This is a series,

a series of CVS Island the world. I'm John Bachelor visiting with my friend and mentor

Bergerie Coppley, Defense and Foreign Affairs, he's in Perth, Australia, with perspective on

the European Affairs, and Gregory, it's impossible to ignore that the London Papers, Tab Lloydy

like, spend a great deal of time reporting on Second Sons.

I'm looking at Andrew, the younger brother of the King, and Harry, the younger brother of the king and Harry the younger brother of the heir apparent

William. Is this traditional that second sons become dissenters in some fashion out of step with their brothers and fathers or is this some

modern twist of the of the Royals?

Well it's not a modern twist of the Royals.

It's an historic fact within the Royal Families, not just in the UK.

I'm a second son myself and I had absolutely no

resent but against my brother or my father. So it's clearly not a genetic or a

familial thing. It's clearly a royal thing, but Prince Andrew was the spare, if you like, in his

Harry, Prince Harry likes to call himself. So therefore he was, he had no job to do. He was like a vice president in the

United States but with even you know less role to play. He was indulged he was spoiled he was favored by Queen

Elizabeth and he became fairly

uh... shall we say insensitive to what he needed to do to grow up and like like Harry

he hasn't grown up he got into a lot of trouble by mixing with the wrong people

including lot of trouble by mixing with the wrong people including the links that he's had with a certain

sex offender in the United States, should we say, and that meant that he was cut out from all

royal duties by King Charles when he came to the throne.

And now, of course, you've got King Charles trying to get him out of the way of causing

...