Twitter Lashes Out at Prince Harry: Bitter, Delusional, Family-Trashing Halfwit

[String]

It worked

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/10/prince-harrys-autobiography-spare-is-fastest-selling-non-fiction-book

Personally I couldn’t give a **** about any of them and the whole obsequious system should be dumped in the sea.

[mpriestnall]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Euc1JskB7Uo

A quote from the comments:

Quote
Jackaljkljkl
Henry VII was from an illigitimate line from John of Gaunt, while his wife (Elizabeth of York) was the daughter of King Edward IV - who we now know was not the true son of Richard, Duke of York - and a commoner, Elizabeth Woodville.

This makes the subsequent lineage from Margaret Tudor illegitimate.

Also, after Queen Anne, George I was not even in the Top 50 in line for the throne, but the rest were all Catholic.
Unquote

[Ally]

I find it interesting. Nothing to show that all the money, training and breeding in the world can't stop people from acting like pure trailer trash if they've got a camera in their face.

However... this is an interesting case in which while, I think it's kind of trashy to be doing this but also, watching how the media "spins" the book as opposed to what he actually says in the book has been interesting. I don't think Harry is a pure soul, I think his motives are suspect, but no more so than anyone else. He's a product of his environment. I think Megan is probably as trash as the rest of them. But beyond doubt, the Royal Family is winning the PR game, simply because they are giving the press much less ammunition to use against them. But it cannot be denied that the media is straight up mischaracterizing and spinning crap in a way he did not say. He absolutely did not brag about killing Taliban soldiers, and it is straight up grotesque irresponsibility for the media to have spun it as him saying that. I haven't read the entire book, and I won't, because I really don't care that much, but I did read the excerpted passage and the way it was characterized in the press was straight up the opposite of what he was saying.

However, he's also got some credibility problems when he's out and out doing what he's railed against and accused others of doing. How is it right for Megs to cut off her father for leaking and dealing with the press when they are doing the same? And then saying it's on his family to extend the olive branch? Like, so when you do it's justified and they're to blame, when someone else does it, they're to blame and you're the victim? How are you always the victim in all circumstances? You don't get to claim the high ground when you're playing in the gutter yourself. If it's not justified for one person to do it, it's not justified for you to do it either.

Everyone always sees themselves as the hero of their story, beset from all sides by external forces, when usually, everyone is their own worst enemy. Harry appears to be the prime example of this.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It looks like the only ‘winners’ in this story are the very people that Harry has most problem with…the Press. I’d have to ask who Harry was taking advice from, if anyone, before he went ahead with the interviews and the book? It might have appeared to him that he’d be shooting into an open goal because he knew that the Royal Family won’t respond in public to any of his grievances but surely he should have been warned that this might backfire as the public might see the ‘dignified silence’ approach more favourably. Whether we like the RF or not it doesn’t take a genius to see that William and Catherine are incredibly popular so why did he think that it was a great plan to try and paint them as the bad guys?

If anyone genuinely wants to heal a family rift (and there could be fault on both sides of course) how can the best approach be to go on TV and then write a book? The RF hate bad publicity so surely they’d have been amenable to potentially conciliatory talks? If no one wanted to make the first move then it’s up to the boss. An increasingly frail Queen probably wasn’t up to it so it’s down to Charles. Is it too late though? Either way, the media won’t be complaining..left or right wing.

[DJA]

Games People Play (book) - Wikipedia

[DJA]

The essence of games described by Berne are that they are not zero-sum games (i.e. one must win at the other's expense), where the person who benefits from a transaction wins the game. On the contrary, the "games people play" usually pay all of the players off, even those who ostensibly are the losers, since they are about psychic equilibrium or promoting adopted self-damaging social roles instead of rational benefits. These payoffs are not consciously sought by the players but they are leading to the ultimate unconscious life script of each as set by their parental family interactions and favored emotions.

[Ally]

If anyone genuinely wants to heal a family rift (and there could be fault on both sides of course) how can the best approach be to go on TV and then write a book?

This is where I am at. Like my problem with this is, no one who actually wants to heal a family rift goes on a press junket to do it. Whether you are Megan Markle's father or the king of England's son. So it seems his actual goal is not rehabilitate his family situation, but his image in the wider world. Which is a very... I don't know... shallow goal to me. But then I don't give a **** how the wider world views me and I certainly wasn't raised to believe that the entire world cared about me because I was a member of a "very special dynasty" so I haven't had that warped indoctrination since childhood. Maybe if you are raised that way, how the world views you is actually more important than your family relationships.

[caz]

I find it interesting. Nothing to show that all the money, training and breeding in the world can't stop people from acting like pure trailer trash if they've got a camera in their face.

However... this is an interesting case in which while, I think it's kind of trashy to be doing this but also, watching how the media "spins" the book as opposed to what he actually says in the book has been interesting. I don't think Harry is a pure soul, I think his motives are suspect, but no more so than anyone else. He's a product of his environment. I think Megan is probably as trash as the rest of them. But beyond doubt, the Royal Family is winning the PR game, simply because they are giving the press much less ammunition to use against them. But it cannot be denied that the media is straight up mischaracterizing and spinning crap in a way he did not say. He absolutely did not brag about killing Taliban soldiers, and it is straight up grotesque irresponsibility for the media to have spun it as him saying that. I haven't read the entire book, and I won't, because I really don't care that much, but I did read the excerpted passage and the way it was characterized in the press was straight up the opposite of what he was saying.

However, he's also got some credibility problems when he's out and out doing what he's railed against and accused others of doing. How is it right for Megs to cut off her father for leaking and dealing with the press when they are doing the same? And then saying it's on his family to extend the olive branch? Like, so when you do it's justified and they're to blame, when someone else does it, they're to blame and you're the victim? How are you always the victim in all circumstances? You don't get to claim the high ground when you're playing in the gutter yourself. If it's not justified for one person to do it, it's not justified for you to do it either.

Everyone always sees themselves as the hero of their story, beset from all sides by external forces, when usually, everyone is their own worst enemy. Harry appears to be the prime example of this.

What Ally said.

By all means criticise anyone in the public eye for what they have actually said, written, done or not done, but when the gutter press lie [let's not mince words here] about this, it is surely worth asking why, if the person concerned really has condemned himself out of his own mouth.

Harry is arguably his own worst enemy, but he was born in the public eye so I don't know how that feels, although it will be different for everyone. How would any of us feel if we had the royal 'genes' which come with a strict code of conduct - never complain, never explain - which simply doesn't apply to the vast majority of us? It's easy to have thick skin if you are currently popular with the media, or at least being left alone. But thin skin is not a crime, and when the media turns, doesn't everyone deserve the right to defend themselves, no matter how privileged they may be compared to the rest of us?

In this regard I would take issue with what Herlock wrote [sorry, Herlock!] while roasting Harry, about hard earned freedoms being eroded, appearance now being more important than substance, and trial by social media being the norm.

It's the media who have made appearance more important than substance in this case, by deliberately twisting the substance of Harry's words about the Taliban to give entirely the wrong impression about him, presumably banking on their readership being too thick, or too busy lapping up all the hate, to bother with what the author himself wrote.

What about Harry's freedom to write a book, giving his own account so the public can decide what to think, based on his own words and not the rancid opinions churned out by the media? Should his freedom be eroded, just because others feel they are losing their own? As for the complaint about 'trial by social media' being the norm, isn't this precisely why Harry is not meekly lying down and taking it? Is he supposed to go away and shut up, just because of his parentage, while everyone else can take pot shots to preserve their own freedom of speech, regardless of whether their views are their own and based on reality, or plucked from the mucky pages of the Daily Mail?

Why isn't all this hate and anger - and more - directed at that other carrier of royal genes, Andrew, who used his wealth to buy himself out of trouble? We can all be truly thankful that this piece of work was born the monarch's second son.

I'm far from fond of any of them, and respect should always be earned, not taken for granted. But I see Harry as no better or worse for speaking up for himself, than any of his relatives for sticking to 'no comment'.

Love,

Caz
X

[Christian]

When I was younger I was fairly ambivalent about the RF too but I see so much of our history being trashed and so much of the modern world that I genuinely loathe (yes, I know…grumpy old [or older] man syndrome) that I find myself feeling more defensive against at least some of our institutions (certainly not all). Harry appears to represent this modern world to a great extent with his non-stop bleating. Using the media, who he apparently hates, to gain some kind of popularity knowing full well that the Royal Family won’t respond. It’s cowardly. And then we have this baffling and never-ending attempt at turning Diana in to some kind of saint. Really? Charles was unfaithful with one woman certainly. Diana was linked to a veritable football team of men but no one mentions this. It’s permanently one-sided. The RF needs pruning and I’d start with this vacuous, waste-of-space pair.

I don’t think I could be in the same room as Harry to be honest Ms D. I’d be too temped to punch the self-obsessed, time wasting ginger kn**head.

Hope you had a good Christmas btw?

Quality!! But pretty spot on regarding the pair of media whores H

[Abby Normal]

His book is signed Prince Harry in big letters across the top! oh the irony.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What Ally said.

By all means criticise anyone in the public eye for what they have actually said, written, done or not done, but when the gutter press lie [let's not mince words here] about this, it is surely worth asking why, if the person concerned really has condemned himself out of his own mouth.

Harry is arguably his own worst enemy, but he was born in the public eye so I don't know how that feels, although it will be different for everyone. How would any of us feel if we had the royal 'genes' which come with a strict code of conduct - never complain, never explain - which simply doesn't apply to the vast majority of us? It's easy to have thick skin if you are currently popular with the media, or at least being left alone. But thin skin is not a crime, and when the media turns, doesn't everyone deserve the right to defend themselves, no matter how privileged they may be compared to the rest of us?

In this regard I would take issue with what Herlock wrote [sorry, Herlock!] while roasting Harry, about hard earned freedoms being eroded, appearance now being more important than substance, and trial by social media being the norm.

It's the media who have made appearance more important than substance in this case, by deliberately twisting the substance of Harry's words about the Taliban to give entirely the wrong impression about him, presumably banking on their readership being too thick, or too busy lapping up all the hate, to bother with what the author himself wrote.

What about Harry's freedom to write a book, giving his own account so the public can decide what to think, based on his own words and not the rancid opinions churned out by the media? Should his freedom be eroded, just because others feel they are losing their own? As for the complaint about 'trial by social media' being the norm, isn't this precisely why Harry is not meekly lying down and taking it? Is he supposed to go away and shut up, just because of his parentage, while everyone else can take pot shots to preserve their own freedom of speech, regardless of whether their views are their own and based on reality, or plucked from the mucky pages of the Daily Mail?

Why isn't all this hate and anger - and more - directed at that other carrier of royal genes, Andrew, who used his wealth to buy himself out of trouble? We can all be truly thankful that this piece of work was born the monarch's second son.

I'm far from fond of any of them, and respect should always be earned, not taken for granted. But I see Harry as no better or worse for speaking up for himself, than any of his relatives for sticking to 'no comment'.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

When I mentioned ‘hard earned freedoms being eroded, appearance now being more important than substance and trial by social media being the norm’ I was really talking about life in general rather than about the Harry situation. They’re some of the reasons why I don’t have a more optimistic outlook.

As far as Harry is concerned I certainly agree with your point about the malign influence of the Press who like nothing more that stirring the you-know-what. They’re the only ‘winners’ in this situation. One real issue with Harry though is that he knows that the Royal Family don’t respond to this kind of thing so he knew that he could fire indiscriminately and that there would be no bullets coming back in his and Megan’s direction. It’s like poking a lion with a long stick through the bars of a cage. The public certainly get to know Harry’s side of things but nothing from the other side.

I don’t really know enough about the Andrew situation so I don’t know if he was actually guilty of anything or not. If he was then there’s no defending it of course. I don’t like the idea of ‘paying someone off’ but I’m equally wary of someone willing to be ‘paid off’ rather than seeking justice in court. I think that I’ve mentioned on here before somewhere though that I knew someone who, during his career, once had to show Prince Charles around a workplace and then later showed Prince Andrew around another. He said that Charles was friendly, open and talkative. He absolutely hated Andrew though, arrogant, dismissive and irritable, we’re the words I think he used.

We’ll probably have to agree to disagree on Harry and Meghan Caz but I’ve no issue with that (it’s not often that we disagree) I have absolutely no time for the pair of them. If I was King I’d strip them both of titles, cash, everything and let them just be the celebrity couple that they clearly want to be. To be honest I’m just curious as to how this will end? I’ve a feeling that after a while things will go quiet then there’ll be some kind of reconciliation. Either that or Charles will have them locked in the Tower.

[Ally]

I don't really know enough about the Andrew situation so I don’t know if he was actually guilty of anything or not. If he was then there's no defending it of course. I don't like the idea of paying someone off but I equally wary of someone willing to be paid off rather than seeking justice in court.

So speaks someone who has never once in their life been put in a position of having been sexually abused by someone and then in order to prove you were assaulted have to have your entire sexual life and history raked over in court to prove you were "pure enough" to have been assaulted. I can 100 percent completely understand how someone can think that they want to pursue something in court, and who, when they sit down for their first deposition and get asked by the opposing counsel, "So you say he forced you to perform oral sex, have you ever consented to giving a man oral sex?" "How many times, how many men"?, "Have you ever consented to anal"? And being forced to answer intrusive questions about your sexual history, I can absolutely 100 percent see that person saying, **** this, this is it's like being assaulted all over again, it's not worth it, and saying, "Give me the check". If of course they were lucky enough to be assaulted by someone with the coin. And if they weren't, just giving up and going home.

Trials re-victimize the victims repeatedly.

[caz]

Hi Caz,

We’ll probably have to agree to disagree on Harry and Meghan Caz but I’ve no issue with that (it’s not often that we disagree) I have absolutely no time for the pair of them. If I was King I’d strip them both of titles, cash, everything and let them just be the celebrity couple that they clearly want to be. To be honest I’m just curious as to how this will end? I’ve a feeling that after a while things will go quiet then there’ll be some kind of reconciliation. Either that or Charles will have them locked in the Tower.

Hi Herlock,

I don't have much time for any of them, frankly, but if Harry wants to have a public fight with a family that won't [not can't, it's their choice] respond to his perceived peeves, either publicly or behind closed doors, nobody has to listen to it or read a single word about it. It would bore me to tears, so I only pop in with the odd general observation.

It made me laugh when I heard on the radio about a recent front page headline in one of the rags: 'Spare us!', before the readers were subjected to umpteen pages of the latest drivel on what Harry did next. The paper had absolutely no intention of sparing its readers! But it's our choice whether to spare ourselves the grief or let the Carry On Harry show into our private living rooms.

I understand that proceeds from the book will be going to charity, and it has already sold more than 1.43 million copies, so I don't have to read it to appreciate the gesture. I saw a pop-up on my screen earlier, telling me Harry is now more 'unpopular' than Andrew [WTF???], whose massive out-of-court settlement could have done a lot of good for victim support charities if he hadn't been such an effing loser. But I suppose he will be praised for keeping a 'dignified' silence compared with his nephew.

Now to lighten the mood with a message I received this morning:

'Turns out Harry didn't shoot 25 Taliban after all. He captured them and spent the next few hours telling them what an awful life he'd had... they shot themselves.'

The moral of the story being that we are not a captive audience unless we want to be.

How hard can it be?

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

So speaks someone who has never once in their life been put in a position of having been sexually abused by someone and then in order to prove you were assaulted have to have your entire sexual life and history raked over in court to prove you were "pure enough" to have been assaulted. I can 100 percent completely understand how someone can think that they want to pursue something in court, and who, when they sit down for their first deposition and get asked by the opposing counsel, "So you say he forced you to perform oral sex, have you ever consented to giving a man oral sex?" "How many times, how many men"?, "Have you ever consented to anal"? And being forced to answer intrusive questions about your sexual history, I can absolutely 100 percent see that person saying, **** this, this is it's like being assaulted all over again, it's not worth it, and saying, "Give me the check". If of course they were lucky enough to be assaulted by someone with the coin. And if they weren't, just giving up and going home.

Trials re-victimize the victims repeatedly.

I’m speaking as someone who doesn’t know what actually happened, that’s all. Without knowing the full extent of the evidence should we assume innocence or guilt or is it more reasonable to say that we simply don’t know? Andrew might well have been guilty and paid for her silence. Yes it’s an absolutely fair point that she might not have wanted to be exposed to the trauma of being accused of being a liar or having the prosecution attempt to paint her in a derogatory way. But as we simply don’t know the full details it also could be that she didn’t want any holes in her story to be exposed in court. How can we know which is true? I’m not making an assumption either way.

Whatever the alleged crime the accused and the accusers are always going to be portrayed as liars by the prosecution and the defence and yes this must be a horribly traumatic experience but is there an alternative? I don’t know enough about the law to know what’s allowed and what’s not when it comes to questioning a witness and what changes need to be made or can be made? I don’t have the answers especially in cases where it’s basically one persons word against another’s. Money and position certainly shouldn’t come into it though of course.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

I don't have much time for any of them, frankly, but if Harry wants to have a public fight with a family that won't [not can't, it's their choice] respond to his perceived peeves, either publicly or behind closed doors, nobody has to listen to it or read a single word about it. It would bore me to tears, so I only pop in with the odd general observation.

It made me laugh when I heard on the radio about a recent front page headline in one of the rags: 'Spare us!', before the readers were subjected to umpteen pages of the latest drivel on what Harry did next. The paper had absolutely no intention of sparing its readers! But it's our choice whether to spare ourselves the grief or let the Carry On Harry show into our private living rooms.

I understand that proceeds from the book will be going to charity, and it has already sold more than 1.43 million copies, so I don't have to read it to appreciate the gesture. I saw a pop-up on my screen earlier, telling me Harry is now more 'unpopular' than Andrew [WTF???], whose massive out-of-court settlement could have done a lot of good for victim support charities if he hadn't been such an effing loser. But I suppose he will be praised for keeping a 'dignified' silence compared with his nephew.

Now to lighten the mood with a message I received this morning:

'Turns out Harry didn't shoot 25 Taliban after all. He captured them and spent the next few hours telling them what an awful life he'd had... they shot themselves.'

The moral of the story being that we are not a captive audience unless we want to be.

How hard can it be?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

Perhaps I’m just too resistant to this practice of people in general baring their souls in public? It all seems a bit Jeremy Kyle to me.

To be honest I’m not particularly interested in the story as it is and I suspect that it will fizzle out after some behind-the-scenes reconciliation. I certainly don’t favour Harry and Meghan but it’s not something I’m losing sleep over. I’m just deeply suspicious of people going straight to the Press.

I like the idea of him boring the Taliban to death. Now, if he could actually do that he’d be my hero.