Re: 'Harry' in Afghanistan

Mike G wrote:
> 
> "R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclayton@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:zJqdnUPwcuo28VTanZ2dnUVZ8saonZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "OM ****VA!108" <grimus108@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>
news:56925164-c2cf-4cc8-9a71-30ce1c9f0282@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/mar/01/royalsandthemedia.military1
>>>
>>> Working out british bastard 1-2-3 anger on the Pasthtun does not make
>>> the little **** a hero - it just gives the silly tosser some rather
>>> nasty karma to have to deal with in future.
>>
>> Master James Hewitt may be a bit of a b******d, but there is no need 
>> for language like that!
> 
> I agree.
> And I don't understand why there is so much animosity directed against
him.
> He is not responsible for his parentage, any more than he is responsible

> for the way he is treated by the media, and for the decision to bring 
> him home.
> IMO he's the victim of his cir***stances. Not the perpetrator.
> Mike.
> 

    Absolutely. who would choose to be born into that situation? In a 
goldfish bowl from the word go!