Prince William

Random entry RSS

  • Posted in:

    Palace of Discord and Deception. [Updated] Prince William's officials covered-up his uncle's involvement in the Epstein-Maxwell sex trafficking scandal.

    Buckingham Palace went to extraordinary lengths to cover-up the involvement of Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, in the Jeffrey Epstein-Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking scandal. The Royal was supplied with a 17-year-old-girl, Virginia Roberts (Giuffre), who was commanded to have sex with him three times, once in London. Palace officials threatened to blackball ABC, an American TV station which got hold of the story in 2015. The latest development is that Prince Andrew has sold his Swiss chalet which will provide him with millions with which to finance a settlement with Roberts. The case will proceed as the judge in the US has rejected his application to discontinue it. What if it is now to late to settle with his victim having branded her a liar? To make matters worse for the Duke, a witness has come forward who can confirm that Roberts spoke to her about her involvement with the Duke at the time of the abuse. The witness saw the infamous picture of the Duke with Roberts and Ghislaine Maxwell shortly after it was taken. What will the Metropolitan Police do if he  manages to settle the civil action by handing over five or six million – or even more – to Roberts? An innocent man would fight his corner rather than enrich a liar who has destroyed his reputation, especially to the extent of making her a multi millionairess. The Duke will hardly settle with Roberts without a guarantee from her  that she will boycott any future criminal prosecution brought against him in London. A criminal prosecution would be doomed to failure without her full co-operation and testimony. Surely, Met. Comissioner Cressida Dick would have to resign if a deal on those terms Is concluded. She refused to investigate the case when Roberts was prepared to co-operate fully. The behaviour of the Royal Family has been a shambolic disaster thus far. In 2015 ABC was warned  that Prince William and Kate would shun them in the future if they ran an interview they had recorded with Roberts. She was 17, he was 41. ABC backed down. More details can be found here: Judge a (future) king by his courtiers: Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, pawns in the cover-up of a transatlantic paedophile network. A video of Amy Robach, the ABC reporter can be accessed via the video in the links below: Remember when @ABC dropped the ball on this investigation, because they were threatened by #PrinceAndrew family? #JeffreyEpstein #GhislaineMaxwell pic.twitter.com/SwDGUaAaDb — Resilient (@KaindeB) January 4, 2022 https://twitter.com/AliciaJ1985/status/1477687840473554944?t=B8z0BI8jD34n1oEQEfJUcA&s=19 In the wake of the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell, the Palace is now trying to rewrite its sordid role in the cover-up. So-called ‘anonymous’ sources are pretending that there was no concealment, rather that matters got out of hand because of the arrogance of the Duke. The Duke has enjoyed the  unwavering support and protection of his devoted mother,  Queen Elizabeth. Clearly, he is now being thrown to the wolves by her courtiers. It is not fanciful to speculate that the monarch is  viewed as a lame duck by her senior retainers as she battles ill health, fatigue and great old age. If the control of Buckingham Palace is indeed passing to Prince Charles, it can be inferred that he has decided that his brother’s sexual excesses are not going to ruin his forthcoming reign as king. The latest message from the Palace via The Daily Mail  is that the Queen is refusing the bail out Prince Andrew, her reputed favourite child. It is more likely that she has had her elderly arm twisted than that she has abandoned Prince Andrew out of a sudden disgust at his behaviour. The Daily Mail was the conduit for the new PR line which the Palace began taking last week. It reported last week that: “Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior former royal adviser stressed that while there was no knowledge of the extent of the duke’s friendship with Epstein and Maxwell to anyone outside of the prince’s private office, the ‘Andrew problem’ was a long-running issue for the royal household in general. ‘Anyone who even dared to offer their professional advice that maybe his way wasn’t the right one was met with a decisive ‘f*** off out of my office’,’ the source said”. The account is backed up by other former royal staff, all of whom claim the prince acted as if he “didn’t have to answer to anyone” and was allowed to “go rogue”. Particularly troublesome, it was said, was Andrew’s role as a roving trade ‘ambassador’, which saw him repeatedly criticised for cosying up to highly controversial world leaders and businessmen. A former Buckingham Palace staff member recalled how it was an “impossible job” to persuade the prince or his advisers to take any instruction. “The duke made clear that the only person he answered to was the Queen”, they said. “He wouldn’t take advice from anyone. [He] acted with total impunity and staff were just too scared to stand up to him as a member of the Royal Family. Her Majesty almost always backed him and he fully exploited that. There’s an element of Buckingham Palace sleepwalking into his whole crisis. Andrew would tell his family that it was all untrue and it would all go away”. It would stretch credulity beyond breaking point to suggest that the Mail’s primary ‘source’ and the other ‘former’ courtiers have all emerged at the same time with the same deceptive story by coincidence. The sources also appear to have no fear of any repercussion for breaking their duty of silence to the Palace. There can only be a tiny pool of people with this background who have retired in the recent past. It would be easy to identify them. Would they all risk losing a pension just to vent some exasperation at the Duke? Or is this all part of a structured PR offensive? More importantly, why are the Mail’s sources concealing the true history of the Royal

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Backstabbing and censorship, by Royal Command. Covering up smears, dirty tricks and child rape by the Royal Family.

    By Joseph de Burca. The BBC is resisting an attempt by Buckingham Palace to neutralise a documentary about a press-briefing war between princes William and Harry. It is entitled ‘The Princes and the Press’ and is scheduled for presentation by Amol Rajan on BBC2 on Monday night at 9 pm. It will be the first of a two part broadcast. The Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are jointly threatening to boycott the TV organisation if doesn’t kow-tow to their wishes. No doubt behind the scenes, the usual tactic of promising knighthoods and other awards is taking place; equally, the making of threats to withhold them from likely future recipients. Prince Harry has no hope of matching that sort of an armoury. One of the known anti-Harry briefings to emanate from Buckingham Palace in recent times was a smear which called  the former’s mental health into question. ITV attempted to reveal this to the public last July but was forced to buckle at the last moment in a broadcast entitled, ‘Harry and William: What Went Wrong’. The BBC has a lamentable history of obsequiousness towards the Palace. The easy ride afforded to Prince Andrew over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal is a good example. The Corporation managed to misrepresent an exclusive interview with the Royal as a triumph for hard hitting journalism when it was nothing of the sort. It wasn’t just the failure to probe, Prince Andrew was not asked a single question about his relationship with the paedophile Lord Greville Janner. See: The Prince, the pauper and the paedophile peer: the dangerous questions the BBC failed to ask. The threat to boycott a TV station is a tried and tested technique deployed by the Royals. Officials at the Palace used it successfully to prevent ABC TV in the US from exposing Prince Andrew’s links to the Jeffrey Epstein child rape and trafficking scandal. The US TV station buckled, and Epstein and his paedophile network pursued children unimpeded for another few years as a result. Details about that can be read here: Judge a (future) king by his courtiers: Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, pawns in the cover-up of a transatlantic paedophile network. Meanwhile, the Palace continues to fight author Andrew Lownie’s campaign to release the diaries and papers of Lord Louis Mountbatten. Those papers may contain clues about the abuse of boys from Kincora Boys’ Home in Belfast. Further details about Mountbatten’s abhorrent sexual abuse of boys as young as 8 can be found at: SECOND UPDATE: Kincora boy abused by Mountbatten committed suicide months later. See also: Mountbatten, the Royal who abused boys aged 8-12. If the timeservers at the BBC finally stand up to the Palace it will be a first. The BBC’s record in making a mess of  issues like these is depressing. See also: Carl Beech and the ‘Useful idiots’ at the BBC. The incompetence of the BBC has now made it a pawn in the cover-up of VIP sex abuse. The darkest forces in MI5 and MI6 are the true beneficiaries of its inepitude. OTHER STORIES PUBLISHED BY VILLAGE MAGAZINE WHICH EXPOSE UK VIP SEX-ABUSE SCANDALS: Prince Andrew has no need to sweat after publication of the Janner paedophile report. James Molyneaux and the Kincora scandal. James Molyneaux was linked to Kincora child rapist in British PSYOPS document. Judge a (future) king by his courtiers: Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, pawns in the cover-up of a transatlantic paedophile network. With regard to Mountbatten: SECOND UPDATE: Kincora boy abused by Mountbatten committed suicide months later Also: Mountbatten, the Royal who abused boys aged 8-12. The British Government purchased Mountbatten’s archive for the benefit of historians (allegedly) but has locked it away. It may include details about his links to paedophile networks including the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. With regard to Prince Andrew:  The Prince, the pauper and the paedophile peer: the dangerous questions the BBC failed to ask. With regard to Prince Philip: Prince Philip’s infidelity, love children and the Profumo scandal . With regard to Roy Cohn who was Donald Trump’s mentor: Trump’s mentor: another sociopathic paedophile child-trafficker in the mix; from Roy Cohn to Epstein and Maxwell. Village’s online book on the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring begins here: The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. Chapters 1 – 3. The plot to discredit victims of VIP sex abuse: Carl Beech and the ‘Useful idiots’ at the BBC. The incompetence of the BBC has now made it a pawn in the cover-up of VIP sex abuse. The darkest forces in MI5 and MI6 are the true beneficiaries of its inepitude. With regard to Enoch Powell: Suffer little children. With regard to former British prime minister Ted Heath: Not just Ted Heath: British Establishment paedophilia and its links to Ireland With regard to Margaret Thatcher, MI5 and the murder of the lawyer Patrick Finucane: Thatcher’s Murder Machine, the British State assassination of Patrick Finucane. By Joseph de Burca.

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Villager May 2018

    No Catholics or bastards please, we’re British Villager despises royalty, as anyone who believes in equality, merit or good taste, must. Interesting though that new-born Prince whatsit will come in fifth in line to the “throne”. Time was the new “Prince” would have been advanced to it over his older sister (Princess whatsit), as a male. The Bill of Rights 1689 and the act of settlement 1701, restrict succession to the legitimate Protestant descendants of Sophia of Hanover, of which there are over 5000, who are in “communion with the Church of England”. Spouses of Roman Catholics were disqualified from 1689 until the law was amended in 2015. The succession to the Crown Act 2013 leaves succession to the Crown no longer dependent on gender for lucky heirs born after 28 october 2011. With such incremental progress it will only be a few aeons now before the monarchy passes for democratic. INMajor trouble 23 years ago Vincent Browne got €90,000 in a private settlement with the state because the Garda tapped his phone over an eight-year period in part believing he was talking to IRA leaders for Magill Magazine. a decade earlier journalists Geraldine Kennedy and Bruce arnold were awarded £20,000 in the high court after their phones were tapped for a short period, for absolutely no reason. So how much will the around 200 lucky victims of Leslie Buckley’s version of phone-tapping – data breach – collect? INM has a cash pile of €90m but a stock-market value of only €110.9 million valuing INM in effect at less than €20 million, plus the cash. The problem is that 200 complaints of data breaches could easily hoover up most of that sum. O’Brien has spent €500m building up his stake, partly to show the O’Reilly family what good management looked like and er partly to boost his popularity, but his holding is now worth only €33m and shares are down 40% over the last year. This is an investment even worse, though not nearly as predictably so, as one in Village Magazine over the last decade. STabbing the competition On 22 april The Sunday Times (Irish edition) unkindly editorialised that the INM group was leaking selective extracts from the 240-page affidavit of the ODCE on which it has grounded its application for the appointment of high court inspectors who would examine various allegations against the media group and its former chairman, leslie Buckley. In particular, The Sunday Times claimed that INM was strangely silent on the allegations leaked from the affidavit that the largest shareholder, Denis O’Brien, had access to sensitive commercial information, courtesy of communications minister, Denis Naughten, before other shareholders. But ironically The Sunday Times is part of the Rupert Murdoch stable, news International, which was forced to close down its News of the World brand in 2011 in the light of damning revelations that some of its senior editorial staff had condoned the widespread tapping of phones and other criminal offences. At one point former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, soon after his inelegant departure from office in 2008 amid evidence of financial wrongdoing, graced a TV advertisement for the News of the World from inside a kitchen cupboard, his most ignominious television appearance until the recent Tim Sebastian interview. The Sunday Times was famously less than wholehearted in pursuing the politician for failing to account for over £200,000 unexplained in various bank accounts while he was Minister for Finance in the 1980s. ahern cultivated Murdoch whose sky division famously obtained rights to cover the Ryder cup in Ireland under Bertie’s premiership. Equally intriguing is the insistence by O’Brien that the leaks to INM from the affidavit came from the ODCE rather than from the copy provided to the newspaper organisation in which he is the largest, though – significantly – non-controlling, shareholder. The leaks came from people close to the non- O’Brien wing of INM. Radio Caroline ended party early Chris Donoghue, Niall O’Connor and Ed Carty have joined the ranks of independent journalists who now advise government. Government Press advisor Nick Miller once toiled for regional titles such as the Kerryman, Tullamore Tribune and Evening Echo. Now the one-time series producer of RTÉ’s ‘The Sunday Game’, and regular voice of ‘It says In The Papers’ on ‘Morning Ireland’, Caroline Murphy, has become press advisor to Minister for Justice Charlie Flanagan. She is of course married to Sean O’Rourke, presenter of RTÉ Radio 1’s flagship current affairs programme, the ‘Today show’. The formidable Murphy described some years ago to the Irish Times how she fell for the uncontroversial presenter: “We met around 1983, when I had a singles BBQ in a house I’d bought in Killiney: everyone invited had to bring a friend of the same sex and Fintan Drury (later chairman of the RTÉ authority who resigned because of a conflict of interest over rights to cover the Ryder cup) brought Seán. He was still there with Fintan at 2am when I threw them out – Seán was shocked. I couldn’t believe anyone would think it wasn’t my right to say the party’s over”. Murphy told the Irish Independent her work at the national broadcaster has been “marginal” in recent years. Neutering neutrality Cosying up to NATO is now de rigueur inside ‘modern’ Fine Gael. Four of the party’s MEPs, Seán Kelly, Brian Hayes, Deirdre Clune and Máiread McGuinness, advocate a policy which would see us dilute neutrality by falling in line with deepening EU military co-operation. In a statement issued to accompany the launch of a discussion paper ‘Ireland and the EU: Defending our common european home’, by Brian Hayes on 9 March, the MEPs stated, “We want to make it clear that we do not support the creation of an EU army. However, Ireland can do so much more in collaboration with our EU partners in the area of security and defence”. These MEPs have not gone off on a frolic of their own volition. This is now FG and Varadkar’s euro-military policy. Ironically, the Taoiseach is known to

    Loading

    Read more