It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Prince Andrew On Front Pages of British Tabloids.

page: 3
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

I would prefer to await due legal process. There's too much money involved for me to think that there is a good chance someone is out to make money - not least the lawyers. History is strewn with false accusations that ruin people's reputations and lives due to publicity etc.

Edit to add that Dershowitz, a co-accused, has challenged the accuser and her lawyers to come to court to stand by the allegations. He said he would legally challenge her accusations.

Regards
edit on 4/1/2015 by paraphi because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 04:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: daftpink
a reply to: Shiloh7

Child abuse sadly happens everywhere and is indifferent to class. However this organised abuse and sex trafficking is most likely more prevalent in the elite because their minds and egos are deluded and corrupted with power, greed and a feeling of being above the law.
Tabloids report all sorts of things without any evidence and may well be the case in this instance. What reason would the royals have in these sort of crimes



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: daftpink
a reply to: Shiloh7

Child abuse sadly happens everywhere and is indifferent to class. However this organised abuse and sex trafficking is most likely more prevalent in the elite because their minds and egos are deluded and corrupted with power, greed and a feeling of being above the law.
Tabloids report all sorts of things without any evidence and may well be the case in this instance. What reason would the royals have in these sort of crimes


I just gave them.



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   
A fair point.

I shall await your input on this debate after it is all over and decided.

a reply to: paraphi



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: crazyewok

Let them face what they made law in the first place - I doubt they expected it would be one of their own though.


 


the Law... for the elites, the wealthy, the mover & shakers of society. and the exclusive Royal Family...
and to some degree even the 'beautiful people' in pop culture...

Law and Rules of life do not apply...Laws are for the riff-raff
Rules of life are more bendable the higher your social status



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Firstly I would like to state I am a avidly against and hate all paedophiles
and rapists with a vengeance. I neither like or dislike Royalty. However
I would just like to bring a few FACTS to the table .....

# Firstly the girl concerned was 17 years old (legal in the UK where
16 is the age of consent)

# Secondly paedophiles are only concerned with prepubescent
children
12/13 years is getting a bit old for them. Therefor
paedophilia can be taken out of the equation.

# The 17 year old girl concerned is now 30 years old and has given the
Mail on Sunday her story. the following are a few excerpts from it ...

ANDREW 'SEX SLAVE' GIRL : MY STORY >>>>

I was working as a changing room assistant in the spa at Donald Trump's
palatial Florida country club, Mar-A-Lago, where her father was a
maintenance manager. Soon after her 15th birthday, in 1998 she met
Ghislaine Maxwell (daughter of the late fraudster Robert Maxwell) at
the club.
The socialite was a friend of Jeffry Epstein's and the pair were known
in NY and London for their hedonistic lifestyle.
Virginia Roberts (the Girl) says she had no idea of the risk she was
running when she leapt at an invitation from Ghislaine to work for
Jeffry Epstein .... who was looking for a travelling masseuse and I'd
get training and be paid large amounts of money.
She was told she could start work immediately and was driven to
Epstein's sugar pink mansion on Palm Beach waterfront.
She was taken to a room where Epstein was lying face down on a
table, completely naked. He asked her a whole bunch of questions
and within the first hour he knew her life story, she told him I'd been
a runaway, and had lived on the street and taken ecstasy, and wasn't
a virgin. And Epstein said to her " So you're a bad girl in a good girls
body"
Virginia Roberts was nauseated by the sexual acts that she was
instructed to perform. But she was charmed by Epstein's rags-to-
riches life story - which he intimated was an example to her.

Miss Roberts makes the extraordinary claim that she was paid about
$15,000 (just under £10,000) by the 58 year old Epstein as a reward
for sleeping with the Prince and other sexual services for Epstein.

In another interview with the M.O.S. another girl Johanna Sjoberg
who was 21 years of age has confirmed the encounter had
been hired by Ghislaine to answer phones and serve drinks in return
for $20 (£13) an hour.

NOW ...
a) She was not prepubescent.
b) She was not held down.
c) She was not under lock and key.
d) She was PAID for services

HOW IS THAT A "SEX SLAVE"
Where I come from that's a
job and its called prostitution



Dictionary definition ...SLAVE = Someone who is Legally owned
by another person and is forced to work for that person
without pay



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 06:08 PM
link   
If anyones interested I have a specific question regarding Prince andrew here

thread question



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 03:52 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

The loathing for paedophelia which we both appear to agree on needs to acknowledge that not all countries think kids are responsible until 18 so this particular witness is 17 and classed in the USA as a minor/child.

I'm not bothered about the sensationalism given by the press as to whether this witness was a sex slave - that's really more today's views on the matter and the world has moved on since the time this occurred, but the fact she was classed a minor and epstein and andrew much havae had a pretty good idea of her being under age is rteally the issue.

Another one not expressed so much yet is that with all VIP's and this certainly happened in a PR firm my wife worked at in the 1970's being a secretary for a board member she had to book escorts for visiting business men. Presumably the girls were willing and above the age of consent - on the odd occasions she did attend these social does with her boss, the women were all very sophisticated and she said she wouldn't have known they were professional escorts. For this kind of entertainment it should occur to most people that Andrew's own staff would have book his preferments when fergy wasn't about. He certainly had his own security police/staff who would have been party to his wishes and actions. The fact he has been named as using a known trafficker and paedophile to seems to suggest this was for specific things he didn't want his own people to know about.

I admit I am more angry about the censorship of this type of behaviour, particularly with the can of worms we are slowly uncovering within our elite and most trusted civil servants. It haas been rumoured and some police seem to be trying to get to the centre of this investigation but are being stopped deliberately and we have no transparency in this matter especially after philip schofield gave cameron his list of paedophiles, that we need this to be actioned on.

I do think people should realise just how vulnerable this country is to gross financial exploitation by other governments who are party to these secrets and, apart from the poor victims who deserve justice and an apology, our country is probably being milked financially by those perfectly willing to exploit this knowledge and also our foreign and trade policies could well be manipulated against the interests of the british public.

We already know that far too many inconsequencial people are being rewarded in the honours lists, so that alone indicates our vulnerability to far more serious blackmail which would have far reaching effects that need to be addressed and miniminalised as quickly as possible.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 03:55 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

Sure its legal in the UK but 17 is not in the USA

And as us riff raff can be dragged from our beds and deported to the tyrannical USA to stand trial for "crimes" against them that are not even crimes hereall on limited evidence I think the same should apply to Andy.
edit on 5-1-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: eletheia

The loathing for paedophelia which we both appear to agree on needs to acknowledge that not all countries think kids are responsible until 18 so this particular witness is 17 and classed in the USA as a minor/child.


The 'offence' occurred in three different locations # the U.S. # the virgin
islands and # the U.K. and as none of us know .... she could have been
17 when it happened in the U.K. and 18 in the other locations? which
would keep him within the law?



For this kind of entertainment it should occur to most people that Andrew's own staff would have book his preferments when fergy wasn't about. He certainly had his own security police/staff who would have been party to his wishes and actions. The fact he has been named as using a known trafficker and paedophile to seems to suggest this was for specific things he didn't want his own people to know about.



Andrew may not have known at the time what we now know
about Jeffry Epstein. After all as I have mentioned before I was
introduced to Jimmy Saville 'twice' .... not of my choice just
happened to be at the same charity function, and we are all now
aware of just how he used charity for his own purposes!?



I admit I am more angry about the censorship of this type of behaviour, particularly with the can of worms we are slowly uncovering within our elite and most trusted civil servants. It haas been rumoured and some police seem to be trying to get to the centre of this investigation but are being stopped deliberately and we have no transparency in this matter especially after philip schofield gave cameron his list of paedophiles, that we need this to be actioned on.


Unfortunately "ROT" is every where and there is more than their
share among the 'elite' which is now hopefully being routed out



We already know that far too many inconsequencial people are being rewarded in the honours lists, so that alone indicates our vulnerability to far more serious blackmail which would have far reaching effects that need to be addressed and miniminalised as quickly as possible.


Too right......



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: eletheia

Sure its legal in the UK but 17 is not in the USA

And as us riff raff can be dragged from our beds and deported to the tyrannical USA to stand trial for "crimes" against them that are not even crimes hereall on limited evidence I think the same should apply to Andy.



We 'riff raff' don't know enough about this "ALLEDGED" offence
only what the media has put out.
As there were three locations concerned he may just have been legal
in all locations depending on the 'time frame' of ALLEDGED
offences?......

But Hey!! What happened to innocent until proved guilty?? OR is
that just for us' riff raff'?



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7

This image is circulating on twitter, posting a link as ATS won't let me post an image.


twitter.com...

Sky News seem to have suffered a technical blip. The words 'Royal Denial' followed with the blip 'approved wording do not change'

Don't think we were supposed to see that and this clearly shows that Sky take orders from the palace on how to report this story.


edit on 5/1/2015 by daftpink because: typo



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7




I expect he has a lot of explanations for his mother, whom will no doubt slap as many D notices or whatever immunity she can get her paws on to protect her privilege and keep them all sitting pretty.


Don't worry. Mommy dearest knows all about it...no explanations needed.

The entire Royal family is deep into perversions that come with being all powerful and having mindless subjects.

Epstein and Saville...what a nice company to keep. Let's see how this plays out in the end...but I won't hold my breath.

Someone already mentioned this...and I agree fully...only tip of the disgusting iceberg...which will probably never fully surface. Too many players involved.

It's things like these that expose the sickness of mankind...the evil within us...and those that are unafraid of human justice...just let their sickness come forth.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 05:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
The emperor has no clothes figuratively and otherwise.

Who would have thought that expression would have so many meanings directed towards the same group. It's curious and very frightening to think how massively intertwined throughout the globe this could be. Not even just ruling elites but religious leaders as well well beyond the catholic sex abuse scandals, which by the way im sure they're relieived to be out of front a center.....for now.

What does this leave us with? I mean really? The world's "leaders" being this "corrupt" is no accident. There is clearly an evil so profound infiltrated into every corner and bowels of our accepted reality. There is something very, very wrong here.


short and brilliant...and on the spot, man.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

Inocent until proven guilty is defunct when uncle sam wants to take us.


Under the US extridition treaty one can be extridited to stand trial on just suspicion, the US does not have supply much if any evidence and many who the US has taken have said there defence team dont get to see the evidence until they reach the states


Now if us commoners have to live under said treaty so does andy here.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




Now if us commoners have to live under said treaty so does andy here.


A decade ago...the Taliban were willing to hand over OBL...provided the US demonstrates proof of his involvement...US doesn't negotiate with terrorists


But Andy here will not stand trial...be sure of it.

His kind rarely does...

Quod licet iovi non licet bovi.




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join