WORLD EXCLUSIVE: The massive rift driving Prince Charles & Harry apart

[easydoesit]

Despite the young prince's apparent commitment to both his duties in the armed forces and Sentebale, the charity Harry established, Charles has for some reason decided his son has failed to show any signs of "building a life for himself", with a source very close to Harry just explaining to me: "Harry can't understand it, and they haven't really spoken since September when all this went off between them. Charles just kept saying he was lazy, lacking direction."

My source, who is a member of the inner circle that Harry regularly frequents nightclubs in London such as Whisky Mist and Mahiki with, says: "Things are very tense right now, and Harry finds the whole thing infuriating. They're only communicating with palace secretaries."

http://www.johnnyikon.com/articles/8959-WORLD-EXCLUSIVE-The-massive-rift-driving-Prince-Charles-Harry-apart.html#firstComment

Sounds doubtful to me.  :sigh:

[NoSense]

load of rubbish

[Emme]

If this is true, it sounds to me like a concerned father. 

[easydoesit]

It could be true but if it is then does Charles have a problem with "William's" attitude too? The reasoning in this article is that

Despite the young prince's apparent commitment to both his duties in the armed forces and Sentebale, the charity Harry established, Charles has for some reason decided his son has failed to show any signs of "building a life for himself"

Harry's doing almost as much as his brother. They're both training, both fulfilling royal duties, both working with charities etc. They're doing almost the same amount of work despite Harry being younger. I wonder about both their futures after training but for now they seem to be doing OK.

[brittanylala]

Extremely suspicious article.

The only part I agree with is this;

Prince Harry's "big attitude problem".

Perhaps Harry has made a new acquaintance and is doubtful of whether or not to elevate him/her to 'friend' status, so Harry fed him/her a 'story' to see whether or not it ends up in a tabloid. Or in this case a relatively unknown gossip site.

[Georgiana]

If this is true I think Charles is in no position to judge

[drezzle]

Their body language suggests a rift between Harry and Charles for at least several years now.   I'm surprised anything is coming out in print about it though.  Maybe Charles thinks Harry is getting too much positive attention?   :notamused:

[wannable]

It looks designed to drive someone away on her (his) own will.

[Lucy]

load of rubbish

Here Chas is patting his son Harry on the bacK:
http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/89096598.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF878921CC759DF4EBAC47D0583A1EB90ABC4AB21C3764E8AE8A3223F94E6F6A046984C3

http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?contractUrl=2&language=en-US&family=editorial&assetType=image&p=prince%20charles%2C%20prince%20harry#

He recently bragged about Harry's service in Afghanistan...again....

I think Harry, Camilla and Charles are very close:

http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/83101047.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA5486A7C3EA8CE3AEE2B0ECD2AEA491977AD05F8D53070F35D21

http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xr/83100615.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=3&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54821FF75A357780E480B1EC9B432D14E113DF8E4D110773C8A4E9C89C783688B46


I don't believe this article.

[drezzle]

Lucy, you need to watch a video of Charles with Harry and William and then you'll probably see what I mean.    For example the long interview the 3 had with a couple funny men at Highgrove a couple or more years ago.

[Stix Chix]

Sounds doubtful to me.  :sigh:

load of rubbish

^ditto. :happy:

who/what on earth is Johnny Ikon?  i'd be suspicious even if it came from a well known source because the reasons given don't make any sense:
- "failed to show any signs of building a life for himself"
- "Charles just kept saying he was lazy, lacking direction."
in the highly unlikely event that this is true then no wonder Harry doesn't understand why his dad feels that way....i sure wouldn't. :laugh:  between the military and his growing royal role it's the opposite of my impression of how he's living his life.

i think the princes have a pretty good relationship with their dad although i don't think they all spend a lot of time together.  with any unhappy marriage and divorce there's bound to be hurt feelings and anger but i think Harry and William have more or less put it behind them.  or at least hide it well. ;)

[Hale]

I agree, I don't believe this story either.  I to think they have managed to put aside any differences caused by the divorce of their parents. 

Lucy, I'm curious to know what the last like you posted is.  Only when I tried to open it, all I got was a 'cannot display this website....blah........blah.'

Drezzle, I'm curious as to your thoughts on this subject.

I maybe fanning the flames here, but I always got the impression that Harry, ironically (because he wasn't born a girl and he has ginger hair - Morton book) Harry has become Charles' favourite.  The reason I believe that, although Charles can be deceitful and manipulative, Harry is heart on the sleeve and no lying.  So irregardless of how Charles is, he would love and appreciate Harry's characteristics.  Harry is an open book.  Someone like Charles who is constantly dealing with sycophants and bashers in the press could not help but find someone like Harry endearing and refreshing.  The fact its Charles' son also makes it doubly so.

[drezzle]

Hey Hale, some of my thoughts on this come from these 2 links although I understand many might not see or read the same thing I do ;)

http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/the-muse-of-the-monarchy/611-another-lamb-to-the-slaughter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBvix8cJ_zc

[Ursula]

Drezzle, that was a very thought-provoking article.  Interesting and I wouldn't dismiss it.  It also reminded me of something I read years ago..  Supposedly, Camilla was extremely upset when someone in Charles' circle advised him not to allow his sons to associate with Tom Parker Bowles because of his drug habit. I've often wondered whether the story about Harry wasn't payback of some sort - maybe from a Camilla/Bolland connection.  I'm not defending Charles but it's possible that he was "encouraged" to use it to make himself look good when the real goal (unbeknownst to him) was to make his son look bad.  Just a theory.      

[easydoesit]

Hey Hale, some of my thoughts on this come from these 2 links although I understand many might not see or read the same thing I do ;)

http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/the-muse-of-the-monarchy/611-another-lamb-to-the-slaughter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBvix8cJ_zc

Reading that article I am reminded of one the security guards who gave an interview in a documentary about the Princes. He talked about having pillow fights with the boys and acting as "surrogate fathers" and how Charles commented that it was better them than him. I don't think Charles is a very hands on father or a disciplinarian. He left it up the people around them (nannies, handlers etc.). Sadly. I do think Harry has been used to make both Charles and William look better but Harry has certainly given plenty of ammunition to do this.  He knows right from wrong and he could have made better decisions. He chose to rebel, to act out and to experiment. And of course Charles didn't know what to do, he's had a lifetime of having other people clean up his messes and take care of his kids.

As far as Prince Harry in that interview, I've always thought that Harry is much better interview on his own than he is with his brother or father (see his 21st bday interview, the interviews during his recent trip to New York...)  Remember the interviews he and William did for the Diana concert? William did most of the talking. Harry mostly only talked when he was asked a direct question and I noticed he would never react, like laugh, unless someone else did it first. I think especially back then he had a great mistrust of the media and didn't hide it well but he's gotten much better in interviews lately. Here's another video him and Charles where they have better chemistry (although shouldn't he know whether his father has ever cooked?  :wacko:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miSqo3j5_8o

[drezzle]

Drezzle, that was a very thought-provoking article.  Interesting and I wouldn't dismiss it.  

Thank you Ursula, and that is kind of you to say ;)   Actually the link from the muse-of-the-monarchy came from Lucy, our forum sleuth extraordinaire.

It also reminded me of something I read years ago..  Supposedly, Camilla was extremely upset when someone in Charles' circle advised him not to allow his sons to associate with Tom Parker Bowles because of his drug habit. I've often wondered whether the story about Harry wasn't payback of some sort - maybe from a Camilla/Bolland connection.  I'm not defending Charles but it's possible that he was "encouraged" to use it to make himself look good when the real goal (unbeknownst to him) was to make his son look bad.        

That sounds plausible Ursula, and one thing is certain -- Harry at age 16 should not have been used as fair game in any media manipulations.  

As far as Prince Harry in that interview, I've always thought that Harry is much better interview on his own than he is with his brother or father (see his 21st bday interview, the interviews during his recent trip to New York...)  

Here's another video him and Charles where they have better chemistry (although shouldn't he know whether his father has ever cooked?  wacko)

Charles has probably never cooked anything in his life but Harry didn't want to say that.   :laugh:  Harry is wonderful in interviews now and with his brother in interviews but he seemed quite uncomfortable with the 3 of them in that interview.  Oh well, I must admit I think Charles for the most part is/was adequate as a father and if there is a rift it's likely temporary.  Ken Wharfe, their PPO for many years, was also a good influence on them as a sort of surrogate father.

[Ursula]

You're welcome, drezzle.  :)  And I agree that Harry should not be used.  Unfortunately, Charles has used Harry and William for personal reasons.

Regarding Lucy's title of " forum sleuth extraordinaire", I couldn't agree more. Her contributions never cease to amaze me. 

[easydoesit]

Charles has probably never cooked anything in his life but Harry didn't want to say that.   :laugh:

I love how Harry was like "You baked a bean?"  :laugh:

[Hale]

Thanks :P for the article Drezzle.  It confirms what I have always thought and that is Harry is the sacrificial lamb.  I have no doubt that Charles uses his family in order to make himself look good.  The Bolland campaign to get Camilla accepted is a perfect illustration.  As for the Ant & Dec interview, Harry came across as disconnected from what was going on around him.  Over the years he has got better a interviews and I would go so far as to say passed William in spontaneous interviews.

Ingrid Seward said that Charles' parenting is based on 'anything for a quiet life'.  I doubt Charles is hands on, I doubt he would know what hands on means because he himself was borought up with absent parents.   

As to Harry's relationship with his father, it is certainly one to watch for the future.  Thanks once again for bringing a fresh perspective.

[Kate]

Thanks Drezzle and Easydoesit, for those links..
I agree that Prince Harry is a better interview when on his own. The time spent in New York last spring, he was wonderful.Of course, on stage at his Mother's memorial concert, he was very sure of himself and was a natural...I think he is a lovely young man and his Mom would be pleased with him. Can you imagine how he would be had they had her, even now? Imo, he has the same saucy sense of humour whereas  Prince William can become more serious.

I feel that Prince Charles never was a very good father to either son, as Camilla and the Camilla campaign, was the most important issue to him, before as well as after Diana's passing. The sons were used to help Camilla's promotion and he gave them time when he could..I do hope that if there is a rift between Charles and Harry, that it will be resolved. I do feel that Prince William would be a go-between for both and try and help..

Lucy, Thanks for the info...and links...

[Mimi-chan]

I don't really believe this. I honestly believe that a "rift" has always existed between Charles and his sons because he's never been there for them in the true sense.

I'm not sure if his "hands-off" approach is a result of his own lonely childhood or a result of constantly being preoccupied with his own work and reputation (and that of Camilla's). Either way I think he has never been as close as most parents are to their children with Harry and William. And possibly less so with Harry as he is (however awful this may seem) the less "important" one.

I personally find it rather sad that the boys seem to have had to seek fatherly affection from other men especially with their father still being alive. I've never delved deep into either of the boys' childhood therefore am not extremely knowledgeable about the many figures brought up here (such as Ken Wharfe) but I find it extremely disturbing that their father has been so absent and let other people "father" his children -- especially considering the fact that they lost their mother.

If this is the typical parenting philosophy within the royal family... then it's really no wonder so many of them have issues!

[gec]

Shame if it is true.

Shame if it is false and has caused any awkward discussions or hurt feelings.

Shame if it is false, but because of Charles' diplays of his character many people believe that it is true, possible or plausible.

[Jenee]

My source, who is a member of the inner circle that Harry regularly frequents nightclubs in London such as Whisky Mist and Mahiki with, says: "Things are very tense right now, and Harry finds the whole thing infuriating. They're only communicating with palace secretaries."

Yes, I'm sure Harry confides his inner most family issues with those people that he frequents nightclubs with :rolleyes:

[Lucy]

Harry needs to follow William's example and do less 'hosing', 'snorting' and 'licking'....
I don't believe this article and still believe that Charles and Harry are close.

[Stix Chix]

I've often wondered whether the story about Harry wasn't payback of some sort - maybe from a Camilla/Bolland connection.

ack!  don't say that....i dislike her enough already. :laugh:

I'm not sure if his "hands-off" approach is a result of his own lonely childhood or a result of constantly being preoccupied with his own work and reputation (and that of Camilla's).

^both, probably.  when Harry and William become fathers they'll face the same difficulties of balancing royal duty with fatherly duties.  i'm sure they'll have nannies and send their kids to boarding school too...but i think they're likely to go out of their way to spend more time with their kids then Charles did.  partly generational and partly because of Diana's influence.

I personally find it rather sad that the boys seem to have had to seek fatherly affection from other men especially with their father still being alive. I've never delved deep into either of the boys' childhood therefore am not extremely knowledgeable about the many figures brought up here (such as Ken Wharfe) but I find it extremely disturbing that their father has been so absent and let other people "father" his children -- especially considering the fact that they lost their mother.

that's a good point.  Lord Mountbatten was absolutely a father-figure to Charles.  and growing up the princes were close to their bodyguards....probably still are. :happy:  meanwhile, Harry seems to have a father figure in Marc Dyer....or at least has a good friendship with him.  i know Marc's not popular with everyone here but say what you like about him he's been there for William and Harry since they were teenagers.

anyway....the best thing a father can do for his children is to love their mother.