Page 4 | To be sick of the royal propaganda the UK is fed?

Ukisgaslit · 2025-08-16T09:06:52+00:00

I know most people don’t give a damn about the Windsors any more . However , in a week when we learn about Philip’s affairs - notably with Sarah Ferguson’s mother ( all covered up of course like the rest of their debachery) we are now expected to swallow the line that William and Kate’s next mansion is ‘paid for by William and Kate themselves ‘ No . That’s not the complete truth .Every penny the Windsors have , they have taken from the people . We now know William and Charles make millions from public services like the NHS schools and charities . We only know about this as a result of dogged journalistic digging . And most of the mainstream media barely covered the scandal . There are many threads here about how the UK is in steep decline and how people are suffering . Yet the royals are taking in half a billion a year and charging charities on top ! At least admit to us that all their money is stolen from us ? Oh and if you haven’t heard the queen knew all about Andrew pocketing money via ‘pitch at the palace’ She was told repeatedly by officials . She did nothing Can we have some facts please ? The Windsors are a total facade - they are all like Andrew - he’s just the latest fall guy .

Original poster

Ukisgaslit · 01/09/2025 08:22

This is from an interview with Lownie about his book on Mountbatten . Obviously it’s better to read the book to get the whole picture but readers of this thread can draw some conclusions from this :

Roughly, how many people did you interview for The Mountbattens? Your acknowledgements section is a lengthy six pages long including with thanks to ‘Sean’ and ‘Amal’ ‘for so bravely speaking out for the first time about their experiences over 40 years ago.’ Can you tell us a bit about those two interviews, both interviewees being subjected to Mountbatten’s pedophilia when they were young boys?
I spoke to over a hundred people. I was amazed how many people were still alive who had worked closely with the Mountbattens. They included their driver from 1948, Dickie’s Military Secretary, Dickie’s valet throughout the 1960s, their gamekeeper, personal pilot, a steward from the 1950s, personal protection officer, ADC, godchildren, private secretaries and members of the family including their daughter Lady Pamela Hicks.
I was introduced to ‘Sean’ and ‘Amal’ through a contact in Ireland. Neither had spoken publicly before and it took time to win their confidence and to ensure they were telling me the truth. The detail about people and places persuaded me they were but I have still left the reader to make up their own mind. A former wartime driver Norman Nield has gone on the record saying he brought young children to Mountbatten, and there are FBI reports about Dickie’s proclivities so ‘Amal’ and ‘Sean’ are not the only evidence of his pedophilia. My blocked attempts to have various government papers referring to Mountbatten and a Belfast care home Kincora, where boys were sourced, and to have the car logs for August 1977 when the boys were abused further suggests there is some sort of cover up.

OP posts:

CathyorClaire · 01/09/2025 07:22

Futurehappiness · 31/08/2025 22:13

Maybe the people they had kicked out of their own homes to make way for them - one of them apparently a retired doctor in his 80s - thought they were in their 'forever homes' too.

Show quote history

Quite.

I've seen it shrugged off as probably part of the deal they agreed to in living on a royal estate and it being absolutely fine as they were moved to comparable or better properties but peasant sweeping is still pretty poor optics.

Pedallleur · 01/09/2025 06:30

The RF own the Government whoever that may be. The media runs the stories but what are we going to do? No one is going to announce a vote to get rid of the Monarchy and supposedly people are spending billions just to come to the UK and stand on The Mall. I'm all for a Crowdfunder for the RF. Let those who want them pay.

Original poster

Ukisgaslit · 01/09/2025 06:28

SixtySomething · 01/09/2025 00:21

'But sure - give Mountbatten the benefit of the doubt '

I'm not giving Mountbatten the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not giving him anything.
I'm not jumping on your bandwagon.
(Or on anyone else's.)

Show quote history

Oh I see @SixtySomething

Personal statements , FBI files ( which stated Mountbatten’s interest in young boys made him a security risk-sound familiar?), closed records, etc etc all not good enough for you

Its all a ‘bandwagon?

Sadly one that is only starting to be able to access evidence decades after the death of the alleged perpetrator
( btw I believe it was Lownie who revealed the FBI files - he spent his inheritance on court cases trying to access papers - it an expensive business this bandwagon )

You claim no interest in the royals but dismiss evidence of their offences as not meeting your high standards.

I assume you think Chris Moore and Andrew Lownie are on the same bandwagon?

I wonder what your thoughts on Andrew are ?

OP posts:

PollyBell · 01/09/2025 06:26

Propaganda? You mean stuff in the media people are free to switch off from

It is not one great big ball of conspiracy, maybe if people were happy in their own life they wouldn't be fixated on the royals? The obesseion is weird

AliasGrace47 · 01/09/2025 06:06

2dogsandabudgie · 16/08/2025 17:49

Apparently some bloke who's written a book and wants to boost sales has said it, so it must be true.

Show quote history

Andrew Lownie is not 'some bloke', he's a highly respected historian.

AliasGrace47 · 01/09/2025 05:55

x2boys · 16/08/2025 12:54

I'm absolutely not justifying Andrews action ,s he's a slimeball
However the age of consent in the UK is 16 rightly or wrongly
I think what is more pertinent is wether he knew she was trafficked ?
Andrew is arrogant enough to beleive anyone would be delighted to have sex with him.

Show quote history

This happened in the US, not the UK. The age of consent is higher there.

AliasGrace47 · 01/09/2025 05:54

Astrak · 16/08/2025 12:49

Prince Andrew's relationship with the late Ms. Guiffre was when she was 17yrs old. The age of consent was 16 yrs old.

Perhaps you should think about emigrating?

Show quote history

You do realise she was a sex slave trafficked by Epstein, so not in a position to meaningfully consent?

Moreover, in the US, the age of consent is 18, like it or not.

SixtySomething · 01/09/2025 00:21

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 18:52

@SixtySomething
Well conveniently for the Windsors Mountbatten is dead so he won’t be put on trial will he to prove the point will he ?

There are many personal accounts from victims . There is Andrew Lownie’s book on Mountbatten where he presents the evidence he has collated

There is another book by Chris Moore I think a journalist who has interviewed more of Mountbatten’s victims . These men have bravely let their names go forward.
The FBI had a file on Mountbatten and his activities .
Furthermore we have Charles and Saville and Peter Ball and Van der Post .
Andrew and Epstein .

But sure - give Mountbatten the benefit of the doubt .

Show quote history

'But sure - give Mountbatten the benefit of the doubt '

I'm not giving Mountbatten the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not giving him anything.
I'm not jumping on your bandwagon.
(Or on anyone else's.)

Futurehappiness · 31/08/2025 22:13

x2boys · 31/08/2025 21:36

Ridiculous really that they are calling it a "forever home"
I mean it's not like they will be living there forever at some point they will be moving into Buckingham Palace and have all the other royal residences at their disposal..

Show quote history

Maybe the people they had kicked out of their own homes to make way for them - one of them apparently a retired doctor in his 80s - thought they were in their 'forever homes' too.

x2boys · 31/08/2025 21:36

CathyorClaire · 31/08/2025 21:00

Does make you wonder how many forever homes one simple heir to the throne might need.

Ridiculous really that they are calling it a "forever home"
I mean it's not like they will be living there forever at some point they will be moving into Buckingham Palace and have all the other royal residences at their disposal..

CathyorClaire · 31/08/2025 21:00

Does make you wonder how many forever homes one simple heir to the throne might need.

LidlAmaretto · 31/08/2025 20:44

CathyorClaire · 31/08/2025 20:11

Yet it is ok for William and Kate to move into an eight bedroomed mansion because they are royals and more deserving than the ‘plebs’

Ah, the eight bedroomed 'forever home' we're breathlessly assured they're renovating with 'their own funds' which we now know may well derive from fleecing charities and HM Government sources.

Never mind the £4.5m we spent renovating the Kensington Palace apartment also touted as their forever home (that lasted seven years). Old news 🙄

And the money spent moving tennis courts at their Norfolk 'forever home'.

CathyorClaire · 31/08/2025 20:11

Yet it is ok for William and Kate to move into an eight bedroomed mansion because they are royals and more deserving than the ‘plebs’

Ah, the eight bedroomed 'forever home' we're breathlessly assured they're renovating with 'their own funds' which we now know may well derive from fleecing charities and HM Government sources.

Never mind the £4.5m we spent renovating the Kensington Palace apartment also touted as their forever home (that lasted seven years). Old news 🙄

ByMintOrca · 31/08/2025 19:11

It is a load of propaganda...like the royal recent trip to church reported Charlotte beeming....she was scowling ...and it wS obvious what she thought of us

WhatAboutTheOtherOne · 31/08/2025 19:00

The concept of ‘royalty’ in current times is ridiculous and outdated. It needs to end. The links between politicians and the Royalty is a particular problem. Politicians are often so eager to get knighthoods or whatever that they forget their duties to the people of the country. Remember John Major doing a deal with the Queen that led to exemption to climate law on her private land among other things. How anyone can justify that is beyond me. You have to wonder how much the fact the royal family dishes out knighthoods etc influences things.
The Queen got herself and future monarch’s a nice little exemption from paying inheritance tax too. Again, how is that benefitting anyone.
There is a whole list of laws that the king is exempt from. He can’t be prosecuted exempt from criminal and civil proceedings as the head of state including his conduct on privately-owned assets, estates, and businesses. He is above the law.
I’m disappointed that the younger Royals don’t see what a ridiculous institution the Royal family is and that they don’t seem interesting in modernizing it.

Original poster

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 18:57

Here is the ISBN for the Chris Moore book

ISBN: 9781785375545

OP posts:

Original poster

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 18:52

SixtySomething · 31/08/2025 17:23

When did I say I 'objected strongly'?
In fact, I'm not greatly into the Royal family and don't know about any of the things you mention.
What struck me sharply, however, is the kind of evidence you quote ie rumours and x's book.
I'm suspicious of this type of 'evidence'. That's what interests me, not the subject.
Had you quoted any genuine evidence, now that would have aroused my interest in the personalities you discuss

Show quote history

@SixtySomething
Well conveniently for the Windsors Mountbatten is dead so he won’t be put on trial will he to prove the point will he ?

There are many personal accounts from victims . There is Andrew Lownie’s book on Mountbatten where he presents the evidence he has collated

There is another book by Chris Moore I think a journalist who has interviewed more of Mountbatten’s victims . These men have bravely let their names go forward.
The FBI had a file on Mountbatten and his activities .
Furthermore we have Charles and Saville and Peter Ball and Van der Post .
Andrew and Epstein .

But sure - give Mountbatten the benefit of the doubt .

OP posts:

Katypp · 31/08/2025 18:41

SomethingFun · 17/08/2025 19:43

Are you asking me what jobs the aristocracy could do if the state took back all the money and land they have taken from the people and they needed to work for a living like the rest of us?

Onlyfans or Deliveroo bike couriers I guess if their expensive educations didn’t provide them with any skills or knowledge they could use to earn some cash. I wouldn’t be losing any sleep over it personally.

Responses like this just make you look silly.
I am a Republican through and through, ever since I mas made to sit through Charles' wedding to Diana by my Royalist family, but even i can see this could not work.
It's OK saying get rid of them (I wish) but you response shows you have engaged no critical thought whatsoever about the practicalities of doing so.

Futurehappiness · 31/08/2025 17:41

VeryStressedMum · 31/08/2025 14:29

The lavish ceremonies are a part of that symbol of privilege so to object to the monarchy would also be objecting to the ceremonies.
Also interested as to what symbols of unity there are in the UK that everyone likes and agrees on? It’s a genuine question as I can’t think of anything at this time.

If the monarchy was abolished how do you imagine the country to look like? Will we become an egalitarian society? Maybe we will feel that we are because we are rid of them and we can all feel better, but even taking the monarchy out of the equation now we aren’t a egalitarian society and I can’t see that changing any time soon. Economic equality will still exist, social classes will still cause inequality in education and health, there will still be racial inequality. The ‘elites’ who really run the country will still be around and don’t get me started on the House of Lords. Do you think poor people affect change at government level or have any influence no it’s the rich and they aren’t going anywhere monarchy or no monarchy.

I think if we had no royal family we would just find something else to idolise because that seems to be what human beings do. From gods to celebrities, influencers, money and whatever else. Actually like we already do, just some people also idolise the royals as well.

I don’t think blind loyalty to the monarchy equals patriotism, my loyalty (if I can call it that) is not blind. I have thought about what I believe would be best for the country and if I thought it would best for the country and our lives for them to go then that’s what I would believe. I understand all the arguments against and I still believe we are better off with them. It doesn’t mean I don’t agree with many points you and others have made.

There is a lot wrong with many things, I totally agree with the pp who have said we are being led down the path (by whom I have no idea) blaming the illegals for everything wrong in our lives so we don’t look in the right direction.
It’s always been the same, it was the single mothers getting pregnant to get a house and loads of children so they could bring in the 2 child policy and cut child benefits, the unemployed are getting too much benefits sitting at home playing the xbox we paid for so cuts to benefits but let’s not worry about the mothers/parents who didn’t have or couldn’t afford childcare and are struggling, then we have the benefit scrounging disabled scamming pip when there’s nothing wrong with them - everything is a smoke screen for their agenda and we are all falling for it.

Show quote history

I don't know exactly what the country would look like with the monarchy gone....whatever we replace it with needs to be better. I agree that there is a wider problem of inequality and scapegoating in this country, and on its own abolishing the monarchy will not remove that.

However the monarchy underpins this inequality and historically has always done so. The monarchy's powers are the reserve weapon of the ruling class; it is a drain on the country, a net taker by a long way, and presents us as being backward and archaic as a nation. Removing the monarchy is not the only social change I would like to see happen in this country, but it is an essential and integral part of it. Monarchy & social equality will always be at odds.

I also don't think that the unquestioning idolisation of the RF - based on their status not their achievements - is at all the same as honouring and respecting individuals who have achieved great things.

I am in my 60s now and refuse to despair that it is possible to have a better world. I think I owe it to myself & others not to do that. The one time when there was a move towards equality - when there was genuine social mobility - was during the WW2 period. Not as much change as there could/should have been - but I think the establishment at the time knew, after the suffering and sacrifices of the war, that the public were not going to tolerate being denied some of the rewards of peace time.

So despite the state being almost bankrupt the Government of the day managed to find the money to effect huge social change via the NHS, Welfare state etc. And social housing - despite many people's homes being blown to bits during the war there was still the money to ensure everyone was decently housed. But somehow (it is claimed) we don't have the money for that now; though it is there for W & K's new 8-bedroom house.

The only way to effect social change is for the public to demand it.

SixtySomething · 31/08/2025 17:23

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 12:10

@SixtySomething

Is this news to you ??

Rumours about Mountbatten have been swirling for years .
Look up Kincora children’s home .
Look up the FBI files on Mountbatten from as long ago as the 1950s
And it’s when they are dead that the so called rumours are suddenly accepted fact and ‘old news’ - eg Philip’s affairs

Andrew Lownie is a respected historian and has published several books on the royals . His investigation into Mountbatten a few years ago was blocked continually . Lownie has written a book about Mountbatten - I suggest you read it if you object so strongly .

He has also written a book about Andrew and Sarah - you can’t have missed that

When did I say I 'objected strongly'?
In fact, I'm not greatly into the Royal family and don't know about any of the things you mention.
What struck me sharply, however, is the kind of evidence you quote ie rumours and x's book.
I'm suspicious of this type of 'evidence'. That's what interests me, not the subject.
Had you quoted any genuine evidence, now that would have aroused my interest in the personalities you discuss

SixtySomething · 31/08/2025 17:18

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 12:18

@SixtySomething

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-63319930.amp

Ok, so what was the result?
This news report dates from 2022.
There have been speculative cases in the past which have proved malicious.

ginasevern · 31/08/2025 16:23

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 16:11

I agree @ginasevern - especially with your last sentence . You have expressed that issue very clearly

Thanks Ukisgaslit. After all that I completely forgot to say that I agree with every word you say!

Original poster

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 16:11

I agree @ginasevern - especially with your last sentence . You have expressed that issue very clearly

OP posts:

ginasevern · 31/08/2025 16:00

Ukisgaslit · 31/08/2025 15:18

@VeryStressedMum

Im not sure what your point is re symbols of unity but the Windsors are certainly not that !

Its likely that Scotland will become independent sooner or later and Northern Ireland is already on that track

Many people’s main objection re the Windsors involves the obscene cost and the fact that this family is above the law

If those issues were corrected the objection may not be so great .
But the problem is Windsor inc would not be happy would they ? I mean they couldn’t be plainer - they even refer to themselves as the Firm

I said quite a lot when this thread started so I won't go into it all again. But just to summarise: It's time this self serving, obscenely rich and privileged family who live above the law was scrapped. I will never understand the cloying sentiment in which this (largely genetically German) family is held. It's incomprehensible. I truly believe it would be an irreversible deficit to the establishment, class system and the selective dissemination of ideas we are constantly force fed if they were to be abolished.