HaHaHa thank you Callistemon 
Gransnet forums
Chat
Royalty the queen and her family.
(1001 Posts)Some news about our H o S
RF family want their 1969 documentary to be taken off air. The Queen was talking in it about a governor that looked like a gorilla, in one little clip, of docu seen on twitter.
Queen doesn't want her various shares and their values in companies made public too embarrassing. And lobbied in the 70s to be made exempt from new law. She has millions in off shore accounts.
P Charles land owner lobbied to be exempt from new leaseholder legislation that would have allowed homeowners to buy the land their property sits on.
And when people from the Duchy die with no living relatives P Charles gets the money, with other landowners around the country money goes to the treasury
Then there is Andrew
The 20,000 Sandringham Estate gets millions in subsidies
Queen gets her Wendy house refurbished to her own specifications including a new thatched roof.
Meanwhile in other news a little boy stole a tin of soup because he was so hungry, never mind.
www.republic.org.uk
Ten out of ten for persistence, Grany!!
???
Deja Vu.
Yes for some.
Bridgeit do you really imagine that just because they lost their Royal status this family would suddenly begin doing all their own dirty work? They would still employ people to clear up for them.
And there would of course be employment for some in the Head of State's staff.
Do you not care about all those employed by RF (& we are talking a lot of people) who would lose their jobs?
Grany
"We are calling on parliament and the prime minister to start an open, honest public debate about the future of the monarchy. We are calling for the abolition of the monarchy."
If a referendum was held I think you will find the vast majority would vote in favour of keeping the monarchy.
I do think Andrew should sit down with the investigators and answer their questions - it can be done in UK. I have no idea whether the accusations against him are true or not but the longer he refuses to answer questions the more fuel is added to the fire that he has something to hide
I believe USA has something called "Sovereign Immunity" which means the sovereign of a foreign country cannot be prosecuted - however, I am unsure whether that extends to the family of the sovereign.
If the monarchy was abolished then we just into the arguments and entitlements of a President. No, leave it alone. We don’t need the crisis of all this. Let sleeping dogs lie.
Smileless2012
Why? Do you honestly think it will make any difference Grany?
It's time to abolish the monarchy and ensure the Queen is Britain's last monarch.
"We are calling on parliament and the prime minister to start an open, honest public debate about the future of the monarchy. We are calling for the abolition of the monarchy."
Why? Do you honestly think it will make any difference Grany?
Sign petition to abolish the monarchy
www.republic.org.uk/petition
trisher
I don't think we'll ever find out the truth anyway. I think Ghislaine Maxwell will plea bargain and some things will just fade away.
I’m another agreeing with trisher That they extent of involvement of various famous men in the murky world of Epstein is likely to remain unknown.
Maddyone, the age of consent varies in the US it can by 17. If a 17 year old is groomed and trafficked, as these girls were, then US age law stands.
It seems highly unlikely any adult could have been unaware that sex with young women or girls would be part of the ‘fun’ when spending time with Epatein
Agreed.
On this we agree trisher, I don’t think we’ll ever find out the truth either.
I don't think we'll ever find out the truth anyway. I think Ghislaine Maxwell will plea bargain and some things will just fade away.
maddyone
Alegrias
I’ve noticed before, and I’ll say outright, you’re extremely opinionated and rude. Report the post if you don’t like it.
What I said was not a personal attack as I mentioned no one by name at that point. But I will say, that although you lied about what a I said, if the cap fits, wear it!
Where did she lie?
Never said he wasn't trisher but it doesn't sit well to let the waters get too muddy either. He hasn't been accused of or charged with child abuse. So, just trying to keep it 'clean' based on what information is in the public domain.
My personal opinion of him is extremely low, but I'm not going to back it up with knowledge I don't and can't have. If I were the Queen I think I'd have offered his sorry arse as a sacrifice, but as it doesn't look like he's done anything criminal that's unlikely to happen.
Condemn him for being an unmitigated cockwomble? Hell yes.
He does seem to be involved, but the details are difficult to ascertain. He is also, in my opinion, a ‘monumental pillock’ as NellG says. I am puzzled about what actually happened, but I don’t suppose anyone knows. Were the girls under age, or were they groomed, or both? I thought under age was under sixteen, but maybe that’s just in the UK.
He was immediately sacked which is quite appropriate, and he was stripped of his military honoury titles. It’s his daughters I feel for, imagine how they must feel, and they always appear to behave with total dignity. I’m pleased they’ve both married, apparently happily, and are moving on with their lives.
The details are slightly different. The MLA is still outstanding it can take up to a year to implement. PA and his team have only offered a statement and the US want a proper cross examination. The US deny the 3 instances his lawyers claim. There are also two teams of lawyers who are anxious to have his input. One is the D.of Justice who are currently prosecuting Ghislaine Maxwell and the others represent the girls trafficked by Epstein. Now if he were entirely innocent and everything was above board he should at least be cooperating and doing everything he can to help them. And let's not forget "I've never visited his (Epstein's) house" until it was shown he had "Oh it was just over night".
Presume him innocent by all means but let's not pretend he isn't hiding something.
Ditto Lexisgranny
Ditto Lexisgranny.
NellG Thanks for clearing that up, I am no Andrew fan, but the details around the case and accusations have become so confused that many seem to have forgotten the innocent until proved guilty maxim.
I did a bit of digging to make sure what I was posting is correct. There is no formal charge against Andrew and no formal accusation. Last year there was a request via MLAT for an interview which was turned down by Andrew's lawyers because the Dept of Prosecution that brought it had previously shot themselves in the foot by releasing dodgy information. No one's lawyer, whether you were royal or otherwise would allow cooperation under those circumstances. He has formally greed to 'help with their enquiries' 3 times, it's the US who can't get the legalities right.
The forced resignation from duties is no an admission of guilt, it's damage limitation because as stated ( by me) he is a monumental pillock.
Rumour has it Pizza Express may sue for defamation and loss of custom through alleged connection 
This discussion thread has reached a 1000 message limit, and so cannot accept new messages.
Start a new discussion


