The Daily Mail’s book of modern day fairy tales: They always involve a Prince don’t they.
And here’s another little fill in for ya.
This one was first published on November 19th 2012 and saw me pour scorn on what was an attempt by the Monkeys Boys to “normalise” Price Big Ears.
Now, I haven’t had time to read through it again, but I am sure that it will have stood the test of time and I do remember that I was quite pleased with the end result… Therefore, I am re-releasing it unchanged from the original… Just sayin’…
Here we go again. After last week’s mass coverage of the Duck of Edinburgh officially opening the Field of Remembrance at Westminster Abbey, where we were meant to believe that the man himself was blubbering over our war dead- the same war dead he helped put in the ground- it would appear that it’s now the turn of his uncharismatic, buffoon of a son, Prince Big Ears to get a makeover.
In fact, the way things are going, don’t be surprised if you find a centre spread news story in this week’s Sunday papers of Bizzy Lizzy helping out in a soup kitchen. After all, the lengths that these parasites will go to in order to keep the ‘gravy train’ going, knows no bounds.
The Royal family are nothing if not consistent. So whenever their popularity takes a nose dive, especially one as severe as this nose dive, they engage their spin doctors, who promptly take over the MSM in an effort to convince the nation that they are just a normal, law abiding family who care deeply for their subjects. Have I told you how much these parasites nauseate me?
Course, as the saying goes, ‘you cannot polish a turd’ which is extremely apt in the case of our Royal family. The newspapers can print whatever they like in their effort to pull the wool over our eyes. But to anyone even half aware of what this despicable family is like, no amount of Mr Sheen is going to make them shine.
Having said that, there are still many who are gullible enough to believe the articles that they read in the MSM. Therefore, I thought it best to take an in depth look at one of these articles in an effort to show them up for what they are. After all, there’s no propaganda like Nazi propaganda.
The article that I am going to dissect is from yesterdays Daily Mail (14/11/12). However, this type of article is cropping up in all of the daily rags. Now, while they might seem harmless enough, and even a bit boring, as is the case with this Mail article, the danger is that they are subtle enough in their content to swing public opinion in the Royal family’s favour.
And that would be a crime in itself. Especially with the support for the current Royal family appearing to be at an all time low.
So let’s take a step by step look at the Daily Mails (DM) attempt to endear the heir to the throne to a nation who are rapidly growing wise to this family of in-breeds…
No, I DON’T have flunkies lining up 7 eggs for my breakfast! On his 64th birthday Charles dispels a few of those ‘myths’ about him. But still no mention of who squeezes his toothpaste…
The Prince of Wales never does things in haste.
He was 32 before he married, he wooed Mrs Camilla Parker Bowles for more than 30 years before marrying her, and he has waited until the eve of his 64th birthday today before letting the world know precisely what sort of a man he is.
This last decision is the most perplexing, because for decades he has had to withstand endless mockery over some of his habits and eccentricities. Some of it, it must be said, he brought on himself — admitting he ‘talked’ to plants, for example.
But over the years, a mountain of myths about the heir to the throne has been building. Now, at last, he is putting the record straight.
Ok, lets first deal with Charlie’s marriage. For the benefit of those not familiar with Royal History, it is an indisputable fact that our Monarchy are so in-bred that many members of the family suffered/suffer from genetic problems associated with in-breeding, i.e. Madness, retardation and physical handicaps.
With Charles being heir to the throne and both his maternal Grandfather and paternal Grandmother victims of the defects associated with an overcrowded gene pool, as well as his own parents being 2nd cousins once removed, it seems likely that the risk was far too great for Charlie to marry one of his own.
Therefore, the search was on for a suitable candidate who would eventually become his Queen, capable of producing a future King who didn’t need to wear a bib and be spoon fed his Coronation dinner.
Now there was no point in letting Big Ears get into his twenty’s before the Palace deciding to get off their arse’s and see what ‘old sorts’ were available. Very careful long term planning was needed. The Royal family never, ever marry common people. Don’t believe the MSM shit about Kate Middleton being a commoner. She is from the Goldsmith family who are interbred with the Rothschild’s… Therefore, she was perfectly acceptable to the Royal Family.
So, with that in mind, the Palace would have been on the lookout for a suitable bride for Big Ears from a very early age. Lady Diana Spencer fitted the bill perfectly. The Spencer line is descended from Royalty with both Big Ears and Diana being direct descendants of King James I. Diana, did in fact have more Royal blood flowing through her veins than Big Ears does. That is, unless Diana is the illegitimate daughter of Sir James Goldsmith, which to be fair, there is evidence to suggest that she could be.You really couldn’t make this shit up, don’t cha know. Never the less, even if she was Goldsmith’s daughter, her bloodline would still have been more than acceptable. Here’s what Tudor History .Org has to say:
Charles and Diana are both descended from James I and therefore share the same royal pedigree back to William the Conqueror. It is with Charles I and his son Charles II that their ancestry took a different turn.
Charles II had 14 children with mistresses, but none with his wife, Katherine of Braganza, so the throne went to his brother James II, then to James’s daughter Mary and her husband William of Orange, then to Mary’s sister Anne. Anne had no surviving offspring so the nearest Protestant relative was the Elector of Hanover in Germany, who became George I; he was the grandson of Elizabeth, sister of Charles I and aunt of Charles II. It is from these Hanoverians that our present Queen is descended.
One of the children Charles II had with his mistress Barbara Villiers was Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Grafton, whose great-great-great granddaughter, Lady Adelaide Horatia Seymour, married Frederick, 4th Earl Spencer; they were the great-great grandparents of Lady Diana Spencer.
So, as you can see, Diana was actually an ideal candidate for the job.
Course, it could just be a coincidence but Diana was actually born and brought up for the early part of her life on the Queen’s Sandringham Estate. However, you will have to draw your own conclusions from that fact. Never the less, with that being the case, Diana had known Charles all her life – despite the twenty two and a half year age gap.
Interestingly, whenever the Queen was at Sandringham she apparently used to invite Diana and her siblings up to the ‘big house’ to watch a film. That film was always Ian Flemming’s Chitty, Chitty Bang Bang.
Neither could Diana’s Aryan features of Blonde hair and Blue eye’s failed to have gone unnoticed by the pro Nazi German Royal family, who sanctimoniously pass themselves off as British. In fact, Phil the Sauerkraut was also heard to say the following about his daughter in law to be:
“At least she will breed height into the line,” was the Duke of Edinburgh’s splendidly laconic observation when 32-year-old Prince Charles finally did his dynastic duty and wed the 19-year-old Lady Diana Spencer…
Mind you, the same article also goes on to say:
…The Windsors would be glad if Diana’s name was never mentioned again,” admits one member of the royal circle. “Diana nearly destroyed them, is how they see it. They’re relieved she’s out of the way.” (Source – The Telegraph)
Hardly surprising then that a few years down the line, The Duck would allegedly play a major role in her murder. That is to say, he would if you based the allegation on the evidence omitted from the inquest into Diana’s death, following Operation Paget.
That last sentence was for the benefit of the Royal Lawyer’s. It comes to something when the evidence implicating Prince Philfy is omitted from the inquest into Diana’s death, yet to mention his involvement could get you arrested:
CRUCIAL evidence which details what Princes Charles and Philip know about Princess Diana’s death will not be made public at her inquest. (Source Daily Express 2007)
Course, and then there’s this:
TRAGIC Princess Diana feared Britain’s Prince Philip would kill her — according to a shocking new report.
Author Ian Halperin alleges Diana — who died 13-years-ago yesterday (August 31) – told one of her closest friends six days before she died that she was terrified Philip would kill her because she refused a proposition he made to have sex with her one night in 1997.
The friend said Philip warned Di that if she didn’t sleep with him he would make her fear rebellion for the rest of her life.
“And he most certainly did,” said the long time Diana friend. “He must have been loaded that night when he propositioned Diana but the dirty bastard was able to scare her to death.
“To this day I wonder if Prince Philip arranged the tragic car crash so he could off Diana and never have to fear her talking about what happened.
“One thing I know for sure is that Diana would have never lied about something like this.”
(Source – Showbiz Spy 20/9/10)
Course, if you are still not convinced, you may be interested to learn that Diana said herself; “I knew from an early age that I had to keep myself… How shall we say, Tidy”. Or, put another way, She had to stay a virgin. Now, if you believe that Diana “just knew” instinctively that she had to remain a virgin until she married, you will believe anything.
The only problem with Diana marrying the future King was, Big Ears didn’t like her. Diana in fact openly admitted that she knew that Big Ears had never loved her. She even told her sisters that she couldn’t go through with the wedding. But they talked her round, pointing out, somewhat sarcastically, that her face was already on the tea towels. That her sisters did, rather than being supportive of Diana is no surprise when you know their part in the events surrounding Diana’s murder. In fact, what a right gruesome twosome they turned out to be.
Diana also told in interview, how once Big Ears had a son and heir, he stopped sleeping with her. She went further still by saying that she was at a loss to explain how Harry was conceived (well she couldn’t exactly tell the truth on that matter, could she). She quickly followed up however, by saying that the period leading up to Harry’s birth, were amongst the happiest times that they had enjoyed as a couple.
Never the less, Diana finishes up by saying that Charles – who had wanted a girl – took one look at harry and without even trying to hide his disappointment said “Oh it’s a boy”, quickly adding “And he’s got ginger hair”. According to Diana, it was at that point that she knew her marriage was over.
Now, while the Duck of Edinburgh may have got away with dating the 13 year old future Queen of England, there was no way Big Ears was going to get away with doing the same. In fact realistically, becoming engaged to Diana when she was 19 was just about the earliest that he could get away with it.
This then makes a mockery of the Daily Mail’s insinuation that Charlie boy never does anything in haste. Therefore it is misleading of the DM to suggest that Charlie waited until he was 32 to get married because he doesn’t rush into things. Its Piffle. He waited until he was 32 because he had no fucking choice but to wait.
The next instance the newspaper site’s as proof that Big Ears – affectionately known as Dobby by no one else other than myself – does nothing in haste, is the fact that he “wooed” Camilla Parker Gravestone-teeth for 3o years.
The fact that the DM even printed this shit is testament to the hand that the Royal Press Office had in composing the fairy tale. Everyone knows that Dobby was shagging Camilla throughout that 30yr period, thus making a mockery of the sanctity of marriage. Now while many may not bat an eyelid at a bit of extramarital sex these days, you have to bear in mind that the Queen is the Head of the Church of England and as such, their marriage vows should have be sacred. Fucking Hypocrites, the lot of them.
None of them, including the Queen could stop themselves shagging about. Read my article Monsters Inc at the following link for further proof on this fact: http://www.chrisspivey.co.uk/?p=3786
Moreover, it was the taxpayer who funded the obnoxious man’s wedding. Talk about taking the piss!
So to romantically say that “he wooed Mrs Camilla Parker Bowles for more than 30 years before marrying her”, is total bollocks.
But it gets better or should that be; it gets worse? Not only was Dobby cheating on his wife, Diana, and Camilla cheating on her Husband, Andrew Parker Bowles (A good friend of Dobbys – With friends like that, you don’t need enemies,) Dobby was also cheating on Camilla with his son’s nanny, Tiggy Legge-Bourke.
Not that Randy Andy Parker Bowles minded. He has been shagging Dobby’s sister Anne on and off throughout her marriages as well as his own.
Moreover, Dobby got the old slapper, Tiggy Legge Bourke pregnant, which ended in abortion. And that’s without the rumours of him sodomising his male Valet… But let’s give the sexual deviant a few more million quid aye.
Then as the third example that the DM site’s as proof that Dirty Dobby doesn’t rush into thing’s, the propaganda outlet states; “he has waited until the eve of his 64th birthday today before letting the world know precisely what sort of a man he is”…
No, he hasn’t. Nowhere in the article does Big Ears admit to being a ‘Fucking lying, hypocritical philanderer’.
But let’s look at that claim even closer. He has waited until his 64th birthday to dispel some of the rumours that surround him. Why? That is to say, why didn’t he do it on his 50th or even 60th birthday? Why didn’t he postpone these revelations until his 65Th birthday? Not that anything of any substance has been revealed or dispelled in the article.
All three birthdays are much more significant milestones than a 64th birthday. In fact, there is nothing commemorative about a 64th birthday what so ever. Even the DM say’s his decision to open up is “Perplexing”, after decades of being mocked for his eccentricities.
The DM might be perplexed, but I’m certainly not. You see, to be thought of as being eccentric is in fact endearing too many. To be thought of as allegedly being a serial, predatory paedophile, is not so endearing.
It is in fact patently obvious that the man has opened up for no other reason than to try to gain public support. And just like his Father’s sickening display on the opening day of the remembrance celebrations, it’s transparent, phoney, sickening in the extreme, and hypocritical. The Royal family are well aware that they could be literally days away from a public lynching if they are not extremely careful right now.
Course, I don’t doubt for a moment that there will be those who will remain loyal to the Royal family. I often get comments left on this site saying something along the lines of I’m well hung… Or is that, I should be hung… However, I digress.
Quite how the general public haven’t already cottoned on to Charlie is a mystery to me. There can only be one reason why a man would socialise with a known predatory paedophile. And that reason is that man must share the same tendencies. It is inconcievable that Big Ears didn’t know Savile was a nonce.
So, I will once again repeat what I have said on many occasions over the past month or so: Outwardly, Jimmy Savile and Dobby had absolutely nothing in common. Savile wore loud clothes liked loud music and was outgoing. Dobby wears suits, is stiff as a plank and awkward around people. They should have hated each other, yet their closeness for each other is alarmingly apparent in the many photos that they appear in together.
Mind you, if you watch the video on this site’s homepage of Louis Theroux meets Jimmy Savile, you will see that Savile comes across as a right prat. Dobby is also a right prat, but that does not explain their closeness.
Dobby was brought up by a Paedophile, his Great Uncle Lord Louis Mountbatten. That is a matter of record. Furthermore, he is continually being linked with paedophiles, typically yesterday (13/11/12) when the paedophile Reverend Peter Ball was arrested. Ball described Dobby as being a ‘loyal friend’.
As for the MSM’s ridiculous claim that Savile was giving Dobby and Diana marriage guidance! What a crock of old Horse shit that is. For a start, Savile has never been married or even lived with anyone except his Mother. In fact, I cannot recall Savile ever even being romantically linked to anyone. Shagging dead bodies and abusing little boys and girls is far different from being married.
So what the fuck does he know about holding a marriage together. That claim would be on a par with Bob Dylan advising Luchiano Pavorotti how to sing Nessum Dorma. And besides, no amount of counselling would have kept the couple together. Charles couldn’t stand the woman. Diana said so herself. He couldn’t even say he loved her when they announced their engagement without adding, “Errrrrr whatever errrrr love means”.
Moreover, if Angelfire.com is to be believed, Dobby isn’t content to just associate with living paedophiles; he also wants to associate with dead ones:
Prince Charles is reported to be a full-blown New Age “Twinkie” who works with Ouija boards. He talks to plants and uses séances to communicate with his dead uncle, Lord Mountbatten.
Substitute séances with Satanic Rituals and you are probably somewhere near the truth.
So, within the first two sentences of the DM’s article on the Prince, it is obvious where they want to take the reader and just as obvious that you’re reading a fairy tale. And so the article continues:
First up is the spectacularly ill-informed notion that at breakfast, seven eggs, each boiled to a different degree of softness, are lined up in front of him so he may choose the one that is exactly the right consistency.
Clarence House now reveals on the Prince’s official website that he does no such thing, and never has.
No one would ever have imagined he (or anyone else, for that matter) would do this had it not been included as a ‘fact’ in the distinguished broadcaster Jeremy Paxman’s book On Monarchy, published in 2006.
The information came from ‘friends of the prince’. Pointedly, Paxman is the only individual to be explicitly named on the prince’s website as being responsible for a canard.
‘It’s been hung round Paxman’s neck like a rotten fish,’ says a BBC colleague. And Clarence House has been full of wicked titters this week at Paxman’s public dressing down on their website, all the more so in the light of the ferocious interviewer’s umbilical link with BBC2’s troubled Newsnight programme.
But why has Clarence House waited until now to publish this list of corrections — which they describe as answers to ‘frequently asked questions’ — to commonly held beliefs about the prince?
The driving force behind the move is said to be the Duchess of Cornwall, who is due to return to London with Charles on Friday after a highly successful visit to Papua New Guinea, Australia and New Guinea, Australia and New Zealand.
It’s natural enough for a woman to become frustrated by so many misleading beliefs about the prince she loves. But the list is curiously, agonisingly incomplete, as we shall see.
Now, in regard to this myth about 7 eggs all boiled to different degrees, all I can do is give a slow shake of my head. MYTH! That’s not a fucking myth, even in the context that the DM are using the word.
A Myth taken in that context is the Ex Italian President Silvio Berlusconi having 8 birds lined up outside his bedroom door all waiting their turn to have sex with him. What do we have? Seven fucking boiled eggs… If this wasn’t so serious, I would be in fits of hysterical laughter, don’t cha know.
Never the less, this ‘myth’, which I have never heard of before, despite the countless hour’s that I have spent researching this family of leeches, apparently originated from Jeremy Paxman’s 2006 book on the Monarchy… I bet that was a right fucking riveting read, if it was packed with gossip such as that.
Whether the claim is true or not, I don’t know. And, to be honest I couldn’t give a flying fuck if it is or isn’t. Paxman didn’t make it up, so the ‘myth’ had to come from somewhere. In this case, it apparently came from ‘friends of the Prince’. Since Paxman’s book was written with Palace approval, it adds credence to my earlier claim that eccentric behaviour is endearing to our gullible nation.
Had I written that book, I would have processed the creditability of that scintillating piece of information by first reasoning that while the tight arsed Royals, who continually lobby Parliament for more money, pay their slaves 70 odd pence below the recommended living wage, their Chef’s would probably fare a lot better wages wise.
By the same token, I would have thought that any Chef worth his salt, having ascertained the correct degree of softness that the pampered arsewipe preferred his boiled eggs, would then not have needed telling twice how long to boil them for. With that in mind, I would have probably dismissed the information as being bollocks. Never the less, the fact of the matter is; the Blue Rinse Brigade loves this type of nonsense. Therefore, I may well have included it in the book myself. Why? Because, it doesn’t fucking matter. It’s trivial and unimportant.
Yet the DM would still have us believe that the hardnosed Paxman – who once had the MP Michael Howard (Paedophile) squirming in his chair on his TV program ‘Newsnight’, refusing to let him off the hook until Howard’s credibility was in tatters – is dying of shame for being the author of this spellbinding revelation. Get fucking real.
So, having put that ‘Myth’ to bed, the DM then reveals that it was Camilla’s idea to come clean, because she loves her man so much. Course, even if you believed that pathetic explanation, you would then be entitled to ask why it has taken her so long. Big Ears has been lampooned for the 30 years or so that he’s been knobbing her. So once again; why now?
Never the Less, lets also dissect this revelation. It obviously goes without saying, that Dobby and Dobbin are related by blood:
LONDON, April 5 /PRNewswire/ — Another talking point surrounding the Charles and Camilla nuptials has been revealed – they are related! Leading genealogists at Ancestry.co.uk have discovered that the heir to the throne and his wife-to-be are cousins. According to the family history experts who have been researching the couple’s family trees, Prince Charles and Camilla are ninth cousins once removed. (Source PR Newswire).
Never the less, it was supposedly Dobby’s Great Uncle Louis the nonce who put the block on Charles marrying Camilla originally, allegedly because of her age and the fact that she wasn’t a virgin… Could also have been jealousy, I suppose. Royal Lawyers take note that last remark was only my own speculation.
However, even though Dobby continued to see Dobbin throughout his marriage to Diana, he didn’t love Dobbin enough to stop himself starting an affair with Tiggy the Tigress did he? Moreover, despite the pair being on tour at the moment, their marriage is a matter of much speculation. Rumours abound, that they are married in name only and that Big Ears can no longer stand the sight of her. I can’t say I blame him, neither can I.
Furthermore, it looks highly likely that just prior to Diana’s murder, Dobbin was also subject to an assassination attempt. The attempted assassination was allegedly carried out by what is called the ‘Boston Brakes,’ a technique invented by the CIA and which – according to Sir Ranulph Fienne’s – is now used by the SAS.
I deal at length with ‘Boston Brakes’ in my forth coming exposé of the Murder of Princess Diana. However, the assassination technique basically involves fitting a parasitic braking system to a car and then overriding the cars on- board computer before steering the car, via remote control into another. Now, while that might sound like something out of a James Bond film, I can assure you that it does exist.
I must stress that this assassination attempt is only speculation, although many experts do believe it to be true. The attempt then, is as follows:
While travelling alone on a quiet road, Camilla was involved in an unexplained serious head on car crash. Now under British Law, it is a serious crime to flee the scene of an accident. Never the less that is exactly what Dobbin did in running off and hiding in some nearby woods.
Dobbin then called Dobby on her Mobile phone. Dobby in turn, then sent his security officers to pick her up and all was well except when Camilla was asked why she had fled the scene of an accident, to which she replied that she had been in fear for her life. Since the accident involved only her and another woman, you have to ask yourself why on Earth Dobbin would have been in fear for her life.
Returning now to the Daily Mail’s article. Their claim that Dobbin wanted to put the record straight for her serial adulterer husband, just does not ring true or even make sense. However, the article then goes on to say that:
It’s natural enough for a woman to become frustrated by so many misleading beliefs about the prince she loves. But the list is curiously, agonisingly incomplete, as we shall see.
‘Does the Prince really dislike all modern architecture?’ asks the official website.
Clarence House says no. Rather, ‘the Prince has been the Patron of several contemporary architects’.
True enough, but his excoriating comments about certain new buildings (he famously described the Sainsbury extension to the National Gallery as a ‘carbuncle’) have infuriated leading modern architects, some of whom accuse him of ignorance.
Peter (now Baron) Palumbo, who went on to become Chairman of the Arts Council, memorably said: ‘I can only say God bless the Prince of Wales, and God save us from his architectural judgment.’
‘Does the prince advocate untested and dangerous alternative medical therapies?’
Not at all, says Clarence House. ‘The Prince is a keen advocate of integrated health care’ and of giving patients ‘access to conventional medical treatment (and) proven complementary care and therapy’.
What the website doesn’t mention is that the complementary healthcare of which he is most in favour is homeopathy. Indeed, his charity, the Foundation for Integrated Health, has lobbied for homoeopathic treatments to be made available on the NHS. Many conventional doctors, however, condemn it as quackery.
‘As an environmentalist, why does the Prince of Wales drive around in a Bentley?’
This accusation of hypocrisy is easily quashed. ‘The Prince does not own or choose to drive around in a Bentley. The car is required for some engagements for security reasons and is owned by the Metropolitan police.’
That’s fair, but not the whole truth. Prince Charles is known to prefer using the Bentley because he complains his official car, a Jaguar converted to run on bio-diesel made from used cooking oil, doesn’t give him quite enough head room.
Once again, these ‘myths’ that Charlie is supposedly clearing up are in fact nothing more than tittle tattle of no importance or consequence. Furthermore, how do we know that the Palace is telling the truth anyway? After all, when it comes to honesty, the palace does not have a very good track record does it? Moreover, even the DM begins to question the Palaces honesty in rebuffing these ‘myths’ that no one except a Royal groupie has ever heard mention of.
Still, let’s take a look at the above ‘myths’ that the Palace has now supposedly cleared up, namely; does Dobby hate all modern Architecture? No says the Clarence House website. Well, says Spivey, who gives a fuck? I would imagine that the Palace is telling the truth on this one. After all, there are hundreds of thousands of examples of modern architecture. Even Dobby-led by tradition- must like one or two of them.
The next on the list is ‘Does the prince advocate untested and dangerous alternative medical therapies?’
No say the Palace. Agreed says Spivey. Why would he? Alternative medicines work and as a general rule cannot be patented. Therefore, there is no money to be made. Moreover, Dobby like his Dad the Duck is a Eugenicist and wants us all dead. Remember, more people die from the effects of Chemotherapy, than Chemotherapy cures.
Next up; ‘As an environmentalist, why does the Prince of Wales drive around in a Bentley’? As you will have seen, there is an answer of sorts that even the DM says is not exactly true but has Something to do with him not having enough head room in his official car. Now while Dobby isn’t what you would call tall, his Ears are fucking massive, so, we will give him the benefit of the doubt on that one… Never the less, it is unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
The article continues:
‘Will the Duchess become Queen when the Prince becomes King?’
How is that a Myth? As the article, say’s its self. The answer is the same now as it has always been… Derrrr. However, once again the DM questions the palace’s honesty:
Here, the website is brief and to the point. ‘As was explained at the time of their wedding in April 2005, it is intended that The Duchess will be known as HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne.’
But this ‘intention’ is unlikely to be to put into practice. Charles is resolved that Camilla should be Queen, and most people now believe that this is what she will be.
Not going well really, is it. Next!
‘Why does the Duchess have her own home at Raymill House in Wiltshire?’
The official answer is: ‘The Duchess likes to spend time with her children and grandchildren at their family home.
I have to tell you, that the following doubts that the DM express in response to the answer given above, nearly had me spitting my tea out over the computer screen:
But privately it is murmured by Camilla’s friends that the Prince does not like noisy young children disturbing the peace of Highgrove.
See what I mean? Dobby! Not like noisy young children! Hmmm… best leave that one there or I will get arrested.
Never the less, children aside, the real reason for the separate homes is in keeping with and supports what I said earlier about Dobby and Dobbin’s marriage being in tatters.
The article then makes mention of how dull it all is, which is about the only thing that the propaganda outlet has been honest about:
The questions and answers drone on rather dully covering everything from the prince’s tax arrangements, plans for a multi-faith coronation and his large staff which numbers an intriguing ‘161.1’. How can you have 0.1 of a gardener?
Well, the DM would find those points dull wouldn’t it? After all, going into detail about his tax affairs, coronations that will be paid for by the taxpayer and his large number of slaves could be counterproductive to this PR drive. NEXT:
However, some of the most intriguing bits of information for which the prince has been regularly lampooned for years are not addressed at all.
Excellent journalism DM. What are those intriguing bits of information then?
Take the story about his toothpaste.
Yes, yes, go on.
Royal folklore has it that it is squeezed on to his brush for him by his valet. The Clarence House website fails to explain that this really isn’t as spoilt as it sounds.
It goes back to 1990 when Charles’s valet was the felicitous and ‘irreplacable’ Michael Fawcett. At the time, the prince needed temporary help because he had broken his right arm falling off his pony when playing polo at Cirencester.
The story about the specimen jar which the valet had to hold particularly steady also dates from this period. The practice was certainly not continued after the Prince had regained the use of his arm.
Fuck me! Is that it? What’s next on the list DM?
And then there’s the Prince of Wales’s lavatory seat. This handy personal device, covered in soft, white kid leather, is said to go everywhere with Charles. Not so ludicrous when you know that the Prince is very hygiene-conscious.
And there is no mention of the rumour that Charles also travels with his own personal supply of Kleenex Velvet lavatory paper.
I gotta tell you. I’m losing the will to live right now. NEXT?
Nor does Clarence House address the claim that wherever he is in the world he takes his own organic food grown at Highgrove and receives supplies of unpasteurised milk from the royal herd at Windsor.
Well of course, Clarence House wouldn’t address the issue of food. Obviously, Elephant Ears takes his own grub with him when he fucks off on his free jaunts. The stuff we have to eat gives you fucking cancer. Don’t bring these points up if you are not going to provide the answers. Bad journalism DM. NEXT?
Also missing is the information given whenever the Prince stays at a country house. When staying somewhere for the first time, his hostess is issued with a list of relevant information about their guest of honour.
Likes: anything organic, soft-boiled eggs, wild mushrooms, fish, game, pasta, ice-cream, soft cheese, Laphroaig whisky and dry Martini (mixed the princely way, three parts gin to one part Martini).
Dislikes: large portions, overcooked vegetables, coffee, chocolate, nuts, garlic, curry, chillies, pork, oysters and blue cheese.
Fuck off with this shit. These are not revelations or Myths. Even B list Celebs send this kind of list. I certainly would not have any objection to him sending an advanced list of likes and dislikes. You see what the DM did there. They made it seem as if they were rebuking the Palace for failing to address the questions we all want answers for. Are we interested if the Prince sends such a list? Are we bollocks. It wasn’t even worth mentioning. Bad DM, bad, NEXT?
But what is most surprisingly absent from the ‘frequently asked questions’ is the most contentious area of Prince Charles’s life — his tendency to meddle in government business.
Nowhere will you find a question asking why the Prince devotes so much time to the ‘black spider’ letters with which he bombards government ministers, and yet this is an issue which continues to interest both politicians and the public.
Many critics feel the prince went too far and overstepped the constitutional boundaries of his legitimate concern in effectively lobbying ministers over issues such as foxhunting, foot-and-mouth disease and the reform of the House of Lords.
Only last month the Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, overruled the High Court in order to block the release of a series of ‘particularly frank’ exchanges between Charles and certain ministers. Grieve did so because he believed publication could affect the Prince’s future ‘kingship’.
Where is the question on the Clarence House wesbite enquiring ‘Does the Prince meddle unduly in government affairs?’? All that is offered by way of information from Clarence House about his relationship with government is to say that it is a convention for him to be asked by Parliament to consent to Bills which affect the Duchy of Cornwall.
Several of the questions are about the Prince’s expenditure. Does The Prince of Wales pay tax? Why doesn’t the Duchy of Cornwall pay corporation tax? Is it true that Members of the Royal Family sometimes spend thousands of pounds to make day trips for single events?
Clarence House has gone out of its way to point out that Charles ‘pays income tax at the 50 per cent rate on his income from the Duchy of Cornwall’ and his taxes ‘are checked by the Inland Revenue like anyone else’.
What it doesn’t say is that his income from the Duchy last year was £18.3 million on which he paid £4.5 million in tax.
I will now say it again. Well of course these things won’t be addressed. The twat’s not going to admit that he’s ripping us off or that he has influence over parliamentary decisions is he? Is that it for this ludicrous MSM article ? Please let the answer be yes, please let the answer be yes.
No doubt the illuminating new information has been published to do away with the absurd idea that the Prince of Wales is both lavish and eccentric.
Fuck me, it wasn’t the end.
So, has it succeeded?
At last, a good(ish) question, which I shall answer seriously.
You never know with the notoriously gullible British public. Most people reading this know exactly what the Royal family are and as such do not need to be put straight. The trouble with dangerous misleading articles like this one in the Daily Mail is that they could just be enough to appease those who are beginning to have their doubts about the integrity of the Royal Family. And that I’m afraid to say could be all it takes to keep the hinges on the establishments doors intact.
Until the next time,