Behind the royal façade: what are they hiding from us?

For a long time I couldn't believe that Kate was a transgendered male but this video made me think that it could be true:

The great artist produces a great work of art

California in 2011, visiting an arts project for children:



This reminds me of the red sun symbol on the cushion in the picture of Charlotte.

Spreading the word about the royal façade

I really enjoy seeing expressions such as “deal with the devil” and “the face of evil” in comments in the Daily Mail. Some people even mention MK, reptilians, the New World Order and the Illuminati! Better yet, some of it is in connection with the royal family.

I wonder where some of them get it from; I suspect that although they may not become members, they look at the David Icke Forum and similar sites including the old Conservative Conspiracy Forum. I think that some of the guests like what they see and repeat it elsewhere – or perhaps it is just that great minds think alike.

This comment appeared on a small royal-watching site not long after a poster had said the same thing on the CC Forum:

“The New Year's Day Middleton walk to church with the royals are all so fake all photoshopped. You can see from the size of HM car to the size of Middletons they don't match.“

Another recent comment that seemed familiar:

“DM has put a campaign together to bring down the royals. That's why they are allowing so many negative comments.“

We had said earlier on CC that DM articles seemed - for a while - to be favouring Prince Harry at the expense of Prince Charles and Prince William. It is very true that critical comments of the royal family and calls for its end are permitted on the DM.

Strangely, I have noticed that while DM readers noticed anomalies in the Harry and MM pictures that were taken before the engagement was announced, they didn’t say anything about other obvious photo-shopping. There were almost 3,000 comments for the article with the giant car and people, but not one mentioned something so obvious that I noticed it immediately.

The Hanoverian kings and their feuds

Contention between father and son in the royal family is nothing new, nor are divisions between royal households such as have been discussed in the DM in connection with Prince Charles and Prince William.

I remember reading that George II disliked his father George I, and that George II’s son Frederick disliked him. The sons set up their own households in opposition.

I found a good article on the subject:

“The young George enjoyed a degree of popularity among the public while his father (George I) governed Hanover for six months in 1716. Factions had started to develop between father and son from the late 1710s, and grew following the birth of George and Caroline’s second son, Prince George William in 1717. At the baby’s christening, George publicly insulted the Duke of Newcastle. His father, George I, was so infuriated by this that he banished his son and daughter-in-law from St James’s Palace and kept their children under his guardianship, away from their parents. The couple petitioned the king to allow them to visit their children, and eventually the king allowed them to visit once a week.

After being banned from the king’s court, George’s household became the centre of opposition to the king’s policies, and Leicester House – George’s residence in London – became the meeting place for members of the Whig faction in government.
Despite reconciling with the king in 1720 after Robert Walpole encouraged the father and son to resolve their issues for the public cause, George’s daughters were not returned to his care, and George was refused the position of regent when his father travelled to Hanover for months at a time.

On 22 June 1727, George I died while in Germany, making the Prince of Wales George II of Great Britain. ..
The following year, George’s eldest son and heir, Frederick, who had been educated in Germany, was brought to England. Father and son had not seen one other in 14 years.

At 21 years old, Prince Frederick quickly became the face of opposition at George’s court, forging a dynamic that mimicked George and his own father’s previous relationship. When George II left Britain for Hanover in 1729, 1732 and 1735, he left his wife, Caroline, to govern as regent, instead of his son, which further frustrated relations.“

www.historyextra.com/article/military-history/profile-life-facts-george-ii

Appropriating the children is really bad.

All this makes me wonder what has been going on in our current royal family. Prince Charles is known to not care much for his father and vice versa. I wonder what Prince William really thinks of Prince Charles.

Oh, it interests me. Note how you have the drawers, which could be argued to be a grid pattern The wall tiling looks a little like honeycomb, and it is a very distinctive colour sequence the shirts have. It has to hold significance. And isn't that a marble top? In any case, it's a good find.

Great to see you back! I wonder where the others have gone.

I remember very well how we covered some obvious causes of ageing on the CC Forum. Some outdoor sports have a bad effect for example. I just can't be sure. I favour the secret smoker theory.

Maybe it’s the makeup

Kate was definitely looking younger and happier for a while. Her expressions were normal too.

Recent pictures from the tour of Scandinavia show a reversion to the bad old days. Some of it could be caused by makeup I suppose.

Again, why does she get away with wearing such dreadful clothes? What are her stylists thinking of? These ones look like furnishing fabrics:

Maybe it's a disguise: She can stand against the curtains, and blend in. Anything to have a few moments peace from the in-laws!

Jimmy Savile and this forum

“Let's not forget that Savile had a huge mother complex. He was really overshadowed by her. So, again... parental issues. A running theme, perhaps?

I'd start a threat of Savile, but I feel he is very well covered elsewhere. “

Avacyn you are right in that the monster DIF thread to which large numbers of people contributed is still there, and while it is rarely updated now it is still very useful for reference.

I have made a few small posts about Savile in connection with black suns, Richard III and Prince Charles on here, but there is little we can add to the main story now. I suppose that we could summarise his relationships with the royals, and there may be a few more new connections to make… I will look into it.

This is an intriguing thought. Most would assume that the royals are the puppet-masters and not the puppets.

The royals can be both! They influence people, but are themselves controlled.

Sometimes everything is upside-down, with the apparent 'winners', including royalty and celebrities, being prisoners and hostages.

After reading about how some people came to the throne and the deaths that preceded them, I got the idea that something is playing chess with the royals.

Lord Frederick Windsor

Lord Frederick Windsor and his daughter Maud are now in the Red Hair thread.

There is more to say about Lord Frederick, who is the son of Prince & Princess Michael of Kent.

He is said to have a drug problem, and I can well believe it after seeing this picture of him on the way to Buckingham Palace for the 2017 Christmas lunch:

Lord Frederick Windsor again

We suspect Lord Frederick’s mother Princess Michael of Kent of being a predator; she is said to have hunted his father like a rabbit. I wonder whether history repeated itself in the case of Lord Frederick’s actress wife Sophie Winkleman.

This picture of her has some good symbolism:



Lord Frederick looks pale and weird again here:



Here is a strange picture of him from 1999:

Is that Noel Fielding? I can see the likeness.

The face on this dress/tent is said to be his, but it looks a bit like Princess Diana to me: