Matthew Steeples wishes readers a very MERRY Christmas and also reminds that Jeffrey Epstein is a bit like that bauble on the tree that didn’t hang itself and suggests that the proverbial turkey Jeremy Clarkson should perhaps get a pass (though not a pardon)
Those wishing you a “very happy Christmas” as opposed to those conferring on you a “very merry Christmas” today should be placed in their correct contexts. Quite innocently, you may not have ever considered such, but it must be made clear that these both kindly sets of well-wishers belong to two very distinct tribes.
The happy first are most probably a little more ‘woke’ and perhaps a little more ‘politically correct’ in their views on life. They’ll also most likely be found sipping a tomato juice than hitting the rum Hunter S. Thompson-style today. The merrier lot will likely be straight on the vodka without any form of nuisance known as a chaser.
Popularised after the publication of Charles Dickens’s A Christmas Carol in 1843, merry is considered by some a word “more befitting in the spirit of Christmas than the word happy.” Others, including even the Oxford English Dictionary, have suggested happy is still as relevant in expressing “inner emotional state” and suggest that merry is too “active and possibly even raucous.” Clearly, whoever wrote that can be noted as probably being more like The Grinch in any room in Britain and beyond today.
Elsewhere this afternoon, as the likely somewhat merry royal family – including the rotten ratbag who paid £12 million to a woman he’d never met, Prince Andrew, and even his feckless live-in ex-wife Fergie also, live-it-up at Sandringham with the new King – it must be remembered that there will be a less than merry, but very much grasping pair whose absence will be very much noted.
Like Jeffrey Epstein, who in proverbial bauble-like fashion didn’t happily hang himself on the Christmas tree, the non-presence of the always-unhappy Duke and Duchess of Sussex will very much be the elephant in the room for the House of Windsor today. That this condescending couple decided to turn Christmas 2022 into a continuation of the war-of-words caused by Jeremy Clarkson’s contentious column is one thing, but that they decided to stamp both their own families good names in the mud once again is most definitely quite beyond unacceptable.
And now, with that, I’m off for a merrywhisky Macdonald. A very merry Christmas to you and yours and a very merry Christmas to the House of Windsor, the Markle family and Jeremy Clarkson also. May the turkeys of times passed now please be merrily pardoned.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.
Pictured Top – A mockup of a bauble depicting the truth of the Jeffrey Epstein ‘suiciding’; Jeremy Clarkson as Santa with the turkey that clearly will be occupying his room as many continue to call for his sacking.
King Charles III danced with Anne Frank’s step-sister, Eva Schloss, 93, in London last week during a celebration of Hanukkah, the Jewish wintertime festival. In doing such his positivity shone through and it marked a charming move as his reign well and truly will begin in 2023.A bitter was meanwhile recently named after the new King’s eternally miserable son recently. Featuring an image of Prince Harry’s face and launched after his noxious Netflix nonsense aired, the 3.9% “weak” beer was mocked as being just like its nauseous namesake.Yesterday, prior to her 61st birthday today, Ghislaine Maxwell’s unnamed spokesperson supposedly told the ‘DailyMail.com’: “Her spirits are holding up well, as you might expect of an innocent woman.” As she rots in a Florida jail today, she might now consider the need to begin to name names if she wants any prospect of her sentence being reduced coming to fruition. Pictured here with her pension pot plundering papa and the late Queen, here is a woman whose birthday today will be neither ‘happy’ nor ‘merry.’
Matthew Steeples asks: “What happened to fact-checking?” in the wake of “berk on a bicycle” Jeremy Vine quoting a fake Twitter account as being that of an ex-Tory MP on his Channel 5 current affairs show
“Berk on a bike”Jeremy Vine is one of those Marmite-like individuals people either love or hate; there’s no John Major “grey area” about him, but what this former Radio 4 Today presenter is meant to be, at the very least, is at least of not-brain-stir-fried.
Clearly illustrating his own lack of ability to spot irony and his Channel 5 current affairs research team’s complete ineptness at the key journalistic requirement to perform a bit of ante-hoc fact-checking, yesterday Vine decided to quote a “guy called Sir Michael Take and he’s apparently an ex-Tory MP” to his live audience.
Without immediately adding that this was very clearly a parody account that most definitely is named in honour of a ‘Mickey Take’ (or a bit of “taking the Michael”) had previously made a fool of a MailOnline journalist, Vine proceed to share ‘Sir Michael’s’ tweet. The alleged “former Conservative MP for Dorset East’s” missive read:
“Our old boys’ dinner at The Ritz has been cancelled because of the Rail Strike. Usually we meet up & raise money for our old school. Thanks to Mick Lynch & his cronies this won’t happen. A public school is now without vital funds & some poor elderly men missing pals to talk to.”
Later, returning to his ever and deservedly growing Twitter following, ‘Sir Michael’ responded:
“Very pleased to see my common sense opinions about The Rail Strike were featured on @theJeremyVine’s TV Programme this morning. I’m delighted that viewers of @JeremyVineOn5 were able to listen to my views on all of this industrial action.”
Meanwhile, as Jeremy Vine took to Twitter also and tried to pretend he’d not been had and called what he’d quoted “an out-of-context tweet,” veteran journalist Tim Walker observed: “There so many people working in television with absolutely no sense of humour whatsoever.”
I’d go further and herewith share my very favourite quote from the 1999 Anthony Minghella film The Talented Mr Ripley. In it, detective MacCarron observes of the situation he’s been sent to Venice to deal with: “See – in America, we’re taught to check a fact before it comes a fact. We’re taught to nose around…” Brown-nosing bore Jeremy Vine and his team jolly well ought to take stock of MacCarron’s sage advice and backtrack on the bloody baloney.
If you’d like to see further buffoons in the media having a bit of the Michael taken of them, follow ‘Sir Michael’ on Twitter at @MichaelTakeMP.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.
With over 73,000 followers on Twitter, ‘Sir Michael Take CBE’ is someone halfwits in the media have come to take seriously. He’s fooled the ‘MailOnline’ and Channel 5’s ‘Jeremy Vine’ show to date. Who’s next on his agenda?On Wednesday, ‘Sir Michael’s’ Twitter account shared: “Our old boys’ dinner at The Ritz has been cancelled because of the Rail Strike. Usually we meet up & raise money for our old school. Thanks to Mick Lynch & his cronies this won’t happen. A public school is now without vital funds & some poor elderly men missing pals to talk to.” The missive has been retweeted over 1,800 times and liked 11,900 times also. In spite of having had over 2,500 comments, Jeremy Vine’s Channel 5 team, didn’t even bother to check its actual authenticity. What a bunch of berks!In October on Twitter, editor of ‘The Steeple Times’ Matthew Steeples shared a tweet about of ‘fake news’ shared by the ‘MailOnline’s’ Elizabeth Haigh after she got taken in by Sir Michael Take and shared a bullsh*t story he’d made up about sewage and effluence. Accompanying a quoted tweet, Steeples observed: “The @MailOnline has been caught out by a spoof Twitter account. Sir Michael TAKE certainly TOOK some pillock on the paper. Retraction? Apology? I doubt it. #fakenews #dailymail #mailonline #youvebeenhad.”In ‘The Talented Mr Ripley’ – the film based on Patricia Highsmith’s brilliant 1955 psychological thriller novel – the detective character, MacCarron is a man who shows he bases everything he does on fact-checking. It is a great shame that the modern media seem to prefer to take an alternative approach.
Twitter reacts to Channel 5 being subjected to a ‘Mickey Take’…
Matthew Steeples suggests that though Lady Susan Hussey should not have said what she did, the pile on against this 83-year-old has been ludicrous given Ngozi Fulani happily attended a reception hosted by the Queen Consort when she previously suggested “Meghan is a survivor of domestic violence from her in-laws;” one of those in-laws is the Queen Consort
Some have claimed “she’s just a silly old bat” whilst others have argued “she’s a racist bigot” of Lady Susan Hussey in the wake of yesterday’s Twitter storm about this octogenarian now former Woman of the Bedchamber to Queen Elizabeth II and now former Lady of the Household under King Charles III.
In fact, I’d counter that Lady Susan is simply an 83-year-old lady who got it wrong, but whose unnecessary but not wanton words are hardly worthy of the media pile-on mostly caused by supporters of the constantly self-publicity seeking Duchess of Sussex.
“You can’t reform this [kind of] bad apple” raged the eternally foaming-at-the-mouth, bombastic bore and leading ‘Sussex Squaddie’ Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu of Lady Susan – who was a key member of the late Queen’s ‘HMS Bubble’ during the 2020 coronavirus lockdown. Whilst this was predictable, was Dr Mos-Shogbamimu accurate in her analysis? The answer is most definitely ‘no.’
Tellingly, in spite of the quick reaction of the royal family to the widow of the late chairman of governors of the BBC Marmaduke Hussey repeatedly insensitively asking a domestic abuse campaigner named Ngozi Fulani where she was from, this ‘story’ has taken on a life of its own. In reality, though the media would do better to focus on more pressing issues affecting the nation, such as the cost-of-living crisis, here most definitely is something that the ‘woke’ wanted us all to get very worked up about instead.
In a statement after immediately forcing Lady Susan to “step aside,” Buckingham Palace shared:
“We have taken this incident extremely seriously and have investigated immediately to establish the full details. In this instance, unacceptable and deeply regrettable comments have been made.”
“In the meantime, the individual concerned [Lady Susan Hussey] would like to express her profound apologies for the hurt caused and has stepped aside from her honorary role with immediate effect. All members of the Household are being reminded of the diversity and inclusivity policies which they are required to uphold at all times.”
Previously, now “left insulted” Miss Fulani – who curiously went on Good Morning Britain this morning to pipe on about an incident she’d yesterday suggested she’d rather forget – has bizarrely also been known to have had a pop at the very lady who hosted the event she attended yesterday, Camilla, Queen Consort of the United Kingdom. In March 2020, the Sistah Space founder very pointedly tweeted of the Duchess of Sussex’s stepmother-in-law:
“I admire Meghan for speaking out. According to clear definition, it seems Meghan is a survivor of domestic violence from her in-laws.”
What on earth then was Ngozi Fulani – whose parents were born in Barbados and who herself is British – doing spending two hours attending a reception hosted by Camilla, Queen Consort? Why on earth would she want to ‘hang out’ with someone she has previously effectively suggested to have been an abuser?
Equally, given it was such a “trauma” for Miss Fulani, why doesn’t she now put an end to this frankly ludicrous Twitter storm and let a long-serving 83-year-old simply retire peacefully to the sidelines?
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.
Pictured Top – Lady Susan Hussey (right) with King Charles III and his wife at Royal Ascot in happier times.
The Right Honourable The Lady Hussey of North Bradley GCVO – who is played by Haydn Gwynne in ‘The Crown’ – should not have spoken to Ngozi Fulani in the way she did at this week’s reception, but the reaction to her remarks has been somewhat of a ludicrous Twitter storm and media pile-on at a time when the nation should be focused on the cost-of-living crisis and other problems. Astoundingly, Miss Fulani has previously “accused the royal family of domestic violence against the Duchess of Sussex” and of the Windsors once remarked: “I admire Meghan for speaking out. According to clear definition, it seems Meghan is a survivor of domestic violence from her in-laws.” Why then, did she even wish to go to a reception with one of those abusive in-laws, Camilla, Queen Consort of the United Kingdom? In spite of claiming that she didn’t want an 83-year-old woman to be subjected to abuse and ridicule, the ‘Sistah Space’ founder opted to name her on social media channels including Twitter. Hardly the actions of someone not trying to garner publicity for herself and who’d rather forget an incident supposedly unpleasant to her.Predictably, the eternally angry ‘Shouty Shola’ (AKA Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu) took to Twitter to try to make out this ‘Twitter storm’ was actually all about the Duchess of Sussex. The keyboard warrior spouted complete nonsense in remarking: “Meghan Markle and Prince Harry told you of racism in Royal Family & household. But she was vilified, abused & violated for speaking the truth. Ngozi Fulani’s experience with Lady Susan Hussey wasn’t isolated, one off or a ‘bad apple’ at Buckingham Palace. You can’t reform this.”Equally predictably, the Duchess of Sussex ensured her “supporters were whipped into a frenzy Wednesday” by getting a mate of hers, Minnesota professor of American studies and feminism Duchess Harris, to tweet a picture of herself with her son, Archie, and her mother, Doria Ragland standing on. The Sussex Squad certainly do love a ‘pile on’ and clearly the wicked wench formerly known as Meghan Markle did what she always wanted to do to Lady Susan Hussey – serve up a dish of revenge cold.
Matthew Steeples asks: “As highly respected forensic scientist Philip Boyce finds yet more serious flaws in the evidence that led to Jeremy Bamber’s conviction, could this result in this 61-year-old finally being exonerated?”
This weekend, BBC Expert Witness star Philip Boyce threw another spanner in the works of Essex Police and those trying to thwart a reinvestigation of the October 1986 conviction of Jeremy Bamber of the killings of his adoptive parents, his adoptive sister and her two sons at White House Farm in Tolleshunt D’Arcy, Essex in August 1985.
In a feature interview shown on YouTube just days after another programme, White House Farm murders – Is Jeremy Bamber Innocent?, also aired its first of three episodes also, Boyce revisited a key piece of evidence used by Essex Police that helped them in the case they built against a then 24-year-old, who is now aged 61 and who has spent 36 years of his life in prison.
In a 1:58-minute clip during an experiment in which he used an identical AGA to that that was in White House Farm in 1985, highly respected forensic scientist Boyce shared:
“Today, I was looking at the possibility that the burnmarks on Nevill Bamber’s back had been produced by part of the AGA whenever it was on full heat.”
“Thankfully, we actually got an AGA that is exactly the same model. As was in White House Farm back then.”
“Based on what I’ve actually done today using pig skin and effectively burning pig skin against the front of the AGA there is the definite possibility that the burn marks on Nevill’s back could have been made with the AGA.”
“… It’s very important in that it actually shows that there’s a possibility that Nevill Bamber’s body was actually physically moved after the police actually arrived at the scene and effectively the evidence was changed for want of a better word.”
Going further, in comments to The Mail on Sunday yesterday, Philip Boyce confirmed his report has been submitted to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) and added:
“This could indicate that Nevill Bamber’s body had been moved somehow to the position he was photographed in after he was burned by the Aga. The photographs of his body shown to the jury… may have been misleading.”
The paper’s Scott Jones and Glen Owens then concluded:
“The tests were filmed by documentary-maker Matt Harris, who said one photo also reveals another key detail. ‘The kitchen door is closed, with two chairs placed in front of it, he said. ‘This is the only door leading into the kitchen from outside, and this is where Essex Police entered… [they] were the only people who went into White House Farm that day and could have closed that door and placed those chairs in that way.’”
“Speaking last night from HMP Wakefield, Bamber said: ‘To restage the crime scene is a moral sin. These things should have been explored 37 years ago. It’s not a case of me proving or getting out on a technicality. I would like to prove my innocence through facts.’”
To learn more about the Jeremy Bamber Innocence Campaign – whose supporters number former MP Andrew Hunter, barrister Flo Krause, human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell and magistrate Lady Waterlow – and to join those supporting demands for a reinvestigation of this case, click here.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.
Interview with Philip Boyce, first aired on YouTube by the ‘Officialbambervideo’ account, November 2022:
Aired first yesterday, Sunday 27th November 2022, on YouTube, a short 1:58-minute interview with Philip Boyce, a forensic scientist specialising in firearms who has also recently featured in the BBC’s Expert Witness series, was filmed in West Sussex in July 2022.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYRNlHqjOaA
‘White House Farm murders – Is Jeremy Bamber Innocent? (Episode 1)’ by ‘True Crime Newsquest,’ first aired on YouTube, November 2022:
The first part of a new three-part mini-series available on YouTube aired on the 22nd November and has been watched 2,200 times to date. It lasts 13:25-minutes, is presented by Mark Williams-Thomas and features interviews with Newsquest reporter Tom Dalby and polygrapher Terry Mullins. The next eposide airs tomorrow, Tuesday 29th November 2022.
Interview by Shaun Attwood and Matthew Steeples with Yvonne Hartley and Philip Walker, first aired on YouTube, September 2021:
Watched over 44,000 times to date, this podcast has attracted over 950 comments also. It lasts 1:45-minutes and features two of the leading supporters of Jeremy Bamber casting “considerable doubt” on how his conviction came about.
Some questions Essex Police plainly need to answer regarding this case… Including some new ones that could lead to to the exoneration of jailed for 36 years and still protesting his innocence Jeremy Bamber
What happened to a suicide note allegedly left by Sheila Caffell that was initially referenced by police and then disappeared?
Why did Sheila Caffell not have rigor mortis when officers discovered her body?
Why was blood still gaping from Miss Caffell’s body when it was found?
Why was the bible found by the body of Miss Caffell not used in evidence and why was that bible destroyed by police also?
Why are there different accounts about how many bodies were discovered on the ground floor of the farmhouse?
How could Jeremy Bamber be the killer if police officers repeatedly detected movement inside White House Farmhouse whilst he was stood with them outside?
Why was the silencer supposedly used in the shootings not discovered immediately when police entered the residence?
Why did scratch marks supposedly made in the kitchen of the house by that silencer not appear in the first photographs taken at the crime scene? How were they actually made in order that they appeared in later imagery?
How could Jeremy Bamber be the killer if he made a phone call from his Goldhanger home 3.5 miles away moments after his father had called police from White House Farmhouse to say that his daughter had “gone berserk” with a gun?
Why did Essex Police hide hundreds of thousands of pages of key documentation including police logs and crime scene photographs from being shared during both the 1986 trial and the 2002 appeal?
Could the AGA be responsible for the burn marks on Nevill Bamber and if so, why did Essex Police move bodies at the crime scene?
Why did Essex Police so push the narrative of Jeremy Bamber’s former lover and known thief Julie Mugford given they knew shew had been sold her story for £25,000 to the now defunct News of the World with the payment to be received only if he was convicted?
Why did Essex Police not investigate why other relatives supported the narrative of Jeremy Bamber as killer given those very relatives only benefitted financially based on Jeremy Bamber’s ultimate conviction?
The scene of the murders during the night of 6th and 7th August 1985: White House Farm, Pages Lane, Tolleshunt D’Arcy, Maldon, Essex, CM9 8AA.Jeremy Bamber’s adoptive parents, Ralph and June Bamber, and the grave where they are buried. Could he finally be exonerated of their killings in 2023?Yesterday, Scott Jones and Glen Owen of ‘The Mail on Sunday’ reported on Philip Boyce’s discoveries. They ran with the headline: “Will THIS photo clear Jeremy Bamber of the notorious White House Farm murders 37 years on? Forensic scientist says the image suggests a body was MOVED by police before official snaps were taken.”Mr Boyce – who has worked on high profile investigations as a forensic scientist for over 30 years –claimed that Essex Police could have “changed the evidence” in the case by moving the body of Nevill Bamber before official photographs of the scene were taken. If true, the three burn marks on Mr Bamber’s back would not have been inflicted by the hot end of a rifle but instead by his dead body being left lying against the AGA and its hot handles instead causing the burns. In photographs taken by police, shown to the trial jury at Chelmsford Crown Court in 1986, Nevill Bamber was instead seen slumped over an overturned chair in the kitchen.On 24th November 2022, the new True Crime Newsquest mini-series ‘White House Farm murders – Is Jeremy Bamber Innocent?’ featured in an article by Jody Doherty-Cove. In it, Tom Dalby, a reporter on the Colchester Gazette and Essex County Standard, is quoted to say: “The support Bamber gets in prison – in 2017 he told us he [got] about 100 letters per week from supporters, 500 Christmas cards. There is this level of support he still gets from people locally… There are people who are very clear he is innocent.” In the programme also, former detective Mark Williams-Thomas quotes Essex Police Acting Chief Detective Michael Ainsley as having written in 1985: “On my return from annual leave, I obviously enquired as to the situation with the murders… [I was assured] the evidence indicated that Sheila [Caffell] was responsible.”In April 2020, ‘The Steeple Times’ reported that “further questions about the conduct of Essex Police [were] raised as it [was] revealed they destroyed the bible, nightclothes and pillows that were found with the victims at White House Farm on the night of the 1985 murders. The 20th March 2000 letter from the Criminal Cases Review Commission to Glaisyers Solicitors LLP and Sheila Caffell is truly a shocking example of a bungling balls-up.The clearly left open bible next to the body of Sheila Caffell was photographed by Essex Police, but was then not submitted as evidence and destroyed. A supposed suicide note also disappeared and countless other evidence was clearly tampered with. “What motivation did those processing the scene have to do this?” is a question that Essex Police and prosecutors have repeatedly failed to answer.Veteran human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, a longtime supporter of Jeremy Bamber, tweeted about the case on 7th March 2021. He remarked: “Is this [the] greatest miscarriage of justice?” and previously in 2017, he wrote to the then chief constable of Essex Police, Stephen Kavanagh, to highlight the “grave injustice” of the force’s withholding and destroying evidence with regard to the White House Farm murders.Jeremy Bamber’s legal team have alleged that the senior investigating officer in the case, Michael Ainsley, took documents relating to the case to his home in 2010 and destroyed them in spite of “knowing there was an active appeal underway.” Surely, now, it is time for a reinvestigation of this case at the very least if faith in the British justice system is to be retained.
Matthew Steeples questions if it is right for the former Prime Minister Theresa May to presumably taking wads of wonga to give a speech to the World Travel & Tourism Council in Saudi Arabia given the World Economic Forum ranked the country 141 out of 149 countries on gender equality
On Thursday, an email pinged into my inbox from a London based organisation I’d never previously heard of – the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC).
In it, the WTTC bragged that they were announcing she who viewed it naughty to go “wandering in wheat fields,” Theresa May, as its “keynote speaker for its Global Summit in Saudi Arabia.”
Of the presence and participation of Lady May – as the queen of “Brexit means Brexit” is now known after her “I do the traditional boy jobs by and large” husband was made Sir Philip for being “her rock” and “political services” – at this event in a country known best for its appalling human rights record, the WTTC did not declare what she would be paid or who was paying her.
Neither also did this organisation reference their thoughts on the regime running Saudi Arabia but instead, Julia Simpson, WTTC president and CEO, pontificated:
“Theresa May has a long-standing interest in the environment and as Prime Minister, she launched the ‘25 Year Environmental Plan’ to tackle issues such as plastic waste. In 2019 she formally committed the UK to achieving ‘net zero’ emissions by 2050, making Britain the first major economy to do so.”
“During the pandemic, Theresa May was concerned about the uncoordinated global response, and she showed great political leadership calling for international cooperation based on evidence.”
“Our event will bring together many of the world’s most powerful leaders in our sector to discuss and secure its long-term future, which is critical to economies and jobs around the world.”
Between 1st February 2021 and 31st January 2022, Lady May unabashedly claimed £143,008.98 ($168,982, €165,017 or درهم620,587) in expenses on top of her MP’s salary and in July 2021, Insider reported that she had earned £1,861,776 ($2.2 million, €2.1 million or درهم8.1 million) for speeches since leaving Downing Street in July 2019. Who’d have thought that anyone would want to give money to hear this “wandering warbler” bang on about anything, but hey, quitting frontline politics has most certainly brought this bland, boring woman a very, very pretty pay packet.
By email to the communications manager for the World Travel & Tourism Council, Felix Parker-Smith, whose contact details were listed alongside the press release, I subsequently requested clarification. My brief missive read:
“My questions are: 1. What fee is Lady May being paid for this appearance/speech and by what means will she be travelling to give this speech? Who is paying her fee and travel expenses?”
“2. What is the view of Lady May on human rights issues and abuses in Saudi Arabia?”
“3. Will Lady May be raising these well documented abuses in Saudi Arabia during her speech?”
“4. Does Lady May view it to be ‘sustainable’ to be travelling, presumably by aircraft, to give such a speech? Could she not have given such a speech via Zoom?”
“I would most certainly write about this and will look forward to answers to all four of my questions prior to doing so.”
Parker-Smith, without acknowledging who is actually giving the former Prime Minister a bag of cash, curtly answered:
“As these are questions for Mrs May, I’ve forwarded your email to our contact.”
By return, given Parker-Smith’s clear lack of willingness to address the issues raised, I responded:
“Thank you for forwarding on to Lady May’s representatives though surely the World Travel & Tourism Council must be the body that hired Lady May (I believe that to be her correct title given her husband’s elevation).”
“I would like to ask your organisation directly: 1. Does the World Travel & Tourism Council have any statement to make about the matter of Lady May being hired and why they chose her?”
“2. Given the then Mrs May’s involvement in bringing about the disaster for British tourist businesses that is Brexit, what influenced your organisation’s choice of the very woman who implemented ‘Brexit means Brexit’?”
“3. If the WTTC is not paying Lady May, who is funding this Member of Parliament on a trip outside of her constituency remit?”
Tellingly in his next email, Parker-Smith attempted to dodge another bullet and concluded:
“We will not be making further statements beyond our press release.”
“However, on background, I can confirm that previous Summits have attracted world leaders such as Barack Obama, Tony Blair and Emmanuel Macron. Alongside Ban Ki-Moon, Theresa May has held a prominent role on the world stage and has been invited in this capacity to speak about her experiences and insight for the global travel and tourism industry.”
As of 10.30am on Monday 21st November, no reply explaining who would be paying Lady May had been received by The Steeple Times from utterly anybody.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
In May 2018, Theresa May was quite rightly slammed by ‘The Sun’ for elevating Lady Meyer, the wife of the now croaked cretinous creep and well-known “red socked fop” Sir Christopher Meyer, to Baroness Meyer of Nine Elms in the London Borough of Wandsworth. The paper raged of the appointment of her “best pal” and quoted Darren Hughes of the Electoral Reform Society as calling her appointment “beyond a joke.” The “Chanel-clad” old boiler with a love of charity cash collecting tins got a jolly lovely bonus – peers get around £30,000 in expenses and attendance fees annually; nice work if you can get it.Lady May MP is often to be found dining with her ‘Garden Gnome-like’ hubby Sir Philip in Malik’s Tandoori House in Cookham, Berkshire. Here, the owner, is pictured serving her and also posing with another regular, her constituent and convicted paedophile Rolf Harris and his wicked wife Alwyn Hughes. Whether she’s ever invited her mate Baroness Meyer down for a ‘nosh-up’ there remains unknown.In February 2019, ‘The Steeple Times’ reported that a “plainly insane Tory donor” had spent £75,000 to spend an evening with Theresa May. Worse still, someone paid £175,000 for a set of four posters signed by this tedious twerp.
What else has Theresa been pocketing from her ‘Magic Money Tree’?
An MPs salary of £84,144 ($99,400, €97,100 or درهم365,100) plus expenses “to cover the costs of running an office, employing staff, having somewhere to live in London or their constituency, and travelling between Parliament and their constituency.”
An £85,000 per year ($100,400, €98,070 or درهم368,800 per year) salary from the Office of Theresa May Limited “until further notice” for just 24 hours work per month or just 288 hours work per year.
Honorary life membership of the Carlton Club.
‘VIP treatment’ at Heathrow Airport, valued at £4,200 a pop, at least 14 times totalling at least £58,800 ($69,500, €67,900 or درهم255,100).
Substantial rental income from a flat in London owned jointly with her husband.
A discount card from Amanda Wakeley, “which has the potential to be of registrable value.”
Matthew Steeples slams Daphne Barak’s toady prison ‘interview’ with Ghislaine Maxwell and calls it out as nothing but yet more PR peddling for the mucky madam sex trafficking nonce
Arrogant and audacious sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell simply can’t or simply won’t pay her lawyers. Her mouthy brother, Kevin, and her much quieter estranged husband Scott Borgerson simply can’t or simply won’t pay her lawyers either. All three of them are clearly liable.
This tiresome trio owe at least £3 million ($3.4 million, €3.4 million or درهم12.3 million), but with assets galore – amongst them two estates in New Hampshire and money hidden in everywhere from La Hogue to Panama – here is a threesome whose deviancy when it comes to hiding money clearly knows no bounds.
Just like ‘Kev’ and ‘Ghiz’s’ pension pot plundering papa, the money of the Maxwell family seems to come and go rather too conveniently – with the grubby groper having claimed to be able to pony up £25.5 million ($28.5 million, €29.3 million or درهم104.7 million) in assets when she sought and failed to get bail in 2019, yet now pretending to have nowt, zero, zilch – but now, with interviews published today in both The Sun on Sunday and The Mail on Sunday, the audacity of this wicked wastrel woman is yet again shown more clearly.
Aided and abetted in what Radio 4’s Broadcasting House this morning quite rightly called out as a “wildly sympathetic to Ghislaine Maxwell” pair of interviews by Hillary Clinton chum Daphne Barak, the nasty nonce tested the waters for a plea deal if she does name names. Epstein’s ex-lover banged on about ‘Killary’s’ blowjob-under-the-desk loving hubby Bill and Prince Andrew and how she was upset at the damage her association has done to them, but failed to show an ounce of contrition towards the victims she so grubbily groped.
Whilst Barak – an Israeli-American journalist-filmmaker who met the ‘Bouncing Czech’s’ deviant daughter some 30 years ago – has most definitely gotten herself a ‘scoop’ that Evelyn Waugh would be proud of, it is a scoop that she failed to turn into something of any real use. Here, I would argue, is a writer who deserves anything other than contempt and criticism.
After all, one key point remains: Once ultra-connected, though now deservedly in-prison-yet-still-able-to-get-her-PR-out, Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking victims in December 2021, but not one of those she has sex trafficked to has been brought to justice still in October 2022. Why didn’t the overtly sympathetic Daphne Barak ask the anything but contrite cretin Ghislaine Maxwell about that? How very convenient that this friend of 30 years was the one brought in to do yet another PR hatchet job as the grubby groper seeks the first of no doubt many appeals. Long may this evil woman rot.
Pictured top – The mucky madam with Jeffrey Epstein at a memorial lunch to her evil father (left) and in prison in October 2022. How the mighty deservedly fall.
Daphne Barak living it up with Hillary Clinton – a woman she references as having “hosted” and “supported the presidential bid” of. Here is a ‘journalist’ whose close connections clearly muddy her mind when it comes to interviewing her subjects. Why didn’t this ‘journalist’ ask mucky madam Maxwell about ‘Killary’s’ husband taking at least 27 flights on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Lolita Express’ and his convicted sex trafficker co-collaborator attending Chelsea Clinton’s wedding? Curious that; very curious indeed.
In a poll issued via Twitter this morning, Matthew Steeples asked: “What is mucky madam Ghislaine Maxwell upto with her ‘Mail on Sunday’ and ‘The Sun on Sunday’ interviews with Daphne Barak? This joke of a journo clearly allowed her to spin whatever narrative she wanted and why did the authorities even allow such audacious antics?” As of 11.30am, the majority of respondents plumped for the answer that she is “as arrogant as ever.”
Key quotes from ‘interviews’ that are more PR peddling spinning than journalistic digging and key questions that arise as a result of this disgraceful PR peddling even being allowed
Today’s toady interviews in both The Sun on Sunday and The Mail on Sunday by a ‘journalist’ who seems to like associating with the mates of the mucky madam Maxwell have been rightly called out as “poor” and “nothing but PR.”
Key questions that arise as a result are:
Why did the American authorities allow a prisoner to give such interviews so soon after her conviction?
Did the authorities not consider the impact such interviews would have on the victims of this convicted sex trafficking nonce and grubby groping abuser?
What is the agenda of Daphne Barak and what involvement did Kevin Maxwell and his siblings have in setting up these interviews?
Did PR peddlers for the mucky madam – such as Brian Basham, Jay Beecher and Ross Gow – have any involvement in the bringing about of these interviews?
Why did this so-called ‘journalist’ not ask anything about what this mucky madam feels about the impact of her actions on her many victims?
Why did this so-called ‘journalist’ not ask anything about this mucky madam’s secret marriage to Scott Borgerson in 2015?
Why did this so-called ‘journalist’ not ask why Ghislaine Maxwell – someone she’s associated with for at least 30 years – hasn’t paid off her debts to her lawyers?
Some quotes from Barak’s clearly biased in favour of assisting Jeffrey Epstein’s one-time-lover and co-abuser’s interviews follow:
Of Prince Andrew:
“I accept that this friendship could not survive my conviction. He is paying such a price for the association. I consider him a dear friend. I care about him.”
Of President Bill Clinton:
“It was a special friendship, which continued over the years. We had lots in common. I feel bad that he is another victim, only because of his association with Jeffrey. I understand he, like others, can no longer consider me as a friend.”
Of Jeffrey Epstein:
“I said in my court statement that meeting Epstein was the greatest mistake of my life. And obviously, if I could go back today, I would avoid meeting him, and I would make different choices.”
Of President Donald Trump:
“We knew each other and mingled in the same circles, in New York, Palm Beach. I was very grateful when he wished me well after (the arrest). He got bad media for it, but he dared, while others didn’t.
“I was honoured he remembered me. Well, he is known to say what he thinks. It gave me a big boost.”
Of other friends and former friends:
“There are people who have disappointed me and there are people I’m surprised have not, you know, been a little more proactive. I completely understand people have livelihoods to protect… children to protect.”
“But having said that, there are people who have stood by me privately. Quite a few, actually, and I’m extremely appreciative of their private support.”
“I have friends who I have literally known my entire life since I was at kindergarten. It’s good to know there are people out there who know who I am, really.”
Of that now infamous photo with Prince Andrew and the then Virginia Roberts at 44 Kinnerton Street, Belgavia in March 2001:
“This photo is not real… There was never an original one produced.”
Twitter reacts to Daphne Barak’s toady interview with croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s one-time lover
Names in the firing line most obvious from Ghislaine’s filthy ‘Little Black Book’ as she seeks to minimise her sentence
Ghislaine Maxwell has until June 2023 to cooperate and thus “name names” if she wishes to see her sentence reduced.
Those Scott Borgerson’s estranged wife has been known to associate with – none of whom The Steeple Times is suggesting at this time as having been involved in any of her crimes, but whom she might seek revenge against for not offering her what she might consider enough public or even private support – include:
Alexander Acosta
Woody Allen
Ehud Barak
Tom Barrack
Scott Borgerson (estranged husband, facing legal woes in connections with the non-payment of his wife’s vast legal bills)
Jean-Luc Brunel (deceased)
Naomi Campbell
President Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary – who the mucky madam clearly is trying to butter up via her interviews with Daphne Barak
Alan Dershowitz
Glenn Dubin and his wife Eva
Bernie Ecclestone
Bill Gates
Geordie Greig
Countess of Iveagh (AKA Clare Guinness, Clare Hazell)
President Donald Trump and his potentially trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein wife Melania – who the mucky madam clearly is trying to butter up via her interviews with Daphne Barak most definitely
Ivana Trump (deceased)
Chris Tucker
Harvey Weinstein
Leslie Wexner
Prince Andrew, Duke of York and his live-in ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York – who the mucky madam clearly is also trying to butter up via her interviews with Daphne Barak
Ghislaine Maxwell and Scott Borgerson – Known assets that should be sold (and one that has already been sold) that should fund the payment of the lawyers they hired with the help of Kevin Maxwell
Linked by their mutual love of submarines and protecting assets and their identities in a secretive fashion, Scott Borgerson and his now estranged wife – it is not known if they have yet divorced – are known to have most recently together been connected with the following properties:
The Phippen-Smith House (AKA ‘Tidewood’), 301 Summer Street, Manchester-by-the-Sea, Cape Ann, Essex County, Massachusetts, MA 01944, United States of America
Currently for sale for £6.52 million ($6.95 million, €7.28 million or درهم25.52 million). Purchased by a limited liability company controlled by Ghislaine Maxwell’s then “secret husband” Scott Borgerson for £2.294 million ($2.450 million, €2.564 million or درهم8.998 million) on 30th June 2016. During the transaction, decidedly deviant Ghislaine Maxwell is said to have used the pseudonym ‘Jennifer Ellmax.’
Tuckedaway, 338 East Washington Road, Bradford, New Hampshire, NH 03221, United States of America
Purchased for £1.004 million ($1.070 million, €1.121 million or درهم3.932million) in a cash transaction on 13th December 2019 by a shell company formed on 18th November 2019 named Granite Realty LLC.
Approached recently for comment as to the current status of this property, a representative selling agent at that time, Four Seasons Sotheby’s International Realty, cryptically responded: “We have no information on this property and unfortunately have no contact information for the owner. Sorry we could not be of more help.”
44 Kinnerton Street, Belgravia, London, SW1X 8ES, United Kingdom
Purchased by Ghislaine Maxwell in 1997 for £290,000 ($310,000, €324,000 or درهم1.1 million) on 22nd January 1997 and sold by her representatives on 19th April 2021 for £1.75 million ($1.87 million, €1.96 million or درهم6.87 million).
Matthew Steeples suggests that Christian Brückner being charged with further alleged sexual offences should not be taken as meaning he will be charged with anything connected to the murky case of the ‘disappearance’ of Madeleine McCann
Convicted German rapist Christian Brückner is most certainly a maniac and a monster, but that does not prove he took Madeleine McCann on the evening of 3rd May 2007.
Now, following news that the 45-year-old has been charged in Germany with five further alleged sexual offences, the media has gone into a frenzy and again brought up this villainous man’s alleged involvement in a crime that of which the McCann case prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters yesterday told MailOnline:
“We hope that we can put all our energy into the McCann case once the other investigations have ended.”
“But we don’t know how it will end, for the time being it is still open, maybe we can bring a charge, maybe we can’t, but we are still hopeful.”
Cleared in February 2021 of the May 2015 kidnapping of Inga Gehricke – a 5-year-old dubbed “the German Maddie” – of the latest developments, Brückner’s lawyer Friedrich Fulscher bit back:
“This has come as a complete surprise to me and my client.”
“The charges appear to be based on statements from two dubious witnesses and on video evidence that no one has been able to find.”
“These same two people have also given evidence in the McCann case and I have not even been shown their testimony.”
“Part of the evidence in the case of the rape [of the 20-year-old woman] is that the attacker had a large tattoo or birthmark on his leg and the prosecution knows full well my client has neither.”
“To bring charges the prosecutor has to be convinced the information in the case is reliable and relevant and we believe it is not. This is not a fair investigation.”
Previously of what I personally believe to be an example of the ‘distraction technique’ being at work in a case where over £14 million of British public money has been wasted on the search for a child very unlikely to ever be found, Fulscher has added:
“The public prosecutor’s office has thoroughly examined connections to the Inga case and determined there isn’t even an initial suspicion against my client.”
“My client hasn’t been charged with anything [connected to Madeleine McCann]. [Christian Brückner] is under investigation and under suspicion. I have to assume that they do not have any concrete evidence.”
“I think that’s quite typical for us Germans. We think we are something special, at least in Europe, and think we can do things better than other nations. We will see if that is the case, but I don’t think so.”
Pictured top (left to right) – Convicted rapist Christian Brückner, father of ‘missing’ child Gerry McCann and his daughter Madeleine.
Christian Brückner with Nakscije Miftari.
The Crimes of Christian Brückner (AKA ‘Christian B’ and Christian Brueckner)
Jailed in 2019 for seven years for the rape of an elderly American woman in her home in Praia da Luz in 2005, Brückner continues to deny being the perpetrator and claims he was convicted after a “bungled investigation.”
In June 2020 – at the height of the coronavirus lockdowns – Brückner was named by German police as “probably responsible for Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.” He has not been charged in the time since.
In April 2022, Portuguese police made him “an arguido – a ‘named suspect’ or “formal suspect’ – who is treated by Portuguese police as more than a witness but has not been arrested or charged.”
Brückner now also stands accused of three cases of rape and two cases of child molestation, the most recent in 2017 when he is alleged to have exposed himself in front of a group of children.
Of this The Guardian reported yesterday: “Two of the charges are based on the testimonies of two former acquaintances of Brückner, who described having seen the sexual assaults on a video camera and videotapes they stole from his house in 2006. The videotapes that show these acts have never been found, and the identity of the two females described by the witnesses remain unknown.”
Missing Madeleine – Questions STILL without Answers in A Truly Murky Case
Many questions about what happened on the evening of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann remain. Some that have been highlighted by the press and discussed online include:
Why did Kate McCann refuse to answer 48 questions put to her by the Portuguese police?
Why were certain records of phone calls on the evening of the disappearance “whoosh-clunked” from the memories of the phones of Mr and Mrs McCann and the ‘Tapas 7’?
Why were relevant mobile phone records never handed over to the authorities in spite of them potentially being useful to the search?
Why did the couple not use the babysitting service on offer in the holiday resort on the evening of 3rd May 2007 when they went out on the razzle dazzle with friends?
Why was the door to the apartment – which opened directly onto a public highway – left unlocked with three children aged under three years old alone inside?
Why did a British sniffer dog sense the smell of a corpse in a cupboard in the apartment from which Madeleine McCann disappeared?
Why did a sniffer dog also supposedly sense the smell of a corpse in a vehicle hired by the couple a month after the disappearance of their daughter?
Why did the McCanns repeatedly try to discredit the work of the sniffer dogs and their handlers?
Why did Mr and Mrs McCann go jogging and play tennis in the days after their daughter’s disappearance?
Was it acceptable for Mr and Mrs McCann’s mortgage to be paid by the fund established to search for their missing daughter?
Why have the McCanns attempted to ‘gag’ anyone who disputes their version of events – most especially Gonçalo Amaral?
Why given over £14 million has been spent on this search to date has nobody come forward with any sighting of ‘missing’ Madeleine McCann given the rewards on offer?
More Murky Matters McCann – Madeleine McCann on a tennis court prior to her ‘disappearance’ in May 2007 and her parents out running near the resort she ‘disappeared’ in the days after her ‘disappearance.’More Murky Matters McCann – Gerry McCann enjoying a round of golf (left); Kate McCann at Downing Street, London hobnobbing with Missing People CEO Martin Houghton-Brown, the Duchess of Gloucester and the then Home Secretary Theresa May on 23rd May 2012 (right).Amongst those to have supported the McCanns have been especially gobby attention seekers including job wrecker Sir Richard Branson, “Chanel-clad” charity begins at home tin banger Baroness (Catherine) Meyer and her pompous arsehole late ex-husband Sir Christopher and job wrecking grabber Sir Philip Green.
More Murky Matters McCann – In December 2017, when £11 million of British taxpayers’ money had been spent towards the search for ‘missing’ Madeleine McCann, 86% of viewers of ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’ said the public purse should cease to fund the investigation. Now, in October 2022, with that sum now well in excess of £14 million (aside from the millions in private money also), it is time to allocate resources to the search for missing people who actually can be found, we would suggest.
As the sickening Sacklers deservedly get booted out by the V&A, Matthew Steeples suggests it is time that the media called out some other equally obnoxious ultra-high-net-worth families
The billionaire Sackler family, just like the equally rich and equally repugnant billionaire Ecclestones, are self-entitled and think they’re above the rest of the planet. Now, in the case of the first of this noxious number, it’s been proven, they’re not.
Whilst the skinflint, coffin dodging, Putin apologist 91-year-old Bernie Ecclestone now awaits trial for an alleged worldwide fraud against HMRC for allegedly not declaring £400 million ($447 million, €458 million or درهم1.6 billion) in assets, the disgrace of what the MailOnline call the “controversial US art philanthropists the Sackler family” is finally quite rightly complete with news that the V&A have torn the name of these rotten ratbags off the V&A’s Centre for Arts Education and its Exhibition Road courtyard.
Alongside their Purdue Pharma company now being bankrupted after their pushy salespeople targeted doctors and forced thousands into addiction to Oxycotin, the Observer yesterday reported that these vile ultra-high-net-worth (UHNW) profiteers have been declared “a stain on those cultural institutions that accepted them.”
Of their decision, a museum spokesperson stated:
“The V&A and the family of the late Dr. Mortimer D. Sackler have mutually agreed the V&A’s Centre for Arts Education and its Exhibition Road courtyard will no longer carry the Sackler name.
“Dame Theresa Sackler was a trustee of the V&A between 2011 and 2019, and we are immensely grateful for her service to the V&A over the years. We have no current plans to rename the spaces.”
“All donations are reviewed against the V&A’s gift acceptance policy, which includes due diligence procedures, considers reputational risk, and outlines best practice within the sector.”
Former chancellor of the exchequer and chairman of the museum George Osborne added that “ending the link with the Sacklers after 30 years would ‘move the museum into a new era.’” He tellingly, however, neglected to mention whose wonga they’d be taking in its place.
Artist Nan Goldin – who “led a group of 30 demonstrators in placing bottles of pills and red-stained ‘Oxy dollar’ bills on the V&A courtyard’s tiled floor” which concluded in a “die-in, lying down to represent the 400,000 worldwide deaths they blame on opioid dependency” – responded:
“We all choose our fight and this is mine… It’s amazing. I was shocked when I heard it. The V&A has been the last bastion of holdouts in terms of those supporting the Sacklers. It’s a big victory for people who go to museums and do not want to see the name of the family who helped ignite the overdose crisis.”
Now, today, with the Sacklers severed and sacked, it is time for others of their ilk to be turfed out with the trash. Those that profit from the misery others and praise the likes of Putin and Prince Andrew deserve all they get; it is time for such disgusting people to move from social sorts to the realms of social pariahs.
Pictured top (left to right) – Twisted late opioid flogger Mortimer D. Sackler KBE (1916 – 2010), the V&A’s entrance on Cromwell Road and alleged fraudster and coffin dodger Bernie Ecclestone with Prince Andrew, a man who paid circa £12 million to a woman he never met after going to a park to cut ties with a man he most definitely knew to be a convicted paedophile.
In February 2020, ‘The Steeple Times’ reported that the “self-entitled drug flogging billionaires Mortimer D. A. and Jacqueline Sackler were rightly roasted by ‘Guest of a Guest’ for their (latest) bleating email.” At the time the female half of this cretinous couple whinged in an email to their few remaining friends: “[OxyCotin destroyed] our work, our friendships, our reputation and our ability to function in society… And worse, it dooms my children. How is my son supposed to apply to high school in September? … We would love to see you either in Gstaad, if you are here or nearby, or elsewhere in Europe (taking advantage of the ease of travel here vs ours in NYC).” Here, indeed, was just one example of how truly awful this family truly is.In 2017, Nan Goldin protested with around 30 others at the Victoria & Albert Museum due to their involvement with a family who profiteered from the misery of others through the OxyContin drug they peddled. She has now rightly declared victory with the removal of their rotten names from the South Kensington museum.The Sacklers paid a fortune to the Victoria & Albert Museum over the years in order to get their grubby name all over it. The Exhibition Road courtyard dedicated to them will now be thankfully cleansed of connection to these vile profiteers from the pain of others.Alleged fraudster Bernie Ecclestone likes to hang out with happy-to-hang-out-also-with-a-paedophile Prince Andrew. He also likes to share comments in support of the tyrannical virtual dictator Vladimir Putin. On occasion, he’s called him a “first class guy” and also said Hitler was “able to get things done… He wasn’t a dictator.” Of Donald Trump, he’s commented: “He has done a lot of good things for the world” but of black people, he suggested: “In a lot of cases, black people are more racist than what white people are.” Here, in fact, one can just observe a rotten piece of toerag with a mind clearly stir-fried.
Matthew Steeples suggests that though people should have the right to protest they and the police also must exercise the responsibility of restraint – especially in the context of the rotten rabid ratbag Prince Andrew
Yesterday in Parliament Square, Westminster a protestor held up a blank sheet of paper. He got short shrift from a clearly over zealous policeman who demanded his details for potentially “offending somebody.” Of this, on Twitter, The Guardian’s recently appointed political editor Pippa Crerar observed: “Just mad.” She was clearly right.
Meanwhile on Edinburgh’s Royal Mile at around 2.50pm as the Queen’s funeral cortège progressed, a 22-year-old named Rory “heckled” a plain-clothed Prince Andrew as he passed and yelled out: “Prince Andrew – Andrew: You’re a sick old man.” He was pushed to the floor and then arrested by police for a breach of the peace as members of the public immediately shouted him down by responding with cheers of “God Save The King.” The rights and wrongs of this were clearly a greyer area.
Analysing reaction, Sky News host Niall Paterson shared: “I am feeling very uneasy about people being arrested for shouting at *Prince Andrew*” whilst trade unionist Howard Beckett described what occurred as “anti-democratic.” Former Chief Crown Prosecutor for the North West of England Nazir Afzal went further and concluded: “There are 12 million reasons why [Rory] did what he did” referencing the alleged settlement between the late Queen’s second son and the woman he allegedly never met, Virginia Roberts Giuffre. Others argued contrary points including: “Right words, wrong place” and “Arresting hecklers is grotesque.”
Whilst the no-longer-so-grand Duke of York – a man, after all, who has never actually been convicted of a crime in a court of law – is most definitely entitled to mourn the loss of his beloved mother, the presence anywhere of a man who paid a sum estimated as high as £12 million to Epstein-Maxwell victim Roberts Giuffre will always clearly upset many members of the public.
Tact and understanding is indeed required at this time and though public sentiment rightly has sometimes turned to outrage against an entitled individual whose moral compass is clearly beyond warped, it is also time for some restraint to be shown also by both the police and public also. Dignity and decency must be upheld, but that does not mean that we should ever forget that Prince Andrew opted to stay in the home of a convicted paedophile just weeks after he got out of jail in 2010.
Next, in the weeks to come, as our national period of mourning concludes and King Charles III’s reign truly comes into fruition, it is time for one thing; it is time for the rotten ratbag Prince Andrew to be consigned to history and sent away into permanent exile. This vile piece of toerag must never hold public office of any form ever again.
As the Queen’s cortège moved up the Royal Mile, a member of public shouted at Prince Andrew -‘Andrew you’re a sick old man’, as he walked next to King Charles, Prince Edward & Princess Anne, behind their mother’s hearse. Immediately people shouted ‘God Save the King’ pic.twitter.com/pJAHnjSou4
The heckling of Prince Charles’s younger brother occurred as Queen’s coffin was taken across Edinburgh on Monday. It was immediately met with shouts of “God Save The King” from a crowd mostly furious at the outrage uttered.
In turn, the crowd descended into dragging the protestor Rory to the ground and punches also before the Scottish police intervened.
Spoke to the protestor who was arrested on the Royal Mile today for shouting abuse at Prince Andrew during the Queen’s procession – his name is Rory, here’s what he had to say: pic.twitter.com/8GTwnVGLF7
Called out as a “horror show” and “really creepy” on social media on Sunday after his “touchy-feely” display with his daughter Princess Beatrice, the Duke of York really is an example of someone who simply does not get the fact that his ‘antics’ are considered utterly beyond the pale.
Responses on social media to the Westminster and Edinburgh incidents:
Matthew Steeples suggests that the crazy conspiracy claptrap that has followed in the wake of the death of Her Majesty The Queen and the ongoing nonsense that circulates online about Jeffrey Epstein is exactly that; crazy claptrap
The death of Her Majesty The Queen has shockingly been accompanied by trolls – surprisingly amongst them a Carnegie Mellon University professor named Uju Anya – making vile comments on Twitter suggesting the otherwise much loved by everyone else monarch to be head of a “genocidal empire” and someone who deserved an “excruciating” death.
Whilst this poison was deservedly condemned by amongst others billionaire Jeff Bezos with one word “wow,” that the footballer turned radio pundit Trevor Sinclair thought it appropriate to follow up with: “Why should black and brown mourn?” was beyond shocking. Who on earth do these people – and people with platforms also – think they are and why on earth would they use such a moment to seek to behave like David Icke, for example?
On Facebook it was even worse. Crackpot crazy conspiracy theorists reveled at the news and some even suggested that the “bloodsucking” Queen never actually met Liz Truss (as they believe she died months ago and also questioned the respective heights of King Charles’s mother and the new Prime Minister) at Balmoral last Tuesday. Here, at a moment when most of the world grieved a glorious and remarkable lady, the laughable became lunatics but thankfully their vile nonsense was subsequently called out for what it truly is; nothing but vile and nothing but nonsensical.
“We ALL know the QUEEN’S been dead for a while now… [They] are preparing/Staging for Operation London Bridge is Falling down. There are other Darker schemes inside the Death of one of the world’s most powerful Deep State royal placed systems to COLLAPSE” claimed one Facebook user on 8th September 2022. The same QAnon conspiracy theorist user ludicrously referenced the conspiracy theorist favourite term “white hats” also unsurprisingly. Of it Politifact – which operates with the agenda “we stand up for the facts” – sensibly surmised: “We rate this claim Pants on Fire!”
Elsewhere last week, Lisa Hagen wrote for NPR – the independent, non-profit media organisation that aims to “create a more informed public” – about how “conspiracy theories about Jeffrey Epstein keep flourishing” in spite of his death three years ago in 2019. “His ghost still wanders the dark halls of the Internet,” she opined before turning to theories about “Epstein-related yarn-spinning” that tie in amongst other things Donald Trump, anti-Semitism and “imagined satanic cabals.”
For some Epstein is still alive (highly unlikely), for others he was “suicided” (quite possible and more likely) and for others (if you believe the established narrative) this mendacious monster simply killed himself knowing his days were numbered.
As I have myself repeatedly said, Epstein was an evil man and it was inevitable that he met a sticky end. There is possible conspiracy in that, but that not a single person he and his mucky madam cohort Maxwell sex trafficked women to has not been brought to justice is not a conspiracy, it is, in fact, an outrage and one that still must be corrected.
Whilst the truth can sometimes be stranger than fiction and the handling of the sordid sagas of Epstein and Maxwell most definitely has resulted in many questioning how powerful elites can and are protected, the claptrap that has followed the end of the life of ‘the grandmother to the nation if not the world’ must be treated with the very disdain it truly deserves.
Long live the truth and God save the King.
Pictured top – The late, great Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II at a cabin on her Balmoral estate in Soctland (left) and the late, anything but great Jeffrey Epstein and his wicked wastrel cohort Ghislaine Maxwell sitting on the deck at the same cabin on a separate occasion. Naturally, crackpots have all sorts of stupid theories about this pure coincidence.
Some online have argued that the photograph of the then monarch and her new Prime Minister on Tuesday was a fake. These people have clearly been on the hooch and are clearly crackpot crazy.The tweets of the disgracefully ‘blue ticked’ by Twitter Ugu Anya were utterly outrageous in the death of the Queen. This professor speaks for no one and her attention seeking diatribe deserves to be condemned as poisonous and pathetic. Shame on this scumbag and shame on Carnegie Mellon University for not firing her.Though it is quite plausible that the Ponzi schemer paedophile Epstein did not kill himself but was actually murdered in his cell, those that believe him still to be alive take it utterly too far.
