General News for Prince Harry, Part 1: December 2016 - November 2017

[O-H Anglophile]

What has he done to deserve this kind of treatment?

What has he done? He's still in a relationship with Meghan and not giving the press anything much to see or write about.

 

[Dman]

No, not on purpose. But he needs better PR.

I think he have a good PR team. He praised the work of the monarchy and he has mentioned his past struggles to deal with his mother's passing. He has a new sense of purpose and I think Harry is doing very well.

What has he done? He's still in a relationship with Meghan and not giving the press anything much to see or write about.

O-H Anglophile, that's a big part of it. Also, as I mentioned before, there's a big tug-a-war going on between the younger royals and the media. The media want more from the royals and the royals want a good and healthy balance between royal life and private life.

Harry, William and Catherine are the new faces of the monarchy and it's down to them to shape the monarchy's future. The media have a big problem with the way the Cambridge's and Harry want to take the monarchy. The media want the younger royals to sacrifice their private life for 24/7 duties without complaint. The younger royals want different.

 

[Osipi]

Y'know, you make some really good points and so does Maia and the more we've discussed, the more I cannot just bluntly say that Harry's royal status did not affect his service. It was a part of it all along.

The Army did have grave concerns not only for Harry being a prime target but also had in mind the safety of those serving close to him. Still, the fact remains that the Army calls the shots. With Harry's service and time in Afghanistan, it was decided by the Army that the next move most logically would be a desk job to advance his rank. This, I believe, is the standard practice for a lot of officers that wish to make the Army their career and advance in ranks. Not many military soldiers spend years in active combat duty but learn behind the scenes at desk jobs to attain the ranks where they are the generals that will eventually lead into battle and command troops. A lot of different factors were at play here. Harry made a personal decision to leave military service. It was his choice. I am in no way that familiar with how the military works but have gleaned this sense of information from what I've read. I'm, of course, open for corrections.

@Dman. I actually haven't really witnessed people on here using Harry's words against him (for the most part) but rather seeing how the repercussions from his words have started up a right royal row. Different people interpret words different ways and the media is quite renowned for this. I don't think there's anyone that doubts that Harry's intentions were anything else but honorable but often times words just plain come out wrong no matter what the intention is. Kind of reminds me of Philip and his "gaffes". It was purely an incident where it was "open mouth, insert foot". The lesson here to be learned is to choose statements wisely that cannot be misinterpreted.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

You know, I'm not sure people in public positions can ever say things anymore that can't be snipped and made into a gratuitous headline to garner clicks. From what I've read it seems for the most part Harry was answering questions and gave thoughtful answers, but parts of answers are being used by the press provoking responses to those headlines.
Awhile ago, William gave an interview where he said he struggled with his role, but in time grew to accept it and was working to forge his own path within those confines. That is pretty much what Harry said as well, except in Harry's place the role is even less defined. There are an awful lot of restrictions on acceptable careers or entrepreneurial endeavors if you are a royal close to the throne. And even Zara and Peter are criticized some. There was whining and criticism of Edward's endeavors (some justified like the William at St Andrew story) but he did some really good documentaries. And Sophie should have been more careful in what she said to strangers but she was flat out set up and had to close her business.

 

[Dman]

Perhaps everyone should allow Harry to clear the air and word things differently, so everyone can calm down.

 

[Skippyboo]

General News for Prince Harry, Part 1: December 2016 -

Harry came back from Afghanistan in 2013 . He didn't leave the Army until Spring 2015. 2014 was spent planning Invictus London and then he had a month attached to the Australian military in 2015 right before he left. He also had his South Pole Trek. If he was Capt Henry Smith would the British Army be so accommodating to allow Capt Smith to plan his pet project or be sent to Australia for a month? So his royal status had good and bad qualities when he was in the military.

 

[Osipi]

Perhaps everyone should allow Harry to clear the air and word things differently, so everyone can calm down.

I don't foresee Harry "clearing the air" about anything. He'll just keep calm and carry on. The more he says now about things already said, the more the words will be twisted and more different meanings put onto things.

I've also noticed that there hasn't been a peep issued from any other royals about it or their PR teams or Buck House.

 

[Mbruno]

An important point we can't lose sight of is that, if Harry really "wanted out", there would be only two practical ways for him to do so:

1) He could convert to Roman Catholicism,

or

2) He could marry without the Queen's consent.

Other than that, Harry cannot unilaterally renounce his place in the line of succession to the crown. Even if he wanted to renounce his rights, a special act of Parliament would be necessary to give legal effect to his renunciation. Even worse than that, since any law changing the line of succession also affects the succession to the crowns of the other Commonwealth realms, Harry's renunciation probably would have to go through the same process that was necessary for the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, i.e., it would potentially require separate legislation also in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc. In other words, hardly a practical proposition.

Besides, in any case, even if Harry and his future descendants lost their succession rights, Harry would still be an HRH, unless the Queen also stripped him of that title, which, I assume, would require separate letters patent.

The point I'm trying to make is that "wanting out" was not a decision that was within Harry's power to make (other than by the aforementioned options that I listed above). It is not like then that he could get out, and didn't do it because his sense of duty compelled him to stay as he claims. Being a prince is not a choice, as nobody chooses to be born in the families they are born and royalty is essentially a hereditary conditon brought by an accident of birth.

 

[Dman]

The "wanting out" was just the painful feelings he was struggling with due to his mother's tragic passing. This has been explained for both William and Harry. The reluctance and procrastination to embrace their royal destinies were due to their past problems. No disrespect to the institution they were born into.

 

[Lady Nimue]

You have said it well, Mbruno. IMO.

"The monarchy cannot go on as it has done under the Queen" may be interpreted as disrespectful to his grandmother. That is why I asked what he meant exactly by that.

Correct.

Furthermore, when he says that "no royal wants to be King or Queen", "no royal" here obviously includes his brother and father and, by saying that, he is undermining their position.

Exactly. This is the most obvious imo.

The problem, you see, is that the "bits that the tabloids chose to publish" are pretty clear literal quotes (as is BTW "I wanted out"). It is not a matter of the press twisting Harry's words, but, on the contrary, of some posters on the forum trying to find hidden meanings or convoluted interpretations to exonerate Harry.

Excellent point!

The truth is that Harry, like Andrew or Margaret before him, is a not a particularly bright person. On top of that, he has many issues and is clearly not very emotionally stable. The best advice to him, in the interest of the institution he represents, is to keep his mouth shut.

Ouch! (OT: It's why I sincerely doubt Meghan Markel will opt to marry him. He's not a good bet - not yet).

 

[Curryong]

I don't think Harry meant 'opt out' in that formal fashion. We don't know exactly when he wanted to opt out. It could have been after he left the army and felt directionless and near to a nervous breakdown, or, less probably,it could have been much earlier in his early twenties when he was devastated at not being able to serve in Iraq with his men, or even earlier than that.

I simply took his statement to mean that he felt if he got away, perhaps to Africa, he could find something else in his life, some other way to be of use. Perhaps a life in Africa and without royal duties and without necessarily using his title, which he wouldnt have to do in those circumstances, it's not compulsory. Being born Royal doesn't mean being born a slave. You can ultimately just stop and walk away, after much thought, of course.

In the end though, he made the decision that he wished to remain within the family as a Royal, and support his grandmother as much as he possibly could, which I am sure he will do for his father and his brother, in their turn.

By the way, there's been much talk about Harry not being bright or emotionally stable. You don't learn to fly Apache helicopters and reach commander level while doing so without some form of intelligence, and your senior officers would soon pick up any signs of emotional instability.

I think he and Meghan will be engaged, probably later this year.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

The "wanting out" was just the painful feelings he was struggling with due to his mother's tragic passing. This has been explained for both William and Harry. The reluctance and procrastination to embrace their royal destinies were due to their past problems. No disrespect to the institution they were born into.

I don't think the wanting out can solely be attributed to Diana's death. I think the restrictions of royal life (yes, there are some amazing benefits of being royalty but there are real disadvantages) as well as normal teen, early adulthood angst had a place in that feeling as well.

 

[Mbruno]

The "wanting out" was just the painful feelings he was struggling with due to his mother's tragic passing. This has been explained for both William and Harry. The reluctance and procrastination to embrace their royal destinies were due to their past problems. No disrespect to the institution they were born into.

Nonetheless, while the parliaments of the United Kingdom, Australia (both at the state and federal level), Canada, New Zealand, etc. were willing to spend precious parliamentary time to make the succession to the Crown gender neutral and end discrimination against Catholic royal consorts, I don't see them so willing to do the same to accomodate Harry's personal wish to quit. In fact, I think it would be a little bit pretentious of him to think otherwise.

In the end, it may turn out to be case that Harry's relationship with Meghan Markle may provide him with a "way out" if he really wants it, although that would be very unfair to Rachel Meghan, who would be blamed for something that probably would not be her fault. In fact, judging from this forum alone, some posters are already blaming it on her anyway.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

I think he have a good PR team. He praised the work of the monarchy and he has mentioned his past struggles to deal with his mother's passing. He has a new sense of purpose and I think Harry is doing very well.

Then we can only agree to disagree. Because I and many others thinks that the KP PR team is worse than bad.

 

[Empress Merel]

He has a sh.t PR team at the moment. If I was his PR adviser, I'd be pissed. Either he keeps running his mouth off, or they are incompetent.

And I also feel every single mistake or misstep by the two brothers shouldn't be attributed to Diana's death. There comes a point in someone's life when those said missteps are entirely your own.

 

[cepe]

I generally agree with you but here I don't entirely. Yes, it was the Army's decision to put Harry in a desk job- but it was because he was the grandson of the Queen. I believe the Army decided it was too hazardous to both Harry AND the men he was serving with to send him back again to the combat zone. That would have been an option for non-royal helicopter pilots- neither Isis, the Taliban or the gutter press would have targeted a random pilot for capture or a scoop.
He may have had to have a desk job of sorts eventually but not while he was still in his 20s. And I don't see him being that good at event planning which is what I believe the job was.

The comment re the army protecting Harry isn't what happened.

Army Air Corps in which Harry was serving (on secondment) is one of 3 squadrons (actual # is by memory, may be more) and they went to Afghanistan in rotation.They are not out there permanently.

Harrys squadron came home and that meant it would be at least 12-18months before the possibility of returning could happen. This is standard practice.

In order to be promoted, he would have to go through the process with his regiment, not the Army Air Corps. That means a desk job for a period of time, and exams. This is also standard practice.

Regardless of who you are, that is what happens.

I don't think that Harry is suited to a desk job - not his forte. Nor has he been particularly successful in passing exams. That's not a criticism because he has other skills.

So leaving the army was about either not wanting to go through the promotion process; failing the process; or not be suitable for attempting the process. And maybe "failing" at something he always wanted to do led to his issues coming to the fore and the "near breakdown".

This is pure speculation on my part I know but it would fit the circumstances.

 

[Dman]

Then we can only agree to disagree. Because I and many others thinks that the KP PR team is worse than bad.

Oh I didn't say the team is prefect. I have my problems with the KP PR team as well. I'm still mad a them for leaving Princess Charlotte out of the pictured tweets for Fathers Day, William's Birthday and the distance created between her parents and brother in the GQ photos.

 

[Mbruno]

The comment re the army protecting Harry isn't what happened.

Army Air Corps in which Harry was serving (on secondment) is one of 3 squadrons (actual # is by memory, may be more) and they went to Afghanistan in rotation.They are not out there permanently.

Harrys squadron came home and that meant it would be at least 12-18months before the possibility of returning could happen. This is standard practice.

In order to be promoted, he would have to go through the process with his regiment, not the Army Air Corps. That means a desk job for a period of time, and exams. This is also standard practice.

Regardless of who you are, that is what happens.

I don't think that Harry is suited to a desk job - not his forte. Nor has he been particularly successful in passing exams. That's not a criticism because he has other skills.

So leaving the army was about either not wanting to go through the promotion process; failing the process; or not be suitable for attempting the process. And maybe "failing" at something he always wanted to do led to his issues coming to the fore and the "near breakdown".

This is pure speculation on my part I know but it would fit the circumstances.

Reasonable hypotheses, I suppose.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

He has a sh.t PR team at the moment. If I was his PR adviser, I'd be pissed. Either he keeps running his mouth off, or they are incompetent.

And I also feel every single mistake or misstep by the two brothers shouldn't be attributed to Diana's death. There comes a point in someone's life when those said missteps are entirely your own.

I couldn't agree more! But, fortunately, William hasn't done many mistakes/missteps.

Oh I didn't say the team is prefect. I have my problems with the KP PR team as well. I'm still mad a them for leaving Princess Charlotte out of the pictured tweets for Fathers Day, William's Birthday and the distance created between her parents and brother in the GQ photos.

Of course you are.

Edit: That post was meant to be ironic, wasn't it?

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Oh I didn't say the team is prefect. I have my problems with the KP PR team as well. I'm still mad a them for leaving Princess Charlotte out of the pictured tweets for Fathers Day, William's Birthday and the distance created between her parents and brother in the GQ photos.

I still think that was much ado about nothing--it was William's eldest child and it was a wonderful loving moment between father and son. Maybe if William had five other children people wouldn't have been so quick to criticize the selection.
As for the GQ photos--it's not like they were posed photos and they deliberately set if up for Charlotte to be doing her own thing. It was a moment in time.

I don't think that Harry is suited to a desk job - not his forte. Nor has he been particularly successful in passing exams. That's not a criticism because he has other skills.

Thanks for the information and perspective in your post. I already 100% agreed with the sentences above.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

That was expressly pointed out in one of the recent videos reporting on this interview story. The journalist who wrote about Prince Harry said that Harry admits to not being 'academic,' but that he has other skills he excels at, one of which is interacting with other people on a human level.

Harry came back from Afghanistan in 2013 . He didn't leave the Army until Spring 2015. 2014 was spent planning Invictus London and then he had a month attached to the Australian military in 2015 right before he left. He also had his South Pole Trek. If he was Capt Henry Smith would the British Army be so accommodating to allow Capt Smith to plan his pet project or be sent to Australia for a month? So his royal status had good and bad qualities when he was in the military.

Yes, @Skippyboo, clearly in the Youtube interview I linked earlier, Prince Harry touched on the points you are making. It's obvious that his position precipitated the decision because his options in the military conflicted with his royal status. And I've heard it said that Harry also felt unduly pressured by palace courtiers about his role in the military.

What has he done? He's still in a relationship with Meghan and not giving the press anything much to see or write about.

Exactly. I was planning to point out this underlying irritation that many press observers have betrayed which indicates how they feel about MM. @Royal Norway mentioned in an earlier post that DF's Rachel Johnson 'has praised' Harry in the past. But so what? That's not proof of anything in particular. Harry has always tended to be a popular prince with the media and the general public, which does not mean they aren't always on the lookout to criticize him when the mood hits or the weather changes. It seems to me that quite a few journalists who cover the royals initially voiced skepticism about MM's so-called 'suitability' as a royal girlfriend. The irritation in the press as well as the outright slurs, Internet trolling, and pap hounding are the reasons why Prince Harry felt the need to depart with protocol and release a strong statement to the press last November.

IMHO none of the media are particularly trustworthy. I used to work for an established publication in the U.S. On general non-controversial topics most reputable publications make an effort to be accurate if they are monthlies (especially the magazine I used to work for), but not every error is caught. Weeklies and newspapers are often full of errors big and small. But more significantly, most publications slant stories to their point of view, or otherwise enhance details and take things out of context to sensationalize for clickbait profit motive.

I'm sure Harry did express much of what has been reported, but most of it is out-of-context. We haven't seen a full video of him speaking in context. The reporting, especially over the length of time mentioned, is an indicator that the story is being pieced together from snippets of conversations that took place months ago.

 

[Skippyboo]

General News for Prince Harry, Part 1: December 2016 -

KP's tweet about William's birthday was a picture of just William with thanks for many birthday well wishes. How is that a snub to Charlotte?

William's GQ interview was actually a pretty good example of how to do one of these interviews. It was somewhat narrow in its focus. You had the questions posed by Alistar Campbell and William's answers. It didn't have the unnamed royal sources of Harry's Newsweek interview. We also don't see what questions were being asked of Harry only various quotes.

 

[Skippyboo]

Yes, @Skippyboo, clearly in the Youtube interview I linked earlier, Prince Harry touched on the points you are making. It's obvious that his position precipitated the decision because his options in the military conflicted with his royal status. And I've heard it said that Harry also felt unduly pressured by palace courtiers about his role in the military.



Exactly. I was planning to point out this underlying irritation that many press observers have betrayed which indicates how they feel about MM. @Royal Norway mentioned in an earlier post that DF's Rachel Johnson 'has praised' Harry in the past. But so what? That's not proof of anything in particular. Harry has always tended to be a popular prince with the media and the general public, which does not mean they aren't always on the lookout to criticize him when the mood hits or the weather changes. It seems to me that quite a few journalists who cover the royals initially voiced skepticism about MM's so-called 'suitability' as a royal girlfriend. The irritation in the press as well as the outright slurs and trolling are the reason why Prince Harry felt the need to depart with protocol and release a strong statement to the press last November.

IMHO none of the media are particularly trustworthy. I used to work for an established publication in the U.S. On general non-controversial topics most reputable publications make an effort to be accurate if they are monthlies (especially the magazine I used to work for), but not every error is caught. Weeklies and newspapers are often full of errors big and small. But more significantly, most publications slant stories to their point of view, or otherwise enhance details and take things out of context to sensationalize for clickbait profit motive.

I'm sure Harry did express much of what has been reported, but most of it is out-of-context. We haven't seen a full video of him speaking in context. The reporting, especially over the length of time mentioned, is an indicator that the story is being pieced together from snippets of conversations that took place months ago.

There is always going to be pressure from the royal side. Would William be giving up his Air Ambulance job and moving his family to London if he wasn't in his position in the royal family? Harry still has more freedom than his brother. Just like Anne, Andrew and Edward had more freedom career wise then Charles did.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

KP's tweet about William's birthday was a picture of just William with thanks for many birthday well wishes. How is that a snub to Charlotte?

Dman was referring to the Father's Day photo of William and George.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

My goodness there are so many variant and quixotic opinions being expressed here. Of course, we are not all going to agree, but I'm with O-H Anglophile re the fact that all of this is a tempest in a teapot and so overblown.

As I mentioned earlier, Prince Harry is talking about struggles he went through during his twenties, and pointing out with forward-looking optimism what he has learned as a result of his struggles. He is also clearly expressing that he has found himself more comfortable in his role as he has grown. He's being straightforward and honest. As the second son, he has more leeway to do so than does William. Prince William bears the heavier weight of being a future monarch, so he would be more circumspect in his responses, plus he has a different personality. But I do not think that William differs dramatically from Harry in his feelings regarding the burdens and pressures of being a royal.

 

[Osipi]

Its summertime and with not much really happening in the royal world to keep our interest going, we can often take one thing and stretch it out enough to write quite a thick book about it.

C'mon Harry. Send some photos of elephants or something willya?

 

[O-H Anglophile]

There is always going to be pressure from the royal side. Would William be giving up his Air Ambulance job and moving his family to London if he wasn't in his position in the royal family? Harry still has more freedom than his brother. Just like Anne, Andrew and Edward had more freedom career wise then Charles did.

I absolutely think William and his family would stay in Norfolk and he would be a full time air ambulance pilot were he not an heir to the throne. If he were in Harry's position he might even be able to make the current status quo permanent--royal duties and part time work.

Perhaps siblings have a little more freedom than a direct heir, but it doesn't seem like there is much freedom until you are a distant cousin of the monarch. And even the Duke of Gloucester had to give up his architectural career when he inherited the title.

Edited to add-Before I get called on this-I know Richard is not a "distant" cousin of the Queen's.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Well, yes, and in an earlier time (not so long ago) Richard's brother, William of Gloucester, (see the documentary I linked earlier) felt even more pressure and there was clearly no chance that he would ever inherit the throne.

And here I go with another book @Osipi , so pardon me for elaborating on a few other points of discussion before I sign off for the day.

As I mentioned, none of us are going to agree on every point, nor have the same perceptions. I often think it's a good idea to examine my own attitudes and motivations which can help in my understanding of why I think the way I do. I say that because what we are all doing is projecting our own feelings onto incidents, faulty press reports, snippets of quotes and topics that we digest and regurgitate without always having accurate confirmation or reliable primary sources. I have read a lot of books about the royal family and watched a lot of documentaries and interviews with royals and conversed with other royal followers, but that's the extent of my knowledge, obviously combined with my own experiences of living in the world. Bottom line, we don't know what we don't know, so for the most part we are guessing based on what we do know, or think we know. In addition, some followers here appear to be bringing some very strong opinions about the way they feel royals are 'supposed to act.' And that is the stance/ attitude which I disagree with.

None of us know what the other royals feel about Prince Harry's recent interviews. They are likely aware of Harry's feelings and many of them likely share with him at least the sense of being too often hounded by the press. Back in the day, Princess Anne curtailed her equestrian career because of OTT press attention during her competitive events, which bothered her horses and caused undue distractions for her fellow competitors. I saw this expressed in a documentary I recently viewed about Princess Anne. Remember the tempest in a teapot made over video of Prince William Dad-dancing at a ski resort in Verbier. There was really nothing to that but OTT mother hen reactions, pearl-clutching, and silly raising of eyebrows. William was attempting to have some down time with friends and obviously someone decided to take video simply because of who he is. It blew over fairly quickly, and William even made humorous reference to his lack of dancing skills later during a charity promo visit to Radio One.

I'll bet that Queen Elizabeth by force of will learned how to hide her true feelings behind the warmth of her regal smile. She was raised during a different time and her personality is very calm, reserved, and dutiful, so she learned to adapt to the role she was raised and groomed to inherit. As a young queen, she probably often felt the need to defer to ancient male counselors and prime ministers not just on matters of state, but on personal matters involving her own family. She persevered because she was raised to do her duty, but I'm quite certain it has never been easy for her. It's the strength of her character and the vow she made to her country so many years ago as an eager, bright-eyed young Princess with the world in front of her: "I declare that my life whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service..."

And as Harry said, it was his devotion, admiration and respect for his grandmother, the Queen, which ultimately led to him finding a way to carve out something meaningful he could do to help support and serve her. But again, I would suspect there are private conversations the Queen has had with her grandsons of which we will never know anything about. I get the impression that she leads by example and offers nuggets of wisdom, but that she does not demand, push or force any of her family members.

Harry's quoted reference to modernizing the monarchy could mean any number of things regarding palace operations, household staff, royal courtiers, royal traditions, general extended family-related concerns, the royal purse, etc., which have probably been discussed privately among the Queen, Prince Charles, Prince Philip, Prince William and Prince Harry. Actually, Harry specifically mentioned changes focused on utilizing technology and social media to update ways the royal family communicates with the public. And, there have already been many indications that Prince Charles has plans to streamline 'the firm' when he inherits the throne. None of this is exactly a secret being kept from the Queen. She surely already knows and expects that many things will change once her reign ends. Leading a royal existence is nothing if not scheduled and planned years in advance. The Queen may not be actively involved in the details of planned changes, but she's surely aware of and perhaps in agreement with some of the proposed changes, or at least with the overall strategy and need for change. With her years of experience, I'm sure the Queen also knows that while it pays to be prepared, there's no way to gauge the outcome of every future development.

 

[M. Payton]

Curryong, although I rarely agree with your posts, I do appreciate them. But if this post was directed at me, then I don't thinks it's fair.

1. I adore and love HM (as most peole does) and I therefore follows her.

2. I'm a great admirer of Charles and I therefor follows him and I think Camilla does a great job.

3. I'm a big fan of William and Kate and I therefor follows them.

4. I'm also a big fan of Sophie and follows her.

5. I've never been very interested in Philip, Harry, Anne, Andrew and Edward or the so-called minor royals, but I have respect for the work they does.

6. And I'm often around in the Harry's threads, although I don't write here so often, but this is a special situation who affects the monarchy.

7. And you must accept that people don't always agree with you, I have to accept that all the time on this forum.

8. You can write that you disagree, but you can do it in a pleasant way. I think I've become a bit better in doing this than I was before, but I know that I have a tendency to still get irritaded when you and others praise Diana like no one else and attack those who disagree.

More about Harry:

Dickie Arbiter and Rachel Johnson are both pro Harry and have praised him in the past, so they are not out after Harry because of some stupid agenda and I agree with everything they say about this.

Dickie Arbiter‏ @RoyalDickie
He should never been let loose. He's not exactly brain of Britain when it come what to & what not to say

Dickie Arbiter‏ @RoyalDickie
At the end of a week in which Prince Harry bared his soul, he should read Rachel Johnson and digest

This is really worth a read:
Prince Harry on the perils of 'doing a Ratner'* | Daily Mail Online

Just a great comment RN and I so agree with RJ on her comment about Harry........He needs to be very quiet for a very long time now, I bet my last stick of gum his brother, father, grandmother and grandfather are wanting to shake him and toss him in the dungeon so he learns to shut the heck up..........we the people need and want the monarchy and he has no clue what *ordinary* really is, shopping for your groceries is not the only ordinary thing we done in life, we face the hard times when money is short, when the car breaks down, when the lease is up and wonder what the rent increase will be..........those are some of the ordinary that he will never face.........so please Prince Harry, do what you do best, promote your charities and be very still and quiet and listen to others who know best for you still have lots of growing up to do.

 

[Curryong]

You know what I wish and hope for? That all the people, in the media, both print and online, and in forums like this one, that have been pontificating about Harry's lack of brain power, maturity and lack of tact etc, on and on and on, lavish as much praise on him when he does what he does supremely well, like WellChild and Invictus later this year, as they have poured criticism, disdain and contempt on him for his interview, continuously over the last three days.