Prince Harry’s book

[Anonymous]

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/courteney-cox-prince-harry-mushrooms-b2290924.html?amp

This was 2016. This dude is so immature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this today. A few thoughts that linger:

1. I cannot believe so much money / so many military resources were spent on him AFTER he had to be pulled from Afghanistan for opsec reasons.

That they gave him months of one-on-one instruction from one of the world's top instructord to teach him how to fly Apaches (equipment which, as he notes, cost hundreds of millions of dollars) just seems like a stupid move when he'd already been forced to abort one deployment for security reasons.

And then, shortly after this massive investment in him, he decides to leave the military! Why? Very unclear, but the way he put it, it sounds like he hit a wall or got bored or something. He says he "knows it was time to move on" or something like that.

What a HUGE waste of resources. Basically, because he's a prince he got to spent months and waste insane amounts of money to acquire a skill he ultimately decided not to use, which someone else could have been learning in his place, had he been honest with himself and others. (Because, again -- the instruction was ONE ON ON, and the instructors available are few and far between.)

That section alone hugely soured my view of him.

In general, my main takeaway was: this guy is evidently incapable of self-reflection. Otherwise, he never would have chosen to share so many ancedotes that cast him as spoiled, self-indulgent, and above all, self-pitying. He always finds a way to shift the blame to someone else. Quite a skill!

Harry could not pass the exam to move to major. He had intense help and every advantage but failed several times. I think this is a shame, because he probably would have had a much better life had he been able to remain in the military. William was also a helicopter pilot in the RAF for about 8 years doing search and rescue missions. He could have easily risen in rank like his Grandfather, but he left to do royal work.

Was that in the book? I don’t remember reading that he failed that exam.

I don’t remember reading that, either so I think it’s false. I do remember reading that he got out of the military because “the firm” didn’t want him to stay in so that he wouldn’t outrank William.

Of course that isn't in the book. I don't know if it's true or not but that poster or someone else has said that before, earlier than the release of the book.

https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/prince-harry-flies-high-after-failing-his-pilot-s-theory-test-6815511.html

Yes, anything not deposited directly out of the polo horse’s rectum shan’t be trusted.

I’m sure failing a theory test was totally meaningless, and Hero Harry merely wanted to not refer to his superior military-ing so much because poor William would suffer from low self-esteem next to his brilliant brother. Makes sense to me.

Right but if you’d read the book you’d have seen that he ultimately passed all his exams, even though he admits to not being good at academic tests.

[Anonymous]

Saw book at Marshalls today...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finished listening to this today. A few thoughts that linger:

1. I cannot believe so much money / so many military resources were spent on him AFTER he had to be pulled from Afghanistan for opsec reasons.

That they gave him months of one-on-one instruction from one of the world's top instructord to teach him how to fly Apaches (equipment which, as he notes, cost hundreds of millions of dollars) just seems like a stupid move when he'd already been forced to abort one deployment for security reasons.

And then, shortly after this massive investment in him, he decides to leave the military! Why? Very unclear, but the way he put it, it sounds like he hit a wall or got bored or something. He says he "knows it was time to move on" or something like that.

What a HUGE waste of resources. Basically, because he's a prince he got to spent months and waste insane amounts of money to acquire a skill he ultimately decided not to use, which someone else could have been learning in his place, had he been honest with himself and others. (Because, again -- the instruction was ONE ON ON, and the instructors available are few and far between.)

That section alone hugely soured my view of him.

In general, my main takeaway was: this guy is evidently incapable of self-reflection. Otherwise, he never would have chosen to share so many ancedotes that cast him as spoiled, self-indulgent, and above all, self-pitying. He always finds a way to shift the blame to someone else. Quite a skill!

Harry could not pass the exam to move to major. He had intense help and every advantage but failed several times. I think this is a shame, because he probably would have had a much better life had he been able to remain in the military. William was also a helicopter pilot in the RAF for about 8 years doing search and rescue missions. He could have easily risen in rank like his Grandfather, but he left to do royal work.

Was that in the book? I don’t remember reading that he failed that exam.

I don’t remember reading that, either so I think it’s false. I do remember reading that he got out of the military because “the firm” didn’t want him to stay in so that he wouldn’t outrank William.

Harry said in "Spare" that the jobs that were available to him after his 20 week deployment in Afghanistan were desk jobs, and he wasn't interested in doing them. Dickie Arbiter, who used to do communications PR for Queen E II referenced that comment in Harry's book and said that he could only get desk jobs because he couldn't pass on to major and get a command. Not sure whey he couldn't pass on to major, but Harry did have difficulty with helicopter training and some other classes at Sandhurst. Maybe that is the source of the comment??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are kicking Andrew and Fergie out of his giant house and giving him Frogmore.

Charles already said he is streamlining. This is it. Probably doing all the hard stuff so William doesn't have to.

Charles is doing all the hard stuff because the British government is making him substantially cut back the Sovereign Grant. Frogmore Cottage is part of the Crown Estates, and the Queen gave H&M a two year lease on the cottage as a wedding present. When they moved to Canada and then California, they took most of their stuff from the cottage. They had renewed the lease but Charles (pressured by the gov.uk) did not allow them to renew the lease. But he did let them extend their occupancy from March 31 (when they should have vacated) to June 30. Not sure what the fuss is since they haven't lived there and landlords are permitted to terminate leases. It is not an "eviction," which would be done if a tenant had violated lease terms, but a simple termination of the lease. NBD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are kicking Andrew and Fergie out of his giant house and giving him Frogmore.

Charles already said he is streamlining. This is it. Probably doing all the hard stuff so William doesn't have to.

Charles is doing all the hard stuff because the British government is making him substantially cut back the Sovereign Grant. Frogmore Cottage is part of the Crown Estates, and the Queen gave H&M a two year lease on the cottage as a wedding present. When they moved to Canada and then California, they took most of their stuff from the cottage. They had renewed the lease but Charles (pressured by the gov.uk) did not allow them to renew the lease. But he did let them extend their occupancy from March 31 (when they should have vacated) to June 30. Not sure what the fuss is since they haven't lived there and landlords are permitted to terminate leases. It is not an "eviction," which would be done if a tenant had violated lease terms, but a simple termination of the lease. NBD.

Well, one reason for the fuss is that they put a lot of money into the property— presumably based on their understanding with the Queen that this would be their home indefinitely, similar to the arrangements held by other family members. It’s funny that one of the few British Royal families actually paying market rate for their house is having their lease terminated — if the issue is related to money / the Sovereign Grant.

[Anonymous]

Why do UK have the BRF and why do the taxpayer support them? Such a racist and stupid family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/courteney-cox-prince-harry-mushrooms-b2290924.html?amp

This was 2016. This dude is so immature.

Isn’t he putting his visa at risk by admitting he uses so many illegal drugs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do UK have the BRF and why do the taxpayer support them? Such a racist and stupid family.

For the same reason we don't. I don't think our reasons are stupid and racist, nor do I think theirs are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are kicking Andrew and Fergie out of his giant house and giving him Frogmore.

Charles already said he is streamlining. This is it. Probably doing all the hard stuff so William doesn't have to.

Charles is doing all the hard stuff because the British government is making him substantially cut back the Sovereign Grant. Frogmore Cottage is part of the Crown Estates, and the Queen gave H&M a two year lease on the cottage as a wedding present. When they moved to Canada and then California, they took most of their stuff from the cottage. They had renewed the lease but Charles (pressured by the gov.uk) did not allow them to renew the lease. But he did let them extend their occupancy from March 31 (when they should have vacated) to June 30. Not sure what the fuss is since they haven't lived there and landlords are permitted to terminate leases. It is not an "eviction," which would be done if a tenant had violated lease terms, but a simple termination of the lease. NBD.

Well, one reason for the fuss is that they put a lot of money into the property— presumably based on their understanding with the Queen that this would be their home indefinitely, similar to the arrangements held by other family members. It’s funny that one of the few British Royal families actually paying market rate for their house is having their lease terminated — if the issue is related to money / the Sovereign Grant.

They should be made whole for those expenses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interjecting here - do you truly think Prince Charles and Camilla "planted" bad stories about William and Harry?

According to book: There are office systems, their staff, and yes, Harry indicated numerous times in which they were the only ones to know something. Secondly, she apparently was using his issues as a way to deflect her bad press. Stuff only Charles and she knew.

I have not read the book yet (still a ways down my library hold shelf) but this had to have stung when it happened. Just absolutely horrible.

Those who actually have read the book: now that it’s been a few weeks at least, do you still like the book? Sometimes when I finish a book I love it or hate it and then a few weeks later I feel differently about it.

[Anonymous]

We are just speculating. We don't know what they are getting in return. I'm sure royal firm knows that if its unjust in their eyes, it'll make a chapter or episode in a book or a podcast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interjecting here - do you truly think Prince Charles and Camilla "planted" bad stories about William and Harry?

According to book: There are office systems, their staff, and yes, Harry indicated numerous times in which they were the only ones to know something. Secondly, she apparently was using his issues as a way to deflect her bad press. Stuff only Charles and she knew.

I have not read the book yet (still a ways down my library hold shelf) but this had to have stung when it happened. Just absolutely horrible.

Those who actually have read the book: now that it’s been a few weeks at least, do you still like the book? Sometimes when I finish a book I love it or hate it and then a few weeks later I feel differently about it.

Yes. Actually I like the book even more, and plan to read it a second time at some point. The first time I read it, I was reading it more for interesting content— as Harry himself said: I wanted to find out how Diana’s boy was doing, and, I admit, hoping for a happily-ever-after resolution. The book is actually MUCH more powerful than that. It offers glimpses of a type of life that few have been privy to. More importantly though, it’s an insightful memoir documenting grief, loss, certain types of neglect…. in a life that has been lived since birth in the often noxious public eye. The next time I read it will be as an invaluable psychohistory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are just speculating. We don't know what they are getting in return. I'm sure royal firm knows that if its unjust in their eyes, it'll make a chapter or episode in a book or a podcast.

You’re “sure”? I agree with you — we are all just speculating. It’s interesting that people who regularly dump all sorts of things in the tabloid press —among other outlets— also seem to worry about chapters and episodes in books and podcasts. It’s also interesting how few people — including Charles — are drawing parallels between SPARE and Dimbleby’s book. You’d think that Charles would see the similarities. Or perhaps he does see them, and that’s one of the many issues being played out now.

[Anonymous]

Every big and small grievance gets aired by this guy so why would anyone not be sure about a incoming backlash if end of lease terms aren't up-to his liking.