth".