An
American news broadcaster has received criticism after suggesting Prince Harry
was allowed to serve in Afghanistan "because he’s expendable".
Despite the 23-year-old prince having endured being referred to as the "spare"
to Prince William’s "heir" since the moment of his birth in 1984, the comment
has provoked headlines across the globe.
It was during a live broadcast of Good Morning America that co-host Chris Cuomo
made the comment during a segment
promoting an upcoming ABC special on the royals and following Harry’s return to
Britain following his ten-week tour of duty in Helmand Province.
The comment prompted Cuomo’s colleague Robin Roberts to ask: "What did you say?"
Continued Cuomo: "It’s true. The reason that Harry is allowed to be in
Afghanistan is because he's not the heir to the throne. William's not allowed
to be there."
While this comment has invariably hit the headlines, Cuomo himself shouldn’t
feel too concerned by the storm of criticism.
In a BBC documentary aired in February 1992, former British Prime Minister Edward
Heath was seen chatting to the Queen and the American Secretary of State, James Baker, about how he’d visited Saddam Hussein’s
Iraq as the leader of a diplomatic mission to avoid full-blown war.
Heath's visit took place after the brutal dictator had taken a number of foreign
visitors, including British citizens, hostage in Iraq after the invasion of Kuwait and before the first Gulf War of 1991.
Hearing
the former Conservative Leader speaking about Saddam Hussein's
intransigence, the Queen chipped in, laughingly saying in response to
Heath's declaration that he'd been to Baghdad: "Yes, I know you did. But you’re expendable now!".
Comment: I agree with m-m they all seem to acting like that, accept HM of course.
As if everything they do is a "private matter".
It seems like they would be the last people to even fight for the monarchy. Harry even said he often wished he wasn't a Prince.
Name: M-M
Comment: IIRC Charles some years ago offered himself to be King of Europe , the Monarch at the head of it all - so he must be aware of what is to come .
Perhaps that is why he actually married Camilla - because it really doesn't matter in the long run ?
Name: exploora
Comment: I do not think a nation can be technically described as a multi national corporation, though I do think a nation in many ways might be better off if it did treat its citizens as the most important stakeholders,instead of the multi-nationals as being the main stakeholders.
People when empowered usually act in their best interest, even though we are led to believe that is not true.
Economists measure utility as a method to predict limited probable behaviour, because one's utility does work as a measuring tool of what one values.
People in the 21st century, might be better off without a patronizing ruling class which could possibly trigger class warfare in one's own country between the unemployed and employed taxpayers as a distraction, while the real multi nationals possibly export and import whatever benefits their own profit margins, in real time dictates to them, regardless of the cost to the stakeholders who actually live in the country and contribute their energy to building the country.
It is possible if the powers to be, continue to focus on the horrors of the past, we might be led to miss the opportunity or the chance to stop the present day horrors from happening in the present.
The key words possibly being the opportunity to make a difference during this moment in time. Of course the present moment in time becomes tomorrow's history before you know it. My point. The past cannot be changed. The future can be.
Name: exploora
Comment: I think what Emily is saying might explain why the young Royals don't appear to act Royal or appear to want to be Royal, and how Harry could even say "he didn't like England much" in an interview he must have known would have broadcasted sooner or later.
And if I remember right, Wills at one time mentioned the Europe Union and the chance that he may even be King, which explains the "snotty my privacy" attitude.
Hopefully it doesn't explain why Harry wore a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party but it might explain why he took such a chance related the effect on the RF the public's anger could have.
Name: Emily Elizabeth Windsor-Cragg
Comment: She'll have her fall wardrobe regardless, won't she?
But the final treaty is coming up this summer, and then England will just be a memory, the Kingdom of David thrown OFF with the Balfour Declaration by George V, the Stone of Scone lost and broken in 1950, and now the Queen signing it ALL away. She will merely be the CEO of a multi-national corporation, just as the US has been merely a multinational corporation since 1871 when it was reorganized as a Delaware corporation.
And you think I'm kidding and you wonder why I sound somewhat bitter?
EEWC
Name: Monika
Comment: Well, then someone should tell the Queen before she invests in a fall wardrobe.
Name: Emily Elizabeth Windsor-Cragg
Comment: Are you folks simply NOT AWARE that the British Monarchy WILL NOT EXIST after this summer?
The abolition of Britain by The Reform Treaty in 2008
The sixth and final treaty has now been named: its is the Reform Treaty, due to be signed by the Queen in the Summer of 2008. This is a year before the deadline set by the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel.
Merkel and former French President Giscard d'Estaing are among many European ministers who have confirmed the Treaty is the EU Constitution, almost unchanged. If they are right, it will abolish the British Constitution, and therefore the nations of Britain and England, sweeping away our Westminster Parliament, and giving the EU dictatorship the power to close it.
This sixth treaty is the fastest moving and most secret the EU has drafted; opposition to and recognition of the EU as a police state is growing, and they know speed is vital.
The Countdown to abolition
Tony Blair agreed to it on 23rd June 2007 as his final stab in Britain's back. On the 23rd July there was an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC), when we should have seen a first draft of the Treaty.
Foreign ministers will agree its terms on 7-8th September at the resort of Viana de Castelo, Portugal. There will be a summit in Lisbon on the 18th and 19th October, where they hope to sign the Treaty, but definitely before December 2007. This should be Gordon Brown's signature.
The Queen and Parliament to abolish Britain summer 2008 They plan to ratify the Reform Treaty in the Summer of 2008. This means Westminster will pass the treaty, and the Queen will sign it behind our backs, as she has the other five treaties.
No referendum
The EU has chosen this sixth Treaty instead of pushing through it's constitution to avoid referendums in its member nations.
Whereas the 465 page EU Constitution would have abolished the five treaties and replaced them with a single document with absolute power, the Reform Treaty adds to the existing five treaties, bringing them up to the powers of the EU Constitution. All six treaties with appendices will add up to something like 100,000 complex and unreadable pages.
The EU remains illegal
Each of these six treaties are completely illegal under the British Constitution, our 1689 Bill of Rights, our treason laws, and under our common law. It is unforgivable that the Queen, her Ministers and our Parliament have committed the criminal act of treason by signing these treaties, and broken our laws to abolish our nation.
The EU will always be illegal in Britain; but once the EU has complete power and control here, we can no more get rid of it than we could Germany, had their planned illegal occupation of Britain in 1940 been successful.
You have one year left
Treason is the most serious of all Britain's crimes. You have just one year left to bring these vile British traitors to justice, and get us out of the EU dictatorship.
Around 45 million British people are against the abolition of our nation, and with the little European voting that has been allowed, it seems clear over 200 million of its victims don't want the EU. But we will never be given the choice. YOU have to decide to act yourself.
There are ways to stop the EU - see "Your Campaigns" on the left. Then we will need a mass blockade of Westminster to stop our criminal MP's and Queen breaking our constitution and laws for the last time.
Copy of the EU's Timetable at the BBC.
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ world/europe/6901353.stm, MPs consider fallout from EU vote]
Original 2009 article from German Parliament -.pdf for download [http://eutruth.org.uk/2009treaty.pdf,
The Abolition of Britain is now set for May 2009]] Then check it at the German Parliament here
It surprises me that Royalists do not refer to this matter as a threat to their whole way of being a British citizen.
Please elaborate on this travesty, the abolition of "governance by consent of the people."
EEWC
Name: M-M
Comment: Harry himself is on record as having said that he knows 'he is not the important one ' .
To say he is regarded as 'expendable ' is an insensitive way to say much the same thing . William cannot be risked . Harry obviously can .
Unless Harry is permitted to take on a real job , or run , in a hands-on way , some Charities , he really is surplus to RF requirements at present . This is not to say that he did not prove himself in Afghanistan and that he has not shown at times great ability .
I hope the RF and the Government can find a really meaningful role for him before long
Name: anyacat
Comment: As unpleasant as it is, Chris Cuomo did not coin the phrase "The heir and the spare," which has dogged Prince Harry since birth. But one would have thought Chris might have been more sensitive as he is the younger brother of New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and youngest son of former New York Governor Mario Cuomo.
Name: shelley
Comment: I find it interesting just how many "spares" have actually become Monarchs.
Name: Rachel
Comment: I'm feeling badly about all the talk about Harry's Afghanistan mission being a "PR exercise" and then the talk about him being "expendable." Like all veterans, he needs some rest and recreation and a chance to start recovering from the experience of war. Prince Harry is a brave young man in my view and needs a break from the constant media chatter. (And here I am contributing to it!)
Name: Elsie Marek
Comment: Of course Harry is more expendible then William, that is what been royal is all about. Knowing your place and your position. That is why some royals get VIP security and others get nothing at all and why others are send to dangerous countries on state visits while others don't hae to. Double standards is part of thier life. The expendible ones do all the work, it is a fact they are born with and understand all to well.
Name: fairmaiden
Comment: Contessa, I am not sure with country you live in. However, the American journalist, Chris Cuomo, has a right to freedom of speech which is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Therefore, he can't be fired for making the comment he made. That is why America is the land of the free.
Name: exploora
Comment: Possibly he meant Harry was being treated as he was expendable. The media circus relating to his duties probably did put Harry at risk. And I think in a round about way Harry did serve to remind people about the war in Afghanistan, and the conditions on the front line, and that horrible looking breakfast, that very few people could actually make it appear edible while eating it, let alone willing to eat it, I think made Harry appear very brave. He ate that horrible looking breakfast like a good sport. It was like breakfast of champions.
I mean his own grandmother was proud that he went. I am not saying she shouldn't be. I am saying HM told Harry he was going, not Wills.
And Wills can't go, cause he might get hurt and Wills is the heir and Harry is the spare.
I see double standards here.
If what he was really saying was ridiculous, then people would treat his comment as irrelevant, his comment is almost being treated like it is dangerous.
Name: Monika
Comment: I hope he didn't mean it the way it sounded.
I also agree with Tracey's reasoning.
Name: Emily Elizabeth Windsor-Cragg
Comment: I don't fault the very shallow and insensitive reporters; they're just working for a living. I fault the owner-publishers who push for sensationalism by trivializing humankind in general and human beings in particular.
If you want to stop this practice, cancel your subscriptions to mainstream media and recycle your tellie to a community center or library. The only antidote for stupidity is literacy, sophistication and a tolerance for ambiguity on the part of the electorate.
EEWC
Name: Tracey
Comment: I wouldn't have thought so, should something happen to William, and let's face it no one knows how long our lives are going to be (re: Diana), or what turns our lives may take (re: Edward VIII) I would have thought Harry would not have been 'expendable'. But having said that because he is third in line rather than first or second, he should be able to seek out a life for himself that he finds fulfilling and enjoyable and if that is Army life with all trappings (and that includes overseas deployments to 'hot spots') then so be it.
Name: Contessa
Comment: I am seeing RED!!!! I will be contacting the network directly to demand the firing of this idiot. I hope everyone else does the same. Harry deserves the utmost respect as do all of our troops!
An
American news broadcaster has received criticism after suggesting Prince Harry
was allowed to serve in Afghanistan "because he’s expendable".
While this comment has invariably hit the headlines, Cuomo himself shouldn’t
feel too concerned by the storm of criticism.
