A Bit Rich

Those privileged young rascals, "Prince" Harry amongst them, who got themselves into the papers last week, are complaining. Arthur Landon, whose US$350 million fortune derives from his father's arms trading, apparently sees no irony in accusing someone without an unearned blood-money fortune of "despicable" behaviour just because she took some pictures of his friend, whose fortune has a similar taint if you go back far enough, and sold them. Perhaps money making activities only cease to be despicable when people are killed as a result.

Apparently, it put "a real dampener" on their holiday, some of which they paid for themselves. How awful. I wonder how much of a dampener all those lovely arms caused.

And one Rosa Monckton, who prefers to use her maiden, peerage-linked name, and who has (perhaps not coincidentally) made something of a career out of being a "close friend" of Diana, the Latter Day Whore of Babylon "Princess" of Wales, "insisted" that the ginga Prince had done nothing “immoral or wrong”. Herself an offspring of a "viscount" and therefore by definition almost 'honourable', and again it seems with no intended irony, she told the Evening Standard: “His mother always thought that there should be a distinction between her private life and her public life" (except when being interviewed by the BBC and talking about Camilla) ...... "The same should apply to her sons, both of whom are serving their country." (that's funny, I didn't see them amongst the soldiers providing security at the Olympics. Weren't they both enjoying free tickets to the best seats?). "He isn’t married" (unlike his mother who was shagging his father, ginga James Hewitt, while married to "Prince" Charles). "He has the absolute right to privacy in his private time” (except when he is taking the taxpayer's money to do it).

Yes, Rosie, and you have the absolute right to get a bit of free publicity out of it yourself. (Or did you get a fee?)