Double amputee war hero who inspired Prince Harry to start Invictus 'disagrees' with Duke's claim British press did not cover stories of wounded in Afghanistan as Colonel says his popularity is dwindling with veterans

[MamoruHisaishi]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12466191/Afghanistan-war-hero-prince-harry-british-soldiers.html

It’s such a shame that these veterans stories are not being listened to just because of the need to paint Harry as whining and playing victim when he does no such thing in this series. Oh well

Does it have to be either/or though?
Some of us are capable of listening to the veterans' admirable stories and regretting that Harry chose such a time to feed the wretched media more meat

Exactly @Iwantcakeeveryday .

I think harry lived that life and played that game while a royal, with the press,, and now doesn't;t want to have to live a life where he has to think about them before he does any little thing.

Can anyone link to anything where Harry says it was the British media that outed him? Or quote it if it was in the documentary? As usual, I want to know exactly what he said and the context, since his other two "crimes" have been massively exaggerated/misinterpreted.

I don't know if it is in full but this is what was repeated by some of the press ( under the headlines he blamed them )

'The whole reason I was allowed to go to Afghanistan in the first place was because it was kept a secret.
'While I was there for the ten weeks no one knew apart from the British press who said ''we'll keep quiet as long as we get access''.
'To suddenly be on the way home I was angry. But it was important for everyone around me – their safety – to remove me.'

Unless theres a part thats not included he doesn't say the British press blew it apart, he said for a while only they knew ( plus MoD of course ).

The media aren’t going to go down without a fight and he is giving them one. He has made a couple of publicly inaccurate statements about the British media (the subject of this thread title being one of them) whilst also hauling their arses through court. They are hardly going to report on him in a positive way or post a flattering picture. It makes the couples PR company’s job doubly difficult. It’s the old saying along the lines of’ play with fire and you’ll get burnt’. Not saying I’m in the tabloid media’s camp before anyone comes along and says I am.

I agree that they won’t and in my book that makes them hypocrites .

@Iwantcakeeveryday thanks for that. Hopefully someone can add more, otherwise it seems to be once again the press taking a statement, spinning it and making it ALL about them.

Excellent to know.

This

But did he actually? I quoted before what he actually said that was spun into "Harry said there was no media coverage ".

He was talking about three wounded soldiers flying home with him. Then he said "I was angry about what happened to these guys,I was angry the media weren't covering it, I was angry I got pulled out." That's all he said. That's what sparked dozens of headlines,responses, threads and what not.

IT. The media spun it as him saying the British media didn't cover Afghanistan or wounded soldiers, or vets. That they didn't care. When he is talking about those 3 particular soldiers, before the statement and in the statement. So what is more likely the it was? No coverage at all, or about those particular guys? The Sun took it personally and made it all about THEM.

If there is disinterest in the doc then it's probably because the rest of the shite on Netflix is more appealing to people ... Too Hot To Handle, Selling Sunset etc

A person shares a story which relates to a discussion about veterans that they as a veteran have some insight into by sharing the issue which let to an initial trauma and then the beginnings of PTSD. Because that person is a persona non grata, that story is picked at and criticised and the point is not at all discussed. Because of the picking at - some people will say it’s the person’s fault for sharing their insight in the first place and they should have known that no matter what they say many people would have an issue with it, so why say anything at all. And there we have it.

Blaming Harry for the press’ behaviour over the past couple of days is actually so indicative of damned if he does damned if he doesn’t.

I know The Sun supported the charity help for heroes in 2007. But that doesn't mean all of the media were covering it well. I can;t remember myself so I don't know how everyone else is so sure they were. When I search for articles about things like PTSD and veterans, there are a lot from about 2014 onwards. I guess when we started becoming more aware of it in general in society.

To recap the apparently awful lies he said by our noble media:

Then he said "I was angry about what happened to these guys,I was angry the media weren't covering it, I was angry I got pulled out."

and

'The whole reason I was allowed to go to Afghanistan in the first place was because it was kept a secret.
'While I was there for the ten weeks no one knew apart from the British press who said ''we'll keep quiet as long as we get access''.
'To suddenly be on the way home I was angry. But it was important for everyone around me – their safety – to remove me.'

I think the articles and this thread have overstated what he said, which is not a surprise

Brilliant post

I'm not 'telling him', I doubt he reads mumsnet. I'm sharing my opinion as are you.

If I were to start another charity representing vets I certainly wouldn't be on a show telling everyone how much I'd suffered too. Tone deaf Harry, always has been.

Yes agreed :)

I don't read The Sun, or The Mail, or any tabloids.

Any points I have made are entirely based on what I viewed/heard Harry say himself.

It'd a tired trope that any criticism is based on being misinformed because all we do is get our views from tabloids.

Harry and William both shared the same things when they started their mental health charity, and many times since when talking about mental health during related charity work. They speak about how they've been affected, as you would when trying to highlight that mental illness is something that can happen to anyone.
Did you have a problem with all that too?

I see the same comments again and again!
Being critical is not hateful or 'bashing' someone, if my children say or do something stupid, damn right I criticise them and I love them!
Note ... I do not now or ever love Harry !

@Janiie You don't always share opinions though, you tend to make sweeping generalisations

" Harry has never demonstrated resilience, pride or loyalty". Not true

" people aren't watching the documentary because of Harry". How do you know that?

'Harry and William both shared the same things when they started their mental health charity, and many times since when talking about mental health during related charity work'

I don't think either of them suggested no-one could help them or they didn't have access to the correct team of experts did they?

H now of course varies his recollections.

Sharing your experience is good yes, doing it with a tone of blame not so good. We can micro analyse what he said til the cows come home but it is clear from all his media blabbing it is bitterness and resentment that drive him, again at odds with what IG is all about.

I think the whole thing is so nuanced, I'm not on either "side"

There are times when I have felt really sorry for Harry and Meaghan and there are times when I have thought wtf

It's the same for Charles and William and the rest of them ( not Andrew)

The unwavering support for a " side" often details these threads and we don't ever get around to discussing the actual thread title

I don't think anyones said any and all criticism is tabloid based, but this thread is based on a tabloid article that doesn't actually reflect what he said very well at all, IMO

Also earlier you were saying The Sun did cover the war well at that time so I guess the assumption would be that you read it in order to be able to say what they covered or write about. Also you linked a Newsweek article I think? Saying the documentary wasn't a hit, that it didn't;t make the Netflix top 10, but theres nothing in the article to back that up or on the netflix top 10 list. I mean it may not make the top 10 and thats ok, a documentary like this might not, but you did link an article thats completely inaccurate.