Discussion:
Britain pulls Prince Bullet Magnet out of Afghanistan
(too old to reply)
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 15:20:00 UTC
Permalink
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict. What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet. Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
f***@gmail.com
2008-02-29 15:58:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict. What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet. Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
The UK news media actually protected his presence there. (to protect
the men serving under him) Matt Drudge ,as usual, hides behind
"freedom of the press", when as one UK commentator write...."No it's
not about freedom of speech. It's an issue of being responsible". It
does not reflect on Harry, it reflects our own trashy talking-heads.
A good leader does not want to endanger his men. But the
decision was taken away from Harry, because of a loud mouth , Rush
Limbaugh type.
CJ Buyers
2008-02-29 17:16:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
  You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".

Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
 Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 17:21:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
  You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
 Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd? This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
Don H
2008-02-29 20:11:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd? This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.

# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 20:34:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd?  This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
#  It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
   The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
   Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
   While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Please, do feel free to impugn my courage. It doesn't concern me.
Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
beyond my comprehension. This young man -- Prince Harry -- has done
nothing, will never do nothing, and, indeed, will not be allowed to do
anything. It is precisely his function to do nothing. His function
is to act as an extreme stanard of idleness and inaction to prop up
incompetence, wealth and privilege; a standard of mindless adherence
to "tradition" -- that is, aversion to all progress of any type in
society. The only proof that could possibly be made of his having
taking any actual physical risks in the "front lines" would have been
to have had his royal head blown off. From which we would all
benefit.
Mr.Smartypants
2008-02-29 20:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd?  This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
#  It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
   The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
   Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
   While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Please, do feel free to impugn my courage.  It doesn't concern me.
Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
beyond my comprehension.  This young man  -- Prince Harry -- has done
nothing, will never do nothing, and, indeed, will not be allowed to do
anything.  It is precisely his function to do nothing.  His function
is to act as an extreme stanard of idleness and inaction to prop up
incompetence, wealth and privilege; a standard of mindless adherence
to "tradition" -- that is, aversion to all progress of any type in
society.  The only proof that could possibly be made of his having
taking any actual physical risks in the "front lines" would have been
to have had his royal head blown off.  From which we would all
benefit
I'd rather have the Queen than all the Zionist controlled democracies.
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 20:47:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd?  This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
#  It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
   The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
   Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
   While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Please, do feel free to impugn my courage.  It doesn't concern me.
Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
beyond my comprehension.  This young man  -- Prince Harry -- has done
nothing, will never do nothing, and, indeed, will not be allowed to do
anything.  It is precisely his function to do nothing.  His function
is to act as an extreme stanard of idleness and inaction to prop up
incompetence, wealth and privilege; a standard of mindless adherence
to "tradition" -- that is, aversion to all progress of any type in
society.  The only proof that could possibly be made of his having
taking any actual physical risks in the "front lines" would have been
to have had his royal head blown off.  From which we would all
benefit
I'd rather have the Queen than all the Zionist controlled democracies.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
So, you feel Britain is less "Zionist controlled" -- whatever that
means -- than other democracies? Why?
Praetorian
2008-02-29 22:12:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd? This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection
on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
*Please, do feel free to impugn my courage.

Thanks, I will.

*It doesn't concern me.

Yeah, cowards always say that. Makes them feel better about themselves.

*Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
*to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
*beyond my comprehension.

And not the subject being discussed. Not very bright, are you?

*This young man -- Prince Harry --

Has more courage in his little finger than you have in your whole body. Tell
us that that doesn't bother you.

*has done nothing,

BZZZT! He's done way more than a gutless turd like you ever will.

*will never do nothing,

Correct. (Who do they get to teach English to these retards?)

*and, indeed, will not be allowed to do anything.

To the contrary, he's been to war and faced the people who would kill YOU in
an instant, given the opportunity.

*It is precisely his function to do nothing.

Yet he trained hard and went to war. Quite good of him, really.

Remaining shit flushed.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 22:24:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Praetorian
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd? This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection
on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
*Please, do feel free to impugn my courage.
Thanks, I will.
*It doesn't concern me.
Yeah, cowards always say that. Makes them feel better about themselves.
*Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
*to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
*beyond my comprehension.
And not the subject being discussed. Not very bright, are you?
*This young man  -- Prince Harry --
Has more courage in his little finger than you have in your whole body. Tell
us that that doesn't bother you.
*has done nothing,
BZZZT! He's done way more than a gutless turd like you ever will.
*will never do nothing,
Correct. (Who do they get to teach English to these retards?)
*and, indeed, will not be allowed to do anything.
To the contrary, he's been to war and faced the people who would kill YOU in
an instant, given the opportunity.
*It is precisely his function to do nothing.
Yet he trained hard and went to war. Quite good of him, really.
Remaining shit flushed.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I think, my friend, you very much exaggerate my significance if you
sincerely feel anyone in Afghanistan could possibly care less about me
one way or another. On the other hand, you sound a bit delusional, so
it should come as no surprise that your perception of reality is,
shall we say, slightly warped. If you are in the category of those
inidividuals who feel that "terrorists" -- whoever the hell "they" are
-- are determined to kill everyone, everywhere, at all times, I have a
little news for you: most of them are paid -- by Iran, for example --
to fight specifically against American invaders. Suicide bombers sign
little contracts in which their families get tens of thousands of
dollars after their deaths. In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry. They're
mercenaries. What we have here are mercenaries fighting merenaries.
Mostly over oil. I hope I'm not traumatizing you with this
revelation.
Turenne
2008-02-29 23:07:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Suicide bombers sign
little contracts in which their families get tens of thousands of
dollars after their deaths. In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.
What about the disabled children and female Down's Syndrome suicide
bombers,
did they sign 'little contracts' prior to blowing themselves up?

Richard Lichten
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 15:11:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Turenne
Post by Jerry Kraus
Suicide bombers sign
little contracts in which their families get tens of thousands of
dollars after their deaths.  In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.
What about the disabled children and female Down's Syndrome suicide
bombers,
did they sign 'little contracts' prior to blowing themselves up?
Richard Lichten
Nope. Just their parents. After all, what are children for?

Same as selling them into prostitution or slave labor.
CJ Buyers
2008-03-01 06:42:01 UTC
Permalink
 In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  
You may certainly "doubt" many things, but I don't think "sincerity"
comes anywhere close to your sentiments on anything.

Oh, by the way we don't have a big problem with "mercenaries" in the
British Army. The Gurkhas hold a supremely honourable tradition with
most people in this country. You may like to know, fact-void person,
Prince Harry did part of his service on foot patrol with the Royal
Gurkha Rifles.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 15:20:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
 In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  
You may certainly "doubt" many things, but I don't think "sincerity"
comes anywhere close to your sentiments on anything.
Oh, by the way we don't have a big problem with "mercenaries" in the
British Army. The Gurkhas hold a supremely honourable tradition with
most people in this country. You may like to know, fact-void person,
Prince Harry did part of his service on foot patrol with the Royal
Gurkha Rifles.
Oh, given the history of the British Empire, I'm sure you have no
problem whatsoever with mercenaries in the British Army! You know, I
just read a biography of that charmer, Cecil Rhodes. Persuaded the
British Empire to wipe out every single Boer women and child in
concentration camps, just because they were in the way of his gold and
diamond mines. No wonder the British have to suck up to the Yanks all
the time. Without them, they'd get wiped out by the rest of the
planet, which they spent centuries exploiting!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cecil Rhodes, founder of De Beers -- still the largest diamond
company
in the world -- and, effectively, "conqueror" of half of Africa,
remains an extraordinary illustration of both the best and the worst
in the human character, and in the human condition. The son of a
country cleric, he transferred his early religious faith into a
passionate fervor for the expansion of the British Empire by whatever
means were necessary, as a manifestation of social Darwinism for the
improvement and perfection of the human species. And, in so doing,
he
created an entire sub-culture of "eager young men", passionately
attached to him and his "vision" -- not of a better world, but of a
more British world.

Rhodes travelled to the diamond mines of South Africa as a teenager
in
the early 1870's, did well, used his money to take a degree at
Oxford,
returned to South Africa and used his charm and experience to take
over the mineral markets of Africa. As his power and wealth
increased, he obtained the legal right to use his companies to raise
money for private armies, and to take huge tracts of African land
from
the natives by armed force. He was even successful in direct
confrontations with the imperial armies of the other nations of
Europe. It was Rhodes and his shareholders, against the world!


Rhodes started out as a champion and friend of the black natives, and
ended up by exploiting them and denying them their rights.
Basically,
he was interested in money and power, and would take whatever route
led most directly to this end. I don't believe Rhodes was
particularly a racist. After all, it was Rhodes who caused the Boer
War, in which virtually all women and children of the White Boer
colonists were exterminated in concentration camps by the British
imperialists. He would destroy anything in his way, regardless of
race, age, gender or creed.


Rhodes was certainly one of the models for the character of "Kurtz"
in
Joseph Conrad's famous novella "Heart of Darkness". While the novel
is more commonly associated with the Belgian Congo, and the cruder
violence of small-scale traders in ivory against the natives, it
seems
clear that Conrad had in mind the broader implications of imperialism
and exploitation in general. And no one ever was better at these
than
Rhodes! Fusing the "vision" of Rhodes with the crude tortures
employed by imperialistic thugs against helpless natives gets to the
"heart" of things here: religious perversion. The concept of
tortured, mutilated natives worshipping their exploiters presents a
pretty clear picture of what the capitalist-imperialists had in mind.
And, it clarifies the parallel to the Roman imperialists with their
Emperor-Gods that Conrad makes at the beginning of the book.


Because, this perversion of human nature is the "Horror" of which
Kurtz dies whispering. The reduction of religion and human purpose
to
exploitation and control. Capitalism at its most extreme.


Just as in the Vietnam War, and Francis Ford Coppola's classic
adaptation of "Heart of Darkness" as "Apocalypse Now". Just as now,
with American mercenaries exploiting the people of Iraq for oil,
money
and power. Aided by Vice-President Richard Cheney's private
Blackwater armies...the Horror...the Horror...




http://groups.google.com/group/alt.philosophy/browse_thread/thread/c0497b401f05a2e7/25ffd00ee7225d2d
CJ Buyers
2008-03-01 18:25:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
 In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  
You may certainly "doubt" many things, but I don't think "sincerity"
comes anywhere close to your sentiments on anything.
Oh, by the way we don't have a big problem with "mercenaries" in the
British Army. The Gurkhas hold a supremely honourable tradition with
most people in this country. You may like to know, fact-void person,
Prince Harry did part of his service on foot patrol with the Royal
Gurkha Rifles.
Oh, given the history of the British Empire, I'm sure you have no
problem whatsoever with mercenaries in the British Army,
I told you that already. The Gurkhas have a very honourbale place in
our military history as they continue to do in the Indian Army. You
know India don't you? It used to be part of that empire. Shock,
horror, take a pill! They don't seem to have much of problem with such
mercenaries either.
Post by Jerry Kraus
  You know, I
just read a biography of that charmer, Cecil Rhodes.  Persuaded the
British Empire ...
Somehow I don't quite think he managed to persuade the British Empire
of anything. I am told that his grasp of Hindi, Yoruba and Burmese was
pretty shaky.
Post by Jerry Kraus
to wipe out every single Boer women and child in
concentration camps, just because they were in the way of his gold and
diamond mines.
Oh I think he was helped a little along the way by disease and the
pretty unsanitary habits of some Boers. I dare say that some of them
may well have died from pining for their lost pastimes, shooting and
poisoning Africans.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 No wonder the British have to suck up to the Yanks all
the time.  
Without them, they'd get wiped out by the rest of the
planet, which they spent centuries exploiting!
I don't quite follow. You mean mercenaries and concentration camps are
not enough?

As for exploitation, would you like to tell us what part of the world
your computer was made or the clothes and shoes you are wearing?
Post by Jerry Kraus
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­----
Cecil Rhodes, founder of De Beers -- still the largest diamond
company
in the world -- and, effectively, "conqueror" of half of Africa ...
Last time I looked, neither the former Rhodesias nor South Africa
quite measured up to "half" of Africa.

Alas, this opening isn't very promising on facts and its down hill
thereafter. So I shall stop right here.

As I said before. Fact-void!
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 20:32:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
 In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  
You may certainly "doubt" many things, but I don't think "sincerity"
comes anywhere close to your sentiments on anything.
Oh, by the way we don't have a big problem with "mercenaries" in the
British Army. The Gurkhas hold a supremely honourable tradition with
most people in this country. You may like to know, fact-void person,
Prince Harry did part of his service on foot patrol with the Royal
Gurkha Rifles.
Oh, given the history of the British Empire, I'm sure you have no
problem whatsoever with mercenaries in the British Army,
I told you that already. The Gurkhas have a very honourbale place in
our military history as they continue to do in the Indian Army. You
know India don't you? It used to be part of that empire. Shock,
horror, take a pill! They don't seem to have much of problem with such
mercenaries either.
Post by Jerry Kraus
  You know, I
just read a biography of that charmer, Cecil Rhodes.  Persuaded the
British Empire ...
Somehow I don't quite think he managed to persuade the British Empire
of anything. I am told that his grasp of Hindi, Yoruba and Burmese was
pretty shaky.
Post by Jerry Kraus
to wipe out every single Boer women and child in
concentration camps, just because they were in the way of his gold and
diamond mines.
Oh I think he was helped a little along the way by disease and the
pretty unsanitary habits of some Boers. I dare say that some of them
may well have died from pining for their lost pastimes, shooting and
poisoning Africans.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 No wonder the British have to suck up to the Yanks all
the time.  
Without them, they'd get wiped out by the rest of the
planet, which they spent centuries exploiting!
I don't quite follow. You mean mercenaries and concentration camps are
not enough?
As for exploitation, would you like to tell us what part of the world
your computer was made or the clothes and shoes you are wearing?
Post by Jerry Kraus
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­----
Cecil Rhodes, founder of De Beers -- still the largest diamond
company
in the world -- and, effectively, "conqueror" of half of Africa ...
Last time I looked, neither the former Rhodesias nor South Africa
quite measured up to "half" of Africa.
Alas, this opening isn't very promising on facts and its down hill
thereafter. So I shall stop right here.
As I said before. Fact-void!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You know, I really love arguing with Brits. There's this fascinating
forest-for-trees issue. 'Oh my, you mean, the reason all the Boer
women and children died was because we put them in concentration
camps? Why, heavens, I thought it was just because they didn't brush
their teeth!'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War#Concentration_camps
CJ Buyers
2008-03-02 07:31:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
 In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  
You may certainly "doubt" many things, but I don't think "sincerity"
comes anywhere close to your sentiments on anything.
Oh, by the way we don't have a big problem with "mercenaries" in the
British Army. The Gurkhas hold a supremely honourable tradition with
most people in this country. You may like to know, fact-void person,
Prince Harry did part of his service on foot patrol with the Royal
Gurkha Rifles.
Oh, given the history of the British Empire, I'm sure you have no
problem whatsoever with mercenaries in the British Army,
I told you that already. The Gurkhas have a very honourbale place in
our military history as they continue to do in the Indian Army. You
know India don't you? It used to be part of that empire. Shock,
horror, take a pill! They don't seem to have much of problem with such
mercenaries either.
Post by Jerry Kraus
  You know, I
just read a biography of that charmer, Cecil Rhodes.  Persuaded the
British Empire ...
Somehow I don't quite think he managed to persuade the British Empire
of anything. I am told that his grasp of Hindi, Yoruba and Burmese was
pretty shaky.
Post by Jerry Kraus
to wipe out every single Boer women and child in
concentration camps, just because they were in the way of his gold and
diamond mines.
Oh I think he was helped a little along the way by disease and the
pretty unsanitary habits of some Boers. I dare say that some of them
may well have died from pining for their lost pastimes, shooting and
poisoning Africans.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 No wonder the British have to suck up to the Yanks all
the time.  
Without them, they'd get wiped out by the rest of the
planet, which they spent centuries exploiting!
I don't quite follow. You mean mercenaries and concentration camps are
not enough?
As for exploitation, would you like to tell us what part of the world
your computer was made or the clothes and shoes you are wearing?
Post by Jerry Kraus
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­­----
Cecil Rhodes, founder of De Beers -- still the largest diamond
company
in the world -- and, effectively, "conqueror" of half of Africa ...
Last time I looked, neither the former Rhodesias nor South Africa
quite measured up to "half" of Africa.
Alas, this opening isn't very promising on facts and its down hill
thereafter. So I shall stop right here.
As I said before. Fact-void!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You know, I really love arguing with Brits.  There's this fascinating
forest-for-trees issue.  'Oh my, you mean, the reason all the Boer
women and children died was because we put them in concentration
camps?  Why, heavens, I thought it was just because they didn't brush
their teeth!'
Well, they may or may not have brushed their teeth. I haven't got a
clue about that.

What I do know about is that their toilet habits were seventeenth
century. Making country hicks, so long isolated from the mainstream of
European development, aware that keeping food separate and distant
from lavatories wasn't entirely successful, because it was seen as
some great imperialist plot to eradicate their culture and ancient
ways. Distributing information to them and making them understand was
hampered by the high level of illteracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War#Concentration_camps- Hide quoted text -
Ah, so that's where you get your facts from. Now doesn't that say
everything.

Now, you have not answered my question about thrid-world exploitation.
Where does your computer and where do your clothes come from. While
you are doing that, please do tell us if you drink coffee or eat
bananas.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-02 20:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
 In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  
You may certainly "doubt" many things, but I don't think "sincerity"
comes anywhere close to your sentiments on anything.
Oh, by the way we don't have a big problem with "mercenaries" in the
British Army. The Gurkhas hold a supremely honourable tradition with
most people in this country. You may like to know, fact-void person,
Prince Harry did part of his service on foot patrol with the Royal
Gurkha Rifles.
Oh, given the history of the British Empire, I'm sure you have no
problem whatsoever with mercenaries in the British Army,
I told you that already. The Gurkhas have a very honourbale place in
our military history as they continue to do in the Indian Army. You
know India don't you? It used to be part of that empire. Shock,
horror, take a pill! They don't seem to have much of problem with such
mercenaries either.
Post by Jerry Kraus
  You know, I
just read a biography of that charmer, Cecil Rhodes.  Persuaded the
British Empire ...
Somehow I don't quite think he managed to persuade the British Empire
of anything. I am told that his grasp of Hindi, Yoruba and Burmese was
pretty shaky.
Post by Jerry Kraus
to wipe out every single Boer women and child in
concentration camps, just because they were in the way of his gold and
diamond mines.
Oh I think he was helped a little along the way by disease and the
pretty unsanitary habits of some Boers. I dare say that some of them
may well have died from pining for their lost pastimes, shooting and
poisoning Africans.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 No wonder the British have to suck up to the Yanks all
the time.  
Without them, they'd get wiped out by the rest of the
planet, which they spent centuries exploiting!
I don't quite follow. You mean mercenaries and concentration camps are
not enough?
As for exploitation, would you like to tell us what part of the world
your computer was made or the clothes and shoes you are wearing?
Post by Jerry Kraus
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­­­----
Cecil Rhodes, founder of De Beers -- still the largest diamond
company
in the world -- and, effectively, "conqueror" of half of Africa ...
Last time I looked, neither the former Rhodesias nor South Africa
quite measured up to "half" of Africa.
Alas, this opening isn't very promising on facts and its down hill
thereafter. So I shall stop right here.
As I said before. Fact-void!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You know, I really love arguing with Brits.  There's this fascinating
forest-for-trees issue.  'Oh my, you mean, the reason all the Boer
women and children died was because we put them in concentration
camps?  Why, heavens, I thought it was just because they didn't brush
their teeth!'
Well, they may or may not have brushed their teeth. I haven't got a
clue about that.
What I do know about is that their toilet habits were seventeenth
century. Making country hicks, so long isolated from the mainstream of
European development, aware that keeping food separate and distant
from lavatories wasn't entirely successful, because it was seen as
some great imperialist plot to eradicate their culture and ancient
ways. Distributing information to them and making them understand was
hampered by the high level of illteracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War#Concentration_camps-Hide quoted text -
Ah, so that's where you get your facts from. Now doesn't that say
everything.
Now, you have not answered my question about thrid-world exploitation.
Where does your computer and where do your clothes come from. While
you are doing that, please do tell us if you drink coffee or eat
bananas.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Mr. Buyers, where do you get YOUR information???

Because, I haven't really seen any in your posts, so far.
CJ Buyers
2008-03-03 07:09:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
 In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  
You may certainly "doubt" many things, but I don't think "sincerity"
comes anywhere close to your sentiments on anything.
Oh, by the way we don't have a big problem with "mercenaries" in the
British Army. The Gurkhas hold a supremely honourable tradition with
most people in this country. You may like to know, fact-void person,
Prince Harry did part of his service on foot patrol with the Royal
Gurkha Rifles.
Oh, given the history of the British Empire, I'm sure you have no
problem whatsoever with mercenaries in the British Army,
I told you that already. The Gurkhas have a very honourbale place in
our military history as they continue to do in the Indian Army. You
know India don't you? It used to be part of that empire. Shock,
horror, take a pill! They don't seem to have much of problem with such
mercenaries either.
Post by Jerry Kraus
  You know, I
just read a biography of that charmer, Cecil Rhodes.  Persuaded the
British Empire ...
Somehow I don't quite think he managed to persuade the British Empire
of anything. I am told that his grasp of Hindi, Yoruba and Burmese was
pretty shaky.
Post by Jerry Kraus
to wipe out every single Boer women and child in
concentration camps, just because they were in the way of his gold and
diamond mines.
Oh I think he was helped a little along the way by disease and the
pretty unsanitary habits of some Boers. I dare say that some of them
may well have died from pining for their lost pastimes, shooting and
poisoning Africans.
Post by Jerry Kraus
 No wonder the British have to suck up to the Yanks all
the time.  
Without them, they'd get wiped out by the rest of the
planet, which they spent centuries exploiting!
I don't quite follow. You mean mercenaries and concentration camps are
not enough?
As for exploitation, would you like to tell us what part of the world
your computer was made or the clothes and shoes you are wearing?
Post by Jerry Kraus
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­­­­----
Cecil Rhodes, founder of De Beers -- still the largest diamond
company
in the world -- and, effectively, "conqueror" of half of Africa ...
Last time I looked, neither the former Rhodesias nor South Africa
quite measured up to "half" of Africa.
Alas, this opening isn't very promising on facts and its down hill
thereafter. So I shall stop right here.
As I said before. Fact-void!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You know, I really love arguing with Brits.  There's this fascinating
forest-for-trees issue.  'Oh my, you mean, the reason all the Boer
women and children died was because we put them in concentration
camps?  Why, heavens, I thought it was just because they didn't brush
their teeth!'
Well, they may or may not have brushed their teeth. I haven't got a
clue about that.
What I do know about is that their toilet habits were seventeenth
century. Making country hicks, so long isolated from the mainstream of
European development, aware that keeping food separate and distant
from lavatories wasn't entirely successful, because it was seen as
some great imperialist plot to eradicate their culture and ancient
ways. Distributing information to them and making them understand was
hampered by the high level of illteracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War#Concentration_camps-Hidequoted text -
Ah, so that's where you get your facts from. Now doesn't that say
everything.
Now, you have not answered my question about thrid-world exploitation.
Where does your computer and where do your clothes come from. While
you are doing that, please do tell us if you drink coffee or eat
bananas.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Mr. Buyers, where do you get YOUR information???
Because, I haven't really seen any in your posts, so far.- Hide quoted text -
Shock horror. I don't take my information from wkipedia. I read books.
That is an odd activity that a lot of people do.

I have no intention of helping you one bit. Take yourself off to a
library, do the leg work, read and educate yourself properly. Who
knows, you may actually learn something along the way and perhaps even
think.
Praetorian
2008-03-02 05:57:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Praetorian
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd? This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection
on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
*Please, do feel free to impugn my courage.
Thanks, I will.
*It doesn't concern me.
Yeah, cowards always say that. Makes them feel better about themselves.
*Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
*to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
*beyond my comprehension.
And not the subject being discussed. Not very bright, are you?
*This young man -- Prince Harry --
Has more courage in his little finger than you have in your whole body. Tell
us that that doesn't bother you.
*has done nothing,
BZZZT! He's done way more than a gutless turd like you ever will.
*will never do nothing,
Correct. (Who do they get to teach English to these retards?)
*and, indeed, will not be allowed to do anything.
To the contrary, he's been to war and faced the people who would kill YOU in
an instant, given the opportunity.
*It is precisely his function to do nothing.
Yet he trained hard and went to war. Quite good of him, really.
Remaining shit flushed.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
%I think, my friend, you very much exaggerate my significance if you
%sincerely feel anyone in Afghanistan could possibly care less about me
%one way or another. On the other hand, you sound a bit delusional, so
%it should come as no surprise that your perception of reality is,
%shall we say, slightly warped. If you are in the category of those
%inidividuals who feel that "terrorists" -- whoever the hell "they" are
%-- are determined to kill everyone, everywhere, at all times, I have a
%little news for you: most of them are paid -- by Iran, for example --
%to fight specifically against American invaders. Suicide bombers sign
%little contracts in which their families get tens of thousands of
%dollars after their deaths. In other words, they're just like the
%American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
%which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry. They're
%mercenaries. What we have here are mercenaries fighting merenaries.
%Mostly over oil. I hope I'm not traumatizing you with this
%revelation.

How much did the Bali bombers receive from the Iranians?

How much did the London transport bombers receive from Iran?

How much was owed to the mob being tried in Australia?

Feel free to enjoy your Leftard delusions.

You cock-head all think the same... "It's all about oil" and "the Jihadists
won't bother me if I appease them".
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-02 20:24:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Praetorian
Post by Praetorian
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd? This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection
on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
*Please, do feel free to impugn my courage.
Thanks, I will.
*It doesn't concern me.
Yeah, cowards always say that. Makes them feel better about themselves.
*Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
*to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
*beyond my comprehension.
And not the subject being discussed. Not very bright, are you?
*This young man -- Prince Harry --
Has more courage in his little finger than you have in your whole body. Tell
us that that doesn't bother you.
*has done nothing,
BZZZT! He's done way more than a gutless turd like you ever will.
*will never do nothing,
Correct. (Who do they get to teach English to these retards?)
*and, indeed, will not be allowed to do anything.
To the contrary, he's been to war and faced the people who would kill YOU in
an instant, given the opportunity.
*It is precisely his function to do nothing.
Yet he trained hard and went to war. Quite good of him, really.
Remaining shit flushed.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
%I think, my friend, you very much exaggerate my significance if you
%sincerely feel anyone in Afghanistan could possibly care less about me
%one way or another.  On the other hand, you sound a bit delusional, so
%it should come as no surprise that your perception of reality is,
%shall we say, slightly warped.  If you are in the category of those
%inidividuals who feel that "terrorists" -- whoever the hell "they" are
%-- are determined to kill everyone, everywhere, at all times, I have a
%little news for you: most of them are paid -- by Iran, for example --
%to fight specifically against American invaders.  Suicide bombers sign
%little contracts in which their families get tens of thousands of
%dollars after their deaths.  In other words, they're just like the
%American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
%which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
%mercenaries.  What we have here are mercenaries fighting merenaries.
%Mostly over oil.  I hope I'm not traumatizing you with this
%revelation.
How much did the Bali bombers receive from the Iranians?
How much did the London transport bombers receive from Iran?
How much was owed to the mob being tried in Australia?
Feel free to enjoy your Leftard delusions.
You cock-head all think the same... "It's all about oil" and "the Jihadists
won't bother me if I appease them".
--
"Don't believe everything you think".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Praetorian, I haven't been bothered a whole lot by Jihadists. Not
lately, and not in the past. Actually, if Bush had been in the White
House on 911, our problems might have been solved back then.
w***@sympatico.ca
2008-03-03 19:51:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by Praetorian
Post by CJ Buyers
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Actually, no. He was there for ten weeks and is coming back about two
weeks earlier than his intended tour.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.
His isn't heir to the throne, actually. That is his father, followed
by his elder brother.
Post by Jerry Kraus
You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
Not quite. Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, not "Military School".
Obviously little experience of British Army instructors.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.
Wrong again. MI5 is an intelligence gathering organisation, not a
protection force. The clue is in the "I" of MI5. Dhaaah!
Post by Jerry Kraus
Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Yes, I know, I know. Get facts right is so very hard isn't it?
Is it really possible to exaggerate the ridiculously absurd? This is,
indeed, an interesting, epistemological question.
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection
on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might be subject of philosophical
discussion as to rights and wrongs, the fortitude of those engaged should
not be denigrated, whether they be Nobles or Commoners.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
*Please, do feel free to impugn my courage.
Thanks, I will.
*It doesn't concern me.
Yeah, cowards always say that. Makes them feel better about themselves.
*Why on earth anyone should have the slightest interest in kow-towing
*to an obscene, obsolete institution like the British Monarchy is quite
*beyond my comprehension.
And not the subject being discussed. Not very bright, are you?
*This young man  -- Prince Harry --
Has more courage in his little finger than you have in your whole body. Tell
us that that doesn't bother you.
*has done nothing,
BZZZT! He's done way more than a gutless turd like you ever will.
*will never do nothing,
Correct. (Who do they get to teach English to these retards?)
*and, indeed, will not be allowed to do anything.
To the contrary, he's been to war and faced the people who would kill YOU in
an instant, given the opportunity.
*It is precisely his function to do nothing.
Yet he trained hard and went to war. Quite good of him, really.
Remaining shit flushed.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I think, my friend, you very much exaggerate my significance if you
sincerely feel anyone in Afghanistan could possibly care less about me
one way or another.  On the other hand, you sound a bit delusional, so
it should come as no surprise that your perception of reality is,
shall we say, slightly warped.  If you are in the category of those
inidividuals who feel that "terrorists" -- whoever the hell "they" are
-- are determined to kill everyone, everywhere, at all times, I have a
little news for you: most of them are paid -- by Iran, for example --
to fight specifically against American invaders.  Suicide bombers sign
little contracts in which their families get tens of thousands of
dollars after their deaths.  In other words, they're just like the
American soldiers, their allies and, if he really did any fighting --
which I sincerely doubt -- our good buddy Prince Harry.  They're
mercenaries.  What we have here are mercenaries fighting merenaries.
Mostly over oil.  I hope I'm not traumatizing you with this
revelation.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I don't think you're in danger of traumatizing anybody on
alt.talk.royalty. I see from your profile that you spend much time
mucking around in steerage. Well, welcome to alt.talk.royalty. You're
in for a treat!
kim
2008-03-01 00:17:17 UTC
Permalink
http://www.princeharryhero.com/

NOT SAFE FOR WORK

NOT SUITABLE FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

(kim)
Panurge
2008-03-01 02:13:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by kim
http://www.princeharryhero.com/
NOT SAFE FOR WORK
NOT SUITABLE FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
(kim)
That is so fucking funny!

Thanks for the link!

"Surround the Taliban and shoot them in the cock!"
Leftists = traitors
2008-03-01 02:55:35 UTC
Permalink
Having him there would be a threat to everyone around him since he
would be an obvious target to the muds trying to kill the civilized
world.
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
2008-03-01 02:23:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don H
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
I don't believe he asked to be removed. I think that the military let
him in there as long as it didn't leak out. It's not like it's only him
who would be in more danger if every Taliban knew about his location.
I'm not sure why they couldn't find some place for him to finish up a
little less in the line of fire but still in Afghanistan.

From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
Panurge
2008-03-01 02:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
Drudge isn't responsible for anything, he (as usual) merely pointed out a
mention about Prince Henry of Wales from an Australian source. A website or
news item that surfaced last week!

Why are people blaming him for this?
Panurge
2008-03-01 02:34:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Panurge
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
Drudge isn't responsible for anything, he (as usual) merely pointed out a
mention about Prince Henry of Wales from an Australian source. A website or
news item that surfaced last week!
Why are people blaming him for this?
I suppose that he would like to take credit, as if he's an "ace reporter"
like Jimmy Olson. But in fact, Drudge just takes what's out there already
and makes it more well known, when he's not just gossiping.
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
2008-03-03 07:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Panurge
Post by Panurge
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
Drudge isn't responsible for anything, he (as usual) merely pointed out a
mention about Prince Henry of Wales from an Australian source. A website or
news item that surfaced last week!
Why are people blaming him for this?
I suppose that he would like to take credit, as if he's an "ace reporter"
like Jimmy Olson. But in fact, Drudge just takes what's out there already
and makes it more well known, when he's not just gossiping.
That is what he does. What does an "ace reporter" do?
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
kim
2008-03-01 02:38:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Panurge
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not,
it's out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order
to keep the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or
something.
Drudge isn't responsible for anything, he (as usual) merely pointed
out a mention about Prince Henry of Wales from an Australian source.
A website or news item that surfaced last week!
Why are people blaming him for this?
Who is this "Drudge" person? I've been hearing his name all day.

(kim)
Panurge
2008-03-01 02:48:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by kim
Post by Panurge
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not,
it's out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order
to keep the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or
something.
Drudge isn't responsible for anything, he (as usual) merely pointed
out a mention about Prince Henry of Wales from an Australian source.
A website or news item that surfaced last week!
Why are people blaming him for this?
Who is this "Drudge" person? I've been hearing his name all day.
(kim)
He's an American who runs a website that generally links to other sources,
and also gossips a lot. Very influential in the mass media and the not-so
mass media.

When a political journalist in the USA wakes up in the morning, you can
pretty well count that his first webpage visited is "The Drudge Report" as
his muse.
Panurge
2008-03-01 02:55:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Panurge
Post by kim
Post by Panurge
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not,
it's out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order
to keep the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or
something.
Drudge isn't responsible for anything, he (as usual) merely pointed
out a mention about Prince Henry of Wales from an Australian source.
A website or news item that surfaced last week!
Why are people blaming him for this?
Who is this "Drudge" person? I've been hearing his name all day.
(kim)
He's an American who runs a website that generally links to other sources,
and also gossips a lot. Very influential in the mass media and the not-so
mass media.
When a political journalist in the USA wakes up in the morning, you can
pretty well count that his first webpage visited is "The Drudge Report" as
his muse.
Unfortunately as Canadian media icon Prof. Herbert Marshshall McLuahan once
warned, when the media is in the hands of everyone, it's up to the reader to
believe what's said.

Well before the Internet, Prof. McLuhan believed that "the information
highway" would be a great thing, where people saw all sides of the debate.
But as we know, people only pay attention to what they support and ignore the
rest.

Drudge? He provides fodder for all the sides. :)
kim
2008-03-01 12:32:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Panurge
Post by kim
Who is this "Drudge" person? I've been hearing his name all day.
(kim)
He's an American who runs a website that generally links to other
sources, and also gossips a lot. Very influential in the mass media
and the not-so mass media.
When a political journalist in the USA wakes up in the morning, you
can pretty well count that his first webpage visited is "The Drudge
Report" as his muse.
Thanks. I think in some ways I'm glad I hadn't heard of him.

(kim)
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
2008-03-03 07:02:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by kim
Post by Panurge
Post by kim
Who is this "Drudge" person? I've been hearing his name all day.
(kim)
He's an American who runs a website that generally links to other
sources, and also gossips a lot. Very influential in the mass media
and the not-so mass media.
When a political journalist in the USA wakes up in the morning, you
can pretty well count that his first webpage visited is "The Drudge
Report" as his muse.
Thanks. I think in some ways I'm glad I hadn't heard of him.
It's difficult to believe anyone on the planet hasn't heard of the
Drudge Report.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
2008-03-03 07:00:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Panurge
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
Drudge isn't responsible for anything, he (as usual) merely pointed out a
mention about Prince Henry of Wales from an Australian source. A website or
news item that surfaced last week!
Why are people blaming him for this?
1) I heard that was his first quote of this. I didn't see it.
2) When I got there, he was taking full credit himself.

The above may answer the question.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
Candide
2008-03-03 11:15:59 UTC
Permalink
Am not following all the usual tittle-tattle, sneaking and whatever
lately passes for civilised conversation here, but am quite happy to
give Prince Harry a giant Well Done! Perhaps even more amazing am also
willing to pay respects to the British media for keeping their
collective mouths shut, allowing PH to get on with doing something he so
obviously wished to do, and do well.

Do not understand why persons feel the need to talk PH down for going
into the military and so wishing to lead a normal life there as much as
possible. Generations of royal, noble and upper-class men (among others)
have made Her Majesty's services their life's work. Indeed for years it
was the only career deemed suitable for men of a certain rank in
society.

Prince Harry is showing signs of growing up, and wishing to be known for
more than getting together with the lads for a few, it should be
encouraged.

Candide
The Doctor
2008-03-03 14:14:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Candide
Am not following all the usual tittle-tattle, sneaking and whatever
lately passes for civilised conversation here, but am quite happy to
give Prince Harry a giant Well Done! Perhaps even more amazing am also
willing to pay respects to the British media for keeping their
collective mouths shut, allowing PH to get on with doing something he so
obviously wished to do, and do well.
Do not understand why persons feel the need to talk PH down for going
into the military and so wishing to lead a normal life there as much as
possible. Generations of royal, noble and upper-class men (among others)
have made Her Majesty's services their life's work. Indeed for years it
was the only career deemed suitable for men of a certain rank in
society.
Prince Harry is showing signs of growing up, and wishing to be known for
more than getting together with the lads for a few, it should be
encouraged.
Candide
You can thank the Germans and Australians for blowing his cover!
--
Member - Liberal International
This is ***@nl2k.ab.ca Ici ***@nl2k.ab.ca
God, Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising! On March 3rd,
Alberta! Time for a change and beware Alliance in PC clothing. Vote Liberal!
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-03 15:27:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Doctor
Post by Candide
Am not following all the usual tittle-tattle, sneaking and whatever
lately passes for civilised conversation here, but am quite happy to
give Prince Harry a giant Well Done! Perhaps even more amazing am also
willing to pay respects to the British media for keeping their
collective mouths shut, allowing PH to get on with doing something he so
obviously wished to do, and do well.
Do not understand why persons feel the need to talk PH down for going
into the military and so wishing to lead a normal life there as much as
possible. Generations of royal, noble and upper-class men (among others)
have made Her Majesty's services their life's work. Indeed for years it
was the only career deemed suitable for men of a certain rank in
society.
Prince Harry is showing signs of growing up, and wishing to be known for
more than getting together with the lads for a few, it should be
encouraged.
Candide
You can thank the Germans and Australians for blowing his cover!
--
Member - Liberal International  
God, Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!  On March 3rd,
Alberta! Time for a change and beware Alliance in PC clothing. Vote Liberal!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I do. Good for the Germans and the Australians! At least they don't
grovel at the feet of the little twit.
Praetorian
2008-03-04 06:22:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
I do. Good for the Germans and the Australians! At least they don't
grovel at the feet of the little twit.
That's funny....

That "little twit" is probably twice the man you are, or could hope to be.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-03 15:25:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Candide
Am not following all the usual tittle-tattle, sneaking and whatever
lately passes for civilised conversation here, but am quite happy to
give Prince Harry a giant Well Done! Perhaps even more amazing am also
willing to pay respects to the British media for keeping their
collective mouths shut, allowing PH to get on with doing something he so
obviously wished to do, and do well.
Do not understand why persons feel the need to talk PH down for going
into the military and so wishing to lead a normal life there as much as
possible. Generations of royal, noble and upper-class men (among others)
have made Her Majesty's services their life's work. Indeed for years it
was the only career deemed suitable for men of a certain rank in
society.
Prince Harry is showing signs of growing up, and wishing to be known for
more than getting together with the lads for a few, it should be
encouraged.
Candide
Do explain to me why you or I need Prince Harry? What, exactly, is
Prince Harry for? If you say "he's entitled to live his own life,",
sure. But, why the high profile? Why the expensive lifestyle? Why
the interest?
CJ Buyers
2008-03-03 17:31:37 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 3, 3:25 pm, Jerry Kraus <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Why the interest?"

Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-03 17:37:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Sacha
2008-03-03 18:52:42 UTC
Permalink
On 3/3/08 17:37, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Then write to the media and answer/question them. That's where the fuss
started.
The majority of British - if those replying to the media you slavishly
follow are to be believed - think that Harry did a good job and that the
press embargo was sensible and for good reasons. Jon Snow, an otherwise and
previously, highly respected British TV journalist and reporter, received
many complaints about his whinge over the media blackout. He did a real
toys out of the pram reaction and has been rightly taken to task over it.
If anything, he demonstrated that the media consider themselves more
important than any other institution in this country. I would say the
majority have shown him that they disagree with this. Report after report
shows people expressing both relief, admiration *and* surprise that the
British media could behave so responsibly, even though the deal was a
mini-documentary of Harry In Afghanistan being made.
The media have another agenda which is to sell and to earn money from anyone
remotely famous. And Prince Harry is a lot more than remotely famous so
he's a magnet for that sort of nonsense. If you're a devotee of it, ask the
media why they're so enraptured by a man trained to do a job managing to do
it. You're falling for the hype and paying the salaries.
--
Sacha
Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
2008-03-03 20:18:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
There is no requirement that you take any interest in Harry.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-03 20:27:55 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 3, 2:18 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
There is no requirement that you take any interest in Harry.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
He's useful as an illustration of social hypocrisy, stupidity,
incompetence, obsolescence, rigidity and, in general, extreme
resistance to contructive change. Although a total non-entity in
himself -- as, I suspect, virtually everyone is aware -- he symbolizes
fundamental social ills which need to be corrected.
w***@sympatico.ca
2008-03-03 21:13:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
On Mar 3, 2:18 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
There is no requirement that you take any interest in Harry.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
He's useful as an illustration of social hypocrisy, stupidity,
incompetence, obsolescence, rigidity and, in general, extreme
resistance to contructive change.  Although a total non-entity in
himself -- as, I suspect, virtually everyone is aware -- he symbolizes
fundamental social ills which need to be corrected.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Please name one "fundamental social ill which needs to be
corrected" (or all of them, is you wish) which is symbolized by Prince
Harry.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-03 21:28:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by w***@sympatico.ca
Post by Jerry Kraus
On Mar 3, 2:18 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
There is no requirement that you take any interest in Harry.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
He's useful as an illustration of social hypocrisy, stupidity,
incompetence, obsolescence, rigidity and, in general, extreme
resistance to contructive change.  Although a total non-entity in
himself -- as, I suspect, virtually everyone is aware -- he symbolizes
fundamental social ills which need to be corrected.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Please name one "fundamental social ill which needs to be
corrected" (or all of them, is you wish) which is symbolized by Prince
Harry.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Well, rewarding privilege, rather than merit, would be a kind of
obvious one, don't you think?
CJ Buyers
2008-03-04 07:34:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by w***@sympatico.ca
Post by Jerry Kraus
On Mar 3, 2:18 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
There is no requirement that you take any interest in Harry.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
He's useful as an illustration of social hypocrisy, stupidity,
incompetence, obsolescence, rigidity and, in general, extreme
resistance to contructive change.  Although a total non-entity in
himself -- as, I suspect, virtually everyone is aware -- he symbolizes
fundamental social ills which need to be corrected.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Please name one "fundamental social ill which needs to be
corrected" (or all of them, is you wish) which is symbolized by Prince
Harry.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Well, rewarding privilege, rather than merit, would be a kind of
obvious one, don't you think?- Hide quoted text -
Quite how that has anything to do with whether or not Prince Harry is
serving in Afghanistan is a little beyond my understanding.

As for priviledge and merit. Prince Harry is not going to make one
iota of difference.

Priviledge will be removed only on the day that keys to executive
toilets no longer exist in the great "republic", and janitors are
allowed to become members of New York clubs alongside Mssrs
Rockefeller.

As for merit, I look forward to the day when they start holding
competative public examinations for the posts of Prime Minister of
Great Britian or President of the United States.
w***@sympatico.ca
2008-03-04 14:43:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by w***@sympatico.ca
Post by Jerry Kraus
On Mar 3, 2:18 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
There is no requirement that you take any interest in Harry.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."
He's useful as an illustration of social hypocrisy, stupidity,
incompetence, obsolescence, rigidity and, in general, extreme
resistance to contructive change.  Although a total non-entity in
himself -- as, I suspect, virtually everyone is aware -- he symbolizes
fundamental social ills which need to be corrected.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Please name one "fundamental social ill which needs to be
corrected" (or all of them, is you wish) which is symbolized by Prince
Harry.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Well, rewarding privilege, rather than merit, would be a kind of
obvious one, don't you think?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
May I suggest that you read Vernon Bogdanor's "The Monarchy and the
Constitution" to better understand some of the well-reasoned arguments
for utilizing the hereditary principle to choose the head of state.
Although I kind-of think you didn't know there were any such arguments
(whether or not you agree with them).

I do not agree with you that monarchy rewards privilege. Obviously, it
cannot reward merit in the limited sense that the hereditary principle
removes the choice of monarch to a higher power (the old view) or
outside the realm of politics and competition (the new view?). Either
way, that is the whole point. That is, that in rare cases when the
reserve powers of the Crown must be exercised (and there are analogous
powers in any kind of system, that is the very nature of government)
we have greater confidence that they will be exercised impartially if
the person doing so is not a product of a political process. In a
parliamentary form of government, someone must decide after a general
election who is called upon to form a government, and whether that
person is permitted a dissolution when the government is defeated on a
confidence-vote, or another person asked to form a government. The
point is that in a parliamentary system, SOMEONE must make such
decisions, and the value of the monarchial approach is that they are
more likely to be made impartially. One alternative is to elect
presidents directly and/or for fixed terms. The problem with that is
you can't get rid of them no matter how little support they maintain,
and that the executive and the assembly (congress, whatever) may be at
odds, which does not produce very efficient government. So there are
those who argue that a constitutional monarchy helps to ensure a
democratic and stable form of government. England, after all, has
never been stuck with a Nixon (or a Bush).

There is also some benefit in having a long line of heirs, in that the
throne can never be vacant. This too has been accompllished in Britain
(by the Act of Settlement) and is a factor for stability.

The Act of Settlement creates a duty for the heir to become king or
queen. The present Queen has exercised her constitutional duties very
well and her heirs seem promising. I am not sure, however, whether
their lives are the ones they would have chosen if they were offered
choice. Admittedly we put up our kings and queens in palaces. (What
else are we going to do with those old palaces, anyway? Turn them into
shelters for single mothers and hold state dinners at the Holiday
Inn?). However, the life of the Windsors is not at all one of the
lassitude and unnacountable privilege of your fantasy. The British and
other peoples would not put up with that. They expect the royal family
to give rather a lot in return and the consensus is overwhelmingly
that they have done so and the institution of monarchy has conferred
benefits comparable or in execess of its cost. When a few members of
the royal family (such as Princess Margaret) edged a little bit too
much toward the good life (or at least, the good life as those who buy
lottery tickets and go to Vegas imagine it to be) they have attracted
quite some vocal criticism. The monarchy would not last very long if
the royal family conducted themselves as you seem to think they do.

Incidentally, the Queen is wealthy in her own right. (Because a
millionaire left his private fortune to her great-great-grandmother.)
Most of the civil list payments go to maintenance of palaces and
staff.

But getting back to your question, what is Prince Henry for? He is
for: to be the king if his brother and father can't. (As to why we
have a king, see above.) In the event his father and brother CAN, then
Prince Henry can choose another role, such as promoting trade abroad
like his uncle, Prince Andrew, or maybe staying with the military and
putting his life on the line for queen and country, which seems to be
his wish. No one is asking him to be a permanent playboy and he seems
to have much less interest in such a prospect.
Paul Morgan
2008-03-03 20:43:02 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:37:02 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Then why don't you find a media newsgroup?
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-03 20:50:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:37:02 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Then why don't you find a media newsgroup?
That's a valid point, Paul. I could substitute a media group for one
of the politics groups. On the other hand, the media's going to do
what it wants, to get ratings and make money, whatever I say about
it. Why not exploit poor, pathetic Prince Harry for my own political
ends, just the way everyone else is exploiting him? That's what
Royals are for, isn't it? Exploitation.
Paul Morgan
2008-03-03 22:10:04 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:50:04 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:37:02 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Then why don't you find a media newsgroup?
That's a valid point, Paul. I could substitute a media group for one
of the politics groups. On the other hand, the media's going to do
what it wants, to get ratings and make money, whatever I say about
it. Why not exploit poor, pathetic Prince Harry for my own political
ends, just the way everyone else is exploiting him? That's what
Royals are for, isn't it? Exploitation.
By the scum of the earth, yes they are.
B1ackwater
2008-03-03 22:12:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:50:04 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:37:02 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Then why don't you find a media newsgroup?
That's a valid point, Paul. I could substitute a media group for one
of the politics groups. On the other hand, the media's going to do
what it wants, to get ratings and make money, whatever I say about
it. Why not exploit poor, pathetic Prince Harry for my own political
ends, just the way everyone else is exploiting him? That's what
Royals are for, isn't it? Exploitation.
By the scum of the earth, yes they are.
There's one thing to be said for Britains 'noble' class however ...
traditionally they're right at the front of battles. A strong
tradition of duty to the homeland. This differs from the "moneyed
class" in Britain and beyond who prefer to profit from wars rather
than actually fight them.

Poor Harry alas ... this PARTICULAR war made him a special target,
especially for kidnappers. Not the usual stand-up war you'd see
between european powers

Will some people 'exploit' him ? Sure. Scum abound. However, I
suspect Harrys time as a "grunt" made HIM a better person and
ultimately a better council for his brother (or even as king
if something goes amiss).
Paul Morgan
2008-03-03 23:27:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by B1ackwater
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:50:04 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:37:02 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Then why don't you find a media newsgroup?
That's a valid point, Paul. I could substitute a media group for one
of the politics groups. On the other hand, the media's going to do
what it wants, to get ratings and make money, whatever I say about
it. Why not exploit poor, pathetic Prince Harry for my own political
ends, just the way everyone else is exploiting him? That's what
Royals are for, isn't it? Exploitation.
By the scum of the earth, yes they are.
There's one thing to be said for Britains 'noble' class however ...
traditionally they're right at the front of battles. A strong
tradition of duty to the homeland. This differs from the "moneyed
class" in Britain and beyond who prefer to profit from wars rather
than actually fight them.
Poor Harry alas ... this PARTICULAR war made him a special target,
especially for kidnappers. Not the usual stand-up war you'd see
between european powers
Will some people 'exploit' him ? Sure. Scum abound. However, I
suspect Harrys time as a "grunt" made HIM a better person and
ultimately a better council for his brother (or even as king
if something goes amiss).
true.
Praetorian
2008-03-04 06:36:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by B1ackwater
Post by Paul Morgan
Post by Jerry Kraus
That's a valid point, Paul. I could substitute a media group for one
of the politics groups. On the other hand, the media's going to do
what it wants, to get ratings and make money, whatever I say about
it. Why not exploit poor, pathetic Prince Harry for my own political
ends, just the way everyone else is exploiting him? That's what
Royals are for, isn't it? Exploitation.
By the scum of the earth, yes they are.
There's one thing to be said for Britains 'noble' class however ...
traditionally they're right at the front of battles. A strong
tradition of duty to the homeland. This differs from the "moneyed
class" in Britain and beyond who prefer to profit from wars rather
than actually fight them.
Poor Harry alas ... this PARTICULAR war made him a special target,
especially for kidnappers. Not the usual stand-up war you'd see
between european powers
Will some people 'exploit' him ? Sure. Scum abound. However, I
suspect Harrys time as a "grunt" made HIM a better person and
ultimately a better council for his brother (or even as king
if something goes amiss).
True.

What tosspot Jerry hasn't realised, is the Harry's duties in the Army has
given the soldiers something they would never have had otherwise.... access
to a member of the Royal Family on a close and daily basis. An opportunity
to give a potential King of the realm an insight into their lives and
backgrounds. That's got to be better than a 30-second chat on a receiving
line at the opening of a new Health Centre, or some such.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
B1ackwater
2008-03-04 13:56:58 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 06:36:37 GMT, "Praetorian"
Post by Praetorian
Post by B1ackwater
Post by Paul Morgan
Post by Jerry Kraus
That's a valid point, Paul. I could substitute a media group for one
of the politics groups. On the other hand, the media's going to do
what it wants, to get ratings and make money, whatever I say about
it. Why not exploit poor, pathetic Prince Harry for my own political
ends, just the way everyone else is exploiting him? That's what
Royals are for, isn't it? Exploitation.
By the scum of the earth, yes they are.
There's one thing to be said for Britains 'noble' class however ...
traditionally they're right at the front of battles. A strong
tradition of duty to the homeland. This differs from the "moneyed
class" in Britain and beyond who prefer to profit from wars rather
than actually fight them.
Poor Harry alas ... this PARTICULAR war made him a special target,
especially for kidnappers. Not the usual stand-up war you'd see
between european powers
Will some people 'exploit' him ? Sure. Scum abound. However, I
suspect Harrys time as a "grunt" made HIM a better person and
ultimately a better council for his brother (or even as king
if something goes amiss).
True.
What tosspot Jerry hasn't realised, is the Harry's duties in the Army has
given the soldiers something they would never have had otherwise.... access
to a member of the Royal Family on a close and daily basis. An opportunity
to give a potential King of the realm an insight into their lives and
backgrounds. That's got to be better than a 30-second chat on a receiving
line at the opening of a new Health Centre, or some such.
Gives the royals insight into the average military man, and
the average military man insight into the royals. The military
tradition of Britians 'lordly' class is a positive.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-04 18:44:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:50:04 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Paul Morgan
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:37:02 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by CJ Buyers
"Why the interest?"
Perhaps you could answer that better than anybody else, you have made
23 posts about him.
I'm simply responding to media reports and attempting to answer them.
Nice stupid question though!
Then why don't you find a media newsgroup?
That's a valid point, Paul.  I could substitute a media group for one
of the politics groups.   On the other hand, the media's going to do
what it wants, to get ratings and make money, whatever I say about
it.  Why not exploit poor, pathetic Prince Harry for my own political
ends, just the way everyone else is exploiting him?  That's what
Royals are for, isn't it?  Exploitation.
By the scum of the earth, yes they are.
   There's one thing to be said for Britains 'noble' class however ...
   traditionally they're right at the front of battles. A strong
   tradition of duty to the homeland. This differs from the "moneyed
   class" in Britain and beyond who prefer to profit from wars rather
   than actually fight them.
   Poor Harry alas ... this PARTICULAR war made him a special target,
   especially for kidnappers. Not the usual stand-up war you'd see
   between european powers  
   Will some people 'exploit' him ? Sure. Scum abound. However, I
   suspect Harrys time as a "grunt" made HIM a better person and
   ultimately a better council for his brother (or even as king
   if something goes amiss).- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Oh, come off it Blackwater, you know as well as I do that no direct
heir to the throne is going to get a scratch as a "grunt"! He never
got near any real danger, his handlers would make sure of that, or
they'd all be sacked, if not sent to prison. Harry's function is to
reinforce authority, as is the function of the entire Royal Family.
Michael James
2008-03-03 21:31:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by Candide
Am not following all the usual tittle-tattle, sneaking and whatever
lately passes for civilised conversation here, but am quite happy to
give Prince Harry a giant Well Done! Perhaps even more amazing am also
willing to pay respects to the British media for keeping their
collective mouths shut, allowing PH to get on with doing something he so
obviously wished to do, and do well.
Do not understand why persons feel the need to talk PH down for going
into the military and so wishing to lead a normal life there as much as
possible. Generations of royal, noble and upper-class men (among others)
have made Her Majesty's services their life's work. Indeed for years it
was the only career deemed suitable for men of a certain rank in
society.
Prince Harry is showing signs of growing up, and wishing to be known for
more than getting together with the lads for a few, it should be
encouraged.
Candide
Do explain to me why you or I need Prince Harry? What, exactly, is
Prince Harry for? If you say "he's entitled to live his own life,",
sure. But, why the high profile? Why the expensive lifestyle? Why
the interest?
Why do you write about him? What's you're interest? Why don't just
ignore him entirely and never mention his name again for as long as you
live?
Praetorian
2008-03-04 06:20:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Candide
Am not following all the usual tittle-tattle, sneaking and whatever
lately passes for civilised conversation here, but am quite happy to
give Prince Harry a giant Well Done! Perhaps even more amazing am also
willing to pay respects to the British media for keeping their
collective mouths shut, allowing PH to get on with doing something he so
obviously wished to do, and do well.
Do not understand why persons feel the need to talk PH down for going
into the military and so wishing to lead a normal life there as much as
possible. Generations of royal, noble and upper-class men (among others)
have made Her Majesty's services their life's work. Indeed for years it
was the only career deemed suitable for men of a certain rank in
society.
Prince Harry is showing signs of growing up, and wishing to be known for
more than getting together with the lads for a few, it should be
encouraged.
Candide
#Do explain to me why you or I need Prince Harry? What, exactly, is
#Prince Harry for? If you say "he's entitled to live his own life,",
#sure. But, why the high profile? Why the expensive lifestyle? Why
#the interest?

If you can't answer that for yourself, you're as stupid as I assessed you to
be.

Here's a suggestion.... If you're not interested in the British Royal
Family, ignore them.

Or are you too envious to look away?
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
Sacha
2008-03-01 09:11:17 UTC
Permalink
On 1/3/08 02:23, in article ***@yahoo.co.uk, "Bill Bonde (
'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )"
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Don H
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
I don't believe he asked to be removed. I think that the military let
him in there as long as it didn't leak out. It's not like it's only him
who would be in more danger if every Taliban knew about his location.
I'm not sure why they couldn't find some place for him to finish up a
little less in the line of fire but still in Afghanistan.
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
IMO, Drudge's behaviour was totally irresponsible. His job is to sell
newspapers but some ethics have to go with that responsibility of
disseminating information. Putting others' lives at risk while sitting in a
warm office a long way from any fighting, is just contemptible. Why not
find out tomorrow or the next day's troop movements in Iraq and Afghanistan
and the names of all the soldiers and publish that? Prince Harry's work in
Afghanistan was as a soldier, one of many, not as a royal or a bit of front
page tabloid fodder. It was a military deployment and as such should not
have been discussed in the press. That goes for all personnel, not just the
royal ones, IMO.
--
Sacha
SaPeIsMa
2008-03-01 14:09:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )"
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Don H
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
I don't believe he asked to be removed. I think that the military let
him in there as long as it didn't leak out. It's not like it's only him
who would be in more danger if every Taliban knew about his location.
I'm not sure why they couldn't find some place for him to finish up a
little less in the line of fire but still in Afghanistan.
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
IMO, Drudge's behaviour was totally irresponsible. His job is to sell
newspapers but some ethics have to go with that responsibility of
disseminating information. Putting others' lives at risk while sitting in a
warm office a long way from any fighting, is just contemptible. Why not
find out tomorrow or the next day's troop movements in Iraq and Afghanistan
and the names of all the soldiers and publish that? Prince Harry's work in
Afghanistan was as a soldier, one of many, not as a royal or a bit of front
page tabloid fodder. It was a military deployment and as such should not
have been discussed in the press. That goes for all personnel, not just the
royal ones, IMO.
Harry's planned trip to Afghanistan was ALREADY on page 1 MONTHS before he
actually went
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 15:13:22 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 29, 8:23 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
#  It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
   The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
   Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
I don't believe he asked to be removed. I think that the military let
him in there as long as it didn't leak out. It's not like it's only him
who would be in more danger if every Taliban knew about his location.
I'm not sure why they couldn't find some place for him to finish up a
little less in the line of fire but still in Afghanistan.
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Oh, I'm sure Harry was removed by his handlers. As it was his
handlers who sent him there. Harry's just a child still, and probably
not too bright. Do Royals ever really grow up?
Paul Morgan
2008-03-01 15:21:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 07:13:22 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
On Feb 29, 8:23 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
#  It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
   The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
   Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
I don't believe he asked to be removed. I think that the military let
him in there as long as it didn't leak out. It's not like it's only him
who would be in more danger if every Taliban knew about his location.
I'm not sure why they couldn't find some place for him to finish up a
little less in the line of fire but still in Afghanistan.
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Oh, I'm sure Harry was removed by his handlers. As it was his
handlers who sent him there. Harry's just a child still, and probably
not too bright. Do Royals ever really grow up?
Hard to say Your Royal Highness.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 15:26:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Morgan
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 07:13:22 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
On Feb 29, 8:23 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
#  It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection on
one's own.
   The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
   Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
I don't believe he asked to be removed. I think that the military let
him in there as long as it didn't leak out. It's not like it's only him
who would be in more danger if every Taliban knew about his location.
I'm not sure why they couldn't find some place for him to finish up a
little less in the line of fire but still in Afghanistan.
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Oh, I'm sure Harry was removed by his handlers.  As it was his
handlers who sent him there.  Harry's just a child still, and probably
not too bright.  Do Royals ever really grow up?
Hard to say Your Royal Highness.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Touché, Touché! My grandmother used to call me her little Prince.
But, I think I could take Prince Harry, at this stage. Military
training and all.
Paul Morgan
2008-03-01 15:32:49 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 07:26:15 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Touché, Touché! My grandmother used to call me her little Prince.
But, I think I could take Prince Harry, at this stage. Military
training and all.
Guess we'll never know. post a picture of yourself and we can give an
opinion.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 15:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Morgan
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 07:26:15 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Touché, Touché!  My grandmother used to call me her little Prince.
But, I think I could take Prince Harry, at this stage.  Military
training and all.
Guess we'll never know. post a picture of yourself and we can give an
opinion.
Sorry Paul, I don't date.
Paul Morgan
2008-03-01 18:05:04 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 07:35:17 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
Post by Paul Morgan
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 07:26:15 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Touché, Touché!  My grandmother used to call me her little Prince.
But, I think I could take Prince Harry, at this stage.  Military
training and all.
Guess we'll never know. post a picture of yourself and we can give an
opinion.
Sorry Paul, I don't date.
Understandable.
Praetorian
2008-03-02 06:57:37 UTC
Permalink
"Jerry Kraus" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:09169412-02ec-4a14-b20a-***@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 29, 8:23 pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
Post by Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack' )
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
# It is risky to impugn the courage of others without causing reflection
on
one's own.
The British Establishment might have the option of going into Church,
Politics, or the Military, in service of the Realm, and, presumably, any
hereditary heir has an urge to prove his mettle.
Having served for 12 weeks anonymously, with risks of a normal soldier,
the risk of becoming a real bullet magnet is probably too much to expect
anyone to take.
I don't believe he asked to be removed. I think that the military let
him in there as long as it didn't leak out. It's not like it's only him
who would be in more danger if every Taliban knew about his location.
I'm not sure why they couldn't find some place for him to finish up a
little less in the line of fire but still in Afghanistan.
From Drudge's point of view, however, he isn't responsible for the
prince's safety, he prints stuff as he gets it, well vetted or not, it's
out the door. That's not an entirely bad thing to have in order to keep
the rest of the media honest, or make them more honest, or something.
--
-"We have a couple of ideas for Texas."
-"Good, we need ideas."
-"One, we provide everybody who shows up with a nice lunch platter, some
sliced meat, a bun, some lettuce, a piece of tomato, a big hunk of bunt
cake. We tell them, vote for Hillary, she's a real winner."
-"What's the other idea?"
-"We start a rumor that Obama had a gay affair while smoking crack."
-"We don't have the money for a deli run."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
*Oh, I'm sure Harry was removed by his handlers. As it was his
*handlers who sent him there. Harry's just a child still, and probably
*not too bright. Do Royals ever really grow up?

You're a wanker.
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
Sacha
2008-02-29 17:37:17 UTC
Permalink
On 29/2/08 15:20, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
He has done ten weeks of an expected (and normal) 12 week tour. Some are
there for longer, some shorter. A relative of mine was there for 12 and
will probably be going back soon.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude.
Given your attitude I think we can safely say that this is not a military
role you're ever likely to play. Sniping from the safety of a computer
screen is about your level of courage.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.
He is not heir to the throne. Your ignorance is pitiful. As to the sex
remarks one assumes you're as much a failure in that direction as in your
understanding of fighting in Afghanistan. In other words, your envy is
showing.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
That would be RMA, Sandhurst where even the King of Jordan was described by
one of the instructors as "You 'orrible little King, sir". I know a lot
more than you do about Sandhurst and there is no place for softness or
favouritism. Other peoples' lives depend on that fact.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Well, clearly too much for you or you'd be out there doing something useful
other than bitching about people who get off their backsides and do it.
--
Sacha
g***@sainty.org
2008-02-29 18:16:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
On 29/2/08 15:20, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
He has done ten weeks of an expected (and normal) 12 week tour. Some are
there for longer, some shorter. A relative of mine was there for 12 and
will probably be going back soon.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude.
Given your attitude I think we can safely say that this is not a military
role you're ever likely to play. Sniping from the safety of a computer
screen is about your level of courage.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.
He is not heir to the throne. Your ignorance is pitiful. As to the sex
remarks one assumes you're as much a failure in that direction as in your
understanding of fighting in Afghanistan. In other words, your envy is
showing.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
That would be RMA, Sandhurst where even the King of Jordan was described by
one of the instructors as "You 'orrible little King, sir". I know a lot
more than you do about Sandhurst and there is no place for softness or
favouritism. Other peoples' lives depend on that fact.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Well, clearly too much for you or you'd be out there doing something useful
other than bitching about people who get off their backsides and do it.
--
Sacha
Well done Sacha. This disagreeable little griper so perfectly
represents the arm chair coward who attacks from the security of his
computer console and probably fails at everything else he attempts in
lifee. As C. B. says, probably a failure with the opposite sex (or any
sex) so expresses his inadequacies though the keyboard.
Sacha
2008-02-29 18:27:11 UTC
Permalink
On 29/2/08 18:16, in article
Post by g***@sainty.org
Post by Sacha
On 29/2/08 15:20, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
He has done ten weeks of an expected (and normal) 12 week tour. Some are
there for longer, some shorter. A relative of mine was there for 12 and
will probably be going back soon.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude.
Given your attitude I think we can safely say that this is not a military
role you're ever likely to play. Sniping from the safety of a computer
screen is about your level of courage.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.
He is not heir to the throne. Your ignorance is pitiful. As to the sex
remarks one assumes you're as much a failure in that direction as in your
understanding of fighting in Afghanistan. In other words, your envy is
showing.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
That would be RMA, Sandhurst where even the King of Jordan was described by
one of the instructors as "You 'orrible little King, sir". I know a lot
more than you do about Sandhurst and there is no place for softness or
favouritism. Other peoples' lives depend on that fact.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Well, clearly too much for you or you'd be out there doing something useful
other than bitching about people who get off their backsides and do it.
--
Sacha
Well done Sacha. This disagreeable little griper so perfectly
represents the arm chair coward who attacks from the security of his
computer console and probably fails at everything else he attempts in
lifee. As C. B. says, probably a failure with the opposite sex (or any
sex) so expresses his inadequacies though the keyboard.
These people make me sick. They're riddled with jealousy and their only
apparent 'pleasure' is bitching at people born into a life they didn't
choose and can do little to change radically.
If 'Kraus' had the will, wit and intelligence he could do or be anything and
anyone he wants, not having been placed in a role where so much of his life
is mapped out for him or where automatic restrictions slide into place on
the day of birth. IMO, Prince Harry is to be warmly congratulated for
having the guts to work at finding a way found for him to do what he has
been trained to do and the media - or any other twerp - whinging about it
want their collective ears boxing. At the outset I said that if they were
not to be allowed to fight, there is little point in members of any royal
family going through military training and that we will have to look at some
other opportunities opening for them. Now, Prince Harry has shown that it
can be done and I hope it will be done again in the future for him and for
future generations. The petulant Jon Snow suggested last night that he
should have become a banker rather than have a media embargo placed on his
safety and that of his troop. I think the arrogance of journalism reached
its nadir at that point - though I'm sure Snow saw it as the zenith.
--
Sacha
Turenne
2008-02-29 18:57:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by g***@sainty.org
Post by Sacha
On 29/2/08 15:20, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
He has done ten weeks of an expected (and normal) 12 week tour.  Some are
there for longer, some shorter.  A relative of mine was there for 12 and
will probably be going back soon.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage.  What fortitude.
Given your attitude I think we can safely say that this is not a military
role you're ever likely to play.  Sniping from the safety of a computer
screen is about your level of courage.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.   You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.
He is not heir to the throne.  Your ignorance is pitiful.  As to the sex
remarks one assumes you're as much a failure in that direction as in your
understanding of fighting in Afghanistan.  In other words, your envy is
showing.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
That would be RMA, Sandhurst where even the King of Jordan was described by
one of the instructors as "You 'orrible little King, sir".  I know a lot
more than you do about Sandhurst and there is no place for softness or
favouritism.  Other peoples' lives depend on that fact.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.  Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Well, clearly too much for you or you'd be out there doing something useful
other than bitching about people who get off their backsides and do it.
--
Sacha
Well done Sacha. This disagreeable little griper so perfectly
represents the arm chair coward who attacks from the security of his
computer console and probably fails at everything else he attempts in
lifee. As C. B. says, probably a failure with the opposite sex (or any
sex) so expresses his inadequacies though the keyboard.
These people make me sick.  They're riddled with jealousy and their only
apparent 'pleasure' is bitching at people born into a life they didn't
choose and can do little to change radically.
If 'Kraus' had the will, wit and intelligence he could do or be anything and
anyone he wants, not having been placed in a role where so much of his life
is mapped out for him or where automatic restrictions slide into place on
the day of birth.  IMO, Prince Harry is to be warmly congratulated for
having the guts to work at finding a way found for him to do what he has
been trained to do and the media - or any other twerp - whinging about it
want their collective ears boxing.   At the outset I said that if they were
not to be allowed to fight, there is little point in members of any royal
family going through military training and that we will have to look at some
other opportunities opening for them.  Now, Prince Harry has shown that it
can be done and I hope it will be done again in the future for him and for
future generations.  The petulant Jon Snow suggested last night that he
should have become a banker rather than have a media embargo placed on his
safety and that of his troop.  I think the arrogance of journalism reached
its nadir at that point - though I'm sure Snow saw it as the zenith.
--
Sacha- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Hear hear. Snow is nearly as bad as Orla Guerin when it comes to
unhelpful rhetoric.

Richard L
Michael James
2008-03-01 01:01:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
On 29/2/08 18:16, in article
Post by g***@sainty.org
Post by Sacha
On 29/2/08 15:20, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
He has done ten weeks of an expected (and normal) 12 week tour. Some are
there for longer, some shorter. A relative of mine was there for 12 and
will probably be going back soon.
Post by Jerry Kraus
What
courage. What fortitude.
Given your attitude I think we can safely say that this is not a military
role you're ever likely to play. Sniping from the safety of a computer
screen is about your level of courage.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.
He is not heir to the throne. Your ignorance is pitiful. As to the sex
remarks one assumes you're as much a failure in that direction as in your
understanding of fighting in Afghanistan. In other words, your envy is
showing.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.
That would be RMA, Sandhurst where even the King of Jordan was described by
one of the instructors as "You 'orrible little King, sir". I know a lot
more than you do about Sandhurst and there is no place for softness or
favouritism. Other peoples' lives depend on that fact.
Post by Jerry Kraus
Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Well, clearly too much for you or you'd be out there doing something useful
other than bitching about people who get off their backsides and do it.
--
Sacha
Well done Sacha. This disagreeable little griper so perfectly
represents the arm chair coward who attacks from the security of his
computer console and probably fails at everything else he attempts in
lifee. As C. B. says, probably a failure with the opposite sex (or any
sex) so expresses his inadequacies though the keyboard.
These people make me sick. They're riddled with jealousy and their only
apparent 'pleasure' is bitching at people born into a life they didn't
choose and can do little to change radically.
If 'Kraus' had the will, wit and intelligence he could do or be anything and
anyone he wants, not having been placed in a role where so much of his life
is mapped out for him or where automatic restrictions slide into place on
the day of birth. IMO, Prince Harry is to be warmly congratulated for
having the guts to work at finding a way found for him to do what he has
been trained to do and the media - or any other twerp - whinging about it
want their collective ears boxing. At the outset I said that if they were
not to be allowed to fight, there is little point in members of any royal
family going through military training and that we will have to look at some
other opportunities opening for them. Now, Prince Harry has shown that it
can be done and I hope it will be done again in the future for him and for
future generations. The petulant Jon Snow suggested last night that he
should have become a banker rather than have a media embargo placed on his
safety and that of his troop. I think the arrogance of journalism reached
its nadir at that point - though I'm sure Snow saw it as the zenith.
He did his duty honourably. Then some brainiac journalist let's the
cat out of the bag.

Yes, as an anonymous soldier he could have been killed over the past
THREE (3) MONTHS, but with his presence known by th taliban they would
not have wanted to kill him, they would have tried to kidnap him, which
would have created great difficulties for the forces there who are
trying to free the Afghans from these Talinazis.

Anyone who bitches about his returning to England ( like this Insanity
Guy) can't see past their insignificant cyber lives and doesn't care
about what is at stake -the lives of thousands of soldiers and their
mission to help Afghanistan find peace after decades of war.

He put his life on the line for others and that says everything.
JFlexer
2008-03-01 00:30:36 UTC
Permalink
I'll say this, allowing Harry to be placed into front-line war situations
demostrates a heck of a lot more commitment and sacrifice on behalf of the
Queen's family, than very nearly all the policitian in the US...

I can't speak for members of the British government, but I suspect the
majority of their children and grandchildren are safe at home as well.

Bravo HM and Pr. Harry!
--
-J
Stan Brown
2008-03-01 20:02:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by JFlexer
I'll say this, allowing Harry to be placed into front-line war situations
demostrates a heck of a lot more commitment and sacrifice on behalf of the
Queen's family, than very nearly all the policitian in the US...
Harry's not the first. One of George VI's brothers was killed in WW2,
and I believe the present Duke of York was in combat in the Falklands
war.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Royalty FAQs:
1. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/britfaq.html
2. http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/atrfaq.htm
Yvonne's HRH page:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040722191706/http://users.uniserve.com/
~canyon/prince.html
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/tech/faqget.htm
Sacha
2008-03-02 00:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan Brown
Post by JFlexer
I'll say this, allowing Harry to be placed into front-line war situations
demostrates a heck of a lot more commitment and sacrifice on behalf of the
Queen's family, than very nearly all the policitian in the US...
Harry's not the first. One of George VI's brothers was killed in WW2,
and I believe the present Duke of York was in combat in the Falklands
war.
Prince Philip was Mentioned In Despatches during WW2 for the Battle of
Matapan. One of the Queen Mother's brothers was killed in WW1 though this
was, of course, long before she married into the royal family and yes, the
present Duke of York flew Sea King helicopters (I think that's correct) in
the Falklands War, being based on HMS Invincible..
--
Sacha
kim
2008-03-02 01:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan Brown
Post by JFlexer
I'll say this, allowing Harry to be placed into front-line war
situations demostrates a heck of a lot more commitment and sacrifice
on behalf of the Queen's family, than very nearly all the policitian
in the US...
Harry's not the first. One of George VI's brothers was killed in WW2,
and I believe the present Duke of York was in combat in the Falklands
war.
Indeed, he was very nearly killed when a British missile was fired in the
direction of the helicopter he was piloting. It was probably aimed at an
Argentinain plane immediately behind him.

Also the future George VI very almost drowned when a K-class submarine sank
during peacetime trials. He was eventually rescued along with the rest of
the crew by a diving bell.

(kim)
Tom Wilding / Stephen Stillwell
2008-03-02 02:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by kim
Post by Stan Brown
Post by JFlexer
I'll say this, allowing Harry to be placed into front-line war
situations demostrates a heck of a lot more commitment and sacrifice
on behalf of the Queen's family, than very nearly all the policitian
in the US...
Harry's not the first. One of George VI's brothers was killed in WW2,
and I believe the present Duke of York was in combat in the Falklands
war.
Indeed, he was very nearly killed when a British missile was fired in the
direction of the helicopter he was piloting. It was probably aimed at an
Argentinain plane immediately behind him.
That was the point of his helicopter. It was to decoy heat-seeking missiles
from the ships laden with hundreds towards a helicopter with only a few
possible casualties.
Anne
2008-03-02 11:35:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Wilding / Stephen Stillwell
Post by kim
Post by Stan Brown
Post by JFlexer
I'll say this, allowing Harry to be placed into front-line war
situations demostrates a heck of a lot more commitment and sacrifice
on behalf of the Queen's family, than very nearly all the policitian
in the US...
Harry's not the first. One of George VI's brothers was killed in WW2,
and I believe the present Duke of York was in combat in the Falklands
war.
Indeed, he was very nearly killed when a British missile was fired in the
direction of the helicopter he was piloting. It was probably aimed at an
Argentinain plane immediately behind him.
That was the point of his helicopter. It was to decoy heat-seeking missiles
from the ships laden with hundreds towards a helicopter with only a few
possible casualties.
But a British missile misled by a British helicopter, rather than hitting an
Argentinian plane?
kim
2008-03-02 18:42:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anne
Post by Tom Wilding / Stephen Stillwell
Post by kim
Post by Stan Brown
Post by JFlexer
I'll say this, allowing Harry to be placed into front-line war
situations demostrates a heck of a lot more commitment and
sacrifice on behalf of the Queen's family, than very nearly all
the policitian in the US...
Harry's not the first. One of George VI's brothers was killed in
WW2, and I believe the present Duke of York was in combat in the
Falklands war.
Indeed, he was very nearly killed when a British missile was fired
in the direction of the helicopter he was piloting. It was probably
aimed at an Argentinain plane immediately behind him.
That was the point of his helicopter. It was to decoy heat-seeking
missiles from the ships laden with hundreds towards a helicopter
with only a few possible casualties.
But a British missile misled by a British helicopter, rather than
hitting an Argentinian plane?
No, the British Rapier missile that almost hit the prince is radar and
manual guided. The operators would have known what they were firing at. It's
so accurate it doesn't even need an explosive warhead, the impact is
equivalent to being hit by a twelve coach train. The nickname for the Rapier
is "Hittile" as it very seldom misses its target. The Prince avoided a
collision by making an emergency landing on a rock and the missile passed
overhead.

(kim)
Gunga Din
2008-03-03 14:12:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sacha
On 29/2/08 15:20, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
My enquiry is more pedestrian. Does he (or any of his clan for that matter)
need a British passport?
Gary Holtzman
2008-03-03 23:20:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gunga Din
Post by Sacha
On 29/2/08 15:20, in article
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
My enquiry is more pedestrian. Does he (or any of his clan for that
matter) need a British passport?
Yes. Only the Sovereign does not need a passport.
--
Gary Holtzman

Change "macnospam.com" to "mac.com" to email.

-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Mr.Smartypants
2008-02-29 20:47:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.   You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.  Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.  Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Perhaps HH Harry saw the "war" for what it really is and decided to
follow the Judgement of Nuremberg 1946.
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 20:52:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr.Smartypants
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.   You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.  Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.  Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Perhaps HH Harry saw the "war" for what it really is and decided to
follow the Judgement of Nuremberg 1946.
Anything's possible, but I doubt it. His handlers concluded that he
might be in real danger, so he's headed back to one or other of his
family's Castle Estates. Poor baby.
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 20:55:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr.Smartypants
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.   You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.  Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.  Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Perhaps HH Harry saw the "war" for what it really is and decided to
follow the Judgement of Nuremberg 1946.
Anything's possible, but I doubt it. His handlers concluded that he
might be in real danger, so he's headed back to one or other of his
family's Castle Estates. Poor baby.
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 21:01:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr.Smartypants
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.   You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.  Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.  Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Perhaps HH Harry saw the "war" for what it really is and decided to
follow the Judgement of Nuremberg 1946.
Anything's possible, but I doubt it. His handlers concluded that he
might be in real danger, so he's headed back to one or other of his
family's Castle Estates. Poor baby.
frilly.lizzy
2008-02-29 20:56:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage. .
I'm sure you'd see everything out of different eyes if you were the
prince.

Would it be plain jealousy, mate?

Lizzy
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 21:07:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by frilly.lizzy
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage. .
I'm sure you'd see everything out of different eyes if you were the
prince.
Would it be plain jealousy, mate?
Lizzy
This is an interesting question you pose Lizzy. Am I jealous of a
young man who has unlimited income, unlimited protection, no demands
on him, and takes no risks. Well, yes Lizzy, it is quite possible
that I AM jealous of that situation! On the other hand, his situation
is so bizarre and aritificial that it might be rather difficult to
relate to it, having not lived that way. What I'm really suggesting
is that his social utility is somewhat dubious, however appealing his
personal situaton might be. Perhaps because his personal situation is
so appealing.
frilly.lizzy
2008-03-01 01:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by frilly.lizzy
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage. .
I'm sure you'd see everything out of different eyes if you were the
prince.
Would it be plain jealousy, mate?
Lizzy
This is an interesting question you pose Lizzy.  Am I jealous of a
young man who has unlimited income, unlimited protection, no demands
on him, and takes no risks.  Well, yes Lizzy, it is quite possible
that I AM jealous of that situation!  On the other hand, his situation
is so bizarre and aritificial that it might be rather difficult to
relate to it, having not lived that way.  What I'm really suggesting
is that his social utility is somewhat dubious, however appealing his
personal situaton might be.  Perhaps because his personal situation is
so appealing.
Would you swap places with him? Have had your mum forever on the front
page and have to be wary of what you do or say becaue you are being
heeled by the paparazzi?

I'd rather camp in a tent!

Lizzy
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 15:10:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by frilly.lizzy
Post by frilly.lizzy
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage. .
I'm sure you'd see everything out of different eyes if you were the
prince.
Would it be plain jealousy, mate?
Lizzy
This is an interesting question you pose Lizzy.  Am I jealous of a
young man who has unlimited income, unlimited protection, no demands
on him, and takes no risks.  Well, yes Lizzy, it is quite possible
that I AM jealous of that situation!  On the other hand, his situation
is so bizarre and aritificial that it might be rather difficult to
relate to it, having not lived that way.  What I'm really suggesting
is that his social utility is somewhat dubious, however appealing his
personal situaton might be.  Perhaps because his personal situation is
so appealing.
Would you swap places with him? Have had your mum forever on the front
page and have to be wary of what you do or say becaue you are being
heeled by the paparazzi?
I'd rather camp in a tent!
Lizzy- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Actually, it's a bit hard to say. I really don't have that clear a
sense what exactly it would be like to be a member of the Royal
Family, these days. Virtually all celebrities have paparazzi after
them. Look at Britney Spears!
Praetorian
2008-02-29 21:58:35 UTC
Permalink
I'll just add you to the ever-growing list of clueless fuckwits. Shall I?
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict. What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet. Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Jerry Kraus
2008-02-29 22:01:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Praetorian
I'll just add you to the ever-growing list of clueless fuckwits. Shall I?
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.   You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.  Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.  Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Sure, if you want. Sounds like you could relate.
Stephen Wright
2008-03-01 00:12:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Praetorian
I'll just add you to the ever-growing list of clueless fuckwits. Shall I?
He attended Queens University. What do you expect?
Praetorian
2008-03-02 06:01:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Wright
Post by Praetorian
I'll just add you to the ever-growing list of clueless fuckwits. Shall I?
He attended Queens University. What do you expect?
I assume it's like the Universities we have in Australia that are, mostly,
hives of Leftist drones?
--
"Don't believe everything you think".
j***@hotmail.com
2008-03-01 09:43:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict. What
courage. What fortitude. Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne. You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say. Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet. Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place. Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Thank Gott the press have exposed Harry in Afghanistan ! At least now
he is being brought back we can get on with complaining about how he,
as Royalty, does nothing.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-01 15:20:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@hotmail.com
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  What
courage.  What fortitude.  Christ, it's hard to be heir to the British
Throne.   You have to have sex with half the wealthy young women in
the country to find just the "right fit", shall we say.  Then, you
have to hang out at Military School for a few years, while all of the
instructors kiss your feet.  Then, why, it's 12 seconds of brutal,
ruthless, real-life war, to the death, shielded only by your rifle,
and the battalion of MI5 agents paid astronomical salaries to take
friendly fire in your place.  Well, all I can say is, he can have it.
Too much for me.
Thank Gott the press have exposed Harry in Afghanistan ! At least now
he is being brought back we can get on with complaining about how he,
as Royalty, does nothing.
My friend, I do believe you've got it!
David Johnston
2008-03-02 22:15:49 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:20:00 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Ten weeks.
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-02 22:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:20:00 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  
Ten weeks.  
Thanks Dave. Thanks.
Wolfie
2008-03-02 23:22:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:20:00 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at. So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.
Ten weeks.
He had more guts than the Neocon Chickenhawks and I really
hope they arrest Drudge if he ever goes to the UK.
--
Wolfie
Jerry Kraus
2008-03-02 23:27:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolfie
Post by David Johnston
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:20:00 -0800 (PST), Jerry Kraus
Post by Jerry Kraus
The British Ministry of Defence, in its inimitable way, has discovered
that if Prince Harry is put on the front lines in Afghanistan, he
might very well get shot at.  So, after a rather brief 12 second tour
of duty, he has been ignominiously removed from the conflict.  
Ten weeks.  
He had more guts than the Neocon Chickenhawks and I really
hope they arrest Drudge if he ever goes to the UK.
--
Wolfie
Anyone has more guts than the Neocon Chickenhawks. Why do you think
they're so terrified of Al-Qaeda, a bunch of desperate, impoverished,
barefoot peasants just struggling to survive? The Neocon Chickenhawks
are the problem. Al-Qaeda is their creation.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...