Headline of Screws: "I'M NO HERO But I'm f**king p**sed off"
Oh yes Harry - you're so brave you must be so disappointed, and you're the only soldier ever to go out there and you're defending your country and not an over-privelidged illegitimate member of the most expensive work-shy chavs in the country at all, are you?
Diddums.
What upsets me further is that people actually buy into it instead of questioning the excellent blackout job the press did for 10 months.
/slavering self-righteous sanctimonious worthless crap
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:32,
archived)
Oh yes Harry - you're so brave you must be so disappointed, and you're the only soldier ever to go out there and you're defending your country and not an over-privelidged illegitimate member of the most expensive work-shy chavs in the country at all, are you?
Diddums.
What upsets me further is that people actually buy into it instead of questioning the excellent blackout job the press did for 10 months.
/slavering self-righteous sanctimonious worthless crap
The Guardian (I presume) were in on it too, and kept their gobs shut.
It doesn't make anyone look good, this, and shows us exactly how vulnerable we are to the manipulation of the press.
They'll be claiming Diana died in an RTA next.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:40,
archived)
It doesn't make anyone look good, this, and shows us exactly how vulnerable we are to the manipulation of the press.
They'll be claiming Diana died in an RTA next.
I'm all for freedom of the press, but if it's actually going to put soldiers at a greater risk, then can you justify reporting it?
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:43,
archived)
Simply demote all the royals to civilian status - the end.
/dreamer
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:46,
archived)
/dreamer
But, given the situation, I think the press have probably done the right thing.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:47,
archived)
I'm far too whiny.
Either they sent him out there to get him offed as he's so obviously Hewitt's son, or
They sent him out there for a few months to shut him up and then "broke" the story as an excuse to get him back.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:49,
archived)
Either they sent him out there to get him offed as he's so obviously Hewitt's son, or
They sent him out there for a few months to shut him up and then "broke" the story as an excuse to get him back.
If you don't read the newspapers you are uninformed, if you do read them you are illinformed.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:50,
archived)
I know I would be if I believed in it.
I don't know, I like Harry.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:40,
archived)
I don't know, I like Harry.
Though why he should live a multi-million pound lifestyle at the taxpayer's expense for doing an average junior officer's job is beyond me.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:42,
archived)
If you were offered that kind of lifestyle just because your dad's your dad, would YOU say no? I certainly wouldn't.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 15:49,
archived)
have you never had the urge to whip out your box brownie when on an exotic holiday and snap away at a local tribal chief or his/her house or palace. think of liz and the gang as our tribal chief and the cost is pretty negligible really.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 16:09,
archived)
It's more that it's given to people who don't need/deserve it.
Maybe I should just become a communist and have done with it.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 16:13,
archived)
Maybe I should just become a communist and have done with it.
and i bet those communist palaces take a bit of heating, and the party must cost a few bob in stationary. also they do tend to demand a fair bit of fawning to.
the only real difference if you're lucky, is you get to choose a new one every now and then.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 16:19,
archived)
the only real difference if you're lucky, is you get to choose a new one every now and then.
Nice idea though. I just find it hard to accept that the royal family deserve our money purely because of their heritage.
(,
Mon 3 Mar 2008, 16:22,
archived)
