|
Post by transformer on Dec 20, 2018 11:42:52 GMT
I find this photo awful as well. He pretty much always looks miserable and as you say the nanny is really creepy
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Dec 20, 2018 19:07:59 GMT
transformer the nanny was discussed a while back, and there were some connections to The Omen. I still can't understand why the Cambridges chose a non-British nanny. There is no information about which families she worked for previously. She does not look like the sort of healthy, happy and wholesome person who is best for young children to be with. Something very strange is going on here.
|
|
|
Post by transformer on Dec 21, 2018 16:49:40 GMT
What was the connection with the omen?
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Dec 21, 2018 18:49:04 GMT
Pictures for comparison
Mrs Baylock and Nanny Maria: Damien and Prince George: transformer there is a bit more about some connections in posts in this thread from October 2017. I get a messed-up quote box when I try to quote you: it could be your avatar but sometimes we get ProBoards problems.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Dec 21, 2018 18:50:05 GMT
Of course it won't mean much if you haven't seen the first Omen film!
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Dec 21, 2018 20:29:15 GMT
Billie Whitelaw and The Omen
I should have said that I was taking about the 1976 original version, not the remake. By coincidence, Billie Whitelaw, who played Mrs Baylock who comes to take care of the boy Damien, died in London four years ago today. By coincidence, Damien’s mother is called Katherine, By coincidence, Mrs Baylock, like Maria Burrallo, is a Roman Catholic
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Dec 23, 2018 18:44:33 GMT
Prince Charles’s Christmas card from 1994
He was separated from Princess Diana by this time. The picture reminds me of the poppies and the yellow brick road in The Wizard of Oz. Princess Diana certainly exposed the man behind the curtain!
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Jan 3, 2019 9:46:08 GMT
Prince William and the shiny shopfront I posted an extract from a DM article on the old CC forum in 2016: Sickbag time Boris Johnson’s sister Rachel has written a sugary article about Prince William in the DM. “RACHEL JOHNSON: Weepy William is no wimp - he's my ideal modern man. And so to the continuing national hunt for Prince William's stiff upper lip. It was first reported missing when he told a boy who had lost his mum to cancer that he missed his own mother every single day, and had done for 20 years. It was still deemed AWOL a couple of days later when he visited a call centre that runs a helpline for worried parents and begged for 'an easy one, please'. He went on to explain why he wanted to be let off the hook. 'I'm carrying a lot of things at the moment. I will be in floods of tears at the end otherwise… Prince William and his perfect wife and family are the gleaming new shopfront of the Royal Family. If he were being true to strict Windsor form, he would allow no cracks in that fascia to show, as a point of principle and pride.” Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3761529/RACHEL-JOHNSON-Weepy-William-no-wimp-s-ideal-modern-man.html#ixzz4IeOn7fF7 Perfect wife? Gleaming new shopfront? A lot has happened since that article was published. Most people realise now that many horrors hide behind the shiny royal façade. The cracks have been showing for a while now; maybe the whole thing will crumble away.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Jan 8, 2019 7:45:17 GMT
An article from January 8th 2002
17 years ago today, there was a very long article in the Daily Telegraph about the Queen’s deficiencies as a parent. She put duty to her country ahead of bringing up her family; the children were left to fend for themselves or turn to others for help. She would not talk to them about their problems and always avoided confrontation. The article is best read at source, but some quotations give an idea of what to expect: “Even some of her most loyal admirers fear that her sense of guilt may be justified. ‘If the Queen,’ said one of her former private secretaries acidly, ‘had taken half as much trouble about the rearing of her children as she has about the breeding of her horses, the Royal Family wouldn't be in such a mess now.’... As a monarch, the Queen's performance has been well-nigh flawless. As a mother, however, she has often been less than adequate, according to many who know her well. For much of the time, they say, she has been so detached from the lives of her children that she has seemed more like a distant figurehead... ‘Utterly, utterly lacking, I'm afraid,’ said one recently retired courtier sadly. Far from giving her children the firmness and guidance they badly needed at crucial moments in their lives, he felt, she had done absolutely nothing. And by failing to take Prince Charles under her wing as both son and heir, according to former courtiers of blameless loyalty, she has arguably made the future of the monarchy less secure - an astonishing piece of negligence in a woman so inspired by a sense of her own divine calling.” www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/3294538/The-real-Elizabeth-II.htmlSo they thought the royal family was a mess then: they hadn’t seen anything yet! If this is all true, the Queen is unlikely to step forward and take action to deal with the Sussexes. With this as an example, Prince Charles too may avoid confrontation with Harry and Meghan. So the people who are waiting for an intervention by senior royals may be deluding themselves.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Jan 26, 2019 19:31:18 GMT
In Princess Diana’s own words
She put on a show, a façade of happiness just for the public: “I’ve got what my mother’s got. However bloody you’re feeling, you can put on the most amazing show of happiness. My mother is an expert at that. Because I had a smile on my face, everybody thought I was having a wonderful time. That’s what they chose to think — it made them happier.” Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4612290/Diana-s-tapes-reveal-moment-confronted-Camilla.html#ixzz4kFoQpajO People chose to think this? It was the impression they were intended to get. And her smiles never looked false, frenetic and over the top the way Kate Middleton’s sometimes do.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Feb 6, 2019 7:16:48 GMT
The royal family and the Athenaeum Club
Memories of the Jimmy Savile thread on the DIF are coming back, and there are one or two points that are still relevant. One of the innumerable questions raised was how on earth could someone like Savile become a member of the elite Athenaeum Club. If you look at the requirements, what might be called the job description and the person specification, look at the list of illustrious members then look at him, it just doesn’t make sense. It is putting it mildly to say that he isn’t the right type. The same thing could be said about Meghan Markle and the royal family. How on earth did she get in? Cardinal Hume is said to behind Savile’s successful application; he threatened to resign his membership if they didn’t elect Savile. Did Prince Harry threaten to do something drastic if the royals didn’t accept Meghan? The Athenaeum Club is in central London; it is a good, convenient place to meet people. So is Soho House... The Athenaeum Club has an impressive façade, but who knows what goes on behind it:
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Feb 6, 2019 7:18:50 GMT
The Athenaeum Club mystery again
From the Daily Telegraph in 2012: “A lot of us took the view that Savile would not be a natural habitué of a club that has counted Sir Winston Churchill, Lord Palmerston and Lord Curzon as members, but the fact is we had no choice,” one grandee of the establishment in Pall Mall informs Mandrake. “It was Cardinal Basil Hume, at the time the Archbishop of Westminster, who put this character up for membership, and, while we did give consideration to blackballing Savile, we knew that would have had to result in something that could not be countenanced – Hume stepping down.” www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/celebritynews/9596850/Sir-Jimmy-Savile-causes-anguish-at-the-Athenaeum.htmlThey had no choice? Why not let Hume resign? Could Savile’s royal connections be the real explanation? Did the royal family have no choice but to accept Meghan Markle? Savile is involved in two small banana coincidences. From WiKi: “Andrew Neil interviewed him for the TV series Is This Your Life? in 1995 where Savile ‘used a banana to avoid discussing his personal life’" Savile also hung upside down dressed as a banana to present an episode of Top of the Pops.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Feb 7, 2019 14:32:45 GMT
Image and reality
This is something I posted on the old forum that seems worth repeating: “I get the impression that the royal family are just a media construction and as such don't really exist. The whole Meghan Markle saga is a good example. I am not even convinced that half of them are even related to each other…” transformer I too think that the royals have always been very different from their public images. The media construction aspect was used a lot by Queen Victoria. She wanted to undo the damage caused by the dissolute lifestyles of her immediate Hanoverian relatives and appeal to the middle classes by creating the image of a close and loving family. All those family portraits were a false front: in real life she disliked her children, at least when they were young. I think that the royals have been fooling most of the people most of the time. It is becoming less and less easy for them to get away with it. Negative publicity is nothing new; what is new is the effect first of TV then of social media. The royals have become devalued. In many cases their true selves have been revealed; it is not a pretty sight. The information coming out in recent years makes most of them look very bad. I think that many people are slowly moving in the direction of letting the lot of them slip away to live their own lives at their own expense. The public can see the men behind the curtain and that the emperors have no clothes.” Since then, the Meghan Markle saga has changed things. Rather than the royals slowly becoming irrelevant and being permitted to go quietly, they are seen as frauds, hypocrites and undesirables who are living at our expense. I wonder how many people now think that the Monarchy should end with the Queen.
|
|
|
Post by magpiejack on Jul 14, 2019 19:59:01 GMT
I've just been reading the older posts about the Queen Mother and drinking. Anyone around in the 1980s and early 90s will remember Spitting Image, they lampooned all the royals but held off with a QM puppet for a long time. Here she is with the rest of the family - I remember that they gave the QM a Brummie accent, and one sketch where she cut the conversation to an end with "Where's me gin?"
|
|
|
Post by magpiejack on Jul 14, 2019 20:37:23 GMT
One other thing that I recall, I think I read it in Kitty Kelly's book The Royals - it was said that George VI had a drink problem and had severe mood swings, so he wasn't an easy person to live with.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Jul 15, 2019 7:18:04 GMT
There are Spitting Image extracts on YouTube. I wish that it would come back and feature the Sussexes and Cambridges! After reading about his childhood, I can well believe that George VI could be ‘difficult’. They are just drinking tea here, but a lot was going on behind the elegant façade:
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Jul 15, 2019 18:05:57 GMT
“They wouldn’t if they knew.” This expression describes the original purpose of this thread. The aim is to stop the royals being worshipped under false pretences. While some material was added before separate threads were created for the Sussexes etc. and some of it is symbolic rather than scandalous, perhaps more suitable for the cross-board area, there is plenty of ammunition for people who want to abolish the monarchy. I think that the word is getting out. This is from a biography of the QM: ”...the image of the Queen Mother, which generated the love and respect of the people, was a façade, a mere performance. It was claimed that she was selfish and aloof, and even vindictive in reality.” The book spins it, saying that even so her public image brought joy to people. I see the point, but the good feelings were all caused by an illusion. I would rather know the truth myself. Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother 1900-2002: The Queen Mother and Her Century by Arthur Bousfield
|
|
|
Post by magpiejack on Jul 16, 2019 10:11:13 GMT
A Georgian royal scandal - Princess SophiaDiscussion elsewhere about Elizabeth I has reminded me of a scandal attached to George III's daughter Sophia, who was alleged to have given birth to an illegitimate child. Here is a synopsis from Wiki. Princess Sophia (1777 – 1848) was the twelfth child and fifth daughter of George III. In her youth, Sophia was closest to her father, who preferred his daughters over his sons; however, she and her sisters lived in fear of their mother. The princesses were well-educated but raised in a rigidly strict household. Though he disliked the idea of matrimony for his daughters, King George had intended to find them suitable husbands when they came of age. However, the King's recurring bouts of madness, as well as the Queen's desire to have her daughters live their lives as her companions, stopped would-be suitors from offering for most of the princesses. As a result, Sophia and all but one of her sisters grew up in their mother's cloistered household, which they frequently referred to as a “Nunnery". Though she never wed, rumours spread that Sophia became pregnant by Thomas Garth, an equerry of her father's, and gave birth to an illegitimate son in the summer of 1800. Other gossip declared the child was the product of rape by her elder brother the Duke of Cumberland, who was deeply unpopular. The Prince Regent supposedly warned his sisters not to be alone in the same room with the Duke. Historians are divided on the validity of these stories, as some believe she gave birth to Garth's child while others call them tales spread by the Royal Family's political enemies. Limited in exposure to eligible men, Sophia and several of her sisters became involved with courtiers and equerries. Sophia entered into a relationship with her father's chief equerry, Major-General Thomas Garth, a man thirty-three years her senior. He had a large purple birthmark on his face, causing Sophia's sister Mary to refer to him as "the purple light of love” and courtier and diarist Charles Greville to call him a "hideous old devil". Despite this, one lady-in-waiting noted "the princess was so violently in love with him that everyone saw it. She could not contain herself in his presence." Greville wrote about Sophia and her sisters' affairs in a diary entry, "women fall in love with anything – and opportunity and the accidents of the passions are of more importance than any positive merits of mind or of body... [The princesses] were secluded from the world, mixing with few people – their passions boiling over and ready to fall into the hands of the first man whom circumstances enabled to get at them.” Gossip soon spread of the existence of an illegitimate child. Some historians contend that, sometime before August 1800 in Weymouth, Sophia gave birth to a child fathered by Garth. Flora Fraser believes the rumours that Sophia had a child, but has questioned whether the child was fathered by Garth, or Sophia's brother the Duke of Cumberland. Historians further write that the child, baptised Thomas Garth like his father, was raised by his father in Weymouth, where his mother would visit him occasionally. In 1828 he apparently tried to blackmail the royal family with certain incriminating documents from his father about his supposed parents' relationship, though this ended in failure. Gossip soon spread of the existence of an illegitimate child. Some historians contend that, sometime before August 1800 in Weymouth, Sophia gave birth to a child fathered by Garth. Flora Fraser believes the rumours that Sophia had a child, but has questioned whether the child was fathered by Garth, or Sophia's brother the Duke of Cumberland. Historians further write that the child, baptised Thomas Garth like his father, was raised by his father in Weymouth, where his mother would visit him occasionally. In 1828 he apparently tried to blackmail the royal family with certain incriminating documents from his father about his supposed parents' relationship, though this ended in failure. Conversely, Anthony Camp challenges the belief that Sophia had a child and provides a detailed summary of the available evidence. In his book Royal Babylon: the Alarming History of European Royalty, author Karl Shaw writes of the possibility that the Duke raped his sister, citing evidence from Charles Greville's diaries, as well as other factors. Historian Gillian Gill believes that Sophia secretly gave birth to the child and that this is the reason Sophia never married. Alison Weir and others, however, write of a possible marriage between Sophia and Garth the same year as the child's birth, but there is no evidence to back this assertion other than the presence of a wedding ring in a portrait of an aged Sophia. After the death of Princess Augusta she inherited Clarence House and Frogmore.
|
|
|
Post by magpiejack on Jul 16, 2019 10:23:27 GMT
George III and a white horseThe Princess Sophia post has reminded me of the Osmington White Horse. The 280 ft. long and 323 ft. high hill figure of King George III riding his horse away from Weymouth was most likely created in 1808 as a compliment, but local legend has it that the king saw it as an offense, and never returned to the area again after viewing it. However, if he had learned of an illegitimate grandson living in Weymouth, that may have been a reason for him not to return.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Jul 20, 2019 7:29:09 GMT
George III and Weymouth
I didn’t know about the Princess Sophia stories or the Weymouth connections. I had a short break in Weymouth some years ago, but didn’t know about George III’s visits or the white horse at the time. Some people say that King George never even saw the horse. I don’t remember seeing this statue of King George either. The inhabitants felt grateful for all the money he brought into the town by making it popular. When I was there, it was obvious that there wasn’t much money around.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 24, 2019 17:57:35 GMT
Historic suicide - caused by the Queen’s dismissal?
Is this another indirect victim of the royal family? If so, it makes some of the earlier posts seem even more significant. “They were the closest of friends... sharing the most intimate secrets of life behind the doors of Buckingham Palace. One was the Queen - the other her trusted lady-in-waiting Lady Alice Egerton, sister of the Borders-based Duke of Sutherland. But a party in a stately home in Scotland shattered the close bond and eventually ended in a tragic suicide. The friendship came to an abrupt end when Lady Alice told the Queen the one thing she didn't want to hear. She told her of her worries about Prince Philip and his fondness for young women who moved in royal circles...The Queen turned a blind eye, but Lady Alice decided she should not be embarrassed any more and told her of her fears. Her reward for her honesty was banishment from the royal household. Formerly one of the most popular members of the Queen's entourage, she became a social outcast, shunned by everyone but her close family. She retreated to the Borders, where she suffered severe bouts of depression, depending on drugs to get through each day. In 1977, the Queen's Silver Jubilee Year, the 54-year-old - who never married - suffocated herself with a plastic bag in the bathroom of her home. " www.thefreelibrary.com/Crown+......-a061255108The Queen can hardly overlook all the allegations about Prince Andrew. She may not want to know, but she can’t escape facing up to things in the world of today. Before the banishment: The Duke of Edinburgh and Queen Elizabeth II, with Wing Commander Michael Cowan and Lady-in-Waiting Lady Alice Egerton, at the Tivoli, Sydney, 1953
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 25, 2019 17:32:47 GMT
Prince Andrew and some filthy-rich Azeris
A DM article from 2012 about rich Azeris who buy their way into everything contains some very familiar wording: “…none has been so high- profile or controversial as Prince Andrew, a regular guest of President Aliyev. In Azerbaijan, Prince Andrew is routinely described as a ‘dear guest’ by the leader of a country that ranks as one of the most corrupt in the world on the Transparency Index. But in Britain, the Prince has been heavily criticised for a friendship that appears to be continuing, though he has now stood down from his role as trade envoy. Last month, he met with Britain’s Ambassador to Azerbaijan at Buckingham Palace. Prince Andrew has made eight visits to Azerbaijan in six years; two of these were private, arousing suspicion that he has business interests there, including a soon-to-be-built golf complex. These claims have been vigorously denied by Buckingham Palace.” www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237824/Azerbaijan-oil-heiresses-bathe--beneath-lurks-murky-secrets.html#ixzz2TFWITA25Denial yet again. I think that more people believed him last time around than they do now. Did Jeffrey Epstein have to outbid the Azeris to get Prince Andrew to accept his invitations? Royal pals: President Ailyeva's wife Mehriban Aliyeva talking to Prince Andrew at an oil conference in Baku with her eldest daughter Leyla (left)
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 26, 2019 7:35:52 GMT
Rosa Monckton, MI6 and spying on Princess Diana
English business woman and charity campaigner Rosa Monckton has also been mentioned in the Epstein Connections thread. Just as there are widespread allegations that Jeffrey Epstein and Robert - and Ghislaine - Maxwell worked for Mossad, Epstein’s close friend Rosa Monckton is said to have worked for MI6. So incidentally are her husband, brother and grandfather! They are said to have kept a watch on some royals on behalf of other royals. Rosa’s ‘friendship’ with Princess Diana may have been arranged as a way of keeping an eye on her: "Other disturbing aspects of the unlikely ‘friendship’ between Diana and Rosa were raised by Paris-based journalist Jane Tawbase in a EuroBusiness investigation into Monckton and Lawson. She wrote: ‘Rosa Monckton, a generation older, made an odd friend for the often unhappy princess. A svelte sophisticate and a wealthy working woman, her first relationships and loyalties lay, almost from when she was born, with the Queen. She was a regular visitor to the royal household all her life and was, for that reason, more given to loyalty to the crown than to an unhappy and disruptive outsider, one who was seriously damaging the public image of the royal family.’ www.whale.to/b/mi6__the_lying_game.htmlThis all sounds very possible. It makes me wonder whether any of the new PR and other staff in the Sussexes’ household are there to keep an eye on them. Rosa Monckton, her husband Dominic Lawson and Princess Diana:
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 26, 2019 7:38:58 GMT
More about the Moncktons’ spying for and on the royals
Members of the Monckton family are alleged to have spied on both Edward VIII and Princess Diana: “On closer inspection, the relationship between Monckton and the ‘disruptive’ Diana, is somewhat inexplicable, perhaps just very odd. Diana was a fashion goddess and fitness fanatic who delighted in shopping and modern music. Monckton, by contrast, is a highly cerebral woman of the world, married to a man with links to MI6 that no journalist or newspaper editor should ever have. Jane Tawbase also raises two further questions on this murky subject and throws more light on the matter than most before or after her. She wrote: ‘Whether Rosa Monckton introduced her brother to the princess and whether he was part of the MI6 operation. It was almost unthinkable that he was not.’ In her second point she wrote: ‘Did MI6 ask Rosa Monckton to do the key job of moving into the princess’s inner circle and become her confidante? It would certainly have made the job easier.’ Dissident MI6 officer, Richard Tomlinson, who has been harassed for years by the French and British authorities, is certain that Monckton’s brother is a spy. It should be noted that Anthony and Rosa’s grandfather worked for Edward VIII and kept a close watch on him for the security services throughout the abdication and beyond. Like Diana, the British Establishment were determined to rid themselves of Edward VIII. The Queen Mother, however, said that Diana was a greater threat to the House of Windsor than Wallis-Simpson and Edward VIII put together. Tawbase concludes that, ‘It would indeed be ironic if history had repeated itself and Rosa Monckton performed the same role for MI6 with regard to Princess Diana.’" www.whale.to/b/mi6__the_lying_game.htmlSo which royals are being spied on now on behalf of the Queen?
|
|
|
Post by magpiejack on Aug 26, 2019 11:12:35 GMT
That's interesting UnseenI that you should raise the Moncktons. Lawson edited the Sunday Telegraph, that is a very 'establishment' paper. I mentioned Jon King's book elsewhere about Diana's death, he mentions the Moncktons and their alleged links to MI6. All strenuously denied in the Paget report, especially Rosa's brother Anthony being an MI6 officer. However, several newspapers ran stories that he was "the most senior MI6 officer in Serbia before being exposed and sent back to Britain". I would imagine that at the first sign of any trouble or scandal connected to the royals, MI5 and MI6 are in there. Do you remember 'Squidgygate', and various other calls by Diana and/or Charles that were allegedly picked up by ham radio enthusiasts? Apparently the Squidgygate call had been made 4 days earlier than when the radio ham, Cyril Reenan, recorded it. Reenan lived just 35 miles away from GCHQ. Highgrove isn't far from GCHQ either. There was also a supposed radio ham taped call of Charles and Diana arguing over Christmas arrangements for the children, but they were both in the same room when the conversation took place. James Hewitt also was warned by the royal PPOs that his relationship with Diana was being investigated by MI5. See chapter 8 of 'Princess Diana: The Evidence' for a lot more detail.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 26, 2019 17:51:33 GMT
“... the Moncktons and their alleged links to MI6. All strenuously denied ...” magpiejack such denials do not work too well in the world of today. I am sure that the surveillance equipment is much more sophisticated too. I couldn’t find any obvious examples of Rosa Monckton using her royal connections on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein, nor any pictures of her with Ghislaine Maxwell, but the latter two must have known about each other.
|
|
|
Post by magpiejack on Aug 26, 2019 18:20:10 GMT
UnseenI, I picked up 'The Defence of the Realm: The Authorised History of MI5' this weekend at the car boot for 50p, a bargain as it's in good nick and £14.99 cover price. It's a sanitised version I'm sure, but hopefully a good insight. At 861 pages, it'll be a long read!
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 27, 2019 6:27:33 GMT
MI5 book
That is a wonderful bargain magpiejack. I like spies and double agents, but only in the pages of fiction. The real thing in the world of today seems both sinister and sleazy. Books by Rafael Sabatini and John Buchan are examples of the spy fiction I like best.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 30, 2019 16:14:03 GMT
Behind Prince Andrew’s façade
The royal façade seems to be melting by the minute, but I suspect that Prince Andrew is trying to keep up appearances now that he is back at ‘work’ today. I think he has aged a lot and that his smile looks false.
|
|
UnseenI
Eternal Member
"Part Of The Furniture"
Keeping on keeping on
Posts: 8,279
|
Post by UnseenI on Aug 31, 2019 16:33:05 GMT
Banana!
There are several threads that this post could go in, but it is mainly because Prince Andrew is royal that his connection with Epstein is being scrutinised and it is another example of what they are really like. “Prince Andrew jetted off to Thailand shortly after Christmas 2000, where he once more met up with Epstein. The duo stayed at the luxury Amanpuri hotel on Phuket, where the Duke was billeted in a £4,000 a-night private villa with a red-and-gold bedroom and private black-tiled swimming pool. He was photographed on board the hotel’s catamaran surrounded by a bevvy of topless young women. During the evenings, Epstein and the Prince hit the local red-light district of Patong, attending a disco called Banana and an ‘adult entertainment’ bar filled with go-go dancers called Rock Hard.” www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7373083/GUY-ADAMS-details-Prince-Andrews-toxic-fixation-Jeffrey-Epstein.htmlI wonder who paid for this holiday for the Prince - as if I didn’t know! I wonder how much Epstein has spent on Prince Andrew over the years and whether he thinks that it was worth it.
|
|