Royal PR Team (aka BBC) - desperate deflections

[TheHaplessWit]

BBC - it's all Andrews fault - poor William

So todays propoganda update is a lengthy article by the BBC, attempting to distance Charles & William from anything Andrew related. It details how William was at Uni when Andrew was on the island, so clearly Williams done nothing wrong and without Andrew the public would be in love with the whole RF. Utter garbage.

Andrew isn't the only reason the RF is declining towards it's end, he's simply the biggest reason at the moment. The behaviour of the rest of the family has been observed and the public aren't falling for the garbage any more.

Charles is the 'Supreme governor of the Church of England' and 'defender of the faith'. Yet he has admitted himself that he committed adultery!!! how can someone who did this be the leader of the church? if you are religious, then there is no way this can be acceptable. If you are not religious, then you won't beleive that god appointed/annointed this family to rule us, which makes them a normal family clinging on the hereditary powers - who wants that. Also, to think that the public would embrace Camilla and call her queen - the arrogance is unreal. There is no amount of PR articles that will make people warm to her.

Then theres William, who this article states to be the change maker we need with:
"The appetite is for change, for greater transparency, and more accountability"
Please - this is ridiculous, this is the man who supports homeless charities yet evicted people from their homes, wants a smaller more efficient RF yet orders more helicopters, wants transparency yet chose to start hiding/avoiding tax. He's the biggest hypocrite of them all - yet this article tries to paint him as a victim.

There is no way the RF didn't know what Andrew was doing, between family, personal assistants, protection officers etc.... it would have been known. Not one of them have spoke out, not one of them stopped him, not one of them did anything to support investigations. They are not victims, they are coconspirators.

Andrew is a nightmare for the RF, but he's not the reason the Monarchy is completely failing. The reason is that the others are also terrible people and the public can see it, through their actions and inactions and no amount of Royal PR or BBC propoganda will stop the monarchy from declining further.

Wow. How to show you are anti Royalist without actually saying so!

Your Church of England was started by an adulterer. Henry VIII slept with loads of women and fathered illegitimate children while setting himself up as the Defender of the Faith in his new church.

Most of your kings slept around. Look James I, Charles II, etc.

I don't think Americans get a say on the whole RF thing, OP. You had that war of independence etc. Also to the other poster with "American" in the username. 🤔
The phrase "go home, you're drunk" springs to mind but given it's about 10am right now in EST, that's some pretty mega day drinking.

But... but, that can't be true! they are the moral compass of the country, leading us by being prime examples of British and Christian values. Their commitment to lives of public service showing that really, they'd give their last penny to a poor man if they could.

How can this be true? say it isn't so! it's almost like they are a bunch of entitled, self-serving villains, who gaslight the public into thinking they are good/needed.

The idea that Charles is unsuitable due to infidelity is hilarious. That's the central tenent of the Christian fairy surely?

I agree with you but I certainly don’t like any of the alternative constitutional models we might adopt.

Henry VIII was divorced twice. I have never understood the divorce issue.

Not sure who is the drunk American poster. I'm drinking tea and prepping for the 13 to 17 inches of snow predicted for tomorrow.

When the BBC produce articles like this, you know that the Royals are in on it. The BBC are a joke at this point.

There is no way that William hasn’t known about Andrew’s behaviour, he hasn’t been a student at uni for 20 years. Yet more pushing of the hands on father having precious time with his children narrative as well in the article and the pretence that he’s working hard….he's been with people in the Middle East with questionable morals and no doubt seeing what he can get out of it.

He won’t be changing the monarchy for the better, he’s already gone backwards by not being open about how much tax he pays on the Duchy when Charles declared his when he was in William’s position.

Transparency and accountability? It’s laughable.

The article mentions it being clear that William doesn’t like Andrew, yet at that funeral, when Sarah Ferguson started talking to him, he turned around to speak to her AND thought it appropriate to say something amusing as Fergie and Andrew laughed, Kate smiles and William smirked. Is that the action of a man who has no time for Andrew and Fergie. He may have felt a need to be polite and respond to them p, but there was no reason to make a joke or amusing comment to them, even less so at a funeral.

Should we not expect those in public office to act with integrity these days?

Royals are free to shag whatever consenting adults will have them. But they should do it as private citizens.

If you accept a post that says you are appointed by God to defend the faith, including the 10 bloody commandments, then you should be ready to live by them. If you're not happy to do so please step aside. I say this as an atheist.

With the monarchy's power and privilege come responsibilities and restrictions. The royal family want the privilege of the monarchy and the freedom of the commoner. It doesn't work, they can't have it both ways.

Apropos of nothing I am pretty certain @BemusedAmerican was not drunk in charge of a keyboard from other interactions.

Anyway my opinion FWIW. I'll stop derailing now and let the thread go on.

What are you drinking?

You are of course right OP but you have posted in a thread frequented by bobbing head, flag wavinng royalists who stand to gawp and have photos with kids, and they will defend them to the bitter end because the royals were selected by God <shakes head? and they will then insist they bring tourism to the country.

Exactly.

Henry married his dead brothers fiance, (in the name of politics probably), but she couldn't produce an heir so had to go. The Pope disagreed so Henry broke away from the rule of Rome. Actually a good move in terms of not ceding power to outside authority which you'll appreciate if you are American, (especially one claiming Gods authority), but caused a few centuries of sectarian butchery, didn't work out so well for Anne Boleyn either. ( Some speculation that she had rhesus issues so couldn't carry again after Elizabeth, again no male heir).
A few hundred years later, in a slightly less credulous and hopefully more secular society and many of us see the monarchy as a wastefully expensive and often sordid soap opera. A couple seems like decent sorts, but really not worth the money or adulation.
Perhaps we could have a model more like Denmark, or even better, Bhutan.

sordid soap opera sums them up.

Tenet. 🙄

The ‘Defender of the Faith’ title was actually awarded to Henry VIII by the Roman Catholic Pope Leo X for writing a defence of the Catholic sacraments. Henry lived as a Catholic, and died as a Catholic - just not a Roman Catholic.

What is up for discussion should be whether Fidei Defensor was intended as a title for every English monarch afterwards, given it was a personal reward for specifically Henry VIII for faith in and defence of doctrine?

How could a Protestant monarch inherit Fidei Defensor?

That’s the question.

I believe Charlie styles himself defender of the
faiths, but I doubt many people are looking to him for spiritual guidance.

OP, you are being completely ridiculous. Other people have explained how the title Defender of the Faith came about. Of course, many/most monarchs will have been adulterous...... shall we mention the murderers as well?
I believe that King Charles III is a good Christian.... and don't forget "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"!

I believe that King Charles III is a good Christian

<snorts>

I agree with you OP

I haven’t looked at or listened to BBC news in years . The bits I saw on social media during mournathon were an absolute disgrace .
Have they shown any of the protests against the Windsors and their protection of Andrew?Were the protests at the commonwealth service given proper coverage ?