Prince Harry Current Events 24: May 2009-August 2010


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Princes William and Harry were ‘very upset’ after their favourite polo pony
collapsed and died of a heart attack during a match.
Click to expand...

why put it in ''??
This is a tragic accident, it's such awful that Harry had just rode her before she died. :ermm:
I hope the boys are okay.
 
I'm glad they took Drizzle off the field before she died. It would've been worse if she collapsed with Harry still riding her.
Poor Harry. It's so difficult losing a long time pet. They become like one of the family. :sad:
 
How sad! I cried my eyes out when my guinea pig died, so I can't imagine a beloved horse. Horses are so very calm and unbelievably smart. They're just like a best friend. No wonder why he's crying and sad. Poor guy:(
 
How terrible for Harry that his horse has died. I don't know much about horses, but the article says the horse was a "pony" which to me means a young horse, but ten years seems like an old age. What is the average age a horse lives to be?
 
A pony is smaller than a full-size horse. I don't know much about horses, but I think that a pony is a differenct species. They're "chunkier" than horses. I saw a post somewhere that a horse can live to over 20 years of age.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
First, congratulations to Prince Harry for getting his wings! Prince Charles looks so proud of his son!

Second, I'm so sorry for Harry losing his pony Drizzle. So sad.

Sheesh, what a week Harry has had. :ermm:
 
The article does't give a direct link to anything that says that they have actually said this. And it's a possibilty, why comment on a possibility.
 
I'm so happy for Harry that he has earned his wings. All of his hard work has paid off! :clap:
 
This is news!!

I would have said it was common sense that they would say this and even try this, including making an attack in London where he is very accessible at times.
 
:previous: So it looks as though they played polo Saturday and Sunday. It's good that they got back in the saddle again after losing their pony. :mountie:
 
Looks like he'll have to knuckle down for awhile after his trip to South Africa.
 
:bang: Those people who commented on that DM article are so annoying. I doubt Prince Harry would have bodyguards if he had a choice. It just happens to be the law and probably, loads of people who get in deep do-do if he wasn't protected on this trip.

BTW: I love how he looks in that brown uniform. So he's got 2 medals now...... plus his wings. I haven't kept up in awhile, as you can tell. ;)
 
I don't think it is the 'law' as sensible practice for someone in his position. Afterall there has been talk of removing the protection from Andrew's daughters who are just as much the Queen's grandchildren and Anne's kids don't have any at all.

As for the medals. The first one he got was before he joined the army. It is the same one that William has and it was given by the Queen at the time of her Golden Jubilee in 2002. They will both get another one in 2012 just for being the Queen's grandsons and another one when Charles is crowned for being his sons etc.

These medals are the Jubilee medals and all the male members of the Royal Family have them. If you look at photos of Charles as a young boy he is often seen wearing a medal and that is the Queen's Coronation medal and later he got the Silver and then Golden Jubilee medals. Andrew and Edward only have the Jubilee medals as they weren't at the Queen's Coronation, not having been born at the time.

The second medal Harry is wearing is the medal for his service in Afghanistan which is awarded to all service personnel in Britain who spend a certain number of weeks there. William doesn't have that one as he hasn't served in a combat zone. Andrew has the equivalent for the Falklands campaign of 1982. Charles doesn't have a campaign medal and nor does Edward. Philip of course has a number of them from WWII, and not only from Britain but also from Greece and Denmark (as he was a Prince of Greece and Denmark at the time the Kings of both those countries also awarded him medals).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's good to see you post here again CasiraghiTrio.
Also, people tend to forget that he would have to have bodyguards no matter where he was or what he was doing so it's not necessarily costing extra.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The extra cost is their plane flights and accomodation not their day to day salary.
Also I remember when Eugenie was on her gap year an additional complaint was that the bodyguards have to be changed every couple of weeks away from home and have to fly first class and when off duty be accomodated in first class hotels etc (this came out because Eugenie was staying in a back-packer hostel but the off-duty officers were at the closest first class hotel and only the on-duty officer was at the hostel). So every two or so weeks (it might be a month) two new officers will have to fly out first class and those that have been there fly home first class. This is the cost that many people object to as this is taxpayers pounds not the Prince's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Iluvbertie said:
I don't think it is the 'law' as sensible practice for someone in his position. Afterall there has been talk of removing the protection from Andrew's daughters who are just as much the Queen's grandchildren and Anne's kids don't have any at all.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah? I didn't know all this. I thought the law was that the first 10 in the succession had to be protected.
As for the medals...
Click to expand...
That's right. I totally forgot all of that. So I guess William only has the GJ medal. I heard Harry might go back to Afghanistan, to fly helicopters now that he has his wings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CasiraghiTrio said:
Oh yeah? I didn't know all this. I thought the law was that the first 10 in the succession had to be protected.
Click to expand...

No there is no place that needs protection as such.

Remember the Peter and Zara have never had protection and when they were born they were 5th and 6th in line. Princess Margaret's kids also have never had protection and until 1977 they were 6th and 7th and have steadily moved down as Peter, Zara, William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and then James were born. Peter was in the top 10 until Louise was born which was when he was well into his 20s. Lord Linley was also in the first 10 until well in his 20s (until Beatrice was born in 1988) and he also never had protection.

Even the Duke of Gloucesters and Kent haven't had full time protection all their lives and yet at times they were also in the first 10.

These days outside of the Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, Wiliam, Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Sophie and Anne no one has full time protection but the Gloucesters and Kents get it when on official duties only.

Personally I think the first 5 should have it 24/7 and other than that only the children of the monarch but not their children or spouses so that would mean The Queen, DoE, Charles, Camilla, William, Harry, Andrew and Beatrice but not Eugenie, Sophie, Louise, James or Anne's children etc.
 
CasiraghiTrio said:
Oh yeah? I didn't know all this. I thought the law was that the first 10 in the succession had to be protected.
Click to expand...
The law doesn't say anything at all as to who gets police protection. The decision comes from the police (and the protection officers salaries come out of the police budget). So currently the policy from the police is that all HRHs receive 24/7 police protection. That is minor royals as well, the Michael of Kents as they are HRHs receive protection, the Philips children, even though they are higher on the succession ladder receive no police protection as they are not HRHs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Gloucesters and Kents haven't had police protection all their lives as the protection royals received was reviewed and upgraded first in 1973 after the kidnapping attempt on Princess Anne. Prior to 1973 royals didn't get 24/7 protection, none of them did. Then it was reviewed again after the assassination of Earl Mountbatten in 1979 and the IRA campaign.

The Gloucesters and Kents do get 24/7 protection, not just when on official duties, they are HRHs. What has changed is that when on overseas trips, the protection officers aren't sent from the UK (Policeforce) but local police provide the protection. The 'higher ups' Harry in this case has their protection officers coming from the UK, and hence the expense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quite frankly I question whether this article is even true. Afterall it is the Daily Mail who are never accurate regarding the royals' travel plans. I also think the title is misleading by calling it a 5-week holiday. If he is in Africa it's simply to spend time with his girlfriend who happens to live there. He also may be checking on his charity that's located there.
 
If he isn't there officially or on military duty then it is a holiday.
It does make sense as Harry does spend a lot of time on holiday and there is a statement from CH that he doesn't start the next phase of his training until the end of summer and then has 8 months of training before another holiday.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

An Ard Ri
  • Sticky
Prince Daniel's Current Events, Part 4
Replies
15
Views
2K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
iceflower
King Frederik X, Current Events Part 1: January 2024 -
2 3
Replies
69
Views
9K
Izzie
Izzie
iceflower
Prince Albert & Princess Charlene Current Events Part 6: January 2024 -
Replies
9
Views
3K
iceflower
iceflower
Marengo
  • Sticky
Liechtenstein: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
doro
doro
Hans-Rickard
Crown Prince Christian, News and Current Events Part 1: January 2024 -
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
Izzie
Izzie

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom