Burrell: Prince Harry ‘resented’ William because William got more sausages

The most difficult part to get through in Prince Harry’s Spare is the first fifty pages or so, when his mother’s death leaves him traumatized and no one in the royal family gives a sh-t. He was neglected, abandoned, ignored, isolated and terrified, all of it made worse by the fact that his “spare” status had been emphasized since birth. His mother was the only one who treated him equal to William – everyone in and around the royal family made it clear that he was never anything more than a backup to his brother. Harry writes about this movingly, the acceptance of it throughout his childhood, the thorough brainwashing that he simply would never be as important as William. So, of course, Diana’s former butler Paul Burrell has taken that and made it into a story about how Harry was bitter about sausages.

Princess Diana’s butler has told how Harry was made to feel less important than William as a child — by getting fewer sausages at breakfast. Paul Burrell, 64, recalled that a miffed Harry would say: “How come he gets three?” A nanny said: “William needs filling up more than you. He’s going to be king one day.”

Paul recalled the incident and said he could see how early rivalry between the brothers played out at times. Paul told The Sun: “When I look back now, I think maybe I was glimpsing the dynamic at play. One time I saw the nanny give William three sausages at breakfast and Harry had two. And Harry would look at his plate and say, how come he gets three? And I only get two.”

Paul recalled the nanny’s comment and added: “Harry would fall quiet and suck it up, but that’s what he had to contend with, even in his own home.”

Paul reckons Harry’s unwarranted attacks on the Royal Family stem from a youth of playing second fiddle to William — who as a boy was second in line to the throne and destined to be king. And while Paul says he witnessed a deep bond of brotherhood between the pair as kids, he now sees how Harry was harbouring a seething resentment towards his brother and the institution that put William ahead of him.

Paul continued: “In their mother’s eyes, they were absolutely equal. The princess doted on them both. But I can see that Harry found it tough living up to the standard set by William.”

[From The Sun]

Harry: Here’s my story, in my own words, about how I was neglected, traumatized and abandoned after my mother died when I was 12, and the neglect was made so much worse because I was only the spare. In adulthood, the heir even violently assaulted me when I wouldn’t capitulate to him and divorce my wife.
Paul Burrell: This is about sausages, this is why Harry resented William!

I am seriously begging these British people to get some f–king therapy.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

90 Responses to “Burrell: Prince Harry ‘resented’ William because William got more sausages”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lorelei says:

    This might surpass all others for the stupidest possible take on this entire sh!tshow. And it’s a high bar at this point.

    Sausages. FFS

    • DK says:

      It is, of course, one of the stupidest takes, I agree.

      And yet…JFC. Repeatedly not giving enough food to one child because they won’t be as important as the other?! That one thing actually IS enough to make any child grow up quite bitter, and all kinds of messed up. (And yet it is just one example from thousands that Harry endured his whole life….)

      What kind of horrible people are they?!
      They’re the British Royal Family, FFS. It’s not like they couldn’t afford enough sausages for each of their growing children.

      They were intentionally choosing to psychologically and emotionally abuse one of their children with that daily action.

      They should be shamed for this horrible behavior! This take is not the flex that idiot thinks it is.

      [Side note: I wonder in what ways W&K are treating their heir and spares in similarly unequal ways, and what actual “early years” experts would have to say about it!]

      • B says:

        @DK- I agree 100%

        If I had my kids at any one’s house and the hostess looked at one and sweetly said “you get the most sausages!” and then looked and the other, and less sweetly said “and you get the least!” I’d be working pretty hard to not get up and slap them right then and there.
        We would -definitely- be leaving immediately and not coming back.
        These stories all illustrate the same values. He got to see those values in big things and then little things as well.

      • Jennifer says:

        This actually proves Harry’s point. Who withholds food from kids. This confirms the abuse from a very young start.

      • Andy Dufresne says:

        I’m sorry, but I really don’t like this Paul Burrell fellow. He’s creepy as f*ck with a sense of entitlement because of how “close” he was to Diana.

        He made a deal with the Queen years ago after they found out he kept (or stole- depending on how you interpret it) most of Diana’s stuff after her death. He just gives me this “ick”.

      • bisynaptic says:

        Absolutely. They (artificially) created a sense of scarcity, just to bash Harry with it. This is a hallmark of abuse.

      • SomeChick says:

        it would be an effective way to give the slighted child an eating disorder, I can tell you that. using food as punishment is very very damaging to a child. please, don’t do it!

      • Heatherthye says:

        I’m surprised that Harry survived as well as he did. Psychologists say that the first 6 years are the most important to the formation of the wholeness of the developing psyche. If Harry had not had so much love and acceptance from his mother during the 12 years she was with him, he wouldn’t have had the core strength necessary to do as well as he did, despite the constant insults, abuse, and reminders of his “lesser” place in the hierarchy. His sense of his true self throughout, despite all the lies, is impressive.

        I am so happy for him and for Meghan now. Personally, I hope they never return to that “family” for the coronation or anything else.

        I am the scapegoat from an alcoholic family, the one who broke the generational dysfunction. After Jungian analysis and a fraught “night sea journey” brought me the wholeness I’d searched for my entire life, I, too, wanted to share this new view of the world and this liberation from dysfunctional chains with my family. Like any new convert, and like Harry, I thought I could lead them to the “water.”

        But, in my experience, it doesn’t happen. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.

        Despite years of knowing intellectually that the chasm with my family members will never be breached, my heart still aches for it. This may be a life-long grief that Harry will need to accept and live with, too, as I have little hope that his family will ever acknowledge what they did, apologize for it, and make efforts to change.

      • THANDIELAND says:

        you got it just right. the butler’s example, if true, gives you further insight as to thousands of daily indignities Harry the Spare had to suffer without a soft spot to go to like he had been able to do until he was 13!
        They the royal family and their sycophants try to make it sound like a small thing and that Harry is unfair, petty and money grabbing with book but the fact that he came through this the man he appears to be today is a miracle in itself.

    • Swaz says:

      Harry should be thanking them for giving him less food, look at him now, so slim and sexy 🤣 The other brother, not too much 🤣

    • Anne says:

      “But I can see that Harry found it tough living up to the standard set by William.”

      It should be “… the standard set FOR William.”

      Willy didn’t “set” any standards; he was handed everything on a silver platter and his brother got the scraps, if that. That’s what Harry found tough — that his brother was prioritized over him in EVERYTHING.

  2. Kiera says:

    Actually I think his story backs up what Harry said. He’s pointing out how something as silly as breakfast and how much food they got became all about hierarchy.

    It permeated every facet of his life and he was told again and again that his needs would always come second. It’s not the sausages that are the problem but they represent the overarching issue.

    • Ciotog says:

      At least in my reading of Spare, Diana was no exception in upholding the heir and spare narrative, despite what Burrell says.

      • DaughterOfSpencer says:

        Harry IS the spare, because he was born second, it’s a reality. Nevertheless, diana was determined to protect Harry from feeling anything less than William. She talked about this to Richard Kay and Anthony Holden.

      • Kingston says:


        Harry WAS the spare. Thats no longer his reality.

        In the final pages of the book, H recalls being with his wife in hospital for the birth of Lili and after watching him pilot their daughter into this world, M wrote him a poem. He said:
        “She jotted some thoughts in a kind of journal. Which she shared.
        I read them as a love poem.
        I read them as a testament, a renewal of our vows.
        I read them as a citation, a remembrance, a proclamation.
        I read them as a decree.
        She said: “That was everything.”
        She said: “That is a man”.
        My love. She said: “That is not a Spare.”

      • Becks1 says:

        @Kingston that part made me teary-eyed, in a good way. I cried at the beginning of the book and at the end of the book for very different reasons. The beginning was so heartbreaking, from the description of Harry’s lesser room at Sandringham to his mother’s death and the funeral etc and then at the end, he’s found peace, he’s found love, he’s with someone who seems him for himself and not just a Spare, etc.

      • equality says:

        DaughterofSpencer Do you not see how toxic your statement sounds in calling ANY child the “spare” for any reason?

      • Tessa says:

        Diana did not treat will as more special. I think that bothered William
        The ones with the heir more important narrative were Charles and the queen. Diana was upset when she noticed the queen mother paying attention to Will and ignoring harry.

    • ShazBot says:


      It’s not like they’re poor – they literally withheld food from him purely because he was less important. No other reason. It’s actually appalling that Paul thought this was a good story to share publicly and that people can’t see how they WITHHELD FOOD.

      • Kingston says:

        Biatchpaul is just pissed that H dissed him in Spare.

      • Petra (Brazen Archetyped Phenomenal Woman) says:

        I’m glad the co-abusers are telling on themselves. I hope more of them (thinking they are supporting the BRF ) indirectly share the truth of the BRF child abuse of Prince Harry. There most be lots of incidents like this one. A grown man shared this without any second thought, thinking this will make Prince look bad. Shame on everyone of them…complicit bastards.

      • Denise says:

        So, realistically Harry being the younger (smaller) brother might have eaten less at that age. In most homes I would think the explanation would be, “Your brother got more because he can eat more and we don’t want to waste food. If you still want a third sausage after you’ve finished your two, you can have another.”

        Even though this family is not poor, food waste is something that I think everyone should be mindful of. Denying food because one child is more “important” than the other? That’s cruel.

    • Snuffles says:

      Exactly!! They were so fucked up about hierarchy they would even feed the spare less!?

      That said, that’s a very normal sibling reaction. When brothers and were kids we were like that. For me it was about cereal and snacks. If one of us thought the other was getting more than we would pitch a fit. My Mom’s solution was to divide everything up evenly and put our names on our bagged up portions. Then she told us to shut up.

    • Arizona says:

      I agree, I think he’s just using it as an example of how even breakfast was used to remind Harry that he deserved less and was less than William.

      also, while I think Diana loved her sons equally, Harry makes it pretty clear in his book that he was referred to as the spare by Charles, Elizabeth, AND Diana.

      • Tessa says:

        In any comments that Diana made I never heard her use the word spare. She talked about good king harry.

    • arhus says:

      I agree! I added a comment below before reading this.

    • TigerMcQueen says:

      I agree that this totally backs up what Harry wrote.

      But Burrell lost me with Harry finding it tough to live up to “the standard set by William.” LMactualAO, the standard of being a lazy, unintelligent bully and still getting fawned over because you came out of your mom’s private parts first?

  3. Alice says:

    It doesn’t seem like Burrell is trying to make it just about sausages? It feels like he is proving Harry’s point- here is an example of a tiny thing that was still used to incessantly remind Harry of his place as the spare. He couldn’t even have breakfast without being made less important.

    And even if it was just about sausages, also valid? That is deeply f-ed up to just straight up feed one kid less because you value him less.

    • goofpuff says:

      Burrell is trying to make it sound like Harry resents and is jealous of William when it’s actually the other way around. Wills resents Harry.

    • Ciotog says:

      In very patriarchal cultures, this frequently happens to girl children and to mothers–they are fed less.

      • maggi says:

        So true Ciotog. My immigrant parents consistently gave my brother large amounts of money (6 figures at a time), telling me that I would be “made whole” in the will. When my mother died, there was no inheritance because my father said she contributed nothing. I have had a lifetime struggle with low self esteem, in part as a result of being treated as less than my brother.

      • Ciotog says:

        maggi, I’m so sorry that happened to you.

      • Cec II Va says:

        Years ago I was gearing up to leave my profession to be stay-home mom. My husband and I met with a financial planner who told us that once I made that change, I’d be worth more dead than alive. Yes, he actually said this to my face.

    • C-Shell says:

      Co-sign every word of your comment, @Alice! Feeding children should never be an opportunity to emphasize the perceived difference in rank. And, how could a child possibly respond to the comment that another child deserves more because he will be king one day?! The brainwashing permeated every aspect of Harry’s childhood/life — it’s no wonder he still reacts viscerally to Bulliam’s rage and abuse. He’s a DV survivor.

  4. Anna says:

    I’m sorry, how can anyone read about a pair of children, born into the same family and social situation, being treated so differently — to the point where one is getting MORE food than the other wtf?? — and not think that’s fcked up??

    • Beana says:

      There are stories about Elizabeth’s dad, King George, when he was growing up as the younger brother of David (later the abdicating King Edward). As the second son, his nanny starved him, and she would pinch him when his parents dropped by so he would cry and they wouldn’t want to hold him.

      This abusive pattern has been going on for GENERATIONS in that family. I’m just surprised that, since George IV went through that, they didn’t all learn some damn lessons.

      What a screwed up, inbred, abusive pack of utter losers. Poor Harry.

      • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

        Wouldn’t surprise me if it was the same nanny. Mabel’s certainly hung about for a while.

        And there was the other brother, the one with epilepsy who was stashed away in secret until he (conveniently) died.

  5. Chloe says:

    ????? Future king or not who the hell would think this is okay? Giving one child more food than the other simply because he was born first?

    And it’s clear that william is the resentful one. Resentful at whatever harry has because he thinks it should belong to him.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      Lots of people (or bots) on social media think it’s okay. They made comments about William being older and bigger therefore needing more food. Of course, this completely ignores the nanny telling Harry that William needs more food because he’s going to be king. It sounds like Harry was constantly being told in a million different ways that William was more important than Harry.

      • Erin says:

        Absolutely unhinged behavior from this nanny, the type of person that thinks like this in modern times is not one that should be caring for children. This isn’t the dark ages and these kids aren’t living in a feudal society.

        Also, my younger son eats twice the amount of his older by two years brother even if he is smaller and younger. So the correlation of being older or bigger means you need more food is BS.

  6. Belli says:

    “But I can see that Harry found it tough living up to the standard set by William.”

    This is the perfect example of royalist brainworms. That wasn’t William setting any kind of standard. That was other people treating Harry worse because he happened to be born second. William did nothing to earn it and Harry could never “live up” to it.

    And the way they’re trying to laugh off this story is disturbing. Do they not see how twisted it is to deny a child food because of birth order?!

  7. Becks1 says:

    So I got into a tiff with someone over this, LOL, because they were like “the older kids often need more food!!” and I was like, that’s not what this is. This isn’t that Harry wasn’t as hungry as William so William got three and Harry got two. This isn’t about Harry not WANTING three sausages. Harry wanted more and was told that William needed more because he was going to be king.

    I know its kind of a petty and small story, but I find it really sad because to me its kind of the whole dynamic in a nutshell. Neither boy was viewed as an individual. It wasn’t about whether William actually needed more to eat or whether Harry wasn’t as hungry etc. William got more because he was the Heir.

    • Nic919 says:

      It is so messed to treat two boys who are only two years apart this differently especially in terms of food. Outside of perhaps when Harry was a young baby and not eating solid foods, there is literally no reason to give William more food than Harry. It is disturbing that anyone did this and to pretend it’s ok is just the sign of serious mental disturbance.

      I have a sibling two years younger and at no point in my memory was my younger sibling told he was going to be given less food because he is younger.

      This is indefensible.

      • Erin says:

        Yes, I commented above about my two sons, the older is older by two years and he doesn’t eat nearly as much as his younger brother and this is all by choice. They are both healthy and normal sizes for their age and we offer them both the same food but the younger one always asks for seconds while the older rarely does. They are both under ten as well so they are both still growing.

    • AnneL says:

      I was the youngest of four. While I do think I got less attention from my parents overall as a result, I certainly was never deprived of FOOD. Good grief.

      The relative dearth of attention in my own family wasn’t intentional. My parents just had their hands fuller by the time I came around. One of my sisters was five years older and become something of a second mother, at least when I was little.

      This very wealthy family, owners of multiple huge homes, knowingly and consistently gave Harry less. Treated him as less. Gave him a smaller room (or side of the room), far less money, and even less food. Fewer sausages. In the late 20th and early 21st centuries. It’s bananas and utterly unconscionable.

  8. Chantal says:

    Despite his obvious attempt to spin this anecdote, it sadly further illustrates Harry’s point. They should all feel ashamed but we know they don’t. I hope the “embarrassments” aka truths told in Spare constantly haunt them all. Any other family would have been investigated as he clearly details abuse and neglect. As a former CPS (Child Protective Service) worker, I would have removed both children from that hellish environment. And TQ was ok with this? I have words for C-Rex but they’re unprintable. Again,C-Rex sucks all day every day and twice on the weekends. Unbelievable.

    • Jay says:

      Exactly – I’m a teacher, and if a child told me about their parent or guardian withholding food from them in this way, it would be a huge red flag.

      Burrell is not a reliable source, and yet this example actually corroborates Harry’s story – that he was always treated as less important, down to the smallest, pettiest detail.

    • AnneL says:

      Exactly! It’s abusive.

      William and Harry were only two years apart. Both healthy, growing boys. The children of a wildly wealthy family.

      For the sake of argument, let’s say there is a family that is on a tight food budget. They have a strapping ten-year-old and a toddler who is a picky eater. In that case, if the older, larger ones gets more food, it’s understandable.

      But that’s not the case here. What they did is disturbing.

  9. Jazz Hands says:

    During the pandemic, I started feeding a few pitiful squirrels that were hanging around my bird feeders. Even though I have my favourite (one-eyed, sweet-natured, with most of its tail missing), I can never give it extra walnuts without feeling bad for the other squirrels that are around. Even if some of them are bullying jerks (they really are). So they each get an equal share.

    The outside world would have reinforced William’s “superiority” at every turn…it didn’t need to be done around the breakfast table too.

  10. Rapunzel says:

    What the actual f–k did I just read? They were denying him more food because he was born second? So they’d let him starve of there was a food shortage?

    This ain’t about sausages. This ain’t about Harry resenting Willy over the sausages. This is about what the sausages represent: Harry’s second class position in his family which turned him into a man willing to break away. … and Willy into a gigantic ball of incandescent rage.

  11. Nivz says:

    “Why is there a Union Jack on the coffin?”

    This line made me blink back tears every single time it appeared. I admire what a good device it was to communicate his repressed grief, re appearing out of nowhere through the narrative.

    • SomeChick says:

      I think he was expecting to see the royal flag. but I hear you about the grief popping up, and H feeling like he had to shove it back down immediately… so as not to embarrass the “family.”

  12. bad bus says:

    When I read the headline, I thought it was some British backhanded double speak gay joke but it really was about sausages.

  13. Jais says:

    This is some fucked up ish and Burrell is an idiot if he thinks this makes Harry look bad.

  14. LHP says:

    Paul Burrell sold out, was also accused of stealing some of Diana’s personal belongings until an ‘agreement’ was reached with the Queen.

    The sausages story reminds me of another though, one of my mum’s friends had a daughter who worked for a fancy gym in London, she used to give William and Harry tennis lessons. One day Diana suggested a game of doubles, Harry allegedly said something like ‘Oh, I supposed you’ll want to be paired with William, he’s the one who’ll be king’ in a sort of resigned/sad way. She said they were lovely boys and very polite and fun.

  15. C says:

    Burrell has been making money off of Diana for years and Harry and William both have called him an opportunist.

  16. eb says:

    I appreciate you trudging trough the slime of what makes up a vocal majority of the British papers. I don’t know how you stomach it. I happily skip the excerpts and just read your synopsis and reaction. It saves me a lot of grief. Thank you.

  17. blue says:

    Being constantly reminded that big brother will be king one day is sad & the sausage thing is bizarre. I do think that a pubescent teenage boy does eat more than the pre-tween but it has nothing to do with rank & that should never be mentioned. Just give little bro another sausage if he wants it. If he’s hungry, he’ll finish all 3.

  18. aquarius64 says:

    Sausages…really? The BRF is really desperate to roll out bottomfeeder Burrell. This clown has made money off Diana many times over for 25+ years. No wonder people side eye these “royal experts” and insiders.

  19. Liz Version 700 says:

    The number of people who will loose $$ if the Royals stop being a story is really apparent reading this book and seeing the terrified reactions of the Rota vultures and other opportunists. You really get a sense of what it is like to grow up as a commodity. It’s all so gross

  20. arhus says:

    To be fair, I feel like this butler is just adding their experience to say they agree with Harry’s perception and treatment. It’s not only about sausages, but it showed the dynamic showed itself even in sausages.

  21. Julia K says:

    Not only is this withholding and denying food to one child, it’s reinforcing an entitled, elitist attitude on another. ” I deserve more than you “. This is child abuse.

  22. HeyKay says:

    I read about that sausage biz and I was so angry.
    WTH?? Give the kids the same amount of food all the time!
    I can’t express how much this piss*s me off.

    Did it never occur to this bunch of cold blooded SOBs that they should have treated the boys as equals? Just as a ways of helping the brothers be close, or basic human kindness, etc.
    It is just sickening, all of it.

    That Burell, the former Butler can shut up too.
    He has done nothing but make money by selling Diana out for decades now. Vulture!

  23. Amy Bee says:

    Paul Burrell was on Dan Wootton and Piers Morgan’s shows crying that Harry didn’t name him in his book and that he was only referred to as the butler. He’s so hungry for publicity.

  24. Julianna says:

    Despite Burrell using Diana to make cash over the years I do feel like he has always defended Diana’s name regardless. He has always discredited the trope of Diana’s “paranoia” and has always emphatically stated her behavior and responses were actually plausible to her treatment and situation. He has spoken many times against the royals and how they treated her and their jealousy. For example, tidbits like the Queen mum seeing a magazine cover with Diana on it and she walked over and flipped it over.

    He has talked a lot about how Charles treated Diana horribly and given many, many examples. And also has told us many examples of his insufferable behavior toward staff including his own treatment for defending Diana. He has told us how Charles was so petty and dropped mail in his trash and literally made him come all the way up to his study to pick it out the trash. He has told us he chunked a book at him. He has told us many things that we otherwise may not have known and I honestly believe him.

    I also think this statement here by Burrell has just reiterated what Harry has been saying all along. He was a guest on the royal beat, and he notably said he didnt pick sides (between peggington and Harry) because they were both Dianas children however he defended Harry in many ways when he talked about it all. I don’t see it totally as him saying Harry is jealous over William but literally giving us an example that shows just how pathetic the royal family is and how even food was withheld from Harry because he was the “spare”. This family is horrid. This IMO makes the rf look terrible. Not so much Harry being jealous of William over sausages in this story.

  25. Emily_C says:

    Giving more food to one child than another because one child is supposedly “more important” than another is as wildly abusive as anything I can think of. Charles told the staff to abuse Harry. It really was a Cinderella situation, just horrible.

  26. Feebee says:

    It’s not about sausages, it’s about being treated like second best in private/all the time. But at the same time, he’s making it about sausages. He knows who’s going to take what from the story. PB’s never learnt how to STFU.

  27. Rnot says:

    There was a similar anecdote about (cake?) where William was allowed to eat all he wanted and Harry had to wait until William was finished before he could have any. This is pathological. As a mandated reporter I would have been legally obligated to notify Child Protective Services if I became aware that these things were happening to a minor child.

    • AnneL says:

      What?! Dear Lord. It just keeps getting worse. And now I am picturing little Prince Willie gorging on cake while Harry looks on longingly. That poor kid.

  28. Lissen says:

    Doesn’t a butler rank higher than a nanny in the servants’ hall hierarchy? Burrell, as butler and self-proclaimed “confidant” of Diana, should have pointed out to nanny, his inferior, the error of her ways and made sure that his boss, Diana, was aware of the unequal treatment. “That’s not what we do here, nanny. Madam made it clear that both princes were to be treated equally. If you persist, I shall have to tell Madam.”

    That’s also what a good person does, intervene when they see a child being abused. Since he didn’t, he condoned nanny’s behaviour, and as head servant, showed he ran a sh!tty household.

  29. QuiteContrary says:

    Burrell witnessed “a deep bond of brotherhood between the pair.”

    Was that when William was telling his little brother to pretend he didn’t know him at school? Or when Diana got a sulky William to join her only after threatening that, if he didn’t, Harry would have all the fun?

    Squaddies are posting videos on Twitter of all the times William belittled Harry in interviews. “Deep bond,” my arse. (It is painful to read in “Spare” about just how much Harry wanted to be close to his brother but was repeatedly rejected.)

    Also, to give William more food because he was the heir? Harry is right when he discusses generational trauma and wanting to break that appalling cycle of abuse.

    • AnneL says:

      I saw one of the interviews. It was one Harry mentioned in the book. Williams’s attitude was so much worse than Harry even described. Boastful, smug, insulting, dismissive, obnoxious. An egomaniac and an attention hog.

      William is ghastly.

  30. j.ferber says:

    Oh, for Christ’s sake.

  31. Bex says:

    He resented him because the servants chose to underfeed Harry while his brother GLADLY accepted it, and didn’t stick up for him.

  32. bisynaptic says:

    My god, these people.
    The standard set by William: three sausages!

  33. Saucy&Sassy says:

    When I finished the book, I really thought about Harry’s time in the Military. I keep thinking that he had instructors and officers above in rank who realized very early on that Harry’s biggest problem was that he had no self-confidence, belief in himself or felt he had worth. They pushed him and, I think, finally got him to see that he was much more than he thought he was. I particularly read with interest the officer saying he had to fly Apache helicopters. This man knew exactly what Harry was capable of. I think by the time he was flying the Apache in Afghanistan, Harry had finally figured it out, too.

    I cannot even imagine what his life was like. From the day of his birth and in every way imaginable, he was told he had no worth outside of being a kidney donor. No worth at all. It was told to him by words and actions over and over again. I am so thankful that he went into the Military.

    What I’ve finally concluded is that the royal family is just sad. Sad little people, who are still playing dress up and competing for approval. They will never change, because they don’t think they have to.

  34. Jennifer says:

    Is anyone else reminded of “Donny Two Scoops” and his ice cream? Just me, then?

  35. blunt talker says:

    This is their way of forcing a spare to submit to thinking less of oneself and getting less of anything in life-all the people who worked for the royal family and senior royals practice this type of abuse from the day Prince Harry could walk and talk until the day he stepped down from the monarchy as a senior royal-Harry should know that God saw all his hurts and sleights or mistreatments-what people should ask why make a big showing of rank about food-such an evil mindset-to say they knew how raise healthy minded children is an understatement-it is hard to believe they used ranking protocols behind close doors as well as publicly. God gave Harry strength to survive and move forward.