FabGuys.com mobile

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

'Prince' Andrew - How much more?

Jump to newest
 

By *tar33 OP   Man
7 hours ago

North London (outer)

We've heard that his former protection officers have been asked to provide details of any untoward happenings that occurred when they were looking after him. This includes times when he met with Epstein, and the use of certain airports.

This morning there have been new allegations that during his time as our Trade Envoy, he made expense claims for 'massage services'. I doubt this will have a happy ending.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *3versMan
6 hours ago

glasgow

And we kinda forget that his brother Charlie was fucking Camilla for all those years when married to Di - they're not really a goodstanding family of the community

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ammy57TV/TS
6 hours ago

Stevenage

Who gives a flying....?!?

Can we please have some forensic examination of what deals were made following meetings with this man?

I don't really care who they had sex with it's pretty clear the sex was a sweetener for business deals and information.

Can we focus on that rather than some royal trade envoy who was never lauded for being all that significant?!?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *izzeekMan
6 hours ago

Out & about

It's keeping Mandelson's involvement in all of this out of the headlines.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *opcock58Man
6 hours ago

Helston

Don't imagine randy Andy is getting much sleep at the moment. As mentioned before here those who knew him provided girls to loosen his lips. As they say an erect cock has no principles!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adBod1986Man
6 hours ago

Runcorn


"Who gives a flying....?!?

Can we please have some forensic examination of what deals were made following meetings with this man?

I don't really care who they had sex with it's pretty clear the sex was a sweetener for business deals and information.

Can we focus on that rather than some royal trade envoy who was never lauded for being all that significant?!?"

You should care who they had sex with, especially if the other person was trafficked or underage. It would seem in Andy's case, at least one of them was.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ucker4you80Man
6 hours ago

Chippenham


"Who gives a flying....?!?

Can we please have some forensic examination of what deals were made following meetings with this man?

I don't really care who they had sex with it's pretty clear the sex was a sweetener for business deals and information.

Can we focus on that rather than some royal trade envoy who was never lauded for being all that significant?!?"

I imagine the underage victims (of which there are potentially thousands) very much care about having those responsible brought to justice for sexual crimes, rather than trade deals.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ildwestheroMan
6 hours ago

Llandrindod Wells

Getting thoroughly bored by the whole thing at the moment

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *amie1402Man
5 hours ago

Liverpool

I’ve still not seen one definite report of an under age girl - at least by the laws of this country and most of the western world - that he had sex with

17 is over the age of consent in almost everywhere except Florida, where it is 18

I doubt if he even knew that.

As as for Virginia Roberts she was paid £15000 dollars by Epstein for every time she had sex with Andrew

Five times apparently

Awful lot of money for a 17 year old

Was she trafficked or did she jump at it ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *3versMan
5 hours ago

glasgow


"I’ve still not seen one definite report of an under age girl - at least by the laws of this country and most of the western world - that he had sex with

17 is over the age of consent in almost everywhere except Florida, where it is 18

I doubt if he even knew that.

As as for Virginia Roberts she was paid £15000 dollars by Epstein for every time she had sex with Andrew

Five times apparently

Awful lot of money for a 17 year old

Was she trafficked or did she jump at it ?

"

You obviously don't comprehend the laws of consent, age notwithstanding

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *amie1402Man
5 hours ago

Liverpool

65000 dollars would produce a lot of consent from 17 year olds in this country I expect

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lphageminiMan
5 hours ago

Folkestone


"And we kinda forget that his brother Charlie was fucking Camilla for all those years when married to Di - they're not really a goodstanding family of the community "

All royals have a long history of persistent fornication. Even Lizzy2 is rumoured to have had an affair with the stable manager resulting in Andrew. Maybe that's why the legit royals shun him.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eefandfurMan
5 hours ago

Edinburgh

Simple solution. Stop paying for these inbred degenerates. All of them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adBod1986Man
5 hours ago

Runcorn


"Simple solution. Stop paying for these inbred degenerates. All of them. "

Hear, hear. That includes the "acceptable face" that is William and Kate. Just as complicit and detached as the rest, despite what their PR team tell you.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *izzeekMan
4 hours ago

Out & about


"Simple solution. Stop paying for these inbred degenerates. All of them.

Hear, hear. That includes the "acceptable face" that is William and Kate. Just as complicit and detached as the rest, despite what their PR team tell you."

Really? How complicit and detached?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ocbigMan
4 hours ago

Birmingham


"65000 dollars would produce a lot of consent from 17 year olds in this country I expect "

But then it isn’t really consent is it? The rich, powerful, older man/men who groomed and trafficked you are giving you lots of money, all you have to do is….

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ostie54Man
3 hours ago

Bournemouth

It’s nothing that’s royals haven’t done through history and like stated 17 and 18 is pretty much legal it’s just the trafficking if course

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oxymusicMan
3 hours ago

Cowbridge


"65000 dollars would produce a lot of consent from 17 year olds in this country I expect "

I have absolutely no doubt that this type of reasoning was used by both Epstein & Maxwell in their mitigation.

Repulsive post.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *amie1402Man
3 hours ago

Liverpool


"65000 dollars would produce a lot of consent from 17 year olds in this country I expect

But then it isn’t really consent is it? The rich, powerful, older man/men who groomed and trafficked you are giving you lots of money, all you have to do is…."

Isn’t it ?

Prostitution has been around a long time

Legal if no coercion is involved

Payment doesn’t class as coercion.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rancd2TV/TS
3 hours ago

Wolverhampton

At the moment, all Andrew is guilty of is being a grade one arsehole.

More will come out undoubtedly, but nothing proven yet.

So far the family have done the right thing by cutting him off and saying the law must be followed, wherever that goes.

As for throwing Charles shagging Camilla in, if that was a crime, there would be s lot of blokes on here very very worried.

When bringing responsibility to other members of the family for what is going on with Andrew, since when has it been part of any law that one person is responsible for another adult’s misdemeanours/crimes?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ocbigMan
2 hours ago

Birmingham


"65000 dollars would produce a lot of consent from 17 year olds in this country I expect

But then it isn’t really consent is it? The rich, powerful, older man/men who groomed and trafficked you are giving you lots of money, all you have to do is….

Isn’t it ?

Prostitution has been around a long time

Legal if no coercion is involved

Payment doesn’t class as coercion. "

What is it about vulnerable, trafficked teenagers being paid for by rich, powerful, old men that may just shift the dynamic of consent that isn’t clear ? To label these women as pr0stituted is mind blowing for me, perhaps it’s my understanding thats off here, but if the women were trafficked, taken to another country, or ohhh I don’t know a private island with no means of escape, or no one to run to if you did, or nowhere to go, and then these powerful men make offers, it is hardly an equal consensual situation is it. I suspect that the potential of some violence may have (even if only I the women’s minds) somewhat influenced any decision making.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oxymusicMan
2 hours ago

Cowbridge


"65000 dollars would produce a lot of consent from 17 year olds in this country I expect

But then it isn’t really consent is it? The rich, powerful, older man/men who groomed and trafficked you are giving you lots of money, all you have to do is….

Isn’t it ?

Prostitution has been around a long time

Legal if no coercion is involved

Payment doesn’t class as coercion. "

How dare you link sex trafficked victims to pros when you cannot possibly have any evidence!

The American courts have already convicted Epstein & Maxwell of being sex traffickers.

Why didn’t they give you a call to advocate their defence.

Repugnant.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *opcock58Man
33 minutes ago

Helston

This is going to tumble along for quite some time yet,couple of years i suspect. Drip drip drip.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top