October 28, 200718 yr Putting a gagging order on topical news is a "red rag" to the Internet. more tat to write about god can they not write about something decent? who cares what the "royals" get up to! bunch of glorified muppets if you ask me! the reporters that is!
October 29, 200718 yr Author What or who is a "minor royal"? I knew a few royal miners...............http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news/uk/v...?ad=1&ct=50A posting on Yahoo says:Lord Frederick Windsor, son of the Windsor Family black sheep Prince and Princess Michael of Kent. He has admitted to cocaine abuse in the past, 1999, and is openly homosexual. He's a board member of the gay social club Sweet Suite, in Soho, LondonSo.. if they hadn't issued a gagging order, and the whole thing had been in the open - like mere mortal's cases - it would have gone unnoticed, or at least have blown over by now. Wonder how much the whole charade cost the taxpayer?
October 29, 200718 yr http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/avdb/news/uk/v...?ad=1&ct=50A posting on Yahoo says:So.. if they hadn't issued a gagging order, and the whole thing had been in the open - like mere mortal's cases - it would have gone unnoticed, or at least have blown over by now. Wonder how much the whole charade cost the taxpayer?I really dont know why you put up with this mob of so called royals. Bunch of lazy expensive yahoos.Thank god we dont have to worry about them, or their numerous hangers on. We have enough of the run of the mill politicians to worry fret about.Joe
October 29, 200718 yr Author Wikipedia has just added a paragraph to cover it!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Frederick_WindsorThe amusing bit is the quote from 1999: "It is very difficult to avoid getting into this sort of thing when you move in these circles.." Now which circles could he possibly mean? Surely not the Royal Family?!
October 29, 200718 yr Author And the Daily Mail is playing games too:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...70&ito=1595Read the article and it's a simple process of elimination. If you are in any doubt they've almost spelled out the location. K.E.N..
October 29, 200718 yr Who cares who did what... of everything happening in this world, the biggest story of the week is Guess What A Random Royal Did.WHO CARES!?Ship them off is what I say, and send the crappy newspapers with them.
October 30, 200718 yr Who cares who did what... of everything happening in this world, the biggest story of the week is Guess What A Random Royal Did.WHO CARES!?Ship them off is what I say, and send the crappy newspapers with them.I care..if any of the Royals have been up to no good, i want them named and shamed It`s like that time that Prince Charles had been caught in the act with a member of his male staff, (snigger) that was hushed up pretty quick! The whole lot of them are dodgy i think..
October 30, 200718 yr Author Wikipedia has just added a paragraph to cover it!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Frederick_Windsor....And now... someone has removed it! :D Censorship on Wikipedia? Is there a new year's honour at stake here?The plot thickens.
October 30, 200718 yr Author The Mail has now re-written their article to remove both the name, and the holier-than-thou stuff about the Internet. But they've added an open invitation to find out for yourself:• The British media is forbidden by a court order from revealing the name or even the gender of the Royal Family member at the centre of the blackmail case.But no such restrictions can control the world wide web.Yesterday the name of the person was only a click of a mouse and a ten-second internet trawl away.By posing a simple question on a number of search engines, it was astonishingly easy to identify the royal individual. One forum gave the name and then added: "And (gender then mentioned) is being blackmailed."Another site was even more direct, giving a colour photograph of the person with the accompanying words:"Guess who this is and why (gender then mentioned) will soon be in the Press???" Such chatrooms and discussion sites are both uneditable and impossible to police or control. In addition, there is no chance of information - once it has been displayed on the internet - being comprehensively deleted.Obviously a more experienced journalist at work here, and a better read. I believe the gender may already have been mentioned by the British press: yesterday - by the Daily Mail!
October 30, 200718 yr I care..if any of the Royals have been up to no good, i want them named and shamed It`s like that time that Prince Charles had been caught in the act with a member of his male staff, (snigger) that was hushed up pretty quick! The whole lot of them are dodgy i think..Prince Charles is gay?
October 30, 200718 yr He must be to marry that drag-queen She does look more of a man than he does...
November 2, 200718 yr I really dont know why you put up with this mob of so called royals. Bunch of lazy expensive yahoos.Thank god we dont have to worry about them, or their numerous hangers on. We have enough of the run of the mill politicians to worry fret about.JoeAs in the UK
November 12, 200718 yr Wow!Monsta,First immigrants, now women.Is this what you believe to be a broadening of your horizons!Try again kid!Joe
November 12, 200718 yr Monsta,First immigrants, now women.Is this what you believe to be a broadening of your horizons!Try again kid!Joewhats wrong joe get out the wrong side of bed! any i wasn't having a go at women just pencils wife! bah!
Create a free account or sign in to comment