Prince Harry’s book

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One question that keeps coming up is why did he include the kill count? I went back to that passage and one quote in particular stuck out:” but in the age of Apaches and laptops, everything I did over the course of two deployments was recorded, time-stamped.” He’s letting the reader know that not only did he kill people, but there’s military records proving it. He’s likely well aware of the rumors and false media reports that he maybe never left base while deployed. He’s essentially saying, yes I did kill people (25 to be exact) and there’s time stamped record of it (so don’t challenge me).

It’s unfortunate he put himself, his family, and military members overseas at an increased security risk to settle yet another score with the media. Settling scores seems to be the central theme of this book so I’m not surprised.

That’s not why he kept count or shared it in the book, that’s just an explanation of how he was able to keep count (otherwise people would claim he was making it up). If you read a page or two after that, he discusses why he is sharing the number.

DP. This is a strange stilted response. PP didn't pick up on the reason that you are pointing to but not explaining. You could help her out, but you aren't doing that.

Because (1) his actual reason has already been discussed in this thread, and (2) pp purports to have a copy of the book at hand to go back and review, so is capable of reading it for themselves. It is not my job to spoon feed someone who can’t be bothered reading either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really enjoyed the first 3/4 of this book, some good tea and good insights into how the royal family works. I went in not being on team harry or team anyone else. But what has struck me is how much Harry puts Megan on a pedestal. She never made one mistake, she was like mother freaking theresa. It was always everyone else's fault. Its like he is projecting the image people had of Diana on Megan. I hope he continues therapy because this is not sure to end well.

Megan is his wife. Why would you expect him to throw her under the bus for his family who in his opinion, threw him under the bus? You want him to be on the outs with everybody in his life? He's already chosen a side.

Certainly not. TBS, admitting someone made a mistake or accepting responsibility for misunderstandings is not throwing your wife under the bus - its being authentic and human. He describes her in a light that seems like he's full of BS or blinded. He was so authentic in the rest of the book, which is why it struck me as so odd.

He is blinded. That is William's issue with them.

It’s his wife! That’s who he is riding with now. Not his brother or father, who by the way, have happily screwed Harry over for their wives and in the name of the Crown, for years. Anyway, of course he is blinded. As he should be. All of you all who think they makes sense for him to lay out her mistakes in book and “accept responsibility” can’t be married.

Thats not quite what I meant - here's an example... when William pushed harry into the dog bowl and Meg finally found out about it he said she didn't even get mad, just sad. That's a load of crap. I'd be pissed as hell. I don't believe the way he characterizes her at all.

Goodness. Why the need to get mad? What would that have accomplished. She had probably already gone through the anger stage with that family and their antics. She was either at the depression or acceptance stage where it came to William and Harry’s relationship.

There is no "need" to get mad. But I have an entire Family Relationship subthread to tell me that people get mad at their in-laws for a whole lot less.

[Anonymous]

Why most posters are critics or supporters, where are neutral and rational analyzers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really enjoyed the first 3/4 of this book, some good tea and good insights into how the royal family works. I went in not being on team harry or team anyone else. But what has struck me is how much Harry puts Megan on a pedestal. She never made one mistake, she was like mother freaking theresa. It was always everyone else's fault. Its like he is projecting the image people had of Diana on Megan. I hope he continues therapy because this is not sure to end well.

Megan is his wife. Why would you expect him to throw her under the bus for his family who in his opinion, threw him under the bus? You want him to be on the outs with everybody in his life? He's already chosen a side.

Certainly not. TBS, admitting someone made a mistake or accepting responsibility for misunderstandings is not throwing your wife under the bus - its being authentic and human. He describes her in a light that seems like he's full of BS or blinded. He was so authentic in the rest of the book, which is why it struck me as so odd.

He is blinded. That is William's issue with them.

It’s his wife! That’s who he is riding with now. Not his brother or father, who by the way, have happily screwed Harry over for their wives and in the name of the Crown, for years. Anyway, of course he is blinded. As he should be. All of you all who think they makes sense for him to lay out her mistakes in book and “accept responsibility” can’t be married.

Thats not quite what I meant - here's an example... when William pushed harry into the dog bowl and Meg finally found out about it he said she didn't even get mad, just sad. That's a load of crap. I'd be pissed as hell. I don't believe the way he characterizes her at all.

Goodness. Why the need to get mad? What would that have accomplished. She had probably already gone through the anger stage with that family and their antics. She was either at the depression or acceptance stage where it came to William and Harry’s relationship.

There is no "need" to get mad. But I have an entire Family Relationship subthread to tell me that people get mad at their in-laws for a whole lot less.

DP. It’s also possible that Meghan was angry but felt it wouldn’t be helpful to Harry for her to express that emotion rather than the sadness she felt for him. We wouldn’t necessarily know that from Harry’s book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5. I thought he showed quite a lack of empathy to his brother. Like, could he really not understand the reaction to the wedding beard? It's so important to Harry but silly for William to be jealous of the same thing? There were so many scenes like this scattered throughout the book - Harry's emotions are proper and well contextualized but he failed to allow the other's emotions and humanity.

This is astute. I think this lack of empathy and myopic thinking reflects immature emotional development (which I don't really 'blame' him for) and is what is leading him to make some poor choices when it comes to his family and other public actions/words.

+1

Also no concern over his niece Charlotte when she cried over the dress at age 3. No it was all about Meghan!

You mean when Meghan told Kate repeatedly the tailor was already there and waiting to alter the dress and Kate was demanding it be fully remade four days before the wedding?

But did she ever express sadness that Charlotte cried? Or was it all business...perhaps a little sympathy for a three year old wouldn't be that difficult!

If you had read the book, you would know Meghan was dealing with something a little more serious than a 3 yo fussing over a dress that could be fixed.

My point is she is always the victim. No concern for anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why most posters are critics or supporters, where are neutral and rational analyzers?

What would a neutral/rational analyzer look like? Some parts of the book were good, some parts of the book made Harry look terrible. I've commented on both, not always in the same post. How would you know the difference?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really enjoyed the first 3/4 of this book, some good tea and good insights into how the royal family works. I went in not being on team harry or team anyone else. But what has struck me is how much Harry puts Megan on a pedestal. She never made one mistake, she was like mother freaking theresa. It was always everyone else's fault. Its like he is projecting the image people had of Diana on Megan. I hope he continues therapy because this is not sure to end well.

Megan is his wife. Why would you expect him to throw her under the bus for his family who in his opinion, threw him under the bus? You want him to be on the outs with everybody in his life? He's already chosen a side.

Certainly not. TBS, admitting someone made a mistake or accepting responsibility for misunderstandings is not throwing your wife under the bus - its being authentic and human. He describes her in a light that seems like he's full of BS or blinded. He was so authentic in the rest of the book, which is why it struck me as so odd.

He is blinded. That is William's issue with them.

It’s his wife! That’s who he is riding with now. Not his brother or father, who by the way, have happily screwed Harry over for their wives and in the name of the Crown, for years. Anyway, of course he is blinded. As he should be. All of you all who think they makes sense for him to lay out her mistakes in book and “accept responsibility” can’t be married.

Thats not quite what I meant - here's an example... when William pushed harry into the dog bowl and Meg finally found out about it he said she didn't even get mad, just sad. That's a load of crap. I'd be pissed as hell. I don't believe the way he characterizes her at all.

Goodness. Why the need to get mad? What would that have accomplished. She had probably already gone through the anger stage with that family and their antics. She was either at the depression or acceptance stage where it came to William and Harry’s relationship.

There is no "need" to get mad. But I have an entire Family Relationship subthread to tell me that people get mad at their in-laws for a whole lot less.

DP. It’s also possible that Meghan was angry but felt it wouldn’t be helpful to Harry for her to express that emotion rather than the sadness she felt for him. We wouldn’t necessarily know that from Harry’s book.

Your brother-in-law pushes your husband so hard that he that he’s got scratches on his back and broke the dogs bowl? You’re not even slightly ticked, protective or annoyed? It’s just too much the way he tries to describe this. She’s a human freaking being. It’s like he’s overcompensating for the horrible things. The media says about her by betraying her as pure perfection. Nobody is that way.

[Anonymous]

^ portraying her as pure perfection

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5. I thought he showed quite a lack of empathy to his brother. Like, could he really not understand the reaction to the wedding beard? It's so important to Harry but silly for William to be jealous of the same thing? There were so many scenes like this scattered throughout the book - Harry's emotions are proper and well contextualized but he failed to allow the other's emotions and humanity.

This is astute. I think this lack of empathy and myopic thinking reflects immature emotional development (which I don't really 'blame' him for) and is what is leading him to make some poor choices when it comes to his family and other public actions/words.

+1

Also no concern over his niece Charlotte when she cried over the dress at age 3. No it was all about Meghan!

You mean when Meghan told Kate repeatedly the tailor was already there and waiting to alter the dress and Kate was demanding it be fully remade four days before the wedding?

But did she ever express sadness that Charlotte cried? Or was it all business...perhaps a little sympathy for a three year old wouldn't be that difficult!

If you had read the book, you would know Meghan was dealing with something a little more serious than a 3 yo fussing over a dress that could be fixed.

My point is she is always the victim. No concern for anyone else.

You know this wasn’t Meghan’s book, right? It’s Harry presenting his own experience of these situations. Harry’s experience in that moment was to be upset that his SIL was haranguing his fiancé about a fixable dress issue when she knew the fiancé was dealing with bigger issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really enjoyed the first 3/4 of this book, some good tea and good insights into how the royal family works. I went in not being on team harry or team anyone else. But what has struck me is how much Harry puts Megan on a pedestal. She never made one mistake, she was like mother freaking theresa. It was always everyone else's fault. Its like he is projecting the image people had of Diana on Megan. I hope he continues therapy because this is not sure to end well.

Megan is his wife. Why would you expect him to throw her under the bus for his family who in his opinion, threw him under the bus? You want him to be on the outs with everybody in his life? He's already chosen a side.

Certainly not. TBS, admitting someone made a mistake or accepting responsibility for misunderstandings is not throwing your wife under the bus - its being authentic and human. He describes her in a light that seems like he's full of BS or blinded. He was so authentic in the rest of the book, which is why it struck me as so odd.

He is blinded. That is William's issue with them.

It’s his wife! That’s who he is riding with now. Not his brother or father, who by the way, have happily screwed Harry over for their wives and in the name of the Crown, for years. Anyway, of course he is blinded. As he should be. All of you all who think they makes sense for him to lay out her mistakes in book and “accept responsibility” can’t be married.

Thats not quite what I meant - here's an example... when William pushed harry into the dog bowl and Meg finally found out about it he said she didn't even get mad, just sad. That's a load of crap. I'd be pissed as hell. I don't believe the way he characterizes her at all.

Goodness. Why the need to get mad? What would that have accomplished. She had probably already gone through the anger stage with that family and their antics. She was either at the depression or acceptance stage where it came to William and Harry’s relationship.

There is no "need" to get mad. But I have an entire Family Relationship subthread to tell me that people get mad at their in-laws for a whole lot less.

DP. It’s also possible that Meghan was angry but felt it wouldn’t be helpful to Harry for her to express that emotion rather than the sadness she felt for him. We wouldn’t necessarily know that from Harry’s book.

Your brother-in-law pushes your husband so hard that he that he’s got scratches on his back and broke the dogs bowl? You’re not even slightly ticked, protective or annoyed? It’s just too much the way he tries to describe this. She’s a human freaking being. It’s like he’s overcompensating for the horrible things. The media says about her by betraying her as pure perfection. Nobody is that way.

I don’t know what to tell you. Sorry the book didn’t give you enough new fodder to fuel your Meghan-rage.

I mean, he also never says a negative word about Diana and treats her as a saint, but that doesn’t seem to draw nearly the same level of ire. Same goes for Chelsy, Cressida, Marko, etc. Does that make you angry too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really enjoyed the first 3/4 of this book, some good tea and good insights into how the royal family works. I went in not being on team harry or team anyone else. But what has struck me is how much Harry puts Megan on a pedestal. She never made one mistake, she was like mother freaking theresa. It was always everyone else's fault. Its like he is projecting the image people had of Diana on Megan. I hope he continues therapy because this is not sure to end well.

Megan is his wife. Why would you expect him to throw her under the bus for his family who in his opinion, threw him under the bus? You want him to be on the outs with everybody in his life? He's already chosen a side.

Certainly not. TBS, admitting someone made a mistake or accepting responsibility for misunderstandings is not throwing your wife under the bus - its being authentic and human. He describes her in a light that seems like he's full of BS or blinded. He was so authentic in the rest of the book, which is why it struck me as so odd.

He is blinded. That is William's issue with them.

It’s his wife! That’s who he is riding with now. Not his brother or father, who by the way, have happily screwed Harry over for their wives and in the name of the Crown, for years. Anyway, of course he is blinded. As he should be. All of you all who think they makes sense for him to lay out her mistakes in book and “accept responsibility” can’t be married.

Thats not quite what I meant - here's an example... when William pushed harry into the dog bowl and Meg finally found out about it he said she didn't even get mad, just sad. That's a load of crap. I'd be pissed as hell. I don't believe the way he characterizes her at all.

Goodness. Why the need to get mad? What would that have accomplished. She had probably already gone through the anger stage with that family and their antics. She was either at the depression or acceptance stage where it came to William and Harry’s relationship.

There is no "need" to get mad. But I have an entire Family Relationship subthread to tell me that people get mad at their in-laws for a whole lot less.

DP. It’s also possible that Meghan was angry but felt it wouldn’t be helpful to Harry for her to express that emotion rather than the sadness she felt for him. We wouldn’t necessarily know that from Harry’s book.

Your brother-in-law pushes your husband so hard that he that he’s got scratches on his back and broke the dogs bowl? You’re not even slightly ticked, protective or annoyed? It’s just too much the way he tries to describe this. She’s a human freaking being. It’s like he’s overcompensating for the horrible things. The media says about her by betraying her as pure perfection. Nobody is that way.

I don’t know what to tell you. Sorry the book didn’t give you enough new fodder to fuel your Meghan-rage.

I mean, he also never says a negative word about Diana and treats her as a saint, but that doesn’t seem to draw nearly the same level of ire. Same goes for Chelsy, Cressida, Marko, etc. Does that make you angry too?

DP. I don't have any Meghan rage. The point is that it doesn't make Harry very believable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really enjoyed the first 3/4 of this book, some good tea and good insights into how the royal family works. I went in not being on team harry or team anyone else. But what has struck me is how much Harry puts Megan on a pedestal. She never made one mistake, she was like mother freaking theresa. It was always everyone else's fault. Its like he is projecting the image people had of Diana on Megan. I hope he continues therapy because this is not sure to end well.

Megan is his wife. Why would you expect him to throw her under the bus for his family who in his opinion, threw him under the bus? You want him to be on the outs with everybody in his life? He's already chosen a side.

Certainly not. TBS, admitting someone made a mistake or accepting responsibility for misunderstandings is not throwing your wife under the bus - its being authentic and human. He describes her in a light that seems like he's full of BS or blinded. He was so authentic in the rest of the book, which is why it struck me as so odd.

He is blinded. That is William's issue with them.

It’s his wife! That’s who he is riding with now. Not his brother or father, who by the way, have happily screwed Harry over for their wives and in the name of the Crown, for years. Anyway, of course he is blinded. As he should be. All of you all who think they makes sense for him to lay out her mistakes in book and “accept responsibility” can’t be married.

Thats not quite what I meant - here's an example... when William pushed harry into the dog bowl and Meg finally found out about it he said she didn't even get mad, just sad. That's a load of crap. I'd be pissed as hell. I don't believe the way he characterizes her at all.

Goodness. Why the need to get mad? What would that have accomplished. She had probably already gone through the anger stage with that family and their antics. She was either at the depression or acceptance stage where it came to William and Harry’s relationship.

There is no "need" to get mad. But I have an entire Family Relationship subthread to tell me that people get mad at their in-laws for a whole lot less.

DP. It’s also possible that Meghan was angry but felt it wouldn’t be helpful to Harry for her to express that emotion rather than the sadness she felt for him. We wouldn’t necessarily know that from Harry’s book.

Your brother-in-law pushes your husband so hard that he that he’s got scratches on his back and broke the dogs bowl? You’re not even slightly ticked, protective or annoyed? It’s just too much the way he tries to describe this. She’s a human freaking being. It’s like he’s overcompensating for the horrible things. The media says about her by betraying her as pure perfection. Nobody is that way.

I don’t know what to tell you. Sorry the book didn’t give you enough new fodder to fuel your Meghan-rage.

I mean, he also never says a negative word about Diana and treats her as a saint, but that doesn’t seem to draw nearly the same level of ire. Same goes for Chelsy, Cressida, Marko, etc. Does that make you angry too?

DP. I don't have any Meghan rage. The point is that it doesn't make Harry very believable.

This. I was actually team hearing Megan before this book, but I thought he wasn’t quite authentic and the last fourth of the book. Now it has me wondering.

[Anonymous]

I thought ther book was very authentic and revealing. Its puts all the stories in context and calls out both the palace and the media in their collusion and bullying of this couple. From the way they are portrayed its like they committed mass genocide or something. Truly bonkers.

I enjoyed reading it and while I hope this will lead to some change in the way the UK media are allowed to operate, the likelihood is slim. However, Its good that some of these issues have been aired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really enjoyed the first 3/4 of this book, some good tea and good insights into how the royal family works. I went in not being on team harry or team anyone else. But what has struck me is how much Harry puts Megan on a pedestal. She never made one mistake, she was like mother freaking theresa. It was always everyone else's fault. Its like he is projecting the image people had of Diana on Megan. I hope he continues therapy because this is not sure to end well.

Megan is his wife. Why would you expect him to throw her under the bus for his family who in his opinion, threw him under the bus? You want him to be on the outs with everybody in his life? He's already chosen a side.

But Harry also writes in a way that shows he is looking for a fighting, looking for his family's disapproval. He took his father's request not to bring Meghan to visit the Queen during her last days as personal "Don't bring her." But in reality, Charles was saying that no wives were attending.

Although if you read Harry’s book — or any other mainstream reputable sources — you’ll find out that your last comment isn’t, in fact, the case. Kate was not there. If it matters enough to you, check to see where the other wives / spouses were. Now it may not have been “personal” if the goal was to support Kate’s (very good IMO) reason for not being there, but I think there were probably multiple goals with that move.

I am sorry if I wrote that poorly. I said Charles said no wives were going. I took that at face value that no wives went because we can be sure Harry would have told us if wives actually went. Not everyone should go to someone's dying bedside. I did not see anything personal against Meghan in the request. But Harry wrote it in a way to sound personal. That's what I meant. As for "multiple goals" I have no idea what that means but not everyone belongs at such personal moments.

I think we might be imagining different scenarios? Balmoral is literally a castle. It’s big. There are grounds and other buildings on the grounds. I quite agree with you that not everyone should go to someone’s dying bedside. It is, though, not unusual that spouses would be together in moments of family crisis. So Meghan could have accompanied Harry to Balmoral, then shuffled off to wherever, while Harry spent time with the Queen and other members of his family. As it was, Harry was told that Meghan wasn’t welcome, and Harry wasn’t included in the travel arrangements made by other family members — which, to me, makes it even worse.

What I meant by multiple goals is that Megan’s absence may have made it easier to explain Kate’s absence, while also leaving Harry without support from the presence of his wife, and allowing the rest of the family distance from Meghan.

As to spouses, I’m pretty sure that several spouses were there — although they may have already been at Balmoral anyway, so it’s not as though the only people present were immediate relatives minus all of the in laws. So I can see why Harry would take Charles’s directives personally— although, obviously, I have no real idea what Charles’s motives might have been, particularly amidst a point of crisis.

I mean isn't that the bolded the whole point. We don't know Charles' motives, and Harry was not clear on Charles' motives. So Harry could give his Dad a little grace when his mom is dying. Or he could always make it about him and his wife and assume the worst.

Yes, it is. And Charles could have given Harry a little grace and support when HIS mum was dying. And so on. We don’t know any of this. So, yes, the bolded is a major point. It’s such a treat to exchange opinions with people who realize this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5. I thought he showed quite a lack of empathy to his brother. Like, could he really not understand the reaction to the wedding beard? It's so important to Harry but silly for William to be jealous of the same thing? There were so many scenes like this scattered throughout the book - Harry's emotions are proper and well contextualized but he failed to allow the other's emotions and humanity.

This is astute. I think this lack of empathy and myopic thinking reflects immature emotional development (which I don't really 'blame' him for) and is what is leading him to make some poor choices when it comes to his family and other public actions/words.

+1

Also no concern over his niece Charlotte when she cried over the dress at age 3. No it was all about Meghan!

You mean when Meghan told Kate repeatedly the tailor was already there and waiting to alter the dress and Kate was demanding it be fully remade four days before the wedding?

But did she ever express sadness that Charlotte cried? Or was it all business...perhaps a little sympathy for a three year old wouldn't be that difficult!

The American wasn't being emotional enough for the Brit? What?

You don't have to be overly emotional to say I'm sorry this upset Charlotte. Remember harry found her "sobbing uncontrollably on the floor" pretty emotional to me except only to their feelings. Who cares about anyone else!

This whole story about Charlotte crying over the dress seems a little odd to me. For a three-year-old, a dress is pretty much a dress. She isn't thinking about what the paps will say about her ill-fitting dress. And if Kate had just said, "oh look, it's a little long, we'll get it hemmed" then the three-year-old would have been fine. Seems like there's something missing there?

You must not know many 3 year Olds. I didn't say she was upset about the paps..you did which is a very odd response. You are still defending meghan over the fe elings over a 3 year old. Plus Kate could have said that and Charlotte could have still be unhappy . Were you there? Meghan? Harry? No.

I'm not a Meghan defender--this is my first post on this thread, or on the subject of Meghan or Kate EVER. I've read this topic brings out the crazies, and you proved the point. Also, learn to punctuate.

Yes, I know multiple three-year-old girls. And no, they don't care much about their dresses except if they love it if a dress involves lots of pink tulle and sparkles. Dress fit is pretty much irrelevant. My only point was that Charlotte was probably taking her cues from Kate...who was the one concerned about paps or something....