Good work, Drudge: Brits pull Harry out of Afghanistan, send him home; Update: Taliban vows revenge

posted at 11:09 am on February 29, 2008 by Allahpundit

Per yesterday’s post, mightn’t Drudge have been doing the Brits’ secret bidding by spilling the beans? Er, probably not: Harry was due back anyway “in a matter of weeks,” which, on the one hand, makes the leak seem not so bad and on the other makes it totally gratuitous. Bummer:

Sky defence correspondent Geoff Meade said it could take at least 24 hours to bring him back to the UK.

He added: “There will be a degree of frustration – not least from the Prince himself – and anger.”

But he said that Harry had proved himself as a solider and, with media support, future deployments to war zones would be possible.

Yeah, where? They already denied him a tour in Iraq because the mujahedeen would be gunning for him. Then again, he’s not entirely safe at home either: “Once this … comes out, every single person that supports them will be trying to slot me.”

As for the media ethics angle, Channel 4 newstool Jon Snow, whom old-school HA readers will remember from this almost comic display of pro-Palestinian bias, gives Drudge a pat on the back for having the stones he himself lacked to break the conspiracy of silence. To which the Guardian responds by wondering when, precisely, temporary media blackouts became some sort of novelty:

Editors accepted a purely voluntary “understanding” with the Ministry of Defence that specifically stated that the blackout applied only to his military duties in Afghanistan and not to any of his other hobbies or activities, such as late night socialising.

In return there would be special access for the media to the prince before, during and after his deployment which could be reported when he returned home [in early April], without any interference by the Royal family or the military except for reasons of operational security…

In fact media blackouts are not that unusual. We do not report kidnaps, at the request of the police, if a hostage’s life might be a risk. We often know about the movements of politicians or royalty so that coverage can be planned but do not report them until they are safe.

Exit question: How much of the ethical question here is informed by one’s opinion of the royals and the propaganda value of having Harry successfully complete his tour? It’s no surprise that a leftist like Snow was itching to blow the story open, even though the actual news value in it is fairly slight. It is kind of a surprise that the Guardian didn’t take the same position.

Update: Jihadist degenerates try to snatch victory from the jaws of propaganda defeat.

According to a Taliban spokesman, the prince’s presence in Helmand province is a direct sign of the British Royal Family’s stance against Muslims and warned it would merely encourage further insurgent attacks against British soldiers.

Zabihullah Mujahid said: “Prince Harry’s presence in Afghanistan encourages our fighters to launch more attacks on British forces.

“The Royal Family is now directly participating in the aggression against Muslims.”…

Mr Mujahid also suggested the British are facing defeat in Afghanistan and that news of the prince’s deployment was deliberately leaked in order to raise spirits.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

I’m sad for him, not being able to finish his tour. He was determined to get out there and do his part. And I admire him for it.

tickleddragon on February 29, 2008 at 11:14 AM

Then let the palace show Drudge (and other bloggers) the respect he/they deserve by requesting that they also not spill the beans. Note to Queen and other big shots: There’s a new media in town.

JiangxiDad on February 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Prince Harry should not submit to any post-deployment interviews.

danking70 on February 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Poor guy… though I doubt a warrior wants pity.

frankj on February 29, 2008 at 11:17 AM

What about the German newspaper or the Australian women’s mag? Are we to be outraged at them too? Or is our opprobrium to be reserved exclusively for Drudge, simply because he has more readership?

The_Freeze on February 29, 2008 at 11:17 AM

It was actually an Australian magazine that broke the story and not Drudge and this is being inaccurately reported by the media.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/28/wdrudge328.xml

JeffinSac on February 29, 2008 at 11:17 AM

I still stand by what I said yesterday. Drudge is a giant egotistical tool for posting this story.

Lance Murdock on February 29, 2008 at 11:17 AM

Another Brit paper said Drudge had some type of agreement NOT to publish this info ?

William Amos on February 29, 2008 at 11:18 AM

Which Brit paper said it?

Allahpundit on February 29, 2008 at 11:21 AM

The possibility of the Brits putting one of the Royal Family in harm’s way would have reflected a state of insanity. The script for Prince Harry’s tenure in “combat” was predetermined months before he left the blessed island. To have done otherwise would have been an act of stupidity which the Brits leave up to the Americans. Drudge was only playing is role. The Brits have just about civilized themselves out of existence. This charade is a continuance in that stream of thought.

volsense on February 29, 2008 at 11:21 AM

What about the German newspaper or the Australian women’s mag? Are we to be outraged at them too?

Sure, why not? Although let’s not be obtuse and pretend that they “really” broke the story. Drudge has massive influence. He used it here. Reap the whirlwind.

Allahpundit on February 29, 2008 at 11:22 AM

JeffinSac on February 29, 2008 at 11:17 AM

So this is all just an Old Media smear job on the New Media?

BohicaTwentyTwo on February 29, 2008 at 11:23 AM

Where did Drudge get the “killed 30 Taliban” numer? I didn’t locate it in the article.

natesnake on February 29, 2008 at 11:23 AM

Also, 12 weeks is very short tour. Is that standard for the Brits?

natesnake on February 29, 2008 at 11:24 AM

This was probably leaked to every news outlet on the planet. Drudge was just the first to bite.

thekingtut on February 29, 2008 at 11:24 AM

It looks like at least the Brit media understand that there are certain thing you just don’t publish during wartime.

Take a note NYT!

db on February 29, 2008 at 11:25 AM

Obviously, the Brits have once again tagged the wrong royal as heir to the throne… the head-strong Ann should have been tapped ahead of the wimpy, terrorist-loving Charles; and now we know who the real man is amongst the younger royals as well… While Wills plays house with his non-wife, the young Harry is out doing his part to save Britian from creeping shari’a… William should hang his head in shame and thank the heavens for the that whole archaic birth-order thingy.

Harry for King!!!

Gartrip on February 29, 2008 at 11:25 AM

I have a feeling Harry is the one to tip off Drudge. He didn’t seem to disappointed when I saw him interviewed. He complained about the environs and how sore he was. He said he was really glad and looking forward to getting back and sitting on a couch.

cat-scratch on February 29, 2008 at 11:26 AM

I think it’s a smart move to pull him out now that the cat’s out of the bag. Of course it’s going to put all the troops in more danger just because Harry’s a really, really juicy target. Could you imagine if he was caught?
I give him total respect for going in the first place.

Geronimo on February 29, 2008 at 11:26 AM

Which Brit paper said it?

Allahpundit on February 29, 2008 at 11:21 AM

That is what this site reported

Drudge broke deal

The British media and the Ministry of Defence had agreed to a voluntary news blackout for fear of increasing the risk to Harry’s life and to the other soldiers serving with him.

But Drudge, which first became famous after revealing Bill Clinton’s affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, ignored the deal and ran the story yesterday afternoon.

William Amos on February 29, 2008 at 11:27 AM

Lance Murdock on February 29, 2008 at 11:17 AM

I’m with you on this one. A famous Brit shows backbone and they make him go home. Well, as a Westerner, thanks, Harry.

emailnuevo on February 29, 2008 at 11:28 AM

12 weeks is a short tour. Is that standard for Brits?
natesnake…..11:23am

That was the approximate length of time Kerry had when he put himself in for 3 purple Hearts. Oh wait, he was royalty too.

volsense on February 29, 2008 at 11:28 AM

Also other hints

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4421036a12.html

The military posted him only after the British media and selected members of the international press agreed not to report his presence until he had returned from a scheduled 4-month deployment. The embargo was broken on Thursday after German, Australian and U.S. Web sites reported he was in Afghanistan.

William Amos on February 29, 2008 at 11:29 AM

Drudge is a tool. He should have had the good sense to keep this one quiet.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 11:32 AM

The man wanted to serve his country in combat and that idiot Drudge had to blow off at the mouth and screw him up.

rplat on February 29, 2008 at 11:33 AM

I tried sending a note to Drudge through the news tip form, but there was an error when I clicked send. He must be getting flooded with people angry with him. hahah Drudge is an idiot!

noelgallagher2k on February 29, 2008 at 11:33 AM

Yeah, remember when the Brits discovered that General George Washington was riding a horse out IN FRONT of the troops?

Did he realize that being a target put his troops in danger?

Oh, wait, that’s leadership.

If Harry wants to lead, he should lead.

BobH on February 29, 2008 at 11:35 AM

So, in other words, there was no agreement between Drudge and the brits. If there were, they would specifically say he had broken it.

Blake on February 29, 2008 at 11:35 AM

I’m just surprised as heck that Harry’s deployment has been kept secret for as long as it had. I mean, didn’t the tabloids notice that he wasn’t making any appearances?

JetBoy on February 29, 2008 at 11:36 AM

I think Harry did a great thing for his country. I like his response to why he went: “The Queen told me to go.”

AbaddonsReign on February 29, 2008 at 11:38 AM

Gartrip on February 29, 2008 at 11:25 AM

By tradition, the second son is sent to war. If Harry had been born first William would have been sent instead.

aengus on February 29, 2008 at 11:39 AM

What I think happened was some treasonous bastard over there leaked to the enemy that Prince Harry was in Talibanistan and the royals came up with this a way to bring him back, while at the same time saving face.

thekingtut on February 29, 2008 at 11:39 AM

Poor guy… though I doubt a warrior wants pity.

frankj on February 29, 2008 at 11:17 AM

Agreed, but it’s hard not to pity him. From his position of standing, to willingly have gone into the fray takes guts and character. To whisk him out of it because of a bunch of loose-lipped sensationalist muckraking yellow journalists and bloggers has to hurt.

MadisonConservative on February 29, 2008 at 11:40 AM

I’m just so damn proud of that kid.

So proud.

Professor Blather on February 29, 2008 at 11:42 AM

“Once this … comes out, every single person that supports them will be trying to slot me.”

I like that he’s picked up the Brit soldier’s lingo; hope he’s around for awhile.

Prince Harry should not submit to any post-deployment interviews.

danking70 on February 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Sure he should, but only with outlets that honoured the agreement, at least until after the story was already broken.

Frozen Tex on February 29, 2008 at 11:42 AM

Who cares about the entire British Royal family?

It’s unbelievable to me the hype the Media here in America is giving to this useless, powerless, scandalous, pompous, arrogant family.

For example, “Hanna Montana” would make better news, bad or good.

At least she’s American and is the most popular.

But, hey, no surprise. The Media has always been out of touch with the American people.

That’s why we hear about the Royal Brits, they are popular among the Media elites.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 11:45 AM

Somewhere, you can bet Princess Diana is looking at her son with pride.

pilamaye on February 29, 2008 at 11:46 AM

Does Drudge think this story will make relevant again? If he does then he’s going to be sorely upset when all he see’s is POed readers. Tool.

Seriously everyone in the British media knew about it. It’s not like he had any special connection. He was probably just talking to some news guy in Britian and that person let it slip that they had a story on Harry that they have to sit on until April. With Drudge having no class, he ran the story. Oh did I mention that Drudge is a giant tool.

Lance Murdock on February 29, 2008 at 11:47 AM

So now another son is getting off the plane, signing in, and getting ‘how to stay alive’ tips from the fellas in his platoon. I wonder if the Dredge Report will report on his escapades in Afghanistan too.

Limerick on February 29, 2008 at 11:49 AM

Indy Conservative,

How do you know they’re not popular with the American people? Have you run a poll?

aengus on February 29, 2008 at 11:49 AM

As I recall, Prince Andrew flew missions during the Falklands War. Serving in the military is admirable. Prince Harry has just moved up a few notches in my estimation.

DAT60A3 on February 29, 2008 at 11:50 AM

Drudge = NYT

Hot Air rules!

ctmom on February 29, 2008 at 11:50 AM

There is no royal family that serves as a pillar of western civilization any longer, with the possible and occasional exception of the Spanish. Therefore this is a celebrity story, and also explains why much of the focus falls on Drudge instead of on the subject of the story, Harry. This about sums it up:

Somewhere, you can bet Princess Diana is looking at her son with pride.

JiangxiDad on February 29, 2008 at 11:51 AM

While Wills plays house with his non-wife, the young Harry is out doing his part to save Britian from creeping shari’a…

Uh, not quite.

Pablo on February 29, 2008 at 11:54 AM

Indy Conservative,

How do you know they’re not popular with the American people? Have you run a poll?

aengus on February 29, 2008 at 11:49 AM

Yes, you’re right, the useless, scandalous Royal British family is popular among the American political “pundits,” and the gossipers.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 11:58 AM

The story was broken by, of all things, an Australian women’s magazine, New Idea. That’s where Drudge picked it up from. The cat was already out of the bag. Drudge just made it more widely known.

Pablo on February 29, 2008 at 11:59 AM

Apparently William is prohibited by law from going, so give him a break.

Way to go, Harry! Your American cousins (except that doofus Drudge) love you.

If anyone gets killed by the Islamists for this, Drudge and his cohorts who revealed this will have to shoulder some of the blame. Sorry, but there’s no “right to know” when lives are in danger.

PattyJ on February 29, 2008 at 11:59 AM

…with media support…

LOL

Ortzinator on February 29, 2008 at 12:00 PM

Also, 12 weeks is very short tour. Is that standard for the Brits?

natesnake on February 29, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Six months is the standard for the Brits.

baldilocks on February 29, 2008 at 12:04 PM

HARRY, YOU D’MAN!!!!!

jimbo2008 on February 29, 2008 at 12:10 PM

I think they should put drudge out on the front lines. and then, tell America.

Moron.

WayWard Fundamentalist Christian on February 29, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Yes, you’re right, the useless, scandalous Royal British family is popular among the American political “pundits,” and the gossipers.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 11:58 AM

Uh, I think the point here is that one of these “useless, scandalous” Royals has been in the trenches, serving his country and taking part in the war.

Frozen Tex on February 29, 2008 at 12:13 PM

Uh, I think the point here is that one of these “useless, scandalous” Royals has been in the trenches, serving his country and taking part in the war.

Frozen Tex on February 29, 2008 at 12:13 PM

I don’t care.

How about the poor, regular young American soldiers who died defending this country. They don’t get much of the “hype,” don’t they? huh?

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 12:18 PM

How about the poor, regular young American soldiers who died defending this country. They don’t get much of the “hype,” don’t they? huh?
Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 12:18 PM

Unfortunately, no. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t celebrate the service of other young men.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:19 PM

I’m not buying the bs for a minute. Harry on the front lines, yeah right. They can tell me til the cows come home that he’s out there in hand to hand combat with the Al-queada, but I’ll never believe it. The Brits suck, and are weak. They’ve been weak for a long time. Harry was probably supervising the mess hall or something. Oh yeah, Britain, please don’t lecture us on tabloid journalism.

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 29, 2008 at 12:21 PM

He may be in more danger when he gets back home….Keep your guard up, Harry.

d1carter on February 29, 2008 at 12:28 PM

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 29, 2008 at 12:21 PM

You seriously think its a highy orchestrated fraud? What are your thoughts on the assasination of JFK, the moon landings, 9/11?

aengus on February 29, 2008 at 12:29 PM

Gartrip on February 29, 2008 at 11:25 AM

The second son is usually sent off to war or to populate the far corners of the empire since he has nothing to look forward to at home with his older brother getting the inheritance. Yay Imperial Britain!

Seriously though, Harry at least has gone off to war and proved himself to be capable, if all the reports are true. My brother has posited that his unit is not really regular Army, but is composed primarily of SAS who are there to watch his back. :)

Vatican Watcher on February 29, 2008 at 12:31 PM

If Drudge didn’t exist, someone else would fill the Drudge role.

Ed Morrissey created a lot of controversy a couple of years ago for breaking a Canadian publication ban on gov’t corruption testimony. This was widely celebrated at the time in the conservative community. Now Drudge is being pilloried by conservatives for violating a publication ban they view as having been justified.

Bottom line: Publication bans don’t work anymore. Period.

The_Freeze on February 29, 2008 at 12:32 PM

As much as I admire his mettle, Harry simply does not belong on the front lines. He’s a victim of his birthright – which stinks, but there it is.

For the same reasons we wouldn’t deploy GWB’s daughters in the killzone, Harry should have been told to suck it up and do some symbolic military photo-op PR like other royals.

Unless they really don’t care if he gets killed just like any other guy. Maybe the queen is happy to eliminate Di’s bloodline.

Either way, the fact remains that he was out there, and it was a security nightmare. The security measures had totally failed long before the time Drudge got his hands on the scoop. It really is pointless crying over spilt milk at that point. There’s no ‘rebagging the cat’ in this digital information age.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:33 PM

My brother has posited that his unit is not really regular Army, but is composed primarily of SAS who are there to watch his back. :)

I’d bet money on it

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:34 PM

The_Freeze on February 29, 2008 at 12:32 PM

There’s a vast sea of difference between bringing sunlight to government actions and publishing information that tells jihadists there’s a high-profile target in their neighborhood.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:34 PM

They don’t get much of the “hype,” don’t they? huh?

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 12:18 PM

No, they don’t, and that’s a shame. The hype only goes to celebrities, and why is that a surprise? I don’t much care bout Dutch politics, but when a Dutch MP makes a film to expose the evils of Islam, I want to know about it. Anytime a “person of importance”, celebrity, what-have-you, decides to abandon comfort and privilege to take the fight to the enemy, I want to know about it, and it doesn’t matter to me if that person is American, Canadian, British, Dutch, Australian, etc, etc. The only time the MSM made a deal about someone enlisting, it was when that person was a player in the NFL with a million dollar plus contract.

Frozen Tex on February 29, 2008 at 12:35 PM

He may be in more danger when he gets back home

Nah. He’s safer than a vicars dick.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:36 PM

I’ll never get all this nonsense about royalty. These people make me sick. God Bless the USA!

pecan pie on February 29, 2008 at 12:37 PM

publishing information that tells jihadists there’s a high-profile target in their neighborhood

The security measures had already failed. Hoping that ‘if nobody prints it maybe the jihadis won’t find out’ is suicidally naive. Drudge (or anyone else) was an academic inevitability.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:38 PM

Drudge (or anyone else) was an academic inevitability.
LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:38 PM

But it was Drudge who made the call and made it an international story. It may have been inevitable, but Drudge didn’t have to be the one to break it.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:40 PM

Nah. He’s safer than a vicars dick.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Now that’s funny! crikey.

JiangxiDad on February 29, 2008 at 12:42 PM

Unfortunately, no. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t celebrate the service of other young men.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:19 PM

“Men” in the plural?

One very rich, “famous,” Media darling, son of an empty suit Prince, is called “other young men?” And to celebrate? What? What extraordinary accomplishment others didn’t do, that he did?

Let’s stop the hype and the blowing out of proportion Drudge-like rhetoric.

Matt Drudge is a hack. He’s yet another empty suit.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 12:43 PM

I feel awful for him. The reason he wanted to go in the first place was because he couldn’t desert his mates. Now they’re forcing him to do just that.

His grandmother drove and serviced military trucks in WWII, by the way, as “Elizabeth Windsor.” And England was a war zone at that time.

Tanya on February 29, 2008 at 12:45 PM

It may have been inevitable, but Drudge didn’t have to be the one to break it.

Of course he didn’t have to do anything. My point is that Drudge’s publication of the story is of zero significance. If security has so totally failed, to the point that Drudge has his hands on details, you’d better already have made plans to remedy the situation.

I suspect that they (MoD et al) were waiting (until some internet loudmouth blurted the story) to yank Harry out, rather than preempt everything by effectively admitting ‘it was a fucking stupid thing to do (putting Harry out there) and predictably the security failed miserably and we all look like a big dogs cock’

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:46 PM

Young Prince Harry did this in the finest traditions of another Harry, the one known as “A little Harry in the night”. That other Harry, known as Henry the Vth, fought at Agincourt. Shakespeare’s play, based on this battle, gave us the now-famous phrase “Band of Brothers”. One of Shakespeare’s plays well worth the read, especially if you’re a vet, like me.

Good show, Harry, you’ve made the West proud. I hope you’ll make Britain “Great” again, some day! And may I suggest you install Bishop Nazir-Ali of Rochester as Archbishop of Canterbury, as your first act?

dmh0667 on February 29, 2008 at 12:46 PM

If his presence puts other troops at risk or creates a distraction from doing everything we can to defeat the Taliban and AQ, then shame on him for going and shame on England for sending him. The goal should be to defeat the enemy as soon as possible while putting the fewest lives at risk. The better he’s out of the theater, the better for the war.

pecan pie on February 29, 2008 at 12:48 PM

If his presence puts other troops at risk or creates a distraction from doing everything we can to defeat the Taliban and AQ, then shame on him for going and shame on England for sending him.

That’s the point. He wasn’t creating a risk because no one knew he was there. Until now.

Tanya on February 29, 2008 at 12:49 PM

If the news leaked into Drudge’s hands, it was out there. So perhaps all’s well that ends well if Harry goes home before tragedy hits.

Still, Bravo, Harry!

And as per Breitbart headlining words out of context, Harry loves England but is naturally disgruntled by the press deflecting him from what he feels is his life’s purpose.

maverick muse on February 29, 2008 at 12:50 PM

One of Shakespeare’s plays well worth the read, especially if you’re a vet, like me.

Great play. Worth the price of entry just for the St. Crispins Day speech.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:50 PM

Also, 12 weeks is very short tour. Is that standard for the Brits?

natesnake on February 29, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Six months is the standard for the Brits.

baldilocks on February 29, 2008 at 12:04 PM

My guess would be they didn’t figure they could keep it secret for much longer than that.

Old Tanker on February 29, 2008 at 12:51 PM

In return there would be special access for the media to the prince before, during and after his deployment

You don’t think his being surrounded by the media while he was there was a distraction from the war?

pecan pie on February 29, 2008 at 12:51 PM

Of course he didn’t have to do anything. My point is that Drudge’s publication of the story is of zero significance.

I understand your larger point, but don’t think that excuses Drudge’s lack of judgment here. The publication of that information in smaller outlets didn’t threaten Harry’s safety and likely would not have tripped an opening of the embargo. Drudge’s trumpeting of it to the world did.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:52 PM

No, they don’t, and that’s a shame. The hype only goes to celebrities, and why is that a surprise? I don’t much care bout Dutch politics, but when a Dutch MP makes a film to expose the evils of Islam, I want to know about it. Anytime a “person of importance”, celebrity, what-have-you, decides to abandon comfort and privilege to take the fight to the enemy, I want to know about it, and it doesn’t matter to me if that person is American, Canadian, British, Dutch, Australian, etc, etc. The only time the MSM made a deal about someone enlisting, it was when that person was a player in the NFL with a million dollar plus contract.

Frozen Tex on February 29, 2008 at 12:35 PM

There are those who are doing it for their country, and those who are doing it for themselves. It should be obvious for the keen observer.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 12:52 PM

He wasn’t creating a risk because no one knew he was there

Security by obscurity is nonsense. Predicating the security of the situation on the risk of exposure in an absurdly complex system, is simply not a sane gamble. Harry should never have been there. Stupid decision. Brave Harry.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:52 PM

There are those who are doing it for their country, and those who are doing it for themselves. It should be obvious for the keen observer.
Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 12:52 PM

So you have special insight into Harry’s motives, then?

Must be nice.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:53 PM

If the news leaked into Drudge’s hands, it was out there. So perhaps all’s well that ends well if Harry goes home before tragedy hits.

That’s a really good point. “Bild” is a major German tabloidy publication, and it’s quite conceivable that the Taliban would have gotten word of his deployment from their article alone.

The_Freeze on February 29, 2008 at 12:54 PM

Harry loves England but is naturally disgruntled by the press

He is misdirecting his ire at the press then. The press does what it does – publishes stuff.

Find out who blabbed. That’s the point of betrayal.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:54 PM

Find out who blabbed. That’s the point of betrayal.
LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 12:54 PM

Agreed.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:55 PM

Archie Roosevelt… Teddy’s 5th child…
http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/life/familytree/Archie.htm#military

max1 on February 29, 2008 at 12:56 PM

pecan pie on February 29, 2008 at 12:48 PM

Is there any tradition left that conservatives are allowed to hang onto that isn’t trumped by the war? I suppose if the Turkish military were to invade Portsmouth we’d just have to get used to it because the war is too important to raise a fuss.

Great play. Worth the price of entry just for the St. Crispins Day speech.

Yep. It’s worth reading Richard II, Henry IV Parts I and II first though.

aengus on February 29, 2008 at 12:58 PM

The publication of that information in smaller outlets didn’t threaten Harry’s safety

Nobody can make this claim. We have no idea of who is paying attention to what and where. It just takes one pair of jihadi eyeballs reading one tatty conspiracy ‘zine to get the message out.

We can criticise Drudge for making unethical decisions (and I would agree), but he simply isn’t responsible for the safety of Harry. ‘Security’ is an abstract perimiter, within which information is controlled. As soon as that perimiter is breached, buy a blabbermouth, pillow talk, spy etc, all bets are off. You are no longer in control of the information and cannot guarantee anything about it from that point forward. In the old days, there was a chance you could quickly destroy copies of documents etc, but in this infinitely reproducable digital age, that’s fantasy.

Drudge is irrelevant.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 1:01 PM

So you have special insight into Harry’s motives, then?

Must be nice.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 12:53 PM

Yes I do.

He wants to “prove” to himself and to the world that he’s not his daddy’s boy, that he “accomplished” something, that he’s not only THAT rich prince, son of a wealthy prince.

It’s a mix of self-fulfillment and a feel of guilt.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 1:03 PM

It’s a mix of self-fulfillment and a feel of guilt.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Or it could be a more traditional British rites-of-manhood by going out and ‘bagging some darkies’.

I actually think he’s pretty sincere, that he doesn’t like the life he was born into, and wishes to make his own way. Thank Di for that wild spirit.

LimeyGeek on February 29, 2008 at 1:06 PM

max1 on February 29, 2008 at 12:56 PM

Thanks Max, that was an interesting read.

bernzright777 on February 29, 2008 at 1:06 PM

It’s a mix of self-fulfillment and a feel of guilt.

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 1:03 PM

I don’t care if he did it to score with chicks! The point is he did it.

Frozen Tex on February 29, 2008 at 1:11 PM

Is there any tradition left that conservatives are allowed to hang onto that isn’t trumped by the war?

Entering into a war should be undertaken very solemnly but is necessary at times. Once that is regrettfully done, winning that war as quickly as possible with the fewest casualties should be the goal of every commander. Allowing a PR stunt (Royal punk surrounded by a media circus) to distract from the battle is contrary to that goal.

Has anyone stopped to ask why the press were told at all? Couldn’t they have kept it a secret even from the press? Why not let him serve briefly and tell everyone when it was over? Answer: They wanted the PR.

My point though (and I admire his wanting to serve) is that I think all the royalty stuff is ridiculously useless and a total sham. But, if we are to believe (as we’re being told) that he can no longer serve there safely and must be removed, then his presence there was creating a risk that should never have been taken. Does he not love his country enough to sit out if it puts others at greater risk? Is he that selfish? If he can’t serve without risking other lives, then I feel bad for him (not really), but shame on them for doing it anyway. England loves these royals too much. They’re willing to put their lives in greater risk and distract from an ongoing war to let ONE MAN serve. How selfish of him and of England as our allies to do that.

I admire our soldiers and military and am greatly thankful for their service. I owe them greatly. But there are other honorable ways to serve your country as well.

pecan pie on February 29, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Why are Americans fascinated by the royal family? Probably because we don’t have one. Everyone’s interested in stuff they don’t have.

doubleplusundead on February 29, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Indy Conservative on February 29, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Repeating and expanding your assumptions is not a special insight. As Frozen Tex has pointed out, who cares what his motives are? He was there and he did his job.

Slublog on February 29, 2008 at 1:19 PM

It’s risible to have royalty today.

That said, Harry is still a good example.

Entelechy on February 29, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Killed 30 Taliban. Seriously doubt it. Man those brits can really cook up a story. Next, the British Press will tell us that Drudge’s story caused him to pulled out before he could slit Bin Laden’s throat with that Rambo move where he comes out of the mud. You know, that one where all you can see is the whites of his eyes, and he gives his victim a columbian necktie. The next big story will be about how this was all bs and he really ran the mess hall or was in charge of cleaning the latrines.

THE CHOSEN ONE on February 29, 2008 at 1:22 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3