- Notice
Norbs
VIP Member
Thanks for the new thread @Palpatine and for the title @Scotch Mist.
Thought you all might like this article from the Daily Telegraph royals newsletter:
Thought you all might like this article from the Daily Telegraph royals newsletter:
 |
| By Camilla Tominey, Associate Editor |
| ‘People do tend to prefer their Royals with a side order of self-deprecation’ I was filming a royal documentary at home on Monday when the subject of ‘Fergie and Friends’, the Duchess of York’s eponymous online storytelling sideline, came up. The producer of the show I was making was marvelling at the fact that the Queen’s former daughter-in-law appeared so willing to throw herself into her YouTube videos, putting on funny faces and voices to keep the so-called ‘coronakids’ entertained. The films have become cult viewing thanks to Fergie’s laid back, make-up free – and often rather wacky – delivery. A recent reading of Goldilocks and the Three Bears, in which the Duchess – wearing a blonde plaited wig – finds herself being chased around the Royal Lodge garden by a figure resembling Bungle from Rainbow, has already clocked up nearly 4,000 views. (I just re-played the video on my laptop and it quickly attracted the attention of my six-year-old daughter who watched it, giggling away). While I appreciate Fergie isn’t everyone’s cup of tea (least of all Prince Philip’s, who still hasn’t forgiven her for Toe-gate and other lurid headlines), there has always been something endearing about Royals who aren't afraid to poke fun at themselves. As a comedy fan who adored The Goon Show, Prince Charles has always been willing to joke around, when appropriate, as has his wife Camilla. Diana, the late Princess of Wales, would enjoy nothing more than a good giggle on official engagements, while even introverted William and Kate have been known to take the mickey out of each other. I remember covering a visit to the Sydney Royal Easter Show during their 2014 tour of Australia when the Duchess prompted hilarity by picking up some alpaca wool and holding it up over her husband’s bald patch. "You need it more than me," she said, pointing to his head. Only recently, the Duke ridiculed himself in a Blackadder sketch with Stephen Fry for a BBC coronavirus fundraiser. And anyone who has ever seen photographs of the Braemar Gathering knows the Queen enjoys a good laugh too. As well as being an excellent mimic, HM is happy to show her sunnier side when the occasion permits, famously agreeing to jump out of that helicopter with James Bond for the opening ceremony of the London Olympics in 2012. She also willingly took part in Prince Harry’s ‘boom’ mic drop video with the Obamas to launch the Invictus Games in 2016. For years Harry was top of the Royal clowning charts, but what has struck me about the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ recent behaviour, compared to the likes of Fergie’s, is how humourless it has been. And I think that goes some way to explaining why they have fallen so spectacularly out of favour with the British public. As the publication of the biography Finding Freedom has now confirmed – if we didn’t know it already – this is a couple who take themselves far more seriously than most. That is hugely problematic when it comes to their UK (and possibly even their US) audience, because people do tend to prefer their Royals with a side order of self-deprecation. There is undoubtedly something fundamentally so ridiculous about Royalty that it doesn’t really deserve to be taken in sincerity all of the time. When did Harry forget this? At what point did he and Meghan start to believe that they were somehow less absurd than any celebrity who preaches about climate change while flying around in private jets or describes their multimillion pound wealth as being “relatively nominal”? The real reason Harry and Meghan have become a bit of a laughing stock is that they forgot the golden rule of being a Royal: take the work seriously, but not yourself |
Palpatine
VIP Member
After flipping a coin exhaustive research this lovely new title was deemed the winner. There is no manager here so suck it up Karen!
Many thanks to @Scotch Mist who provided it.
So what happened in the last thread I hear you ask. Well, if you really want to know then you should read it yourself. I mean, it’s not like it’s 53 pages long or anything...oh wait!
According to the forum search the word ’cunt’ was only used in 19 posts. Clearly this isn’t true and the search engine gave up and washed its mouth out with soap.
The subjects of these threads once again contrived to give us daily ammunition to mock and ridicule them mercilessly. Today was no exception with a day in court for us to pull apart.
Anyhow. Enough drivel from me. Carry on you lovely people
Many thanks to @Scotch Mist who provided it.
So what happened in the last thread I hear you ask. Well, if you really want to know then you should read it yourself. I mean, it’s not like it’s 53 pages long or anything...oh wait!
According to the forum search the word ’cunt’ was only used in 19 posts. Clearly this isn’t true and the search engine gave up and washed its mouth out with soap.
The subjects of these threads once again contrived to give us daily ammunition to mock and ridicule them mercilessly. Today was no exception with a day in court for us to pull apart.
Anyhow. Enough drivel from me. Carry on you lovely people
antinoos
Well-known member
That interview with Thomas Markles son in the Mail is really significant. Noone even pretends this sympathetic character blaggarded initially by the Press, doesnt speak directly and convincingly for his father and he confirms some matters that are deadly for Meghans catastrophic litigation.
The whole case turns essentially around the first event that made most people realise there was something up with our fairytale Duchess. The weird story around the sudden abscence from the Wedding of her only other related (or even known) attendee Daddy. That and the FFF and their actions and motivations.
There are two versions: his that he foolishly posed for some silly but harmless pap shots and was disinvited then got seriously ill; and hers that he sought to exploit and degrade her and then resisted the increasingly frantic attempts by her and her noble consort to fly him on a magic carpet to the worlds worst wedding not involving a Chinese mistress assaulting the vicar - by deliberately ignoring them.
Who to believe? Well obviously one would believe a spokesman for the United Nations Psychopathic Liars Association before Meghan BUT why would Sid and Nancy allow Scabies to give such a detailed account of the "dozens" of ignored phone calls by both shitweasels if they hadnt been made?
Simples as the convincing and loyal son explains. He was in hospital, under a general anaesthetic then recovering. Obvious really. All the rest is electronic records and hospital notes.
Also Thomas no longer trusts his daughter and has abandoned all hope of reconcilliation. He thinks she has become a bad person.
He's coming to court baby and he's going to blow their shit wide open and everybody knows it.
The whole case turns essentially around the first event that made most people realise there was something up with our fairytale Duchess. The weird story around the sudden abscence from the Wedding of her only other related (or even known) attendee Daddy. That and the FFF and their actions and motivations.
There are two versions: his that he foolishly posed for some silly but harmless pap shots and was disinvited then got seriously ill; and hers that he sought to exploit and degrade her and then resisted the increasingly frantic attempts by her and her noble consort to fly him on a magic carpet to the worlds worst wedding not involving a Chinese mistress assaulting the vicar - by deliberately ignoring them.
Who to believe? Well obviously one would believe a spokesman for the United Nations Psychopathic Liars Association before Meghan BUT why would Sid and Nancy allow Scabies to give such a detailed account of the "dozens" of ignored phone calls by both shitweasels if they hadnt been made?
Simples as the convincing and loyal son explains. He was in hospital, under a general anaesthetic then recovering. Obvious really. All the rest is electronic records and hospital notes.
Also Thomas no longer trusts his daughter and has abandoned all hope of reconcilliation. He thinks she has become a bad person.
He's coming to court baby and he's going to blow their shit wide open and everybody knows it.
antinoos
Well-known member
Its actually very dangerous funding someone elses litigation. Its called "maintenance" and its fundamentally unlawful the punishment being liability for the other parties costs. If the Mail really wanted to stir up some shit they could demand proof of whose paying for this. Especially if she Discontinues and they can argue it was all a sham!
It really is one of the biggest shitshows Ive ever seen nearly as cringe to watch as the bloody wedding.
antinoos
Well-known member
"Dont give him your name Pike!"
The shitshow for the reputation of the glamour girls and boys of 5RB (sounds like an experimental back rub) continues apace.
Warby will rule sometime in August whether the Five Former Friends (FFF) have "a super-charged right of privacy" (what the fuck you might ask is that?) because they are (birdies tweet and butterflies fly) "young mothers" and "journalistic sources" doing the right thing by their much loved and widely admired friend who has been the victim of bullying by the baying racist mob that is the British public led by "Bloody Elizabeth" their hated monarch and her evil army of tabloid Orcs.
I could be wrong but - Good luck with that Justin.
We also now know a lot more about just how much money is being burnt in public here. She has agreed to pay nearly £70k of hard fought costs in respect of Mays disaster. Her own costs of that, a minute part of the overall picture, must be at least the same. Thats nearly £150k down the kazi. If as I suspect everyone expects, she looses in August thats at least another £150k. This is just on two small procedural Applications. The Claimant has also paid to write letters to the Mail; draft and issue a Claim; answer two sets of Further Particulars; consider a Defence and Reply and prepare for the next step which is a Directions Hearing. I would be amazed if shes spent less than £500k of someones money! The costs of the next stages and trial will take that into millions - and if she looses? Will it by 2% on Income Tax?
This is what happens when you give a showgirl your credit card and suggest they buy themselves something nice because theyve been crying. They come back with a Sikorski helicopter and a pilot who looks like Brad Pitt.
Just what is this litigation actually about? Its not protecting anything private. That bird has flown. Its not righting any kind of wrong and the Daily Mail (which is just loving this - the best PR campaign ever; its even managing to make the bastards look good) is unreformable. No this Claim was initially about money and vengeance and now its about protecting the identity of the FFF. I mean what the actual fuck?
As clever poppet 50'sGirl (I cant do that underlining thing sorry) commented perhaps shes looking for an excuse to bail out on the grounds she is protecting her friends. In which context the line in her Witness Statement "To disclose their identities at this stage in public is an unaceptable price to pay..." sounds very interesting.
People get involved in litigation for various reasons. For us lawyers its just an often interesting but also dangerous and demanding job for the "Clients" its often existential. The worst problem of their lives: involving life changing sums of money, reputation, sometimes even liberty itself and at huge unpredictable cost.
The best clients are poor people. Its rarely their fault that they have got involved whereas greed and lies often lie at the heart of litigation for people who can afford it; they are a joy to work with and they are the only ones who are ever grateful. Oh and murderers. They are often perfectly happy having done what we'd all secretly like to do to someone who has pissed us off, and resigned to their fate.
The worst are the liars, the crooks, the fraudsters the common enemies of mankind. They often dont want to win and are undertaking the litigation to punish someone or because they love the drama or because they are not paying and have no intention of paying and being shits is what they do.
What do you think we are looking at here?
The shitshow for the reputation of the glamour girls and boys of 5RB (sounds like an experimental back rub) continues apace.
Warby will rule sometime in August whether the Five Former Friends (FFF) have "a super-charged right of privacy" (what the fuck you might ask is that?) because they are (birdies tweet and butterflies fly) "young mothers" and "journalistic sources" doing the right thing by their much loved and widely admired friend who has been the victim of bullying by the baying racist mob that is the British public led by "Bloody Elizabeth" their hated monarch and her evil army of tabloid Orcs.
I could be wrong but - Good luck with that Justin.
We also now know a lot more about just how much money is being burnt in public here. She has agreed to pay nearly £70k of hard fought costs in respect of Mays disaster. Her own costs of that, a minute part of the overall picture, must be at least the same. Thats nearly £150k down the kazi. If as I suspect everyone expects, she looses in August thats at least another £150k. This is just on two small procedural Applications. The Claimant has also paid to write letters to the Mail; draft and issue a Claim; answer two sets of Further Particulars; consider a Defence and Reply and prepare for the next step which is a Directions Hearing. I would be amazed if shes spent less than £500k of someones money! The costs of the next stages and trial will take that into millions - and if she looses? Will it by 2% on Income Tax?
This is what happens when you give a showgirl your credit card and suggest they buy themselves something nice because theyve been crying. They come back with a Sikorski helicopter and a pilot who looks like Brad Pitt.
Just what is this litigation actually about? Its not protecting anything private. That bird has flown. Its not righting any kind of wrong and the Daily Mail (which is just loving this - the best PR campaign ever; its even managing to make the bastards look good) is unreformable. No this Claim was initially about money and vengeance and now its about protecting the identity of the FFF. I mean what the actual fuck?
As clever poppet 50'sGirl (I cant do that underlining thing sorry) commented perhaps shes looking for an excuse to bail out on the grounds she is protecting her friends. In which context the line in her Witness Statement "To disclose their identities at this stage in public is an unaceptable price to pay..." sounds very interesting.
People get involved in litigation for various reasons. For us lawyers its just an often interesting but also dangerous and demanding job for the "Clients" its often existential. The worst problem of their lives: involving life changing sums of money, reputation, sometimes even liberty itself and at huge unpredictable cost.
The best clients are poor people. Its rarely their fault that they have got involved whereas greed and lies often lie at the heart of litigation for people who can afford it; they are a joy to work with and they are the only ones who are ever grateful. Oh and murderers. They are often perfectly happy having done what we'd all secretly like to do to someone who has pissed us off, and resigned to their fate.
The worst are the liars, the crooks, the fraudsters the common enemies of mankind. They often dont want to win and are undertaking the litigation to punish someone or because they love the drama or because they are not paying and have no intention of paying and being shits is what they do.
What do you think we are looking at here?
Yorkiejules
Chatty Member
I really hope the DM doesn't accept if she tries to settle and does everything they can to expose her...I know,harsh but fair.i also hope Charles suspends maintenance payments and they bankrupt her and every other law suit goes the whole way to make sure they win...so her name will be mud and
She is finally recognised as the crunt we all know her to be...
Next thing all the 5 will sue her for harassment if they get named and she has to pay their costs,
Then the powers that be sue her for the dodgy accounts and misappropriation of charity funds.
Then every John doe in the world sues her for defamation of character..
Then the surrogacy comes out and the lies about 3 baby Archie...
Then Tyler Perry sues for squatting
Then she's called in the Maxwell trial as a yacht girl
Then she's hauled over the coals for deep state dealings
Then she's sued for crimes of fashion....
At the same time as fighting a divorce and trying to get custody of the moon bump,I mean Archie...
Then sued for perjury and wasting time and perverting the course of justice
And inciting sugared almonds to threaten and unlawfully use the race card and for promoting race hate
And if I forgot anything...that as well...
She is finally recognised as the crunt we all know her to be...
Next thing all the 5 will sue her for harassment if they get named and she has to pay their costs,
Then the powers that be sue her for the dodgy accounts and misappropriation of charity funds.
Then every John doe in the world sues her for defamation of character..
Then the surrogacy comes out and the lies about 3 baby Archie...
Then Tyler Perry sues for squatting
Then she's called in the Maxwell trial as a yacht girl
Then she's hauled over the coals for deep state dealings
Then she's sued for crimes of fashion....
At the same time as fighting a divorce and trying to get custody of the moon bump,I mean Archie...
Then sued for perjury and wasting time and perverting the course of justice
And inciting sugared almonds to threaten and unlawfully use the race card and for promoting race hate
And if I forgot anything...that as well...
PennyCrayon
VIP Member
I love the part when there was the attempt to kidnap her. They told her to get out of the car and she said ‘not bloody likely’.
She has her mother’s grace and her fathers forthrightness. A wicked combination.
antinoos
Well-known member
It works like this:
MM I want to settle lets "drop hands" and put out a lovenkisses statement.
DM Fuck off
MM I will pay a contribution of a portion of your costs to charity
DM Fuck off
MM I will pay your costs
DM Either give us £1m and put out a Statement saying sorry or file a "Notice of Dicontinuance" which entitles us automatically to all our costs (assessed) and is Unconditional Surrender and we will then publish all the shit we have been gathering on you and the Princeling and you can crawl back under a rock
MM Harry!
ie because theres no counterclaim she can unilaterally drop the claim. the rarest outcome in litigation because its admitting your claim was worthless whatever you might say; and its murderously expensive.
antinoos
Well-known member
I see the Mail has released more info about what was said yesterday and its very interesting.
Only Friend B has provided a Witness Statement. Meghans team describe her as "the best possible person to give evidence" no doubt because she is the "ringleader". BUT the Mails chap says she "has proved to be unsatisfactory" which usually means giving inconsistent or even untrue evidence.
So there we have it. Meghan wants to limit the evidence to her alone. Why do we think that might be? Also the Mail have already nailed her in some way. There is an air of desperation about this Application. Expect settlement, tearful speeches, claims of racism and heroically defending her friends. Does anyone not on meds actually believe any of this?
Only Friend B has provided a Witness Statement. Meghans team describe her as "the best possible person to give evidence" no doubt because she is the "ringleader". BUT the Mails chap says she "has proved to be unsatisfactory" which usually means giving inconsistent or even untrue evidence.
So there we have it. Meghan wants to limit the evidence to her alone. Why do we think that might be? Also the Mail have already nailed her in some way. There is an air of desperation about this Application. Expect settlement, tearful speeches, claims of racism and heroically defending her friends. Does anyone not on meds actually believe any of this?
antinoos
Well-known member
If I was advising the Nanny I would argue that Scobies statement about what specifically Didnt Happen is a breach of the bi-lateral secrecy covenants in the NDA and thus none of them applied. He is clearly her spokesthing and the courts will not allow circumvention of obligations of confidentiality by a "process of denial limitation" ie "OK did this happen then?" "No" "What about this?" If one party flouts the confiedntiality covenant then arguably neither party is bound by them. He should have said "I am unable to comment"......bit of a long shot but nevertheless a runner, for whats called in the trade "buggeration".Forgot to charge the batteries?
I've never doubted there is a child and you have to feel sorry for the poor kid getting caught up in this. Who or what has turned up in the staged photos is a whole different question.
If Omid Scobie knows the confidential reason why a staff member, who would only have been hired with a triple-plated NDA, was let go, given that episode would surely have been handled under another triple-plated compromise agreement, who was his source?
And that Nanny is probably having a quiet chat with her lawyers right now before giving her side to Wootton as an exclusive.
For Campagne:
Scobies fucked up again.
Campagne
VIP Member
A huge amount of info has come out this week.
My take on the pair of them is that they’re both extremely insecure and status obsessed; but in different ways.
Meghan wants to be the centre of attention and the leader.
I think there were definitely money worries in her childhood; despite her father winning the lottery, he was eventually bankrupt; hence her always merching and trying to hustle cash.
Her desire for Status must come from the skewed world of Hollywood; where only Alist counts; and Meghan couldn’t make it on merit or talent alone, so she thought she’d be catapulted into the Alist by having a title. However celebrity and royalty can exist side by side; but they do not mix; you are either one or the other.
Back in the day; there was talk of Kevin Costner casting Diana in the Bodyguard 2.
if it had ever happened; the result would be risible.
Even Grace Kelly; who actually was Alist and had an Oscar; remained just the Princess of Monaco.
Then we have Harry, no money worries; it’s not something he’s ever thought about.
His insecurity is his paranoia of the press, and the lack of proper parenting from the age of 12.
Also, he knows that he is not quite as bright as his brother, and he will always be number 2. He basically has the same insecurities and issues as Prince Andrew.
Harry has the Visible status of his title and security detail which Meghan craved, but which he hates.
However, being able to be aide de camp and colonel in chief etc as well as a Royal Duke; is hugely important to him; despite the “Just call me Harry”.
Its not something he could ever have early on his own merit.
i think the appeal of the US was that he thought (pre Covid) he was going to be like the Obamas / Clintons / Gates and all the other billionaires he met at Googlecamp.
So he would have a status at least equal to his brother and a billionaire to boot.
Problem is, that all looked great on the back of a fag packet. But the Harkles do not have the intelligence or the hard work behind them to justify their status. Leave alone the impact of Covid; they are just a pair of hollow figureheads.
My take on the pair of them is that they’re both extremely insecure and status obsessed; but in different ways.
Meghan wants to be the centre of attention and the leader.
I think there were definitely money worries in her childhood; despite her father winning the lottery, he was eventually bankrupt; hence her always merching and trying to hustle cash.
Her desire for Status must come from the skewed world of Hollywood; where only Alist counts; and Meghan couldn’t make it on merit or talent alone, so she thought she’d be catapulted into the Alist by having a title. However celebrity and royalty can exist side by side; but they do not mix; you are either one or the other.
Back in the day; there was talk of Kevin Costner casting Diana in the Bodyguard 2.
if it had ever happened; the result would be risible.
Even Grace Kelly; who actually was Alist and had an Oscar; remained just the Princess of Monaco.
Then we have Harry, no money worries; it’s not something he’s ever thought about.
His insecurity is his paranoia of the press, and the lack of proper parenting from the age of 12.
Also, he knows that he is not quite as bright as his brother, and he will always be number 2. He basically has the same insecurities and issues as Prince Andrew.
Harry has the Visible status of his title and security detail which Meghan craved, but which he hates.
However, being able to be aide de camp and colonel in chief etc as well as a Royal Duke; is hugely important to him; despite the “Just call me Harry”.
Its not something he could ever have early on his own merit.
i think the appeal of the US was that he thought (pre Covid) he was going to be like the Obamas / Clintons / Gates and all the other billionaires he met at Googlecamp.
So he would have a status at least equal to his brother and a billionaire to boot.
Problem is, that all looked great on the back of a fag packet. But the Harkles do not have the intelligence or the hard work behind them to justify their status. Leave alone the impact of Covid; they are just a pair of hollow figureheads.
antinoos
Well-known member
No hes not a party to the proceedings.Really appreciating Aunty's expert input here!
What's the law's view regarding this on individual vs marital joint assets - does Harry's wealth count as theirs and therefore hers?
She doesnt actually seem to own anything does she? Which is classic.
Isnt all the USA stuff in Doria's name? The only joint UK asset is whatever leasehold interest they might have in the no doubt hideous shagpad they had done up at our expense. So one half of that could be attacked (not the Freehold but they must have some kind of real personal interest or why else make the insultingly small repayments?) forcing someone else to pay out of embarassment if it all goes tits and she storms off with the baby/hostage claiming shes been the victim of domestic abuse and refusing to meet her legal obligations - which is the ultimate (probably very unlikely) risk for the stupid deluded twat.
That zoom broadcast by Harry today made me seethe. He really is just carrying on likes he's George VIth leading his brave "people" in a global struggle rather than a pathetic unemployed barely literate grubby ex-royal shacked up with a psychopath in a borrowed villa.
Thanks for all your kind words I'm off out now.
Margot1977
VIP Member
Oooo....Princess Anne throwing some shade I think (subtly)...she said that "people talk about being trained for the life in the Royal family, and I'm sorry to say there's no such thing. You just learn through experience"
antinoos
Well-known member
Finally for me, after a fascinating week and in anticpation of Warby delivering judgment next week - isnt it odd that the best outcome would be her winning and having no immediate excuse to ditch the litigation that is going to be her undoing? The Law is the greatest non-violent arena for unintended consequences.
freda19
VIP Member
OK, meant to comment on that weeks ago but got distracted. Sorry this is a bit long. Feel free to scroll past.
The stuff that's coming out must be doing his head in. She no doubt told him she hated the paps and had never/would never have any truck with them ... yet now they are speaking out that she's had them on speed dial since early toronto days.
Pertinent to that , and hugely significant to haz I should think, is that a pap caught an image of them on the street at their first date (because she must have called one). He will not like that at all, her conspiring with his avowed enemy.
Another massive red flag should be the new revelation of her changing her wikipedia(or whatever it's called) page, erasing all the frippery and nonsense work and adding all the Humanitarian/eco warrior wokey shite that haz professes to support, just weeks before their shagathon became public knowledge. Timely or what?
I mean a normal human with even a half functioning brain would collate these revelations and be suspicious. Wouldn't they?
Then there's the business stuff that's flopped. I'd bet my house she told him she knew exactly what she was doing and would make them millions. Flop. She hasn't a clue and they've wasted money hand over fist.
Then there's the Mylilpony mess. OK, MLP is a cunt but smeggy should have showed some indication of support, albeit vague and nothing she could get battered for, but no. She saw that BLM thing as literally her ticket to ride the bandwagon and fly her colours (no pun intended) so MLP, the twat who stood by her through thick and thin, can go fuck herself cos it's every gal for herself.
Also, coaching dopey haz for that rehearsed video where they dissed the commonwealth and called for compensation and street rebellion against 'the establishment'(read Royals
). She didn't do her homework and he's pig ignorant of his family history so they both made fools of themselves. Even thick as pigshit haz must have cringed at the feedback where people were laughing at their ignorance on the subject they were preaching about.Surely to God he must be becoming aware that he's hitched his wonky wagon to a very dodgy star and it's hauling him off to the rubbish tip.
Margot1977
VIP Member
I think I know what H was doing during those 3 minutes while waiting...
Right ear: check
Left ear: check
My balls: oh fuuu*k!
Right ear: check
Left ear: check
My balls: oh fuuu*k!
PennyCrayon
VIP Member
antinoos
Well-known member
Ta dum, silly old Aunty keeping you waiting:
It provides that any "asset" within Travalyst (that is a SR or MWX "net asset") can be transferred at anytime (before or after dissolution) by the Members (who are effectively by fiat Harry) to pretty much anything they can argue has "a similar purpose" or particular purpose within that similar purpose - ie anything.
Now call me an old cynic but given that Travalyst has no identifiable activities that might spend the £150k of net SR assett ie public money given by the former joint foundation, doesnt this sound like a vehicle to recycle its own donations? Its well dodgy and the proof of the pudding will be whether Travalyst ever actually does anything but go quietly out of business.
It provides that any "asset" within Travalyst (that is a SR or MWX "net asset") can be transferred at anytime (before or after dissolution) by the Members (who are effectively by fiat Harry) to pretty much anything they can argue has "a similar purpose" or particular purpose within that similar purpose - ie anything.
Now call me an old cynic but given that Travalyst has no identifiable activities that might spend the £150k of net SR assett ie public money given by the former joint foundation, doesnt this sound like a vehicle to recycle its own donations? Its well dodgy and the proof of the pudding will be whether Travalyst ever actually does anything but go quietly out of business.
PennyCrayon
VIP Member
Oooo....Princess Anne throwing some shade I think (subtly)...she said that "people talk about being trained for the life in the Royal family, and I'm sorry to say there's no such thing. You just learn through experience"