Prince Andrew

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Chromatic

Chromatic

New Member
IMG_0027.jpeg
 
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Pharaoh
An interesting piece on that photo:

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/02/20/...71624860&utm_medium=social&utm_source=bluesky
 
Psamathe

Psamathe

Guru
An aspect I find worrying is when the king says "they [the Police] have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.". Beggars belief that there might ever be the possibility they wouldn't. Why should he be saying something that goes without saying and/or why would anybody imagine the king wouldn't cooperate with the Police.

Similarly when king says "the law must take its course.". Does king or anybody think it wouldn't or shouldn't? That king is suggesting he's giving his permission for the law to take its course.
 
All uphill

All uphill

Senior Member
Psamathe said:
An aspect I find worrying is when the king says "they [the Police] have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.". Beggars belief that there might ever be the possibility they wouldn't. Why should he be saying something that goes without saying and/or why would anybody imagine the king wouldn't cooperate with the Police.

Similarly when king says "the law must take its course.". Does king or anybody think it wouldn't or shouldn't? That king is suggesting he's giving his permission for the law to take its course.
Click to expand...

I'm no fan of the royals, and would like to see the back of them, but I thought those statements were important to counter any assumption that he might want the rozzers might go easy on A MW. It also distanced the remaining royals from A MW.
 
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Pharaoh
All uphill said:
I'm no fan of the royals, and would like to see the back of them, but I thought those statements were important to counter any assumption that he might want the rozzers might go easy on A MW. It also distanced the remaining royals from A MW.
Click to expand...

Ditto. I can't see a better way of phrasing it - it had to be neutral as far as guilt or otherwise is concerned, but also giving no sense of protection by 'the firm' or divulging inner thoughts.
 
Blazing Saddles

Blazing Saddles

Active Member
Psamathe said:
An aspect I find worrying is when the king says "they [the Police] have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.". Beggars belief that there might ever be the possibility they wouldn't. Why should he be saying something that goes without saying and/or why would anybody imagine the king wouldn't cooperate with the Police.

Similarly when king says "the law must take its course.". Does king or anybody think it wouldn't or shouldn't? That king is suggesting he's giving his permission for the law to take its course.
Click to expand...

It can’t go without saying though. The royals have been pilloried in the past for remaining silent when things should have been said.
 
Psamathe

Psamathe

Guru
briantrumpet said:
Ditto. I can't see a better way of phrasing it - it had to be neutral as far as guilt or otherwise is concerned, but also giving no sense of protection by 'the firm' or divulging inner thoughts.
Click to expand...
For me that where I gave the big issue ie that there is and possibly of "protection by the firm", that the possibility exists and needs closing off.
 
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Pharaoh
Psamathe said:
For me that where I gave the big issue ie that there is and possibly of "protection by the firm", that the possibility exists and needs closing off.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you're reading it any other way than they are standing back and letting the police do their job. Feel free to have a go at wording it better to get the meaning you'd like.
 
Psamathe

Psamathe

Guru
briantrumpet said:
I don't see how you're reading it any other way than they are standing back and letting the police do their job. Feel free to have a go at wording it better to get the meaning you'd like.
Click to expand...
It’s not what you wrote, not even changing kingly wording. It just highlights the wrongness that people think there might be any sort of protection, deference by authorities, etc. I can see how people think there might given the secrecy, lack of transparency and past history from the Firm and saying what king said almost acknowledges those views by us subjects (ie we were right to think what they might do).
 
briantrumpet

briantrumpet

Pharaoh
Psamathe said:
It’s not what you wrote, not even changing kingly wording. It just highlights the wrongness that people think there might be any sort of protection, deference by authorities, etc. I can see how people think there might given the secrecy, lack of transparency and past history from the Firm and saying what king said almost acknowledges those views by us subjects (ie we were right to think what they might do).
Click to expand...

Most families and organisations have a tendency, at least initially, and sometimes a lot longer, to 'protect their own'. Jeez, look at the GOP and Trump when the evidence is overwhelming and all in their possession. Maybe you'll be complaining when Mike Johnson says:

"I have learned with the deepest concern the news about Donald Trump and suspicion of his participating in child rape.

"What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities.

"In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.

"Let me state clearly: the law must take its course.

"As this process continues, it would not be right for me to comment further on this matter."

OK, sure, up to that point Johnson has been the most craven Trump apologist and enabler, but wouldn't that statement, if a genuine statement of intent, be welcome?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom