# Prince Harry faces outcry at Nazi costume



## Alex252 (13 Jan 2005)

Prince Harry faces outcry at Nazi outfit
By Neil Tweedie and Michael Kallenbach
(Filed: 14/01/2005)

In pictures: Tearaway Harry

Politicians, pressure groups and religious leaders queued up yesterday to criticise Prince Harry after the publication of a photograph showing him wearing Nazi insignia at a private party.

   
The furore surrounding the Prince has made headlines around the world 
The 20-year-old prince, who is third in line to the throne, was castigated by, among others, the Tory leader Michael Howard, the Israeli foreign minister and survivors of the concentration camps for wearing a crude imitation uniform including a swastika armband.

The furore, which has made headlines around the world, represents a new low for the prince, whose late teenage years have been characterised by a facility for "hell-raising", including excessive drinking, cannabis use and taking a swing at photographers.

But there were some willing to defend him, describing the outcry over the photograph, published by The Sun, as excessive.

Calls for Prince Harry to be stripped of his place at the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst fell on deaf ears. 

A senior Army official said there was no question of the prince not beginning his instruction in May.

"He is most emphatically not a liability. We take the same attitude to the prince as any other cadet.

"I am quite sure there are plenty of cadets who display lack of judgment, but we never hear of them because they do not end up in The Sun."

   
Prince Harry on the front page of the Sun yesterday 
Harry and Prince William were among some 250 guests at a fancy dress party last Saturday at the home of the Olympic triple gold medallist Richard Meade to celebrate the 22nd birthday of the horseman's son, Harry.

Many there were members of the Beaufort Hunt, favoured by the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles.

Prince Harry was shown holding a drink and a cigarette and dressed in a shirt altered to look like a German uniform by the addition of collar flashes and an eagle insignia on the chest.

But the most offensive part of the amateurish ensemble was the red, white and black swastika armband.

The costume was apparently meant to represent the Afrika Korps - a rather odd interpretation of the birthday party's "colonial" theme.

Few guests were prepared to discuss the event, but a number did say that Prince Harry had behaved well during the party. 

Guests were not particularly shocked by the costume but some thought it ill-advised and bound to attract publicity.

Clarence House swiftly issued a written statement from the prince apologising for any offence, and there were indications that he received yet another dressing down from his father.

There were plenty of others waiting to give the prince a telling off. 

Silvan Shalom, the Israeli foreign minister, said: "Anybody who tries to pass it off as bad taste must be made aware that this can encourage others to think that perhaps that period was not as bad as we teach the young generation in the free world."

Mr Howard, who is of Romanian Jewish parentage, was not satisfied with the statement, arguing that the prince should account for his actions in public.

"It would be appropriate to hear from him in person," he said. "It is something which will disappoint very many people and offend very many people. It might be appropriate for him to tell us himself just how contrite he is."

The Simon Wiesenthal Centre urged the prince to visit Auschwitz for instruction in the horrors of the Nazi regime.

The camp will be the scene of a large international gathering this month marking the 60th anniversary of its liberation. The Earl of Wessex will represent the Royal Family, with the Queen attending a British survivors' event in London.

Doug Henderson, a Labour backbencher and former Armed Forces minister, said the incident demonstrated that Prince Harry was unfit to go to Sandhurst and called for him to withdraw his application.

"I don't think that this young man is suitable," said Mr Henderson.


----------



## George Wallace (13 Jan 2005)

A definite case of bad Judgement......but look what happened to these guys:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6818054/?GT1=6065

GW


----------



## Armymedic (13 Jan 2005)

Yeah, whatever!   :

First, some friggin numbty is making a mint from that picture,

second, while I have to agree the swastika on the sleeve was a tad much, this is a storm fueled by the simple fact he is a Royal. The average citizen wearing the uniform of the Wermacht Afrika Corps (not the SS), wouldn't even raise an eyebrow at a private costume party....

To say his unfit for military collage because of it...

ludicrous.


----------



## R031button (14 Jan 2005)

As a prince and a future officer, he is expected to demonstrate a slightly higher standard then the rest of us. I don't know about you, but my Master Corporals always told me that being in the service of the Crown meant being held to a higher standard; I would expect that higher standard to be displayed by the Crown itself.


----------



## MikeM (14 Jan 2005)

I agree, although it was a poor decision to wear the uniform.. if it were an "average joe" I doubt it would raise that much of an issue, if any.. and certainly not one worthy enough to make the media. However, since he is a royal.. he has to keep in mind stuff like this will almost certainly come out in the paper.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (14 Jan 2005)

He made a youthful mistake- were any of you mistake-free at his age?   I wasn't. Probably makes a good lesson for him.   He should apologize, make a real effort to learn about the holocaust and endeavour to do better in the future.

IMHO he is not disqualified from future service to his country or the commonwealth.


----------



## winchable (14 Jan 2005)

While he is a royal, he's also a 20 year old male.
The idea of divine royalty is pretty much out the window, so I wouldn't flip out at the lad.

If anything this strengthens my belief that royals should do military service, I think many of us can attest to the fact that service will straighten people out.
Other than this, Harry is immensley involved in his mothers charities as well as having devoted his GAP year to working in an orphanage in the developing world...so, whatever mistake he made at a costume party I think for the most part he's shown quite a bit of promise (Compare him to any British Prince in waiting historically and you'll find he's probably head and shoulders above many)


----------



## 1feral1 (14 Jan 2005)

He has made a certified fool of himself, and embarrassed the Royal family, especially in the 60th anniversary of the end WW2 (VE) in May. No doubt this will insult many Vets throughout the Commonwealth.

Although he is 20, he must always remember who he is, and what his family represents within his own country and around the world. Very bad choice of costume.

My 2 bob.

Wes


----------



## SeaKingTacco (14 Jan 2005)

> He has made a certified fool of himself, and embarrassed the Royal family, especially in the 60th anniversary of WW2. No doubt this will insult many Vets throughout the Commonwealth.
> 
> Although he is 20, he must always remember who he is, and what his family represents within his own country and around the world. Very bad choice of costume.



Wes-

No disagreements here with what you said, but I don't think it should be a hanging offence either.


----------



## Gilligan (14 Jan 2005)

It's true, he does have to remember who he is at all times, he's a member of the Royal family, 3rd in line to the thrown.   He'll be a Prince for life, and has had a very rough life what with his mother and father divorcing, then his mother being killed, his brother being teen hearthrob and all, he's got a lot to rebel against, you can't say he's a horrible person for that.   He didn't choose to be a Prince, and he can only be Mr. Perfect Prince so much without just wanting to relax and be like a normal 20 year old and goof around a bit.   His costume taste was in poor taste, whether or not he's a Royal, he screwed up, he has apologized for it, and will publicly soon I've heard.   As said he's been actively working with his mother's charities, and doing aid work around the world, so one (well a few) things done in poor taste as a young man should hardly count as a terrible character flaw, thus I say why should he be unfit for military service....maybe he just needs to grow up a bit first.


----------



## winchable (14 Jan 2005)

> maybe he just needs to grow up a bit first.



I would say that's why he needs to do it!


----------



## onecat (14 Jan 2005)

"Although he is 20, he must always remember who he is, and what his family represents within his own country and around the world. Very bad choice of costume"


Well he is only twenty, and lets face when your twenty you don't make the wisest of choices, or really think things though.  I'm sure it knows its a misstake now and in future wouldn't dream of dressing that way.  A bad choice is just that a bad choice, now many peopel here haven't made at least one.  And add to that he royal. from a totally disfunctional family, who never actually interact with normal people... only makes that much easier to make wrong choices.


----------



## 1feral1 (14 Jan 2005)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Wes-
> 
> No disagreements here with what you said, but I don't think it should be a hanging offence either.



I agree, it aint no hanging offense,  but its a bad 'faux pas', and does not show much respect for the older generation (who not so long ago gave their tomorrows for our todays), and again if it was you or I nothing would be said, but look at the position he is supposed to hold. Ya, 20 yrs old, but a 20 yr old prince, 3rd in line to the throne.

BTW I am not a monarchist at all, and I am as about as non PC as you can get, but I do know decorum and understand what common sense is.

Cold beers,

Wes


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Jan 2005)

I figure he is in good company.  Pierre Trudeau was wearing similar gear around the streets of Montreal when he was that age (somewhere round about 1940).  At that rate he makes a first class candidate not just for military college but for senior public office in Canada.


----------



## Shec (14 Jan 2005)

He gets my vote for:


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (14 Jan 2005)

I think this is part of the problem why we are not comfortable around Royals and they are not comfortable around us. Yes, we hold them to a higher moral standard then us but is that really fair? He wore a Nazi uniform and while clearly a poor choice, he is a young male adult, if he is allowed to make mistakes he can learn from them. If people keep telling them how perfect they are suppose to be as Royals, then how are they going to grow as people and learn from their mistakes? He will learn a valuable lesson from this if he is allowed and should be permitted to move on.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (14 Jan 2005)

Have to agree with Ex here, as a society we are all about second chances, especially when it comes to criminal offenses but very eager to hang somebody just for the crime of being a " somebody" and screwing up.


----------



## RCA (14 Jan 2005)

Since he is moving into the military (as an officer, although I'm not sure if its Sandhurst), his instructors should knock the immaturity off. By the time he is finished, you should see a different young man.


----------



## Goober (14 Jan 2005)

The best way to learn, is from your mistakes. However, the British press are loving this, and making it out to be more than it is, which is a poor costume choice by a 20 year old kid.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Jan 2005)

The only reason he is being subjected to this is because he is Royalty.  Now, does anyone feel that this presents a moral quandary in a democracy where the continual presence of the monarchy is sustained?

Being a democratic nation, the Prince is a citizen like any other, no more and no less (ie: subject to the rule of law, etc, etc).  However, because he inherited a role in the figurehead of the Commonwealth, this kid is immediately tagged with additional responsibilities and expectations.  Is this really fair to any members of the monarchy?  In a system where such an important role is inherited (Head of State), it is unfair to have these people unwillingly thrust into the limelight, with their adolescent foibles picked at by the public.  In proper democratic fashion, anyone could run for public office, holding them and their family up to public scrutiny.  But to just throw this responsibility and scrutiny on a child because of who his Grandmother is is a tad unfair.

Maybe he just wants to be a rockstar or a street-sweeper or something (which is entirely acceptable in a liberal democracy) - but because of our insistence of an inherited institution, he never really got the chance to do so because expectation (along with the paparazzi) was lumped on him and and his brother from day one.

My grumbling of the day....
Infanteer


----------



## tomahawk6 (14 Jan 2005)

The Prince has few responsibilities and way too much free time to get into trouble. Too bad his knee prevented him from attending Sandhurst this month or this wouldnt have happened. The sooner he joins the Army the quicker he will grow up.


----------



## c4th (14 Jan 2005)

I would be surprised if anyone who spent their first day of life as international front page news did not have at least a little bit of media savvy after 20 years.  Assuming that he is not touched in the head, I would wager that Prince Harry knew exactly the media and international response that would be generated by wearing a Nazi uniform.  

An honest youthful mistake is about as likely as the 'average' 20 year old jaywalking across the 401 without looking both ways.

A rebellion, or an "I'm an untouchable celebrity" cry for help?  Maybe.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Jan 2005)

OK

Try this:

Replace "Prince Harry" in this context, with the name of any Political figure you want and see if your reaction is the same......

GW


----------



## c4th (14 Jan 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Replace "Prince Harry" in this context, with the name of any Political figure you want and see if your reaction is the same......



Yup, works for everyone except JÃƒÂ¶rg Haider.


----------



## LF(CMO) (14 Jan 2005)

Goober said:
			
		

> The best way to learn, is from your mistakes.......... is a poor costume choice by a 20 year old kid.



 Having raised four kids (all teenagers at the same time and three of them girls!!).   I would say that there is a whole lot of wisdom in the above statement!


----------



## winchable (14 Jan 2005)

> Replace "Prince Harry" in this context, with the name of any Political figure you want and see if your reaction is the same......



Close but not quite (imho) replace "Prince Harry" with the name of a child of any political figure, how many of them have done stupid things in the media spotlight? (Tony Blairs son comes to mind)

c4th is right, every Royal is at least a little media savvy, I would wager young Harry knew what kind of reaction he would get but didn't really realise the extent of it.
I also think this is as a result of younger generations losing touch and memory with WW2 events and history, I think the trip to Auchwitz would do him good, and rumour is that's what his father wants.
Official releases state that Harry visiting the camps would put the "wrong kind" of media attention on the event, which I agree with.


----------



## Hoplite (14 Jan 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Maybe he just wants to be a rockstar or a street-sweeper or something (which is entirely acceptable in a liberal democracy) - but because of our insistence of an inherited institution, he never really got the chance to do so because expectation (along with the paparazzi) was lumped on him and and his brother from day one.



This expectation (because of who his grandmother was) was unfairly lumped upon him, I would agree with that.   However, I have not heard many complaints about the lifestyle that it has brought him.   Perhaps Eton failed to teach him the age old adage of "there is no such thing as a free lunch."
There is an expectation on him, and that IS NOT on other celebrities (perhaps unfair, a topic for another thread), to maintian an appropriate level of decorum at all times.    

Is this asking too much of a young man?   Perhaps, young people are prone to making mistakes.   But, it is not an unfair expectation that a future king would have the common sense not to do something so ridiculous.   His training and education are supposed to have imparted that into him.

Maybe the training didn't work, maybe he wants no part of the throne.   Abdication always remains a possibility.   No one is forcing him to remain in queue.   

I feel bad that he has long been under the microscope because of his mother.   He is in the transition period to being judged because of the being tied to the monarchy, hopefully the military might make things a touch easier for him.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Jan 2005)

Che

Again, close, but not close enough.  Tony Blair's son could be used as example should he be as large a public figure as his father.  He is not.  Prince Harry is.  He has been in the Public  eye since birth and should know the ramifications of his actions, now he has become a young adult.  The "age argument", IMHO, is invalid.  He has been brought up and trained in how to behave in Public since birth.  He made a poor choice in judgement and got caught.  He should have known better.

GW


----------



## qjdb (14 Jan 2005)

The question that I ask, is where were his 'handlers'?  I am sure that he has to have at least one person who said to him, "Er, Harry, do you think that is such a great idea?"

Were all these people so over-whelmed by his Princeliness, that they just let him do his thing?

Quentin


----------



## Infanteer (14 Jan 2005)

Hoplite said:
			
		

> However, I have not heard many complaints about the lifestyle that it has brought him.   Perhaps Eton failed to teach him the age old adage of "there is no such thing as a free lunch."



How many other Eton graduates are hounded daily by the press?



			
				Hoplite said:
			
		

> Maybe the training didn't work, maybe he wants no part of the throne.  Abdication always remains a possibility.  No one is forcing him to remain in queue.



He will still be branded with the title of Prince, even if he were to step out of line.

I guess the general thrust I've my arguement is that we are setting ourselves up for disappointment by foistering the duties of an inherited monarchy on people who's only qualification is their lineage.  Sure, the media may poke at the transgretions of the Bush daughters, but they are scolded to "remember who their father is" while Harry is constantly pestered for failing to "remember who he is"; whether he wants it or not.

In a liberal democracy, where meritocracy is the rule, people are entitled to amount to nothing if they wish (just as they are able to strive to something if they work for it).  I'm suspicious of the inherited monarchy because the Head of State is closed to any Canadian (or British) citizen simply because they were not born into it, while Harry cannot get away from it and be a "Joe-Blow Sixpack" even if he tried.


----------



## c4th (14 Jan 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> How many other Eton graduates are hounded daily by the press?
> 
> He will still be branded with the title of Prince, even if he were to step out of line.
> 
> Harry cannot get away from it and be a "Joe-Blow Sixpack" even if he tried.



Life must be really hard.  I suppose any royal could seek an audience with the Queen and renounce their titles and any responsibilities and privileges that go along with it.  

Other than King Edward VIII I haven't observed too many of the blue blood set lining up to abandon their posts.

As it were, he has accepted the Queen's shilling...


----------



## PPCLI MCpl (14 Jan 2005)

I wish the scandal hungry public and opportunistic media would react with equal outrage and indignation to the people who proudly wear the swastika.

Having said that, it was still a poor choice of costume.


----------



## winchable (14 Jan 2005)

> haven't observed too many of the blue blood set lining up to abandon their posts.



And if he were to do that, there would be just as much media outcry and outrage in the British public.
Rock and a hard place.


----------



## Kirkhill (14 Jan 2005)

Amen Che


----------



## 735_winnipeg (16 Jan 2005)

exile him!


----------



## RCA (16 Jan 2005)

Strike two.


----------



## winchable (16 Jan 2005)

Was strike one punching out the photographer? I'd of done the same myself.

Some more thoughts about young Harry of Windsor and this...thing:

I am a royal supporter and as such have overlooked some of the..lesser moments in recent history, but I found Harry's apology to be completely inadequate.
He better bloody well visit Auschwitz, rumour has it his father, brother and grandfather are all pushing for him to go and if he doesn't I will be sorely disappointed as will many in Britain, I expect due to this he will go.
Until this point he was far from perfect and definetly more the more "human" of the royals but he did do some altrustic things for a late teen and 20 year old so while it is certainly right to scold him, lynching might be somewhat inappropriate as he does have potential to develop into a respectable royal despite his failings.

On a side note, thankfully we have William to look forward to(those of us keen on the monarchy)

Just spitballing I suppose.


----------



## Goober (16 Jan 2005)

I don't see how forcing him to goto Auschwitz would change anything. One should goto Auschwitz on his or her own accord to show respect, and to remember the victims of that camp. If he goes, its just going to look like the only reason he is there is to appease those who are offended, and not for remembrance.


----------



## Armymedic (16 Jan 2005)

Goober said:
			
		

> I don't see how forcing him to goto Auschwitz would change anything. One should goto Auschwitz on his or her own accord to show respect, and to remember the victims of that camp. If he goes, its just going to look like the only reason he is there is to appease those who are offended, and not for remembrance.



The thinking is probably the same for any bad deed, he must show some sort of pennace to atone for his error. Sorta like going to Anger management, or community service.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (17 Jan 2005)

I would have been more worried if his costume had actually been authentic.  He was wearing a civilian shirt, East German border guard collar tabs, and a homemade armband.

No one in North Africa actually wore swastika armbands (though some members of the NSKK may have served in theatre) - and his costume was pretty much a get up straight out of the Raiders of the Lost Ark/Indiana Jones movies.  In other words, complete fantasy.

I suppose he could get a pass based on that (ie he was dressed as a bad guy from a movie).

Like I said, if he had a stitch-perfect uniform with Heinrich Himmler's personal insignia and decorations, down to a T, complete with pince nez I would be far more worried and concerned.


----------



## Art Johnson (17 Jan 2005)

Michael do some research. A former Prime Minister of Canada walked the downtown streets of Montreal in a Nazi uniform during the war complete with a dummy P38. PET the guy who gave us all the finger and did his pirouette behind the Queen. The left leaning press didn't seem to get upset. I am not holding a candle for the Royal Family but once Queen Elizabeth is off the throne there is no way that I could swear allegiance to any of her idiot children.


----------



## winchable (17 Jan 2005)

I'm still holding out for William,
Must put up with Charles first.


----------



## Kirkhill (17 Jan 2005)

Arhh, Che me hearty, yer a good man.  ;D


----------



## winchable (18 Jan 2005)

I've said it before and I'll say it again.
Let's first assume that having a Royal Family is a given, then look historically at the royals..yeah we're doing alright.


----------



## Freddy Chef (18 Jan 2005)

Nazi Germany (Swastika clad), was Britain's enemy during WWII.

The Nazis were also the architects of The Holocaust, making them humanity's enemy.

The Luftwaffe (Nazi) assaulted the UK during The Battle of Britain and The London Blitz, 1940-1941. Nazi Germany also assaulted London with V-1 â Å“cruise missilesâ ?, and V-2 â Å“ICBM'sâ ? during 1944. Londoners and Britons have every right to see anything Nazi as a personal enemy.

Any Briton (anyone with a brain in their head) would know what a Swastika is and what it stands for.

Thus, for a kindred of the British head of state, to wear the insignia of an organization that tried to exterminate an entire race/religion, and tried to obliterate Britain herself, is pure stupidity.


----------



## Gunnar (18 Jan 2005)

And entirely in line with the sympathies of some of the Royal family at the time.  I believe it was the Duke (forget his exact name, but he was the King who stepped down), who had a real thing for Hitler.  It was quite an embarassment to the government and the Royals with the onset of the war.


----------

