@Roussette @Mirabai It wasn't an accusation as I don't think you're the same account, I think you are separate, but I'm amused by how you defend the same points in the same way. I was having the conversation with you Roulette when Mirabai jumped in out of nowhere to respond in the same way you would, which is why I teased you about it.
It’s no different and you know it.
Of course it's different. A news report is different in necessity and relevance to something in a general autobiography (and not one that is specifically and fully military related).
The media reports lionising the SAS sniper simply makes SF more of a target.
Perhaps, but the difference is that the SF aren't named or photographed are they 
With Harry it might be easy to find out who was serving with him.
Indeed the security risk detailing a current or recent mission is much greater than for a mission long time past.
As @Mummyoflittledragon wrote earlier, the Taliban have something to prove it, given how they've recently come back into power. This makes the length of time since Harry's last mission somewhat irrelevant. He's also, as I said, the son of the current British Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces Such a statement coming from Harry was provocative.
There are many factors that create a security risk. Neither you nor I know what the security risks are, but there are several people who do saying there is in a risk in non-tabloid newspapers.