Thread: That Prince Andrew interview

Originally Posted by taxexile

on a similar theme, years before jimmy savile was exposed as an abusive pedophile, the respected journalist louis theroux lived at saviles apartment for a month whilst filming a documentary about saviles extrovert personality and lifestyle. when the revelations about savile came out, theroux was amazed that during the month he spent at his apartment he had no suspicion whatsover of saviles perversions.

epstein lived in massive mansions and rambling apartments, and it is quite possible that someone staying there would be completely unaware of the darker aspects of his lifestyle. i believe that the visit in question took place before epsteins conviction for underage sex.

epsteins procurer in chief, ghislaine maxwell, probably has answers to all the questions being asked at the moment, and unsurprisingly she has gone awol.

if andrew raped the girl in question then a crime has been committed, if there was sex and it was consensual, then no crime has been committed, although ethically and morally boundaries may well have been crossed in that a member of the royal family has ventured "below stairs" as it were to consummate his lust "a la droit du seigneur"

its a messy and shameful business no doubt, but as to whether criminality is involved in andrews behaviour? i doubt it.

his daughters must be very proud of him.

I find it hard to believe that Prince Andrew would stay in the house of somebody so predominant in the child sex trafficking business without knowing was what was happening.

Originally Posted by baldrick

the madness of crowds

not sure why so many people are crying pedophile except it gives them a warm fuzzy feeling

why are her parents not being blamed ?

What ??

Indeed, a strange comment to make.

Baldik always takes the side of any coont who has been acused of partaking in Dodgy shit .

I mean if ya hangin out with some nonce ya gunna pik up that the coont is well dodgy.

Andy is just a nasty dirty fuker who was born with a gold plated cock and right there is the makings of a non conforming Royal who thinks he can shag young girls who are on tap due to his dodgy fookin mate.

Thats it innit.

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

Harry and Meghan all over the news yesterday

Is she pregnant again or has she finally recived her UK citizenship papers?

I assume none of you have ever visited nana or cowboy...

Comes across as a witch hunt on some bloke that everyone thinks is a complete and utter twat.

The interview was cringeworthy and a monumental embarrassment to the royals, who have been doing so well on the PR front for the past few years.

But at the end of the day, and from the facts presented, he was just a horny 41 year old slobbering at the chops to bone some lithe young chickster half his age which is something plenty of fellas can relate to.

His witless inept presentation in the interview was a shambles, but the paedo insinuations seem a bit hyperbolic.

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

What ??

you are telling me he is a pedophile ? or why did her parents let her near such a decadent old man ?

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

so predominant in the child sex trafficking business

what ?

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

Harry and Meghan all over the news yesterday

why aren't the outraged giving the red headed bastard sh1t about marrying a porn star ?

Originally Posted by Looper

His witless inept presentation in the interview was a shambles, but the paedo insinuations seem a bit hyperbolic.

Yep +1 ... that's my take on it also.

Originally Posted by baldrick

you are telling me he is a pedophile ? or why did her parents let her near such a decadent old man ?



what ?

Epstein was a 'fixer of young girls' . He was convicted for sex trafficking minors. He was a pedophile and there are numerous reports of 12/13 year old kids trafficked for sex. Prince Andrew had intimate ties with Epstein and frequented his home for private parties. The writing is on the wall.

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

The writing is on the wall

so you say

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

numerous reports

ok - reports

I would wager that the majority of the crowd baying for blood had never heard of Epstein before this year and whose only knowledge comes from the click bait news they consume

I really don't care as it is not something I am able to influence , but I find it amusing

^ok, cool.
We have different opinions.
The issue strikes a chord with me.
Makes me sick to the stomach.
I believe where there is smoke, there is fire.

And my particular favourite. .

Prince Andrew is a peado

Pedophilia is the attraction to prepubescent children.


Haven't followed the case, but think he's accused of boning a 17 yr old, and getting a foot massage from a young Russian woman?

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

Epstein was a 'fixer of young girls' . He was convicted for sex trafficking minors. He was a pedophile and there are numerous reports of 12/13 year old kids trafficked for sex. Prince Andrew had intimate ties with Epstein and frequented his home for private parties. The writing is on the wall.

Epstein had a whole island and "sex-holiday" mansion set-up. All with hidden cameras, and surveillance equipment installed. The place was designed to entrap politicians and famous people with evidence of them having sex with children for blackmail. Ghislaine Maxwell supplied the underage kids to him for the entrapment and his famous pedo 'parties' that he used to throw. Maxwell's father Robert was a Mossad agent before his death, so it's a fair bet to say that his darling daughter is too..
Jimmy Savile did the exact same thing in the UK, supplying kids for sex to the upper crust as well as being a prolific pedo himself. The Royal Family protection he was given made him untouchable while he was alive. Prince Andrew is the common thread between Savile and Epstein.

Originally Posted by Neverna

The female who claims she had sex with Prince Andrew was 17 years old at the alleged time. Old enough in the UK, so if it happened in the UK, he's not a pedo by UK legal standards.

As you say 17 is legal in the UK, not sure of the legal status and it may be 18 or more at that time and place. But it's not the age that matters, so much as his absolute denial of any form of contact or even meeting with her, which suggests a good memory by one that meets no end of people, toppled by a convenient inability to remember (an increasingly common defence) having that pic taken with her and Maxwell in the background. If it is not a fake, his defiance reeks of one that is far out of touch with the world he is trying to persuade. Though it risks defrosting the tip of the proverbial iceberg, I would give him some respect if he shrugged and said yes I did have sex with her and it was great, so what! Or even yes I had sex with her and loads of other gorgeous women at Epstein's homes, but none were underage and it was fcuking great you really want to try it sometime!

In his favour, esp after the Clinton/Lewinsky saga, 17 is old enough for Giuffre to know it makes sense to preserve a slimy souvenir of the alleged event. Did she? We'll know if she ends up as the next suicide, a la Epstein offing himself soon after claiming to be in possession of nuclear incrimination. And what's with Maxwell, is she off the suicide list wherever she is?

One question the interviewer did not ask, and definitely should have, is if he knew or suspected, or with hindsight as an intelligent person should have suspected, what was going on at Epstein's homes and island, while he was there as a guest that knows his host is a pedo convicted, and on reduced charges. I for one would like to know what he was doing as a serial guest, and would guess it was more sinister than playing donkeykong.

I think Maitlis took it easy on him, could've done better. 5/10

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

There's a very high probability he used and abused vulnerable young women, just like many other powerful folks involved in the abuse ring.

If he did, there will be evidence; Epstein didn't reach those heights by being a mug.

Originally Posted by Looper

The interview was cringeworthy and a monumental embarrassment to the royals, who have been doing so well on the PR front for the past few years.

But at the end of the day, and from the facts presented, he was just a horny 41 year old slobbering at the chops to bone some lithe young chickster half his age which is something plenty of fellas can relate to.

His witless inept presentation in the interview was a shambles, but the paedo insinuations seem a bit hyperbolic.

+1.
Concur.
Innocent until proven guilty and all that.
Everything else is just assumptions.
However, he is still a twat.

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

Yes, but there were apparently harems of 12/13 year olds in his residence - where Prince Andrew stayed numerous times.

Hearsay may be inadmissible, even if it contains some truth. While sex is and always has been a prime motivator for all sorts of shenanigans through all levels of society, it's no secret that world definers often tend to view themselves as supremely privileged (in many respects they are), and get their kicks by boldly stepping beyond acceptable conduct, confident that they are beyond the law and able to fix anything.

It's logical that investigators would visit neighbouring islands to see what they can find, and from one report I heard it seems the people on those islands generally knew what was going on at Epstein's, but were intimidated into voluntary silence by the status of its visitors.

Ftr I do not give this any credence at all, not on hearsay but because it was on the internet and did not go viral, even though it struck me at the time that the source was one of the 'respected' American media. Maybe someone can follow up?

---

Just a thought, if there were harems of underage kids on the island and or at his homes, who selected and trained them (if not Maxwell), and more important where are they now? Afaik the FBI have not yet sent in sniffer teams with shovels.

and not to mention that people who are as rich as they are have hordes of people hired for menial jobs around their residences - where are all their testimonies ?

I think people are being played and wish to believe to justify their way of thinking

I am not saying that it didn't happen or does not continue to happen , but rational skepticism has long been left behind

Originally Posted by thaiguzzi

Innocent until proven guilty

As we see this rule applied every day, don't we? (Especially in UK nowadays...)

Originally Posted by jabir

it was on the internet and did not go viral,

Who pray tell, manages the search engines/ratings/returned list position, of the "truly open and honest" western internet?

It appears there are "facilities which can be purchased" enabling some to appear on the first hits page and conversely, to not display results of some who are deemed, by some wise oracle, as being let's say "unreliable in their views".

As we see here on TD if ones source is from a dubious, by some regard, agent of propaganda, they can be ridiculed.