Posted on 01/13/2005 5:54:13 PM PST by veronica
How do you know?
LOL...true...and ignored by many.
It's time to give genuine consideration to restoring the House of Stuart, rather than putting up with this nonsense from the Windsors a moment longer.
Regards, Ivan
It was said on Sky News this morning that his minders were not present.
Regards, Ivan
Leno just said he misheard when someone told him to "make a fashion statement", hearing instead: "make a fascist statement." LOL
Correct.
Harry is an excellent reason why the monarchy should be abolished.
I seem to recall seeing a thread here recently that the majority of young people in England know nothing about WWII and the Holocaust.
Unfortunately, given that information, this sort of thing shouldn't be suprising.
Mark
C'mon. They're not going after him because he said or did anything that was remotely anti-Jewish or even pro-Nazi. It was a COSTUME party. He should have known the reaction, but that's what makes him stupid, not that he wore a stupid costume.
This is being done to teach Harry and his brother who the bitch is in the relationship between the British Media and the monarchy.
Maybe he was dressing up as his Nazi sympathizer great-great uncle. Let it not be forgotten that part of Hitler's plan for an invasion of Great Britain was to put the Duke of Windsor back on the throne as a Nazi puppet....which was why Churchill shipped him off to Bermuda and kept him there most of the war.
Your second paragraph is so self-conciously flip I don't think it's penetrable, at least by me.
Here's what you're missing: Harry should have known better that the media is a pack of circling vultures, and especially where the royals are concerned. Any situation in which the royals can be made to look the fools, they are. Harry's handlers and Harry himself have to have known that any negative perception of him would be the one the press would play up. If the kid had worn buck teeth and a tricorner hat, he'd have been called out for insulting Americans. Perception of the royals is set by the media's slant, because the public perception of this kid is by and large neutral. He's a royal but he's a kid, so he kind of falls in the middle as far as public perception of his actions, stupid or no. The skew here is to make him humble so far as the press is concerned.
To say it again: This is being done to teach Harry and his brother who the bitch is in the relationship between the British Media and the monarchy. The press is setting the tone for Harry to come to them, hat in hand. It's all about him being at THEIR beck and call, instead of being a normal human being. Royals are not to be allowed to be people, so far as the press is concerned--they are media properties. There was no ACTION that required him to be taken to task--this is about making sure all the royals know who is in charge.
I'm sorry if you didn't understand that last post, but I don't know what was so unclear about it. Perhaps you were too focused on the joke you'd made/idea you had put forth about Harry claiming he was pretending to be in the Producers, to catch the fact that the Continental celebro-paparazzi is entirely different from the fawning American Hollywood-wanna-be press. I hope it's clearer what I meant now.
"then spend a few years doing community service for a Jewish Center. "
That's a bit excessive.
As of last night, the press was attacking Harry for his actions and no explanation of his behavior was forthcoming from The Royals' camp. The media has been pontificating in tandem, from the British tabloids to Fox News, that Harry should not have worn the uniform to the costume party; that he should have known better; that he had been incredibly insensitive; and that he had no, or little, knowledge of history. Solutions offered by the press included an apology during a possible trip to Auschwitz, where he would learn of the plight of those poor souls who suffered so horribly at the hands of the Nazis. One British military official suggested that the Armed Services will naturally and inevitably deal with his "arrogance" once his military career begins.
Now, it seems to me from all these accusations and profferred solutions that Harry's sin has yet to be identified. Is he ignorant, or is he arrogant? We must put aside the notion that he should have known the reaction of the press for a moment; he isn't being taken to task by them for not knowing how they would react; his actions have given them a huge story that's making them a lot of money. The press is quite happy whenever they see a Royal engaging in behavior having the scent of scandal. It's true that he should have known what their reaction would be, but he isn't being attacked because he didn't know, and as such, he has no reason to address that particular lapse in judgment.
For what then is he being called on the carpet? Arrogance? Regarding what? Did he don the uniform in defiance of commonly-held ethics of mores? Did he think, "I don't care what the Jewish people think or have experienced by-and-large; I will don this Nazi outfit, attend a costume party, and intentionally humiliate them"? If so, he deserves what he gets; if not, the only alternative offered by the press has been his ignorance. He "should have known" his actions would create a panic. But if he didn't know, he didn't know; and he is being held to standards of which he is unaware.
This is why it seems clear to me that an explanation of his motives should have been offered from the outset. It seems evident that he found the costume amusing. Now, there isn't anything amusing about Nazis per se; however, like all evil, they can be mocked, and herein lies the secret with which he might have disarmed the press.
He might have said, through his press people, "I wore this costume because I thought it would be amusing to the people at the party to see a member of the Royal Family being absurd. I had recently viewed The Great Dictator and The Producers and had foolishly come to the conclusion that pretending to be a Nazi was in itself funny, regardless of the context. I was wrong and I apologize profusely for my insensitivity.
Without a motive, can there be guilt? I say yes, if one is willfully blind. This explanation would have both addressed Harry's willful blindness and explained the resulting willful ignorance. It would have had to have been reported by the press, and he could have acknowledged the specific blame for this specific act and silenced the media's howling.
As it is, his detractors have yet to make his wrongdoing clear. One of the jobs of a press agent is to explain things to the press; he who controls the story wins. The Royals' attempts at damage control aren't working. Accepting culpability for specific sins, even if spin is involved, puts the ball in one's own court and one can play the four corners until the clock runs out on the news cycle.
Why is all of this Harry stuff about Jews? How many British Jews died in the Holocaust? Far fewer than the tens of thousands of British civilians who died as a result of Nazi bombs--several thousand of whom were in church at the time. Where is the British outrage over this?
I don't see that the House of Stuart and the various pretenders to that title have shown themselves any less inbred or imbecilic than the current clowns.
So9
Then we'll see if he thinks what he did was funny.
What nonsense.
How is wearing a Nazi uniform as a costume any worse than dressing up as Napoleon, which, I assume, would have been perfectly acceptable?
Napoleon warred with Britain, killed vast numbers of Brit soldiers and planned to invade and conquer the island.
How is wearing a Nazi uniform as a costume any worse than dressing up as Julius Caesar, which, I assume, would have been perfectly acceptable?
Caesar warred with Britain, killed vast numbers of Brit soldiers and actually invaded and conquered the island.
So9
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.