Have We Made Harry a Marked Man for the Rest of his Life?

The news that Prince Harry has been out on the frontline firing a heavy machine-gun at the Taliban and directing allied aircraft on to their targets has provoked a storm of debate in the UK. Why was his life put at risk? What would have happened if he had died? And what of the compliant media, keeping stumm at the behest of the MoD? Would they have even told us if he had been killed?

Let’s put that last one to bed straight away. If you think it is a habit of mine to keep quiet any old time the MoD asks me to do so you’re clearly new to this blog. Just cast your eye back over some of the things we have said in the past. I particularly recommend the blogs catalogued under the title Ministry of Pretence. No it isn’t my habit to do the MoD favours but in this particular case TimesOnline, together with the vast bulk of the British media, agreed to keep it quiet.

This was not through any craven desire to keep the establishment happy, it was because if it were known that Prince Harry was in Afghanistan, there would most likely have been a mass Taliban campaign in Helmand, with snipers targeting any soldier at all in the hope it might be Harry and an increased number of suicide bombers, all looking for the prize of having killed a British prince.

People would have been killed that would not otherwise have died, and given the likely increase in suicide bombs they wouldn't just have been British soldiers. If you think that your need to know what is going on is so important that people should die unnecessarily so you know it, well fine. But it is one thing journalists dying while trying to report important news from places like Iraq and Afghanistan, and large numbers have, it is quite another thing for someone else’s life to be put at added risk just so you can hear, right here, right now, that a junior Royal is fighting in Afghanistan.

So should the media have acted differently was not one of the questions that I asked myself as I read and watched the coverage last night and this morning. For me it was a straight up and down no-brainer. We were collecting the story, we were going to report it – if anything rather too excessively – once he came out and no-one was going to die unnecessarily because we reported it while he was there.

What I did wonder, as I watched that video of him firing off a heavy machine-gun at “Terry Taliban” and grinning at the camera, was how many mad Islamist terrorists will see that as a red rag, a reason to go after him once he gets back from Afghanistan? Not because I think there is no role for British troops in Afghanistan, although the US attitude is beginning to make me wonder, and not because I think humour is out of place in a war zone, it is often the only way of stopping yourself from going mad.

No. My concern was this. Amid all the careful planning of the deployment and the media blackout, did anyone think that we might be setting Harry up as a marked man for the rest of his life – a prime target for any sad, mad wannabe Islamist terrorist trying to make a name for himself?

Comments

[CJWarnock]

Has anyone else thought that this is the modern day Cinderella? Harry cannot go to the Front Line Ball as the nasty high profile means he will not be able to do anything. HM Fairy Grandmother says you shall go to the ball and the media deal prvides the magic carriage of secrecy. Then the Dredge Report sounds (a slightly early) midnight chime. Which leaves me wondering if he will find his glass slipper or more likely, camo fatigues and be allowed his own happy ever after, getting the normalcy he clearly craves.

[Denis]

No, he will not be a target, and at least he is alive unlike the 89 "plebs" who have did not have the protection offered to a royal.

[Peter I.]

Best to target 'them,' ere they target us.

[William29]

Watching Prince Harry with the GPMG made me wince, had he pulled the trigger with his hand over the ejection cover a handful of hot brass would have been the result. I am sure the lads whatever status they achieve will remain friends with this young man. I respect anyone who stands with his comrades.

[William29]

A little jealousy too, fired many types of weapons, some old ones at a trials unit, never got my hands on the old .5 browning, (or is it 12.7mm now) Ah well !

[Chris]

Surely, Harry's retreat will be used as propaganda by the Taliban.

It may be good PR for the royals, but it's a debacle for our armed forces.

I agree that the bodyguard detail will need to be strengthened.

[stuart]

did you not read the comments Denis? he is not being pulled out cos he is a prince, but being pulled out cos he is a target and therefore putting all out in Afganistan under increased threat. the protection is for his comrads not cos he wants to.

[anthony.alcock]

So you didn't blow the whistle on Prince Harry because the Times told you not to. Pretty fearless.

[Cllr Ken Tiwari (independent)]

No! Where ever this good old media
think of, all these moronistic words
and why? Every officer of our forces
are in danger, and have been before,
these so called Taleban are criminal
as any criminals in this world, this
is just media gimmicks, our concern
must be for all our officers, the word says God bless us all?
What kind of propaganda media wants,
its the good old media may make some
thing out of our dear prince Harry-
I hope harry will go on serving our
forces as long he wants to:Cllr Ken

[luca]

Harry describes his life at war as the most "normal" he has experienced for some time. It makes the poor boy come across like a born target.
No. The only thing worse than this prince getting his way and being allowed to endanger himself and others would be if he was indeed killed by "the enemy". I wager that the reaction of nationalist Britain to a Royal death could be to prolong this conflict beyond reason. As if it made sense and had any chance of success today.

[Maxadolf]

It was and is wrong to allow any of the senior Royals to be trained ostensibly for military service, principally for two reasons:

1. Their presence subjects their comrades to enhanced attacks by the enemy.

2. Any military action against them is fundamentally incompatible with their status as Royals simply because they would have to be removed from such hostilities, as has actually transpired with Harry.

For these reasons it is a complete waste and misuse of taxpayers' money to have them join the military training centres at a considerable cost to the taxpayer.

Furthermore, it is an insult to genuine soldiers to have to carry these pretenders only to have them extricated if the going gets rough.

If the princes want to learn to fly aircraft then let them do so out of the substantial monies already made available to them by the taxpayer via the Monarch, without adding insult to injury by training them under false pretences of being real soldiers available for hazardous military duties when required.

The current service-training activities of Prince William are even more absurd in the present context.

[Marty]

What is all this fuss about - of course Harry is a target, as is the rest of the Royal Family, as it has been since the Germans and then the IRA and now the 'slamists - what's changed? - the enemies of England have been trying to kill all or any of us for as long as I can remember - what I don't understand is why half the country now seems to want to surrender to these killers.

[Danny]

Well, they want to either kill us or convert us so I'd be perfectly happy for them to put their resources into going after someone who isn't me.

For my part, if I were to be found gurning at cameras I'd be a hell of a lot more photogenic... Let them have Harry, I say.

[Judge Dredd]

Send him to the US (Texas), we'll help protect him. We'll stand toe to toe with anyone who messes with Our Friends and Allies, Royal or Not. Done it before and we'll do it again.

God Bless Our British Friends

Burn in Hell Drudge you Traitorous Dog...

[J. Lindsay]

A royal does not have to go all the way to Afghanistan to become a target of Islamists and/or anyone else with an axe to grind. Trying to keep out ahead of groups and/or individuals with an ajenda is part of the fame gig these days. The royals understand this. Let's not loose sleep over it. They are not.

[AM]

I think he's just walking in the footsteps of his old man.

[ausmike]

"People would have been killed that would not otherwise have died." Maybe but people who would have otherwise been killed would not have been. The sum total wouldn't change.

[harry flashman]

Probably better to flush the scum out with Harry, than try to win by a war of attrition. It is time we accepted this is a global war, and got on with it. I suggest an extra tax on Mosques and Muslims to pay for the bloody mess they are making. After all, given a chance they would impose Jizyah on us...

[moose]

This young man has done his duty like alot of other fine young people he is no better or worse than his comrades.

[Sheila]

Why on earth did they let him join the army in the first place? His presence in any front line unit is always going to be a problem. Why not the navy like his father and uncle? Then he could have been deployed at sea for months on end preferably in a nuclear submarine.

[jacqui]

Will Muslims now hunt down Harry?

Yes, they will try.

But the point is this: There is no way that a very large scale war between Islam and the rest can now be avoided.

There will be fighting soon in all Western countries that have kindly taken in refugees from failed and failing, and of course tryrannical, Islamic states.

The scale of death will be massive.

And the staggeringly deluded left-wing Westeners will fight with and assist the Islamic enemy.

It'll be a close run thing. Actually it is much worse: The Muslims will win, for sure.

The ignorance and cowardice already shown by the Western left, and even by elements of the right, has permitted extreme infiltration of Western institutions.

Example: the visa dept of the Australian Govt immigration service is controlled by Muslims and non-Muslim Australian idiots who take bribes to allow in more Muslims.

[Moondanser]

I don't understand all the hostility towards Prince Harry from the readers. Here is a young man who is willing to fight not only to defend his own people, but those from other countries as well. Perhaps it is American idealism, but why shouldn't he be allowed to fight? From what I've read he pulled the same duties as the other soliders in his unit and had been trained to do so. Why would anyone even imply that he is simply "pretending" to be a solider. As stated previously Harry did not go running home because it became to dangerous for him or because he was not "having a good time." He was pulled out for the saftey of his fellow soldiers. And in all this talk about the media blocking the prince's tour from the general public did anyone stop to think that its a safety issue, not a freedom of the press issue. I am ashamed that is was an American media source that revealed the mission that Harry was to be part of, and I am ashamed of anyone who belive's that thier right to know is more important then the lives of those who risk their lives to protect us and ours. Personally I could not be more proud of Harry, and I'm sure if Diana were still alive she would feel the same pride in her son. The rebellious boy has grown into a man who is willing to stand up for what he belives in. What more could anyone ask for?
~Moondanser~
(USA)

[chris, woodbridge]

By some of the comments, it appears dammed if you do, dammed if you dont. Just wish some people would just get off his back.

[David Weston]

I'm baffled by this call that the media has a right to know everything that goes on, and to report it and that the public has a need to know.

Of course they don't.

It is not a case of censorship, but one of being discreet.

If at friday prayers next week some extremists decide to have a go at Harry because of this press coveage and that he is killed or injured as a result, even years ahead, I hope we will remember the low-life journalists who 'outed' the story. And that would include Jon Snow of C4 News who showed his true colours over the story.

[Wilf]

The jihadists can try, but if MI5 can keep them away from Salman Rushdie for almost 20 years, they should have no problem protecting Harry.

[Bosco]

Was Prince Andrew's service in The Falkland's kept a media secret?

[Chris Fomes]

I applaud Harry on the front line because it demonstrates a degree of leadership that the English have historically always demanded from their Royalty.

The thing that concerns me is that he is now a terrorist target for the rest of his life and there will be huge social and retributional ramifications should one of Lady Dianas sons be murdered in his own country. Yes he should have gone, but it should have remained a secret.

[Chris Fomes]

But then did we have a problem with Argentine Jihadists?

[Wilbur Varela]

War is about killing. Some will die. Life itself is a risk. The Taliban cut off heads with knives, murder women and prevent girls from being educated, they kill those who listen to music or fly kites, and promote a perverted brand of Islam which encourages hatred of anything western. Prince Harry is out there fighting the good fight, and all you people think it's publicity? Wake up! We need to pull together and realize Afghanistan is a problem for all of us. Fight them there so they don't fight us here. God bless the Royal Army.

[William29]

Cry, god, for Harry, England and Saint George (and me ex SG). Democratic countries always have and presumably always will sleepwalk into the next conflict. I believe many people think freedom is some form of god given right, unfortunately freedom has to be bought and paid for. When our guard is down we will once again buy our freedom from the next enemy wishing to impose their will. In answer to those that say we should only defend our island, battles are best fought on ground of your choosing, if that means in the homeland of the enemy so be it.

[trevor]

Can someone from the US tell us a little more about the Dredge Report and the people behind it?

It is difficult to believe that our friends and allies (albiet sometimes a little slow in coming to help) could drop this bombshell.

Why did they choose to effectively undermine and sabotage friendly forces - they have only helped the miserable, mad, medieval taliban?

[Lucio Rossi]

Prince Harry's tour in Afaghanistan is good publicity for Royal Family.
Dont be silly, Harry has only changed his image. God save the Queen from stupidity.

[Catherine Jones]

So many unkind comments. There is something about comradeship that civilians will never quite understand. Is it that hard to believe that a prince might be immune to the esprit de corps which is the glue that binds together all regiments? For the smug non-combatants to wish any soldier dead because of their personal animosity towards the monarchy betrays a pettiness that is mind-boggling in its venomous ignorance. Would you rather Prince Harry dressed up, only to attend parties and charitable events, rather than stand up with his fellow troops?

[Peter]

Is he a marked man? The progressives would tell us there is no problem with Islam, the religion of all that is goodness and light - so who exactly is going to harm him?

[Daz. Oxford, NZ]

Mick,
As a Kiwi who served in the British Army during the eighties and nineties I'm always interested to read your blog.

What strikes me with the current ho-ha over young Harry Wales, is the shear level of vitriol, much of it offensive, gutless and ignorant, that is levelled at him by large sections of British society. Seems the lad is damned whatever he does. Perhaps it's just the good old pommie class divide or a national need to whinge at everything. I'm not actually sure what he's supposed to have done wrong, apart from show a bit of character and getting stuck into the nightclub scene - wish I'd done a bit more of that myself. However, I do share you concern at the wisdom of some of the film released to the media.

From reading around the blogs it strikes me that there are still far too many people living in a pacifist dreamworld with regard to the threat from Islamism. The same sort of people who vilified Churchhill as a war monger when he warned about the rise of Nazism, are now desperately trying to prove that the Islamsts will go away if we ignore them. Or take the view that 'they've attacked us, therefore we must be bad people'. Pacifism didn't stop the Nazi death camps and it won't stop Al Quaeda either.

Yes, Iraq was a collosal mistake and yes, the conduct of operations in Afghanistan has been dysfunctional.
Yes the people responsible should have been held to account. And, yes, we can never win by miltary means alone. But, we are where we are.

We can't un-invent the Taleban and they are not going to go away if we hand them a victory. Too few people
understand, or are even willing to contemplate, that when the Islamists
say they want to destroy western society they mean it. They now have the means (it would be nice to know where from?)
and certainly have the will.

We may well be seeing the end of Pax Americana, but if the alternative is China, Russian gangsters and a Caliphate;we might just look back at this as the good old days. No more worrying about human rights, climate change and celebrity gossip

[Dan Bartol]

What a complete farce. Get your head out of your ass and be a man for once in your life.

[EAG]

Some posters seem to have little idea of the real danger that FAC's put themselves in. They are always at the "pointy end of the spear."

Prince Harry should be commended rather than criticized!

[EAG]

I find peculiar those who chose to criticize H.R.H. for wishing to fulfil his duty as an Army Officer rather than criticizing the idiots who felt that it was our right to know every detail the moment it happened. At that rate we'd all have been speaking German or Japanese or perhaps Russian these past six or so decades.

[William29]

Dear Catherine:

So well put. My own experience tells me that those who mock will be the first to hide behind the thin red line.

[oldsmiddy]

"Would you rather Prince Harry dressed up, only to attend parties and charitable events, rather than stand up with his fellow troops?"

I would rather he wasn't made to feel the only way to find fulfilment and purpose in his life was by being armed to the teeth and killing people.

[AmericanInParadise]

Trevor, I'm an American and I can tell you a little bit about the Drudge Report. It's just a blog, and all this stuff about "American media" strikes me as a bit unfair. Matt Drudge, the man who runs the thing, is a one-man-show and a sensationalist news-troll. He reads an enormous number of papers and picks up underreported stories, looks into them as best he can, and writes them up in the hopes of gaining publicity (and $$$). CNN and the AP--both American--knew about Harry and kept mum, but why would the MoD or anybody else think to talk to all the bloggers in America? Surely that would have done more harm than good. I'm sure that slime Drudge is glorying in the attention, but I doubt it was his intention to "out" Harry as he did--he picked it up from Germany, after all, so he might have thought it was an open story. The thing was that Drudge realized (probably just through a google search) that Harry hadn't been reported on anywhere since December last. Nonetheless, Drudge is not by any means a journalist. He's one horrible slimy man who lives for noteriety; there are many people like that all over the world and it wasn't any respectable media who outed Harry over here. The one difference between Drudge and anybody else is that he happens to have a website that gets 15 million hits a day.

[Neil McGowan]

Nice to see Hooray Harry fighting for William Kristol and the rest of the PNAC scum.

Glad to see the future British monarch knows his place - sucking yankee shoeleather.