Rog Posted January 19, 2020 Author Share Posted January 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, manxman1980 said: So everything you claim about them comes from the media. So where else does information about such things come from? But that doesn't mean taking info from a single source or just from the spoken or written word. It's what such people do, what they say during interviews, it's where they go and what they can be seen getting up to over a period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freggyragh Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 So, after defending the (friend of a) beast, Rog switches his attack to Meghan. I don’t know what campaign of bile the Daily Mail or Telegraph has been waging against her. We all know the only thing people like Rog really don’t like about her is her melanin, but I’d like to hear from him about what qualities de facto partner Sarah Ferguson has that qualifies the other prince to keep his title, protection, royal residency, etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 19, 2020 Author Share Posted January 19, 2020 13 minutes ago, Freggyragh said: So, after defending the (friend of a) beast, Rog switches his attack to Meghan. I don’t know what campaign of bile the Daily Mail or Telegraph has been waging against her. We all know the only thing people like Rog really don’t like about her is her melanin, but I’d like to hear from him about what qualities de facto partner Sarah Ferguson has that qualifies the other prince to keep his title, protection, royal residency, etc, etc. It's always amused me how so many people find reasons that they understand rather than even consider that they're WRONG. As for HRH Prince Andrew thus far there is no proof that he has broken any UK law plus as he remains a member of the RF there is no reason why he should not be accorded all that comes with that status. I just wonder when the train wreck of a marriage that Prince Harry has found himself clawed in to collapses he will return and take up his position as part of the RF and so of course resume the title of His Royal Highness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freggyragh Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 Marriage doesn’t seem to be seen as permanent these days, certainly not in the royal family. I’m not speculating on whether Andrew himself is a beast, but he did choose to hang out with and party with a child sex trafficker over many years, and yes I know Saville was a great pal of Charles, but he hadn’t been convicted at the time and it is quite possible that the royals were unaware of the rumours. Andrew chose to fly to New York and stay at a nonce’s house, a nonce who was celebrating being released from prison after being convicted of procuring a child for prostitution. I’d ask you to think about that charge for a minute, but knowing your beastly views I’m guessing you’d blame the child. I don’t know if that trip was paid for out of the public purse or not, and I don’t know how much working time Andrew spent over the years hanging out with beasts or raising funds for Sarah Ferguson’s extravagant lifestyle when he should have been promoting British trade, but I don’t suppose we’ll ever find out. Rog, you are a lonely old troll, I know you post on here defending the murder of British soldiers and the beast friendly behaviour of Andrew just to get attention, it’s getting boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 19, 2020 Author Share Posted January 19, 2020 35 minutes ago, Freggyragh said: Marriage doesn’t seem to be seen as permanent these days, certainly not in the royal family. I’m not speculating on whether Andrew himself is a beast, but he did choose to hang out with and party with a child sex trafficker over many years, and yes I know Saville was a great pal of Charles, but he hadn’t been convicted at the time and it is quite possible that the royals were unaware of the rumours. Andrew chose to fly to New York and stay at a nonce’s house, a nonce who was celebrating being released from prison after being convicted of procuring a child for prostitution. I’d ask you to think about that charge for a minute, but knowing your beastly views I’m guessing you’d blame the child. I don’t know if that trip was paid for out of the public purse or not, and I don’t know how much working time Andrew spent over the years hanging out with beasts or raising funds for Sarah Ferguson’s extravagant lifestyle when he should have been promoting British trade, but I don’t suppose we’ll ever find out. Rog, you are a lonely old troll, I know you post on here defending the murder of British soldiers and the beast friendly behaviour of Andrew just to get attention, it’s getting boring. In fact you could not be more wrong. If you mean by the murder of British soldiers the attacks on British troops in Israel by genuine freedom fighters in Israel - those poor sods were in a place they had no right to be doing what they had no right to do. As for HRH the Duke of York what he may or not have done thus far there is no evidence that he has broken any British law. As an aside in my opinion is the behaviour of HRH the Duke of York has been appalling over many years but so far no British laws have been broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 21 hours ago, Rog said: ...broken any UK law... You keep saying this as if it has any relevance. He hasn't been convicted in the UK, but that doesn't mean he hasn't broken any UK laws. Plus, why keep specifying "UK", as if his Royal status makes him immune to the laws of other countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 19 hours ago, Rog said: In fact you could not be more wrong. If you mean by the murder of British soldiers the attacks on British troops in Israel by genuine freedom fighters in Israel - those poor sods were in a place they had no right to be doing what they had no right to do. As for HRH the Duke of York what he may or not have done thus far there is no evidence that he has broken any British law. As an aside in my opinion is the behaviour of HRH the Duke of York has been appalling over many years but so far no British laws have been broken. Unbelievable. Andrew went on national TV in attempt to distance himself and came across as an arrogant piece of shit with no remorse for what he did. How the hell can you even consider defending him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 20, 2020 Author Share Posted January 20, 2020 6 minutes ago, Neil Down said: Unbelievable. Andrew went on national TV in attempt to distance himself and came across as an arrogant piece of shit with no remorse for what he did. How the hell can you even consider defending him? I don't defend him, not for a New York Second. He makes me sick BUT he has thus far not been shown to have broken the law in the UK. My sincere wish is that he will be extradited and torn to shreds where he HAS broken the law - but I'm not holding my breath. As for coming across as an arrogant piece of shit with no remorse for what he did on TV in all fairness there was a reason for that. He IS an arrogant piece of shit and he is far from alone in that family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 20, 2020 Author Share Posted January 20, 2020 50 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said: You keep saying this as if it has any relevance. He hasn't been convicted in the UK, but that doesn't mean he hasn't broken any UK laws. Plus, why keep specifying "UK", as if his Royal status makes him immune to the laws of other countries. That immunity could be withdrawn and if it were not then it would be a huge hit on the RF that I don't think they would dare to risk taking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 10 minutes ago, Rog said: That immunity could be withdrawn and if it were not then it would be a huge hit on the RF that I don't think they would dare to risk taking. Royals do not have immunity from prosecution like diplomats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 20, 2020 Author Share Posted January 20, 2020 15 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said: Royals do not have immunity from prosecution like diplomats. Richard, there's immunity --- and then there's immunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 I cannot understand why so many are getting their knickers in a twist about Harry and Meghan. As far as I can see this all seems to be an exercise in the media whipping up a frenzy about nothing. I personally think that anyone actually being bothered about them must have too much time on their hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 3 minutes ago, Rog said: Richard, there's immunity --- and then there's immunity. There is legal immunity, and then there is assumed immunity. See which one will stand up in a court of law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 20, 2020 Author Share Posted January 20, 2020 8 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said: There is legal immunity, and then there is assumed immunity. See which one will stand up in a court of law. See which one will get past the CPS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 5 minutes ago, Rog said: See which one will get past the CPS. Depends which country the case is in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.