# What a Stupid, Stupid Boy (Prince Harry)



## timoc (Jan 6, 2023)

I normally steer well clear of contentious stories, but this one borders on madness.

I find it difficult to believe that intelligent people didn't tell Harry not to be so stupid as to tell the world about what he has had published in his book 'Spare'.
He may well have painted a target on his, his wife's and his children's backs, because the Taliban will most likely want revenge for Harry's insulting remarks about the 25 he claims to have killed, just like chess pieces on a board.

A very stupid boy.

https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-biggest-revelations-from-his-new-book-spare-12780975


----------



## Lewkat (Jan 6, 2023)

This entire book of his has earned him many enemies, methinks.


----------



## Pinky (Jan 6, 2023)

I think he will come to regret the book, and the podcasts. He certainly wasn't thinking ahead to what
effect it will all have on his children's future.


----------



## CallMeKate (Jan 6, 2023)

timoc said:


> He may well have painted a target on his, his wife's and his children's backs, because the Taliban will most likely want revenge for Harry's insulting remarks about the 25 he claims to have killed, just like chess pieces on a board.


What the heck??!!   I have no interest in the book, but when I heard what the title was going to be, I assumed it was just going to be whining about the old saying "the heir and the spare" with "the little brother" being jealous of having to be "the spare."  But THIS?!   Yeah, what was he thinking?  I guess once they abandoned the job duties and moved here, it removed any power the king may have had to approve and/or stop the publication... is that how it works?


----------



## Nathan (Jan 6, 2023)

timoc said:


> A very stupid boy.
> 
> https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-biggest-revelations-from-his-new-book-spare-12780975


ill advised at best.  Pointless.


----------



## oldaunt (Jan 6, 2023)

Pretty much like twitter and tiktoc or whatever.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 6, 2023)

CallMeKate said:


> I guess once they abandoned the titles


I don't think having 'Prince Harry' on the cover, and subsequent references to 'The Duke of Sussex'  really qualifies as 'title abandonment'......... it's all he has as selling features. 

If the book was renamed 'Whining Spoiled Boy Child' however........


----------



## Disgustedman (Jan 6, 2023)

I think he knows he's as likely for the big chair as a American citizen would be. So he's deciding to drive a knife into any chance of a reconciliation and calming of the waters.


----------



## Pepper (Jan 6, 2023)

I'm back to not liking Charles again, except for his 'Prince's Trust' rock concerts.


----------



## Sawfish (Jan 6, 2023)

oldaunt said:


> Pretty much like twitter and tiktoc or whatever.


Hah!

"TikToc royalty"


----------



## CallMeKate (Jan 6, 2023)

Nemo2 said:


> I don't think having 'Prince Harry' on the cover, and subsequent references to 'The Duke of Sussex'  really qualifies as 'title abandonment'......... it's all he has.
> 
> If the book was renamed 'Whining Spoiled Boy Child' however........


Yes, I realized I made a goof and edited it to abandoning their royal duties/ job duties since they still (I think) have the titles.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 6, 2023)

CallMeKate said:


> Yes, I realized I made a goof and edited it to abandoning their royal duties/ job duties since they still (I think) have the titles.


No probs, I wasn't taking a shot at you.......I believe that Harry & Migraine would do/say/promise _anything _in order to remain on the 'front page' and keep the bucks rolling in, so I'd put nothing past them.


----------



## DebraMae (Jan 6, 2023)

I honestly have not paid much attention to it.  Sometimes you have to just quit whining and get on with your life.


----------



## Alligatorob (Jan 6, 2023)

DebraMae said:


> Sometimes you have to just quit whining and get on with your life.


Unless the "_whining_" pays as well as his probably does.  

For money like that I'd whine, even if I had to make something up to whine about... there's a thought.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Jan 6, 2023)

Supposedly, there was some flub or other, and the book went on sale in Spain, - four days earlier than it should have been.  So, there's all kinds of speculation about what's in the book. If you bought that line, you'll probably buy the book. Great claims require great proof.


----------



## Jace (Jan 6, 2023)

Anything to stay relevant!


----------



## Pinky (Jan 6, 2023)

The military is none too pleased with him, either.


----------



## Jean-Paul (Jan 6, 2023)

Follows a long  tradition of other British Kings...madness or idiots! 

Think of the King George III at time of the American Revolution... 

https://www.royal.uk/george-iii#:~:text=George III is widely remembered,the colonies is not great.


Or the  abdication of  King Edward VIII 1936,  just before WWII...smitten by the controversial American Mrs Simpson...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdication_of_Edward_VIII

WOW Reminds me of  the   Harry><Meghan affair...

Both Edward VIII and Prince Harry.. somewhat naive, unstable and vulnerable royal, hoodwinked by a very clever American lady....

God Save the King! 

Jon


----------



## Pinky (Jan 6, 2023)

Whatever happened to wanting a normal, private life? I feel sorry for their children.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 6, 2023)

Prince Harry has undermined his own security and increased the risk of being targeted by Islamists in future revenge attacks after claiming in his memoir that he personally killed 25 Taliban insurgents while serving as a helicopter pilot in Afghanistan, MPs and military chiefs today warned.
The Duke of Sussex writes in his astonishing tell-all, Spare, how he regarded his targets as 'chess pieces', not people - in an admission that has sparked fury among military veterans, including some of Britain's top commanders.
Questions are now being raised about whether Harry has 'shot himself in the foot' and made himself a bigger target with his startling revelation - with the Taliban today taunting the Duke as a 'big mouth loser' who 'fled Afghanistan and hid in his grandmother's palace'. 
Ex-Army chief Colonel Richard Kemp today warned that Harry's admissions could cause pro-Taliban sympathisers to be 'provoked to attempt revenge' against him and possibly 'incite some people to attempt an attack on British soldiers anywhere in the world'.

A former head of royal protection has condemned Prince Harry's boasts about killing Taliban fighters as 'foolish in the extreme'.

Retired chief superintendent Dai Davies said that the Duke of Sussex's claims had increased the security risk not just to himself and his family - but the British public at large.

'He has raised the risk to all of us by resurrecting the war in Afghanistan with his ill-advised comments, which are foolish in the extreme,' he said.

'In the UK we have a Coronation this year with a whole raft of public events. All it takes is one extremist seeking to make a point.'

Mr Davies, who has worked in police and security for more than 50 years, said that Harry's comments would almost certainly prompt a review of royal security in the UK.

He added: 'He has increased the risk not just to himself, his wife and children and also those who protect him in the US, but also to our Royal Family here in the UK.

'This has raised the game. The Taliban has been quite quiet recently but this is a long term issue, you can't predict when an attack is going to happen.

'I would be recommending that RAVEC [the Royal and VIP Executive Committee] immediately undertake a risk assessment - not tomorrow but today - and where necessary take steps to increase protection. I think this should apply not just for senior royals but the more junior ones too who may be deemed easier to get at.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...mined-security-MPs-military-figures-warn.html


----------



## Been There (Jan 6, 2023)

What a Motard. He may as well put pictures of his family in the book. Who does that, unless they have a death wish?


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 6, 2023)

Pinky said:


> Whatever happened to wanting a normal, private life? I feel sorry for their children.


Neither Harry nor Migraine comprehend the meaning of the word 'normal'.


----------



## jujube (Jan 6, 2023)

They want to be the "Royal Kartrashians".


----------



## Pepper (Jan 6, 2023)

jujube said:


> They want to be the "Royal Kartrashians".


You mean billionaires?


----------



## jujube (Jan 6, 2023)

Pepper said:


> You mean billionaires?


Well, of course.....but trashy to boot.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 6, 2023)

jujube said:


> Well, of course.....but trashy to boot.


Mission Accomplished!  What's the next assignment?


----------



## horseless carriage (Jan 6, 2023)

DebraMae said:


> I honestly have not paid much attention to it.  Sometimes you have to just quit whining and get on with your life.


Me neither, but our royals do have a regular habit of producing the one that's:

Not the brightest bulb in the chandelier
A few bricks shy of a load
Not the sharpest knife in the drawer
A few cards short of a deck
A few fries short of a Happy Meal
Sharp as a marble
Only has one oar in the water
The elevator doesn't go all the way to the top floor
Lights are on, but nobody’s home
Fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down
Took an IQ test and the results came back negative
Dumb as a sack full of rocks
Has a mind like a rusty steel trap
As thick as two short planks
One prawn short of a cocktail
Brain about as useful as a chocolate teapot
A sandwich short of a picnic
Not exactly the same, but related


----------



## Lewkat (Jan 6, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> Prince Harry has undermined his own security and increased the risk of being targeted by Islamists in future revenge attacks after claiming in his memoir that he personally killed 25 Taliban insurgents while serving as a helicopter pilot in Afghanistan, MPs and military chiefs today warned.
> The Duke of Sussex writes in his astonishing tell-all, Spare, how he regarded his targets as 'chess pieces', not people - in an admission that has sparked fury among military veterans, including some of Britain's top commanders.
> Questions are now being raised about whether Harry has 'shot himself in the foot' and made himself a bigger target with his startling revelation - with the Taliban today taunting the Duke as a 'big mouth loser' who 'fled Afghanistan and hid in his grandmother's palace'.
> Ex-Army chief Colonel Richard Kemp today warned that Harry's admissions could cause pro-Taliban sympathisers to be 'provoked to attempt revenge' against him and possibly 'incite some people to attempt an attack on British soldiers anywhere in the world'.
> ...


Holly, there is a great deal of merit to your statement that it isn't amusing.  Most people are unaware of the fact that the military never publicly boasts of the number of people they have killed in wartime.  And judging from the Taliban's leader to Harry's remarks, we can understand why.  It is inconceivable that the editors and publisher let this reach the public in this day and age.  

Perhaps this was Harry's intention.  He obviously despises not only his family, but the Brits as well, for he still thinks they treated Meghan cruelly.  At any rate, your country will now have to go on some degree of alert and so will Montecito, CA.  I'm sure the Sussexes neighbors are not too happy today either.


----------



## Tish (Jan 6, 2023)

@timoc The man didn't only break the soldier's code but now has put his whole unit in danger of being sued for war crimes.
That despicable disgusting bitter vengeful jealous manchild needs to be stopped!

He is a walking Bellend with ears!


----------



## timoc (Jan 6, 2023)

We have given our opinions here about Mr Harry, and rightly so, but from someone (me) who had regard for the Royal family, I really don't see anyone amongst the senior Royals worthy of being a 'Royal'.
Sadly, the last decent member of that family was Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 2.
I do believe, that we in the UK will see an upsurge in republicanism over the coming years.


----------



## timoc (Jan 6, 2023)

Tish said:


> @timoc The man didn't only break the soldier's code but now has put his whole unit in danger of being sued for war crimes.
> That despicable disgusting bitter vengeful jealous manchild needs to be stopped!
> 
> He is a walking Bellend with ears!


I wish that I could have thought of those words, Tish.


----------



## Lewkat (Jan 6, 2023)

Tish said:


> @timoc The man didn't only break the soldier's code but now has put his whole unit in danger of being sued for war crimes.
> That despicable disgusting bitter vengeful jealous manchild needs to be stopped!
> 
> He is a walking Bellend with ears!


If he and his unit killed Taliban fighters, Tish, it does not constitute a war crime.  But, if they were innocent civilians, that changes the picture exponentially.


----------



## Packerjohn (Jan 6, 2023)

Ah!  I have to say I have not seen the Netflix series.  I have not read the book.  I will never see the series and I wouldn't even borrow the book from the library for free.  Why?
1.  I am tired of "Harry" always in the media.
2. I think he is a rich, spoiled little brat and I never did like rich, spoiled little brats.
3. He is constantly complaining.  I don't like complainers.
4. He is a media hound.  Kind of reminds me of those actors and celebrities doing silly things to get attention.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 6, 2023)

Lewkat said:


> Holly, there is a great deal of merit to your statement that it isn't amusing.  Most people are unaware of the fact that the military never publicly boasts of the number of people they have killed in wartime.  And judging from the Taliban's leader to Harry's remarks, we can understand why.  It is inconceivable that the editors and publisher let this reach the public in this day and age.
> 
> Perhaps this was Harry's intention.  He obviously despises not only his family, but the Brits as well, for he still thinks they treated Meghan cruelly.  At any rate, your country will now have to go on some degree of alert and so will Montecito, CA.  I'm sure the Sussexes neighbors are not too happy today either.


Absolutely Lois.. as the wife of an ex serving officer, and the aunt of ex marines..I know this only too well..

There;s a school of thought that his immaturity may have had him boast like this to get full armed protection paid for by his father when he visits the UK.. which currently he's in dispute with his father about!

he doesn't want to play by the rules of the RF.. but he wants all the gold trappings... 

All he's done now is put him , his wife and children in real danger for the rest of their lives.. as well as potentially the rest of the RF, and the British public  , if the Taliban decide to take  revenge..

He's not only a snowflake, he's a liar.. and completely disloyal to his family, to his army colleagues  and friends..


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 6, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> He's not only a snowflake, he's a liar.. and completely disloyal to his family, to his army colleagues  and friends..


And those are his _positive_ qualities.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 6, 2023)

Nemo2 said:


> And those are his _positive_ qualities.


I can't disagree.. sadly..


----------



## Tish (Jan 6, 2023)

Lewkat said:


> If he and his unit killed Taliban fighters, Tish, it does not constitute a war crime.  But, if they were innocent civilians, that changes the picture exponentially.


Thank you for explaining it to me.


----------



## shedevil7953 (Jan 6, 2023)

timoc said:


> I normally steer well clear of contentious stories, but this one borders on madness.
> 
> I find it difficult to believe that intelligent people didn't tell Harry not to be so stupid as to tell the world about what he has had published in his book 'Spare'.
> He may well have painted a target on his, his wife's and his children's backs, because the Taliban will most likely want revenge for Harry's insulting remarks about the 25 he claims to have killed, just like chess pieces on a board.
> ...


Agreed.


----------



## Chet (Jan 6, 2023)

From Daily Mail Online, the Taliban have replied.
EXCLUSIVE - Taliban taunts 'big mouth loser' Prince Harry after he revealed he killed 25 enemies in Afghanistan:​https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Prince-Harry-revealed-killed-25-enemies.html


----------



## horseless carriage (Jan 6, 2023)

timoc said:


> We have given our opinions here about Mr Harry, and rightly so, but from someone (me) who had regard for the Royal family, I really don't see anyone amongst the senior Royals worthy of being a 'Royal'.
> Sadly, the last decent member of that family was Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 2.
> I do believe, that we in the UK will see an upsurge in republicanism over the coming years.


Not every royal is a paragon of virtue. While there have been plenty of solid, dependable types quietly getting on with the job over the centuries, some royals have used their privileged position to have as much fun and cause as much mayhem as possible.

Step back in time to George IV, George Augustus Frederick; 12 August 1762 – 26 June 1830, he was King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and King of Hanover, that's the Saxony part of Germany, from the death of his father, King George III, on 29 January 1820, until his own death ten years later. At the time of his accession to the throne, he was acting as Prince Regent, having done so since 5 February 1811, during his father's final mental illness. 

For republicans unaware, a Regent is the term given for temporary cover, as a Vice President would do if the President was unable to. His father, King George III, known as the mad king, he sired fifteen children, enough to drive anyone mad, was deemed insane, unable to reign. So the regency went to his eldest son who became George IV, he had led an extravagant lifestyle contributing to the fashions of the Regency era. He was a patron of new forms of leisure, style and taste but his dissolute way of life and poor relationships with his parents and his wife, Caroline of Brunswick, earned him the contempt of the people and dimmed the prestige of the monarchy. He excluded Caroline from his coronation, accusing her of philandering and pressured the government to introduce the unpopular Pains and Penalties Bill in an unsuccessful attempt to divorce her. Talk about the kettle calling the pot black. George IV was notorious for his gambling philandering and womanising during his time as the first Prince of Wales.

Then you have Edward VIII, Nicknamed 'Dirty Bertie', Edward kept several mistresses throughout his life and gained an international reputation as a womaniser and playboy_, _whilst finding the job of ‘princing’ (as he dismissively called his royal duties) utterly boring, the future Edward VIII loved the flipside of royal life, the late-night parties, the adoration of almost everyone he came into contact with and the attention of a string of high society women, many of them married. Not that their marital status bothered him in the slightest.

In 1930, Edward met and fell madly in love with American divorcee Wallis Simpson. When he became king in 1936, the headstrong young monarch was determined to marry Wallis. The British establishment was having none of it and Edward was forced to abdicate in favour of his taciturn brother Albert, who went on to become George VI. Free of the shackles of monarchy, Edward married Wallis in 1937 and the two lived in exile in France after the Second World War as the Duke and Duchess of Windsor until Edward’s death in 1972

Our Royals, how we love them!

​


----------



## Lewkat (Jan 6, 2023)

Chet said:


> From Daily Mail Online, the Taliban have replied.
> EXCLUSIVE - Taliban taunts 'big mouth loser' Prince Harry after he revealed he killed 25 enemies in Afghanistan:​https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Prince-Harry-revealed-killed-25-enemies.html


Watch your back, Harry.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 6, 2023)

Tish said:


> @timoc The man didn't only break the soldier's code but now has put his whole unit in danger of being sued for war crimes.
> That despicable disgusting bitter vengeful jealous manchild needs to be stopped!
> 
> _He is a walking Bellend with ears!_


Tish, please, why don't you say what you really think ?


----------



## Geezerette (Jan 6, 2023)

Agreeing with Pinky. Why don’t they just go get a life, have fun, take up arts and crafts, or learn a new sport or a a musical instrument, do volunteer work, take aim at having a normal young, healthy, rich adults’ life.


----------



## Tish (Jan 6, 2023)

Chet said:


> From Daily Mail Online, the Taliban have replied.
> EXCLUSIVE - Taliban taunts 'big mouth loser' Prince Harry after he revealed he killed 25 enemies in Afghanistan:​https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Prince-Harry-revealed-killed-25-enemies.html


Well, I suppose it is good news that the Taliban see him as a joke.
At least that might remove the target of the RF and his wife, kids, and neighbors. ( I hope)


----------



## Tish (Jan 6, 2023)




----------



## Jamala (Jan 6, 2023)

Here we go again!!!! I am wondering where you people get your vast amount of misinformation. 
Would you like to share that? No, I guess not. The Sun, The Mirror, the Daily Mail and whatever twits choose to write.

My grandfather was a Field Marshall ( the highest rank in the British Army).  In his memoirs he disclosed the numbers killed. His writings are in the British Library, and stored in archives for army personnel.  His name is well known in England and no Germans or Indians  have come to get him or his decendants.


----------



## Lavinia (Jan 6, 2023)

Surely it's time for the media to start ignoring him! Like so many privileged people, he has difficulty dealing with reality. It's his problem, not ours.
I have seen it predicted that Meghan will be the next Oprah, and I can well believe it. She has the same patronising attitude. She has encouraged Harry's self pity, and now she is set to do it professionally.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 7, 2023)

Jamala said:


> Here we go again!!!! I am wondering where you people get your vast amount of misinformation.
> Would you like to share that? No, I guess not. The Sun, The Mirror, the Daily Mail and whatever twits choose to write.
> 
> My grandfather was a Field Marshall ( the highest rank in the British Army).  In his memoirs he disclosed the numbers killed. His writings are in the British Library, and stored in archives for army personnel.  His name is well known in England and no Germans or Indians  have come to get him or his decendants.


Different times, different enemies.  (Not the same, but Louis Mountbatten, 1979, blown up?)


----------



## Lewkat (Jan 7, 2023)

Jamala said:


> Here we go again!!!! I am wondering where you people get your vast amount of misinformation.
> Would you like to share that? No, I guess not. The Sun, The Mirror, the Daily Mail and whatever twits choose to write.
> 
> My grandfather was a Field Marshall ( the highest rank in the British Army).  In his memoirs he disclosed the numbers killed. His writings are in the British Library, and stored in archives for army personnel.  His name is well known in England and no Germans or Indians  have come to get him or his decendants.


Your grandfather wrote of these things after the end of hostilities, and seemingly are intended for those of us who enjoy reading war stories and those who experienced the action.  Mind you, he also wrote certain items intended solely for the Army, not the public domain.  Memoirs are usually very educational as well as entertaining.


----------



## Jamala (Jan 7, 2023)

Lewkat said:


> Your grandfather wrote of these things after the end of hostilities, and seemingly are intended for those of us who enjoy reading war stories and those who experienced the action.  Mind you, he also wrote certain items intended solely for the Army, not the public domain.  Memoirs are usually very educational as well as entertaining.


So you know my Grandfather then…you know when his memoirs were written, for whom they were written and whether they were published? 
Hmm…very interesting!


----------



## hearlady (Jan 7, 2023)

If you hear strange thunder in the UK it's likely the queen rolling in her grave.


----------



## Jamala (Jan 7, 2023)

*Harry is a hurt man. He lost his mother in tragic circumstances. He never recovered from his loss.
He has good reason to be bitter. *


----------



## hearlady (Jan 7, 2023)

I do hope he gets the help he needs and moves on.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Jan 7, 2023)

Pepper said:


> I'm back to not liking Charles again, except for his 'Prince's Trust' rock concerts.


I never liked Charles and it would take a miracle to change my opinion. I'm wondering if he really intimated to Harry that he might not be his real father (?).


----------



## Chet (Jan 7, 2023)

Jamala said:


> *Harry is a hurt man. He lost his mother in tragic circumstances. He never recovered from his loss.
> He has good reason to be bitter. *


The tabloids hounded his mother to her grave and tried going down the same path with Meghan and himself.


----------



## timoc (Jan 7, 2023)

Jamala said:


> *Harry is a hurt man. He lost his mother in tragic circumstances. He never recovered from his loss.
> He has good reason to be bitter. *


There are millions of people from very humble backgrounds who have lost mothers, fathers, sisters , brothers and children, without having any support, but they just have to grit their teeth and get on with it.  Harry had an extremely comfortable upbringing and support system in comparison, but he is whinging that he is more of a special case because of who he is. 
He is doing it all for money, he is reprehensable.


----------



## Jean-Paul (Jan 7, 2023)

Jamala said:


> *Harry is a hurt man. He lost his mother in tragic circumstances. He never recovered from his loss.
> He has good reason to be bitter. *


lots of us can match sob stories with that pampered and weak snowflake. 

You get grieve, accept the death (or whatever) go on with life. 

Fixating on Diana's death (caused by poor choice of a lover) for the rest of time has ruined him. 

life is short. HARRY: STOP WHINING! GET OVER IT! BE A MAN! 

Jon


----------



## Jamala (Jan 7, 2023)

Chet said:


> The tabloids hounded his mother to her grave and tried going down the same path with Meghan and himself.


 Absolutely Chet and that is the reason the couple left the UK.
All will be revealed one day.
In the meantime, I pray for both Harry and Meghan.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

Jean-Paul said:


> lots of us can match sob stories with that pampered and weak snowflake.
> 
> You get grieve, accept the death (or whatever) go on with life.
> 
> ...


He's such a snowflake.. and having difficulty coming up with anything to get people to feel sorry for him about, that his latest whine ( want wine with that)?.. is that on the Morning of Williams' wedding to Katherine.. he could still smell rum on Wills' Breath!!

Oh No.. never.. surely that horror didn't happen to you Harry .. How could a brother have the smell of alcohol from the night before on his breath on the day of his wedding. This must have scarred you for life!!


----------



## oldaunt (Jan 7, 2023)

OneEyedDiva said:


> I never liked Charles and it would take a miracle to change my opinion. I'm wondering if he really intimated to Harry that he might not be his real father (?).


It was all in the news when Harry was born that he said it. Charles has been a jerk his whole life.


----------



## timoc (Jan 7, 2023)

OneEyedDiva said:


> I never liked Charles and it would take a miracle to change my opinion. *I'm wondering if he really intimated to Harry that he might not be his real father (?).*


I often wondered about the similarity.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

In the media today there's a Q&A


1 Harry, have you ever done anything wrong in your life, or is everything always someone else’s fault?

2 Which member of the Royal Family expressed concerns about the colour of Archie’s skin and why haven’t you mentioned it again in six hours of Netflix documentary and hundreds of pages of your book? And can you explain the puzzling discrepancies in the accounts of this event you and Meghan have given?

She told Oprah there were ‘several conversations’. You told Oprah ‘that conversation I’m never going to share,’ which implied that there was only one comment. Who, if anyone, is telling the truth?
3 Congratulations on losing your virginity in a field to an ‘older woman’ who treated you ‘like a stallion’. Does this mean she supplied you with quality hay and a salt block? Or is there another connotation to those words? Actually, please don’t tell us. We just can’t take any more.

4 Do you have sympathy for dear Elizabeth Hurley, who has been moved to publicly state that the ‘older woman’ in question is not her? Or do you believe the bikini entrepreneur is still spiffing top totty who maybe protesteth too much but you can’t remember anyway because you had been taking drugs and talking to bins that night?

5 This is important, please concentrate. Meghan told a television audience of millions that your son Archie was denied a royal title against protocol, also referring to ‘concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born’.

It is plausible that she may not have grasped the finer points of complicated royal protocols and hereditary titles. But you understand this world all too well. Why did you never correct her provocative assumption?

6 On this subject, why don’t you and your family do the decent thing and ditch your royal titles? Your Royal Highness, if I may be so bold, you profess to loathe the institution and all it stands for — so why not set yourself free from such a conspicuous connection to it?

7 One thing that puzzles everyone. Right at the beginning, you and Meghan claimed to be committed working members of the Royal Family. Yet now it has become clear that you were negotiating contracts with Netflix and storing up fly-on-wall footage from day one. Was Megxit a financial strategy and a foregone conclusion?

8 Which of the following do you think best describes you?

a) pathetic

b) vengeful

c) a bit dim

d) proud Taliban killer

e) loving brother and son

f) someone who says ‘yes dear’ a lot

9 Was it wise, to reveal you killed 25 members of the Taliban in Afghanistan?

10 Speaking of bad guys, how can you justify your comment that your family ‘want to keep us as the villains’? Particularly when they have maintained a dignified silence over the firestorm of accusations and insults you have hurled at them recently?

11 Can you explain why Meghan told Oprah that when she was pregnant with your son, she had thoughts of suicide, ‘didn’t want to be alive’ and believed she was not allowed to seek professional help for her mental health crisis?

Bearing in mind that you had a personal therapist on speed dial at the time and, indeed, immediately called this person after a physical altercation with your brother.

Is there some arcane royal law that states ye prince shall verily have ye therapiste sessions yet his ladywife musteth not?

12 You and Meghan have talked at length about your ‘basic right to privacy’. Fair enough, but why have you so brutally invaded the privacy of others? Was it fair, for example, to reveal that the King, in the hours after burying his own father, wearily appealed to you and your brother not to spoil his last years by fighting?

13 Do you think the King will ever forgive you for revealing that you and William begged him not to marry Camilla because you believed she would become a ‘wicked stepmother’?

14 Which of the following would you say best describes the Princess of Wales?

a) bit of a baby brain

b) the sister I never had

c) a wife who fits the royal mould

d) Mrs Arch-Nemesis

e) a bit scary

( all of the above at various stages he's described his sister-in-law ..make your mind up Harry)

5 A major flashpoint came when William told you that Meghan was ‘difficult and abrasive’ towards staff. Illogically, you accused your brother of accepting the ‘Press narrative’ on this matter, even though he must have experienced first-hand and second-hand accounts of her behaviour.

Did you at any point stop to ask yourself if there could be any truth in what he was saying? Or do you believe St Meghan of Montecito can do no wrong?

16 You say you were always in competition with your brother, whom you called your ‘arch-nemesis’. Yet, like you, William did not choose his destiny, nor to be heir to the throne.

You understand his position better than most, so why choose betrayal instead of being supportive of him?

17 You claim that because of your privileged upbringing, you had no idea the word ‘P***’ was a racial slur. And also that it was those rotters William and Kate who encouraged you to wear a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party.

*Yet you were 20 years old and an officer cadet at Sandringham when these things happened — when are you going to properly accept responsibility for your flaws as well as your strengths?*

18 You have never met your father-in-law Thomas Markle, who has now been ostracised by you and Meghan for talking to the Press. Yet what you have done — Oprah, Netflix, an autobiography, television interviews — is a thousand times more invasive and incendiary.
You say that family is important to you — yet you are kinder to your rescue chickens than you are to Thomas, a lonely old man in poor health. Isn’t it time to finally meet him, forgive him and introduce him to his young grandchildren before it’s too late?

19 Despite your claims to the contrary, you were invited to Sandringham for Christmas and the King has made it known that he wants you and Meghan to be at his Coronation — yet you are refusing to say whether you will attend. How does this square with your stated belief that the Royal Family are ‘showing no willingness to reconcile?’

20 Harry, in Spare you spare no one’s blushes except your own. Is this a one and done? Or should we all prepare ourselves for Spare 2: Now Meghan Has Her Say?

No need to reply. I think we all know the terrible answer to that.


----------



## Jamala (Jan 7, 2023)

oldaunt said:


> It was all in the news when Harry was born that he said it. Charles has been a jerk his whole life.


Yes, he is a jerk. The jerk  king!


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

timoc said:


> I often wondered about the similarity.
> 
> View attachment 261051


Simply not true.. Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until 4 years after Harry was born


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

From Andrew Neil in the Mail


A_mong the many incendiary claims in Spare, Prince Harry's upcoming memoir, the boast that he killed 25 Taliban while serving as an Army helicopter pilot in Afghanistan will do him the most long-term damage by far.

I doubt he will recover from it.

Most of the revelations in his book amount to a further public airing of his family's dirty laundry, an endeavour to which he and wife Meghan have devoted their lives since running off in a huff to California. Jaw-dropping as some of them are, their real import serves merely to confirm what most had already concluded about Harry.

Blaming William and Kate for encouraging him to dress up as a Nazi for a fancy-dress party in 2005 illustrates his repeated failure to take responsibility for his own stupid actions and reinforces his default position that, no matter his own culpability, he is always the victim.
_
In relating _an altercation with his brother at his London home in 2019 which resulted in him falling on a dog bowl and breaking his necklace_, _Harry shows that he has lost all self-awareness and is beyond embarrassment. As a friend said to me last night: 'If that had happened to me, I would have gone to my grave without ever mentioning the necklace.'

The great 19th-century expert on the constitution, Walter Bagehot, famously wrote about the monarchy: 'We must not let in daylight upon magic.' That stricture is now in tatters. Harry is piercing the monarchy with searchlights that reach into every corner, making the Royal Family a laughing stock in the process.

What is left but to laugh at a Prince who boasts of killing the Taliban but gets distraught over a broken necklace?

He doesn't seem to care, as long as he and Meghan get to promulgate their supposed 'truth' and so-called 'lived experience', accumulating great wealth as they do so.
_
*But Harry is not necessarily the most reliable of storytellers. He says the first thing that he, a Taliban killer, did after the unbrotherly confrontation was call his therapist (as I say, he's beyond embarrassment).
*
_Yet, in previous exposés of the evil ways of his family, he claimed that when Meghan was going through some mental anguish of her own, she was left to deal with it alone, unaided. Why that should be so when he had his therapist on speed dial is not clear.

_


----------



## timoc (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> Simply not true.. Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until 4 years after Harry was born


There definitely is a very striking resemblance though, Holly, and we only have Diana's and Hewitt's words on that.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

timoc said:


> There definitely is a very striking resemblance though, Holly, and we only have Diana's and Hewitt's words on that.


No we don't.. it's obvious that there would have been a DNA sample taken from Harry if Charles had, had any doubts whatsoever.. and he would now have no qualms in disowning Harry right now, if he knew he wasn't his son..


----------



## oldaunt (Jan 7, 2023)

Lavinia said:


> Surely it's time for the media to start ignoring him! Like so many privileged people, he has difficulty dealing with reality. It's his problem, not ours.
> I have seen it predicted that Meghan will be the next Oprah, and I can well believe it. She has the same patronising attitude. She has encouraged Harry's self pity, and now she is set to do it professionally.


The media is too busy getting rich off the stories they make up to sell to the idiots who actually believe all they print to stop now. Anyone who actually believes they really know anything needs a shrink.


----------



## oldaunt (Jan 7, 2023)

timoc said:


> There definitely is a very striking resemblance though, Holly, and we only have Diana's and Hewitt's words on that.


Harry looks like Diana's red headed brother.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

But it is the excruciating stuff about Taliban kills which will haunt him and his family for some time to come.

_It is unseemly, unnecessary and, most important of all, un-British. It amounts to a watershed in public perceptions of him, from which there is no turning back. Even the Americans, hitherto far more sympathetic to Harry (and Meghan) than the Brits, are turning on him.

It's not just that there's something unsavoury about being proud of kills made from the world's most advanced and sophisticated attack helicopter against an enemy, however barbaric, armed largely with Soviet-era AK47 rifles. It's the way he compounded this folly, as only Harry could, by saying he regarded the targets as pieces on a chessboard.

All of that would be bad enough. But he's also breached the long-standing convention among British military veterans of all ranks that they don't talk much about the wars they waged, and never about 'kills'.

Just why Harry decided to flout that convention is best known to himself. But folks are furious.

Former Army officers, including those who'd served with him in Afghanistan, are speaking out against what he has said. But I found the testimony of civilians whose fathers and grandfathers had fought in various wars even more telling.

When news broke of Harry's 'kill' claim, I tweeted: 'My father was in uniform against the Nazis for six years. Never once in his long life did he ever talk to me about killing the enemy. Even the concept, much less numbers. And he was at Alamein. On the ground. Not in a helicopter.'_


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

* From Andrew Neil .. for the Mail..*

_I cannot understand what possessed him to say this, or why he was allowed to by those around him. A responsible publisher would have urged — even insisted — he blue-pencil the remarks.

But his publishers are more interested in putting out content that will generate headlines and sell books regardless of the fallout, to justify the massive advance they shelled out for Spare.

Meghan, of course, is the one person Harry does listen to. I doubt he does or says anything without her approval. But in this matter she would have been wholly useless, ignorant of British military tradition, or of the consequences that could follow from flouting it.

Maybe she was happy to have him talk of killing people on the grounds that it would counter the widespread impression that he's under her thumb by reminding people that he was once quite the macho man.

If so, it was a massive miscalculation. Harry has placed a large target not just on his own back but on his family's and even his neighbours' backs. As this paper reports on the front page, the whole Royal Family is now in greater jeopardy.

So is anybody physically close to him. I wouldn't be surprised if those who live next to the couple in the wealthy Californian enclave of Montecito — where I've seen reports that people are already tired of their presence — are thinking of launching a petition demanding that they get out of town.

Social media in the Islamic world is awash with posts depicting him as a 'crusader, terrorist, murderer' and spreading the word that he 'enjoys killing Muslims'. Who knows where this will end? It is actually rather scary.

The Taliban are condemning him as 'cruel' and 'barbaric' (I guess they know about things like that) and demanding he be brought before an international court for 'proudly confessing [his] crime'. Some in the Taliban, and its allies, will already be mulling over a rather more violent response._


----------



## horseless carriage (Jan 7, 2023)

Lavinia said:


> Surely it's time for the media to start ignoring him! Like so many privileged people, he has difficulty dealing with reality. It's his problem, not ours.
> I have seen it predicted that Meghan will be the next Oprah, and I can well believe it. She has the same patronising attitude. She has encouraged Harry's self pity, and now she is set to do it professionally.





Jamala said:


> Here we go again!!!! I am wondering where you people get your vast amount of misinformation.
> Would you like to share that? No, I guess not. The Sun, The Mirror, the Daily Mail and whatever twits choose to write.


Ignore him, I can hear the press say. "Are you serious?" As Jamala points out, the misinformation put out by the press, sells newspapers and some. The bottom line as always is how much cash can be squeezed out of the story? So it's squeezed and squeezed and as any journalist will tell you. "Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story." Define good as a money maker.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 7, 2023)

When you consider what is now considered 'normal/acceptable' by so many people in so many facets of our existence, social/economic/corporeal, etc, etc, ad infinitum, this whole situation is really unsurprising   -  we have entered an era of mass hysteria, and the flagellants are in the streets, the media, politics.....ad nauseum.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

horseless carriage said:


> Ignore him, I can hear the press say. "Are you serious?" As Jamala points out, the misinformation put out by the press, sells newspapers and some. The bottom line as always is how much cash can be squeezed out of the story? So it's squeezed and squeezed and as any journalist will tell you. "Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story." Define good as a money maker.


It's not misniformation HC..it's there for all to hear from his own mouth in interviews, and read from his own words in his newly  released Book...


----------



## oldaunt (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> It's not misniformation HC..it's there for all to hear from his own mouth in interviews, and read from his own words in his newly  released Book...


Yep, through the media filter that loves to twist, unless you actually paid attention to the interview and read the book yourself. Common sense is always a better look on anyone.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Jan 7, 2023)

I worked in the VA hospital (Veteran's) for over ten years, and not one of them ever bragged about killing anyone.


----------



## Aunt Mavis (Jan 7, 2023)

I cannot tell a lie, I wouldn’t have a clue what Meghan’s ethnicity was unless I was told. She’s about as good-looking as they get in my opinion but, full of bs like her husband. Not a redeeming quality obviously.


----------



## JustBonee (Jan 7, 2023)

With all the talk about Harry,    the stories about Prince Andrew seem to take a  backseat ....  he must be relieved  to be out of the spotlight at the moment. 

Then  there's those  many  internet  news links/leaks  about Prince William cheating on Kate while she was pregnant 
...  some pretty gross stuff on the Internet about his cheating ways.  


So I guess ripping on Harry takes away from the rest of the family's  messed up affairs.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 7, 2023)

Aunt Mavis said:


> I wouldn’t have a clue what Meghan’s ethnicity was unless I was told.


Nor, I suspect, would just about anyone else........it's simply used as one more weapon in the "They're picking on me 'cause I'm......." arsenal.


----------



## timoc (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> No we don't.. it's obvious that there would have been a DNA sample taken from Harry if Charles had, had any doubts whatsoever.. and he would now have no qualm in disowning Harry right now, if he knew he wasn't his son..


Diana went on TV  (BBC Panorama 20/11/95) and bared her soul about her marrital situation. 
Charles having a long time affair with Camilla, then Diana herself having a 5 year affair in the 80s with James Hewitt. This really must have angered the Monarchy to such a point that Hewitt was, (in my opinion) 'got at' to deny parentage of Harry. A bastard son to the future King's wife would have been too embarrasing, and I also believe that blood and DNA were taken to find out who fathered Harry. 
Harry has said over and over how badly his father and brother have treated him, and when Meghan arrived on the scene, he claims that she was treated shabbily by by his father and brother, so it became easier for the 'Royal' household to elbow Harry out. 
I do believe that Charles DID disown Harry, many moons ago.
It was mentioned earlier in this thread about the shenanigans of this family over the course of history, the above discussion is just another chapter in their history. 
Come Maytime this year, they will all (probably minus Harry) put on their pompous faces for Charlie's coronation.

I apologise if anyone has been angered by my postings, but I believe what I believe, and until someone gives me irrifutable evidence that I'm wrong, I will continue to go on believing what I believe.


----------



## RadishRose (Jan 7, 2023)

Nemo2 said:


> Migraine


----------



## Senenity (Jan 7, 2023)

Washing dirty linen in public is so unnecessary even when one wants to be spiteful on wrong doings of the past. It could backfire on them.  This happens only when there is financial gain, one would stoop so low.


----------



## AnnieA (Jan 7, 2023)

Jamala said:


> Here we go again!!!! I am wondering where you people get your vast amount of misinformation.
> Would you like to share that? No, I guess not. The Sun, The Mirror, the Daily Mail and whatever twits choose to write.
> 
> My grandfather was a Field Marshall ( the highest rank in the British Army).  In his memoirs he disclosed the numbers killed. His writings are in the British Library, and stored in archives for army personnel.  His name is well known in England and no Germans or Indians  have come to get him or his decendants.



From what I've read, those who write about the UK military must submit their manuscripts to a military board for review.  Most UK military commenting on his book think Harry didn't do that since he's discussing 'kills' of a still active threat.


----------



## oldaunt (Jan 7, 2023)

fuzzybuddy said:


> I worked in the VA hospital (Veteran's) for over ten years, and not one of them ever bragged about killing anyone.


I have personally heard both navy and airforce men telling about the ships they sunk and the planes they shot down. It may be a bit less "personal" but its still killing.


----------



## Senenity (Jan 7, 2023)

Jamala said:


> Here we go again!!!! I am wondering where you people get your vast amount of misinformation.
> Would you like to share that? No, I guess not. The Sun, The Mirror, the Daily Mail and whatever twits choose to write.
> 
> My grandfather was a Field Marshall ( the highest rank in the British Army).  In his memoirs he disclosed the numbers killed. His writings are in the British Library, and stored in archives for army personnel.  His name is well known in England and no Germans or Indians  have come to get him or his decendants.


Those were the days when  revenge and spitfire did not go hand in hand.   We are now in another life where mindsets are different.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 7, 2023)

Senenity said:


> We are now in another life where mindsets are different.


Not only that, but groups such as the Taliban*, (*since they were the ones mentioned), and others who might claim they were acting on their behalf, can send a couple/few expendable volunteers, gain a great deal of publicity and attract more nutbar supporters.


----------



## Tish (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> He's such a snowflake.. and having difficulty coming up with anything to get people to feel sorry for him about, that his latest whine ( want wine with that)?.. is that on the Morning of Williams' wedding to Katherine.. he could still smell rum on Wills' Breath!!
> 
> Oh No.. never.. surely that horror didn't happen to you Harry .. How could a brother have the smell of alcohol from the night before on his breath on the day of his wedding. This must have scarred you for life!!


Amen!


----------



## timoc (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> Simply not true.. Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until 4 years after Harry was born


You cannot prove that, Holly, we only have the words of Diana and Hewitt as to when they 'liased', but they did have an affair.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

timoc said:


> You cannot prove that, Holly, we only have the words of Diana and Hewitt as to when they 'liased', but they did have an affair.


Tim everybody in the English speaking world knows they had an affair especially all of us who worked in the media who learned it first ... .. but I don't know how many times you have to be told Diana didn't meet Hewitt until 4 years after Harry was born. She said it....he said it.. everybody who knew about the affair and have written books..aka Lady Colin Campbell  (who was not a fan of Diana)  and many others have said it... ...

It's clearly obvious if Charles thought for a second  that Harry was not his child he would have  had the greatest excuse to have divorced Diana.. and currently to oust Harry out of the RF...  Just because Harry doesn't look much like Charles, doesn't mean he's not his son... Harry is the image of Dianas' Brother ..


----------



## Bellbird (Jan 7, 2023)

Harry has been a spoilt boy right from the start. Diana made sure of it. I can only guess but I would say he never learned what the word NO meant. Understandably he would grow up being jealous of his big brother more so when William was making a name for himself with him growing into maturity.


----------



## Nemo2 (Jan 7, 2023)

Me, I'm pretty much ambivalent, (although leaning slightly to the positive side, since they provide a slight counterbalance to politicians, and also engender a fair amount of tourist income), about the Royals.  That said, it _is_ a job, very often, I would imagine an extremely demanding, tedious one.

Seems to me Harry wanted the perks without the works, and Migraine envisioned being the Queen of Hearts running around shouting _"Off with their heads!"_


----------



## Tish (Jan 7, 2023)

In all honesty, I believe that the Harry we are seeing today is the same Harry that the RF has been putting up with for years.
The only difference is that they longer have to work so hard on his public image.

He is spoilt, self-entitled, and very jealous of his brother.
He wants to be King.


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

Tish said:


> In all honesty, I believe that the Harry we are seeing today is the same Harry that the RF has been putting up with for years.
> The only difference is that they longer have to work so hard on his public image.
> 
> He is spoilt, self-entitled, and very jealous of his brother.
> He wants to be King.


Hear! hear !! exactly that !!


----------



## IKE (Jan 7, 2023)

Just curious......so who actually wears the pants in their marriage ?


----------



## Trish (Jan 7, 2023)

It is obvious that Harry has a lot of anger and resentment and some of it is probably justified but, airing your laundry in public has never been a good idea especially when you enjoy a certain amount of privilege and wealth.

On the James Hewitt thing.  I have always thought that William resembles Diana's family while, although Harry's ginger hair is a Spencer thing, his facial features are more like Charles and Phillip.

I think his interview is on tomorrow night - ITV (UK).


----------



## hollydolly (Jan 7, 2023)

Trish said:


> It is obvious that Harry has a lot of anger and resentment and some of it is probably justified but, airing your laundry in public has never been a good idea especially when you enjoy a certain amount of privilege and wealth.
> 
> On the James Hewitt thing.  I have always thought that William resembles Diana's family while, although Harry's ginger hair is a Spencer thing, his facial features are more like Charles and Phillip.
> 
> I think his interview is on tomorrow night - ITV (UK).


His book has already been released. 4 days early in Spain, so it's already been serialised in the media... If he'd been hoping to get rich from it, he can think again...


----------



## Lewkat (Jan 7, 2023)

As Harry ages, he resembles Charles more and more.  His smile is exactly like Charles', and his eyes are definitely Charles.


----------



## oldaunt (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> His book has already been released. 4 days early in Spain, so it's already been serialised in the media... If he'd been hoping to get rich from it, he can think again...


He has a 3-book contract, so betting he will do ok.


----------



## JustBonee (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> His book has already been released. 4 days early in Spain, so it's already been serialised in the media... If he'd been hoping to get rich from it, he can think again...



Not sure how he expects to make money from the book,   when he has been on every news outlet/media source talking about it.  
Reporters  ask .. he tells all  ....   doesn't make  any sense. 

And he will be interviewed again tomorrow night on 60 Minutes (US news program) with Anderson Cooper.


----------



## Aunt Mavis (Jan 7, 2023)

Harry is breaking a code between bros  that’s for sure. He’s broken multiple “man codes” recently too.


----------



## timoc (Jan 7, 2023)

hollydolly said:


> Tim everybody in the English speaking world knows they had an affair especially all of us who worked in the media who learned it first ... .. but I don't know how many times you have to be told Diana didn't meet Hewitt until 4 years after Harry was born. She said it....he said it.. everybody who knew about the affair and have written books..aka Lady Colin Campbell  (who was not a fan of Diana)  and many others have said it... ...
> 
> It's clearly obvious if Charles thought for a second  that Harry was not his child he would have  had the greatest excuse to have divorced Diana.. and currently to oust Harry out of the RF...  Just because Harry doesn't look much like Charles, doesn't mean he's not his son... Harry is the image of Dianas' Brother ..


You are right about one thing, Holly, the whole world knew that an affair took place between Diana and Hewitt, but they were economical with the truth about the time frame of that affair.

As for Charles having the greatest excuse to divorce Diana , did you miss something, Charlieboy was having it off with Camilla at the same time,  now that would have been a scream in a divorce court.
No, I firmly believe that the Palace didn't want it known that Harry was not the future King's offspring because it would have made the Royals a complete laughing stock, which they now are.

Harry does have a resemblance to Diana's brother, which is to be expected, because he shares the same bloodline as his mother and her brother, however, Harry is the absolute spitting image of, James Hewitt, take another look at the pictures.


----------



## Jamala (Jan 7, 2023)

Still at it children???

"The world may be full of fourth-rate writers but it's also full of fourth-rate readers.”

(Barbara Walters)
RIP

.


----------



## Jamala (Jan 7, 2023)

AnnieA said:


> From what I've read, those who write about the UK military must submit their manuscripts to a military board for review.  Most UK military commenting on his book think Harry didn't do that since he's discussing 'kills' of a still active threat.


Don't believe everything you read!


----------



## Jamala (Jan 7, 2023)

horseless carriage said:


> Ignore him, I can hear the press say. "Are you serious?" As Jamala points out, the misinformation put out by the press, sells newspapers and some. The bottom line as always is how much cash can be squeezed out of the story? So it's squeezed and squeezed and as any journalist will tell you. "Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story." Define good as a money maker.



Horseless Carriage...as you may be well aware, the gutter press in Britain put out only *"misinformation." *
That's how they put food on the table.

All we are reading on this thread is regurgitation from the tabloids.
Now, I wonder how many of these posters are gong to actually buy Harry's book??
.


----------



## timoc (Sunday at 2:38 AM)

Jamala said:


> Horseless Carriage...as you may be well aware, the gutter press in Britain put out only *"misinformation." *
> That's how they put food on the table.
> 
> All we are reading on this thread is regurgitation from the tabloids.
> ...


Take care, you may fall off your high horse.


----------



## timoc (Sunday at 2:39 AM)

Jamala said:


> Still at it children???
> 
> "The world may be full of fourth-rate writers but it's also full of fourth-rate readers.”
> 
> ...


Oh dear, Mummy's going to send us to bed.


----------



## Jamala (Sunday at 4:43 AM)

timoc said:


> Take care, you may fall off your high horse.


Nope, I ride it all the way to Banbury Cross


----------



## Jamala (Sunday at 4:44 AM)

timoc said:


> Oh dear, Mummy's going to send us to bed.


That's right and without any supper


----------



## Pepper (Sunday at 4:45 AM)

Jamala said:


> Horseless Carriage...as you may be well aware, the gutter press in Britain put out only *"misinformation." *
> That's how they put food on the table.
> 
> All we are reading on this thread is regurgitation from the tabloids.
> ...


Not me, don't buy books anymore but won't take it out of the library either.


----------



## oldaunt (Sunday at 4:46 AM)

timoc said:


> Oh dear, Mummy's going to send us to bed.


Yet, sadly enough, she is right.


----------



## timoc (Sunday at 8:16 AM)

Jamala said:


> Nope, I ride it all the way to Banbury Cross


"Hiyo, Silver, away."


----------



## Aunt Mavis (Sunday at 8:20 AM)

I’d have to flip a coin to decide whether the British rags or those two brats are more full of bs.


----------



## Nemo2 (Sunday at 8:21 AM)

Aunt Mavis said:


> I’d have to flip a coin to decide whether the British rags or those two brats are more full of bs.


I'd say the answer is "Yes".


----------



## perChance (Sunday at 8:28 AM)

Jamala said:


> Nope, I ride it all the way to Banbury Cross


You may still be on your horse, but Harry and his wife fell off their high horses a few years ago.


----------



## hollydolly (Sunday at 8:44 AM)

Aunt Mavis said:


> I’d have to flip a coin to decide whether the British rags or those two brats are more full of bs.


errrm...excuse me.. this from the land of the Enquirer ?


----------



## Aunt Mavis (Sunday at 9:17 AM)

hollydolly said:


> errrm...excuse me.. this from the land of the Enquirer ?


I wasn’t insulting anyone, The Enquirer is the worst! I’m not sure how much they report on those two though. I don’t shop nor stand in the line much anymore. Lol.


----------



## AnnieA (Sunday at 11:32 AM)

Jamala said:


> Don't believe everything you read!



I don't, especially message board posts.   UK military personnel who are willing to put their names to their writings, I do believe.  Many have stated that Harry's 'kill' claims are inappropriate and that they do not believe he followed procedure for submitting his manuscript for military reivew when writing about his service.  If he did, it'll be easy for him to prove.


----------



## oldaunt (Sunday at 11:48 AM)

hollydolly said:


> errrm...excuse me.. this from the land of the Enquirer ?


Most of us just laugh at the Enquirer. Brits seem to think theirs are factual.


----------



## RobinWren (Sunday at 3:05 PM)

Just read a very good article by Pattie Davis, Ronald Reagan's daughter warning Harry. Our perceptions change and maybe when he is a little older he might regret the error of his ways. It is true what they say "silence is golden"


----------



## Tish (Sunday at 3:22 PM)

RobinWren said:


> It is true what they say "silence is golden"


Absolutely!


----------



## hollydolly (Sunday at 4:06 PM)

RobinWren said:


> Just read a very good article by Pattie Davis, Ronald Reagan's daughter warning Harry. Our perceptions change and maybe when he is a little older he might regret the error of his ways. It is true what they say "silence is golden"


the thing is people keep talking like he's a little boy... he's 38 years old...


----------



## Jamala (Sunday at 4:11 PM)

timoc said:


> "Hiyo, Silver, away."


This time me bring Tonto


----------



## Jamala (Sunday at 4:13 PM)

oldaunt said:


> Most of us just laugh at the Enquirer. Brits seem to think theirs are factual.



The Enquirer is known for publishing outrageous stories and fake news.


----------



## Jamala (Sunday at 4:14 PM)

AnnieA said:


> I don't, especially message board posts.   UK military personnel who are willing to put their names to their writings, I do believe.  Many have stated that Harry's 'kill' claims are inappropriate and that they do not believe he followed procedure for submitting his manuscript for military reivew when writing about his service.  If he did, it'll be easy for him to prove.


There was no need to submit anything. He did not write a formal army document.


----------



## Jamala (Sunday at 4:16 PM)

perChance said:


> You may still be on your horse, but Harry and his wife fell off their high horses a few years ago.


I disagree and time will tell when he makes up with  his family. 
Charles loves Harry and Meghan.


----------



## timoc (Sunday at 5:12 PM)

Jamala said:


> This time me bring Tonto


Hopalong Cassidy said he'd love to come, but his bunion is giving him murder.


----------



## Lilac (Sunday at 7:10 PM)

Jamala said:


> There was no need to submit anything. He did not write a formal army document.


In the U.S., any former soldier who writes anything, fiction or factual, that has information/story line that is military related must be reviewed by the DoD (or the appropriate dept.) so that certain information is not released that shouldn't be.  Doesn't the UK have something like that?


----------



## Bellbird (Monday at 1:20 PM)

timoc said:


> You are right about one thing, Holly, the whole world knew that an affair took place between Diana and Hewitt, but they were economical with the truth about the time frame of that affair.
> 
> As for Charles having the greatest excuse to divorce Diana , did you miss something, Charlieboy was having it off with Camilla at the same time,  now that would have been a scream in a divorce court.
> No, I firmly believe that the Palace didn't want it known that Harry was not the future King's offspring because it would have made the Royals a complete laughing stock, which they now are.
> ...


I have never doubted whose son he really was. A DNA should have been done years ago, that would have put the cat amongst the pidgeons. I watched him  on tv for a few minutes last night, then turned it off, the arrogance of him makes me sick, he should be reminded of just who he really is.


----------



## Pepper (Monday at 1:27 PM)

Harry was born in *1984*.
"Anna Pasternak published the book _Princess in Love_ in 1994. Hewitt was a major source, and it alleged that he had a five-year affair with Diana, Princess of Wales[11] from *1986 to 1991*."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hewitt

You folks should be in the audience of the _Maury Povich _show, if that is still on!


----------



## Nathan (Monday at 1:36 PM)

OneEyedDiva said:


> I never liked Charles and it would take a miracle to change my opinion. I'm wondering if he really intimated to Harry that he might not be his real father (?).


I disliked Charles and his consort from back when Princess Diana was killed. Over the years that dislike has not changed.


----------



## Nemo2 (Monday at 1:42 PM)

Nathan said:


> I disliked Charles and his consort from back when Princess Diana was killed. Over the years that dislike has not changed.


1997 My late wife & I drove across Canada.....we stopped at her mom's in Ontario...I walked in the kitchen and heard Diana had died.....said "Oh, so we won't have to constantly hear about her any more".

Who knew?


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Monday at 2:01 PM)

I'm not up on the "royals". I can never remember which brother is the heir and which is the spare, or who married who. But whether its ego or the big check, we're in for dueling 'royal' exposes. Ya wanna bet " Camilla, The Untold Story" is in the works.


----------



## AnnieA (Monday at 4:10 PM)

Pepper said:


> Harry was born in *1984*.
> "Anna Pasternak published the book _Princess in Love_ in 1994. Hewitt was a major source, and it alleged that he had a five-year affair with Diana, Princess of Wales[11] from *1986 to 1991*."
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hewitt
> 
> You folks should be in the audience of the _Maury Povich _show, if that is still on!



Besides that, he looks more and more like Charles as he ages.  He has Charles' close set eyes and lump on the upper nose.


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 4:14 PM)

Lilac said:


> In the U.S., any former soldier who writes anything, fiction or factual, that has information/story line that is military related must be reviewed by the DoD (or the appropriate dept.) so that certain information is not released that shouldn't be.  Doesn't the UK have something like that?


 

Since he did not write the entire book about life in the army or detailed war events. It was a passing comment and that step was not necessary. Seems, although it was very unwise, it was not a breach of any army codes.

Ex-army officer Col Richard Kemp, who was sent to Kabul in 2003 to take command of forces in Afghanistan, told the BBC it was unusual but he did not have a problem with Prince Harry revealing his kill number.

He said soldiers did talk about people they had killed or wounded privately, sometimes as "a way of almost decompressing after a period of combat".

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said he would not comment on the appropriateness of the prince's 25 kills claim, but added he was "enormously grateful to our armed forces".


----------



## Mr. Ed (Monday at 4:40 PM)

I was stupid before I knew what stupid was....lived happily ever-after until the moment of truth arrived when society embraced stupid as the status quo.


----------



## Remy (Monday at 4:50 PM)

I was considering getting the book but I have plenty of reading material right now. I'm going to wait for a thrift store copy. I'm sure one will show up.


----------



## hollydolly (Monday at 5:10 PM)

Remy said:


> I was considering getting the book but I have plenty of reading material right now. I'm going to wait for a thrift store copy. I'm sure one will show up.


LOL..very fast...


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 6:00 PM)

Nice to see King Charles is reaching out to members of the community.
Wish he would also reach out to his unhappy son.


----------



## hearlady (Monday at 6:03 PM)

I just watched his 60 minutes interview. 
Since his pain was played out in public is it naive to think that his healing may need to take place in public?
Sometimes we need to be selfish to save our own lives.


----------



## hollydolly (Monday at 6:06 PM)

hearlady said:


> I just watched his 60 minutes interview.
> Since his pain was played out in public is it naive to think that his healing may need to take place in public?
> Sometimes we need to be selfish to save our own lives.


the pain of what ?.. the lies he told about his brother , the lies he told  about his sister-in-law, ?.. the boasting and bragging about killing 25 Taliban.. ? what pain..? The pain he's created for other people though his lies... let him Heal _that !!_


----------



## Remy (Monday at 6:11 PM)

hollydolly said:


> LOL..very fast...


  I think you are right! I had considered buying the book on release but I've changed my mind.


----------



## hearlady (Monday at 6:13 PM)

hollydolly said:


> the pain of what ?.. the lies he told about his brother , the lies he told  about his sister-in-law, ?.. the boasting and bragging about killing 25 Taliban.. ? what pain..? The pain he's created for other people though his lies... let him Heal _that !!_


I mean the pain of his mother dying.


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 6:14 PM)

hearlady said:


> I just watched his 60 minutes interview.
> Since his pain was played out in public is it naive to think that his healing may need to take place in public?
> Sometimes we need to be selfish to save our own lives.



Absolutely correct!
We live in a culture that is blind to betrayal and intolerant of emotional pain.
Yes, you have hit the nail right on the head hearlady.

*Harry spoke the truth*. He had nothing to hide. It’s time the intrigue and messy secrets at the palace were made public.
.


----------



## RobinWren (Monday at 6:15 PM)

hollydolly said:


> the thing is people keep talking like he's a little boy... he's 38 years old...


You are absolutely right but I think he is stuck.


----------



## Nemo2 (Monday at 6:16 PM)

hearlady said:


> I mean the pain of his mother dying.


Luckily his brother never had to experience that.....oh, wait...


----------



## hearlady (Monday at 6:16 PM)

It was just a thought...just a thought.


----------



## Nemo2 (Monday at 6:17 PM)

Jamala said:


> *Harry spoke the truth*. He had nothing to hide. It’s time the intrigue and messy secrets at the palace were made public.
> .


Plus, who's going to pay big bucks to hear that all was wonderful?


----------



## Lilac (Monday at 6:20 PM)

Jamala said:


> Since he did not write the entire book about life in the army or detailed war events. It was a passing comment and that step was not necessary. Seems, although it was very unwise, it was not a breach of any army codes.
> 
> Ex-army officer Col Richard Kemp, who was sent to Kabul in 2003 to take command of forces in Afghanistan, told the BBC it was unusual but he did not have a problem with Prince Harry revealing his kill number.
> 
> ...



A passing comment that reveals a small amount of military information may still have serious repercussions.  Even if the entire book or an interview wasn't about his life in the military, he still released military information.  Maybe it's time for rules about releasing military info be reviewed to avoid problems in the future, no matter how small it may seem.

Yes, soldiers do talk about combat.  Most are smart enough to keep in amongst their brothers & not hang it out for public view.


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 6:20 PM)

RobinWren said:


> You are absolutely right but I think he is stuck.



Amyone who has gone through trauma, is stuck in that event. That is what PTSD is all about.


----------



## RobinWren (Monday at 6:21 PM)

Jamala said:


> I disagree and time will tell when he makes up with  his family.
> Charles loves Harry and Meghan.


I'm sure he does but how does a parent bounce back from all these allegations without ostrasizing the rest of his family. I feel that Harry might be forgiven but I am not so sure about Meghan. I hope that they can stay in California and just be a happy family. Reconcilation is not coming anytime soon. IMO


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 6:22 PM)

Lilac said:


> A passing comment that reveals a small amount of military information may still have serious repercussions.  Even if the entire book or an interview wasn't about his life in the military, he still released military information.  Maybe it's time for rules about releasing military info be reviewed to avoid problems in the future, no matter how small it may seem.
> 
> Yes, soldiers do talk about combat.  Most are smart enough to keep in amongst their brothers & not hang it out for public view.


Yes, that's why I said it was "unwise."


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 6:23 PM)

RobinWren said:


> I'm sure he does but how does a parent bounce back from all these allegations without ostrasizing the rest of his family. I feel that Harry might be forgiven but I am not so sure about Meghan. I hope that they can stay in California and just be a happy family. Reconcilation is not coming anytime soon. IMO



Without Meghan, Harry would not have survived. She was his saviour.
I know this for a fact, but I cannot dislose any information.
Thank goodness, she came into his life when she did.


----------



## hollydolly (Monday at 6:25 PM)

Nemo2 said:


> Plus, who's going to pay big bucks to hear that all was wonderful?


he's already been paid $20 million ..


----------



## Nemo2 (Monday at 6:26 PM)

hollydolly said:


> he's already been paid $20 million ..


My point exactly.


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 6:54 PM)

RobinWren said:


> I'm sure he does but how does a parent bounce back from all these allegations without ostrasizing the rest of his family. I feel that Harry might be forgiven but I am not so sure about Meghan. I hope that they can stay in California and just be a happy family. Reconcilation is not coming anytime soon. IMO


The royal family have a reputation for "following the leader" ....whatever Charles decides to do, they will all accept. No doubt about that!


----------



## hollydolly (Monday at 7:15 PM)

hearlady said:


> I mean the pain of his mother dying.


many of us had mothers die when we were teens .. me .. and all my siblings. The youngest only 10 years old.  We weren't lucky to have the cosseted life he and his brother had, the care that was especially taken for those boys right after their mothers' death ...we didn't have that and many kids who lose a parent don't .. but we didn't back-stab our family  and friends with Lies.. and exaggerations for  the filthy lucre   because of it..

This is a grown man who is crying over a broken necklace caused by his Brother giving him a shove in the kitchen  (both as men at the time)  , and having to call his Therapist  to get over it.. in one breath.. , and  then insisting he killed 25 Taliban as easily as picking off Chess men ,  in the next Breath , ... ...  which is it?.. man or snowflake.. ?

I know which one most people have their money on !!


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 7:29 PM)

I am so pleased about this…

Last month Prince Harry and Meghan received the Ripple of Hope Award from the Robert F Kennedy Human Rights (RFKHR) organisation at a gala in New York.

At the gala the couple spoke about their "belief of courage over fear and love over hate".

The RFKHR is a human rights advocacy organisation that focuses on issues such as mass incarceration, racial justice and gender-based violence. It honours those who have demonstrated "an unwavering commitment to social change and worked to protect and advance equity, justice and human rights".

Princess Diana would have been so proud of them…in her own words…

_"Nothing brings me more happiness than trying to help the most vulnerable people in society."._

She also said:

_" If you find someone you love in life, you must hang onto it, and look after it, and if you were lucky enough to find someone who loved you, then you must protect it."

And this: "T*he day I walked down the aisle at St. Paul’s Cathedral, I felt that my personality was taken away from me, and I was taken over by the royal machine."*_

Meghan has volunteered to help the less fortunate since she was a child, work that continued when she was filming _Suits _in Toronto and that commitment has clearly not wavered despite her Royal adventure.

Certainly worth a mention!


----------



## hearlady (Monday at 7:42 PM)

hollydolly said:


> many of us had mother die when we were teens .. me .. and all my siblings. The youngest only 10 years old.  We weren't lucky to have the cosseted life he and his brother had, the care that was especially taken for those boys right after their mothers' death ...we didn't have that and many kids who lose a parent don't .. but we didn't back-stab our family  and friends with Lies.. and exaggerations for  the filthy lucre   because of it..
> 
> This is a grown man who is crying over a broken necklace caused by his Brother giving him a shove in the kitchen  (both as men at the time)  , and having to call his Therapist  to get over it.. in one breath.. , and  then insisting he killed 25 Taliban as easily as picking off Chess men ,  in the next Breath , ... ...  which is it?.. man or snowflake.. ?
> 
> I know which one most people have their money on !!


It's hard for anyone to lose a parent I'm sure.
I watched the documentary and the 60 minutes interview. Unless I missed part I've not watched anything about his time in service.
I've not kept up with royals through the years except some during Diana's days. 
I comment objectively on what I see as an outsider.
I don't claim to know much else about it.


----------



## Jamala (Monday at 8:01 PM)

Many people lose mothers, fathers etc. some in tragic circumstances, but they do not have the entire world watching them trail behind a coffin at 11 going on 12 years of age. 

They do not have to read about or hear about private things concernig their mother in the tabloid press. To compare one’s circumstances with another’s is quite foolhardy and not worthy of mention.


----------



## Lilac (Monday at 9:11 PM)

Jamala said:


> Many people lose mothers, fathers etc. some in tragic circumstances, but they do not have the entire world watching them trail behind a coffin at 11 going on 12 years of age.
> 
> They do not have to read about or hear about private things concernig their mother in the tabloid press. To compare one’s circumstances with another’s is quite foolhardy and not worthy of mention.


WOW! I can't believe what I just read. Maybe I read it wrong.

No matter how a parent is lost - whether that parent was a public or private figure - whether a child hears good or bad things about that parent from either tabloids or individuals - whether the funeral was broadcasted or private ... it is still traumatic for children & young adults to lose a parent before they should have.

Loss is loss folks.  Not every child or young adult can have the access to the support that Harry did.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Monday at 10:26 PM)

timoc said:


> You are right about one thing, Holly, the whole world knew that an affair took place between Diana and Hewitt, but they were economical with the truth about the time frame of that affair.
> 
> As for Charles having the greatest excuse to divorce Diana , did you miss something, Charlieboy was having it off with Camilla at the same time,  now that would have been a scream in a divorce court.
> No, I firmly believe that the Palace didn't want it known that Harry was not the future King's offspring because it would have made the Royals a complete laughing stock, which they now are.
> ...


OMG! Harry is the spitting image of Hewitt.


----------



## hearlady (Tuesday at 4:28 AM)

@hollydolly I can see that unfortunately you have a view of this that we're grateful not to have. I certainly wouldn't want to seem insensitive to that.
I have one more objective observation.
I wonder if William is reacting to seeing Harry working through this and he has not. Sometimes common demons stick together until one person's are released. The ensuing battle comes with collateral damage that can unfairly effect others around them.
In the end they'll be some forgiveness and some broken ties.


----------



## perChance (Tuesday at 4:29 AM)

Jamala said:


> They do not have to read about or hear about private things concernig their mother in the tabloid press.


Then perhaps Harry and his wife should be more concerned about how their children will be impacted in the future.


----------



## hearlady (Tuesday at 4:30 AM)

That's a great point!


----------



## oldaunt (Tuesday at 4:53 AM)

hollydolly said:


> many of us had mother die when we were teens .. me .. and all my siblings. The youngest only 10 years old.  We weren't lucky to have the cosseted life he and his brother had, the care that was especially taken for those boys right after their mothers' death ...we didn't have that and many kids who lose a parent don't .. but we didn't back-stab our family  and friends with Lies.. and exaggerations for  the filthy lucre   because of it..
> 
> This is a grown man who is crying over a broken necklace caused by his Brother giving him a shove in the kitchen  (both as men at the time)  , and having to call his Therapist  to get over it.. in one breath.. , and  then insisting he killed 25 Taliban as easily as picking off Chess men ,  in the next Breath , ... ...  which is it?.. man or snowflake.. ?
> 
> I know which one most people have their money on !!


I am grateful to not be this bitter and full of hate.


----------



## Raven (Tuesday at 4:59 AM)

I have no sympathy for Harry.
He is thrashing his family for money and apparently expects them
to apologize to him.
If his wife is such a wonderful person why didn't she persuade him not
to write the pitiful book for the sake of their own children if for no other reason.

I will not be reading the book.
Most of his whining has already been reported on TV and it is sickening.


----------



## Pepper (Tuesday at 5:00 AM)

Harry appears Oprah influenced.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 5:04 AM)

Markle dumped her own family, and she's managed to persuade the Dim Harry to destroy the relationship he had with his...


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 5:16 AM)

Lilac said:


> WOW! I can't believe what I just read. Maybe I read it wrong.
> 
> No matter how a parent is lost - whether that parent was a public or private figure - whether a child hears good or bad things about that parent from either tabloids or individuals - whether the funeral was broadcasted or private ... it is still traumatic for children & young adults to lose a parent before they should have.
> 
> Loss is loss folks.  Not every child or young adult can have the access to the support that Harry did.



You are missing a* vital *point.
*The thread is not about you, me or the other person.*
It is about Harry!
Why bring personal bereavements into it?
Why make comparisons?
It's all about Harry!
.


----------



## perChance (Tuesday at 5:23 AM)

Jamala said:


> You are missing a* vital *point.
> *The thread is not about you, me or the other person.*
> It is about Harry!
> Why bring personal bereavements into it?
> ...


Harry thinks everything is about Harry.


----------



## Pepper (Tuesday at 5:27 AM)

perChance said:


> Harry thinks everything is about Harry.


Most people feel everything is about them, royal or not.


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 5:29 AM)

Jamala said:


> You are missing a* vital *point.
> *The thread is not about you, me or the other person.*
> It is about Harry!
> Why bring personal bereavements into it?
> ...


100%  Correct.   Comments should totally focus on how stupid, spoiled and neurotic Harry is, and real people with real problems should butt out!  Well said!


----------



## timoc (Tuesday at 5:36 AM)

Jamala said:


> You are missing a* vital *point.
> *The thread is not about you, me or the other person.*
> It is about Harry!
> Why bring personal bereavements into it?
> ...


No, it's not, the thread (which I started) is about the affect that Harry's actions have/will have on other people as well as himself and his family, do please try to keep up. 

Oh dear, the school headmistress is at it again, but we are not children, so her condescending manner is now becoming a bore. Please give it a rest.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 5:41 AM)

timoc said:


> No, it's not, the thread (which I started) is about the affect that Harry's actions have/will have on other people as well as himself and his family, do please try to keep up.
> 
> Oh dear, the school headmistress is at it again, but we are not children, so her condescending manner is now becoming a bore. Please give it a rest.





timoc said:


> No, it's not, the thread (which I started) is about the affect that Harry's actions have/will have on other people as well as himself and his family, do please try to keep up.
> 
> Oh dear, the school headmistress is at it again, but we are not children, so her condescending manner is now becoming a bore. Please give it a rest.


Do you wish everyone to agree with you?


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 5:42 AM)

perChance said:


> Harry thinks everything is about Harry.


I think everything about my life is also all about me


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 5:51 AM)

All the recent information has either been from the prematurely released book or from the interviews Harry has been giving so, of course opinions will be formed on that.  I watched part of the interview which was on TV a couple of days ago and while I don't doubt that Harry struggled with many things in his life, this is not the way to resolve family issues no matter who your family might be.


----------



## Pepper (Tuesday at 5:53 AM)

I view this story as relief from all the other horrors I listen to on a daily basis.


----------



## timoc (Tuesday at 5:55 AM)

Jamala said:


> Do you wish everyone to agree with you?


Not at all, as long as your input is not disrespectful of other members postings.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 5:59 AM)

timoc said:


> Not at all, as long as your input is not disrespectful of other members postings.


Nothing I have written is "disrespectful".... if you think so then report to Matrix and he will remove it.
Have a nice evening!


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:05 AM)

Pepper said:


> I view this story as relief from all the other horrors I listen to on a daily basis.


yes I suppose in a way it can be seen as very humorous..  . .. but it's such a shame that we're watching a child whom we saw Born.. grow into a self centered weak, snowflake of a man who is trying to destroy an institution which fed , raised loved and nurtured him.. and the Same family and Institution all of us have known our whole lives ...


----------



## perChance (Tuesday at 6:15 AM)

Jamala said:


> I think everything about my life is also all about me


Yes, I already came to that conclusion.


----------



## Pepper (Tuesday at 6:23 AM)

hollydolly said:


> *yes I suppose in a way it can be seen as very humorous.. * . .. but it's such a shame that we're watching a child whom we saw Born.. grow into a self centered weak, snowflake of a man who is trying to destroy an institution which fed , raised loved and nurtured him.. and the* Same family and Institution all of us have known our whole lives ..*.


Well, it's not comic relief for me but I'll take it just the same.  I understand and respect how difficult this is for the British public.


----------



## hearlady (Tuesday at 6:30 AM)

Pepper said:


> Well, it's not comic relief for me but I'll take it just the same.  I understand and respect how difficult this is for the British public.


I was going to say that maybe this is all about our need to be in other people's business however I understand the British public funds them (?) so they do have a say.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:31 AM)

hearlady said:


> I was going to say that maybe this is all about our need to be in other people's business however I understand the British public funds them (?) so they do have a say.


yes every single Tax payer in the UK has to pay for the RF...   we cannot opt out!


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:31 AM)

Pepper said:


> Most people feel everything is about them, royal or not.


I don't agree ..perhaps when they're children.. but not when they're grown with a family


----------



## AnnieA (Tuesday at 6:37 AM)

Jamala said:


> *Harry spoke the truth*.



Whatever that happened to be for him at the moment.  His truth sure changes a lot.


----------



## AnnieA (Tuesday at 6:40 AM)

hollydolly said:


> he's already been paid $20 million ..



He certainly wasn't the loser in this deal but not so sure about his publisher since the book pre publication is marked down significantly from list price on Amazon and is half price in some brick and mortar outlets.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:41 AM)

AnnieA said:


> He certainly wasn't the loser in this deal but not so sure about his publisher since the book pre publication is marked down significantly from list price on Amazon and is half price in some brick and mortar outlets.


yep , one major store here has refused to sell it altogether because it's too expensive they said @£28, and they have no Pre-orders for it...


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 6:47 AM)

hollydolly said:


> yep , one major store here has refused to sell it altogether because it's too expensive they said @£28, and they have no Pre-orders for it...


£28!  Blimey


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:47 AM)

Trish said:


> £28!  Blimey


lol..they gotta claw that $20 million back somehow..


----------



## Georgiagranny (Tuesday at 7:00 AM)

I just read that he has a four-book deal with his publisher. Um. Four? No. He's already said way too much of _his_ truth. Am I alone in feeling like he and his wife are yesterday's news?


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 7:19 AM)

Each British taxpayer pays 1penny per day towards expenses for the royal family.

The royals have an unusual agreement with the British government—an agreement that likely makes British citizens' tax bills cheaper, *not more expensive*.
This is due to a deal originally cut in 1760 by King George III, allowing the British government to reap the revenues from the royal family's vast private property, called the Crown Estate, while giving them their taxpayer-funded stipend in return.

In total, these properties brought £486.9 million, or $671.9 million, in revenue in 2021. In contrast, the royal family's taxpayer-funded expenses, in the form of a "sovereign grant," totaled only $118.5 million that year, thus netting the British government a profit of almost $550 million in 2021 dollars. Were the monarchy to be retired, this deal would likely end, allowing the royal family to retain the whole profits from the Crown Estate.

So as you can see we pay practically *nothing* towards the expenses of the royal family.


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 7:27 AM)

Georgiagranny said:


> I just read that he has a four-book deal with his publisher. Um. Four? No. He's already said way too much of _his_ truth. Am I alone in feeling like he and his wife are yesterday's news?


Harry mentioned that Meghan kept a diary throughout her time with the RF.  I would be surprised if Meghan isn't writing her own book.


----------



## Georgiagranny (Tuesday at 7:40 AM)

Trish said:


> Harry mentioned that Meghan kept a diary throughout her time with the RF.  I would be surprised if Meghan isn't writing her own book.


Maybe they want to one-up Wallis and Edward (and make some money).


----------



## Pepper (Tuesday at 7:42 AM)

Jamala said:


> Each British taxpayer pays 1penny per day towards expenses for the royal family.
> 
> The royals have an unusual agreement with the British government—an agreement that likely makes British citizens' tax bills cheaper, *not more expensive*.
> This is due to a deal originally cut in 1760 by King George III, allowing the British government to reap the revenues from the royal family's vast private property, called the Crown Estate, while giving them their taxpayer-funded stipend in return.
> ...


Very interesting.  Thank you.


----------



## Sunny (Tuesday at 8:10 AM)

Not really knowing anything about the inner workings of the British royal family, I have no opinion about who is right and who is wrong. The only people whose opinion carries any weight are the members of that family.

But here's a generalization I've arrived at:  Having too much money, too much luxury, too many priceless worldly goods, etc. is not good for people. It doesn't make them happier than the average person; it seems to be the opposite. This applies to all of the very, very rich, not just the royal family.

And before you say it's better than being poor, of course it is. Being poor is its own kind of hell.

I think the happiest kind of life is somewhere in the middle. Enough to feel comfortable and secure, to have choices as to where to live, what to eat, wear, how to amuse ourselves, etc.  But not unlimited, excessive choices. I have heard of very few billionaire families who are very happy, or devoted to each other. Too much wealth seems to be a kind of poison.

But then again, why would the media concentrate on rich people who are happy and love one another?  All we really know is what is presented to us. Those who worship the royal family have been taught to do so, probably all their lives.  Those who hate them have been influenced by the tabloids and other media who hate them. Our opinions are formed by what is shown to us.


----------



## MountainRa (Tuesday at 8:16 AM)

Sunny said:


> Not really knowing anything about the inner workings of the British royal family, I have no opinion about who is right and who is wrong. The only people whose opinion carries any weight are the members of that family.
> 
> But here's a generalization I've arrived at:  Having too much money, too much luxury, too many priceless worldly goods, etc. is not good for people. It doesn't make them happier than the average person; it seems to be the opposite. This applies to all of the very, very rich, not just the royal family.
> 
> ...


  Well said, And true.


----------



## JustBonee (Tuesday at 8:26 AM)

Royal families,  and their problems,   have always  been a form of entertainment in our  country over the years.  
I guess that never changes.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 9:21 AM)

Trish said:


> Harry mentioned that Meghan kept a diary throughout her time with the RF.  I would be surprised if Meghan isn't writing her own book.


oh you can bet your bottom dollar she will be... and I doubt for a second she was keeping a Diary then.. his mention of it will be to cover for the fact that she's thinking of writing one in the future ...I'd bet money no other publisher will touch it if she does..


----------



## Georgiagranny (Tuesday at 9:42 AM)

...and we thought it was tasteless to air the family's dirty laundry on Facebook... Royalty or not, it's still tasteless


----------



## oldaunt (Tuesday at 10:02 AM)

Georgiagranny said:


> ...and we thought it was tasteless to air the family's dirty laundry on Facebook... Royalty or not, it's still tasteless


Yes, but no more tasteless than constantly commenting on it.


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 10:04 AM)

oldaunt said:


> Yes, but no more tasteless than constantly commenting on it.


They're like a plague, and everyone keeps talking about Covid....same difference.


----------



## oldaunt (Tuesday at 10:23 AM)

Nemo2 said:


> They're like a plague, and everyone keeps talking about Covid....same difference.


Just like any other old gossip, right?


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 10:46 AM)

Your first thought as to who has made this comment and who is it referring to?

_"It was merely one man's self-justifying, self-centring version of events"_





**Harry referring to Paul Burrell.  He also described the book as _"mummy's former butler had penned a tell-all which actually told nothing"_


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 11:09 AM)

oldaunt said:


> Just like any other old gossip, right?


And neither, unfortunately, avoidable.


----------



## Chet (Tuesday at 11:18 AM)

I watched Harry (formerly known as Prince) on 60 Minutes and I'm glad I did. Hearing his story from his mouth was ten times better than reading about it. After 80 years on this planet you get to read people pretty well, and I found him to be genuine, and left with the feeling of  him having legitimate gripes with how he and Meghan were treated, and why he left that atmosphere that they were subjected to in the U.K.


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 11:38 AM)

Chet said:


> After 80 years on this planet you get to read people pretty well, and I found him to be genuine, and left with the feeling of  him having legitimate gripes with how he and Meghan were treated, and why he left that atmosphere that they were subjected to in the U.K.


I'm also 80, but perhaps I move my lips, and run my fingers under the words, when I read.  I don't watch Harry & Migraine, but unfortunately it's almost impossible not to be impacted by their histrionic soap opera.  

What I see, (perhaps I should get a Covid mask and wear it over my eyes), is a narcissistic predator, with a handful of magic beans, who latched on to a titled, wealthy, spoiled doofus with a Golden Goose who she's held in thrall and manipulated since their first meeting.

But hey.....


----------



## Remy (Tuesday at 11:41 AM)

The book is #1 on Amazon right now.


----------



## Sunny (Tuesday at 11:41 AM)

One columnist in today's paper did make an interesting observation:  Harry keeps complaining that the media have intruded into his family's privacy, etc. and hounded his mother literally to death. But then, what are he and Meghan doing, publicly airing all their dirty linen over and over again?


----------



## oldaunt (Tuesday at 11:55 AM)

Nemo2 said:


> I'm also 80, but perhaps I move my lips, and run my fingers under the words, when I read.  I don't watch Harry & Migraine, but unfortunately it's almost impossible not to be impacted by their histrionic soap opera.
> 
> What I see, (perhaps I should get a Covid mask and wear it over my eyes), is a narcissistic predator, with a handful of magic beans, who latched on to a titled, wealthy, spoiled doofus with a Golden Goose who she's held in thrall and manipulated since their first meeting.
> 
> But hey.....


And what I see is a bunch of hate-filled folk carrying on as if any of that has any impact on their lives whatsoever. Do you REALLY not have a life of your own?


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 12:00 PM)

oldaunt said:


> And what I see is a bunch of hate-filled folk carrying on as if any of that has any impact on their lives whatsoever. Do you REALLY not have a life of your own?


Honestly, you are coming across as a little hate-filled yourself.  What is so dreadful about people discussing someone who has spent goodness knows how many months publicly slagging off his family and has now published a book on that very same subject whilst also dropping in details about his frostbitten penis, his intimate encounters and drug taking?  Goodness folks, respect the man's privacy


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 12:08 PM)

oldaunt said:


> And what I see is a bunch of hate-filled folk carrying on as if any of that has any impact on their lives whatsoever. Do you REALLY not have a life of your own?


As I've noted before  -  they're inescapable  -  and, as Canadian taxpayers, we had to fund the security for their "Let's move to Canada" interlude:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/prince-harry-rcmp-protection-1.6276872

Nothing would please many of us more than if we never heard another word from or about them........I don't _hate_ them, I'm just sick and ********* tired of them.


----------



## hearlady (Tuesday at 12:12 PM)

Nemo2 said:


> Nothing would please many of us more than if we never heard another word from or about them........I don't _hate_ them, I'm just sick and ********* tired of them.


They'll only go away when you stop talking about them.


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 12:16 PM)

hearlady said:


> They'll only go away when you stop talking about them.


They won't go away...ever.......they're like telemarketers, every time the 'phone rings it's "Aw Sheesh".


----------



## JustBonee (Tuesday at 12:48 PM)

Nemo2 said:


> They won't go away...ever.......they're like telemarketers, every time the 'phone rings it's "Aw Sheesh".



They'll go away when William's kids  become teenagers/20's ... the narrative will change and the stories will shift to their lives then.


----------



## Pepper (Tuesday at 12:53 PM)

JustBonee said:


> They'll go away when William's kids  become teenagers/20's ... the narrative will change and the stories will shift to their lives then.


Yeah, but Nemo's _80._


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 12:53 PM)

JustBonee said:


> They'll go away when William's kids  become teenagers/20's ... the narrative will change and the stories will shift to their lives then.


I'm 80 now...how long can I wait?


----------



## Lewkat (Tuesday at 1:52 PM)

oldaunt said:


> And what I see is a bunch of hate-filled folk carrying on as if any of that has any impact on their lives whatsoever. Do you REALLY not have a life of your own?


Maybe the Royal Family will sue Harry for libel after this.  Seems like something most people would do.

After all, one just doesn't go around assassinating character after character, and expect to get away with it.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 1:54 PM)

Lewkat said:


> Maybe the Royal Family will sue Harry for libel after this.  Seems like something most people would do.
> 
> After all, one just doesn't go around assassinating character after character, and expect to get away with it.


I doubt they will sue, it's just not the Monarch way... however there's a great possibility he will be cast out like his great Uncle David and his wife Mrs Simpson.. nearly 90 years ago... and tbh..Markle is making Mrs Simpson look like a veritable angel..


----------



## AnnieA (Tuesday at 2:07 PM)

hollydolly said:


> oh you can bet your bottom dollar she will be... and I doubt for a second she was keeping a Diary then.. his mention of it will be to cover for the fact that she's thinking of writing one in the future ...I'd bet money no other publisher will touch it if she does..



Below is a snippet from the entertainingly snarky The Cut article about Meghan ...puff piece gone horribly wrong.  Problem with the way Meghan recounts the  2022 Jubilee return to Frogmore Cottage is that the Sussexes had been renting the cottage to Eugenie and her husband since November 2020.   I'm sure they loved living with Meghan's diary and socks in their space.

Someone needs to write a _Sussexes Index of Lies and Contradictions_. That would be a best seller for sure with more money to be made on updated editions through the years.

From The Cut :

In June, the couple attended some of the events for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee in London. It was their first time appearing at a public event alongside the rest of the royal family since they’d left. While there, Meghan had quietly seen to more personal matters, slipping back into their former residence, Frogmore Cottage, to pack up their belongings.It was bittersweet, you know? Knowing none of it had to be this way.​​The cottage is still theirs and has remained mostly untouched since they left. “You go back and you open drawers and you’re like, _Oh my gosh. This is what I was writing in my journal there? And here’s all my socks from this time?_” The blue-and-white linen pants she’s wearing today were something from the cottage, actually: “They’re like $30 pants from Boden, and I brought them back.” It was “surreal” to walk right back into the life she’d been building in that cottage. There were all the things she’d had shipped from her old apartment in Toronto and barely gotten to unpack...​


----------



## Mike (Tuesday at 2:17 PM)

I think that he shouldn't have boasted about killing
25 people in Afghanistan, the Taliban, who rule the
country, say that he should be put on trial, but that
could be just to let the "Crazies", who escaped to the
UK & the USA, what they can do.

Shame really, but it shows how much trouble you can
get into, if you engage your mouth before your brain.

Mike.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 2:25 PM)

AnnieA said:


> Below is a snippet from the entertainingly snarky The Cut article about Meghan ...puff piece gone horribly wrong.  Problem with the way Meghan recounts the  2022 Jubilee return to Frogmore Cottage is that the Sussexes had been renting the cottage to Eugenie and her husband since November 2020.   I'm sure they loved living with Meghan's diary and socks in their space.
> 
> Someone needs to write a _Sussexes Index of Lies and Contradictions_. That would be a best seller for sure with more money to be made on updated editions through the years.
> 
> ...


she's so full of nonsense.. exagerating the time she spent there..  they only lived in Frogmore Cottage for 11 months before moving to the US...and after spending £2.4 Million of Taxpayers money renovating Frogmore into a 4 bedroom home with a Nursery.., which originally had been  a ten bedroom home 

it's not the tiny home they make it out to be...






 when they moved to the states we, the British Public were up in arms about them using Taxpayers money to renovate a property they were about to rent out to line their own pockets, so The palace insisted Harry pay  the Money back...


----------



## Jules (Tuesday at 2:28 PM)

Wow.  I’d never seen a picture of the ‘cottage’.  Is the public permitted to walk around it?


----------



## Georgiagranny (Tuesday at 2:29 PM)

Cottage? That's a cottage?


----------



## Pepper (Tuesday at 2:29 PM)

Jules said:


> Wow.  I’d never seen a picture of the ‘cottage’.  Is the public permitted to walk around it?


It's like the 'cottages' of Newport RI!


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 2:30 PM)

Jules said:


> Wow.  I’d never seen a picture of the ‘cottage’.  Is the public permitted to walk around it?


yes only in August... which is when the Royal family are usually in Scotland...


----------



## AnnieA (Tuesday at 2:48 PM)

hollydolly said:


> she's so full of nonsense.. exagerating the time she spent there..  they only lived in Frogmore Cottage for 11 months before moving to the US...and after spending £2.4 Million of Taxpayers money renovating Frogmore into a 4 bedroom home with a Nursery.., which originally had been  a ten bedroom home
> 
> it's not the tiny home they make it out to be...
> 
> ...



That's Frogmore House which she would've loved.

Frogmore Cottage is much smaller.  This pic is before they renovated it.  It now has privacy hedges and fences so the view in post renovation pics isn't as clear.   Still not slumming by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 2:57 PM)

The picture posters are seeing at post # 222 in 
misleading.
That is Frogmore House *not* Frogmore Cottage

Not everyone who lives in Britain knows Britain!!


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 2:58 PM)

AnnieA said:


> That's Frogmore House which she would've loved.
> 
> Frogmore Cottage is much smaller.  This pic is before they renovated it.  It now has privacy hedges and fences and the view in post renovation pics isn't as clear.   Still not slumming by any stretch of the imagination.



Correct !!


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 3:00 PM)

AnnieA said:


> That's Frogmore House which she would've loved.
> 
> Frogmore Cottage is much smaller.  This pic is before they renovated it.  It now has privacy hedges and fences and the view in post renovation pics isn't as clear.   Still not slumming by any stretch of the imagination.


Yes, that looks more like the photos I have seen.  I thought it was a lovely cottage.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 3:02 PM)

Chet said:


> I watched Harry (formerly known as Prince) on 60 Minutes and I'm glad I did. Hearing his story from his mouth was ten times better than reading about it. After 80 years on this planet you get to read people pretty well, and I found him to be genuine, and left with the feeling of  him having legitimate gripes with how he and Meghan were treated, and why he left that atmosphere that they were subjected to in the U.K.



Thank you for an intelligent post.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 3:26 PM)

Trish said:


> Yes, that looks more like the photos I have seen.  I thought it was a lovely cottage.


10 bedrooms before they ripped it apart with OUR money...


----------



## Jace (Tuesday at 3:42 PM)

Nemo2 said:


> I'm also 80, but perhaps I move my lips, and run my fingers under the words, when I read.  I don't watch Harry & Migraine, but unfortunately it's almost impossible not to be impacted by their histrionic soap opera.
> 
> What I see, (perhaps I should get a Covid mask and wear it over my eyes), is a narcissistic predator, with a handful of magic beans, who latched on to a titled, wealthy, spoiled doofus with a Golden Goose who she's held in thrall and manipulated since their first meeting.
> 
> But hey.....


Hate to admit..but I 'absolutely' AGREE!!


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 3:57 PM)

Remy said:


> The book is #1 on Amazon right now.


..but already at half the original price £14..rather than the £28 RRP


----------



## Remy (Tuesday at 4:00 PM)

hollydolly said:


> ..but already at half the original price £14..rather than the £28 RRP


22.43 dollars on the U.S. Amazon site. Original is 36 dollars.  Save 38%

But fully 1/2 price in UK then.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 4:01 PM)

Remy said:


> 22.43 dollars on the U.S. Amazon site. Original is 36 dollars.  Save 38%
> 
> But fully 1/2 price in UK then.


and it's literally just been released.. give it a month and it'll be given away for free...


----------



## Lewkat (Tuesday at 4:36 PM)

No one seems to have verified those 25 kills that Harry is claiming.  Only he seems to have been the one counting and if so, it doesn't count.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 4:39 PM)

* The Duke of Sussex has paid back the cost of refurbishing Frogmore Cottage near Windsor Castle.*

The cost, estimated at £2.4m in 2018-19, was covered by taxpayers through the Sovereign Grant, but the duke and duchess said they would repay it when they stepped back from royal duties.

Prince Harry's spokesman said he had paid the bill *in full* by making a contribution to the grant.

*https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54062799*

The British taxpayer did *not* pay for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage!


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 4:51 PM)

Lewkat said:


> No one seems to have verified those 25 kills that Harry is claiming.  Only he seems to have been the one counting and if so, it doesn't count.


Could it possiby be a figment of the ever truthful harry's Imagination ?... nooo surely not...


----------



## Packerjohn (Tuesday at 5:23 PM)

I don't think Harry is all that stupid.  Look at all the money he is racking in on TV appearances and now the book.  Perhaps the "stupid" people are those watching his Netflix show and spending their hard earned money buying his book.  Harry is laughing all the way to the bank about those "stupid" peasants.  He knows there is a "sucker born every minute."


----------



## Chet (Tuesday at 5:33 PM)

Sunny said:


> One columnist in today's paper did make an interesting observation:  Harry keeps complaining that the media have intruded into his family's privacy, etc. and hounded his mother literally to death. But then, what are he and Meghan doing, publicly airing all their dirty linen over and over again?


When a new book or movie is coming out, the writer or the actors will appear on radio or TV plugging it. That is why Harry is doing what he's doing, and I'm sure 60 Minutes went to him and not the opposite.


----------



## AnnieA (Tuesday at 5:36 PM)

Chet said:


> When a new book or movie is coming out, the writer or the actors will appear on radio or TV plugging it. That is why Harry is doing what he's doing, and I'm sure 60 Minutes went to him and not the opposite.



The publisher arranges appearances.  It's usually part of the contract that authors have to do the publicity rounds.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 5:43 PM)

The publisher of Prince Harry's memoir says sales have exceeded its "most bullish expectations". Transworld Penguin Random House said Spare was its fastest-selling non-fiction book with sales so far topping 400,000 copies.
That includes hardback, audiobook and ebook downloads.

Some bookshops in the UK opened hours early overnight on Tuesday in anticipation of strong sales, with industry experts predicting that Spare could be one of the best-selling pre-order titles of the past decade.

People queued for midnight shop openings, waiting outside WH Smith in London's Victoria station to be among the first to buy a copy.

US retailer Barnes and Noble said the pre-publication leaking of details from the book had "only heightened the frenzy".

Barnes & Noble, the world's largest bookseller, showed on Tuesday that _Spare _had beaten heavyweight titles such as _The Stolen Heir _by Holly Black, former US first lady Michelle Obama's autobiography _The Light We Carry _and 2022 book of the year _Lessons in Chemistry _to take the top spot on the retailer's Top 100 list in the US.

It also topped Amazon's bestseller list in the US and UK.

The memoir had already ranked first on many bestseller lists ahead of its release date.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 5:44 PM)

Chet said:


> When a new book or movie is coming out, the writer or the actors will appear on radio or TV plugging it. That is why Harry is doing what he's doing, and I'm sure 60 Minutes went to him and not the opposite.


You are absolutely correct!


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 5:55 PM)

Packerjohn said:


> I don't think Harry is all that stupid.  Look at all the money he is racking in on TV appearances and now the book.  Perhaps the "stupid" people are those watching his Netflix show and spending their hard earned money buying his book.  Harry is laughing all the way to the bank about those "stupid" peasants.  He knows there is a "sucker born every minute."


I think your overall premise is correct, it's just your aim that's slightly off.......try pointing over to one side, just slightly.


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 5:57 PM)

hollydolly said:


> Could it possiby be a figment of the ever truthful harry's Imagination ?... nooo surely not...


I'm sure Mrs. Bucket can provide elucidation.


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 6:22 PM)

hollydolly said:


> 10 bedrooms before they ripped it apart with OUR money...



I don't think they ripped it apart.  It was ten rooms but divided into five units to house Royal staff members.  Royal staff are known for being poorly paid and I doubt if the staff accommodation is that great.  I think it reasonable that it would be renovated to a higher standard prior to becoming a Royal residence. 

As I understand the system, it would not have been H&M who applied for the (taxpayer funded) Sovereign Grant, that is an annual grant paid to the monarch to support the cost of things like maintenance of Royal residences and workspaces so, it would have been the Queen who awarded the grant.  H&M are leaseholders and paid for the fixtures and fittings.  The cottage is owned by the Crown Estates.   

Morally I think it was right to expect H&M to repay the cost of the renovations as they renewed the lease and obviously planned to keep hold of the property but, I don't think they actually did anything wrong in this respect.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:24 PM)

Trish said:


> I don't think they ripped it apart.  It was ten rooms but divided into five units to house Royal staff members.  Royal staff are known for being poorly paid and I doubt if the staff accommodation is that great.  I think it reasonable that it would be renovated to a higher standard prior to becoming a Royal residence.
> 
> As I understand the system, it would not have been H&M who applied for the (taxpayer funded) Sovereign Grant, that is an annual grant paid to the monarch to support the cost of things like maintenance of Royal residences and workspaces so, it would have been the Queen who awarded the grant.  H&M are leaseholders and paid for the fixtures and fittings.  The cottage is owned by the Crown Estates.
> 
> Morally I think it was right to expect H&M to repay the cost of the renovations as they renewed the lease and obviously planned to keep hold of the property but, I don't think they actually did anything wrong.


I didn't say they did anything wrong. I said the UK taxpayer paid for the renovation which included a nursery, and 10 rooms became 4.. and they were only there for 11 months... and the Crown rightly  asked for the money to be repaid when it was clear they were going to live overseas..


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:28 PM)

I'm beginning to think he's deranged..

Earlier today Harry ddenied talking to Oprah Winfrey about any kind of Racism in the Royal family.. esily disporved when the media showed the interview with Oprah.. and NOW Harry...says this

_....has furiously slammed down accusations that he 'boasted' about killing 25 Taliban fighters in his explosive memoir Spare - while accusing his critics of 'spinning' his words and spouting 'lies' about the revelation, which he says have put his family 'in danger'. 

The 38-year-old vehemently defended his decision to share the information as he sat down for an interview with The Late Show host Stephen Colbert - a pre-taped chat that was recorded on Monday night and is due to be aired in full this evening. 

In a teaser clip for what will no doubt be another bombshell TV tell-all, Harry hit back at accusations that he 'undermined his own security' by writing about his Taliban kills, while blaming his critics for spreading 'dangerous lies' and 'spinning his words'. 

'I think one of... the most dangerous lies that they have told is that I somehow boasted about the number of people I have killed in Afghanistan,' he told Colbert. 
_
*'I would say that if I heard anybody else, anyone, boasting about that kind of thing, I would be angry. But it's a lie.
*
_He added: 'My words are not dangerous, but the spin of my words are very dangerous to my family.'_

The Duke of Sussex faced serious criticism from politicians and senior former military members alike after leaked excerpts from his book - which were published after the book was accidentally released early in Spain - revealed his recollections of killing Taliban members while he was serving as an Apache helicopter pilot. 

After the excerpts were published last week, former British Army commander Colonel Richard Kemp described Harry's comments as 'ill-judged' warned that his admissions could cause pro-Taliban sympathizers to be 'provoked to attempt revenge' against him and possibly 'incite some people to attempt an attack on British soldiers anywhere in the world'.

Meanwhile, former Royal Marine commando Ben McBean suggested the Duke had broken an 'unwritten rule' with his revelation. 

However, Harry insisted to Colbert that it was not his words that were in any way dangerous - but rather the 'spin' that his critics have put on them, with the Duke saying it is 'a choice they have made', which has put his family in danger. 

*He went on to insist that that the 'reason' he chose to write about his kill count was to 'reduce the number of suicides' among military veterans. 
*
'I made a choice to share it because, having spent nearly two decades working with veterans all around the world, I think the most important thing is to be honest and to give space to others to share their experiences without any shame,' he said - while receiving applause from the audience, which included several veterans.


----------



## CarolfromTX (Tuesday at 6:33 PM)

Why anyone would watch those two whiners, let alone admire them, is beyond me.  But to each his own.


----------



## Trish (Tuesday at 6:37 PM)

hollydolly said:


> I didn't say they did anything wrong. I said the UK taxpayer paid for the renovation which included a nursery, and 10 rooms became 4.. and they were only there for 11 months... and the Crown rightly  asked for the money to be repaid when it was clear they were going to live overseas..


No, you didn't.  I was replying to you because you mentioned the renovations, not suggesting you were saying anything other than you had posted.  

I remember at the time, as likely you do, that there was public outrage over the cost of the renovations shortly before it became clear that they were leaving.  I agree, absolutely right that they were asked to repay it.


----------



## Magna-Carta (Tuesday at 6:43 PM)

hearlady said:


> I was going to say that maybe this is all about our need to be in other people's business however I understand the British public funds them (?) so they do have a say.


I'm not entirly sure what you mean.  As a Brit, as far as I'm aware, I don't fund them.


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 6:47 PM)

Magna-Carta said:


> I'm not entirly sure what you mean.  As a Brit, as far as I'm aware, I don't fund them.


There's this..(maybe there's more but I wouldn't know):
https://britishheritage.com/royals/royal-family-cost-british-taxpayer


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:47 PM)

Magna-Carta said:


> I'm not entirly sure what you mean.  As a Brit, as far as I'm aware, I don't fund them.


You ..we, as Brits  do fund the royal family.... 

https://taxscouts.com/blog/does-uk-tax-go-to-the-royal-family/


----------



## Lewkat (Tuesday at 6:48 PM)

In researching just how much a British taxpayer does ante up for the monarchy today, I learned that, it is either some pennies per year, or really nothing as it is considered to be self funding since its members pay taxes themselves.


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:49 PM)

_Kudos to the manager of Bert's Books in Swindon, whose carefully arranged copies of Spare were displayed yesterday alongside . . . Bella Mackie's How To Kill Your Family.

And to The Open Book in Richmond, South-West London, which placed its copies next to A History Of Treason by Diarmaid MacCulloch.





_


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 6:51 PM)

Lewkat said:


> In researching just how much a British taxpayer does ante up for the monarchy today, I learned that, it is either some pennies per year, or really nothing as it is considered to be self funding since its members pay taxes themselves.


the Queen only started paying taxes in the 90's after an outcry when she wanted the Taxpayer to cover the cost of the fire at Windsor castle.. but we as taxpayers still pay for the RF... Last year 2022, the RF cost the taxpayer over £104 Million up 17 % on the previous year


----------



## Magna-Carta (Tuesday at 7:29 PM)

hollydolly said:


> the Queen only started paying taxes in the 90's after an outcry when she wanted the Taxpayer to cover the cost of the fire at Windsor castle.. but we as taxpayers still pay for the RF... Last year 2022, the RF cost the taxpayer over £104 Million up 17 % on the previous year


The royal family, over the centuries, have amassed land, property & business. As far as I’m aware, the control of these assets was handed over to the British government in, I think, 1760? It’s all now managed by an independent commercial business called the ‘Crown Estate’, but still owned by the reigning Monarch. Up to 25% of the profits from the Crown Estate are paid into the ‘Sovereign Grant’. I believe money used to finance the British royal family comes from this Sovereign Grant. All other moneys stay with the British treasury. The Crown Estate made a profit of £312 million last year.

I believe one example of these businesses is Royal Ascot race course. Founded by Queen Ann on land she owned. Some profits from this business ultimately go into the Sovereign Grant.

As yet, no one has been able to tell me what percentage of my own tax money goes to the royal family, if any at all.

£312.7 million going into the Sovereign Grant in 2022 from thair own propert & busnesses.  Then £102.4 million being given to the Royal famliy in 2022.  £210.3 stayed with the treasury last finacial year


----------



## hollydolly (Tuesday at 7:33 PM)

Magna-Carta said:


> The royal family, over the centuries, have amassed land, property & business. As far as I’m aware, the control of these assets was handed over to the British government in, I think, 1760? It’s all now managed by an independent commercial business called the ‘Crown Estate’, but still owned by the reigning Monarch. Up to 25% of the profits from the Crown Estate are paid into the ‘Sovereign Grant’. I believe money used to finance the British royal family comes from this Sovereign Grant. All other moneys stay with the British treasury. The Crown Estate made a profit of £312 million last year.
> 
> I believe one example of these businesses is Royal Ascot race course. Founded by Queen Ann on land she owned. Some profits from this business ultimately go into the Sovereign Grant.
> 
> As yet, no one has been able to tell me what percentage of my own tax money goes to the royal family, if any at all.


A percentage of your tax money does go to the upkeep of the Crown.. read the links...


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 7:35 PM)

Magna-Carta said:


> The royal family, over the centuries, have amassed land, property & business. As far as I’m aware, the control of these assets was handed over to the British government in, I think, 1760? It’s all now managed by an independent commercial business called the ‘Crown Estate’, but still owned by the reigning Monarch. Up to 25% of the profits from the Crown Estate are paid into the ‘Sovereign Grant’. I believe money used to finance the British royal family comes from this Sovereign Grant. All other moneys stay with the British treasury. The Crown Estate made a profit of £312 million last year.
> 
> I believe one example of these businesses is Royal Ascot race course. Founded by Queen Ann on land she owned. Some profits from this business ultimately go into the Sovereign Grant.
> 
> As yet, no one has been able to tell me what percentage of my own tax money goes to the royal family, if any at all.



See my post # 192 on page 8.
You and I and every British person pays one penny a day.


----------



## Jamala (Tuesday at 7:37 PM)

*(Harry did not accuse the RF of racism in the interview with Oprah).*

What Harry actually said is this: 
A family member made “troubling” comments about the skin colour of his son, Archie, related to “unconscious bias”, *not* racism.


----------



## Nemo2 (Tuesday at 7:44 PM)

Jamala said:


> What Harry actually said is this:
> A family member made “troubling” comments about the skin colour of his son, Archie, related to “unconscious bias”, *not* racism.


What, so now he's a psychic who can determine intent by mind reading?  (Quick, hide the Kryptonite everybody!)


----------



## Magna-Carta (Tuesday at 8:27 PM)

hollydolly said:


> A percentage of your tax money does go to the upkeep of the Crown.. read the links...


I would say some of the wording in those links seems incorect?  Example, when refering to the Sovereign Grant, the link says, "_This money comes from HM Treasury and is funded by the taxpayer_".

Yes, the money for the 'Sovereign Grant' comes from HM Treasury, but its not directly funded by the taxpayer.  Its funded by the ‘Crown Estate’.

I would say Crown Estate money & my (our) tax money are two different things.  Yes, the business profit from the Crown Estate, & seperatly our tax money, both go into HM Treasury.  But when there is over £300 million going into the Treasury from the profits made by the Crown Estate each year, and then around £100 million going to the royal family,  I fail to see how its my money going to finance the royal family.  Especialy when there is around £200 million left to play with from the Crown Estate.  The Crown Estate being the profits from the royal family's business, property & land assests.

The royal family, through the Crown Estate, are paying more into the Treasury than they are taking out.  I see the cost of security & official ceremony's as somthing different.  Thats not directly financing the royal family.

What might i be missing here?

I don't want to run the risk of making it look as though I'm hijacking the thread, so I’ll leave it at that.


----------



## oldaunt (Wednesday at 4:51 AM)

Magna-Carta said:


> I would say some of the wording in those links seems incorect?  Example, when refering to the Sovereign Grant, the link says, "_This money comes from HM Treasury and is funded by the taxpayer_".
> 
> Yes, the money for the 'Sovereign Grant' comes from HM Treasury, but its not directly funded by the taxpayer.  Its funded by the ‘Crown Estate’.
> 
> ...


If by "hijacking" you mean one of the rare actual intelligent and factual posts on this thread, then yes.....


----------



## hollydolly (Wednesday at 5:08 AM)

He's done it again... he stated in his book (Spare) that Henry Vl was his great great great great great great, Grandfather,..... and that his school (Eton) made him and the other kids dress in pinstripe trousers and frock coat... to  be in perpetual mourning for the old King..  ... and that he had to mourn his great ( 5 times removed) Grandfather, was too much of a stretch..

errrm.. no... King Henry Vl only son died in Battle , childless.. .... In fact Harry's great great repeating.. Grandfather was Georg lll

he also claimed and goes into a Romantic Scenario in exactly the same way Markle does when she's inventing a story... that he was at school when he got the call to say his grandmother had died.. he romanticises that he couldn't remember who called .. but that he remembers the sun shining in through the window , filled with Vivid colours...


When in fact there's Proof of photos taken at the time, that he, his brother and His father were skiiing in the Swiss alps on that very date.. 




_It was his first public appearance after admitting to smoking cannabis and drinking underage, BBC reported at the time.

Prince Harry reportedly told the gathered crowd he was on doctors orders to 'take it easy' on the slopes, and appeared jovial by all accounts. 

The trio leaned against a rock, laughed with one another and even put their arms around each other in the pictures. 

_

Stupid Boy.. should have studied more at school... tsk tsk... go to the back of the class!

Going forward , If he needs a reminder of the Funeral, my husband who attended the Queen mothers' funeral in a work capacity... would probably have a better recall...


----------



## Magna-Carta (Wednesday at 5:30 AM)

hollydolly said:


> He's done it again... he stated in his book (Spare) that Henry Vl was his great great great great great great, Grandfather,..... and that his school (Eton) made him and the other kids dress in pinstripe trousers and frock coat... to  be in perpetual mourning for the old King..  ... and that he had to mourn his great ( 5 times removed) Grandfather, was too much of a stretch..
> 
> errrm.. no... King Henry Vl only son died in Battle , childless.. .... In fact Harry's great great repeating.. Grandfather was Georg lll
> 
> ...


Is this the same skiing holiday (2005?) where Prince Charles was recorded [by the BBC] quietly muttering to his sons about the person interviewing him?  I think Prince Charles said of Nicholas Witchel, something like, "bloody people, I can't stand that man, he's awfull".  It was then broadcast on national TV news.

If so, how come I can even remeber that.


----------



## hollydolly (Wednesday at 5:35 AM)

Magna-Carta said:


> Is this the same skiing holiday (2005?) where Prince Charles was recorded [by the BBC] quietly muttering to his sons about the person interviewing him?  I think Prince Charles said of Nicholas Witchel, something like, "bloody people, I can't stand that man, he's awfull".  It was then broadcast on national TV news.
> 
> If so, how come I can even remeber that.


No the Queen Mother  died in 2002


----------



## hollydolly (Wednesday at 5:40 AM)

_Furious audience members of The Late Show have slammed Prince Harry for failing to appear in front of the usually scheduled audience.

Disappointed fans of the CBS talk show visibly bristled when they were told by the host that the Duke of Sussex, 38, was not going to appear in front of them.

One loudly said, 'are you serious' after Stephen Colbert apologized to the audience for not telling them Harry was not going to be in attendance before claiming it was for security reasons.

Many of the audience had travelled to the Ed Sullivan Theater in New York City from all over the state to see the royal

The recording of the show, which is set to be aired at 11.30pm tonight, usually lasts for two hours - including a warm-up act.

But those hoping to catch a glimpse of Harry were left disappointed and bewildered when Colbert ended the show an hour before advertised.

One person said  'Security issues? Really? It's not like he's Prince William 

They are just creating their own drama now for the sake of it.

'If it's about your family and your safety why are you doing the interview in the first place?'

Harry is currently in the midst of a media blitz to promote his memoir, for which he was reportedly paid a $20 million advance.


_


----------



## Jamala (Wednesday at 6:59 AM)

So much misinformation is presented in this thread. I am aghast!

Perhaps this will shed some light….

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6l0ObY2XVM*

*(Prince Harry and Stephen Colbert interview)
.*


----------



## charry (Wednesday at 8:08 AM)

Why don’t they all just leave that poor boy alone ……
they and us , know nothing about what he has been going through ,
He wants accountability , basically for how his wife was treated by the royals 
Again, The media, journalist , gossips…..
some people thrive on this ……!!! With nothing better to do with their time …


----------



## JustBonee (Wednesday at 8:28 AM)

.


----------



## Jamala (Wednesday at 9:08 AM)

charry said:


> Why don’t they all just leave that poor boy alone ……
> they and us , know nothing about what he has been going through ,
> He wants accountability , basically for how his wife was treated by the royals
> Again, The media, journalist , gossips…..
> some people thrive on this ……!!! With nothing better to do with their time …


You've hit the nail right on the head.


----------



## Nemo2 (Wednesday at 9:34 AM)

I think everyone should just sit back, and thank the powers that may or may not be that they, or their descendants, will not have to witness the coronation of King Whiner the First.


----------



## perChance (Wednesday at 9:36 AM)

They want attention - and attention they are getting.


----------



## charry (Wednesday at 11:08 AM)

hollydolly said:


> He's done it again... he stated in his book (Spare) that Henry Vl was his great great great great great great, Grandfather,..... and that his school (Eton) made him and the other kids dress in pinstripe trousers and frock coat... to  be in perpetual mourning for the old King..  ... and that he had to mourn his great ( 5 times removed) Grandfather, was too much of a stretch..
> 
> errrm.. no... King Henry Vl only son died in Battle , childless.. .... In fact Harry's great great repeating.. Grandfather was Georg lll
> 
> ...


Thankyou for all your information Holly


----------



## Georgiagranny (Wednesday at 11:19 AM)

Nemo2 said:


> I'm sure Mrs. Bucket can provide elucidation.


That's "boo-kay". And do you suppose there's room for a pony?


----------



## Nemo2 (Wednesday at 11:22 AM)

Georgiagranny said:


> That's "boo-kay". And do you suppose there's room for a pony?


Careful, she'll set Onslow on you.


----------



## Georgiagranny (Wednesday at 11:24 AM)

hollydolly said:


> In fact Harry's great great repeating.. Grandfather was Georg lll


Maybe hereditary? LOL


----------



## hollydolly (Wednesday at 11:34 AM)

Georgiagranny said:


> Maybe hereditary? LOL


I thought that too tbh...because George lll was deranged


----------



## Nemo2 (Wednesday at 11:39 AM)

hollydolly said:


> I thought that too tbh...because George lll was deranged


Perhaps that's why he wanted to go to the US......loved that old song "Home on the Derange"?


----------



## hollydolly (Wednesday at 11:57 AM)

Nemo2 said:


> Perhaps that's why he wanted to go to the US......loved that old song "Home on the Derange"?


Best one so far....


----------



## Right Now (Wednesday at 12:32 PM)

hollydolly said:


> Going forward , If he needs a reminder of the Funeral, my husband who attended the Queen mothers' funeral in a work capacity... would probably have a better recall...


Nope, this one is the best one yet!  Has everyone forgotten what the one closest to royalty knows as a fact because she knows the most about everything?!?


----------



## Nemo2 (Wednesday at 12:45 PM)

Right Now said:


> Nope, this one is the best one yet!  Has everyone forgotten what the one closest to royalty knows as a fact because she knows the most about everything?!?


Mrs. Bucket you mean?


----------



## Tish (Wednesday at 12:45 PM)

Looks like we have a sugar.


----------



## charry (Thursday at 5:05 AM)

hollydolly said:


> I thought that too tbh...because George lll was deranged


Lots of folk are deranged at the moment LOL ….


----------



## charry (Thursday at 5:07 AM)

hollydolly said:


> Best one so far....


Sad really….not very funny …


----------



## oldaunt (Thursday at 6:16 AM)

""
HILLEL ITALIE
Wed, January 11, 2023 at 4:49 PM CST


NEW YORK (AP) — No, the public has not tired of hearing about Prince Harry. Sales for “Spare" have placed the Duke of Sussex in some rarefied company.
Penguin Random House announced Wednesday that first day sales for the Harry's tell-all memoir topped 1.4 million copies, a record pace for non-fiction from a company that also publishes Barack and Michelle Obama, whose “Becoming” needed a week to reach 1.4 million when it was released in 2018.""


----------



## AnnieA (Thursday at 8:34 AM)

hollydolly said:


> _Furious audience members of The Late Show have slammed Prince Harry for failing to appear in front of the usually scheduled audience.
> 
> Disappointed fans of the CBS talk show visibly bristled when they were told by the host that the Duke of Sussex, 38, was not going to appear in front of them.
> 
> ...



Harry's appearance was before an audience.  Sounds like they pre-recorded it instead of live which is usual for The Late Show.   Makes sense in terms of spin control.   Pretty sure it was filled with people who were paid to clap for Harry rather than people who actually paid money for tickets to The Late Show that were stood up.


----------



## Pepper (Thursday at 8:36 AM)

No one pays to be in a studio audience for filming TV.


----------



## Nemo2 (Thursday at 8:38 AM)

Everyone loves a train wreck......when they're not aboard, that is.


----------



## hollydolly (Thursday at 8:42 AM)

AnnieA said:


> Harry's appearance was before an audience.  Sounds like they pre-recorded it instead of live which is usual for The Late Show.   Makes sense in terms of spin control.   Pretty sure it was filled with people who were paid to clap for Harry rather than people who actually paid money for tickets to The Late Show that were stood up.


yes apparently it was a specially invited audience


----------



## hollydolly (Thursday at 8:44 AM)

Pepper said:


> No one pays to be in a studio audience for filming TV.


You're correct...however you still have to apply for tickets for a specific show.. and nothing more frustrating than paying for travel..for some people that could be from very far away.. and overnight accommodation.. and all that entails, only to be turned away at the door, and it happens... sadly most people don't realise this, and are rightly very aggrieved


----------



## hollydolly (Thursday at 8:45 AM)

Huge Faux Pas in the Book... Harry talks about getting Frost Bite on his Willy.. and we're not talking about his brother here... then  remembering his mother as he rubbed his tender part with her favourite Elizabeth Arden cream...


----------



## Pepper (Thursday at 8:46 AM)

I was in a bunch of studio audiences when I was young.  My mother started taking me at about 3 years of age, and we would enjoy doing this way through my teens.  It was fun and we would sometimes meet the hosts and/or guests afterward.


----------



## Nemo2 (Thursday at 8:47 AM)

hollydolly said:


> Huge Faux Pas in the Book... Harry talks about getting Frost Bit on his Willy.. and we're not talking about his brother here... then  remembering his mother as he rubbed his tender part with her favourite Elizabeth Arden cream...


Could have been worse......his grandfather for instance.


----------



## oldaunt (Thursday at 8:49 AM)

hollydolly said:


> Huge Faux Pas in the Book... Harry talks about getting Frost Bit on his Willy.. and we're not talking about his brother here... then  remembering his mother as he rubbed his tender part with her favourite Elizabeth Arden cream...


So...you actually read the book.......


----------



## hollydolly (Thursday at 9:09 AM)

_Prince Harry has left readers wincing with his account of applying Elizabeth Arden cream used by his late mother to his frostbitten penis in 2011. 

The moment appears in his explosive memoir Spare, with a clip from the audiobook narrated by the Duke of Sussex himself making the rounds on social media, where horrified readers have called it a 'Freudian nightmare.'

In the passage, Harry recalls that his late mother Princess Diana used to apply the cream to her lips, and says the smell of the product made him feel like his mother 'was right there in the room' before he applied the cream to his penis. 

Prince Harry, 38, recounts how a friend recommended he use the product on the injured area after he returned from a trip to the North Pole before his brother Prince William's wedding. 

Harry recounts he had been unsuccessful with home remedies to heal his ailment when a friend recommended he use the Elizabeth Arden formula.  

'My mum used that on her lips. You want me to put that on my todger?' he said. 

After his pal's reassurance that the cream worked, Harry procured himself a tube, saying the smell of it brought him back to his childhood, when his mother was still alive. 

'I felt as if my mother was right there in the room. Then I took a smidge and applied it…down there,' he recalled. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...scribes-applying-cream-frostbitten-penis.html
_


----------



## AnnieA (Thursday at 9:09 AM)

hollydolly said:


> Huge Faux Pas in the Book... Harry talks about getting Frost Bite on his Willy.. and we're not talking about his brother here... then  remembering his mother as he rubbed his tender part with her favourite Elizabeth Arden cream...





oldaunt said:


> So...you actually read the book.......



That part and others have been quoted in multiple places directly from the book.   Copyright allows for under a certain amount of content to be copied verbatim.  When using quotes, there are specific conventions in writing to show that the content is verbatim. 

More than one media outlet has posted that particular section of the book and it's disturbingly weird.


----------



## Remy (Thursday at 9:12 AM)

hollydolly said:


> Huge Faux Pas in the Book... Harry talks about getting Frost Bite on his Willy.. and we're not talking about his brother here... then  remembering his mother as he rubbed his tender part with her favourite Elizabeth Arden cream...


It's still #1 according to U.S. Amazon site sales.

I'm beginning to wonder if even a thrift store copy might be worth the cost.   Maybe if it's at our PAWS thrift since I'm fine with throwing them money.


----------



## AnnieA (Thursday at 9:25 AM)

Here's the Elizabeth Arden cream to the nether regions quote.  Harry ends that it's weird.  It is.  Weirder than I think he realizes and this guy has a team of therapists.

Excerpt:


----------



## Pepper (Thursday at 12:31 PM)

TMI


----------



## Bellbird (Thursday at 1:06 PM)

The reality, know one can inherit when they are not of the same blood.


----------



## hollydolly (Thursday at 5:17 PM)

More Lies...

_The book also includes a line where the Duke says Meghan Markle booked an Air New Zealand flight from Mexico to the UK for her father Thomas.

*But the airline has now revealed it has never operated flights between the two countries.*

_
_Harry wrote: “We told him, leave Mexico right now: A whole new level of harassment is about to rain down on you, so come to Britain. Now._

“Air New Zealand, first class, booked and paid for by Meg.”

*Air New Zealand said of the book’s claim: “We’ve never had flights between Mexico and the UK. And we only have Business Premier.
*

_The airline added it also does not operate first class seats, reports the NZ Herald.




_


----------



## Lewkat (Thursday at 5:20 PM)

hollydolly said:


> More Lies...
> 
> _The book also includes a line where the Duke says Meghan Markle booked an Air New Zealand flight from Mexico to the UK for her father Thomas.
> 
> ...


According to Harry's ghostwriter, he admitted that Harry himself said that there may be inaccuracies, but they are his memory alone.


----------



## Nemo2 (Thursday at 5:36 PM)

Lewkat said:


> there may be inaccuracies, but they are his memory alone.


Obfuscators R Us.


----------



## hollydolly (Thursday at 5:44 PM)

More Lies...

_The book also includes a line where the Duke says Meghan Markle booked an Air New Zealand flight from Mexico to the UK for her father Thomas.

*But the airline has now revealed it has never operated flights between the two countries.*_


_Harry wrote: “We told him, leave Mexico right now: A whole new level of harassment is about to rain down on you, so come to Britain. Now._

“Air New Zealand, first class, booked and paid for by Meg.”

*Air New Zealand said of the book’s claim: “We’ve never had flights between Mexico and the UK. And we only have Business Premier.*


_The airline added it also does not operate first class seats, reports the NZ Herald._







Lewkat said:


> According to Harry's ghostwriter, he admitted that Harry himself said that there may be inaccuracies, but they are his memory alone.


yes that's as good as when people tell blatant lies... it's now ''My truth''... ..

Harry's memory alone ?.. which means completely invented in Harry's head..

ETA in fact when you're trashing other peoples lives with ''your truth'' and ''your memories alone''.. then you should be  ashamed of yourself.. but we all know there's No shame In Markle or her  lapdog..


----------



## mrstime (Thursday at 6:12 PM)

horseless carriage said:


> Me neither, but our royals do have a regular habit of producing the one that's:
> 
> Not the brightest bulb in the chandelier
> A few bricks shy of a load
> ...


When they were passing out smarts he thought they said sharks and he didn't want any!


----------



## mrstime (Thursday at 7:16 PM)

timoc said:


> I often wondered about the similarity.
> 
> View attachment 261051


Check out Diana's Brother at that same age.


----------



## Jules (Thursday at 10:48 PM)

hollydolly said:


> it's now ''My truth''..


I’m so sick of that phrase!


----------



## Tish (Yesterday at 12:01 AM)

AnnieA said:


> Here's the Elizabeth Arden cream to the nether regions quote.  Harry ends that it's weird.  It is.  Weirder than I think he realizes and this guy has a team of therapists.
> 
> Excerpt:
> 
> View attachment 262016


*Shudder* Oedipus Complex much?


----------

