“This was my attempt to reduce suicides of military/vets - explains PH around the killing number

[Ticketyboots]

….as he has worked with vets for 2 decades so sharing this info (killing number) was not boastful and means no shame to discuss it - but his intention was to reduce the number of suicides.

This what he said on The Late Show to counter the recent furores about the Taliban piece. I felt that was an uncomfortable reach for me to believe.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=E6l0ObY2XVM&bpctr=1673424179

He (aided and abetted by someone) is trying to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds.

So all the touchy-feely woo woo and woe is me stuff, but with “I’m a veteran,me” added in to appeal to more traditional types.

Anyone would think this is an attempt to appeal to the American voting public…….

He could be described as an danger to himself. He is releasing information that his extremely controversial (it’s dehumanising to reveal the kill number and against protocol), denies it’s his fault for the kickback and has now got himself in a serious security situation.

Its also dangerous to others because you have to be very careful when talking about suicide. There are strict rules on British tv about how it can be discussed and the dangers of linking suicides to whatever issue you are talking about.

This is so true, and I think it was incredibly brave of him to do.
The tabloid front pages scooped it in 2013 with front page headlines about him killing Taliban leaders etc.
I wrote a book about the Congo war in the early 60s (which my father was involved in) and spoke about the enemy killed and also recently participated in an inquiry where there were 125+ submissions. The biggest taboo for veterans is deaths they may have caused and most simply can't talk about it, and was a major reason why there were an alleged 8 suicides in my fathers Company of 150.
I wouldn't have mentioned it if I were Harry (due to his personal profile) but i dud in my book, most war/battle books do and if it helps veterans unlock the taboo and talk about, then I agree it may help many veterans mental health, as he stated was his rationale as well as his overriding intention not to let tabloid journos explain the story of his life

for someone who claims to know through bitter experience how the press works, dealing with it his whole life, he seems pretty naive about how the press works.

Then he should have talked about his experience In Afghanistan without with revealing his kill number. It not that he’s talking about his experiences as such, but that he stands against the code that you don’t reveal this number. Its utterly dehumanising to make someone a number.

No one is disputing that military / vet suicide is a huge issue that needs tackling.

The issue is that PH - specifically didn’t tackle it in the book and raised it only after his words were scrutinised and inserted it as his “whole goal” for that section as a disingenuous rebuttal.

Or we need to stop listening.
I’d love to see a total media blackout as from now.
He’d surely whinge about that too, except we’d never know.

The first voice to accuse Harry of 'boasting' that I'm aware of was that of Bob Stewart, a former colonel who led British troops in Bosnia, and now an MP. This was then reported on (very quickly) by the Mail Online.

Other very early critics of the 'kill number' passage included Colonel Tim Collins and former Colonel Richard Kemp, as well as veterans talking on e.g. LBC. They used words like 'betrayal'.

But the press had already had a front page splash that he'd killed The Taliban leader and others in Helmand ....the subject had already been scooped & been duhumanised.
Sure he could have said nothing, kept schtum etc....but he doesn't want to allow the tabloids or their commentators (Clarkson/Morgan) to own the/his narrative....and from his experience of veterans mental health he thought he owed them a duty to be able to talk honestly about it, ....and I get that although I wouldn't have done, nor been brave enough, to do the same

That’s is not a soldiers Kill number.

That’s a person, who was given an identity and was constructed as a whole. He wasn’t a number.

You understand what the kill number is? and that the only person who revealed it was Harry?
It’s a wholly dishonourable thing to do

I can't see how it can be taken out of context?
He says he killed 25 people. Presumably not accidentally. He was in the Army so it would be expected that there was a possibility he had killed opposition. What's to misinterpret?

In a story of his life it would be unusual not to include his time in the army, but there would have been plenty of material without explicitly counting the people he killed, regardless of the intention.

Why wouldn't they? Why is it so inconceivable that the Taliban have a PR department? They retook a country by force, and banned women from all sorts of shit, immediately.

But they still have trade relationships to manage, etc.

I admit that I laughed out loud at "big mouth loser", because they played that line JUST RIGHT.

I read the DM occasionally, and the comments. When brexit happened, I realised I'd been listening far too little to one sort of press. I formed the conclusion that Boris would be out by reading right wing press, not left wing press. If you want to understand this country, you can't ignore half of it.

Seeing this extract on TV made me realise that almost everything I have read so far is via the DM who Harry is taking to court for phone hacking. Of course the DM are going to spin a negative view and it’s utterly stupid of us to try to interpret what’s going on from their hate-filled pages.

H&M are obviously flawed, but they have something important to say about the media and competition in the royal family. Far better to read about this in his book directly than through the eyes of salivating right wing vultures like Dan Wootton, Sarah Vine et al

Oh I understand it alright, as my father had this exact type of PTSD unfortunately & all I am saying (and we'll have to agree to disagree) is that if it helps veterans to talk about it without the inherent shame that many feel, then I get why he did it

The only newspaper I read with any regularity is the Guardian online. They reported on the kill number story with neutrality I suppose, in comparison to the Mail maybe, but it still included the criticisms from Collins, Kemp and Muslim leaders who had previously been sympathetic to Harry and Meghan, Zillur Rahman and a member of the Afghan government. It doesn’t come across any better tbh, and to suggest it’s been ‘spun’ is incorrect. It’s people’s visceral reaction to the actual words he wrote.

You can help veterans without revealing to the world your kill number. Talk about your experiences etc but there’s just some things you don’t do. He crossed a line and now he faces real security risk consequences

Your username made me laugh. There are squirrels being chucked around all over these threads!

This made me laugh. I actually started to google the first one (as I’ve had to do with some of the excerpts that have been posted over the last week), but then I read to the end of your post.

Top marks 🤣🤣🤣

It’s the kill number that is causing controversy and I can’t see how mentioning that helps prevents veteran suicides. Talking about his experiences I have no problem with and if that helps other veterans that’s great. But if his sole purpose of talking about his experiences was to help other veterans then I would have expected him to expand on that in the book and make reference to it in his pre-recorded interviews. He only seems to have mentioned it so he can blame the media again

I did see someone pop up to say that they’d seen how the board had exploded and decided to take a few days off. I’d imagine others are doing the same. Very convenient, it’s hard to argue when stuff is straight from the idiot’s mouth.

Can anyone who is defending Harry explain why he was right to publish his kill numbers?

But if his sole purpose of talking about his experiences was to help other veterans then I would have expected him to expand on that in the book and make reference to it in his pre-recorded interviews.

Exactly.

“The whole goal of that detail - was to reduce suicide”

Its offensive, insensitive and revisionist with ZERO evidence that this was his goal in any of his written or spoken words as you say.

He had to dig deep to counter the criticism of the community he holds dear and rather than acknowledge he caused offence by crossing a line - he blamed the media and stooped as low as he could go by referring to suicide.

I’m not defending him (no skin in the game either way) but can anyone explain why he wasn’t right to publish the number?

So far I’ve heard ‘making himself a target’ (legitimate but that’s his free choice) and ‘not the done thing/not the code/unprofessional’ without any explanation of why that rule/code/convention exists.

Veterans have long talked about this kind of thing, but only between themselves which is the correct thing to do.

Civvy Street cannot relate to much about army life.

At the end of the day, it doesn't appear to me that the press claimed Harry was boasting about it. And it's entirely logical the Taliban would take huge offence to it so presenting a potential security risk. That's ample reason to NOT say anything about "kill numbers".

No Op Banner, Op Granby or Op Herrick veteran I know would do what Harry's done on that score.

Talking about army experiences is one thing. Talking about how many you've killed is another, especially when that enemy is still alive and armed. Hence no veteran I know would do it as the Taliban and PSF/PIRA are still around. It would be foolish to do so.

It also doesn't help veteran suicide rates.

Did any of the press reports actually say he was ‘boasting’ about it?