All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Jan. 11, 2023 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
47:13
20230111_piers-morgan-uncensored-harry-v-the-british-press
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Harry Exposes Media Lies 00:14:50
Tonight on Piers Morgan Uncensored, Harry's truth exposed as a pack of fibs.
The prince has gone nuclear on the British media's lies, so I'm going to call out every single one of his.
Harry and Megan's infamous claims on Abra Winfrey saw the royal family condemned as a bunch of racists.
Now they say we didn't mean that, and it was all, of course, the fault of the British press.
So did they or did they not accuse the royals of racism?
We'll settle that debate once and for all.
Plus, Harry calls himself a feminist, married to one of the world's biggest feminists.
And yet in his book, he slates women as greasy, loathsome toads and villains.
Who's Harry now, the Duke of Toxic Masculinity?
She was the villain.
That made her dangerous because of the connections that she was forging within the British press.
Pat wasn't hot.
Pat was cold.
Pat was small, mousy, frazzled.
And her hair fell greasily into her always tired eyes.
Live from London, this is Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Well, good evening from London.
Welcome to Piers Morgan Uncensored.
First, Harry told us his truth.
Now he's telling us his truth about his truth because he says we're not telling the truth about his truth.
Can you follow that?
Well, last night, the Prince of Grievance continued his trashing tour with a nauseating appearance on Malay show.
I found it nauseating.
A lot of people may have enjoyed it.
Viewers who are seething about his shabby assault on his family and his ever-changing story should maybe reach for the seat buckets.
Thank you for bringing in the crowd.
Well, the host went on to mock the Corgis.
He pulled him a couple of tequila shots.
They sort of took the Mickey out of British pomp and ceremony.
And then Harry launched into his favourite subject, which of course is, well, it's two favourite subjects, isn't it?
One is trashing his family.
The other one's trashing the evil British press, of which I have been a leading member for many years.
And once again, Harry wants to convince you that what you have seen with your own eyes and heard with your own ears, you haven't actually seen and heard.
Without doubt, the most dangerous lie that they have told is that I somehow boasted about the number of people that I killed in Afghanistan.
My words are not dangerous, but the spin of my words are very dangerous.
Dangerous because it makes you an increased target, those around you that you love.
That is a choice they've made.
Yeah, actually, Harry, the choice was yours.
You chose to reveal the number of people that you killed in Afghanistan.
You chose to describe them as chess pieces removed from the board.
And it was military leaders and servicemen, some of whom served alongside you, who lined up to condemn your choice as undignified and dangerous.
Never mind what I have to say about this, although my brother is a recently retired British Army colonel and my sister married an army colonel.
But another colonel, Tim Collins, a British war hero, accused Harry of turning on his military family.
He called it a tragic money-making scam.
Is he, too, a dangerous spinner?
Or is he calling it as many people in the military see it?
Well, Harry told People magazine that he had made that boast for his own healing journey.
There's not much healing in this book, is there?
A lot of hurt being thrown at people at Buckingham Palace.
Last night he said it was his intention when he revealed the number of people he killed of the Taliban to reduce the number of suicides amongst military veterans.
But he never mentioned that as the reason why he was talking about this in his book.
Could it be that he's now putting a spin on his own words because of the backlash?
And as for lies, and he's very, very hot on accusing the British press of lying.
Well, Harry's book, it turns out, is chock full of little porkies.
But first, this is what Harry has to say about the importance of accuracy.
Yes, I have actually watched the crown.
Oh, yeah.
Recent stuff or the older stuff?
The older stuff and the more recent stuff.
Yeah.
Do you fact check it while you watch it?
Yes, I do, actually.
Which, by the way, by the way, another reason why it's so important that history has it right.
Yeah, I couldn't agree more.
Very important that history has it right.
So in the interests of history, we've done some fact-checking ourselves with the help of other journalists around the world.
Harry writes glowingly, for example, about his distant grandfather, King Henry VI, who founded Eton College.
But actually, King Henry's lineage ended when his son died as a childless teenager.
Harry says he can't remember anything from his early childhood, but he does miraculously remember his father calling him a spare shortly after his birth.
He says he got an Xbox for his 13th birthday, four years before Xboxes existed.
He vividly describes receiving a phone call while he was at Eton to break the news of the Queen Mother's death.
But the problem is he was in Switzerland skiing with his family when it happened.
He describes urging Meghan's father Thomas to fly to Britain to escape the media, which is confusing because it's of course the British press who are the rabid devils.
In that case, we told him, leave Mexico right now.
A whole new level of harassment is about to rain down on you.
So come to Britain.
Now, Air New Zealand.
First class, booked and paid for by Meghan.
Yeah, problem is Air New Zealand doesn't even offer first class tickets from Mexico to the UK.
In fact, it doesn't offer flights at all from Mexico to the UK.
But Harry's big lie, the tallest tale of a lot and the most damaging, is of course the claim that he and Megan never accused the royal family of racism.
The way the British press reacted to that was fairly typical.
Neither of us believed that that comment or that experience or that opinion was based on racism.
Really?
Yeah, not buying it, I'm afraid.
If that's the truth, Harry, why did both of you allow almost two years of this kind of coverage?
Just the fact that there is, according to both of them, this ongoing blatant racism, not only in the UK taboo press, but in the family.
Megan spoke about the racism she faced from inside and outside the institution.
She said there were concerns about the colour of their sun's skin.
It suggests that the institution, the people within it, working and as royals, are in some way racist.
Her own family thought differently of her.
Racism, a new construct in this world for people of colour.
So it wasn't a complete surprise to hear her feelings.
And just to remind everybody, in December, Harry and Megan flew to New York to receive an award from the Kennedy Foundation for their, quote, heroic stand against structural racism in the royal family.
Think about that for a moment.
An award for something they now say they never said.
There was no racism.
It was the evil British press that made it all up.
Well, the inference of those comments to Oprah Winfrey was crystal clear.
I'll play the clip again in a moment.
The result was emphatic and predictable.
Harry and Megan could have put a stop to this racism charge at any moment in the last two years.
All it would have taken was a short statement to clarify that's not what they meant or a few seconds of reflection in any one of their many hours of podcasts, documentaries, and multiple television interviews.
But they didn't, did they?
They let the whole world believe the royals were racist.
And now they say that's not what we meant.
Well, Harry's a big fan of healing, trauma, personal journeys and therapy.
I'm sure he knows what gaslighting is.
If he doesn't, Megan can tell him.
It's when you lie and spin to trick people into questioning their own sanity and reasoning.
And that's what this is, isn't it?
He's trying to gaslight all of us into believing his truth.
And that what comes out of his mouth and his wife's mouth is not actually what comes out of their mouths.
And that's the problem, isn't it?
When you choose your own version of the truth.
Anyway, we'll get into all this tonight and we're going to have people who don't agree with me, which is always the best place to start, I think, with a debate.
I'm joined by the Black Lives Matter activist, Iman Aiden, and the author and friend of Prince Harry and former Rugby International, James Haskell.
Well, we could both of you.
James, if you're sitting very patiently there, listening to me tear into your mate, am I wrong?
I've never seen you in full flow, actually.
It's quite terrifying.
I was wondering what's going to happen if you got a bit shouty and I was trying to think, am I articulate enough?
Am I intelligent enough to take Piers Morgan on?
Well, I have seen you in full flow in a rugby field and you have another way of dealing with me.
That's what I feel like.
So I think on this banner, I'll keep you just...
I thought violence could be the answer.
Click where it will go to the roof.
And look, I think it's interesting because obviously you're very invested in the story.
I think there's a lot of people.
Well, I'll tell you, before you go anywhere, I just want to say the reason I'm so personally invested, I think people know why, is because I queried a lot of these things at the time.
And I, for example, when the Oprah exchange with Megan Markle about racism was played, we'll play it now so you can remind yourselves, and I'll tell you what then happened.
Let's watch this.
And also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he's born.
What?
About how dark your baby is going to be?
Potentially, and what that would mean or look like.
Hold up, hold up.
There are several.
There are several conversations.
There's a conversation with you.
With Harry.
About how dark your baby is going to be?
Potentially, and what that would mean or look like.
Ooh.
And you're not going to tell me who had the conversation?
I think that would be very damaging to them.
Okay.
Compartmentalized.
I'm concerned that if you were to brown, that that would be a problem.
Are you saying that?
I wasn't able to follow up with why, but if that's the assumption you're making, I think that feels like a pretty safe one.
Here's the thing, James.
The morning after that aired, on Good Morning Britain, I came out fighting.
And I said, I just don't believe that.
I don't believe a senior member of the royal family would have expressed concern that if the baby's skin colour was too dark, that would be a problem.
And I wanted to see the evidence.
I also said that when she talked about having suicidal thoughts and then said, she went to the palace, spoke to officials and they said she couldn't get help for it.
I said, I just can't believe that conversation has happened.
I want to see the evidence.
For two years, no evidence emerged.
It's not in his book, either of those things.
They don't appear in the book of his life.
And now he just casually says, well, we never meant it to be racism.
That was the evil British press.
Now, look, I get why he hates the press.
I get it.
He thinks the press killed his mother.
I think a drunk driver killed his mother.
And I think that she was obsessively followed by the paparazzi and too much so.
And I've always said that.
But ultimately, the inquest determined it was a drunk driver was the predominant cause of her death.
But he hates the press because he believes that the press conspired to kill his mother.
So I get why he feels the way he does.
But that doesn't give him license to brand his family a bunch of racists.
Allow two years of this kind of onslaught headline.
So damaging to the royal's reputation.
And you know, like you do a podcast with Mike Tyndall, you know, you know how they all feel about this.
And then to just to casually say, we didn't mean that.
Yeah, look, I think.
But I put it like that.
Does part of you think, even though you're a mate?
No, look, I think I'm always very objective about everything.
You know, just as people would accept my friends to be objective about me, you know, I don't get things right all the time.
I saw the documentary and I've read only a little bit of the book because I only got it the other day.
And I'm a slow reader, as you imagine, me rubber flare.
And, you know, one of the things I've felt as a Zed list celebrity, right, is incomparable to someone like Carrie.
I understand how the media aren't always held accountable.
They can take things and put their interpretation on it.
Part of the stuff that he talked about in his book, because the manuscript was stolen, and a lot of this sensationalist stuff, because it was so out there, was taken out of context.
Yeah, but hang on, I've read it all.
Yes.
I literally spent six hours on Tuesday reading the whole thing.
Precisely as I can see things in context.
The point about the Taliban revelation, for example, was twofold.
One, the British Army guy, they just don't put a number on it in public.
They might to each other.
No, I agree with that.
They don't do it in public.
You know that.
You've spoken to enough of them.
Secondly, dehumanizing the enemy to a bunch of chess pieces.
That, again, is not something they do in public.
They might in the bar.
Yeah.
But they know that there is a certain code that comes with being a British Army either officer or one of the troops.
And you don't cross that line.
I mean, I think, look, you're looking at kind of the intention with the particular details.
Well, I'm talking more as an overarching view of saying when someone is in his position, more often than not, the belief from being part of the royal family was never complained, never explained, never comment about anything.
Right.
Firstly, we've got to break this idea that they're not just a normal family because they absolutely are.
Dysfunctional, normal family that everybody has.
Well, they're not a normal family.
Well, but no.
Because they live in palaces.
They do loads of service.
And the British taxpayer pays for it.
But they don't pay for you and me.
No, but when they scrape that away, they are simply still humans.
I know people think they're not religious, so I don't believe that people are gained by the people.
So if you take that to a point, and in his position, you very rarely get to tell your story without people, a journalist interviewing me.
So you and I are on TV today, right?
This could be edited up and bits of it could be altered.
Or if you were doing a written interview, your interpretation is written out, not what I actually said.
So I feel that he has written this book as a way of going, look, irregardless of what happened, this is what I feel.
And I'm not saying whether it's true or not.
I've got no comment.
I don't really care, to be honest with you.
But I'm saying he's put this out there to go, this is my version.
I finally got an opportunity to speak.
Now, whether he should have spoken, what he said was right or wrong, that's another story.
I just feel that people in that position don't often get to tell a story.
And I think he's done it in a way that most of his peers and most of his family have never had the opportunity to do.
Unconscious Bias in Speech 00:14:56
And I think for me, that's important because it cannot be misinterpreted or shouldn't be misinterpreted.
Let me tell you what would happen if they all did what he's done.
The monarchy would die away.
I agree.
The mistake would go.
Agreed.
They would become a real-life soap opera, right?
It would be utterly catastrophic for the reputation of the royal family and the monarchy if all they did was throw mother at each other in public.
And the monarchy would die.
One of the last surviving monarchies is it is.
But I think interestingly, in his particular situation with what happened to his mother, for example, right?
And again, you know, in your own words, you said, look, you know, was she hounded to the nth degree?
Yes.
And do you see what happens with the royal family, for example, that the zeitgeist of how popularity goes.
One minute, one of them is the best thing since life's bread.
The next minute.
Yes, but that's why they have to play the long game.
I mean, the Queen Mother was a great example.
She never gave an interview, nor did the daughter of the Queen.
She was absolutely of the mantra, never complain, never explain, because she just thought over time, it all balances out.
You get the great stuff, we've had the jubilee stuff.
But I think in the modern world.
And you get the negative stuff.
But I think, sorry to interrupt you.
But in the modern world, right, when they were sort of, when she was reigning and when the Queen Mother was alive, you didn't have social media, you didn't have instant comments, you didn't have 24-hour news.
That is a new feature.
And the problem is, if you...
I don't think it matters.
Well, I think it does because the way it spreads and the nature of things like trolling, you cannot get the truth out there.
So, for example, I follow you on Twitter.
You know, I'm a big fan of what you do in lots of parts, but you're very defensive of yourself.
So, when someone questions you, you will come out and tell the truth.
But I'm a journalist.
I'm not a member of the author.
No, no, but he is also a human that I think has to do with the world.
I get that he's put up with a lot of rubbish.
So, just as you would defend yourself, I would defend myself.
The difference is what he does now actually has some weight.
Because when, for example, if you wrote an article about me in the paper and it was wrong, and I got an apology, it's page 37.
If I did a video on social media after that you made a me head front page article, maybe 20 people see it.
He has now put like a flagpole or a mark in the ground to say, this is my truth, this is my story.
Now, you can debate it to the end of the degree whether that's factually correct, but I think that's just important for him.
Let me bring him on.
Look, you know, it's good to have a friend of Harry on to give the other side of it.
And I know that I'm sure a lot of his friends feel that way.
My issue really is about this incendiary racism charge, because to me, it was very clear what they were saying in that Oprah Winfrey interview.
There was no ambiguity on that.
And I had a vested interest because I queried it.
And as a result of querying it, I lost my job, right?
And as a result of Sharon Osborne supporting my right to just have an opinion, she lost her job for backing a racist sympathiser, me.
Because I wouldn't believe these allegations that made me a racist.
So I do feel personally invested in this.
You and I have debated this issue of race in the royals before.
What do you make of this?
It's an extraordinary climb down.
I know, right?
I have to preface my statement by saying this.
So I watched you yesterday and the day before.
I watched you be gaslit by two ignorant black women.
I actually felt quite sorry for you.
So I want to say, welcome to the club, Piers Morgan.
How does it feel to be gaslit when claiming something is racism?
How does it feel?
It's annoying, right?
It's annoying.
It's very annoying.
I saw your face.
I don't mind, Richie.
I don't mind.
I can take it.
I'm a big boy.
I don't mind it.
What I do like, I like getting to the truth.
Yes.
Which is not my version of it.
It's not Prince Harry's.
It's not Meghan Markle's.
It's not even your version of the truth.
Truth should be sacrosanct.
And it seems to me we've moved from the royal family were racist about the skin colour of our baby to we never meant to say anything about them being racist.
Yes.
And I'm sorry, you can't do that and let that hang there for two years with all of them under suspicion.
So that was never the issue.
So I'll just make it nice and clear.
They made a claim of racism because the statement itself is racist.
They knew it then.
They know it now.
And they also knew how it was going to be perceived.
And I just want to touch on this point in terms of this racism versus unconscious bias issue, if you wouldn't mind, Piers.
So what Harry tried to say is that in order to stop your unconscious bias from manifesting into racism, you have to be anti-racist, right?
So that equation that he offered is accurate.
He just made a mistake in terms of how he explained it and he contradicted himself in the process.
So I just want to make this clear for all of your viewers and for yourself and for your lovely self as well.
Unconscious bias is a feeling or an inclination that you didn't know you had.
So it's a feeling.
But you have to start at the top of the equation.
So number one is prejudice.
Prejudice is based on thought.
That comes first.
Bias is based on feeling.
That comes second.
Racism is based on behavior, behavior as a result of your thoughts and feelings.
That comes last.
So the minute the individual vocalized their concern about Archie's skin colour, it was no longer.
Let me just finish.
We don't even know that.
Hold on, let me just finish, but let me just finish.
The minute it was vocalized, and I agree with that, I'm not disputing on that point, I'll get to that point.
The minute it was vocalized, it was no longer a thought, which is prejudice.
It was no longer a feeling, which is biased.
It became a behavior.
And a behavior is racism.
So therefore, if we take obviously what they said literally, that person was being racist.
Right, so here's my problem with all this.
I don't disagree with anything you just said, right?
That's a perfect description of where we are with all the nuance.
If you agree with everything, there will be lots of people who don't even know what unconscious bias means, right?
So to have it explained is useful for this debate because he talks about it a lot now.
But you can also be an unconscious idiot.
Yes.
And I think this is where I would lay the charge at Harry.
He may not have even realized what they were getting into here.
But remember, she said that these comments were made when she was pregnant.
He said it was when they just got together.
That's a two-year gap.
They couldn't even get the year right that these comments were supposed to be made.
We never got told who was supposed to have said them.
We never got told the context.
Not a word of it appears in his book.
And I'm sorry, I'm as cynical today as I was the morning after.
And it may have cost me my job, but I have not seen a shred of evidence that any member of the royal family was racist about their baby.
Not a shred.
And now it looks to me like they've climbed down completely and hope we all just move on and forget it.
Okay, so what I will say is I will happily and humbly accept the defeat when it comes to them being called liars.
They have proven themselves to be liars.
However, you're a Black Lives Matter activist.
Is it not incredibly damaging to the cause of trying to get rid of racism in society?
And I don't think Britain's a racist country, but we still have racists in it.
That in our efforts to try and expunge this country of all racism, it's not very helpful when the sixth in line to the throne throws a race grenade, and his wife does, at the royal family, and it turns out not to be true.
Well, I have to say, so like I said, I will concede that they are liars.
However, it does not negate the fact that Harry was bullied and harassed by the media.
It does not negate the harmony.
Actually, he talked about it.
What about his own bullying and harassment?
I'm not disputing that point.
I'm just saying it does not negate the fact that he was bullied and harassed.
It does not negate the fact that his wife had to contend with racism and it does not negate the fact that he has the right as an individual to defend himself when he feels aggrieved.
Don't throw the baby out of the bathworld.
This is the second time I've told you.
No, no, I don't mean it.
He absolutely has the right.
The question is.
And can I just touch on the point of evidence?
Because you've said it so many times, and it's only a valid point I have to make.
Forgive me.
Thank you very much, Piers.
So, in terms of the evidence, you're right.
Don't overdo it.
No, Because you don't ever give me a chance to speak.
It's way too friendly for my liking.
If you give me a chance to speak, and I'm very grateful.
I would give credit to speak.
Come on, get on with me.
Right, thank you.
So, in terms of the evidence, right?
We already know that they have backpedaled.
We already know that they didn't disclose certain bits of information pertaining to the racism claims.
However, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
So, when in doubt, rely on the balance of probability.
What is the likelihood that an institution steeped in centuries of colonialism and oppression of others, including the Irish, Welsh and Scottish nations, could continue to perpetuate racism?
I'm afraid that.
If we look at the fact that Queen Elizabeth banned black people from having jobs in the 1960s within the institution, that is institutionalized racism.
Tottenham Hospital.
It's very clear.
Tottenham has likely pierced.
Tottenham Hospital won the league in 1961.
They've never won it since.
Arsenal are playing them on Sunday.
They're very unlikely to win it again.
My point being, you can go back to anything in history and say, something happened then.
They're going to do it again.
What if, what if, whatever, whatever.
James, you've written a great book.
It's called Approach Without Caution.
I think I would approach you with caution.
You're a massive unit.
It's the five-step plan to take control of your life.
Looks like Harry could do with reading this.
Well, when you said, please, James, come on my show and boost my ratings.
I thought you were going to plug the book.
We're talking about Harry.
My book's way more interesting.
It's all factually been checked as well.
No, look, what's the central point?
Because everyone thought about the point about this, particularly in this case, I think it's great for, you know, some causes are worth fighting for, some aren't.
I think, especially in 2023, everyone's got to worry about everyone else's business.
Everybody is after everyone else.
Everyone's got a comment, very judgmental.
And I think if you're on a path of self-development, which everyone should be, stop looking over the garden fence at what other people are doing.
You know, we're very critical of other people.
We comment, we get, you know, like I've seen you interview lots of people who partly pseudo-crusades, gluing themselves to motorways and doing whatever, thinking they're making a profound difference.
Because a lot of the time it's an excuse for not looking at their own deficiencies and how they can improve themselves.
And I think for me, I wrote a couple of other books, and one of the themes that came out of it was I've had many pitfalls.
Some of you were involved in.
Is it too late to say sorry?
No.
On live or TV, I'm going to cut up and send it to my mum because she's not a big fan.
But I'm sorry, sorry to your mum.
Yeah, that's right.
As soon as you have Piers Morgue was very sorry.
He got into a scrape at school.
I was editor of the mirror.
We ran it.
His mum was furious.
It's never too late to apologise.
I'm sorry.
Now we're best of friends everywhere.
He's going to put my book at number one.
But I think a lot of the idea is about taking charge.
And some of the feedback I got from the books was how I dealt with the misfortunes, pressure, success, and failure, dealing with the media, and also some of the stuff around cancel culture and stuff like that.
You know, the example that you've seen when you lost the job at GMB, how people are so rattled about things.
But if you were to look at those people individually and go, look, are you better coming after peers?
Are you probably worried about getting yourself healthier, fitter?
More successfully.
And so some of the goals are.
Well, I'm in a new year, new peers thing at the moment.
No alcohol, eating healthily, working out all the time, shredding the weight, getting the guns going.
That's that's the thing.
So I'm gonna the next phase of new peers, new year, you peers, is this.
Read it.
I'm gonna go and read this.
And I've heard good things about it.
I think you I like the podcast you do.
Thank you.
And it's great to see you.
And you haven't hit me, so we can move on now.
Yeah.
And there's a new spirit of cooperation.
Even you'll be nice to me.
All very discombobulating.
Thank you very much.
James Haskell, Approach Without Caution: The Five-Step Plan.
Take control of your life.
Excellent, excellent book.
I'm told by those who've read it.
I haven't read it all yet.
Well, next tonight, Harry claims to be a feminist, married to one of the world's leading feminists.
He trashes Camilla, mocks a disabled matron, whacks his sister-in-law.
Feminist?
Spare me.
Welcome back to Piers Morgan.
My younger brother just messaged me to say that I was actually on holiday when that James Haskell story ran in the Daily Mirror.
He remembered it.
So I'm off the hook.
So I may have to withdraw my apology to Mrs. Haskell, the mum.
But actually, I'll take responsibility because I take accountability.
When you're the boss, you're the boss, right?
So I'll take that on for the team.
Well, Prince Harry says he's a feminist.
So in his own words, here's how he talks about women from his mother-in-law to the disabled matron at his school.
You wrote, I even wanted Camilla to be happy.
Maybe she'd be less dangerous if she was happy.
How was she dangerous?
Because of the need for her to rehabilitate her image.
That made her dangerous.
That made her dangerous because of the connections that she was forging within the British press.
I want to sort of just briefly talk about your stepmother and press because you are pretty consistently scathing and suggest that you are.
Scathing?
Well, scathing towards well, as in you say that your interests were sacrificed on her PR altar.
I think in the book, it's very clear what happened.
There's no part of any of the things that I've said are scathing towards any member of my family, especially not my stepmother.
Unlike the other matrons, Pat wasn't hot.
Pat was cold.
Pat was small.
Walking was hard.
Stairs were torture.
She'd descend backwards, glacially.
Often we stand on the landing below her doing antique dances, making faces.
Do I need to say which boy did this with the most enthusiasm?
We went on mocking her as she came down the stairs.
The reward was worth the risk.
For me, the reward wasn't tormenting poor Pat, but making my mates laugh.
Who the hell is this editor?
Loathsome toad, I gathered.
Everyone who knew her was in full agreement that she was an infected posture on the arse of humanity.
Plus, a excuse for a journalist.
Now, that editor happens to be a good friend of mine.
And yeah, not a nice way to speak about a woman, right?
Especially someone who gets so uptight when people use that kind of language about his wife.
Well, joining me now is journalist and friend of Camilla, Petronella Wyatt, the son's royal photographer, friend of everybody, Arthur Edwards, and the journalist and historian Dr. Tessa Dunlop.
Arthur, let me start with you, because you've covered the royals for longer than I've been alive.
Not quite.
Sorry to jump that one on you.
Nearly 40 years, Brilliant.
Nearly, nearly.
But you've known them all very, very well.
What do you make of this, this book, and the interviews around it?
Well, I'm disgusted with what he said about Camilla because she is just the nicest person.
And, you know, when she married the prince, he risked everything for that.
There was a lot of hostility towards him over that.
But you know what?
She just got her head down, worked and worked and worked.
And I remember those early jobs with her.
She was so nervous.
But she kept trying, trying, trying.
And in the end, people got to love her because they found what a really nice person she is.
And Harry just trashing her like that.
I was so...
I really wanted to smack him one.
You know, I thought it was an awful thing to do.
She's been nothing but nice to him.
I remember once when he, I think it was 2017, and he made some stupid mistake, a statement about he didn't want to be a member of the royal family anymore.
And I remember talking to her about it the next day.
She said, you know, he's such a lovely boy.
Camilla, all she said was how nice he was.
You know, speaking.
Listen, I've known Camilla a long time.
She comes from the next door village to me.
I've known her a long time in her family.
They're incredibly nice people, very down-to-earth, very normal.
I had lunch with her at this now infamous lunch with Jeremy Clarkson before Christmas.
She was utterly delightful to everyone.
And I don't think she deserves this.
No, no, I'm right.
To be called a dangerous villain by Prince Harry as we head towards a coronation where her and Charles are going to be crowned, our king and queen of this country.
I just felt was so damaging and unnecessary.
Tessa, defend it.
I just would like, as it's all about truth and accuracy, I'm not sure he called her a dangerous villain.
He called her a villain and dangerous.
No, he explained that she was the villain of the peace because she was the other woman.
Slightly taken out of context, in fact, that line.
Camilla's Dangerous Villain Label 00:03:30
But he knows what he's writing.
He knows when he writes those things, that'll be the headline.
You're crediting him with high intelligence.
And I think Harry has many things.
No, I don't think he's stupid, actually.
I don't think anyone would accuse him of her.
I think he has high EQ.
I think he's got a high ego.
And we're seeing the full blast of it right now.
What about the way he generally talks about women?
Can we just pick up on the Camilla thing and what you two have both said, that she's charming, that she's the woman next door, literally, for you, the village next door, that she does have this very natural way.
She's comfortable in her skin.
She fits in.
She gets on with it.
She loves a gin.
She loves a fag.
We all love Camilla.
Do you know, when that replaces your dead mother and when you feel like an outsider, there's umbrage there.
Yeah, but sure.
There's a feeling.
But hang on, but hang on.
His mother died in 1997.
We're now 2022.
He's nearly 40 years old.
All right.
There comes a time, it's 2023.
There comes a time when you just have to not move on and forget your mother, but actually accept your father's very happy with a woman.
He's been married to you for 17 years.
Why would you try and ruin her reputation in the run-up to the coronation?
I think there's probably aspects of jealousy where she has managed to rehabilitate her image.
And interestingly, she's done that in Britain.
She hasn't successfully done that in other realms or indeed within the Commonwealth where things are on much thinner ice.
She hasn't been given a chance.
No, it is, therefore, his point stands, Reed, that this it is about her ability to work alongside the press, of which both of you two are significant players.
Sure.
So that point stands.
Now, as for his relationship with his stepmother, only they know the real truth, don't they?
And we're only hearing what we're doing.
We're never going to hear Camilla's side.
Camilla has other things to put in.
No, no, Camilla, she will never respond to any of this.
That's why I feel sorry for all the roles because they're trapped now with this hand grenade going on.
The thing is that Camilla had to endure such vicious attacks from the press and a level of violence from the public that Megan never did.
It was never even close.
I remember when Camilla had bread rolls thrown at her.
She knew it was not true.
Well, she says it's not true.
Maybe it wasn't, but there was, she really was, at one point, the most hated woman in Britain.
And Diana, who was much cleverer at the press and was younger and more beautiful.
Well, Diana learned to work with the media.
I mean, she used to work with me.
Exactly.
Diana used to ring me up and brief me about stuff.
But the point is that Camilla never complained.
No.
She never schemed.
I mean, I've known her since I was young.
She's incapable of...
Let me ask you on a wider point about the way that he talks about other women in this book.
And in particular, not just taking down his sister-in-law, which he does.
I mean, revealing text messages after his wife sues a newspaper for revealing contents of a letter from her father, the brass neck of Harry to then reveal text messages without the consent of Kate in his book to make money.
Yes, but what struck me is the tawdriness of the book, the sexual aspects, which you might have.
Mounting older women behind the pipe.
You won't expect that from a reality TV star.
Even the Kardashians would edit it.
No, but you don't expect it from the royal family.
And it is very sexist.
It's very disagreeable.
And the stuff about this poor matron, Pat Jones, she has a name, Pat Jones.
Tawdry Royal Book Critique 00:06:29
She was the matron at Love Grow School.
He calls her greasy.
He calls her ugly.
None of the boys got horny when they saw her.
She had a spinal deficiency, which he mocked and did it in person.
He mocked the way she was.
Exactly.
How can he defend any of that?
And why does he have to talk about Todgers, for example?
But more importantly, how can he take down his matron line?
I want to make two points.
One, to answer your specific question on the matron.
That is preparatory school mentality.
Oh, really?
Yeah.
I mean, I think they should be confined to the dustbin.
Why would you put it in a book?
Yes, but it's been written.
Why when you're supposedly a great feminist?
Why would you annihilate a poor, innocent woman?
We don't even know if she's alive or not, whether her family have read this.
But this was probably something she talked about.
I was a matron at the time.
The point is, just hang on.
It was written now.
It was not written.
We've got to take a short break.
Short break.
Time out.
A couple of minutes, we'll be back.
Hold your passion there, everyone.
I do have a left it on a fiery cliffhanger.
So, Tessa, you want to say something?
Yeah, I feel a degree of sympathy when stories are taken from the book.
They're dumped out that she had greasy hair and she had a twisted spine and she was this awful old toad and we all mocked her.
But actually, it was quite poetic, that piece.
It wasn't poetic.
It was nasty.
Wait, wait, let me finish my piece.
It ends up with, it ends up, the payoff is, actually, the great joy for this boy who's just lost his mother is to make all the kids laugh.
And then, and I'm going to say that.
Well, would we do for him?
That's why.
There's no payoff for the matron.
Wait, let me read the line.
I loved cracking my mates up, but nothing quite did it for me like making the otherwise miserable Pat bust a gun.
Right.
How does that mean?
Another word.
She laughed too.
She laughed.
She had to laugh.
I bet she wouldn't be laughing.
She wouldn't be laughing at a description of herself in the fastest-selling book in history of being greasy, ugly.
She had to laugh because she was an employee.
I'm sorry, I think it's totally fun of her servant.
She had to laugh.
She had no choice.
Jumping is the rose between two thorns.
The film Between Two Roses.
Feeling very thick.
I think, well, I, going back to Harry, I mean, he was saying about Camilla using the media.
No one used it more than Harry.
I mean, we went everywhere in the world with him, and he was fantastic.
And I remember, at the end of the day, we'd all go to the pub and we'd have a drink with him and he would get it all off his chest.
But, you know, he used to say to us, I do my best to give you great pictures every day.
I want to get in the paper, you know, get it in the paper, get these, promote these causes that I'm a patron of.
He was brilliant.
So, you know, having to go about Camilla doing exactly the same thing.
It's just a brass neck of it.
I'm sorry.
I just read that book.
I put it down.
This guy is just a spoiled, entitled, victimhood-laden boy.
But no, no, he is also.
So he is also, I think he's deeply unhappy because a happy person does not write that kind of book.
He knows it's going to hurt.
And a self-proclaimed protector of women's reputations and someone who objected to anyone who suggested that Meghan Google the royal family or somehow scheme to marry into it says that Camilla schemed to marry Charles and become Queen Consort.
Well, I think we're all losing sight of the bigger picture.
No, we're not.
I hear Piers in tone on your love, understandable love for the monarchy.
Here we have Andrew Edwards, MBE for Arthur Edwards, basically.
The legend Andrew Edwards.
The legendary Andrew Edwards.
Can you write in your hair then?
A man who writes favourably about the royals in the spectator regularly.
You're passionate royalists, more so than me.
I'm also a royalist, by the way.
But if we want this institution to survive, it's no good getting in behind our bunker and going, go away, everyone else.
We're our royal family.
We're not.
What we're saying, all right, imagine for a moment.
Imagine now that William does his version in a book.
He's not going to.
Exactly.
Kate does hers.
Camilla does hers.
The royal family would collapse.
There would be no royal family.
There'd be no monarchy.
They would be sent off to some part of Europe and that'd be the last we'd ever see them, like every other monarchy virtually in Europe, right?
So we have one of the last great monarchies.
And that's why I care.
I care when this little renegade duo in California are making hundreds of millions of dollars spray gunning this family and the institution whilst trading off the royal titles they've been given.
I think it's totally disgusting.
And they're not giving any money to charity.
It's a piecemeal.
How dare I say?
Let me bring in Arthur.
Arthur, you wrote a lovely book.
It's Behind the Crown, My Life, Photographing the Royal Family.
You wrote a very interesting piece defending Camilla and the Sun, but you also made a point.
You don't want to photograph Harry and Meghan.
No.
They were miserable.
I mean, they just didn't want to know.
You're done with that.
I didn't do the big tour of South Africa.
I didn't go to Australia.
I just find working with them is so miserable.
They just didn't want to help you in any way.
I mean, they wouldn't do simple things like hit a ball or anything.
You know, where Catherine and William would do all that, the Prince would...
Look, here's the deal with the royals, right?
They survive through the patronage of the British public, and that is fueled by the British media, which Harry detests so much.
He can call us a bunch of liars as much as he likes.
What's interesting about the book is how many stories appear in it where he confirms what the media reported at the time, which were condemned a lot of the time as lies.
But the worrying thing is, Piers, the predominantly right-wing media, and I'm going to include you in this.
I'm not right-wing.
Don't be surprised.
I know once a month.
I'm not editor of the Daily Mirror for 10 years.
My father was a laborer.
I've got a right-wing bone in my body.
You're now sitting on a mud steel.
I was editor of the Daily Mirror for 10 years to the Labour Paper.
With the exception of you two.
Complete nonsense.
With no exception.
Okay, with the exception of you two Corbin Easters, most of the people at the moment supporting the royal family tack hard to the right.
Right-Wing Bone in Body 00:07:26
Oh, absolutely.
Let me finish my question.
Absolutely garbage.
The Daily Mirror.
No, you can't finish.
Because you're talking garbage.
The Daily Mirror is the people who tackle the people.
It's the working class people of this country who revere the Royal Family.
And many of them vote Labour.
I know that because I was editor of the Mirror.
They were our readers and they loved the Majority of the Finnish.
So let's end on a note that Tessa managed to hold it together reasonably long, but in the end, of course, talking like Harry, complete claptrap.
Arthur, great book, behind the crown.
My live photograph in the Royal Family.
Great to see you.
I know you've had a tough time.
Thanks, and it's really great to see you.
Thanks, Brad.
What's this?
It's Harry in his underwear.
Coming next, what on earth is the BBC playing at, giving this loathsome terrorist lover such a massive platform at taxpayers' expense?
I'm joined by my pack to discuss that.
This lot will carry on shouting.
Arthur won't, so the other two won't.
Look at that pack.
Welcome back.
Welcome to my new stunner pack, Talk TV political at Decay McCann, making a rare regal visit.
Daily Mirror Associate Editor Kevin McGuire, I'm talking TV contributor, Esther Crack.
Well, welcome to all of you.
Happy New Year.
Happy New Year.
Let's start with you, Kate, about this unbelievably abhorrent excuse for a human being, Andrew Bridgin, MP, who tweeted a load of claptrap about the COVID vaccines and said, as one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust.
And that came after a number of other ludicrous tweets he did about COVID and vaccines and so on.
And that was the tipping point where he's now had his whip suspended.
What's going to happen to this guy?
How can you have a serving member of parliament expressing such views?
Well, there are lots of people in his own party and beyond it now who want to see that he won't stand at the next election because this has been going on not just for a couple of weeks, but a couple of months on a scale.
He's been talking about some of the data around some of the rare effects of COVID vaccination and manipulating that data or misrepresenting it perhaps for the last couple of months.
And then things have stepped up recently and it's been causing some real worry in his party.
And you're right that the tweet you just read out there is the tipping point.
Do you know what I think may be the problem?
We've got a picture here.
This is of the same Andrew Bridging having his COVID jab.
And I think what's happened is his worst fears came true that he got injected with the vaccine.
It planted a chip in his brain that turned him into an utter moron.
And that is a terrible side effect of the vaccine, Kevin, which we weren't aware of until we read his tweets.
No, look, I think he's finished now.
I don't think the Tories will have much more.
He's just gone nuts.
He never used to be this mad, did he?
No, and what's happened is he's lost a big civil case with his brother.
He's going to have to pay something like a million quid in costs.
I don't know if he's going to be able to do the family phone.
You can't have somebody representing the situation.
No, no, no.
I agree, but he's there now until the general election.
I don't think he'll be after that.
But no, it's ridiculous.
The other hot story, Shimima Begum, right?
So this is an ongoing story of this.
She was 15 when she went off to live with an ISIS terrorist, had three babies with this ISIS terrorist.
He would come back having beheaded people, stuffed heads in bins and so on.
I've got no time for it whatsoever.
I don't think she should be allowed back into this country.
She should stay in the terror bed she made for herself out there for a number of years.
She's now staggeringly been given this like eight-part podcast on the BBC at taxpayer expense called I'm Not a Monster, basically explaining why she's a perfectly decent human being.
You should be allowed to come back.
I think you're right.
Most British people don't have time for Shimima Begum or any other terrorists that decided to go out there and do what she did.
I think the question is, why is the BBC, the national broadcaster that we are forced to pay for, co-signing this?
And why are they trying to put it in the middle of the market?
It's all just a short interview.
Isn't eight parts of it?
Exactly.
But why are they trying to rehabilitate the image?
To what end?
Why do we need this?
But they're not about rehabilitating.
It's about a woman who in Britain has become a poster girl for ISIS.
That's because she marries an ISIS terrorist.
She told people.
Look, she could be a threat to national security, but she is our problem.
And I think the government was wrong.
Why is she our problem?
Because she's British.
And for us to say, because her parents were born in Bangladesh, are you saying to all of us?
Well, they were.
Are you saying to all second generation migrants in Britain that we might take by your passport and kick you out?
But I don't think any ISIS terrorists who were born in Britain should be allowed back if they went off to commit terror attacks.
There's about 350 the government have allowed to come back and not jump over.
Well, that's the thing.
But they have used her as a poster, a poster girl, to make it look like a girl.
Well, why should we let her become a celebrity?
She was 15.
She was 15.
No, that's not an excuse.
That's not an excuse.
She was 15.
That is not an excuse.
She was 15.
She was groomed and she was trafficked.
15-year-olds.
She was underage for sex and married off.
Tell me what 15-year-old did.
If she had sex for four years with a guy, he was coming back from beheading people.
Innocent people.
If a group had radicalised that and done this to her and with her in Swansea or Sunland or Sterling rather than Syria, she would be in the care of social services.
What's the Kate McCann view of this?
Well, I think the fact that you're arguing about it so intensely says that actually there is an argument to say some journalism could be done here.
Now, the tone of this podcast is going to be absolutely everything.
Is it going to be all about trying to get sympathy for her or is it actually interrogating what's happened here?
And listening to the journalist who is behind this podcast, there is some question now about what he is exposing and whether that could actually harm the appeal process that she's currently in because she is appealing the decision to revoke her citizenship.
She's not been allowed to come back to the UK to do that, but it was only recently heard a few months ago.
And there are some who say the fact that she does talk about, I did travel, I made these decisions myself, might undermine the case that she's making that she was trafficked.
And there's a whole other element about a Canadian spy involved here, and it's complex, but I think shining a light on it is only going to help us.
Interesting point.
Quick question about the strikes.
Listen, I've got a lot of sympathy with people who are really on the breadline working in these industries who are striking.
I get it.
They can't all get inflation pay rises.
We'll go bust as a country.
What I didn't like today were the ambulance workers, the scenes of them all looking like they were celebrating.
You know, all coming out dancing and cheering and people tooting.
Hey, what are they celebrating?
I mean, if they came out looking serious and like this was an awful thing they were compelled to do, they might get my support.
I can't support them cheering as people might be dying.
Yeah, but look, people are dying every day because of the state.
So why let more die?
The state of the ambulance service, but they feel they've watched the service they work in and they care about being run down and also their wages and their support.
Is there any sympathy in Hammer?
You wouldn't be able to tell they care very much about it with the celebrating.
This is a PR disaster.
That's the issue.
A lot of people have sympathy for them, but when you do this, you kind of lose yourself.
Don't come out singing and dancing.
I think it's all great.
Great to have the royal visit.
Please don't leave it as long.
We like having you.
Kevin, good to see you.
Esther, great to see you again because you've put the yards in over here.
It doesn't go unnoticed.
It doesn't go unnoticed.
That's it from me.
Tonight, what are you up to?
Keep it uncensored.
Good night.
Export Selection