Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Prince Andrew Was Lying (and Sweating) From The Start, Wasn't He?

866 replies

TallerSally · 04/01/2024 14:50

So now we have it, the abject and in all likelihood criminal behaviour of Prince Andrew, still titled Duke of York and still eighth in the line of succession to the British throne, laid out for all to see.

Settled out of court as part of a grotesque cover-up.

Still denying knowing Virginia Giuffre, and presumably Johanna Sjoberg whose breast he allegedly fondled, who are undoubtedly the tip of the iceberg of the girls Prince Andrew and his paedo friend Jeffrey Epstein abused.

Still protected by Buckingham Palace who have gone out of their way to state the accusations as "categorically untrue", as if anyone believes them.

Still supported by the British Royal Family who seem desperate to "rehabilitate him" (and his grifter ex-wife), still living in a Royal Palace presumably at taxpayers expense (i.e. Grifter in Chief), still prancing around at official functions, still oozing a sense of arrogant entitlement, with no-one including King Charles having any sense of courage or moral rectitude to deliver to make him face the consequences of his repugnant actions.

Still being defended by the royal palaces briefing operations and the British media, and by those at ease with shameful double standards on various boards, including this one, who are happy spending their time posting 100'000+ messages a year attacking Meghan and Harry while turning a blind eye to a likely real criminal.

No amount of covering-up will ever rehabilitate Prince Andrew. All it'll do is drag the royal family further down in the esteem of folks with any sense of decency.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
40
DysonSphere · 06/01/2024 15:04

I don't read H&M press stories generally these days as they're usually brain rot, so I have no idea what you're referring to.

When I say Traitors to the Crown, I mean the stance on these threads, which over some time of rare checking in, I notice tend to be polarised between H&M are a focus for those who want the RF gone (Republican supporters) and or Traitors to the Royal Family by anti-H&M Royalist supporters. Hence the need to contrast Andrew with H&M and paint them as anti-establishment, which they're not. There's little nuance.

I find the response to my post exactly indicative of that. Criticism of H&M is seen automatically as anti-republican and support of H&M as being something akin to treasonous. It's noticeable.

DewinDwl · 06/01/2024 15:08

The way the royal family is dealing / not dealing with Andrew's behaviour is a rot that is not going to go away. It's getting worse and worse, eroding the RF's image, making them look more and more out of touch, turning more and more good faith royalists to republicanism. It's incredible that they don't realise.

Good for Harry to go low contact.

TallerSally · 06/01/2024 15:09

2dogsandabudgie · 06/01/2024 14:23

Tallersally - There's no proof that King Charles knowingly protected Savile. Savile was a highly intelligent manipulative man who used the Royal Family for his own gains. Savile knew exactly what he was doing. Princess Diana said that Charles saw Savile as a "sort of mentor".

When it comes to Jimmy Saville it's something worth taking another close look at.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prince-charles-jimmy-savile-pr-advice-b2051942.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10693583/As-new-letters-lay-bare-relationship-did-Prince-Charles-know-Jimmy-Saviles-abuse.html

Upthread, we have evidence of Charles' conduct in relation to at least two other paedos:

It often gets forgotten when we are talking about Andrew that Charles also chooses to surround himself with deeply troubling people.
We have Laurens Van Der Post, a man who, age 46, raped a 14 year old who then became pregnant. Charles made him godfather to William.
And of course the paedophile bishop Peter Ball, who was forced to step down. Here's what Charles wrote to him:
“I wish I could do more,”
“I feel so desperately strongly about the monstrous wrongs that have been done to you and the way you have been treated. It’s appalling that the archbishop has gone back on what he told me, before Xmas, that he was hoping to restore you to some kind of ministry in the church. I suspect you are absolutely right — it is due to fear of the media.”

There is such a thing as wilful ignorance.

One would have thought that given his experience with Jimmy Saville, and the reputational risk of being seen as a befriender of paedos, King Charles would draw a clear line in the sand in relation to Prince Andrew.

But we're seeing the opposite, aren't we?

Prince Charles wrote to Jimmy Savile for PR advice, newly revealed letters claim

‘You are so good at understanding what makes people operate,’ Prince of Wales reportedly tells sexual predator in one letter

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prince-charles-jimmy-savile-pr-advice-b2051942.html

OP posts:
alltootired · 06/01/2024 15:12

@Ellmau Andrew paid out millions to settle the law suit because he was being accused of crimes.
Massages as I am sure you know is often a code term used for prostitution. These massages were on Epsteins property, Andrew was not popping off to a top health spa to have a massage and some hot stones.

alltootired · 06/01/2024 15:18

@TallerSally thank you for posting that article.
Unlike some of you here I do not follow the Royal Family. But it looks very much as if the Royal Family do not care about rich people raping and sexually exploiting plebs. Maybe they think the plebs should be grateful for the attention?

Roussette · 06/01/2024 15:18

I don't read H&M press stories generally these days as they're usually brain rot, so I have no idea what you're referring to

I have linked it on here. It's not just a 'press story' 😮

Two men have been jailed for threatening to execute Harry and Archie (who they called 'a creature'). They had a podcast and a radio station saying this

Hardly brain rot

billysboy · 06/01/2024 15:29

PA is a Nonce is still one of my favourite flags viewed at Glastonbury

DysonSphere · 06/01/2024 15:39

Roussette · 06/01/2024 15:18

I don't read H&M press stories generally these days as they're usually brain rot, so I have no idea what you're referring to

I have linked it on here. It's not just a 'press story' 😮

Two men have been jailed for threatening to execute Harry and Archie (who they called 'a creature'). They had a podcast and a radio station saying this

Hardly brain rot

You're getting wound up and I genuinely don't know why.

If I don't know about the story you're describing, then I can't make a judgement about it. Most H&M stories are indeed brain rot. A bit of brain rot is fine occasionally, like trash TV (not that I have a TV either but you get the point) but I haven't gone seeking any in relation to H&M this week. Of course that being my point I'm liable to have missed something important. I haven't read every post on thread.

You need merely have given a synopsis or provided a link. I don't understand the😧

Pray tell which page on this thread is the said article on?

Mystro202 · 06/01/2024 15:40

100% agree with what is written in the OP 👍 it's like these die hard Royals will slate anyone who decides to leave the circus but will stick up no matter what for whoever stays loyal&Royal no matter what!

DysonSphere · 06/01/2024 15:40

No worries I'll Google

Grandmasswag · 06/01/2024 15:41

Massages = being serviced sexually. In this case by underage girls, women kept in slavery, or both. What a Prince.

DysonSphere · 06/01/2024 16:03

Yes I found it via Google someway under several headlines including: 'Harry & Meghan. What's next for Hollywood's Biggest Losers' the sort of brain rot I alluded to.

That is very nasty. They deserve prison but will likely be out earlier than their given sentences. Neo-Nazism is alarmingly on the rise.

Why did you automatically assume I would agree with their views? Or even bring this up? That was a pretty rash and presumptuous thing to accuse someone of. It isn't something I would have accused anyone on MN of. Very bad faith Rousette.

Besides read my original comment again. I said there ought to be a middle ground between two extreme opinions of H&M. Not that I thought them traitors.

Your response was 'so you agree with these men?' How ridiculous.

Read properly next time before getting overwrought and accusing posters of agreeing with white nationalist terrorists!

Roussette · 06/01/2024 16:10

Please stop saying I am overwrought or wound up

It's rude

Livingtothefull · 06/01/2024 16:10

TallerSally · 06/01/2024 15:09

When it comes to Jimmy Saville it's something worth taking another close look at.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prince-charles-jimmy-savile-pr-advice-b2051942.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10693583/As-new-letters-lay-bare-relationship-did-Prince-Charles-know-Jimmy-Saviles-abuse.html

Upthread, we have evidence of Charles' conduct in relation to at least two other paedos:

It often gets forgotten when we are talking about Andrew that Charles also chooses to surround himself with deeply troubling people.
We have Laurens Van Der Post, a man who, age 46, raped a 14 year old who then became pregnant. Charles made him godfather to William.
And of course the paedophile bishop Peter Ball, who was forced to step down. Here's what Charles wrote to him:
“I wish I could do more,”
“I feel so desperately strongly about the monstrous wrongs that have been done to you and the way you have been treated. It’s appalling that the archbishop has gone back on what he told me, before Xmas, that he was hoping to restore you to some kind of ministry in the church. I suspect you are absolutely right — it is due to fear of the media.”

There is such a thing as wilful ignorance.

One would have thought that given his experience with Jimmy Saville, and the reputational risk of being seen as a befriender of paedos, King Charles would draw a clear line in the sand in relation to Prince Andrew.

But we're seeing the opposite, aren't we?

The idea that Charles knew nothing about Jimmy Savile's character and activities, is nonsense and wilful naivety. Savile's behaviour was an open secret for years, John Lydon referred to it back in 1978.

Everyone - even William & Kate's children's school friends - are security vetted. There is just no way that anyone remotely dodgy would be allowed to get close to them unless they themselves agreed to it.

Angrycat2768 · 06/01/2024 16:24

Lauren's Van Der Post ( another of Charles' mentors, along with Dickie Mountbatten) was made Williams godfather, 30 years after he sexually abused and impregnated a 14 year old in his care. He was 42 at the time. Maybe Prince Philip and The Queen have a case to answer as to why their son was so desperate for guidance that he had to keep running into the arms of shady older men for mentorship.

DysonSphere · 06/01/2024 16:29

Roussette · 06/01/2024 16:10

Please stop saying I am overwrought or wound up

It's rude

I'd say deserved when you go around hysterically accusing posters of being in sympathy with two convicted white nationalist terrorists. Remove your post to me and I might apologise. Otherwise, eat me.

DysonSphere · 06/01/2024 16:33

Angrycat2768 · 06/01/2024 16:24

Lauren's Van Der Post ( another of Charles' mentors, along with Dickie Mountbatten) was made Williams godfather, 30 years after he sexually abused and impregnated a 14 year old in his care. He was 42 at the time. Maybe Prince Philip and The Queen have a case to answer as to why their son was so desperate for guidance that he had to keep running into the arms of shady older men for mentorship.

This is a rather unfortunate but thought provoking and valid point😬

It does suggest Andrew may have observed some rather skewed values growing up.

Themountainwithsnowonit · 06/01/2024 16:55

Angrycat2768 · 06/01/2024 16:24

Lauren's Van Der Post ( another of Charles' mentors, along with Dickie Mountbatten) was made Williams godfather, 30 years after he sexually abused and impregnated a 14 year old in his care. He was 42 at the time. Maybe Prince Philip and The Queen have a case to answer as to why their son was so desperate for guidance that he had to keep running into the arms of shady older men for mentorship.

I think it's really important to use the right terms. LVDP age 46 raped a 14 year old.

Roussette · 06/01/2024 17:03

Themountainwithsnowonit · 06/01/2024 16:55

I think it's really important to use the right terms. LVDP age 46 raped a 14 year old.

Exactly.

It's no different to the coerced trafficked Epstein girls. Like the three 12 year olds shipped over from Paris for his birthday.

OhGetFucked · 06/01/2024 17:56

DewinDwl · 06/01/2024 15:08

The way the royal family is dealing / not dealing with Andrew's behaviour is a rot that is not going to go away. It's getting worse and worse, eroding the RF's image, making them look more and more out of touch, turning more and more good faith royalists to republicanism. It's incredible that they don't realise.

Good for Harry to go low contact.

True but SO many fools people fawn over them. I mean the circus of people lining the streets to cry over the coffin of someone they'd never met - someone who spent her life profiting handsomely while overseeing the number of food banks spiralling as people literally starved - absolutely disgusted me, and shows me that this country will never become a republic.

TallerSally · 06/01/2024 18:28

I think it's important to reiterate again and again, particularly given some comments from apologists upthread, that the third batch of Epstein files reveals that Prince Andrew "spent weeks" at Epstein's Palm Beach residence, and that during these weeks, he received "daily massages".

So for anyone who is still in any doubt that Prince Andrew raped underage girls for weeks on end, I have some great leads on cut-price bridges in Brooklyn.

So basically this Prince, at the time second in line to the British throne, would spend his days satisfying his sexual urges on children on Epstein's estate.

Which raises the question: what did his entourage think he was doing, travelling to Florida and spending weeks with Epstein? What did Fergie, who apparently also visited pervie estate, and may well have noticed the underage girls there, think he was doing? What did King Charles?

Does anyone seriously believe they had no clue what was going on, when apparently it was an open secret, but with the perps simply believing they'd never get caught?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67898784

Prince Andrew, left, and Jeffrey Epstein in New York's Central Park

Prince Andrew 'spent weeks' at Epstein home - witness

The testimony by a Jeffrey Epstein employee appears in around 1,300 pages of newly unsealed evidence.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67898784

OP posts:
OhGetFucked · 06/01/2024 18:31

Saw a story in the DM last week saying Andrew and Fergie might remarry and this explains why. Deflect deflect deflect. Bread and circuses.

GrouchyKiwi · 06/01/2024 18:33

Do senior members of the RF (like Andrew was at the time) travel with security officers like US Presidents do? I wonder if they can be subpoenaed if their secured people* have taken part in crimes in their presence.

*What's the proper term for this? Blush

Roussette · 06/01/2024 18:43

GrouchyKiwi · 06/01/2024 18:33

Do senior members of the RF (like Andrew was at the time) travel with security officers like US Presidents do? I wonder if they can be subpoenaed if their secured people* have taken part in crimes in their presence.

*What's the proper term for this? Blush

Edited

Apparently... the last time Andrew went to Epstein's NY mansion to do the honourable thing... that is... break up with him Hmm his security advised he stayed at the Consulate. He refused. So he spent 4-5 days there as guest of honour for a dinner. (as he said in the carcrash interview)

Swipe left for the next trending thread