Buckingham Palace "blackmailed" over sex and drugs claim involving a Royal

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

Royal in question unidentified but, come on, it's Harry isn't it?

Matt DC, Sunday, 28 October 2007 13:45 (eighteen years ago)

i heard he smoked a "cannabis joint".

pc user, Sunday, 28 October 2007 13:49 (eighteen years ago)

If I was Prince Harry I'd use my cash and position to get naked with the following 5 women, instead of dressing like a Nazi and killing wildlife...

keeping it tidy!

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 28 October 2007 13:52 (eighteen years ago)

According to a lady on Radio 4 this morning, if you Google it, you can find out easy peasy. I was hoping this thread had saved me the bother. But the royal was "having sex" while the aide was snorting coke. I think that was according to Barry Norman.

PJ Miller, Sunday, 28 October 2007 13:52 (eighteen years ago)

google news illustrates the story with:

http://alaskareport.com/images907/blackmail_royal.jpg

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 28 October 2007 13:54 (eighteen years ago)

Ah, didn't see the other thread. The story probably deserves its own thread anyway and of course we are merely speculating on the identity of the blackmailed person and not casting any aspersions at all on the character of the person or persons involved and the opinions contained here do not represent the opinions of Ilxor.com so please don't sue us.

Matt DC, Sunday, 28 October 2007 13:58 (eighteen years ago)

is it definitely a female aide? there was all that weirdness at prince charles's gaff that had to be covered up a few years ago.

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 28 October 2007 14:00 (eighteen years ago)

what was all that about? i remember a rumour about one of his staff getting raped by him, was the guy just a nutter, or was there some kernal of truth in it?

pc user, Sunday, 28 October 2007 14:15 (eighteen years ago)

It starts with cannabis joints and it ends with anal buggery

StanM, Sunday, 28 October 2007 14:18 (eighteen years ago)

Man, a life of nearly infinite privilege since birth must really fuck a mind up.

Oilyrags, Sunday, 28 October 2007 14:20 (eighteen years ago)

my heart bleeds.

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 28 October 2007 14:24 (eighteen years ago)

Well, yeah, an asshole is an asshole, but still. I don't think he ever had a choice in the matter.

Oilyrags, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:11 (eighteen years ago)

dalai lama turned out ok

s1ocki, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:15 (eighteen years ago)

Peter Jones from Dragons' Den as well.

Dom Passantino, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:17 (eighteen years ago)

george clooney

s1ocki, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:28 (eighteen years ago)

I don't know anything about Peter Jones, but I don't think the situation was at all similar for Dalai Lama and especially George Clooney.

Oilyrags, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:31 (eighteen years ago)

if you Google it, you can find out easy peasy

I always see people saying this, but when I try I only get anonymous articles. What should I be looking for?

Ismael Klata, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:48 (eighteen years ago)

erm, as it was all for a dare there was no consummation, but i was manually stimulated in turn by the girl i pulled and a boy who was also in the room, who wanted to see my knob in a fully erect state. alas, i had drunk far too much to get it all the way up (it still beat HIS even at 90%) and the full glory was spared. there were 3 boys and 3 girls in the room, all 3 boys and 1 of the girls were fully naked, and the other 2 girls were only wearing knickers. the night ended (after the naked girl upped sticks and headed off) with a wanking contest, the 2 remaining girls (whose idea it was) watching intently as we strived to bring ourselves to climax. it took me about twice as long as anyone else, mostly through fear of being struck by another's jet, being as i was in the centre of the three. throughout, i was made up in lipstick, rouge and a headband, and when i had been wearing clothes it had been drag. one of those ordinary student nights, then...

Matt DC, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:49 (eighteen years ago)

googling "aide blackmail buckingham palace" just got me loads of news articles rather than concrete X did Y.

it will have to come out via a police leak soon, perhaps to a foreign paper.

xpost

lolololololol

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:50 (eighteen years ago)

pfft

Just got offed, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:53 (eighteen years ago)

(Sorry, but that really was an open goal)

Matt DC, Sunday, 28 October 2007 15:54 (eighteen years ago)

I'm surprised nobody has said "... the Aristocrats!" yet.

StanM, Sunday, 28 October 2007 18:38 (eighteen years ago)

sorry guys, remind me why Harry is an asshole again? Young man engages in sexual acts with woman, the horror, is that it?

The Real Dirty Vicar, Sunday, 28 October 2007 19:50 (eighteen years ago)

http://www.humorgazette.com/images/prince-nazi.jpg

s1ocki, Sunday, 28 October 2007 19:52 (eighteen years ago)

was that really anymore offensive than half the shit his granpa phil's said?

pc user, Sunday, 28 October 2007 19:59 (eighteen years ago)

...

s1ocki, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:01 (eighteen years ago)

XPOST oh yeah, because no one else has ever dressed up as a Nazi for a fancy dress party.

The Real Dirty Vicar, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:01 (eighteen years ago)

speak for yourself

s1ocki, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:03 (eighteen years ago)

Well I for one have never dressed up as a Nazi for a fancy dress party, because I am not a Nazi. It is well known that if someone dresses up as something for a fancy dress party then they are actually in real life what they dress up as (so be careful if you see any vampires or ghosts at Halloween parties).

The Real Dirty Vicar, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:05 (eighteen years ago)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7066348.stm

pc user, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:11 (eighteen years ago)

I think it's more that said party's theme was "colonialists and natives", maybe? And I don't think anyone could reasonably argue that that's that's remotely acceptable, particularly when one of the attendees is part of a family which did quite nicely out of the whole colonial shebang thanks, and then goes and dresses like that also. Plus, you know, he's a tit.

The royal in question, however, looks like being one the lower reaches of the civil list.

xpost, quite

Matt, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:13 (eighteen years ago)

lol, member.
xpost

StanM, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:29 (eighteen years ago)

cap'n save a nazi dipshit

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:36 (eighteen years ago)

What is wrong with you Englishes (and I guess, other europes, etc.) that you even tolerate having a royal family, anyway? Please not to bring up 'dynasties' like Bush/Kennedy. I find it fucking repugnant that we seem to be developing a literal ruling class. Getting on toward guillotine time again!

Oilyrags, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:40 (eighteen years ago)

:(

http://www.buckleshop.com/images/elb1.jpg

DG, Sunday, 28 October 2007 20:47 (eighteen years ago)

Oilyrags: I think it's mostly that the family in question bears little to no relevance to the day to day governance of the country beyond the odd bit of pomp and circumstance and siphoning off a load of public money. It's annoying if you think about it, but you don't tend to think about it.

Intellectually it's massively offensive, of course. Practically, ehhh, no more offensive than a president doling out rebuilding contracts for his mates. I'm certainly not a royalist by any stretch of the imagination. That said, I don't really see the point of a head of state at all. I'd rather they wren't there, but I'm not going to get too exercised about it.

Matt, Sunday, 28 October 2007 21:00 (eighteen years ago)

> Practically, ehhh, no more offensive than a president doling out rebuilding contracts for his mates.

Fair enough, I guess, but I want to see heads roll over that shit, too. Also, among the Britishes I have encountered personally, there seems to be a lot of adoration of the inbred twitmonsters, which I find utterly bewildering and often infuriating (along with the redneck admiration of Trumps, Bushes, etc. which are the equivalent hereabouts, so I guess I can't really lay it on you limeys after all.)

Oilyrags, Sunday, 28 October 2007 21:07 (eighteen years ago)

It's like: how many Americans would want to change the whole political structure to create a new kind of head of state? The same inertia applies over here. Plus, as you say, there's a whole slew of fuckwits here who like Royalty cos they love being lickspittles and they need to look up to Special People.

Noodle Vague, Sunday, 28 October 2007 21:11 (eighteen years ago)

i would

remy bean, Sunday, 28 October 2007 21:14 (eighteen years ago)

It's funny how other European countries can have royal families that do not seem to obviously embody all their nation's worst characteristics.

The Real Dirty Vicar, Sunday, 28 October 2007 22:42 (eighteen years ago)

Dirty Vicar for king of Ireland!

Ned Raggett, Sunday, 28 October 2007 22:46 (eighteen years ago)

I can't remember the last time I paid any attention to anything another country's monarch did though. Oh yeah except maybe the King of Thailand during that coup thing.

Matt DC, Sunday, 28 October 2007 22:54 (eighteen years ago)

It's kinda funny, when Finland gained independence from Russia in 1917, we almost got ourselves a king. Back then a lot of people seemed to think a proper country can't go on without a king as the head of the state (though I think he would've been merely a ceremonial leader), even though the leftists were obviously against the idea. But the royalists eventually won the political battle, and some German prince was asked if he wanted to be the king of Finland, and he'd already agreed, but then Germany went and lost the First World War, so suddenly having a German king wasn't such a cool thing anymore, and Finland became a republic. In the 90s some local newspaper brough the great-great-grandson of that prince here to see what might've been his kingdom, if history had gone a bit differently.

Tuomas, Sunday, 28 October 2007 23:00 (eighteen years ago)

Those early 20th Century Finnish royalist headhunters must have had a pretty low opinion of their country's stock, frankly. Waiting all that time for independence only to have to go to another European country to find your monarch.

Matt DC, Sunday, 28 October 2007 23:28 (eighteen years ago)

Yeah, I dunno why exactly they wanted a German for the job. Maybe it was because the actual Finnish nobility was rather small, and most of them were descendants of the Swedish nobility that stayed here when Russia conquered Finland, so the royalists might've thought Finns wouldn't want a Swedish king after having been ruled a by the actual King of Sweden before independence.

Tuomas, Sunday, 28 October 2007 23:36 (eighteen years ago)

Waiting all that time for independence only to have to go to another European country to find your monarch.

-- Matt DC, Sunday, October 28, 2007 11:28 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

yeah, you wouldn't catch the english going to scotland or holland or um hanover for their... oh hang on...

That one guy that hit it and quit it, Monday, 29 October 2007 00:26 (eighteen years ago)

Wuz gonna say, European monarchy = one small pan-European gene pond, basically.

Noodle Vague, Monday, 29 October 2007 00:36 (eighteen years ago)

Tuomas, we had a similar thing here in Ireland, pre-independence, with some people thinking that if we were to be freed from Britain we would have get a monarch in from somewhere. In the early 20th century I reckon that Switzerland and France were the only republics in Europe (if not the world), so seeing monarchy as a natural political system was not so crazy then as it is now.

I get the impression the Finnish presidency inherited the powers that had been put by for the monarch.

On the picking of a foreign prince to become your king - again, I think this is what everyone did when they became independent (off the top of my head, it is what Belgium and Greece did, so there must be more). If you pick one of your own to become king, you are strengthening one domestic faction against another, while if you pick some foreign guy who has never heard of your country then you have someone who is above your petty squabbles. Or so the argument goes.

The Real Dirty Vicar, Monday, 29 October 2007 11:52 (eighteen years ago)

I get the impression the Finnish presidency inherited the powers that had been put by for the monarch.

Yeah, I've always thought one of the reasons the Finnish president got relatively much power was the he was supposed to be sort of a king substitute. Nowadays they've stripped down most of the political power, but s/he still lives in a place called "Presidential Castle" and has an annual gala on the Independence Day, where politicians and other notables gather in the "castle" in fancy dresses, very much like a court feast or something.

Tuomas, Monday, 29 October 2007 12:03 (eighteen years ago)

I read that after Finnish independence and after it was established that Finland was not going to become a monarchy the Right wanted a presidential system while the Left wanted a parliamentary one, and from all this came your semi-presidential one.

But anyway, back to the British royal family... what particular acts do you reckon this Royal person was filmed doing, and with whom?

The Real Dirty Vicar, Monday, 29 October 2007 14:55 (eighteen years ago)

act 3 of the two gentlemen of verona

s1ocki, Monday, 29 October 2007 18:46 (eighteen years ago)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Armstrong-Jones,_Viscount_Linley

Dom Passantino, Tuesday, 30 October 2007 22:01 (eighteen years ago)

Just sayin'

Dom Passantino, Tuesday, 30 October 2007 22:01 (eighteen years ago)

I wonder what PRINCESS ZARA makes of all this. Or PRINCE MICHAEL OF KENT. And I've heard LORD MOUNTBATTEN is somewhat perturbed by current events OH NO WAIT HE'S DEAD.

The Real Dirty Vicar, Tuesday, 30 October 2007 22:14 (eighteen years ago)

RIP big man

Dom Passantino, Tuesday, 30 October 2007 22:22 (eighteen years ago)

i can honestly say i wouldn't recognise viscount linley if he was ... i dunno, sucking my dick.

grimly fiendish, Tuesday, 30 October 2007 23:12 (eighteen years ago)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/7070362.stm

pfunkboy, Tuesday, 30 October 2007 23:34 (eighteen years ago)

what a right royal cunt. and yes, i know he might not have been involved in the shooting. but still. what a right royal cunt.

grimly fiendish, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 00:20 (eighteen years ago)

A spokeswoman for Clarence House said the prince and a friend were in the area at the time but had no knowledge of the incident.

"Oh, ok then, you're free to go, sorry to have bothered you your royal highnesses"
Backs out of room tugging forelock.

Ned Trifle II, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 08:51 (eighteen years ago)

Didn't they at least hear the shots? I thought his "dad" was ol' cloth ears?

StanM, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 08:55 (eighteen years ago)

Can Prince Harry kill swans?

Dom Passantino, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 09:14 (eighteen years ago)

With his bare hands.

onimo, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 09:29 (eighteen years ago)

Prince Harry is plainly the new Prince Phillip. I wuv him.

The Real Dirty Vicar, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 12:04 (eighteen years ago)

BREAKING NEWS - PRINCE SHOOTS PROTECTED BIRDS, SHOOTS JISM ON UNPROTECTED BIRDS!

Tuomas, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 12:16 (eighteen years ago)

I'm sorry.

Tuomas, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 12:17 (eighteen years ago)

Royal jelly.

moley, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 12:29 (eighteen years ago)

placed between two intact hen harriers?

StanM, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 12:31 (eighteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.