So here's what bothers me. According to Chris Cuomo on ABC's "Good Morning America, the reason Prince Harry was allowed to fight in Afghanistan was because he's only third in line to the British throne behind Charles and William. He is, in Cuomo's words, "expendable."
But is that the real reason, or is the truth hidden somewhere below the glossy surface? Are we really being made to believe it's okay for Harry to risk his life in a far off land but not his older brother because of the royal line of succession? Conspiracy theory, anyone? Think about it. In July of 2005, Harry was criticized for wearing a Nazi costume to a party. This is generally considered bad form in England considering that whole WWII thing. Recently, the British prince was quoted as saying "I generally don't like England that much." This comment seems especially strange given that Harry has been trained his entire life to always say and do the right thing, making some surmise that these two incidents emerged from feelings and attitudes that have been boiling up for some time. Perhaps he was becoming a bit of an embarrassment to the Royal Family and Britain, herself. It's possible the Royals saw the writing on the wall and didn't want young Harry to explode exactly at the wrong time. To avoid a possible international incident, they sent the boy off to war.
On the other hand, the more likely answer is that the Brits all took a poll and decided that William is the better looking brother, more kingly, thus making young Harry truly "expendable." Now Britain has infiltrated the American media with lies about "succession" and the free-spirited Harry trying to be a hero to his country by serving in Afghanistan. It makes sense, after all. No one wants an ugly king on the throne. Hey, if the Royal family could have lost that Mr. Ed look-a-like Prince Charles at sea they would have done it years ago. This is probably why Queen Elizabeth will most likely hang on for another quarter century or so, just to make sure she outlives Chuck so that he'll never be king. I hope so. Can you imagine how frightening that old man will look in another 25 years? I mean, really.
What? You have a different theory?










Ha too funny. In my opinion the whole lot of them are ugly. I agree wholeheartedly that Charles is gonna be some freaky looking old man. He's scary enough as is, hopefully Liz will indeed hang on...
Posted by: Michele | March 18, 2008 at 06:07 PM
I think Harry's hot...I love red heads
Posted by: Sissy J. | March 07, 2008 at 09:36 AM
Actually yes,Prince Harry is not Prince Charles son, but James Hewitt ,so he really is "expendable'.Lol!
Posted by: purseslut | March 06, 2008 at 11:10 PM