Prince Harry - Accusations of him being a drunken warrior 'hunter' of innocent Afghans during Chri

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
saw this the other day...
'Prince Harry kills Taliban chief
Hero prince in missile strike on commander'

www.thesun.co.uk...

The 28-year-old gunship co-pilot was called on to unleash a missile strike to eliminate a senior terror leader.

The Sun understands the decisive strike occurred in late October during a partnered patrol with Afghan troops hunting the Taliban chief.

i thought that a brit would post this to ATS?
no? go figure.

No Intelligent British citizen would quote the Sun newspaper. I think that is the reason why we didn't.
It is like sorcha Faal in quality.

Daily Mail at a pinch.

Daily Telegraph and Guardian are broad sheets and are quite acceptable.

Maybe we should have a forum heading for "Unsubstantianted Wild Heresay" and propaganda from terrorist warlords.

No proof was made that Harry was drunk.

No proof was made that he targeted anybody or was even in the air at that time.

No proof + crazy warlord = terrorist Bologna and Hogwash.

Now, if somebody can PROVE Harry was drunk and piloting and targeting innocents ... THEN THAT would be BAN (Breaking Alternative News).

Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
Maybe we should have a forum heading for "Unsubstantianted Wild Heresay" and propaganda from terrorist warlords.

Haha, brilliant!
I'm chuckling at the wild unsubstantiated personal assumptions people are making regarding Harry's intentions to serve. No-one on ATS knows the guy, or any of the non-royal guys he actually serves day to day with - oh, don't tell me, they're all secret service protecting him and no-one non 'royal' ever sits in his Apache or eats the same food at his mess.
Again, to avoid silly flaming, I do not support the UK constitutional monarchy nor the UK policy of incursion in Afghanistan.

Originally posted by AriesJedi

No Intelligent British citizen would quote the Sun newspaper.

I agree.
I asked a question of tinhattribunal regarding the 'why no Brits mentioned it, go figure' comment, but no response so far.

Originally posted by dianashay

*and in regards to taking the words of a 'warlord' seriously, well all I can say about that is if it isn't taken seriously then why is it on the front page of the Telegraph?

If you take the Telegraph as your absolute truth of the state of affairs, here is another quote you may like to consider:

The Ministry of Defence has dismissed claims by an Afghan warlord that Prince Harry kills insurgents while "drunk" as simply absurd.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

...does that make it true?

*Edit*
It's a bit quiet here on ATS at the moment so I shall wait for the overnight explosion of comments when our US friends have some time to waste overnight.
I look forward to seeing points expressed without the unsubstantiated emotional bias so often found in this forum, but I expect a lot of silly passion inspired assertions which have little or no substance aside from personal belief.

An Afghan leader makes assertions which UK media denies - it's up to the consumer of the media to decide why they may or may not subscribe to the particular opinions.

...again, due to the childlike inability of some ATS members to distinguish between factual or belief based comments, I repeat, I do not support a constitutional monarchy for the UK nor the UK's incursion into Afghanistan. - That is a debate for another thread though