Hey boss what do you think of Prince harry and his "nude" pics. LOL just wondering what the britsh people think of that?
Like mom said though "every time i see him from now on i will picture him naked." LOL mom didn't like it she thought it was awful.
I don't know what i think. i was reading a people magazine article that said that makes harry endearing or somethign like that. i don't know if i agree with that. it makes him human though. i know i've done share of mistakes so i won't judge him and his life.
He's made msitakes before, in particular going to a fancy dress party dressed in a nazi uniform, when it was literally a few days away from a holocaust rememberence day. He was soundly rounded on for that.
He has been changing his life around. Going on part of an arctic trek with war veteran amputees and serving in Afghanistan, but this will potentially dent his image, with an "old habits die hard" kind of viewpoint from people.
The question now being asked I believe, is why one or more royal protection officers permitted this.
There is a rag called Sun claiming they are going to print Harry photos, which is their style frankly and to me makes no sense, in relation to whether one or more royal protection officers are culpable of a dereliction of duty, because if you describe what he was doing most people would understand, it's not like saying he was in a car with a prostitute, a wrestler, a nun and a baboon, or describing some other equally outlandish scenario that people might not understand, without pictures or an artists representation.
To illustrate how crummy the Sun are, there was a famous incident in 1989, when two football, (soccer teams), Liverpool and Nottigham Forest were playing a knockout cup match at the ground of Sheffield Wednesday, (Hillsborough).
A mistake by a senior officer, reacting to what was beleived to be a growing unruly mob outside, that had no tickets and couldn't get in, meant a lot of people where let in to a section called the Leppings Lane end and more than 2x the amount of people that section could hold were crammed in and in the scenes that followed, the crowd congestion caused 99 Liverpool fans to die.
The senior officer was eventually advised to retire on health grounds, to protect his police pensio, and absolve him of potential blame at an official hearing / enquiry, so I believe.
The Sun made some disparaging remarks about Liverpudlians and how they react to grief, which caused outcry and weeks later an apology was served. However about 17 years later, the paper admitted the apology was fake and it caused more outcry again.
It is a paper owned by Ruper Murdoch, who also owned the now defunked News Of The World, which you may have heard of, because they hacked the phones of certain people, including celebrities.
Interestingly, it was that papers former deputy editor, that has been saying the Prince Harry photos being printed, in relation to supposed dereliction of duty by Royal Protection, makes sense.
I don't agree, as I think describing the pool antics is enough. Seeing exactly what was happening is not relelvant, as the question is, should the situation have been permitted or not and depicting it, rather than just simply describing it, to me, is an irrelevant thing.
He is entitled to be a human being, not a media puppet, but the protection service does need to be investigated, for at least the mobile phone mistakes, as the phones shouldn't have been there to capture any photos or video footage.
This will just misrepresent him somewhat now and given some of the dumb stuff he's done in the past, after trying to repair his image, this could set him back quite a bit.
Boss Man wrote:It wasn't secret service exactly, it was royal protection, who are a fancy sidearm of the police, so they're not really the James Bond squad .
Well nevertheless, I think "protection" should include protecting you from yourself.
Absolutely. They should have a cap or ceiling limit on the amount revelling a royal can get up to, for the royals sake. That's not to say that he should have been forced to holiday like a monk, but certainly perhaps tone down his act a little, as at one point he was drunk on a table and made some sort of comment to a croupier about kicking his head in, which was without doubt the drink talking, but the allowing of pictures to be taken occurs, that's when dereliction of duty is achieved.
what do you think of kate middleton's photos boss?
I don't know much about privacy laws in europe. I can see both sides really. In a lot of respects worldwide they aren't royalty to us they are like celebrities. But at the same time looking at what happened to princess di i see the other side, where they do need some privacy too. With all the money that celebrities are given i have a hard time feeling really badly for them when their privacy is nonexistent. I don't envy them in that aspect and i wouldn't want that myself but I've never wanted to be a celebrity either. In the USA we wear bathing suit tops too i know it's more common in eurpoe not too.
i suppose they thought the privcy laws in france would protect them. They must have thought no one was around. She's probably done it many times before and never had a problem. I understand where kate and will are coming from. I do like kate and will both very much.
mom didn't like it she thought it was awful. 
.