Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Prince Andrew, Duke of York, named in underage 'sex slave' lawsuit

That whole article is bad. Like the main problem with Andrew Windsor is that he had lots of sex? Ffs. The "Randy Andy" stuff (yuck) didn't really harm the royals' rep.
Also the person they describe as "a royal fan" is very definitely not, and it would've taken them seconds to find that out. (Search [twitter handle] + "queen.")
And yeah, mistakes as above.
 
Man accused of heckling Prince Andrew at Queen’s funeral procession won’t face court

“After careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, including the available admissible evidence, the procurator fiscal decided that there should be no proceedings taken at this time.

“The Crown reserves the right to proceed in the future if it is appropriate and in the public interest to do so.”
Alternatively, they wanted to avoid the embarrassment of further publicity.
 
Yo, what's good, peeps?
I just wanted to talk a little bit about the prince Andrew, cause he's been in the news a lot lately and I know a lot of people have strong feelings about him.
First of all, let me just say that I ain't no fan of the monarchy. I think it's an outdated institution that's more about preserving the privileges of a few than serving the needs of the many. But at the same time, I gotta give props to the royals for all the charitable work they do. I mean, they've got a lot of resources at their disposal and they use them to do some good in the world.
But let's not get it twisted, the royal family is still about maintaining their status and power, and they'll do whatever it takes to keep their throne. And I think that's something we should all be aware of, especially when we see them out there doing good deeds.
So, in short, I think the royal family is a mixed bag. On the one hand, they do some good in the world, but on the other hand, they're also about preserving their own interests and keeping their grip on power. It's up to us to decide how we feel about them and what we want to do about it.
Peace out.
 
Ah, diddums. Should we organise a whip-around for the poor fellow?

There was a very heavily hinting gossip article in the Daily Heil a couple of days ago about an Earl who, having attended someone’s house party, spat into a staff member’s face; the article‘s last line was ‘Time, self-evidently, that the family spat the Earl out for good.’. There were a lot of reports and pictures of various royal family members on the same page; the tabloids’ favourite means of naming someone without naming them.
 
There was a very heavily hinting gossip article in the Daily Heil a couple of days ago about an Earl who, having attended someone’s house party, spat into a staff member’s face; the article‘s last line was ‘Time, self-evidently, that the family spat the Earl out for good.’. There were a lot of reports and pictures of various royal family members on the same page; the tabloids’ favourite means of naming someone without naming them.


Who was the earl then?
 
Could you lay off the DM links? Or at least post a warning with it. Clicked it by accident without realising it was that shit rag.

I really don't think your clicking on it is gonna massively increase the Mail's revenues

And it does have their URL and has their logo on the link (twice)
 
Back
Top Bottom