The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #221  
Old 03-17-2011, 10:45 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,661
The recent events brings A&S back to the front cover. This week's BUNTE title is "greedy & embarrassing" - hits the nail on the head.
BUNTE – Das Heft Nr. 12, 2011: Inhaltsverzeichnis - BUNTE
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 03-18-2011, 12:27 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Omaha, United States
Posts: 1,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
May I ask for a link where you are basing this information? Andrew is a grown man who seems to have no problem making deals that will not bear the scrutiny of daylight. Why are you placing the blame on Sarah? She did not sell the house to the Khazakis
I got my info from the Mail, Telegraph and the BBC. I didn't blame Sarah, please read my post again before making accusations.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 03-19-2011, 09:38 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 421
After a slow down it's coming back.

Why did Prince Andrew visit Gaddafi in Libya with ‘shady’ Tory
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 03-19-2011, 10:01 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,217
The Japanese catastrophe was in the papers earlier in the week. Now that the nuclear situation looks more hopeful, that subject was dropped. Then the big news was the invasion of Libya by the coalition. Now it's back to Andrew again. In my opinion, there's no scandal here, and I don't think that Andrew personally profited from the negotiations that he allegedly carried out on behalf of the government. I don't see what Rowland has to do with the trip to Libya except that he travelled with Andrew; but he covered his own costs. It's a way of working the whole story about Sarah's debt and "help" she's received. That could indeed be "shady", but it has nothing to do with Libya. That the UK's government saw fit to trade a terrorist for an oil contract could leave a bad taste in a person's mouth; but in this case I think that Andrew was simply doing his job.

"During his talks with Gaddafi, Prince Andrew is believed to have discussed the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. Megrahi was released from prison in Scotland in 2009 amid reports that Britain had won a lucrative oil deal for BP from Gaddafi in return."

Read more: Why did Prince Andrew visit Gaddafi in Libya with ¿shady¿ Tory? | Mail Online
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 03-21-2011, 12:29 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,699
Prince Andrew should go says former Foreign Office Minister | Mail Online
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things" Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 06-09-2011, 09:41 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,211
The Duke of York should be questioned over his knowledge of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, one the American financier's victims said today.

Virginia Roberts alleged that the Royal could give 'valuable' insight to the FBI investigation against Epstein, a convicted sex offender.

The Wall Street financier was jailed for 18 months in 2008 for soliciting a minor for prostitution.



Read more: Prince Andrew should be questioned because he 'knows the truth' about billionaire U.S. paedophile, claims victim | Mail Online
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 06-09-2011, 12:57 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 202
It's not looking good. But my guess is that Andrew will not be called to testify because of diplomatic immunity. It will probably all be swept under the carpet and in time forgotten.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 06-29-2011, 12:25 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 983
Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm” | VF Daily | Vanity Fair

This article claims that Sarah received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Epstein - much more than originally reported.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 06-29-2011, 12:32 AM
Dymphna's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Gettysburg, PA, United States
Posts: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286 View Post
Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm” | VF Daily | Vanity Fair

This article claims that Sarah received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Epstein - much more than originally reported.
Wow. Quite a damning article. It sounds as though Andrew is as troubled in some ways as Sarah is. Very sad.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 06-29-2011, 01:04 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,527
Nothing new in this article to what was made public back in March/April.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 07-25-2011, 02:29 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
According to this article she states that thanks to P. Andrew she is now debt free. I can't help but contrast that with her vanity fair article a couple of years ago (the one w/ the dominatrix photo) where she stated she helped P. Andrew out financially.

I've cleared my debts (yet again) says Fergie... and it's thanks to Andrew, my knight on a white charger | Mail Online
The current issue of Vanity Fair has a very unflattering portrait of Prince Andrew, with side comments about Sarah, equalling unflattering. It pre-dates by a week the fall of Prince Andrew from his position as Trade Envoy. (The link below is not to the full article - just a snippet).

Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm”
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/dai...-the-firm.html
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 07-25-2011, 06:04 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger View Post
The current issue of Vanity Fair has a very unflattering portrait of Prince Andrew, with side comments about Sarah, equalling unflattering. It pre-dates by a week the fall of Prince Andrew from his position as Trade Envoy. (The link below is not to the full article - just a snippet).

Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm”
Prince Andrew: Ties to Jeffrey Epstein and His Tenuous Position in “the Firm” | VF Daily | Vanity Fair
Here's the article in full:

The Trouble with Andrew | Society | Vanity Fair

Unfortunately there is much information given that is false - so I don't know if you can really trust the rest...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 07-25-2011, 06:09 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
Here's the article in full:

The Trouble with Andrew | Society | Vanity Fair

Unfortunately there is much information given that is false - so I don't know if you can really trust the rest...
I have enormous respect for the journalism work of Vanity Fair - yet I have to say I was surprised at the tone of this article. It has a really nasty edge - I wondered about it. Now you say there are inaccuracies - what are they? Can you say?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 07-25-2011, 06:28 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger View Post
I have enormous respect for the journalism work of Vanity Fair - yet I have to say I was surprised at the tone of this article. It has a really nasty edge - I wondered about it. Now you say there are inaccuracies - what are they? Can you say?
- Sarah is said to have received nothing after her divorce while Diana went away with millions.
- Camilla is said to be really wanting to be the first "commoner" queen and Charles indulges her - I only heard information to the contrary, that Charles is keen for her to be queen, but it doesn't matter to her.
- If the "Way Ahead group" only dealt with "such paramount issues as primogeniture, the feudal rule by which the Crown passes to the eldest male heir.", there wouldn't be much to deal with, as the line is fixed and potential changes can only come from the government. Ok, there will be Royal input, but I guess the position of the RF is fixed, there is no need to discuss that two times a year. Plus they write that last Christmas was the first time Prince William was invited to the sessions of the group: then when was Harry invited? Earlier than William?
- "What’s more, Philip tried to bully Andrew into kicking Fergie out of her residence at Royal Lodge—a demand that placed Andrew in the awkward position of having to choose between his overbearing father and his over-the-top ex-wife. He chose her." Is that so? I really doubt that info!
- The timing of Andrew's investiture as GCVO was different - it was published officially before the story about Epstein broke, just the actual investiture ceremony was afterwards. Edward received his promotion around the same time, so it is not proven that the queen wanted Andrew to be untouchable under her protection as the article claimed. And the fact that Edward received the same honour at around the same time shows that it was not using her "most potent instrument" to protect her "favorite son".
- "When Beatrice was 17, she fell in love with a disreputable American by the name of Paolo Liuzzo. (snip paragraph) Beatrice was heartbroken when the relationship ended and she had to return to Goldsmiths, which is part of the University of London.". Beatrice was not at Goldsmiths, when she split with that guy. all the time she studied at Goldsmiths, she had Dave Clark for her boyfriend.

etc. See what I mean?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 07-25-2011, 06:54 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
- Sarah is said to have received nothing after her divorce while Diana went away with millions.
- Camilla is said to be really wanting to be the first "commoner" queen and Charles indulges her - I only heard information to the contrary, that Charles is keen for her to be queen, but it doesn't matter to her.
- If the "Way Ahead group" only dealt with "such paramount issues as primogeniture, the feudal rule by which the Crown passes to the eldest male heir.", there wouldn't be much to deal with, as the line is fixed and potential changes can only come from the government. Ok, there will be Royal input, but I guess the position of the RF is fixed, there is no need to discuss that two times a year. Plus they write that last Christmas was the first time Prince William was invited to the sessions of the group: then when was Harry invited? Earlier than William?
- "What’s more, Philip tried to bully Andrew into kicking Fergie out of her residence at Royal Lodge—a demand that placed Andrew in the awkward position of having to choose between his overbearing father and his over-the-top ex-wife. He chose her." Is that so? I really doubt that info!
- The timing of Andrew's investiture as GCVO was different - it was published officially before the story about Epstein broke, just the actual investiture ceremony was afterwards. Edward received his promotion around the same time, so it is not proven that the queen wanted Andrew to be untouchable under her protection as the article claimed. And the fact that Edward received the same honour at around the same time shows that it was not using her "most potent instrument" to protect her "favorite son".
- "When Beatrice was 17, she fell in love with a disreputable American by the name of Paolo Liuzzo. (snip paragraph) Beatrice was heartbroken when the relationship ended and she had to return to Goldsmiths, which is part of the University of London.". Beatrice was not at Goldsmiths, when she split with that guy. all the time she studied at Goldsmiths, she had Dave Clark for her boyfriend.

etc. See what I mean?
Very sloppy. Agree. What could they be thinking? Or they don't have good fact checking on things Royal? Went to press with the story precipitously? It almost sounds like a gratuitous trashing and I would not have thought that of Vanity Fair.

And there's even an 'etc' in there? Hmmm.....what more is askew?

Question: Is William (and Harry) members of the 'Way Ahead Group'? Is there such a group? Being here on TRF has made me sensitive to the partisanship around Charles and William - did you get the impression from the little bit written about William and the WAG, that it was being suggested that there is polarization between Charles and William? I had the impression that it was being suggested that William was in active discord with his father.

From the article: Last Christmas she reportedly invited Prince William to sit in on his first meeting of the Way Ahead Group, preparing him for the day he becomes King.

Like his mother, Princess Diana, William has a knack for connecting with ordinary people, a quality his father conspicuously lacks. “William is a key player in the future monarchy,” said a source who has studied the matter closely. “He’s going to help direct how things will happen.

“What’s far more likely to happen,” said the royal-watcher Robert Jobson, “is that there will be a seamless change of power in the monarchy, a gradual shift away from the Queen. Charles’s influence will gain, as will William’s. During the last years of Elizabeth’s reign, Charles and William will be like shadow kings.”


What do you make of this slant in the article? It startled me.

Also, I was given to understand that Sarah refused money from the Queen at her divorce - is that so? Or did she have millions like Diana?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 07-25-2011, 04:16 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,500
The Way Ahead Group really exists...
User:Hemlock Martinis/Way Ahead Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 07-25-2011, 04:18 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,211
Please note that off topic posts about Prince Charles as it relates to his personality, and his interactions with people have been deleted as off topic.

All discussions regarding Prince Charles in THIS thread, should be in reference to Prince Andrew and the Jeffrey Epstein Controversy.

Thanks!

Zonk
British Forums Moderator
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 07-25-2011, 04:23 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,500
Is there anything left to say about the Epstein controversy ?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 07-25-2011, 04:42 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,217
I think it's a done deal unless Andrew or Sarah are called in to testify or some reporter discovers an as-yet-unexploded bomb-shell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renata4711 View Post
Is there anything left to say about the Epstein controversy ?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 07-25-2011, 08:04 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bronx, United States
Posts: 421
Until every case with Epstein is done it's not going to be over. There are still lawsuits pending and we don't now what Andrew was doing during his trips. All it takes is one woman to mention that the Prince was there when something inappropriate happened (Not necessarily seeing but just there) and Andrew will be right back in the heat of things.

I do wonder if the FBI would question him. I get the feeling that the British government, more than likely urged by the crown, would ask them to back off unless they got something that looked seriously damaging.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:20 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]