How the Palace Tried to get Andrew off the hook

February 21, 2022March 29, 2022 / Revolting Subject / 3 Comments

Bizarrely, when it comes to Prince Andrew, there is some sympathy around for the Royal Family & Monarchy. As if…. he’s just an aberration – the embarassing black sheep of the family. Conveniently ignoring that his behaviour is a predictable result of enabling arrogant toffs who are never ever told they are wrong Sir.

Let’s look back on Prince Andrew and the workings of the Palace – and note how the Monarchy’s army of PR people and “aides” assisted and enabled him at every turn.

We all now know – and he does not deny – that Prince Andrew forced himself on a vulnerable teenager. This Bad Apple theory suits the secretive inner workings of the monarchy – it obscures the fact that the palace that has been straining to help him avoid justice all along. Enabling Andrew. That’s the story no-one is focusing on…

1999 – Prince Andrew flies with Maxwell to Epstein’s island. Flight logs show this. Prince Andrew’s security & the palace knew this. Did no-one think….erm….to ask ANY questions ? Did the Met Bodyguards who accompanied him report what they saw at Little St James ? What say you Buckingham Palace? It really stinks.

1999 – Epstein and Maxwell stay at Balmoral. Is there any security clearance or background check required ? Did anyone query who they were ? Or if Prince Andrew says they’re his chums, do they dare not question Royal Judgement (mind you Savile was allowed to roam around the palaces as he pleased)

2001 – Prince Andrew Rapes Virgina – The Photo. The house. The vulnerable 17 year old runaway surrounded by older rich and powerful people. So, Buckingham Palace – why can’t you tell us …were Andrew’s security with him ? Why are their logs not available ? Why won’t the palace produce the notes that prove he was in Pizza Express that night ? Did they rip out & destroy the pages that said ‘Tramp nightclub. Private residence in Belgravia with young girl’ ?

2012 –THE PALACE HELPS ARRANGE FOR EPSTEIN TO PAY OFF FERGIE’S DEBTS: that’s what happened. It was all arranged via ‘The Duke’s Office’ – i.e. palace staff. Despite Epstein’s conviction – nobody objected. They were not duped, they facilitated. Later Fergie apologises for taking £15k from Epstein to pay off her debts – saying “I abhor paedophilia and any sexual abuse of children and know that this was a gigantic error of judgment on my behalf.” Thanks for clarifying that Fergie. She also added “This is the first time ever in my life, and I mean ‘ever’, that I have been debt free. It allows me to go forward to do what I do, being a good mother, a philanthropist for children…”

There you go, a “philanthropist for children”, who eagerly grabbed money from a convicted paedophile.

2015 – THE PALACE VICTIM BLAMES – “It is emphatically denied that the Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship with [the woman]. The allegations made are false and without any foundation.” thunders Buckingham Palace. Think about that for a moment – those are not Prince Andrew’s words, they are The British Monarchy’s words. They are issued from on high, and come with the full heft of the establishment behind them. They are written by a highly paid aide, with expensive lawyers whispering advice. I’d imagine the Queen would have had to approve the wording. We now know they are LIES. You, the taxpayer paid ( lots) to victimise a young girl, to upset and traduce her.

THE PALACE THREATENS JOURNALISM – When the initial story broke, the Palace started flexing its muscle, making veiled threats against newspapers who might reveal further information. ABC newsreader Amy Robach (unwittingly) revealed that she had recorded an interview with Andrew’s victim – Virginia – and that it had never been broadcast. “I’ve had the story for three years,” Robach says in the video ( which no longer seems to be online, but there’s a version here – warning links to FOX ). “We would not put it on the air. Um, first of all, I was told, ‘Who was Jeffrey Epstein? No one knows who that is. This is a stupid story. Then The Palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways.”

September 2019 – “sources close to” Prince Andrew ( i.e. the palace and his PR people ) claimed the Andrew / Virgina photo was faked – absolutely desperate stuff from the palace, trying to undermine the victim and their irrefutable evidence.

November 2019 – The Prince and the Palace thinks they can outsmart us, with a tell all interview with Emily Maitliss. Whilst turned out to be a great scoop, it’s worth considering the dubious journalistic practice – it took place in the grandeur of Buckingham Palace ( ergo, lending it state-like gravitas ). Also, the interview was not in keeping with news norms – Maitlis discussed the content of the interview in advance ( over tea at the palace, Prince Andrew himself declared he thought the photograph was a doctored fake. ) Astonishing though it may seen, the incredibly stupid alibi – I was at Pizza Express – was prearranged by the palace before the interview. His answer would have been rehearsed.

From Emily Maitlis’s blog about the interview

Feb 2020 – An exasperated FBI announced “Prince Andrew has provided zero cooperation“. “Sources” tell the newspapers that he is ‘more than happy to talk’. But of course, those unattributable sources ( i.e. The Palace) are just lying. The Monarchy is run by the Queen, and no-one is making Prince Andrew cooporate with the law, and they continue to lie to the public, and besmirch the victim.

There may be other countless moments the palace intervened to pervert the course of justice. They know Prince Andrew is toast. I wonder what role the Government took in the whole thing. Did they apply pressure to get rid of charges?

But they don’t want anyone scrutinising THEIR ROLE in the whole sleazy farrago. Because you – the taxpayer – pay for palace staff, for PR, for lawyers.

Which is why we should not draw a line under it.

( and once again, respect & sympathy for Virginia Giuffre, the girl from rough circumstances who took on the establishment and won. Go Girl.)

[ UPDATE: 29th March – Prince Andrew, is pride of place beside the Queen at Westminster Abbey for Prince Phillip’s memorial service. Being chauffered, heralded, protected. ]

Please do share on Facebook & Twitter & elsewhere.

Top 5 BBC Royal Grovels

September 26, 2018March 27, 2019 / Revolting Subject / 3 Comments

Barely a day goes by, with out some bum-clenching toadying nonsense about the royal family broadcast on the BBC. It’s relentless and it’s brain rot for the vulnerable.

Lets see what the BBC thinks we really need to know…

Woman Closes Door – The BBC reported that a Woman closed a car door. Alert the Pulitzer committee.

Boring Posh Couple Get on Tube – The BBC fawned at the very idea that Chaz n Dazed stepped out of their Bentley and deigned to slum it..

BBC Presenter Gleefully excuses Queen’s racism – here, the BBC suddenly have an interesting royal story so…they quickly sweep it under the carpet. A grovelling guest recounts the time where the Queen met a foreign ambassador and declares ‘I thought I was talking to a gorilla’. BBC Presenter, gives nervous hoot and describes such blatent xenophobia as ‘cheeky’. Will I Am doesn’t look too impressed.

If a working class person had said speaking to a foreign ambassador was like ‘talking to a gorilla’ on BBC1, can you imagine the outrage?

The Queen Lobbied The Home Secretary to Have A Man She Didn’t Like Deported – Wow – an actual news story. – not many Abu Hanza fans about – but still the queen shouldn’t be interfering in justice like some Daily Mail gammon should she ?

WAIT….the BBC reached for it’s forelock & quickly APOLOGISED to the queen for daring to report an interesting insight. Scoops 0 Sycophancy 1

Child Grows Up – Prince George is 1. Prince George Is 2. Prince George is 3. Prince George is 4. Prince George is 5. – don’t bother clicking the links – I can assure you it’s a dull read. And, y’know, it’s sort of creepy – this child presented to us as if it’s the new Blue Peter dog. Child Deprived of Normal Upbringing to Serve As Cute Mascot for Feudalism is a not a story I can find anywhere on the BBC.

The point is….it’s RELENTLESS.

And psychologically, it seeps in – the point is Everything That Posh Rich People Do is Very Important.

It’s not.

They’re not.

And this world of royal fetishists is right wing Jacob Rees Mogg culture, drip fed to the masses.

What can you do ? Share this article on Facebook & Twitter and print it off and slide it under the cubicle if you see Nicholas Witchell going for a royal poo.

masticating for the royals

( update: I am going to add a list of unbelievably trivial royal stories as the bbc continue to publish them)

23rd October – Prince harry drank something People seemed pleased.

22nd October – a few people with red hair like Prince Harry. THANK YOU PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTERS MY LICENSE FEE HAS BEEN WELL INVESTED

18th October – Royal tour Non-Events. They saw some things, she looked pretty. Lap it up proles.

17th October – In this truely moronic and dire report, some oul’ Aussie who won’t even go to see the royals, mouths some banal platitudes about the royals. This is utterly utterly dire. Why even publish this?

17th October – Boy rubs beard. 4th headline

14th November Prince CHarles likes posh food

Christmas Day – dull family go to church as usual

16th January – posh woman says some shit about pizzas

26 January – Queen plays game.

27th February – woman speaks a bit differently

The Royal Family – above the law…

July 30, 2018May 12, 2019 / Revolting Subject / 4 Comments

Some otherwise reasonable and savvy people, are are Mushy Monarchists.

They talk the talk politically, but reserve the right to flop on the couch and wallow in a a tedious documentary about the Queen’s best pals all being horses.

The Mushy Monarchists justification runs thus…’oh come on it’s harmless pageantry and flags & good ol’ British tradition’. Such nonsense lets the upper classes sentimentalise inequality & repackage unpleasant snobbishness as charming character traits.

But this whimsical narrative is shattered when members of the royal family are revealed to be above the law, meddling and arrogant.

I’ll be the Judge

The laws don’t apply to the Windsors. Under UK law, the Sovereign cann ot be prosecute d. Or even questioned apparently.

Prince Charles has long hung out with some dubious characters. Despite some desperate spinning by royal PR, Prince Charles’s long friendship with Jimmy Savile is undeniable, his life guru Laurens Van Der Post impregnated a 14 year old girl ( lets not forget that Van Der Post is Prince William’s godfather ). Recently, Charles sympathised with abusive bishop Peter Bell, lamenting the ‘monstrous wrongs that have been done to you’. He gave the Abusive Bishop money, and then a house “not too far from here so you can come over more easily”. Aww. That’s nice.

Of course none of this association implies Prince Charles himself is guilty of anything so sinister – I am politically opposed to The Windsors, but no-one should be accused of anything so toxic unless there’s compelling evidence. So to be clear, I am not amongst the wilder fringes of the net insinuating against Charles.

But clearly, the legal process does not hold them to account.

Here we have a man who no-one can question, but he readily admits he was deceived. A man who’s always ready to lecture us on ‘duty’, but REFUSED to give a legal statement to the Independent Inquiry on Child Sexual Abuse.

Think about that for a second. An inquiry who’s stated aim is to ensure that children get ‘the care and protection from sexual abuse they need and deserve, now and in the future.’

Charles and legal staff REFUSE. A statement implies swearing an oath – and Charles lawyers shrugged, and said the court couldn’t compel him to release a statement. Why are they so concerned ?

Instead, they send a long letter, full of equivocation and ‘can’t remembers’ which was read out to everyones dissatisfaction.

One of the many things Charles couldn’t remember was who he was referring to in his letters when he told the Bishop he would ‘see off this horrid man if he tries anything again’. How convenient.

After Savile, wasn’t there a collective moment when a shocked UK resolved that in the future, no stone would be left unturned, no matter who it upset ? Apparently not.

Before I bang the cyber gavel, , here’s a list of royal incidents where the current crop got away with it…

Prince Andrew rams gates to avoid 1 mile detour ( completely fine ).

Prince Harry out shooting, rare birds of prey shot in area…( nothing to see)

Prince Andrew goes to small house in London to meet with 17 year old girl who was trafficked across the Atlantic by a convicted paedophile ( seems legit )

In fact the only court case where a member of Royal Family was held to account was when Princess Anne’s dog attacked a 7 year old and 12 year old, biting them on the collarbone and leg. Penalties for this crime could be a £5000 fine, 6 months in jail, and having the dog put down. Anne was told to pay £250 to each of the traumatised kids ( there’s no mention of an apology anywhere). The child biting bull terrier went home to eat steak. But a ended up eating one of the Queen’s corgis.

If you’re wanna be in the cool gang with the cool kids, please share this post on the Information Super Highway.

They never interfere with democracy. Until they do.

March 21, 2015March 21, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 7 Comments

Of all the laughable falsehoods about The Windsors, the idea that they are apolitical is the most mendacious.

Apolitical ? In a Land Owning-Fox-Hunting-Posh Worshipping-Class-Structure-Entrenching-Public School Promoting-Army-Lovin-Aristocrat-justifying-Red-white-and-blue-patriotism type way? Apolitical in the way that reinforces the idea of a class system where those at the top deserve their status because they DO RIGHT? Remind you of any political outlook?

Their very existence is a deterrent to progressive social change, they are a mascot for the 1%, always have been, always will be, no matter how many faux matey Harry’s Just One o’ The Lads type photo-bullshit they do in The Sun.

So, they’re a massive icon of traditional right wing establishment thinking, seeding the idea that Things Cannot Be Any Other Way. That is bad enough….

But the dim Windsor family ( go on, count those A-levels… ) interfere politically behind close doors, and occasionally, in the open.

Prince Charles, of course, famously interferes, championing a whole host of -mostly moronic -causes. Even when he’s on the right track, he has no right to interfere. That’s the deal. So whilst I agree with Chazza about the environment, as a Windsor he has no right to voice an opinion. More on the Republican’s Great Hope another time.

Instead, lets look at Betty Windsor’s meddling in last years Scottish Independence Referendum – an absolute straight down the line abuse of power. It’s an outrage, but of course, the sycophantic scribblers just cheered louder.

With the polls tight, and 4 days to go in the most exciting democratic event in UK politics, which could enable radical change….Betty went to church in Aberdeenshire.

For the first time in 12 years, the press are invited – fancy that ! Betty comes out – and highly unusually – fancy that ! she goes for a walkabout outside the church. The Police then “invited press to observe exchanges” ( this is almost completely verboten – fancy that ! ), and queeny “warns” an onlooker – who prefers not to be named ( fancy that ! )- that Scots should “think very carefully about the future”.

Of course, it wasn’t a spontaneous remark ( the fact that there’s wriggle room suggests it’s been written with spin doctors ) but with the BBC & tabs in full British Unionist Cry she didn’t need to spell it out.

So there you have it. Regardless what you think of the referendum, the queen deliberately and consciously interfered. She tried to sway the most important vote in UK politics for years. The establishment was threatened, and she intervened on the side of the establishment.

There as almost no criticism. No journalists was bold enough to ask her if she’d interfered.

Most of the people who voted No, were older, and richer.

David Cameron phoned her with the result, and she “purred” down the line.

Boak.

Boak Boak Boak Boak Boak.

They don’t interfere in politics. Except when they do.

Reporting on the Royals…

March 12, 2015March 12, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 1 Comment

The first problem with royal reports being dribble-jizzed all over our papers and telly is that it exists at all. That it’s seen as Vitally Important That You Pay Attention To These Rich Dullards.

But lets park that, and not linger on the pacifying effects on the national psyche.

What kind of journalism is royal reporting ? Because, essentially, what the royals do is deadly dull. A typical ‘appointment’ sees a Windsor arrives, a Windsor inspects some non-controversial thing, A Windsor nods, A Windsor leaves in a fast car ( about 45 minutes later). They usually say nothing, or if they do, it’s excruciatingly tedious. Surely journalists stare at one another after with ghastly realisation that they have to confect some guff around…THAT ?

And if they do say something that can be used as a feeble quote – “my brother would never let me live it down” the press present this cold turd to us as if Oscar Wilde and Martin Luther King had been brainstorming over a bottle of buckfast.

And there’s never any context, let alone criticism- when opening an NHS hospital none of the reporters ever say – “this is the only time the Windsor family are in an NHS hospital because despite the hugely positive message royal endorsment of NHS would send would send… they landrover off to the clutches of expensive private care when they need treatment…”

Who are you ? Whats the NHS ? And When can one leave?

Weirdly, it’s not only me who is appalled by the press – but the Windsor family themselves clearly treat them with contempt. So not only do royal-hacks have to write 2000 words of fawning copy based around Prince Harry having a ball-achingly boring look at some red squirrels – they have to do it knowing that the very people they’re sooking up to, can’t bear the sight of them. I mean, imagine for a second, you’re life’s work is devoted to praising dull toffs who won’t deign to speak to you because they despise you. Bloody Awful – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4397667.stm.

It would not surprise me, if many of the hacks are much more cynical about Das Feudal Circus than their deferential copy suggests, but they need to pay the mortgage, and they get nice trips around the world at license-payer / Daily Mail’s expense. At least, I hope that’s the case, it’d be much more shocking if they were actually in a sycophantic thrall to The Firm.

Enough sympathy for the red-faced boozy royal hack pack…it’s us – the viewer, the reader, the citizen – that our sympathies lie. I mean, those BBC reports are insulting to our intelligence.

Consider today’s bilge..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31856606

The royal says not a thing. It’s entirely choreographed. It’s completely unenlightening. Nicholas Witchell ( who scabbed during the 1989 BBC strike, and who Prince Chaz described as ‘an awful man’ ) tells us she’ll really remember it ( without a shred of evidence). It’s not news !

The point is, Nicholas Witchell pre-chews everything here, he brightly beams about how brilliant it was that a posh women had a short visit to a set, and then tells us it’s memorable.

It’s not important to us at all. And it pushes other stories from the news agenda. Not only that, after reports about the fucked up world, this sugary baby food gently suggests that despite the rest of the news – EVERYTHING IS FINE, because The Posh People Find that Things Are As They Should Be When They Are Presented For Inspection. Be good serfs. Don’t question those above. They’re nice and you should fawn to them

How can this be news ? How can these people consider themselves journalists ?

What I’m saying is, I can’t bear Nicholas Witchell masticating with the royals.

Masticating with Kate.

Masticating with The Queen

Masticating with Prince Harry

Masticating with Prince Chaz

Masticating, dear viewer, over you.

masticating for the royals

revoltingsubject

Can't Stand The Reign

press