Britain's Royals - Andrew

[Roger]

As a Brit it's hard not to be ashamed of sleazebag Prince Andrew . . .
Marina Hyde has clear views :-

''. . . . BULL. SHIT. Bullshit Prince Andrew didn’t know what sort of guy his friend was when he was snapped walking with the Tier 1 sex offender, after he got out of jail, in a photo the New York Post headlined “PRINCE & PERV”. Bullshit he didn’t know why his close friend WENT TO PRISON FOR A YEAR, but kept hanging out with him anyway. Bullshit if, as Brockman recounts, he lay on his back in that guy’s house, with a Russian attending to his feet, talking over her head to men of the world about the nocturnal licence afforded to minor European royals, and he didn’t know roughly what he was swimming in. Bullshit. I get we have to pay for Andrew’s lifetime of jollies; but we don’t have to have our intelligence insulted by him.''

''. . . . . . Where Princess Anne pointedly didn’t, Prince Andrew demanded all the titles and trappings for his two daughters – security details, civil list money, full royal weddings – and was furious when denied some of them.''

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/23/prince-andrew-appalled-epstein-royal-wedding

[Coolkorat]

Andrew has long been known for being odious; he inherited his father's lack of tact. I thought that article was spot-on. The navy couldn't get rid of him fast enough - he would want to be Lord High Admiral of the Seven Seas and Heaven by now. As it is, he has a chest full of tin-pot medals and awards.

But this Epstein business takes the biscuit. I think something very bad is about to emerge about Andrew, and he will be dispatched as far from the public gaze as possible. Interesting that no-one is biting about him and Fergie getting back together; they've misjudged this, because no-one cares.

[Roger]

Good reply CK. Probably more to come unfortunately. Head down Andy 

[Coolkorat]

Probably more to come unfortunately

Thanks Roger. I'm not sure about the 'unfortunately', except in the sense that we will have to read about it; I am generally ambivalent when it comes to the royals, but Andrew is the one I simply cannot stand. Some years ago he was guest of honour at a local charity event and the chair of the charity stood up to make a speech/ vote of thanks etc. Andrew was loudly and obnoxiously rude for no good reason, and about someone held in great respect locally. It confirmed and cemented his reputation and he has not been welcome here since.

'Airmiles' made his own choices; he was happy to maintain his friendship with Epstein even after his conviction perhaps through fear of what Epstein knew, and has a list of 'friends and associates' that would turn the stomach of most decent people. He is a gold-plated, right-royal fool and I will be very glad to see the back of him.

[KiwiCanadian]

Over the years the stories about the "Royals" have servery degraded my esteem for what I was lead to believe as a young fella growing up in NZ.
P Andrew seemed, at least to me in the back ground of royal life, seemingly thrown in the navy to keep him quiet. I think this getting back with Furgy is just a cover up to make him look good?
P Charley is another douche bag , when he was told to marry Dianna, he had to drop his then girlfriend Camilla, to do that.
God help us if and when he becomes Queen , oops I mean king of England.
Nigel Farage in an interview was asked of his view of PC and his answer was, long live the Queen!

Their father PP seemed to come from royal blood lines that have been probably diluted over the centuries, even he has let slip a few good ones that the press have picked up on, I remember a year or so ago when he was quoted as saying there are too many people on this planet, or words to that effect.

I still have respect for Lizzy she seems to be the one keeping the flock together, at least on the outside, god knows what is being said in B Palace.

[Coolkorat]

P Charley is another douche bag , when he was told to marry Dianna, he had to drop his then girlfriend Camilla, to do that.

Camilla is/was catholic. She was also not a virgin (Charley had been there and done that plenty of times by then). The 'establishment' selected Diana as a pure-blood, English virgin baby-factory; I still find it shocking that she had to suffer an intimate examination to ensure she was still virgo intacta. She had no idea what she was getting into or she would have fled the country.

Much of the blame lies with Philip, who is the power behind the throne and bullied Charles to toe the line. Charles should have stood his ground and pressured for a change in the law to allow him to marry the woman he loved; decades later he has done exactly that, and the law was changed well ahead of William's marriage to Kate.

I still have respect for Lizzy she seems to be the one keeping the flock together, at least on the outside, god knows what is being said in B Palace.

Randy Andy is Liz's favourite son; he can do no wrong in her eyes. She will protect him through thick and thin. But when she's gone Charlie will get Andy on a fast boat out: perhaps Governor of St Helena? More likely Andy will become the equivalent to Princess Margaret; a bit of an embarrassment but generally out of sight.

[KiwiCanadian]

Thanks CK for filling in I could not agree more.

[Alfie]

Do the UK princes not have advisors to guide them? Surely someone should have advised Andrew not to get involved with Epstein.

[Roger]

The clouds continue to gather around sleazy Prince Andrew   

In contrast, Prince Harry is well liked by most    but here's what I thought were some words of wisdom from Ms Pearson in the DT :-

". . . .  despite their clear intentions to do good and make a difference, the Sussexes have blundered from one unforced error to the next. This recent African tour, which should have been a triumph that reset their standing in the Royal family, ended on a note of such sour sadness, it almost effaced the wonderful work of the previous ten days."


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/got-just-duke-duchess-sussex-need-home-truths/

[sfs]

I for one am sick and tired of hearing about Harry and Megan, they appear to be trying to grab as much media coverage as they can and then moaning about media intrusion, very much in a similar vein to his late mother.

Learn from you brother Harry he manages his media appearances as a royal should.

[Alfie]

I think if the British royals want to be "Royal" and not just the same as ordinary people, they should do fewer media interviews and be more cautious about what they say in those interviews, and I think they should keep their own counsel on their problems. I'm sure their intentions are good (promoting mental health awareness, for example) but I think they say too much sometimes.

[Roger]

CK reply 2 - " I think something very bad is about to emerge about Andrew"   
CK reply 4 - "He is a gold-plated, right-royal fool and I will be very glad to see the back of him"    
CK reply 6 - "Charlie will get Andy on a fast boat out: perhaps Governor of St Helena?

Spot on IMO CK, EXCEPT, maybe Prince Andrews chance of any position of public standing, anywhere at all, has gone. Maybe only the 'John Profumo' route to redemption remains 

Alfie reply 11 - "they . . (the Royals) . . should do fewer media interviews and be more cautious about what they say in those interviews, and I think they should keep their own counsel on their problems".

Alfie you can only offer the advice    Andrew knew better and look where it's got him 

Without dancing on any graves, what I heard in excerpts of this disaster left me sort of breathless at Andrew's stupidity - this in particular :-

"At the end of the day, with a benefit of all the hindsight that one can have, it was definitely the wrong thing to do. But at the time I felt it was the honourable and right thing to do and I admit fully that my judgement was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable but that’s just the way it is."

Andrew - if you need 'hindsight' AT ALL to see it was wrong for you to visit Epstein for FOUR days after his release from jail - words fail me. How about foresight ?

Andrew - yep that's it - you're 'too honourable' - it's plain for all to see   

Bollocks Andrew. Preposterous comments . . . .

It's going down well in the Press :-

Talk of exile (I agree) :-

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2019/11/17/prince-charles-urged-exile-brother-king-misguided-interview/

"Prince Andrew’s appearance on Newsnight was a turning point in British history."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/17/prince-andrews-pathetic-excuses-make-spit/

This one will run and run . . . . . .

[Alfie]

The full interview for anybody who's interested.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKQi3wzNFGQ" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKQi3wzNFGQ</a>

[Roger]

Thanks Alfie - I'll catch that 2m 

[sfs]

Well I watched this last night and his arrogance continues throughout.  The horror on his face when the name John Brockman was mentioned was priceless and in my opinion he was lying thoughout the whole interview.

[Coolkorat]

"At the end of the day, with a benefit of all the hindsight that one can have, it was definitely the wrong thing to do. But at the time I felt it was the honourable and right thing to do and I admit fully that my judgement was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable but that’s just the way it is."

Andrew - yep that's it - you're 'too honourable' - it's plain for all to see   

In an interview full of clangers, that little nugget will have serious repercussions. How long before law enforcement in the US asks Andrew for a formal interview? Surely just days or weeks. And having told the world he is not just honourable but too honourable, how can he possibly refuse? He can't even refuse to fly to the US as he's already said he was prepared to do this to "end the friendship" with Epstein.

And now we have the 'nigger in the woodpile' comment to further muddy his reputation (if only in that it proves he lacks good sense and diplomacy).

The mention of his time in the Falklands was clearly intended to paint him as a stoic war hero. But the Falklands was 37 years ago and almost meaningless to anyone under 45.

I agree Roger: one that will run and run.

[Roger]

CK I watched the whole interview and thanks to Alfie for that.
I fear there are more revelations to emerge ?

After Epstein was released from Prison - how the Hell would it need a 4 day visit to say - I can't be around ? That takes NOT even one second, you just don't go.

Andrew might be innocent (until proven) - we weren't there - but to visit for 4 days seems more like, "how can we arrange a cover up?"

Andrew already looks like a Plonker - he should stop digging his hole. Maybe much worse to come . . . . 

[Roger]

Hard to see Prince Andrew continuing in public life ?

"Prince Andrew should withdraw from royal duties – the public doesn't want to fund the friend of a paedophile

For Prince Andrew to say he visited those (Epstein's) homes, and took trips to Epstein’s private island aboard a jet which locals called the Lolita Express, without ever suspecting that his host was a total creep is, in every sense, hard to swallow.

Watching the interview, set in a Buckingham Palace ballroom whose grandeur struggled to lend dignity to the tawdry subject, it was striking that the prince had great difficulty remembering anything that might land him in trouble. But when it came to providing an alibi, suddenly he was Sherlock Holmes."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/prince-andrew-should-withdraw-royal-duties-public-doesnt-want/

[Alfie]

After Epstein was released from Prison - how the Hell would it need a 4 day visit to say - I can't be around ? That takes NOT even one second, you just don't go.

I agree with that. If Andrew really felt the urge to explain himself to Epstein, he should have just phoned him. To stay at Epstein's residence for 4 days and be seen in public with him was utter stupidity. And his explanation for staying 4 days in Epstein's home (it was a convenient place to stay) in such circumstances defies belief.

[Roger]

So it's bye bye Andrew and all done and dusted now. Or is it ?

Commentators have made a lot of Andrew's omissions - the TV interview is being touted as crucial      Myself I'd guess it's other aspects yet to become clear, that have triggered his downfall in advance. IF there was nothing else to come, maybe he could have dug his way out by expressing concern for the Epstein victims and by regretting his Friendship with Epstein, (as he has now) and by keeping his head down :-

. . . what was Andrew trying to cook up in those last 4 days with Epstein ?
. . . how could Andrew have been long term Friends with Epstein and Maxwell but not have been thoroughly involved in the routine excesses of their lifestyle ? What then, would the basis of that Friendship be ? Money ? Patronage ?

There's MUCH more to come - IMO that's why he's gone now. I'll be surprised to see him back in 'Public Life' again, ever. What a mess ! 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2019/11/20/prince-andrew-quits-public-life-prepares-give-evidence-epstein/