Prince Andrew and the establishment. When will justice be served.

a reply to: JPtruther

Listen very very carefully.

The people want justice/change then the people better all convene in a small section of the country and do a sit in until all current people of power are removed.

A sit in means everyone stays put, the country stops completely until all current power structures are removed and vacant for reoccupation by pre selected individuals.

This is the very only way a complete breakdown of these disgusting powers at be can be achieved.

Until then its only white noise no matter what so ever happens or is said.

End of story.

originally posted by: povray
Regarding monarchies, I'd like to ask: What scientific, logical, rational reason is there to subsidize any family in the world to the tune of millions of dollars a week without them working for it?

Talk about welfare queens - LITERALLY.

Not to digress from the OP, but you need to understand how the Monarchy is actually paid. Look up Crown Estates.
From the Crown Estates the Monarch pays nigh on 100% tax to the Government. From this the Monarch then receives a 'salary' from which she needs to repair Crown Estate properties, entertain dignitaries etc. For example the contentious repairs to Buckingham Palace which people seem to think is her personal property...it is not, it belongs to the country, and which people seem to think they the tax payer are paying for.....they are not....it comes from her 'salary' as a Monarch and it is her job to maintain it and run it to make more money for the Government. Monarch is Lizzies job.
As Queen, she pays the highest tax of any UK citizen. She holds that title by birth.

Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: CthruU
A sit in means everyone stays put, the country stops completely until all current power structures are removed and vacant for reoccupation by pre selected individuals.

Who does the pre-selection?

It doesn't matter if they are exposed. They are above the law.

Sovereign immunity.

a reply to: povray

To raise and train your rulers from birth to rule..


And thus avoid totally unqualified dumpster fires who can talk a good game..aka demagogues ..

Now obviously that is not a perfect system either... none is..


With monarchies you are rolling the dice that the person you trained from birth was not born a psychopath..

Hypothetically, then you have someone who can make the hard decision, even when it is unpopular.

A monarchy also removes all red tape...

Wanna Invade your Neighbor???

Done

Wanna build a wall to keep out the monguls that will take 3 generations to build??


Done..

That tyrannical power works for good decisions too.



I think it was Dan Carlin who said something like this concerning societies falling into disaster “ a democracy has a greater margin for error, you need more than one crazy person to create an atrocity, but when democracies go bad (mob rule) .. they go bad..

Aka the nazi’s.. the confederacy.. the Athenians at the end..


In a democracy, Once the majority of the population decides to do something stupid... there is no applying the breaks.. they go full steam ahead into disaster..


With a monarchy you just replace one guy.

a reply to: ArMaP

Exactly lol..


If everyone could agree on leaders then we wouldn’t need a whole scale replacement, now would we?!!

That is what is known as something that..


Sounds good..

a reply to: JPtruther

Hope in one hand, crap in the other JPtruther.

See which one fills up first?

There is no danger of our royals or aristocracy ever being held to account, nor any real proof materializing as to the nefarious diabolical heinous acts of depravity.

They simply wield too much power and monies.

Such is the world in which we live.

Prince Andrew is becoming Radioactive. Ireland dis-invited him.

mobile.twitter.com...

a reply to: JPtruther
Just seen your thread . I can’t comment on the royals ( don’t know them , don’t really care for them) but I live in jersey . There has been a massive historical abuse enquiry as you are no doubt aware of . Was it as bad as the media made out ? I’m not sure as most of the compensation has been paid to those affected by mental or physical abuse as opposed to sexual . Is there something being covered up ? After the mi ey spent I’d like to think not however there is a thing called “ the jersey way” . Best described as the elite closing ranks , shady deals etc . Lenny Harper was publicly ridiculed by the government at the time but why ? Was he wrong in his findings ? Or did he rattle a few cages ? For an island 9x5 we seem to have a peadophile being sentenced every week . May be it’s a as a result of the care enquiry or maybe it’s a way of diverting attention away from those in power . There are plenty of blogs to read that reference influential people traveling to the island for sordid activities but none of these Have made it to court . Possibly because they didn’t happen or possibly because of “ the jersey way”

June 15, 2020

Prince Andrew says he will not "cooperate" with the U.S. Department of Justice's inquiry without a Quid-Quo-Pro.

www.harpersbazaar.com...

originally posted by: carewemust
June 15, 2020

Prince Andrew says he will not "cooperate" with the U.S. Department of Justice's inquiry without a Quid-Quo-Pro.

www.harpersbazaar.com...

Interesting, as he is the subject of the whole inquiry. How can he want an olive branch when he is the guy they want to question about the goings on on Epsteins island?

He is in a sticky situation. He knows the noose is getting tighter but can't do anything about it without incriminating himself more.

a reply to: rhynouk
I guess he wants to avoid jail by "spilling the beans" on other high-profile crooks?

originally posted by: Grenade
It doesn't matter if they are exposed. They are above the law.

Sovereign immunity.

The Royal Family are not above the law. Royals have been variously prosecuted in modern times.

The Queen is above the law however, but not immune from civil proceedings, nor other legal instruments including an Act of Parliament. Sovereign immunity in the UK does not afford immunity from legal proceedings.

It's a tricky position, because if the Queen (the Monarch) was found to have broken laws there would be a public outcry, and as has been shown in the past, the Monarch is not immune to being thrown out and even (ahem) losing their head.

EDIT to add... Back to the OP. With regards to Prince Andrew - If there is compelling evidence which would stand up in court then the US prosecutors should attempt to extradite the Prince. I am guessing they don't have evidence with the exception of "guilt by association" and hearsay. There's the small matter that having sex (if that's true) with a 17 year-old is not a criminal offence in the UK, so not an extraditable offence anyway, because it's not an offence in the UK. UK-US Extradition Treaty

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: rhynouk
I guess he wants to avoid jail by "spilling the beans" on other high-profile crooks?

If for one minute, 'they' knew he was going to spill the beans on certain people in the circle, he would be dealt with. Like Jill Dando and Jeffery Epstein were.
Can he spill the beans without incriminating himself though? He was on that island and no doubt saw some dodgy stuff.

a reply to: paraphi

Andrew goes on the tv to give an interview. The accused said that he was with the kids at a Pizza joint on the night he was supposed to be at Tramps night club, where he danced with Virginia Giuffre, then went back to Maxwell's pad and had sex with her. The big problem with this is that Tramps nightclub is a public place and nobody has come forward to say he was there. Virginia says she had sex with Andrew , and is pretty adamant, He says he has no recollection of meeting the girl. Their is a photo of him with his arm around her at the top of the stairs after a night of sex....Really? he is not a total idiot who would leave this piece of glaring proof. I think he has probably been caught with a load of other people in compromised situations, Epstein even had the loo under surveillance. Mabey we are looking at a sting. In the present Political climate the Royals would have to go simply because its a fall back form of government if Parliament collapses. When in the past things get unstable the proles are revved up by the acts of a sexual nature which have been done by the royals. Something is up for sure but what it is , is anyone's guess as its being fed to us by a lying media.

a reply to: anonentity

If you can’t tell Prince Andrew was lying during that interview then you’re totally blinkered.

His game was up when he claimed he doesn’t sweat.

I say we (UK) hand him over to the US to be questioned and face whatever repercussions he deserves...

...just after the US hands over Anne Sacoolas for killing a British teen wit her can and then fleeing the country.

Seems fair.

I tell you what it will be confirmed that society as a whole has passed the point of no return in terms of ethics & morals if the world media stays focussed on hippie chav gardens & inside job protests & bat ship crazy, hypocritical " simon says " type government directives rather than reporting to the worlds angry millenials about this coming weekends NAMBLA 2020 'event' !!

a reply to: paraphi

"The Queen is above the law however, but not immune from civil proceedings, nor other legal instruments including an Act of Parliament. Sovereign immunity in the UK does not afford immunity from legal proceedings."

You just contradicted yourself.

a reply to: Grenade

Er, no it's not a contradiction.

To qualify. The Queen is truly above the law, because the authority for justice is carried out on her (the Monarch's) behalf. Hence judges are also referred to as Queen's Counsels (QCs) and prosecutions are carried out as Whoever versus the Crown.

However, the UK Monarch is not absolute, so while she is above the law, she can also be brought to justice in some circumstances. There are legal instruments which could be used for this.

Historically, Magna Carta declared the King (the monarch) to be subject to the rule of law.