Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

there is an order of precedence (as in who outranks who, not who's the most obnoxious although there may be overlaps)

i can't even face reading it - the 'they're all a bunch of cunts' approach seems easier
Aye, but the question is why does this sort of thing appear:

“The Sovereign's brothers​
Why are they not listed as Prince Andrew and Prince Edward? How do they work out when a Dukedom is more noteworthy than a princeship and so on?
 
You've posted his name (including quotes) 1069 times whereas he has posted yours (or abbreviated to Pickmans) a mere 727. The eviden e suggests that you are obsessed rather more then he.
My rough estimate is that about 700 of those 727 are direct responses to being name-checked by Pickman's model , making him aproximately 4000% as obsessive as me, another damning statistic to add to his hall of shame.
 
Doesn't seem right that these people can just call themselves after places without the residents of said places having any say in this; at the very least the RF should be compelled to fund a local plebiscite to determine whether or not there is democratic consent.
 
Doesn't seem right that these people can just call themselves after places without the residents of said places having any say in this; at the very least the RF should be compelled to fund a local plebiscite to determine whether or not there is democratic consent.

I didn't have any say in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex getting those titles, but I hope they keep them, as it gets Mail readers and GB News viewers frothing at the mouth.
 
I don't have a problem with people going against NDA's etc in order to expose wrongdoing or criminality. I also don't think the royals have a right to privacy, because they claim that their existence is somehow a public service and anything done by public servants on the public tab should be subject to scrutiny.

None of that rules out this guy being a prick of course.


I don’t disagree with this. But if he was a whistleblower acting with some kind of honour or integrity that could /should have been covered. A short question and brief answer to acknowledge the situation would have been sufficient. Would have given weight to the whole thing.

Also, it’s hardly groundbreaking stuff.

Never mind anyway. It’s not an important interview. As I said, it’s diverting at best.



I wish I’d never opened this Pandora’s box now. :( So many posts generated by something so unnecessary.
 
Last edited:
Apparently Edward is due to be made the new Duke of Edinburgh. Perhaps they're waiting until he's brushed up on his racist quips.
Part of the initiation rights.

  1. Spit on a member of all 54 native states of the commonwealth
  2. Insult 5 nations states not in the commonwealth
  3. Drive a landrover for 1km in a straight line after imbibing 4 bottles of 30 yr old Macallan bouble cask
  4. Assemble the staff and do it in reverse.
  5. Go down in the crypt and make an offering.
 
You've posted his name (including quotes) 1069 times whereas he has posted yours (or abbreviated to Pickmans) a mere 727. The evidence suggests that you are obsessed rather more then he.
You say that like there's only one measure of obsession, simple numbers. There isn't. I've mentioned teuchter in fewer than 0.5% of my posts, according to your figures, in comparison to which teuchter has mentioned me in almost 2% of his contributions: he is clearly more concerned with me than I him.

E2a: as you'll see on this thread I posted a joke three months back. Teuchter came along and traced it back to a tweet I'd not seen then made reference to this again this morning, three months after the event. Doesn't really speak to this so-called obsession you suggest I have.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom