Drudge is an indiot. To endanger an entire platoon of soldiers to report "a scoop" is both arrogant and stupid.

Maybe MI5 will pay him a visit.

I really have a problem with the press self-censoring itself.

I was listening to the BBC last night and they were saying that in Russia the press covered only Putin's candidate for president. While in Russia and other authoritarian countries the press is censored by government, here in the west there is this problem of self-censorship. Take for example the case of the press not covering third party candidates or their issues. No government agency is pressuring to to it, yet it is a problem.

Grossly irresponsible.

Maybe the NYT is rubbing off on him.

The information was revealed by the British Army -- how is that Drudge's 'leak'?

Indeed! They revealed the information ... and at the same time announced he was heading home (and probably well away before the Army released the info to Drudge!).

However, you know that and just take this opportunity to rag on the USA, as per usual, you stuck-up, degenerates of empire ...

..............Drudge.. is a prick...............

Typical example of conservatives putting lives in danger while feigning patriotism.

Wylde was right. Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious.

"The information was revealed by the British Army -- how is that Drudge's 'leak'?"

Because he was supposed to be a "gentleman" and not realease it, LOL!

Or because people love picking on Drudge.

I think it fascinating that Drudge is labeled as a 'conservative' because he didn't spike the Lewinski story like all the other liberal MSM supporters of Clinton did!

So, since he isn't a slavish yellow-dog-democratic (like the NY Times or LA Times), he's automatically named a 'conservative'.

Actually, he is a gossip columnist whose reputation is made for him by you puling liberal hypocrites!

I love the irony!

They revealed the information ... and at the same time announced he was heading home (and probably well away before the Army released the info to Drudge!).

That's not what happened. The Brits did not publicly confirm Harry's combat role until after it was reported by Drudge. They had an agreement in place with the British press not to reveal this information.

I woke up this morning to six angry emails from people who mistakenly thought I was Matt Drudge. He must be getting hammered on his site about this.

Worthless Piss Ant !!!

I Love Chicken Hawk Pussies Who Are So Willing To Fuck Up Someones Military Service While They Stay Home Safe And Warm When They Would Never Serve Their Country !!

-Sarge

"Australian magazine" Isnt this the "villain" not Drudge. All Drudge did was cut and paste, it was already out there. Drudge is not a journalist any more than any of we are that post articles we find on the DR.

I think it fascinating that Drudge is labeled as a 'conservative' because he didn't spike the Lewinski story like all the other liberal MSM supporters of Clinton did!

He's labeled a conservative because he was a public and vociferous critic of the Clintons who said that his biggest political hero is Ronald Reagan.

By the way Im not supporting Drudge I am just looking for clarification. Don't flame me. :)

"Australian magazine" Isnt this the "villain" not Drudge.

The Australian magazine didn't get any attention when it reported the story, presumably because it is a lot smaller than the honking Drudge Report.

I woke up this morning to six angry emails from people who mistakenly thought I was Matt Drudge. He must be getting hammered on his site about this.

Posted by rcade

This is funny. If I were in your place I don't know whter I'd be happy or concerned about this.

Maybe you should send the stuff to Drudge and tell him they confused you with him. With any lucky, the Retort might be mentioned in this page and it could drive a lot of traffic this way.

Gerblis get ready!

Rcade, that doesn't change the fact that it was out in the public. It would have made it onto the Web eventually. If not Drudge a ton other Bloggers would kill for the publicity and web traffic.

If you went on vacation in Australian and happened to see the magazine story, would you hesitate to put it on here? Of course you would not know what you know now. 20/20 hindsight you know.

Does the magazine have a web site? Maybe someone from Australia would have posted the link here. Wouldn't that have been funny.

The information was revealed by the British Army -- how is that Drudge's 'leak'?

It wasn't Drudge's leak-it was the Aussies. I'm sure the taliban reads the aussie mag when they're online.

Drudge isn't a journalist, he's a link sensationalizer, like the NYT thing, all he did was be the first biggie to post a link to an article already on line.

As for the MOD revealing it to the military-they expected somebody would find out but wanted to pre-emptively stop a news story before the media went all FOX/Geraldo on it and got troops killed.

It was a magazine called "New Idea." A woman's magazine, I guess like Redbook. It was online until Drudge linked it to his page. New Idea than took it down.

"That's not what happened. The Brits did not publicly confirm Harry's combat role until after it was reported by Drudge. They had an agreement in place with the British press not to reveal this information."

A news blackout surrounded the decision to send the younger prince to Afghanistan, with British media in an agreement with Harry's London office not to report his whereabouts to protect his safety and that of British forces.

Sorry, I took "London Office" to mean the Army, rather than this scion of inbreeding's personal offices. However, THEY are the ones that made the 'leak'. Then, apparently an Australian magazine, then Bild, then Drudge ...

So, of course, British correspondents blame the USA via the Drudge Report ...

"I woke up this morning to six angry emails from people who mistakenly thought I was Matt Drudge. He must be getting hammered on his site about this."

You're delighted, of course! Drudge has the mantle of the evil-leaker placed about him with alacrity, after removing it from the NY Times -- Drudge's leak is far more damaging to the USA than the NY Times embarrassing us to the entire world, over-and-over ...

... ask any Brit, anglophile or Democratic ...

I woke up this morning to six angry emails

Rogers, any way you can post those? I think that would be some wonderful reading to start my Friday, which isn't really a Friday in the exciting sense because I will be working Saturday and Sunday - damn tax season.

Member that would have been funny and thats kind of my point. If its already online its fair game.

The information was actually more dangerous to Harry if it remained obscure. Just think if a Taliban sympathizer saw it in online and passed the info to Afghanistan. The Army would not have known Harry was in danger.

Since Drudge put in on his sight it blew up and the Army reacted and pulled Harry out.

I think the information should have remained secret but Its not Drudge's fault it came out. It was already out.

"...which isn't really a Friday in the exciting sense because I will be working Saturday and Sunday - damn tax season."

Gee...pass the Fair Tax and you could relax on Saturdays and Sundays...and maybe Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays too...LOL.

BTW, Rogers ... you are sure in your own mind that when the info appeared in the Australian magazine is when the Brit Army pulled him out, right?

"It was a magazine called "New Idea." A woman's magazine"

Ah well, this explains why people are blaming Drudge then. It's easier to blame a "male pig" than to blame a women's magazine, that would be politically incorrect in today's world.

You know, I hear they had a GENTLEMEN'S agreement to not leak out the info. I guess they should have had a LADIES' agrement too to prevent this kind of thing.

Gee...pass the Fair Tax and you could relax on Saturdays and Sundays...and maybe Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays too...LOL.

For a different thread, but the regressive sales tax would kill our economy. You want to discuss it, start another thread.

"... the regressive sales tax would kill our economy ..."

How? I'm really tired of all the simple declarations, sans any support whatsoever!

What do you mean by 'regressive'? Is that a label attached for pejorative inference -- that a national sales tax is somehow a part of ancient history? The USA had a national sales tax but gave it up so they could send you to jail, instead?

Give us a clue, please ...

That's not what happened. The Brits did not publicly confirm Harry's combat role until after it was reported by Drudge. They had an agreement in place with the British press not to reveal this information.

----

Was Drudge part of that agreement?

spoiling the carefully orchestrated deal under which British news organizations had been given details about the prince''s deployment in exchange for not telling anyone.

----

Unless Drudge was part of that deal, the story was already leaked before Drudge posted it. Now, you can argue that Drudge should not have posted the information to begin with but the information was already leaked.

"They had an agreement in place with the British press not to reveal this information."

Did they also have an agreement with everyone in Harry's platoon. that they wouldn't write home and tell anyone they were serving with Royalty?

Am I the only one who has a problem with the press making "agreements" with governments not to report certain stuff? If they have an "agreement" about this, what else do they have an "agreement" about?

Wisgod,

You really DON'T have a clue do you? You defend the right-wing cocksucker by questioning the competence of professional soldiers?

What a f'ing tool!!!! Typical GOPiggie it's best!!!!

You defend the right-wing cocksucker by questioning the competence of professional soldiers?

Posted by axe

What does questioning if they would write home have to do with questioning the competence of professional soldiers? Are you this fucking stupid everyday, or just every Feb. 29th?

Wisgod - Its because this story is about Drudge and in turn all conservatives. So not matter what Drudge did you can in no way defend it or try to mitigate his malice. To do so means you disagree with every liberal view point from the beginning of time and think the world is flat. Oh yeah your a racist and hate poor people.

Question, do the letters and e-mails soldiers write home get censored by the military? It happened in WWII I think and I would imagine you can't just write whatever you want home.

captainOface, no kidding. It's a good thing the NYT didn't break this story. People like Axe-hole wouldn't have anything to contribute.

Yes, the militatry sensors e-mails, and goes through packages being sent to the good boys in Iraq. Believe me, when I sent things to Iraq, most of the things are stollen.

MATT DRUDGE HAS A MICRO-PENIS!!!!!!!!!!!

I am absolutely disgusted that to obtain a "scoop" you felt you needed to let the world know that Prince Harry is (was) in Afghanistan. Whilst your guys are sitting on their backsides feeling good about yourselves and the advertising you get for this "scoop", which I might add everyone else (almost) managed to keep their mouth shut about is disgraceful.

It makes a mockery of the American Anglo relationship (which I for one could and would quite happily live without if this is the way your values go). The fact that you can live with yourselves for putting lives at risk is nothing short of pathetic - suggest you get a real job.

Beverly

MATT DRUDGE HAS A MICRO-PENIS!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Silence


***** DRUDGE RETORT EXCLUSIVE ******

You read it here first folks.

The prince is one man. The reason this got reported has to do with the media's obsession with celebrity and their insistence that what happens to celebrities is "news"

Who the hell cares?

If this gets us one step closer to removing all royalty from the planet, then I'm all for it.

Beverly,

I think you wanted to direct that at the Drudge Report and not this site (the Drudge Retort) which is not owned by Matt Drudge.

I've updated this story with the misdirected hate mail I've received, which continues to come in.

Contrary to my first opinion on this, I agree with Drudge's decision to report the story. If it was already in an Australian magazine and being reported by Germany's Bild newspaper, it wasn't a secret anymore.

Drudge could have ended up saving Harry's life -- and stopping a propaganda coup by the Taliban -- by reporting the story when he did. It wasn't going to stay secret, and could possibly have been known to terrorists already.

I don't know why, but the thought of people misdirecting hate mail intended for Matt Drudge to Rogers Cadenhead is really pretty funny. Maybe it's the unbeatable combination of ignorance and irony.

Drudge could have ended up saving Harry's life -- and stopping a propaganda coup by the Taliban -- by reporting the story when he did. It wasn't going to stay secret, and could possibly have been known to terrorists already.

Rogers, how sick did it make you to type out praise for Matty?

who the hell cares is right!!! daddy got his little boy home end of story.

Rogers, how sick did it make you to type out praise for Matty?

It's not that tough if I take anti-nausea medication beforehand.

Maybe it's the unbeatable combination of ignorance and irony.

----

I was thinking the same exact thing.

rcade,

What are you doing about the hate mail? Replying back or set up an auto reply stating you're not Matt Drudge and don't run the Drudge Report?

The emails aren't coming in with return addresses. They're posted through the News Tip box on the front page.

Rcade dont I get any credit for posting the same thing as you before you did? Come throw me a bone here.


***Member that would have been funny and thats kind of my point. If its already online its fair game.

The information was actually more dangerous to Harry if it remained obscure. Just think if a Taliban sympathizer saw it in online and passed the info to Afghanistan. The Army would not have known Harry was in danger.

Since Drudge put in on his sight it blew up and the Army reacted and pulled Harry out.

I think the information should have remained secret but Its not Drudge's fault it came out. It was already out.


Posted by captainOface at 2008-02-29 08:49 AM | Reply | Flag:***

**Contrary to my first opinion on this, I agree with Drudge's decision to report the story. If it was already in an Australian magazine and being reported by Germany's Bild newspaper, it wasn't a secret anymore.

Drudge could have ended up saving Harry's life -- and stopping a propaganda coup by the Taliban -- by reporting the story when he did. It wasn't going to stay secret, and could possibly have been known to terrorists already.

Posted by rcade at 2008-02-29 10:48 AM | Reply | Flag**

Pirate,

He is probably sitting there laughing his ass off reading them. I'd save them up and publish them in a book or something. Perhaps set up a page here and let us read them and get a little more ad revenue. I'd click thru an advert to get to that page!!

"The emails aren't coming in with return addresses. They're posted through the News Tip box on the front page."

I don't know how your News Tips feature works because I just post stuff to the blog, but the Drudge News tip feature says after you send stuff in, "Thank your for your story" or something like that. Can you make a screen saying something like "I am not Matt Drudge, etc".

I knew months ago he was headed to Afghanistan. This is from May, 2007

Have you read a paper *since* May 2007, RightIsRight? The British press wrote a lot of stories about Harry's unhappiness over not being allowed to serve in combat. He threatened at one point to quit the service over it.

For you to suggest now that Harry's combat duty *wasn't* a secret demonstrates an amazing blindness to the facts of a news story. Switch recently to decaf?

People are even leaving you nasty comments in your Workbook article thinking you're Matt Drudge, rcade.

Unbelievable.

It wasn't a secret. And if the Islamists wanted to do the Good Prince harm, would've been far easier to take him out at one of his many nights out in London pubs. If the English paparazzi are able to keep up with him whenever he's on his little island, seems he's better protected now, surrounded by American Special Forces and British SAS and field armor.

Again, your outrage is selective. Did you take MSNBC to task when they issued the story on his training in Canada, gearing up for his deployment there? Did you post a link to the article, and say that it was irresponsible for MSNBC to endanger the lives of Prince Harry and his men? How about anyone else on the DR?

What's more--doesn't your circulation of the story add to the danger? Why is it irresponsible journalism of the worst kind for Drudge to link to the information, but not you?

A few weeks ago some teenie-bopper from High School Musical had her nude photos posted on the internet by her boyfriend, and Geraldo Rivera did a short segment on what a jerk the guy was. Isn't Geraldo just as bad? LOL. You "journalists" are all the same. It's only when Drudge beats the world to the release, and the idea that he might be a conservative (or not--who really knows?) that gets you guys riled up.

MSNBC releases Prince Harry deployment info. Posts on the DR: zero.
Drudge Report releases Prince Harry deployment info. Posts on the DR: dozens.

In reference to Drudge - "Nor was he the first global outlet to reveal the story. The Australian women's magazine, New Idea is said to have published the story as early as January 7."

Maybe Rcade can forward them to Briwo. Would be good fodder for a web-based radio discussion regarding Lefties, and the Misdirected Politics of Hate.

I agree with Drudge reporting the story, RightIsRight. I said so in this discussion and in the article linked in this thread.

When I said it was a secret, I meant it was a secret *before* it got out to some of the press outside Britain. Your claim that it was never a secret at all is bogus. The British government intentionally tried to keep secret that he was serving a combat role in Afghanistan. Before Drudge's report, Harry was believed to be serving a support role (in the UK I think).

RiR - The point is Drudge was not even the first to post the story. He was third!

Rcade - your going to lose credibility with the wackos that come to this site. You cant have a common sense, logical, argument that adds support to Matt Drudge's actions...gasp, he didnt like the Clintons...ahhhhhh.

When I said it was a secret, I meant it was a secret *before* it got out to some of the press outside Britain. Your claim that it was never a secret at all is bogus. The British government intentionally tried to keep secret that he was serving a combat role in Afghanistan. Before Drudge's report, Harry was believed to be serving a support role (in the UK I think).

Posted by rcade
* * * *

Nope. I knew he was in Afghanistan. But maybe you're hung up on the word "secret". It's a secret that Israel has nuclear weapons, for example, but if you're ignorant of that fact, it's because of willful self-deception. It's also a secret as to how stealth technology works, how atomic bombs are made, and where Madonna's kids go to school. And it's all available at a local public library, or after a google search lasting 0.14 seconds.

the best part of the story is how the page title appears in my task bar....

Drudge Blew Prince Harry

Dont you know any defense on this site any argument against a "liberal" means you support a "conservative" and and defense of "liberal" means you support a "conservative." Just ask Boob..there is no other way. Its one or the other, regardless of topic, regardless of facts, regardless of anything else you may have ever said.

the best part of the story is how the page title appears in my task bar....

Drudge Blew Prince Harry

----

Funny flag!

"The point is Drudge was not even the first to post the story. He was third!"

Well, New Idea and Bild should suffer some repercussions for this. Harry's status as a royal somewhat aside, this needlessly endangered rank-and-file troops. It is the place of the media to report, but it is not the media's place to influence. At the point where reportage would actually begin to change the story, a responsible journalist would stop.

New Idea can probably be dealt with under Commonwealth law. Bild is not subject to British law, but it should find itself having a very difficult time doing business or gathering news within Britain itself.

To both those publications and Matt Drudge: WHAT PART OF LIFE-AND-DEATH DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?

P.S.: Rogers, your headline made me laugh. "Drudge Blew Prince Harry's Cover".

He probably did it because he can't blow Prince Harry.

Mary,
I dont think many are supporting the outing of Prince Herry's deployment. I think Drudge has been unfairly made the villain when all he did was link a German and Austrailian story that was a month old (Jan AU). The only reason some people are upset is becasue it is Drudge - and he represents all that they hate.

Isn't it also possible that someone in the British government - or even just his Grandmother - decided "OK, 2 1/2 months is enough. Leak it to the press so we can pull the plug and get him back home"?

Seems like a pretty plausible scenario to me.

Argh - I was actually thinking the same thing. Hopefully thats not true but it is plausible.

Again, your outrage is selective. Did you take MSNBC to task when they issued the story on his training in Canada, gearing up for his deployment there? Did you post a link to the article, and say that it was irresponsible for MSNBC to endanger the lives of Prince Harry and his men? How about anyone else on the DR?

We are at war with Canada? The Canadians are terrorist? I thought they were just free-loaders, go figure.

Typical Yank! If you are not killing British troops you are putting the lives of our Royal Family at risk. We are your only friends in the world right now. With friends like you who need enemy's. Give me the Russians or the Chinese any day. At least they would stab you in the front!!!!

Nope. I knew he was in Afghanistan.

Unless you can point to some evidence that he was in Afganistan before these stories, you knew nothing. You may have "suspected" that he was in Afganistan, but unless you are clairvoyant, you did not "know" hew was in Canada.

Couple of things here, first, the fact that Bild and the Aussie Womans magazine had reported on this story first was known yesterday when the story broke.

Second, the most amazing part of this story was the fact that the British Press managed to keep the story from reaching a broad audience for so long not that it finally broke.

Finally, perhaps Drudge was leaked this information in order to give Prince Harry a rationale for returning from the War Zone a hero.

Be Well.

/Drudge is still an asshole.
//Drudge Blew Prince Harry? Yeah, he wishes.
///Drudge isn't a journo he's a conduit.

"Drudge Blew Prince Harry's Cover" It's only because he wishes he blew Prince Harry. Harry was the goofy looking one when he was little, but he clearly grew up to be the hottie royal. Thank God Diana chlorinated that gene pool.

Maybe the NYT is rubbing off on him.

~KBM

Here's a fun factoid about the NYT.

In 1973 they did their traditional summing up of SCOTUS decisions made that year and managed to leave one of those decisions out.

A decision by the SCOTUS to not revive a paternity suit against then publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger.

Guess that one wasn't fit to print.

That was not the first nor the last time America's Document of Record commited a sin of omission.

People on the right who buy into the notion that the NYT is a solid Bastion of Liberal Journalism are simply not paying attention.

Be Well.

Drudge is a fucking Right Wing hack with no morals. But anyone who has read his blog already knew that. To put the life of the Prince an his men on the field at risk just to get a "SCOOP", is typical of the Press especially the Press with no concern for there reports, or what it may mean to the people involved.

Thank God that Drudge wasn't around for D-Day!!!!!

Celsary -
From Rcade
Contrary to my first opinion on this, I agree with Drudge's decision to report the story. If it was already in an Australian magazine and being reported by Germany's Bild newspaper, it wasn't a secret anymore.

Drudge could have ended up saving Harry's life -- and stopping a propaganda coup by the Taliban -- by reporting the story when he did. It wasn't going to stay secret, and could possibly have been known to terrorists already.

Posted by rcade at 2008-02-29 10:48 AM | Reply | Flag

Come on, folks, Drudge is irrelevant. He just posted a story that was already out in the public sphere. This just confirms two things; the first is that even though Drudge was the third "news source" (and I use that in the loosest sense in Drudge's case) to report the story, because he's an American he's seen as the most important or influential one - which is a farce in itself.

The second thing that is confirmed to me is exactly how cowardly the Bush family is. While a prince in the British royal family actively sought out front line service in Afghanistan the two Bush daughters are nowhere near serving in a war their father and country started.

That alone should tell you all you need to know about the character of the British people and all you'd want to know about Americans. Shame on Jenna and Barbara Bush, shame on the American public for not demanding they serve in their father's war.

"I dont think many are supporting the outing of Prince Herry's deployment. I think Drudge has been unfairly made the villain when all he did was link a German and Austrailian story that was a month old (Jan AU). The only reason some people are upset is becasue it is Drudge - and he represents all that they hate."

Cap'n:

I agree with you that Matt Drudge isn't the only culpable party here; the Aussie and German publications were first. But Mattie June was the one who gave the story real prominence, world-wide. I'm quite willing to bet that the Taliban reads him, too, which I think is a bit unlikely in the case of obscure women's mags from Down Under, though likelier when it comes to Bild.

I just wish that journalists of all stripes would consider the ramifications of their actions. Certainly, it's valuable when the press outs someone who's up to no good, and who should be called to account. But in this case, we had a royal who wanted to put rank and privilege aside, to fight alongside ordinary Britons. What the bloody Goddamn hell purpose was served by breaching the pool agreement, other than putting Harry's mates in the most appalling danger?

I wish horsewhipping weren't so frowned-upon today. It makes quite an impression. God knows we seem to be running out of other options with the irresponsible and the greedy.

Mary - "I wish horsewhipping weren't so frowned-upon today".

You can always waterboard.

I thought it was leaked to two news outlets, one German and the other Australian. Then Drudge picked up the story and ran with it because it was already reported before any of the bigger media outlets did. I'm very disappointed with the Drudge Report and there is no excuse revealing the Prince's location in combat. I don't care if smaller media outlets reported it before it appeared on the Drudge Report, there is just no excuse for it.

By having Prince Harry was a great morale boost for the British troops, he was great doing his mission, and he wanted to be there to fight along side his countrymen. He's a brave man, it's just too bad there are so many fame seekers in the media who can't keep their big mouths shut.

He's a brave man, it's just too bad there are so many fame seekers in the media who can't keep their big mouths shut.

THIS.

Agreed. Here's a question do you think Harry got pulled out of Iraq because of the Aussie woman's magazine article or the Bild article or because of Drudge?

Spud sez Drudge.

Be Well.

Heres a question of critical thinking you should all ask yourselves before you hang matt drudge.

Can you identify the platoon that the Prince is serving in?

Can you tell me within a 20mile radius where he is located?

If you truly put yourself in the mind of the prince hating terrorist, just what exactly has this news report done for you towards advancing that goal?

Couldn't we have really just expected he was serving "somewhere"? We already knew he was in the service, and that in all likely hood was going to be required to head to the middle east.

Like Condi rice would point out, there is a serious lack of actionable intelligence here... its not like terrorists can send in B52's into afghanistan to carpet bomb the prince out...

DethSpud, I think it was a combination of all three. I think Drudge got more attention because both the Germans and Australians have a higher sense of duty and personal responsibility. To them it's no surprise that Harry would be serving in active combat. In the US there seems to be a greater sense of "me first, the state a distant second" so when the son or daughter of someone in power serves their country in active combat it's much more of a surprise and, therefore, much more of a story.

Generico - I assume you were in the Peace Corps or the Military or maybe some other civic duty like a Vol Fireman? Just seems right given all your talk about Americans having no selfless nature that YOU would be an exception.

Oh..and for the record my wife was in the Peace Corp (Tonga) I was in the Military and I am a vol firefighter.

Generico: DethSpud, I think it was a combination of all three...

No doubt it ws but the Aussie rag and der Bild article have been out fer some time. It wasn't until Matt in the Hat made it a banner headline thingy that Harry got pulled. Maybe it's just me natural inclination towards despising Matt Drudge but Spud feels rather strongly that he deserves the Lion's share of the blame here.

Be Well.

Spud - What did you think of Rcade's opinion?

From Rcade
Contrary to my first opinion on this, I agree with Drudge's decision to report the story. If it was already in an Australian magazine and being reported by Germany's Bild newspaper, it wasn't a secret anymore.

Drudge could have ended up saving Harry's life -- and stopping a propaganda coup by the Taliban -- by reporting the story when he did. It wasn't going to stay secret, and could possibly have been known to terrorists already.

Posted by rcade at 2008-02-29 10:48 AM | Reply | Flag

Spud - What did you think of Rcade's opinion?

Spud thought the blog-god was being overly kind to Matt in the Hat.

Spud opined earlier that perhaps Matt (more a conduit than any kind of journo or blogga) was fed this information (alongside Bild and this Aussies womans mag) by folks in England (like the Royal Family or MI5) in order to give Harry a face saving way out of Iraq because the ten week gentlemen's agreement was already over-strained.

In which case he may have done a noble thing but for an ignoble reason.

...And that's the best case scenario fer Matt.

Worst case has Matt refusing to honour the gentlemens agreement purely out of an attempt to remain relevant and scoop his competitors.

Be Well.

Matt
you are my hero!
Can you tell where is Prince William serving?

matt drudge is a worthless piece of human excrement....however....

in this instance; if harry was recalled because of his report, he should be credited with saving the prince's life....

Anyone who thinks that info like this can be kept secret in the news environment we live in... is simply not paying attention...

Captainoface, I'm not an American and my duty to Queen and country are not at issue here. What is at issue is why your countrymen find it so incredibly newsworthy that Prince Harry is serving in a war zone? He's not the first royal to do so nor will he be the last so why the buzz?

Drudge didn't leak because Drudge doesn't write. There is no original reporting on this site. He just cuts and pasts links to the real leakers, and for that he gets all the credit/blame. Go figure.

Farken - that was my point but no one seems to care about that. There has to be a villain and who better than Matt Drudge.

notice that, unlike Drudge Retort, no comments can be made at Drudge site, and on entering it, it creates 2 spyware cookies

just a thought!

Okay I will amend my previous comments "may Matt Drudge, The Aus Magazine and the German Paper eternally fry in the deepest bowls of hell for what they have done"

There, that sorted that out. It is sad that Harry is having to be sent home cause of this, I am sure he is disappointed as will be his fellow troops, who by all accounts thought he was a good bloke. I am sure Dad, Grandpa, Uncle Andy and Lord Mountbatten (may he rest in peace) are proud.

PS) It is strange to me, that two countries (The UK and the US) who were once at war with each other, have since become the firmest allies that I think has ever been in history. I mean to be honest we Brits are not real good at the forgiving stuff, we still can't stand the French after 1066, and it's been a while you know? Talk to the Royal Marines about the battle of Gibralter and they will tell you what they think about the Spanish. The Italians, well WWII and all. The Germans, ditto. Why is it do you think, that our countries are now so closely alligned? I suspect (and I could be wrong) that this country for the most part was "seeded" (excuse the term from Mission to Mars) by the English (the lost colony and all), that there is still a strong tie on both sides of the pond. Just a thought.

Matt is the new Geraldo!

"Captainoface, I'm not an American and my duty to Queen and country are not at issue here. What is at issue is why your countrymen find it so incredibly newsworthy that Prince Harry is serving in a war zone? He's not the first royal to do so nor will he be the last so why the buzz?"

Generico:

It's because our own leaders either take great care not to end up in a war zone (Bush), or come back from one with highly suspect service records (damn near everyone else). You lot actually receive a bit of real service from your royals (at least the ones who aren't Heir Presumptive), which leaves us Yanks slack-jawed with wonder and admiration. Having a President who saw honest-to-God combat hasn't happened here since 1960.

I suppose it would have leaked out eventually and whoever printed it would be held up as the posterchild of irresponsible journalism. But let's face it, Prince Harry was the one ultimately responsible for compromising the safety of himself and the soldiers around him. He made the choice to go there against all advice to the contrary. I truly commend him for his bravery and patriotism but shake my head in disbelief that he would actually go there for something more than just a troop inspection.

"Matt is the new Geraldo!"

Not exactly. Could you imagine that pussy Drudge and his gay little hat getting anywhere close to Afghanistan?

That is true, Jomama

"It's because our own leaders either take great care not to end up in a war zone (Bush), or come back from one with highly suspect service records (damn near everyone else). You lot actually receive a bit of real service from your royals (at least the ones who aren't Heir Presumptive), which leaves us Yanks slack-jawed with wonder and admiration. Having a President who saw honest-to-God combat hasn't happened here since 1960."

Are you serious?

It's 1988, not 1960.

Bush 41 was awarded the DFC as a naval aviator in wwII.

Since 1960, there's been only one president to have zero military service in war time.

That would be William Jefferson Clinton.

Since 1960, there's been only one president to have zero military service in war time.

That would be William Jefferson Clinton

Babalouie FAILS.

Bush avoided the Vietnam war using his fathers connections.

Bush also avoided his NG service because A) He knew he could get away with it and B) His coked out drunkard ass woulda been deemed unfit to fly if he had shown for his physical.

Besides, Bush isn't really the POTUS he's the ma-child over in the corner playing with his bucket of toy soldiers while Cheney and his corporate minions decide policy.

And Cheney, as we all know, had 5 deferments and "other priorities".

Bush 41 has served and Spud respects that service.

Trying to make the same case for Dumbya is fucking laughable.

Be Well.

/The fact that BushCo now use the National Guard as an International military force is one of those sadly ironical bits of history.

I cannot believe you could be so irresponsible. Putting his life and the lives of those he fights with in danger. Funny how parents get wiser as you grow older. My Dad use to say..."you can't fix stupid" and he was right. As one mother to another and on behalf of his mother....SHAME ON YOU!!

RC -- Amazing how many people DON'T read the whole story. And misdirected anger hurts more than appropriately directed anger. At least the appropriate target can respond with a rationale -- what can the recipient of a wildly mis-targeted barb do? Just what you are doing -- call the barb tosser a fool and hope they figure out their mistake.

Babuenthal and Spuddie:

I stand corrected on Bush 41's war record; he did actually get his ass shot at. But everyone else since Kennedy (and yes, that includes Clinton) found some sort of safe haven during wartime, even if they wore a uniform. I had forgotten that Bush 41 served in WWII, but then I'm actively trying to forget as much about him and his misbegotten son as possible.

We just don't have a good track record for egalitarianism in this country, in spite of all our hollering about how "all men are created equal". The British, with their constitutional monarchy, often do a better job of leading by fookin' example than we do, which was my point.

MTW: The British, with their constitutional monarchy, often do a better job of leading by fookin' example than we do, which was my point.

Spud'll agree with that.

Well... provided that when talkin' about Brit's "leading by example" yer not also talking about tooth brushing and cuisine.

^_^

Be Well.

/Spud is an Anglophile, really.
//Lives in BRITISH Columbia, doncha know!

"I wasn't advancing the merits of anyones service, only that they served."

Babuenthal:

I'm glad you're not "advancing the merits of anyone's service", because Ray-Gun did special service in a motion picture unit in Hollywood, and Nixon was basically a supply warehouseman, albeit in the Pacific Theatre. Johnson was a Lieutenant Commander in the Naval Reserves for all of six months during WWII, as a desk jockey and observer. Carter was peacetime, and his Naval experience with nuclear subs did not extend to learning how to pronounce the word "nuclear".

The only two Presidents we've had since Ike who did anything halfway meritorious in wartime were Kennedy and Bush 41. That's a pretty pitiful record; out of the last forty-eight years of Presidents (counting from when Kennedy was elected to succeed Ike), we've had true combat vets in office for less than seven.

Why is it necessary to have a military man as President? Was Lincoln? FDR? Truman, for that matter (I really don't know). What exactly was Nixon's service? Thanks!

"Carter was peacetime, and his Naval experience with nuclear subs did not extend to learning how to pronounce the word "nuclear". "

Thanks for the Nixon tidbit. I'm reminded of the SNL when "Carter" saves a nucular meltdown and becomes 50 feet tall. Ah, the good ol' days.

At least these people served in some capacity Mary.

There's only one treasonous bastard president who protested an American war on foreign soil.

"At least these people served in some capacity Mary."

Serving "in some capacity" isn't enough, Bub. Ray-Gun spent WWII in a movie studio when other stars like James Stewart and Clark Gable served with the other grunts and got their celebrated asses shot at. Nixon was so far away from fire it wasn't funny. Johnson spent six months pushing paper, then got an honorable discharge because he was a legislator. And we all know how far away Dubya the Stupid was from 'Nam.

I'd personally like to see Federal law specifically removing all privileges of deferment and assignment for members of Congress and their immediate families in wartime. You go, you serve, and if a bullet has your number on it, you die, just like everyone else. We are supposed to be an egalitarian society- let's start fucking proving it.

And when someone runs for public office, his (or her) military record should be clearly honorable. That Bush got elected in spite of all the hinky places in his was the most absurd thing I've ever seen in a Presidential election. That a man who took such care to stay away from combat should become Commander-in-Chief made a mockery of what this country should be about. Clinton's deferments were bad enough, but Bush's blatant working of privilege? Feh.