Prince Harry is 'clearly broken' and 'distressed' by two different problems
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info
Prince Harry's recent bombshell interview with the BBC has sparked concerns about his wellbeing, as he appeared deeply troubled following his defeat regarding government-funded security arrangements. Royal commentator for Canada's CTV News, Afua Hagan, pointed out that the Duke of Sussex struggles to disentangle his family issues from those concerning his personal protection.
On True Royalty TV, Hagan remarked, "I don't think he can separate the issues with his family from the issues of security, because it's all tied up,".
During the emotional exchange, Hagan explained the royal's predicament, saying, "It is all the same thing. The reason why he is in the position he is now is because of the family, because he feels that they are instrumental in taking away that security from his nuclear family, from his immediate family."
While acknowledging Prince Harry's evident anguish during the interview, Hagan highlighted that the Duke did have some compelling points to make. "Like you said, Sarah [Hewson], he was clearly broken. He was clearly distressed."
Observing the Duke's struggle, the expert added, "You can see the toll that this has taken on him over the past five years, but there was also an element of him saying lots of the quiet parts out loud.", reports the Mirror.
Despite the intense nature of his revelations, Hagan suggested that, "And maybe he didn't deliver it in the best way, but he made some very, very good points."
Hagan has weighed in following Prince Harry's bombshell BBC interview last week, where the Prince shared concerns about his family's safety in the UK after a legal defeat.
In a startling revelation connected to his mother's passing, Prince Harry mentioned: "I don't want history to repeat itself - from the disclosure process I've discovered that some people want history to repeat itself, which is pretty dark."
Without naming individuals, Harry's words heavily suggest he was referencing the tragic fate of his mother, Princess Diana, who died due to a car accident in Paris in 1997 while paparazzi were in pursuit.
Prince Harry faces a dual crisis regarding his family and their security, struggles he finds challenging to disentangle as they have stirred familial conflict. Speaking to the BBC, the Duke of Sussex revealed that King Charles has ceased communication with him, stating plainly: "He won't speak to me because of this security stuff."
Despite the strains in their relationship, Prince Harry expressed a desire for resolution, particularly in light of his father's declining health: "Life is precious. I don't know how much longer my father has... but it would be nice to reconcile. I would love reconciliation with my family, there's no point in continuing to fight anymore."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Belfast Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Gerry Adams wanted to ‘put manners' on the BBC – but growing up the greatness of this TV was overwhelming
The BBC is 'The British Broadcasting Corporation', but nobody calls it that except Gerry Adams. Again and again, very deliberately, as he savours his triumph in the recent libel action against 'The British Broadcasting Corporation', he gives it the full official title — almost as if the 'British' part has connotations of inherent badness. He claims that his purpose in taking the action was to 'put manners' on this British Broadcasting Corporation. There were even suggestions — later denied — that the BBC would consider blocking the transmission of its programmes in the Republic of Ireland, rather than risk further exposure to the country's atrocious libel laws.
BBC News
4 hours ago
- BBC News
'We were friends of the US': Fearful Afghans face Trump travel ban
Ahmad has been hiding in Afghanistan for former Afghan military employee is living in fear of being found by the Taliban, which seized power in 2021 as US forces withdrew from the Central Asian a result, Ahmad is unable to get a job or access medical care, relying on donations from friends outside the country to survive. His son, 12, is unable to go to they are found, Ahmad says, the Taliban "will remove" hope had been refugee resettlement in the US, but - with just a medical check to complete - the process was put on pause by the Trump he hoped. Then, on Thursday he woke to the news that US President Donald Trump had issued a new order banning the entry of Afghan passport holders to the US, citing national security threats."I am not a threat to the United States," Ahmad told the BBC. The BBC is not using his real name because of concerns about his safety."We were friends of the United States," he added. Why are these 12 countries on the list?How nations have responded Everything else we know about the ban - so farTrump's new ban dodges pitfalls from last time, experts sayChad halts US visas in revenge for Trump travel ban Trump's sweeping travel ban came into force on Monday, blocking people from Afghanistan and 11 other countries, including seven from Africa, as well as countries like Haiti and Yemen, from entering the US. There are partial bans on seven other to the ban, Afghanistan was included because the Taliban are considered by the US government to be a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) group, and the country does not have "a competent or co-operative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents", or "appropriate screening and vetting measures". It also notes a relatively high rate of people overstaying their Trump administration has, however, recently dropped temporary protected status for more than 9,000 Afghans living in the US, arguing its assessments showed the security and economic situation in Afghanistan had those living in Afghanistan are faced with a series of restrictions brought in by the Taliban government in line with its strict interpretation of Sharia ones affecting women - including the enforcement of head coverings, restrictions on travel and education over the age of 12 - amount to a "gender apartheid", according to the United Nations. The Taliban says it respects the rights of women in line with Sharia and Afghan culture.A different UN report from 2023 found there were credible reports that hundreds of former government officials and armed forces members had been killed since the group returned to power in 2021, despite a general amnesty. The Taliban has previously said all Afghans could "live in the country without any fear" - and those abroad should come back and help rebuild the country."There is a general amnesty," Mohammad Suhail Shaheen, Taliban ambassador to Qatar, told the BBC earlier this year. "Countrywide security is prevalent in Afghanistan. Every citizen and traveller can travel to any corner of the country without any obstacles or any difficulties."There are exceptions to Trump's ban - including for Afghans who worked directly with the US military before the Taliban back took control of the country in Ahmad, whose application for resettlement was backed by a former US service member, does not qualify for a Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) because he did not work directly for the he is far from the only one. Trump to end protected status for Afghans Some 200,000 Afghans have been resettled since the US military's chaotic withdrawal, but there are still tens of thousands more waiting for a have fled across the border to neighbouring Pakistan to wait for a decision to be made on their who spoke to the BBC's Afghan Service, is currently in Pakistan - which has been expelling tens of thousands of Afghans in recent months. If the path to the US is closed to her, she is not sure what to do next."Returning to Afghanistan is not an option for us - it would be incredibly challenging," she said. "Our children have already lost years of education, and we have no hope of safely going back." More than 8,300 family members of US citizens are ready for an interview in Afghanistan, with more than 11,400 others awaiting family reunification, according to US Department of State data shared by who asked to be identified by his nickname, is one of the 200,000 Afghans who have already reached the US, because he worked directly for the US military. He is now a US sister, however, remains in Afghanistan where she and her husband are "living in a hide and seek game", he says. They change their address and city every couple months in order to stay passed the background and medical checks for refugee resettlement, but like the others who spoke to the BBC, they became trapped when the process was paused in latest order has made Mojo, who lives in Houston, Texas, and the rest of his family lose "all our hope completely" ."I wish that he would change his mind, make some exception, change the rules or take his order back and let people have a peaceful life," he said. Pakistan expels tens of thousands of AfghansAfghans hiding in Pakistan live in fear of forced deportationEx-US generals describe chaos of Afghanistan withdrawal The ban also affects Afghans who are not trying to reach the US for Ghafari is studying at Cornell University in New York state, but is currently in Germany for the summer with her young said she began a "frantic" race back to the US on Thursday in order to continue her studies, before the start of the travel ban on ban has put her under "immense pressure" and has made her feel "very vulnerable", the the 30-year-old former politician told the makes it worse, she said, was that she regularly had to return to Germany every few months to maintain her residency status there too. Describing her situation as "precarious", she said she worried about how she could make her regular trips to Germany when the travel ban VanDiver, of AfghanEvac, said the ban broke a promise Americans had made to Afghans over the 20 years they were in the country."This policy punishes people who escaped the Taliban, risked everything to support democracy, are already vetted, were told by the US government to wait," he wrote on social media platform X."They're not threats. They're our allies - and they're being left behind."Meanwhile, many of those still in Afghanistan have other problems to contend one Afghan man in Kabul told AFP news agency: "We don't even have bread, why are you asking me about travelling to America?"Additional reporting by Azadeh Moshiri and Gabriela Pomeroy
The National
4 hours ago
- The National
It's sad to see only 44% of the electorate using their hard-won votes
Sadly only 44% of the registered electorate was motivated enough to exercise their hard-won democratic right to cast a vote despite many having registered to vote by post. Down from 61% in 2021. The SNP gained 29% of the vote and only 13% of the electorate. Their share of the vote vote fell by almost half – from 46% in 2021. READ MORE: Furious Anas Sarwar clashes with BBC journalist over Labour policies A recent opinion poll indicated that 63% of Scots would back independence if the only other option was direct Westminster rule. 37% said they would back direct rule. Interestingly, those who voted Labour at last July's General Election are quite split on the issue, narrowly backing a return to direct rule by 51% to 49%. The same survey found that overall support for Scottish independence is at 54% but would this would rise to 58% if Mr Farage were to be in power. I hope over the next few days, weeks and not months the SNP leadership might reflect on the chasm of a 25% difference between the SNP vote of 29% at the by-election and the 54% who apparently want independence. Given there is a possibility of Farage becoming the next UK Prime Minister, the chasm widens to 29%. Only a few weeks ago John Swinney talked about securing 'demonstrable support' for independence and compared it to the 1997 referendum for a Scottish Parliament, which was backed by around 74% of Scots, before even attempting to moving forward on what is fast becoming a long, winding, very bumpy and uphill road to independence. READ MORE: SNP must turn support for independence into 'real political action' The gap between John's completely unrealistic 74% and the SNP's 29% by-election result is a whopping 45%. I suspect many of us, perhaps none of us, would live long enough to see that size of gap bridged. The SNP seem to have morphed into a party more interested in stopping Reform than starting independence. Tarring all current Reform voters (26% at this election) as right-wing (or worse) will do little to convert any of them into independence supporters at some point in the future. The SNP need to have a very radical strategy rethink long before the Scottish Parliament elections in May 2026. Brian Lawson Paisley SCROLLING though all the comment and 'hype' by all parties, following the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, the one thing hardly mentioned is electoral turnout. Those who turn up is the real test of the state of our antiquated first-past-the-post democracy and antiquated party politics. I am very grateful to your correspondent Xander Elliards for putting all the numbers up front mentioning turnout. With 44.2% turnout, the 'winner' got 14% of the of the possible votes. This makes our current electoral democracy a sham. A sham of democracy full stop. Also, and very importantly, a sham of party political behaviours in the name of democracy: the word politicians at all levels bandy about, with no understanding of or belief in what democracy should, or indeed could be in the 21st century. READ MORE: Ruth Wishart: SNP have to learn from shock defeat and re-focus on independence We are still largely using a 19th-century model where money largely buys seats, until occasionally people choose to rail against the corruption of money politics. Boundaries drawn on a map no longer represent how people live their lives, living in one constituency and working in another. 27,155 out of 61,485 people bothered to vote, compared to previous turnouts, where about 9000- 10,000 more people would normally vote. They didn't in a by-election. Why? By-elections don't make a difference? They don't. An assumed SNP victory? Laziness. Fed up with party politics? Disinterested. Not bothered even with the rise of the minority Reform UK party, which despite media hysteria, will remain – no pun intended – a minority party and never a government-maker under full, proper, much-needed proportional representation. Not the Mickey Mouse version the Scottish Parliament currently has. READ MORE: SNP 'demeaned themselves' with focus on Reform UK at by-election We assume we are different to England. The rise of Reform proves we are not. The social policy wins for the SNP, independence aside, have run out of steam, ie unfortunately they have been forgotten. The gains are increasingly squeezed, if not stopped, as global economic realities come crashing in, via Westminster priorities and cuts. Reform may well win regional seats during the coming Scottish Parliamentary elections as the Tory vote continues to implode, but they will never form a government. So re-focussing on social democracy and independence may be the only way forward. Time then for the SNP, Greens and Alba to stop playing party politics and work together and listen to those who are for independence but disinterested in their diversionary day-to-day party/personality politicking that does not serve the people. James J Paton Lerwick, Shetland Islands THE message for John Swinney from the Hamilton by-election result: If you don't put independence as the SNP's #1 priority and talk about the benefits of being independent, you are going to lose the 2026 election. Can it be any clearer! Colin T Largs
