Duke of York BBC Interview

Twister2 · 17-11-2019 3:03pm

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't blame him. Its a monumentally bad idea and could only have come from a mind that has absolutely zero connection with the real world.

I'm betting that that was Andrew, himself.

It's bizarre in a way that he could proceed with the interview

OG anyhow

Oops69 · 17-11-2019 3:04pm

high_king wrote: »

Leo and Micheal D cost a fair bit

Whatever about leo , I agree, the president of Ireland , a small country, rattling around a large desolate mansion in the park, its bleak and lonely in the middle of winter anyway, costing a fortune really is a relic of colonialism, the Presidency costs here really need to be slimmed down.
Put him in a nice house some where, maybe paid for out of the very generous salary , and use the aras for some other good , Farmleigh could be used for all the formal presidency occasions.

BorneTobyWilde · 17-11-2019 3:05pm

Prince Andrew

'' it wasn't me, it was the one armed man, when I came home there was a man in my house, he had one arm, he had sex with those underage girls, find that man!, me I was in Pizza Express''

WTF

He's a liar, but he'll get away with it.

Twister2 · 17-11-2019 3:05pm

Donald Trump wrote: »

He gets around this grand ol' Duke of York

Apparently he had 10,000 men as well

I like the way i slipped it in under the radar

Bringing a bit of the commonwealth home

17-11-2019 3:18pm

Twister2 wrote: »

Prince Andrew looking to salvage his reputation

How will it play out

The queen has approved the whole thing

Andrew is irrelevant. A pompous oaf. Should be cut free to try and make his own way.

Sandor Clegane · 17-11-2019 3:34pm

I really wouldn't trust any member of the royal family, past or present generation.

Hoboo · 17-11-2019 3:39pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Andrew is irrelevant. A pompous oaf. Should be cut free to try and make his own way.

Could say the same for all the 'royals'. What a ****ed up system.

dhaughton99 · 17-11-2019 3:40pm

It’s hitting all the right memes. Pizzagate and shapeshifting lizard people who can’t sweat.

17-11-2019 3:55pm

dhaughton99 wrote: »

It’s hitting all the right memes. Pizzagate and shapeshifting lizard people who can’t sweat.

And those turned up trousers!!

4068ac1elhodqr · 17-11-2019 4:42pm

dhaughton99 wrote: »

It’s hitting all the right memes. Pizzagate and shapeshifting lizard people who can’t sweat.

As he said: no sweat due to 'adrenaline overload' this has all the ingredents and curious toppings for Dave Icke to publish another dozen books, and sell them also.

BorneTobyWilde · 17-11-2019 4:51pm

Duke of York, hmmm more like the Duke Of Porkies

high_king · 17-11-2019 4:57pm

What the big deal with HRH the Duke of York bedding suitable 17 year olds, is that not the age of consent ? and in the UK it's 16

Strazdas · 17-11-2019 5:03pm

high_king wrote: »

What the big deal with HRH the Duke of York bedding suitable 17 year olds, is that not the age of consent ? and in the UK it's 16

You're forgetting the context : Epstein was trafficking underage girls, making them available to wealthy clients, flying them on his private jet to his luxury resort, effectively a billionaire pimp.

It's not as if Andrew randomly met the 17 year old at a party : Epstein 'supplied' her to him (apparently it was Epstein who took the now infamous photo).

Gynoid · 17-11-2019 5:04pm

high_king wrote: »

What the big deal with HRH the Duke of York bedding suitable 17 year olds, is that not the age of consent ? and in the UK it's 16

Don't think it was the age of consent where Virginia lived. But that's not the point here, in my opinion. Epstein was trafficking girls, girls younger and Virginia when she was younger, girls who were by the nature of the situation vulnerable. It was sexual trafficking and abuse. He was supplying young girls to rich people, he was convicted. It appears Andrew was having sex with a girl trafficked by an abuser.
Bit different than a bit of a lark with a willing young one on the edge of legal.
Edit - wrote at same time as Strazdas, that is my understanding also.

Alf Veedersane · 17-11-2019 5:12pm

Bizarre.

Second most cringey moment- after calling Epstein's activities as 'unbecoming' - was saying she couldn't be telling the truth because he wasn't able to sweat at the time.

17-11-2019 5:14pm

Catherine Mayer is after getting interviewed in studio BBC news?

"Queens children have little real world experience"

"Andrew not a very bright man at all"

Interviewer: "Shouldnt we give him some credit"

Catherine: "No"

It was short but it was the type of interview Id like to see a bit more of on their news. Lots of focus from the BBC on how "ill advised" he was to do the interview.

17-11-2019 5:21pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Andrew is irrelevant. A pompous oaf. Should be cut free to try and make his own way.

LOL, not without an ankle tag, ya never know what he might get up to.:cool:

high_king · 17-11-2019 5:27pm

Strazdas wrote: »

You're forgetting the context : Epstein was trafficking underage girls, making them available to wealthy clients, flying them on his private jet to his luxury resort, effectively a billionaire pimp.

It's not as if Andrew randomly met the 17 year old at a party : Epstein 'supplied' her to him (apparently it was Epstein who took the now infamous photo).

What's the issue if they were above the age of consent where they were banging. A 17 year old knows fine well what they are getting into.

Gynoid · 17-11-2019 5:33pm

high_king wrote: »

What's the issue if they were above the age of consent where they were banging. A 17 year old knows fine well what they are getting into.

Trafficked.

Strazdas · 17-11-2019 5:41pm

high_king wrote: »

What's the issue if they were above the age of consent where they were banging. A 17 year old knows fine well what they are getting into.

Epstein was trafficking girls as young as 14. Andrew is in trouble for his ten year friendship with a convicted sex offender and pimp : the suggestion is he knew full well what Epstein was doing and was regularly availing of his 'services'.

bmc58 · 17-11-2019 6:11pm

Twister2 wrote: »

Prince Andrew looking to salvage his reputation

How will it play out

The queen has approved the whole thing

Lizzy approved this "car crash" interview??? Are you for real? This may hasten Lizzy's exit from this world.

FTA69 · 17-11-2019 6:20pm

Anyone thinking that this man isn’t a f*cking nonce case who’s as guilty as sin is utterly delusional; just watched the whole interview there and it’s absolutely mad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer c*nt either.

I hope he is exposed and utterly ruined, and that it helps bring down the wider family of horrible parasites.

dd973 · 17-11-2019 6:32pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Andrew is irrelevant. A pompous oaf. Should be cut free to try and make his own way.

If they were all stripped of their wealth, titles and baubles they'd struggle to get work in McDonald's cleaning the jacks, the British monarchy in particular is steeped in the anti-intellectualism of British culture which is what the wigs, gowns and letters after the names are all about, flummery and mummery to be genuflected before by the credulous. It's the width of a tissue paper away from the rituals of the Church at the height of it's powers here in decades past.

smurgen · 17-11-2019 6:47pm

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone thinking that this man isn’t a f*cking nonce case who’s as guilty as sin is utterly delusional; just watched the whole interview there and it’s absolutely mad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer c*nt either.

I hope he is exposed and utterly ruined, and that it helps bring down the wider family of horrible parasites.

Here here. I'm delighted for the lot of them.the way they look down their noses at wider society yet they're more dysfunction than anyone.it make the upper classes that kiss their asses look ridiculous also.

smurgen · 17-11-2019 6:48pm

And let's not forget this creep is effectively an arm's dealer also.

bmc58 · 17-11-2019 6:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This kindof puts paid to his claim that he's not the "huggy" type when out and about with the peasants-

https://twitter.com/danleburrowhole/status/1195661444668416000?s=21

Randy Andy,looks apt here.

Always Tired · 17-11-2019 7:02pm

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone thinking that this man isn’t a f*cking nonce case who’s as guilty as sin is utterly delusional; just watched the whole interview there and it’s absolutely mad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer c*nt either.

I hope he is exposed and utterly ruined, and that it helps bring down the wider family of horrible parasites.

Came in here to say pretty much the same. Weird how boards has so many people who think this is all fine, the planet being flooded is fine, everything except being on the dole is fine for the boards brigade now.

Epstein was nothing more than a pimp for the eilte and these guys all wanted young girls - the less 'mileage' on them these guys will pay big money.

Purple Mountain · 17-11-2019 7:07pm

Hearing the term 'Tramps nightclub' being uttered by the supposed upper echelons of aristocracy is quite amusing.

Aidric · 17-11-2019 8:46pm

Hard to know where to start with that interview. If the aim was to strike a conciliatory note than it failed spectacularly. First things first a lot of credit has to go to Emily Maitlis for her restrained and professional handling of the interview.

This interview was 6 months in the making apparently yet Prince Andrew still managed to appear startled. He also came across as very inarticulate, rambling in places. He was very quick to agree with the facts which are public knowledge but once Maitlis posed a supplemental question it was visible how incredulous he became.

The pizza express line was laughable as was the story about staying at Epstein's place for 4 days but apparently impervious to what was going on. Add to that the sweating story and he becomes wholly unconvincing.

Tony EH · 17-11-2019 9:27pm

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone thinking that this man isn’t a f*cking nonce case who’s as guilty as sin is utterly delusional; just watched the whole interview there and it’s absolutely mad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer c*nt either.

I hope he is exposed and utterly ruined, and that it helps bring down the wider family of horrible parasites.

Hopefully it'll act as a wake up call to those in Britain who still cling onto the Royals as a valuable institution and realise that they are closer to the their 'Spitting Image' puppets than everybody thought.

Honestly, it's hard to understand why some people are so shocked at this really. Andy's probably been at this sort of lark for decades.

riclad · 17-11-2019 10:14pm

He was friends with a man who ran a sex trafficking network,he was still friends with him after he was convicted and sent to jail for 1 year .
He also stayed in epsteins house for days .
did he not see all the young women hanging around the house .
theres one law for the poor and the rich,
if you are very rich you can afford to hire expensive lawyers and
get a short sentence.
The reason there was a new case against epstein was because a few reporters kept on following the story and publishing storys about
waht he was doing in new york.
Every family have a few people who are stupid,foolish and reckless .
if he did no know what epstein was doing he must be very stupid or naive
,there were storys about epstein years ago when he was convicted in florida .
Epstein had friends in high society,he made large donations to various
universitys in america.
The main question is why would a member of the royal family
hang around with a man who was a sexual predator .
Every week on the daily mail uk website there are storys
about epstein and prince andrew .
He did this interview to save his reputation ,
he knows if he go,s to america ,if he was to appear in court
his story about not knowing anything would not stand up in court.

Thargor · 17-11-2019 10:19pm

Aidric wrote: »

Hard to know where to start with that interview. If the aim was to strike a conciliatory note than it failed spectacularly. First things first a lot of credit has to go to Emily Maitlis for her restrained and professional handling of the interview.

This interview was 6 months in the making apparently yet Prince Andrew still managed to appear startled. He also came across as very inarticulate, rambling in places. He was very quick to agree with the facts which are public knowledge but once Maitlis posed a supplemental question it was visible how incredulous he became.

The pizza express line was laughable as was the story about staying at Epstein's place for 4 days but apparently impervious to what was going on. Add to that the sweating story and he becomes wholly unconvincing.

I felt she didnt properly nail him for going to stay with a convicted pedo, I would have liked to see Jeremy Paxman get a proper answer to that.

Why isnt his answer that he couldnt have been sweating profusely all over her because he was shot at in the Falklands and suffered an adrenaline overdose that left him unable to sweat all over the place? Its just so comically stupid and an obvious lie.

17-11-2019 10:27pm

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone thinking that this man isn’t a f*cking nonce case who’s as guilty as sin is utterly delusional; just watched the whole interview there and it’s absolutely mad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer c*nt either.

I hope he is exposed and utterly ruined, and that it helps bring down the wider family of horrible parasites.

Now that you’ve got your rant out of the way, can you be specific in terms of your Allegation?

Vwsham · 17-11-2019 10:38pm

riclad wrote: »

He was friends with a man who ran a sex trafficking network,he was still friends with him after he was convicted and sent to jail for 1 year .
He also stayed in epsteins house for days .
did he not see all the young women hanging around the house .
theres one law for the poor and the rich,
if you are very rich you can afford to hire expensive lawyers and
get a short sentence.
The reason there was a new case against epstein was because a few reporters kept on following the story and publishing storys about
waht he was doing in new york.
Every family have a few people who are stupid,foolish and reckless .
if he did no know what epstein was doing he must be very stupid or naive
,there were storys about epstein years ago when he was convicted in florida .
Epstein had friends in high society,he made large donations to various
universitys in america.
The main question is why would a member of the royal family
hang around with a man who was a sexual predator .
Every week on the daily mail uk website there are storys
about epstein and prince andrew .
He did this interview to save his reputation ,
he knows if he go,s to america ,if he was to appear in court
his story about not knowing anything would not stand up in court.

Don’t worry, Trump will make this ‘go away’ for the Queen. If he’s in power that is, perhaps the Royals are getting a little nervous in case he’s impeached!?

Aidric · 17-11-2019 10:41pm

Thargor wrote: »

I felt she didnt properly nail him for going to stay with a convicted pedo, I would have liked to see Jeremy Paxman get a proper answer to that.

On the contrary I think she did. On that point he went on an incoherent ramble by which point she interjected with 'you were staying at the house of a convicted sex offender'. His answer 'it was a convenient place to stay' nailed him. It doesn't take a hard line presenter like Paxman to draw that out.

Mervyn Skidmore · 17-11-2019 11:11pm

padd b1975 wrote: »

Pure Partridge right there!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8FCTKmdZVU

Salary Negotiator · 17-11-2019 11:14pm

The Guardian are reporting the he thought the interview went well.

Poor Andrew, not the sharpest tack in the box.

Be right back · 17-11-2019 11:17pm

He seems to think he has said his piece about the whole affair and that's that. Hopefully not. It must have been an amazing pizza seeing as he can't remember anything else.

blackcard · 17-11-2019 11:29pm

Could/should Prince Andrew end up being prosecuted? What sentence should he get?

MonkieSocks · 17-11-2019 11:35pm

Be right back · 17-11-2019 11:36pm

blackcard wrote: »

Could/should Prince Andrew end up being prosecuted? What sentence should he get?

He should at least testify if summoned but I doubt it. Too well connected.

Tony EH · 17-11-2019 11:37pm

blackcard wrote: »

Could/should Prince Andrew end up being prosecuted? What sentence should he get?

What would you prosecute him for?

padd b1975 · 18-11-2019 12:28am

bmc58 wrote: »

Lizzy approved this "car crash" interview??? Are you for real? This may hasten Lizzy's exit from this world.

You could be right, I thought she sounded very frail at the opening of parliament.

padd b1975 · 18-11-2019 12:29am

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

The Guardian are reporting the he thought the interview went well.

Poor Andrew, not the sharpest tack in the box.

*Ted and Dougal waving off the three bishops*

GolfNut33 · 18-11-2019 12:47am

This'll go down in history as the car crash that it was, like Clinton and the "I didn't have sexual relations with that woman" interview.

Bottom line is that this interview has done more damage than if he'd kept schtum.

LincolnsBeard · 18-11-2019 2:27am

Strazdas wrote: »

You're forgetting the context : Epstein was trafficking underage girls, making them available to wealthy clients, flying them on his private jet to his luxury resort, effectively a billionaire pimp.

It's not as if Andrew randomly met the 17 year old at a party : Epstein 'supplied' her to him (apparently it was Epstein who took the now infamous photo).

You're also forgetting to mention that nobody knows how Epstein actually got his money despite apparently being a billionaire.

Yet his cover was that he was a 'hedge fund manager' for some of the most powerful people in America, whilst simultaneously running some kind of high net worth trafficking ring of young children.

Former US labor secretary Alex Acosta, who as a US attorney cut the plea deal with Epstein in 07/08 that halted a federal investigation into his trafficking, was told that Epstein 'belonged to intelligence' and was to be left alone.

Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's partner and the person it is said was responsible for procuring these young girls, is the daughter of Robert Maxwell, former owner of the Mirror Group in the UK and somebody who it is accepted worked for Israeli intelligence up until he drowned to death off his boat.

Now you have Epstein with intelligence links who has connections to the most powerful people on the planet and you think none of that happens to be related to the fact that he was essentially a high net worth pimp of minors?

Now consider how beneficial it would be for an intelligence agency to have evidential proof in the form of a surveillance tape of a member of the British Royal Family sleeping with minors and you get some idea as to what was most likely going on here.

And if you think intelligence agencies would be apprehensive with getting their hands dirty with this stuff just look into places like the Kincora Boys Home in Belfast.

kona · 18-11-2019 2:33am

LincolnsBeard wrote: »

You're also forgetting to mention that nobody knows how Epstein actually got his money despite apparently being a billionaire.

Yet his cover was that he was a 'hedge fund manager' for some of the most powerful people in America, whilst simultaneously running some kind of high net worth trafficking ring of young children.

Former US labor secretary Alex Acosta, who as a US attorney cut the plea deal with Epstein in 07/08 that halted a federal investigation into his trafficking, was told that Epstein 'belonged to intelligence' and was to be left alone.

Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's partner and the person it is said was responsible for procuring these young girls, is the daughter of Robert Maxwell, former owner of the Mirror Group in the UK and somebody who it is accepted worked for Israeli intelligence up until he drowned to death off his boat.

Now you have Epstein with intelligence links who has connections to the most powerful people on the planet and you think none of that happens to be related to the fact that he was essentially a high net worth pimp of minors?

Now consider how beneficial it would be for an intelligence agency to have evidential proof in the form of a surveillance tape of a member of the British Royal Family sleeping with minors and you get some idea as to what was most likely going on here.

And if you think intelligence agencies would be apprehensive with getting their hands dirty with this stuff just look into places like the Kincora Boys Home in Belfast.

Completely agree, lets not forget how deeply involved mi5 were in murdering irish people in thelast 30 years.
Nothing is below these scumbags.

skimpydoo · 18-11-2019 5:05am

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

He was at home with the kids that day. He took them to a pizza express in woking

https://twitter.com/i/status/1195816154541035525

The Pizza Express in Woking only opened in 2004 with a 25-year lease for the restaurant.

BuboBubo · 18-11-2019 11:15am

He's thick as mince, I blame the inbreeding.

He comes across as a real dopey arße in that interview. Ould Lizzie and Phil will have words with him I'm sure, Phil should bring him for a little spin in his land rover

realdanbreen · 18-11-2019 11:22am

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone thinking that this man isn’t a f*cking nonce case who’s as guilty as sin is utterly delusional; just watched the whole interview there and it’s absolutely mad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer c*nt either.

I hope he is exposed and utterly ruined, and that it helps bring down the wider family of horrible parasites.

Oh come on, get off the fence and tell us what you really think!:D

Duke of York BBC Interview

Comments