AIBU to think this BBC headline is misleadingre Andrew Windsor ? ?

[Ukisgaslit]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvgw31y75ywt

Andrew has not given up anything .
His own ( I doubt the wrote it ) statement says he will not use his ‘titles’ .He still has them

Charles and William dare not touch Andrew in case Andrew reveals all about the rest of them - plus they no doubt see nothing wrong- what’s another used and abused peasant to them ?
But another woman linked to the Windsors has died, Virginia Giuffre, and her book is released next week . So the Windsors need to throw a bone to the public and make it look like they have done something . They have done precisely nothing .
It’s hot air .

Is the BBC helping to prop up the Windsor grift ? The article does say Andrew doesn’t ‘use’ his HRH - but he still has it . So they must know this nonsense re ‘giving up’ a title is not the whole story . Why not make it clear to the reader ?

Thank you @SomeConstellation

That was exactly it

That's one of yours as well, is it?

@blacksax

No it isn’t .

But I thanked a poster for highlighting the issue of Mountbatten’s rape of children in care homes .
Any comments from you that ?

He was blown up by the IRA. Punishment enough, surely?

And any comment on the treatment of those who tried to speak out about Mountbatten ? ( dear uncle Dickie to Charles )

I agree. The headline on the Mail today (not that I bought it or read it - sorry to mention the awful rag)is ‘Andrew Falls on his Sword’, which makes him seem noble and gallant and as if he willingly gave his titles up all by himself. I laughed to myself as I would bet you any money he was dragged kicking and screaming to his sword and someone held it for him.

At no point have I defended Andrew- he makes my skin crawl. My point was this poster went very quickly to rather ridiculous statements that don't really give any thought out basis to what their views actually are; and I'm sorry but I find their username a fairly good indication of what they're trying to achieve. We don't have to agree on monarchy/anti monarchy, but a little bit of not being ridiculous about it would be nice.

Come on, be honest- this is just an anti monarchy thread isn't it? No one with a brain likes or wants Andrew in our society. You could have at least been a little more honest from the start. Plenty of rotten apples in many family barrels.

@Catsknowbest

Perhaps I should have explained my point more carefully to you .

Someconstellation describes ‘royalty’ as a story . I describe it as a lie .
I repeat , no one is born royal . It’s a construct designed to dupe the gullible .

Please don't trouble yourself on my account.

The point of the thread however was that headlines stating Andrew has been ‘stripped’ of his titles are misleading

He has not been stripped of anything

Shame on the Windsors

So premium search shows you are running a minimum of 5 (5?!?) threads about the monarchy. Is this a full time occupation for you? Good grief 😅 I stopped looking after 5....

I’m not running anything .

I have started five threads since the start of this year - maybe end of last year I’m not sure

One highlighted the shocking abuses carried out in William and Charles’ names via the duchies - ie charging state bodies / NHS for use of ‘their’ land ( it isn’t )

Another was promoted to a similar issue as today’s - royal propaganda .

Is that ok with you ?

Am I breaking some rules ?

I tried looking under ‘ I started ‘
I see one in may - one in sept and today’s .

I’ve checked again
I started the thread in the financial abuses of the Duchies in January !
If you are triggered by reading about the abuses the Windsors carry out - don’t read them

People posts multiple daily threads for months on end in the Harry Hate section - but I just ignore them
HTH

So contact the BBC directly and demonstrate to them that their reporting is misleading? And/or report them to OFCOM, if they've violated standards.

People can call themselves whatever they want. My partner used to teach abroad and every year he had children in his classes with first names like Prince, Princess, Duke, Duchess, Pope, Imam, etc. - he even taught a "Prince Charles (Lastname)" (and once, a generic-sounding "Heiress"). The power the King has is to invoke consequences for Andrew IF he uses titles or stylings he's agreed not to use. And the reason he can invoke consequences is because he has the ability to withdraw or limit financial support, protection, and legitimacy to Andrew.

If anything, this latest move highlights what you'd think the RF would be desperate to hide - the fact that under this fundamentally flawed system the public is forced to subsidise and the media is incentivised to elevate what could easily be the absolute worst people in the world. It's pure dumb luck that Andrew is 8th in line to the throne, and not sitting on it.

At least 5 since start of this year. Not breaking any rules as far as I know. You just seem utterly obsessed.

I'm not triggered. I just had a feeling one thread just wouldn't be "it"

That's a puerile way of looking at it. He was never held to account for his grotesque crimes, whilst his victims (orphans and children in care) were systematically silenced by the establishment. They have not seen justice, apology or recompense and I doubt they ever will. Mountbatten died an instantaneous death at the age of 79 having lived a supremely privileged and licentious life. He should have stood trial but of course the Royal Family has always enjoyed unfettered protection by the establishment. The latest pantomime involving Andrew is merely an act of pure self preservation on the part of "The Firm".

@ginasevern

Thank you for your post Exactly this

@Catsknowbest

Sorry to disappoint you but that won’t be ‘it’

The corruption and abuses are numerous .
The more light shed on them the better .

Feel free to keep monitoring me however - maybe you’ll see the light !

I agree with this.

Who are the people who have (rightly) lost something as a result of the whole awful affair (other than Epstein himself obviously)?

I can think of only four - all British citizens:

Ghislaine Maxwell
Prince Andrew
Sarah Ferguson
Peter Mandelson

It could be that I have missed it, or that the British media is not covering it, but what is happening to the other men who abused Epstein’s victims? I seem to recall that in one of the recent documents that was released in the USA, every single name was redacted except for Prince Andrew’s.

One final point, I really don’t think referring to Prince Andrew as a paedophile is helpful.

Virgina Roberts was under the age of consent in New York (but not London). He was far older.
But she was 17, not a pre-pubescent child.

So in your gallant efforts to free the people from the yoke of made up royalty @Ukisgaslit have you complained to BBC, to IPSO or just enjoying a rant on MN?

https://middletemplar.org.uk/to-strip-or-not-to-strip-prince-harrys-titles/

This suggests that you don't need an act of parliament to remove the HRH. It's in the gift of the monarch.

I think a few people have asked that but it hasn't had a response as yet.