Royal Thread - All royal stories here please

[Katsika]

11 minutes ago, Sit down, Waldo said:

What's 'Chinese spy' code for?

Andy Pandy?

[jack121]

Talking about the royals, do you know why it's taking so long to disclose all the records surrounding epstein's paedo island. The place was raided a long time ago but the information is not being disclosed

[lobster]

4 hours ago, jack121 said:

Talking about the royals, do you know why it's taking so long to disclose all the records surrounding epstein's paedo island. The place was raided a long time ago but the information is not being disclosed

One would assume it's because the client list might be embarrassing for the PTB.

I doubt the Americans are that fussed about keeping Andy out of the shit, so some others, perhaps

Edited December 16, 2024 by lobster

[jack121]

 

The lazy layabouts who just turn up somewhere and wave, then expect you to pay all of their bills £ Billions every year have fucked up again. Because they are not as cool or popular as they would have you believe

 

 

You see there's this thing callled a royal warrant which allows a company to stamp a copy of the Royal Arms onto their products as a promotion mechanism. Apparently stupid sheep up and down the country will more likely to buy a product is it has these arms on it. Which means the royals can  claim they support businesses and charities, without actually supporting businesses and charities or doing any kind of work whatsoever. After centuries of pracrise the royals have got this art fine tuned. Here's Liz pretending to be intrested in her sheep slaves, she waved and left quickly after this back to her life of free castles and mansions and free money

 

 

Pressure group B4Ukraine wrote to the chaz - ophile calling for companies including Bacardi, Nestlé, Unilever and Cadbury’s to have the award revoked.

b4ukraine claimed the companies were indirectly contributing to the Russian war effort by continuing to maintain operations in russia. “We urge the Royal family to stand in solidarity with Ukraine by demonstrating that companies contributing to the Ukraine war  will not be bestowed with the privilege and honour of holding a royal warrant,”

 

A spokesman for Mondelez International said: “Cadbury is a much-loved brand that has been a part of British life for generations and remains the nation’s favourite chocolate.Whilst we are disappointed to be one of hundreds of other businesses and brands in the UK to not have a new warrant awarded. Our sales have increased since the warrant was revoked.”

Buckingham Palace said that it does not comment on decisions relating to specific warrants.

 

[jack121]

On 12/16/2024 at 12:17 PM, lobster said:

One would assume it's because the client list might be embarrassing for the PTB.

I doubt the Americans are that fussed about keeping Andy out of the shit, so some others, perhaps

They named the clintons and the obamas, beyonce, jay-z, madonna, lada gaga, will smith, the rothschilds, a lot of high profile peeps - wonder who else they do not want us to know about

[lobster]

5 hours ago, jack121 said:

They named the clintons and the obamas, beyonce, jay-z, madonna, lada gaga, will smith, the rothschilds, a lot of high profile peeps - wonder who else they do not want us to know about

Who named them ? No one official as far as I know

[Katsika]

2 hours ago, lobster said:

No one official as far as I know

Maybe you don't know everything.

[lobster]

1 hour ago, Katsika said:

Maybe you don't know everything.

I'm pretty convinced of that, just more than most people, if there is something important I've missed please share

[Katsika]

1 hour ago, lobster said:

I'm pretty convinced of that, just more than most people, if there is something important I've missed please share

No, sorry, I've got goats to feed.

[lobster]

21 minutes ago, Katsika said:

No, sorry, I've got goats to feed.

It's okay, I can wait a while,  though I'm still waiting for answer from last time you avoided it with "I have to feed my goats"

[SoundOfSilence]

3 hours ago, Katsika said:

No, sorry, I've got goats to feed.

Rather than see your goats go hungry, here is the list compiled from the flight logs.

 

These are people who visited Epstein's Orgy Island on his Lolita Express.

 

Jeffrey Epstein Flight Logs Evidence in Ghislaine Maxwell Trial 

 

As far as the Obamas go the evidence for their involvement follows from Barrak ordering a substantial amount of Pizza.

 

The claim was purportedly debunked by USA Today

 

Fact check: Barack Obama did not spend $65K on pizza and hot dogs

 

However, as is typical of these so-called fact checkers, the debunking falls apart when the fact checker is fact checked.

 

The fact checker focuses on Pizza Gate and debunks that as support for debunking the Obama claims. The two are unconnected. Pizzagate being a false flag operation to provide cover for the pedophilia honey trap ensnaring so any of Washington's power brokers.

 

Wikileaks provides confirmation that Obama did spend an extraordinary sum on pizzas and hotdogs.

 

The Global Intelligence Files - RE: Get ready for "Chicago Hot Dog Friday" 

 

If one reads the emails, there is no doubt that more is going on than just an innocent $65,000 hot dog and pizza eating frenzy.

 

One of the attendees seemed rather enthusiastic about seeing the same waitress as last time.

 

"If we get the same "waitresses," I'm all for it!!!"

 

Looking at a rough average price of a Domino's pizza in the US, say $15. Domino's Menu Prices (Updated: December 2024) 

 

That's about 4.300 pizzas. It seems Obama had a lot of hungry mouths to feed.

 

The FBI confirms that 'pizza' is indeed a codeword for trafficked children.

 

FBI Confirms “Pizza” As Pedophile Code Word - America's Future 

 

I can't be bothered looking up the others, the evidence will be to various sources.

 

Though I do find it interesting that Rock would require official sources as confirmation.

 

The very people actively covering this up ... 

 

[lobster]

52 minutes ago, SoundOfSilence said:

Rather than see your goats go hungry, here is the list compiled from the flight logs.

 

These are people who visited Epstein's Orgy Island on his Lolita Express.

 

Jeffrey Epstein Flight Logs Evidence in Ghislaine Maxwell Trial 

 

As far as the Obamas go the evidence for their involvement follows from Barrak ordering a substantial amount of Pizza.

 

The claim was purportedly debunked by USA Today

 

Fact check: Barack Obama did not spend $65K on pizza and hot dogs

 

However, as is typical of these so-called fact checkers, the debunking falls apart when the fact checker is fact checked.

 

The fact checker focuses on Pizza Gate and debunks that as support for debunking the Obama claims. The two are unconnected. Pizzagate being a false flag operation to provide cover for the pedophilia honey trap ensnaring so any of Washington's power brokers.

 

Wikileaks provides confirmation that Obama did spend an extraordinary sum on pizzas and hotdogs.

 

The Global Intelligence Files - RE: Get ready for "Chicago Hot Dog Friday" 

 

If one reads the emails, there is no doubt that more is going on than just an innocent $65,000 hot dog and pizza eating frenzy.

 

One of the attendees seemed rather enthusiastic about seeing the same waitress as last time.

 

"If we get the same "waitresses," I'm all for it!!!"

 

Looking at a rough average price of a Domino's pizza in the US, say $15. Domino's Menu Prices (Updated: December 2024) 

 

That's about 4.300 pizzas. It seems Obama had a lot of hungry mouths to feed.

 

The FBI confirms that 'pizza' is indeed a codeword for trafficked children.

 

FBI Confirms “Pizza” As Pedophile Code Word - America's Future 

 

I can't be bothered looking up the others, the evidence will be to various sources.

 

Though I do find it interesting that Rock would require official sources as confirmation.

 

The very people actively covering this up ... 

 

You last point was rather my point, myquote above I queried, was they hadn't released the client list, thats different than the flight logs and as you correctly point out they haven't officially released those as they are undoubtedly covering up for someone or possibly lots of someones,

 

it's the usual accuracy issue I'm querying,  not that there isn't something decidedly dodgy going on

 

Pizza has been slang for indecent imaginary of children for decades. I dont need the FBI to tell me that, its actually "cheesy pizza" giving  the initials CP

Edited December 25, 2024 by lobster

[SoundOfSilence]

1 hour ago, lobster said:

You last point was rather my point, myquote above I queried, was they hadn't released the client list, thats different than the flight logs and as you correctly point out they haven't officially released those as they are undoubtedly covering up for someone or possibly lots of someones,

IIRC, the client list was deemed inadmissible at Gislaine (can't be bothered looking up correct spelling) Maxwell's trial. 

 

So, it is not surprising that it is not in the court records.

 

I know that wasn't your point Rock, but a lot of debunkers rely on this.

 

There are a number of sources claiming to have access to the actual list and have published names. As far as I am aware none have been sued for naming the people on the list.

 

If I was named on that list I would be suing.

 

Nevertheless, my point is that there is corroborating evidence supporting the allegations that the people named on this 'unofficial' client list were engaged in these activates.

 

There are the numerous photos of the Spaniel in the company of Jimi Savile, and it is difficult to ignore Andrew's connections to Epstein.

 

As you suggest, Andrew may well be the fall guy for the Royal family. 

 

There is evidence against the Clintons and the Obamas that I have pointed out.

 

I am not really interested getting evidence for the Hollywood pedovore club. But it is fairly well known. Megan Fox is on record describing how she and her husband sometimes drink each other's blood.

 

An unusual hobby ...

 

This is one of the reasons that I rarely watch any film made after the 1960s. 

 

But whether or not the 'unofficial' list is genuine or not is really a distraction. It can be recompiled from other sources.

 

So, if someone wants to use the list as a convenient way of collating and naming parties engaged in these activities, I really don't have a problem with it.

 

 

[jack121]

7 hours ago, SoundOfSilence said:

If I was named on that list I would be suing.

I remember when michael jackson got sued and he paid $23 million to avoid trial, with the excuse that he was too busy with his career to bother with allegations

Jordan chandler came back and got another $7 million a few years later.

Wonder what excuses the elites are going to use now

Clinton was asked why he went to epstein's paedophile island 27 times to which clinton refused to answer,  the questioner was booed and hissed by the surrounding herd of stupid sheep who shouted " Do you know who that is ! That is the president ! "

[Katsika]

28 minutes ago, jack121 said:

I remember when michael jackson got sued and he paid $23 million to avoid trial, with the excuse that he was too busy with his career to bother with allegations

Jordan chandler came back and got another $7 million a few years later.

Wonder what excuses the elites are going to use now

Clinton was asked why he went to epstein's paedophile island 27 times to which clinton refused to answer,  the questioner was booed and hissed by the surrounding herd of stupid sheep who shouted " Do you know who that is ! That is the president ! "

Apparently Billy boy is currently in hospital due to an unexplained fever!

[lobster]

11 hours ago, SoundOfSilence said:

IIRC, the client list was deemed inadmissible at Gislaine (can't be bothered looking up correct spelling) Maxwell's trial. 

 

So, it is not surprising that it is not in the court records.

 

I know that wasn't your point Rock, but a lot of debunkers rely on this.

 

There are a number of sources claiming to have access to the actual list and have published names. As far as I am aware none have been sued for naming the people on the list.

 

If I was named on that list I would be suing.

 

Nevertheless, my point is that there is corroborating evidence supporting the allegations that the people named on this 'unofficial' client list were engaged in these activates.

 

There are the numerous photos of the Spaniel in the company of Jimi Savile, and it is difficult to ignore Andrew's connections to Epstein.

 

As you suggest, Andrew may well be the fall guy for the Royal family. 

 

There is evidence against the Clintons and the Obamas that I have pointed out.

 

I am not really interested getting evidence for the Hollywood pedovore club. But it is fairly well known. Megan Fox is on record describing how she and her husband sometimes drink each other's blood.

 

An unusual hobby ...

 

This is one of the reasons that I rarely watch any film made after the 1960s. 

 

But whether or not the 'unofficial' list is genuine or not is really a distraction. It can be recompiled from other sources.

 

So, if someone wants to use the list as a convenient way of collating and naming parties engaged in these activities, I really don't have a problem with it.

 

 

I'm a bit wary of internet sources  / investigators,  they may have an agenda which causes them to ignore some facts whilst putting undue emphasis on others, that's not to say they are automatically wrong, just a I need a lot more context before I jump to conclusions. 

 

The not being sued isn't really a sound argument for it being true, everyone is aware of the Streisand  effect and more often than not your better off ignoring random rumours,  than bringing them in to sharp focus, by taking legal action,  if it's a major news channel or paper, maybe but randoms on the internet less so, most people dont believe them anyway and you just end up giving credence to it

Edited December 25, 2024 by lobster

[SoundOfSilence]

5 hours ago, lobster said:

I'm a bit wary of internet sources  / investigators,  they may have an agenda which causes them to ignore some facts whilst putting undue emphasis on others,

 

As opposed to government and mainstream media ...

 

5 hours ago, lobster said:

that's not to say they are automatically wrong, just a I need a lot more context before I jump to conclusions. 

 

Interesting. You only jump to conclusions after some of, but not all, the context. That must be a very difficult balancing act.

 

5 hours ago, lobster said:

 

The not being sued isn't really a sound argument for it being true, everyone is aware of the Streisand  effect and more often than not your better off ignoring random rumours,  than bringing them in to sharp focus, by taking legal action,  if it's a major news channel or paper, maybe but randoms on the internet less so, most people dont believe them anyway and you just end up giving credence to it

 

I agree that failure to sue, by itself, is not necessarily determinative.

 

For example, if you are a high net worth individual it may be beneficial to settle a nuisance suit for a couple of hundred grand. By the time you lawyer up and go through the ordeal of litigation it can be easier and less stressful to settle.

 

However, in the example given by jack121, $23 million is not settling a nuisance suit.

 

 Context is important. 

 

And in the examples that I provided there are some troubling facts. The problem with suing someone for defamation is that they get discovery. And the last thing some of the people on the client list want is discovery.

 

I agree with you about not having a desire to bring unwanted attention through starting a lawsuit. But it isn't because of the Streisand effect. It is because in the middle of a massive coverup of the Epstein client list you do not want to do anything that brings more focus on the list.

 

I am sure these people have been told by their puppet masters "Don't sue. We've got this."

 

So, in the context I outlined, failure to sue is relevant.

[lobster]

4 hours ago, SoundOfSilence said:

 

As opposed to government and mainstream media ...

 

 

Interesting. You only jump to conclusions after some of, but not all, the context. That must be a very difficult balancing act.

 

 

I agree that failure to sue, by itself, is not necessarily determinative.

 

For example, if you are a high net worth individual it may be beneficial to settle a nuisance suit for a couple of hundred grand. By the time you lawyer up and go through the ordeal of litigation it can be easier and less stressful to settle.

 

However, in the example given by jack121, $23 million is not settling a nuisance suit.

 

 Context is important. 

 

And in the examples that I provided there are some troubling facts. The problem with suing someone for defamation is that they get discovery. And the last thing some of the people on the client list want is discovery.

 

I agree with you about not having a desire to bring unwanted attention through starting a lawsuit. But it isn't because of the Streisand effect. It is because in the middle of a massive coverup of the Epstein client list you do not want to do anything that brings more focus on the list.

 

I am sure these people have been told by their puppet masters "Don't sue. We've got this."

 

So, in the context I outlined, failure to sue is relevant.

You've sort of changed topics, 

 

The issue you identified was that innocent people would sue and as I explained that's far from certain, turning a fringe theory into main stream news isn't particularly wise.

 

Your response seems to be guilty people wouldnt sue, and that also has some truth,  though there is quite a lot who have.

 

So in short there is a good chance nether the innocent or the guilty would sue, which makes the litigation point you made a little redundant 

 

I have no idea what MJ being sued has to do with the substantive point, it's the reverse if what we are discussing. 

 

Yes it is a balancing act, once you accept that there are people just making things up and putting it on the internet AND that people/ governments cover things up and lie, finding the truth isn't that easy, that's why I generally advise caution and differentiating between what you know and what you suspect to be true 

 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2024 by lobster

[SoundOfSilence]

27 minutes ago, lobster said:

You've sort of changed topics, 

 

You've sort of had too much Christmas cheer.

 

27 minutes ago, lobster said:

 

The issue you identified was that innocent people would sue and as I explained that's far from certain, turning a fringe theory into main stream news isn't particularly wise.

 

Your response seems to be guilty people wouldnt sue, and that also has some truth,  though there is quite a lot who have.

 

You must have missed the bit where I stated: "I agree that failure to sue, by itself, is not necessarily determinative."

 

In the case of Andrew, there are additional facts which would make discovery rather embarrassing.

 

Likely more embarrassing than his train wreck of an interview where he tried to explain away his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. I don't think his explanation that he doesn't sweat was entirely satisfactory.

 

27 minutes ago, lobster said:

 

that's why I generally advise caution and differentiating between what you know and what you suspect to be true 

 

 

Thanks for the advice, Rock.

[lobster]

30 minutes ago, SoundOfSilence said:

 

You've sort of had too much Christmas cheer.

 

 

You must have missed the bit where I stated: "I agree that failure to sue, by itself, is not necessarily determinative."

 

In the case of Andrew, there are additional facts which would make discovery rather embarrassing.

 

Likely more embarrassing than his train wreck of an interview where he tried to explain away his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. I don't think his explanation that he doesn't sweat was entirely satisfactory.

 

 

Thanks for the advice, Rock.

But Andrew is as off topic as MJ, the issue under discussion is people who have been linked to sex scandal by uninvolved people on the internet , sueing the uninvolved people posting allegations on the internet for defamation or similar 

[SoundOfSilence]

34 minutes ago, lobster said:

But Andrew is as off topic as MJ, the issue under discussion is people who have been linked to sex scandal by uninvolved people on the internet , sueing the uninvolved people posting allegations on the internet for defamation or similar 

I must be confused.

 

I thought this was a thread about Royal stories.

[jack121]

Another fake lookalike Chaz gives a christmas speech

 

 

The shape of his nose has changed since the last time we same him, receeding hairline has changed, shape of ears has changed.

Where is the real chaz ( not that i care ) Is he dead as the japanese PM suspects

Chaz spoke about the wars around the world and the suffering they cause, he forgot to mention most of them are fake as Ukrainan Zelensky takes $ Billions of tax payers money from countries around the world, simultaneously his wife buys the most expensive sports car in the world, along with a new wardrobe of clothes, new cars and new property - no fake furs for her, or foodbanks

Chaz spoke of ethnics and diversity, that being of different skin colour and nationality is brilliant - from the royals who carved an empire of hate out of colonialism , murder, war, and the slave trade in which millions suffered and died. The royals still refuse to aplogise for the slave trade even after appeals from trindad tobago jamaica and other countries around the world, the royals are so proud of their actions

Chaz kept talking about christmas and british traditions, despite being not british and not christian - He spoke little of his links to hitler, germany, war crimes, £Billions of taxpayers money the royals spend, and why everyone hates him

 

[Katsika]

23 minutes ago, jack121 said:

The shape of his nose has changed since the last time we same him

Yes, he's looking very Pinocchio in the piccy

[jack121]

On 12/26/2024 at 9:28 AM, Katsika said:

Yes, he's looking very Pinocchio in the piccy

 

I'm glad you noticed his huge pinocchio nose, This puppet's nose does seem to grow longer every second as his dire speech progressed

[Anti Facts Sir]

Sounding like a broken record here, I know, but that ain't him.

 

Jap PM knows what he's saying.