https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51271871
Prince Andrew 'uncooperative' over Epstein inquiry, US prosecutor says
*smack head*
Honestly, I can't see any great likenesses. I'm far from a royal fan and I love people dishing the dirt on them, but I just don't buy any of those. Look at all the dirt on Princess Margaret, it's all out there, but Elizabeth seems genuinely mumsy and has never seemed to be involved in anything like that. Seriously, somebody would have spilled the tea in deathbed confession or something.People like Epstein, Savile and Rolf Harris, hang around important people to get away with what they do. Like how Savile spent every new year day with Margaret Thatcher and Rolf Harris painted the Queen.
I find it confusing when news keeps on with unproven accusations, but couldn't care about things with bigger consequences.
Like how the Queen is the head of the Church of England, while having children with 3 different men. It's interesting how some people are brainwashed they immediately call it nonsense and don't look for images of the alleged fathers to see the similarities.
Look for Lord Porchester to see how similar he is to Andrew. Also Baron Plunket to see how similar he is to Edward.
In the book called Behind Palace Doors by Nigel Dempster, he says when Andrew was born he was called the Love Child. I think Dempster thought it meant that Queen and Philip had got back together after not sharing a bedroom for years. Well anyway see my image and I don't see how you can deny the obvious.
Her public appearance with him was alarming, I’m not a massive H&M fan but their antics pale in comparison to what Andrew has done & gotten away with over the years. I do think he had with the girl accusing him, her account just rang true for me. Maybe it wasn’t technical criminal re age of consent, but she appears to have been trafficked, & even if she wasn’t it’s si unsavory for a man with daughters especially.Andrew has always been problematic. Even as far back as 2011, there were articles about it. Here's my favorite one:
The Trouble with Andrew | Vanity Fair
In the royal-wedding afterglow, Buckingham Palace still has a major P.R. problem: how to handle Prince Andrew, Britain’s trade ambassador and fourth in line to the throne. The prince’s dissolute lifestyle, links to unsavory foreign potentates, and friendship with the American registered sex...archive.vanityfair.com
The Queen has always coddled him far too much. Even discounting his close association with a sex-trafficker, the business shenanigans that he has got up to should have never been allowed. He has monetized the Crown for a long time, right under the noses of Her Majesty's subjects. His messy ex-wife and her shady, and frankly embarrassing behavior, bankruptcies, etc. It's appalling.
I feel sorry for Charles in a way. He was ignored as a child, denied his first choice of a bride, and now has this mess to contend with as his time to reign draws closer. Andrew should be stripped of all his privileges (his HRH), his security, he should be banished as in no more outings with his mum at church, no more balcony appearances, and he should be forced to at minimum meet with the FBI and cooperate. I think he's still in contact with Ghislaine Maxwell and likely, IMO, knows exactly where she is. But I think he'll continue to hide and try to ride this out. The Queen is showing him her support by letting him accompany her to church, and I've seen articles quoting palace peeps that he's "been her rock during Sussexit", so she's walking a very thin line. I felt the Queen had always put her duty first, yet apparently she hasn't when one considers everything Andrew has gotten away with. He's a POS with no sense of duty whatsoever. A self serving, sweaty, entitled, twat.
I bet he is being “her rock” aka sucking up so he’s not banished!. The Queen is showing him her support by letting him accompany her to church, and I've seen articles quoting palace peeps that he's "been her rock during Sussexit", so she's walking a very thin line.
Exactly! I have wondered if Andrew's actions didn't embolden Meghan, making her think, well he's bringing in tons of extra money whilst still being a working Royal, so why can't we? It wasn't her place at all, but the difference in standards is deafening. No wonder Harry is so pissy. It's unprecedented that the BRF is entangled in a sex-trafficking scandal whilst being blackmailed by an American.Her public appearance with him was alarming, I’m not a massive H&M fan but their antics pale in comparison to what Andrew has done & gotten away with over the years. I do think he had with the girl accusing him, her account just rang true for me. Maybe it wasn’t technical criminal re age of consent, but she appears to have been trafficked, & even if she wasn’t it’s si unsavory for a man with daughters especially.
As for the I don’t sweat from the trauma of being a war hero what the actual F!
I’m no fan of Andrew but it’s seems the FBI/investigators are cherry picking who they want to investigate and make it public knowledge. If I was Andrew I’d tell them, OK, I’ll play your games as soon as you include Clinton and Bloomberg in the equation. So many high profile people seem to be flying under the radar on this one. I don’t doubt they are all guilty, at least by association, but it hardly seems like a level playing field at the moment and Andrew is such a high profile element he may just end up being the fall guy.Its such a cliche word these days but this is unprecedented. The queen's second son can't go to the states.
He must have been advised it's better for him to say nothing and have it hanging over his head forever.
Yes, I do agree, the number of high profile people closely associated with Epstein who aren’t being sought for questioning by the FBI is staggering.I’m no fan of Andrew but it’s seems the FBI/investigators are cherry picking who they want to investigate and make it public knowledge. If I was Andrew I’d tell them, OK, I’ll play your games as soon as you include Clinton and Bloomberg in the equation. So many high profile people seem to be flying under the radar on this one. I don’t doubt they are all guilty, at least by association, but it hardly seems like a level playing field at the moment and Andrew is such a high profile element he may just end up being the fall guy.
Fair comment and they should all be interviewed/questioned. No stone unturned etc.I’m no fan of Andrew but it’s seems the FBI/investigators are cherry picking who they want to investigate and make it public knowledge. If I was Andrew I’d tell them, OK, I’ll play your games as soon as you include Clinton and Bloomberg in the equation. So many high profile people seem to be flying under the radar on this one. I don’t doubt they are all guilty, at least by association, but it hardly seems like a level playing field at the moment and Andrew is such a high profile element he may just end up being the fall guy.
I remember seeing footage of the Queen returning from a long foreign tour around the commonewealth and prince Charles who was about 3/4 years waiting to meet her off the train with his grandmother the Queen Mother. He was tiny and I remember Queenie coming over to him looking v severe and not crouching down to be be level with him and just extending a gloved hand for him to shake, she was really icy and quite cruel, her smile was forced and fixed and the poor little kid looked terrified, you could see the Queen Mother knew what was going on and how he felt, that is why he grew so fond of her she was his mother figure not his biological mother. In contrast Anne was far more confident and was her father's favourite and of course the real contrast came when Andrew was born, the Queen couldn't stop smiling at him and she was very tactile with him, and yes it was widely rumoured that Porchester was his Dad and he looks like him, far more stocky than his brothers with a full head of hair. Can't say I have heard much about Edward's parentage though, I thought Philip was his dad. Never really got why she was so cold to Charles maybe he was unplanned she seemed to despise him and to be honest still does while pweirdo Andrew is still her favourite.
It shows a great coldness if you are obliged to loath the heir and your firstborn, its horrible. Thanks goodness that Charles and Diane, even more so, broke this awful "tradition".From a historical standpoint, the Germanic royal houses always had issues where the King / Queen would never trust or like their heirs. Regicide and being usurped by impatient heirs was a legitimate fear, especially in Europe. Think Houses of Hanover and Saxe Cobergs etc. Queen Victoria positively loathed her eldest son, and thats before you get to the Kings before her.
Disliking one’s heir is pretty much tradition in that establishment. Charles had no chance. I know some put it down to his quiet and reserved nature, but I think that she still would have been cold with him even if he was the spit of his dad.
I remember reading something years ago where Elizabeth was keen to outlive her son to ensure the crown never went to Charles - this was during the spider letters era and the height of Diana.
I think it’s less an obligation to hate your heir as opposed to being raised in an environment when you witness your family constantly plot against each other and slag each other off. Notwithstanding courtiers and other aristocrats winding things up between the generations to progress and enrich themselves.It shows a great coldness if you are obliged to loath the heir and your firstborn, its horrible. Thanks goodness that Charles and Diane, even more so, broke this awful "tradition".
Thanks for this, I’d never thought of it before but makes perfect senseI think it’s less an obligation to hate your heir as opposed to being raised in an environment when you witness your family constantly plot against each other and slag each other off. Notwithstanding courtiers and other aristocrats winding things up between the generations to progress and enrich themselves.
And not only would you have needed to keep a close eye on your immediate relatives, your extended family abroad could be tricky too. The UK has literally imported royals with tenuous claims before and Saxe Cobergs (Windsor was a family name invented in WWI to preserve the UK monarchy) fought on both sides of the Great War.
It all results in a high pressure environment that us modern snowflakes would describe as “toxic”.
You will note how chilled out by comparison Liz was when it came to Andy. Andy came with less responsibility and less of a perceived threat to her dynasty than his older brother. With any luck, the positive spin presented by the Cambridges as parents contains some truth and George won‘t be packed off to an austere boarding school to toughen him up.
Fuck it, I’m getting my coat. I need to get out more.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?