Prince Harry murdered a buffalo & posed with the carcass. In 2004.

wenn21093754

Here are some weekend photos of Prince Harry visiting the Boultbee Flight Academy in Goodwood, then trying out some cars on the Goodwood Circuit. I’ve read articles about Goodwood and their annual car show/race whatever. It seems like a somewhat cool thing, and it was only a matter of time before our favorite ginger party prince found his way there. I just have to say one thing about his appearance: that sweater is nice. It looks nice on him. He should wear that “jumper” style more often.

Anyway, as we’ve discussed for more than a week now, Prince William and Harry went on a boar-hunt in Spain a few weekends ago. Duchess Kate was not in attendance, but William’s ex-girlfriend Jecca Craig was there. William got the brunt of the criticism. It was HIS ex-girlfriend and he was the one in the midst of a “gap year” to focus on conservation and anti-poaching initiatives after all. While hunting wild boar doesn’t exactly run contradictory to those efforts, the optics of “going on a holiday for bloodsport” didn’t look good. Well, it looks like William saw that he was getting the brunt of the criticism and magically, The Daily Mail got their hands on a photo – from 2004! – of Prince Harry crouched over the dead body of a buffalo he had just shot – you can see the photo here.

A smiling Prince Harry crouches over the body of one-ton water buffalo moments after he shot it dead on a hunting trip. This photograph has emerged less than a week after the young royal pledged to do all he could to save Africa’s critically endangered wildlife. And it also follows worldwide condemnation of another royal hunting trip just ten days ago when Prince William went boar shooting in Spain.

Harry, who is also known to stalk stag, is likely to face similar attention following the publication of this picture, which has not been seen before in the UK. It was taken in November 2004, when the then 20-year-old was on a gap year trip to South America shortly before he enrolled at Sandhurst military academy.

The prince spent several months working on the El Remanso polo farm in Argentina. During the trip, he and his then girlfriend Chelsy Davy joined an expedition to hunt big game, staying at a private lodge in the province of Entre Rios. The ranch was owned by Count Claudio Zichy-Thyssen, one of the country’s most powerful landowners with more than 170,000 acres stocked with game.

A firm called CH Hunting organised the shooting party. The company offers huntsmen the chance to bag red stag, wild deer, puma, antelope, boar and birds such as doves and pigeon. But the water buffalo, which can turn deadly if wounded, is the ‘trophy kill’ for any Argentinian hunter.

At the time, a local newspaper claimed the head of the animal in the picture, and that of a wild boar shot by Harry, were embalmed so they could be shipped back to the UK as a gift for the prince. It is not clear whether this ever took place.

A Kensington Palace spokesman declined to comment on the photo last night.

But a senior royal aide said: ‘It would be a great shame if the publication of this picture were to detract from the efforts being made by the three princes to curb the appalling illegal wildlife trade. Like his father and brother, Prince Harry has always been a strong supporter of the campaign to protect endangered species.’

Speaking at a conference on Thursday, Prince Charles – flanked by his two sons – warned that the imminent extinction of some of the world’s most precious species would have ‘dire consequences for humanity’.

The heir to the throne told the meeting of international leaders in London that the ‘appalling’ illegal trade in ivory, rhino horn, tiger parts and endangered animals was ‘annihilating our threatened wildlife’.

There is no suggestion that any member of the Royal Family has ever shot an animal illegally. In 1961, on an official visit to India with the Queen, Prince Philip, a former president of the World Wildlife Fund, shot a tiger at Ranthambhore, while a guest of the Maharaja of Jaipur. On the same trip the royal – once a keen big game-hunter who shot stag, pheasant and grouse until recently – killed a crocodile and six urials, a type of mountain sheep. His actions prompted widespread condemnation from British and Indian politicians. But, significantly, they were not against the law at the time.

[From The Daily Mail]

The good news is that they had to go back a decade to find some bad stuff on Harry. The bad news is that it feels like St. James Palace – or perhaps Prince William’s press secretary? – keeps a file of all of Prince Harry’s embarrassments or misdeeds so they can pull one out if necessary whenever William is getting bad press.

Now, is it possible that The Daily Mail just happened to get their hands on this photo this week and they decided to run with it immediately and this is all some huge, unnecessary conspiracy? Of course. But isn’t it more likely that this is just a naked attempt to push some bad press on Harry so everyone will stop yelling about Will?

wenn21093757

wenn21093890

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

109 Responses to “Prince Harry murdered a buffalo & posed with the carcass. In 2004.”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. V4Real says:

    Well did he eat it after he killed it? I can see a person killing something if it’s for consumption but not just for game. Even though I haven’t had red meat in over six months Bison burgers are delicious.

    • FLORC says:

      V4Real
      Bison burgers are great! Very lean and the flavor is something I prefer overr other ground meats.

      I’m not well versed in how the brits or for that facts, euros hunt. Do they use the whole animal or donate it to a nearby foodbank, village, or some one in need? Do they just breed the animals to kill them and then destroy the body?

    • L says:

      It’s not a American bison, but a water buffalo. There are 172 million of them worldwide-so not a endangered species, and the meat (while tough) is still tasty.

      I agree with others-this is just a ploy to make William look better.

  2. Lucinda says:

    I’m not a royal watcher but this sure feels like they are throwing Harry under the bus. Someone last week even commented that they were grateful the RF didn’t seem to be using Harry as a scapegoat to misdirect attention. Yet a week later, here we are…..

    • LadySlippers says:

      @Lucinda: The Spare is the BRF’s Sacrificial Lamb so Harry (and Andrew for Charles; Margaret for Elizabeth and so on) will always get thrown under the bus to deflect from the heir’s scandals (or heiress in Elizabeth’s case).

    • FLORC says:

      Nearly all the royaloonies were shocked last week that Harry wasn’t being turned into a scapegoat. We spoke too soon I guess.

    • m says:

      Spare logic: doing something at 18 should totally be held against you ten years later if it means saving your brothers ass.
      It reminds me of how William was photographed drunk with his pants around his ankles showing off his bare ass, dancing on a table and those never saw the light of day, meanwhile Harrys Vegas pics were everywhere. Both were taken under the same circumstances so what gives?

      • Sarah says:

        m says:
        “It reminds me of how William was photographed drunk with his pants around his ankles showing off his bare ass, dancing on a table and those never saw the light of day,”

        How come you know them then? Did you attend the occasion or have you friends doing so?

  3. linlin says:

    They could have gone back to 2007 as well, at this point 2 endangered birds had been shot on the royal estate while Prince Harry and a friend were shooting (and were believed to be the only people in the area to be shooting). The police questioned them but couldn’t prove that they had done it, but really, a bird gets shot while people are hunting, it doesn’t really take Sherlock Holmes to connect the pieces, right? I wonder if it had been just an ordinary bloke and not Prince Harry if the police would have arrested him. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies

    • LadySlippers says:

      @linlin: Great article but it comes with no damning picture. That’s probably why they didn’t use it.

    • fairy godmother says:

      They probably did not use this info since he was only questioned a few times and police could not find any evidence (meaning the two hens’ corpses were no where to be found). Reportedly Will was present and encouraged Harry to shoot. So imo Will is just as responsible for knowingly encouraging his younger brother to shoot when Will knew it was illegal to go after those particular birds. Who knows what Harry knew at the time- he tends to do what his big bro tells him to do just like telling him he should wear a nazi costume. Insensitive buffoons both of them!

      • FLORC says:

        Fairy Godmother
        William is often the devil on Harry’s shoulder telling him to do things that he later gets in trouble for.
        Wasn’t William the one encouraging Harry to dress up as a Nazi soldier and said to be laughing heavily at the costume during the party?
        It’s hard to find the article including William now.. Of course.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @Florc:
        But that story IS in a book about the boys…

        (I know because I own it)

      • FLORC says:

        What book LadySlippers? Also, finish To Marry An English Lord. Any more suggestions?

      • fairy godmother says:

        I am horrible at choosing a great book to read. It must be due to my 24/7 job- all these demanding b!itches wanting to marry rich men syndrome going on no thanks to Waity. Now every unaccomplished female thinks they should have what she got. Sorry OT- Pippa has been quite a pest these past months and that mother of hers! Nightmare!
        Thanks for this book- any others you can recommend would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance.

      • LAK says:

        Florc/Fairy godmother: a book that encapsulates in a nutshell the differences between them and us is ‘snobs’ by Julian Fellowes.

  4. JaDeRu says:

    I couldn’t look at the photo. I have a soft spot in my heart for buffalo. I think they’re cute. No kidding.
    Yeah, I think the palace is throwing Harry under the bus here. He is the “badboy” so maybe they figure the blow won’t be quite as bad.

    • Azurea says:

      Well, it was a water buffalo, which isn’t the same thing at all. Not that that makes it any difference. Also, it sounds like this estate keeps animals on it solely to be hunted for sport, which is sickening to me. Really, the arrogance of humans & how so many of us have no respect for the planet & its inhabitants is horrible.

  5. Esti says:

    Or maybe whoever had the picture saw the stories about Will and realized there was money to be made by selling the pic?

    Will and Harry are by all accounts, including Harry’s, very close. I don’t buy that Will is waging a campaign to throw his brother under the bus every time Will is criticized in the press. And if all this site’s conspiracy theories about Will were true, he would in fact be the hardest working Royal in the world, scheming 24/7.

    • LadySlippers says:

      @Esti: No, it’s not William who throws Harry under the bus — it’s the ‘Grey Men’ — the various Palace staff that do it.

      Making the Spare the Sacrificial Lamb has been going on for decades, if not centuries, in order to bolster the popularity of the heir (or heiress).

      But it’s not William doing it personally. Oh no.

  6. Kiki says:

    It doesn’t matter if it was yesterday or ten years ago. How can these people have this kind of “fun”? Bunch of hypocrites.

    • Brittney says:

      Exactly. I feel the same way about people who hunt deer; no matter what the reason, you have a hobby that revolves around taking lives. I question the integrity and compassion of any human being who thinks it’s fun to kill defenseless animals for sport.

      • Tippy says:

        Hunting deer in places where they have no natural predators and are prone to overpopulation is essential and more humane than death by starvation.

      • aang says:

        I was born on an Indian reservation. If my dad didn’t hunt, we didn’t eat. Not exactly a hobby. I have shot one deer in my life, I hated doing it but it helps one appreciate where the food comes from. Meat doesn’t just appear on the shelves in the super market.

  7. Cazzee says:

    Maybe Cressida, with her dance background, can help move the British royal family away from their love of blood sports and towards activities involving the arts and culture.

    We can hope, can’t we?

    • fairy godmother says:

      LOL!! You give this woman far too much credit! Only thing she is interested in is being taken care of and living on easy street the rest of her life. I saw pics of her out at a shoot so she may hunt too.

    • bluhare says:

      Sorry, but that’s just the best visual of Cressida, scarves a draggin’, leaping around the trees.

  8. Talie says:

    I totally buy into your theory that this is like House of Cards and William’s people would rather smear the brother than have Will take any heat. Harry is so Peter Russo.

  9. HoustonGrl says:

    It’s funny to watch the palace’s pathetic attempts at justifying these hunting trips…The same people that own these exclusive hunting resorts in Africa, like the one in the picture, are the ones involved in the sanction of “controlled” hunting of lions and other species – Anyway, it’s very hard to police these 140,000 + acre ranches or to really know what happens there. Remember GoDaddy’s CEO elephant hunt in Zimbabwe; or King Juan Carlos’ hunt in Botswana for which he later apologized (only because he got caught)? All these individuals are cut from the same cloth. Even if the princes “only” hunt non-endangered species, it’s hard for anyone to take them seriously now. You can’t cherry pick, not in this instance. Remember, none of these folks are hunting for food or sustenance.

    • FLORC says:

      I was hoping someone brough him up. And didn’t Donald trump’s son kill a lionor something like that and posted it to a social media site?

      IMO it seems they kill only because they have so much money all other forms of entertainment seem to bore them. And it may never stop. Blood sport is something all generations of the wealthy seem to do and accept.

    • bluhare says:

      I do not like hunting at all. I would like it a bit more if what was killed was eaten, however, I don’t think that’s the purpose of these trophy hunts. That’s all they are; trophies. How I wish the elephants/buffalo/lions got to go after someone dropped into a fenced enclosure; we’d see how “sporting” it is. But I couldn’t watch that either — it isn’t fair.

      I can’t even get into how cute Harry looks in the black jacket photo I’m so bummed he hunted for a trophy.

    • Dame Snarkweek says:

      FLORC
      Spot on.
      Blu
      I live in a part of the country where animals are killed on Saturday, dressed on Sunday, eaten on Monday and frozen for winter on Tuesday. Rural neighbors trade different types of dressed game and there is a deep appreciation for what the land provides. This makes it impossible for me to admire a group of billionaires strutting around in $1,500 hunting apparel and blowing holes in animals that have been bred or corralled to take away their God-given defenses. It is disturbing, vile and cowardly.
      And the women are not blameless. They participate in foxhunting. Read about what happens when the wealthy ride to hounds and you’ll be sickened. Murdering animals makes them feel virile and powerful because deep down they know their lives of Bentleys, velvet slippers and Limoges china teacups are fraudulent – the result only of being born.

  10. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    How can you look at that beautiful animal and then just kill it? Why does that give you pleasure? I will never understand. And it doesn’t matter to me whether or not you eat it, unless you’re stranded on an island with no other access to food. It sickens me.

    • LAK says:

      Harry as a PR deflection from William aside, i’m right there with you.

      This is why I became vegetarian (almost vegan, but can’t give up milky tea-other types of milk aren’t the same).

      I can’t bring myself to eat or wear anything that had eyes. End of. Since I was a child.

      And i’m completely, fundamentalist, hard core against hunting. I don’t care for any reason given.

      • bluhare says:

        Which is one of the reasons I love you, LAK!!

        Although I have been able to get into soy milk in my tea.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @GoodNames @LAK:
        I’m from Minnesota and it’s a HUGE hunting and fishing state. At one time, MN’s DL used to have raised text, like credit cards, because we topped the nation in DNR licenses (Dept of Natural Resources) for hunting and fishing and the raised text made it easier to issue those hunting and fishing licenses. So I’ve heard all the reasonings why hunting is good for the environment blah blah blah. I do understand the logics behind the argument. However, I’ve never been able to reconcile that with my heart.

        I do eat meat every once and awhile and I only wear articles from animals I’m willing to eat (I’ll eat a cow but not an alligator). I do understand that something had to die in order for me to eat meat and I try not to abuse that.

      • FLORC says:

        I love your opinions and how thoughtful you can state them.
        And I won’t argue my points in favor of meat. Only that I hate shmeat. Google shmeat. It’s horrible.
        Being raised on a farm I saw the whole process from birth to death and i’m comfortable with eating meat. Also a huge animal lover. Big hater of corporate farms though. Nothing good about those.
        LAK
        I love almond milk. Silk dark chocolate almond milk is by far my favorite, but their sweetened plain imo is equal to 1% milk.

      • bluhare says:

        FLORC, anyone who hates factory farming is OK with me! Almond milk, eh? Not tried it; maybe I should.

        I try to only wear animals that have been slaughtered for food too, LS, although I prefer non animal material when I can find it. Shoes are hard. Who wants to sweat all day in plastic shoes? I can’t do it . . . one of the reasons being my poor nostrils threatened to quit if I ever did it again.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @everyone: Food Inc goes to town against factory farming. *shudder* I think only the people who don’t know how vile they are can support it.

        Also, I’ve started alternating between coconut and almond milk with real milk. Still doesn’t taste quite the same…

        @bluhare: I’m looking at my vegan Earth shoes now. I have several but don’t wear them much anymore as it wasn’t only my nostrils that were offended….

      • LAK says:

        Florc: My African tribal culture means that when you visit someone, especially if they live in the countryside, they bring out the food to admire it before they cook it.

        in essence it’s to honour you and to show you how well daisy [or some other animal] is. and then 2 hrs [or more] later, daisy, who you bonded with [in my case], is on your plate!!! i was traumatised, and i continue to be traumatised on the rare occasions i visit.

        Further,one of the schools i attended was a working farm which supplied food to us and the surrounding villages. Part of our school curriculum included agricultural studies and farming. From that, i understood their journey to our table, but it was equally traumatising.

        And also one of my BFF’s tribal custom is to drink blood drawn from the artery of a still living cow as a beverage. Cow isn’t killed in the process, but having someone had me a glass of freshly drawn blood was traumatising.

        In one way or another, i’ve either been traumatised into becoming a vegetarian or i think the animals are so cute and cuddly that i can’t imagine eating or wearing them.

        on the other hand, some animals are so scary and creepy that they are best left alone. Snake and crocodile skins give me major creeps. Perhaps i have an over active imagination, but i can’t help see the creep crawly in the scaly skin of the leather item.

        I try not to have any leather goods. Britain is very good for leather alternatives, so it’s not a hardship not to own anything made from leather.

        re: Milk…..i’ve tried all the different milk substitutes on the market and continue to try every new one that comes out. don’t like it. tea doesn’t taste right. better to drink black tea than sully it with all that stuff.

      • FLORC says:

        LAK
        I did only once see a goat brought out during a gathering and 3 hours later cooking on a spit. I was not ok with it then, but the whole animal was used and I was assured it was killed extremely humanly. It sounds like we come from different worlds though
        I can imagine being traumatized for life if I was handed a glass of blood though.

        As far as tea i’m sure you have a wonderful selection there, but I prefer milkless tea, but use a milky tasting tea blend from teavana if i’m craving that flavor. Do you have teavana over there? Still, if you’ve tried it all and milk is all that keeps you from vegan you’ve not doing too bad at all.

      • LAK says:

        Florc: due to colonisation of East Africa by the British, there is alot of British [and indian] influence there. I had no culture shock when i came to Britain.

        i’ve never heard of teavana. will look out for it and give it a try.

      • bluhare says:

        I love learning about other cultures, even if it’s things that make my stomach curdle. Really interesting, LAK.

  11. HH says:

    This is always a rough topic for me. On one hand I could never imagine seeing an animal in the wild going about its business one minute and then I shoot it dead for the sake of sport. It’s heartbreaking. On the other hand, I’m perfectly fine ordering meat at a restaurant or picking it up in the grocery store. The conditions animals are raised aren’t the best, so I could see where that’s considered hypocritical.

    On a lighter note, I really want to meet Harry in person. In some photos I find him to be irresistibly handsome, and in other photos I just have to chalk it up to his charm.

  12. Froop says:

    Using Harry as a scapegoat to preserve William’s Golden Prince reputation once again. He’s an idiot but I feel sorry for him.

  13. LAK says:

    That photo has been on the internet for many years. It took me about 5secs to find it when the original hunting story came up last week because I was curious if any of the brothers had ever been pictured hunting as opposed to the occasional blurry shots of them on shoots at Sandrigham.

    Also, it’s carried by many anti-hunting/bloodsports websites, so it isn’t a secret.

    However, as soon as I saw it printed large on the DM, my first thought was that it was a deflection. And a poor attempt at that.

    Harry isn’t bleating on about conservation, and he was a last minute addition to the conference last week.

    Sidenote: Hasn’t Harry come a long way since ten years ago? It must annoy the Royal promoters that his public goodwill has been a spontaneous one, despite their repeated efforts to discredit him. Much like Diana’s public regard was spontaneous rather than directed.

    • FLORC says:

      They really reached back in time to find something to deflect. It’s hard for me to believe there wasn’t anything more recent.

      • Tippy says:

        King Edward “The Longshanks” ordered that William Wallace’s head be stuffed and mounted.

      • bluhare says:

        I can think of a few heads that would be better stuffed and mounted, Tippy. Unfortunately a lot of them are in use right now.

    • bluhare says:

      Harry’s goodwill is so entrenched I can’t find him unattractive even after this. He’s a force of nature!

  14. Jeanette says:

    I just have to mention..THAT is an interesting place for a zipper in that last pic..did anyone else notice???

    • bluhare says:

      My god, you’ve got eyes. I just scrolled up as I didn’t . . . but is he unzipped?

      • FLORC says:

        He’s zipped up. The zipper is just at the bottom. Maybe one of those double zippers?
        And thank you for giving me a legit reason to zoom into harry’s crotch.

      • bluhare says:

        Thank Jeanette, FLORC. She got us both up there with our magnifying glasses. Double zipper, eh? Couldn’t that get a little, um, rough, if he’s not careful?

      • LadySlippers says:

        I think double zippers are the norm for flight suits.

        (And darn it I saw nothing on my phone!!! *collapses into a sobbing mess*)

  15. Alina says:

    to be fair that buffalo picture was in the net for years. I posted the link here some months ago when we were discussing Morrissey´s critic about Harry and William hunting little deers and buffalos… so there was no deep digging neccesary. I just googled PrinceHarry+buffalo.

    That this pic is now so important shows that things go on behind closed doors. I have no doubt that this is some kind of PR move to save William´s reputation (the golden prince is the elephant-saver and nice hunter while Dirty Harry is the badass hunter). All to distract the hypocrisy critic away from William.

  16. Angelic 21 says:

    Harry has been thrown under the bus for years now but the great thing is people are seeing this and recognizing the palace’s prejudice treatment. Another plus thing is Harry have his mom’s personality so he comes off really likable compared to his brother.

    • Tuatara says:

      You mean likeable apart from the racist comments and dressing up as a Nazi?

      • LadySlippers says:

        Unfortunately both incidents are grossly taken out of context.

        And equally unfortunate, neither William nor Harry seemed to know a heck of a lot about the Nazis as they both were in on the decision for Harry to wear it. However Ken Wharfe states that their RPOs should have squashed the idea so as to not create a sh*t storm.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        The racist comments did happen and are inexcusable. Wearing the Nazi uniform was also inexcusable and can not be blamed on Harry’s age or William’s influence. These attitudes prevent Harry from looking at himself honestly and making changes in his decision making processes.
        But also. Who would want to be judged for a foolish mistake made years ago? Harry is not a racist, I believe, just not the brightest. In fact Harry, Charles and Phillip have/used to have a fondness for ladies with ethnic hues/complexions.
        It shouldn’t be too much to ask that we admire and congratulate Harry for the outstanding, compassionate royal he has turned out to be.

      • Tuatara says:

        It’s too much to ask of me. I won’t forget.

        My grandfather had five years of hard sacrifice fighting for the queen and the Empire against Nazi Germany. That’s two generations ago. How can William and Harry not know “a heck of a lot about the Nazis”? They should. That’s inexcusable. The truth is, they thought the costume would be funny.

        I would like to know when it is acceptable to make racist comments. What is the context that makes it OK?

        Seems that Harry always get an easy pass on this site. He’s a privileged knob, not an outstanding and compassionate royal.

      • bluhare says:

        Tuatara, my parents lived through the Blitz in Britain and were evacuated into the country. I still have a letter the lady my dad stayed with sent my grandmother. I remember when I got married my dad wrote a letter to my great aunt (who was his second mom) telling her I was getting married and Mr. bluhare wasn’ t the best looking guy in the line up, but he treated me well. He omitted the fact he’s of German Irish Catholic extraction. Her grave would still be spinning if she knew!

        Fact of the matter is, the upper classes in Britain do tend to be racist and we do give Harry slack. I do, that’s for sure. I’m not going to defend it. But I do hope he learnt something from it and until I find out otherwise, my love for him continues only mildly abated.

      • Sixer says:

        Tuatara – I think Harry gets a pass because he’s NOT the other, hard to find even the tiniest saving grace, one. Plus, he’s ginger hot(ish) and you’d have to be a muddyfunster on acid to call the other one hot.

      • LadySlippers says:

        @Snark @Tuatara @everyone:

        I’ll go chronologically.

        RE: Nazi uniform.
        William and Harry went to a ‘fancy dress shop’ to look for costumes for William’s (?) party. Both boys seemed to have no clue as to what the Nazi’s did when they selected it. (Harry was overheard during the party to say, ‘The Nazis — what did they do?’ and ‘Are they really bad?’ that supports his ignorance.)

        Ken Wharfe (former RPO to the boys and then long time RPO to Diana) really had issues with both the owner of the shop and the RPOs assigned to William and Harry for allowing either boy to rent this. Wharfe stated that while the boys’ were to be given freedom to be young but the RPOs also need to protect the monarchy too. Wharfe thinks the RPOs (as adults) would have known better as it appeared neither William not Harry had a good grasp of history (sad).

        CH had put out a bland apology that angered people even more. In Harry’s defense, Charles absolute forbade Harry from personally and publicly apologising. But most people don’t know that Harry was very willing and ready to make amends. He was very, very sorry for the misstep (he was reportedly in years).

        I can’t fault either one if they truly had no idea who the Nazis were. And from reports — they didn’t.

        Note: I’m Jewish so I would be, obviously, a target for the Nazis.

        RE: Racist comments.
        In the military non PC words are used quite often but often aren’t meant to be nasty. Harry’s use was conversational AND okay with the person he described. In addition, he apologised to the person. (I get most people will still be upset but the fact of the matter is the military is not PC. At all.)

        Before people jump down my back — there are times when derogatory terms are used in acceptable circumstances. The ‘N’ word is not a word I’ll write or use, in fact, I strongly dislike it. However, certain groups have reclaimed that word and use it quite freely. Most derogatory terms have been used, in the right context, in an acceptable manner. Basically, nothing is as black and white as people would like to think. That doesn’t mean I’m nuts about derogatory terms either…

        In both the above instances, Harry absolutely did or tried to do the right thing. That says a lot in my book. He’s not perfect (he’s human) but he tries.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Tuatara
        It is never okay to make racist comments. Nor is it ever okay to do anything, especially openly, that makes a joke out of one of the most despicable events in human history. I think people grow and hopefully, change. I think Harry is one of those people. I really hope so. His brother, on the other hand, has no social exposure/friction to hone and shape his character, the way Harry does. That is why we often root for Harry.

      • Tuatara says:

        I think I had better avoid Harry posts from now on. As much as I enjoy CB, Harry posts make me RAGE!!

      • Ange says:

        Let’s not forget the comedian Stephen K Amos has a bit where he talks about meeting Harry and Harry’s words to him were ‘you don’t SOUND like a black chappy.’

        How is that ok?

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Lady,
        In this rare case your back story/explanation makes it seem a hell of a lot worse. So now not only were Harry and Wills inncredibly insensitive and stupid but at the time this happened they didn’t have the historical perspective of any 12 year old? And those excuses sound tired. The Windsors have all been rumored to have been anti-semitic throughout the years. True or not there is no other explanation for choosing that costume other than the shock value and the potential for drunken giggling and finger pointing from the other posh, private party-goers.
        I don’t think they meant to hurt anyone and Harry seems like the soft-hearted type and probably was sorry. But they certainly knew what was going on.

    • Lisa says:

      I am absolutely shocked and dismayed at how much twisting and turning is going on to defend anti-Semitic, racist words and actions, all because some beady-eyed moron is hot or ginge or whatever the hell he is supposed to be.

      And yes anyone who kills for sport — not for food, not because it’s their job to help manage wildlife populations — is, at the very least, lacking empathy if not sick in the head.

      • Tuatara says:

        You’ve got my vote, Lisa. I think, however, we are out of step with the rest of the CB community.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Lisa and Tu
        No, Harry’s words and actions were indefensible. There are no excuses but I believe people can grow and change. Either way you don’t have to be in the majority to be right. I’m sorry you feel badly about this :(

      • Lisa says:

        Dame Snarkweek — thank you for your kind words. I do appreciate that people can change and grow — I’m just not seeing it in this individual. I think we all have non-negotiables in life and I generally very much agree with the ladies defending Harry here on most topics but my line really is drawn at racial/religious disrespect and joy in GRATUITOUS death. It speaks of a person’s soul and what I see is very dark and callous indeed.

        Tuatara — I am very happy to be in your company.

      • LadySlippers says:

        I’m not defending him because he’s ‘hot’ or anything of that nature. I’m defending him because I honestly think he made an ignorant error. If he made that mistake now, I’d have a much different response.

        When my son was a target of anti-Semitic incidents at school — I was just as concerned for the student doing it against my son as I was for my son. That shocked my son’s principal but I try to remember everyone’s human and come from different perspectives.

      • Dame Snarkweek says:

        Lisa
        Your feelings and opinions are not unusual or outlandish in any way. I used to feel the same way until I began to read more about the royals. Harry is not the sharpest knife in the drawer by anyone’s standards. In school he was rambunctious, heedless and impulsive. But he seems to have some childlike qualities that, if they continue to develop, will keep turning him into a decent human being. Having said that, I still do not see how anyone can line up their sights, pull the trigger and high five the lackeys carrying your gear as a beautiful creature sinks to the earth – defenseless, terrified and dying. Disturbing beyond description.

      • Sixer says:

        LadySlippers – I hate to contradict you, but I don’t think it’s credible that ANY British child could make it to adolescence without knowing who the Nazis were and what they did. WWII and the defeat of the Nazis is an intrinsic part of our national identity. It suffuses everything – television coverage, national ceremonials, school curriculums (including private school curriculums). And doubly so for the royals, whose public life consists often of honouring the dead of that war. Honestly – there’s no snowball’s chance in h4ll that William and Harry did not know what a Nazi uniform signified.

        I can buy that the outfit was chosen for shock value and the arrogance of youth finding the shocking funny – and, getting it horribly wrong, as the arrogance of youth often does. But someone should have stopped them.

  17. Tippy says:

    Is killing a buffalo or a sheep with a rifle considered to be some sort of accomplishment? It hardly even seems like a challenge. Maybe it’s just tradition that male royalty have stuffed heads to hang in the royal trophy room.

    • bluhare says:

      LOL. I guess it would be an accomplishment if he did it with a Swiss army knife!

    • Alina says:

      Yes, where is the thrill? I mean not one of them fights against some beast. Those animals mostly stand there and eat or lie in the sun. What´s so cool? I don´t get it.

  18. Brittney says:

    I find it fascinating (and not in a good way) that Diana rarely comes up in stories about the princes’ hunting trips/events. Their mother was vehemently opposed to taking lives for sport (fox hunts in particular), and I really wish some of that compassion had rubbed off on her sons… or at the very least, that they’d refrain from recreational hunting out of respect for her.

    • bluhare says:

      That would be dear old Dad’s influence. Although when you read stories about the Queen wringing the necks of birds at a hunt it’s pretty inbred in them and I don’t think even Diana could overcome that.

    • Angelic 21 says:

      Brittney,

      Diana was actually not opposed to hunting. She came from a family that hints, she went on hunting trips when she was trying to land Charles in the beginning of their brief courtship , there are photos of her hunting. But unlike most royals now she understood PR and her audience and what they expected from her. She was very aware how hunting will go against her kind hearted, fragile image and her ‘fans’ would be disappointed in her so she maintained her distance from hunting. This is the reason I’m her fan, she knew how to be a world class public figure. She never had any problem with hunting and that’s why she allowed her sons to do it too.

      • Suze says:

        Spot on, Angelic.

        Of all the revisionist pieces of history about Diana, the Diana as anti blood sports crusader is one of the most egregious. She caught Prince Charles eye as a sixteen year at a – you guessed it – grouse shoot at Althrop.

        As late as the week before her death she told her friend, Rosa Monckton, that hunting was part of her son’s heritage and she understood why they wanted to do it.

        It’s all documented in numerous places, including Tina Brown’s “Diana Chronicles”, which is considered comprehensive and accurate.

  19. bluhare says:

    I agree with you about that term; I thought the same. I even agree with you about hunting vs. factory farming. We differ on hunting/poaching as I look at it from which end of the gun you’re facing, rather than legal/illegal.

    As far as sensationalizing, just about every site that generates money will do so to increase hits. You just don’t like this particular one.

    All that being said, we all have free will to read what we enjoy.

    • LadySlippers says:

      @bluhare: That’s the tough thing about being on a gossip site — it’s their job to sensationalise stuff to increase hits. That sucks.

      The upswing is when there is a smart and intelligent discussion anyway. That’s where and how CB trumps other sites — we can and do have some fantastic conversations. So that’s a huge plus for CB in my book.

      • bluhare says:

        Agree, LS. Apparently, I can’t respond directly as the first post is now gone. But I mean to respond to #22 above.

        Everyone else: Responding to posts #19-24 will post your response separately.

  20. LadySlippers says:

    @Louise:
    There are topics I’ve just steered clear from because they upset me. So I get it. However, on certain posts there ARE people willing to have an intelligent discussion and that’s what pulls me back.

  21. hmmm says:

    Meh. One is not better than the other. These freeloaders both lead entitled, bloodthirsty, debauched lives no matter how much they are prettified, no matter how much people fall for it. I can’t wait for the republic.

  22. Lisa says:

    Seeing that buffoon gloating over that majestic and noble being makes me sick.

  23. Nemesis says:

    Scapegoat

  24. Therese says:

    People murder babies and throw them in the trash can every day. When everyone starts getting upset about that, then I’ll move on to buffalo. Man before beast.

  25. Juan says:

    what kind of ignorant says “murdered a buffalo” ???