Prince Charles
 

There's a whole lot of media fuss about Prince Charles today in the UK press.

Because of a Court Injunction the British press are not allowed to publish anything about an allegedly scandalous incident.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/1...3,00050003.htm

Nobody in the UK has info on this, but I heard that the Aussie media have published something.

As I am not sure how far reaching this Court Injunction reaches globally please don't post details here..... but I really wanna know what Charlie has allegedly done this time.

Any clues???

I believe they want to have him investigated to see if he had anything to do with the death of princess Diane.

Thanks Cleo. :)

I am shocked ........ allegedly.

Charley
 

We managed to find out what Charlie has allegedly done but living in the UK not sure if we can say. Cleo your way off.

I don't really keep up on these things. I was just repeating what I watched on Larry King the other night when he had her butler on his talk show.

tropica :)

I am about to PM you.

On CNN this morning.. some reporter from London said.. the entire world will know before UK will know..

which of course will make us American Scandal Loving Hoes stay glued until we find out..

hmmmm Camilla's really in drag???

|jester|

OOOOHHHHH.. i just heard from my pal in amsterdam.... he said he read Sunday that one of the Royal butlers was caught in bed with one of the Royal cousins.. (male/male) and now Charles came out with the statement that it was him...but it didn't happen..

The Sun *tee hee hee*


that really makes one wonder..since the rumor is that Harry isn't his.. *thank gawd they both look like Diana*..

Lock Down the Palace closets.. you don't know who could Cum out.. LMAO..

wonder if Charlie will do content shots???

This is being treated as the top news story of the day by the UK media. But how can they call this a story without there being some kind of content to it???

Charles has denied something which we didn't know anything about in the first place.

That's like knocking on your neighbours door and saying....

YOU: Hello, I just wanna say that I didn't do it.
NEIGHBOUR: Didn't do what?
YOU: It doesn't matter what I allegedly did, because I am denying it before the rumours start.
NEIGHBOUR: So now I wanna know what you did.
YOU: I'm sorry but I am taking out an injunction to stop anyone finding out what it was I allegedly did.

And the psychiatrists say that I'm fuckin' crazy!!! |crazy|

Update.....

As far as I can tell, from the masses of message boards, news groups and other news sources I have read today, plus a couple of people I bumped into in the supermarket, and now docholly.....

Allegedly gay sex is a popular sport in central London. Nothing new or shocking about that..... but if you happen to be a certain individual, this could turn into a slight problem.

You non-americans...
Prince Charles is being accused of ass fucking a male servant.

Nothing quite like "Freedom of the Press"

You see folks....... Jim is free to say that.

But I cannot.

Just part of the reason we jumped on those big boats and came here and kicked some British ass :)

When did butt fucking become world news???

Personally I don't care who's poop shoot he sticks his tube steak in as long as it is not my butt.

So Urb what happens if you talk about this? I mean like does the Queen herself come over and spank you?

|Jim actually you do remind me of an historical figure.......

Cleo, I ain't into all that spanking....... we just have very stiff libel laws over here.

Hmm sounds like soon there will be Prince Albert and Prince Charles in the can |jester|

Who cares!

YAWWWWWWWWWN!

|goodnight

DD

The queen does not spank you but you can be hanged for treason. We have such crap laws over here. It is the only thing you can be hanged for. Not only that but the libel laws do cover charlies butt. (excuse the pun). |lightsabe

Well thank god, if there is such a thing, that my ancestors came to the new world so that I have the freedom to talk about anybody's butt, or other body parts, that I want to.

Can you imagine if it was illegal to talk about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski? What kind of craziness is going on over there? It's a new century....you should be able to express an opinion in Great Britain.

UK newspapers are still too chicken shit to print anything. :(

Basically at a time when the more fundamentalist bigoted sections of the Anglican Church of England are foaming at the mouth with the ordination of a gay bishop in America, it would be very amusing if the future Keeper of the Anglican faith (as the monarch is always the head of the English Church) were to swing both ways. :)

The issue here is as Jim & Cleo are saying..... WHERE is our freedom of information here? The British Press are gagged. :(

Ah, well you Brits have always been into B&D |escape|

I didn't know that until I heard about the Prince fucking some male servant in the ass. I mean, I know, legally...our press can print anything as long as it is true without trouble. But, I never knew there was a reason for our founding fathers to come up with that part of the "Bill of Rights". And, I would have thought that by now, the Brits would have adapted the same thing.

It was funny watching the Today show where, the US reporter could talk about it and all the British reporter could do was nod or shake his head no :)

And, if Prince Charles likes to fuck men in the ass, that is his business. But, for it to be illegal to talk about it is crazy. There are a lot of things I like about Great Britain but this is surely not one of them.

Man this is better than watching Benny Hill reruns |jester|

okay firstly..we have the internet too so it isn't like people don't know what the rumours are meant to be.

Secondly, every country has libel laws. In this one anyone can apply for a court injunction. In the States you can get gag orders too.

Thridly, the person who is said to have made these claims is known to have mental health issues and it is widly thought that these claims aren't exactly true.

Lastly, most people really couldn't care less.

I've searched the net and I still can't find any details of what this story is about.

The main thing bugging me is the freedom of speech issue.

Details of the affair have been published in a Scottish newspaper, which is not subject to the same legal restrictions as newspapers in England and Wales.

"Mental health issues" could mean anything. 1 person in 3 suffers from some kind of "mental health issue" at some time in their life. It could be anything from mild depression, right up to being a raving sociopath.

well, they had an injunction and then the injunction was partially over turned ..which is why we know the name of the servant.

It is a libel issue, not a Royal issue. Anyone can get such an order if a judge rules in your favour. It does help to have the money to do it but you can and people do.

Trust me, they will print it. They are just waiting for someone in another country to so that they can report it as something someone else said. That way they are in a little bit less legal hot water when the alligations prove to be unfounded and the libel lawsuit starts.

This is what I don't get...
It was OK to talk about affairs with Diana and affairs with the Prince so...how is this different? Is it because he may have done something illegal? Is that what it is...you can't talk about the Royal Family having illegal dealings?

And...is it only the royal family that this applies to? The start of the newscast I saw was "There is a story about the Royal Family that is so bad, it is illegal to talk about it". And then the US reporter started talking about Prince Charles fucking some guy in the ass. And like I said, the British reporter could only nod or shake his head.

Probably done as protection against multi-million dollar law suits that the Vatican is now paying..

..good thing there wasn't Electronic Media in the 16, 17 and 1800's over there.. what a "jolly good" show that would have been..

Of Course the church of England was started so Henry VIII could have more than 1 wife, be they from divorce or beheading.. and certainly the double standard applies as didn't Edward VIII give up the throne for Wallis Simpson because she was divorced, not because she was American? How does Charlie plan to slide Camilla in, as his royal consort???

Adult webmasters view being bi or gay as a content opportunity.. the rest of the world is still pretty much Homophobic. Quite frankly i think his male lover, Michael Fawcett looks a hell of a lot better than Camilla.

the Sun posted an article about how Camilla had lost her Champion in the palace when Fawcett left the Prince's service.. perhaps a 3some was more likely!!

Here's the Sun article with the Timeline:

Timeline

I guess Charlie didn't like looking across the breakfast table at Harry and seeing the eyes of his ex-wife's lover staring back at him, so Harry was shipped to a Sheep station in Oz. Must be to prepare him for his Military Service that is coming up.

|rasta|

The big difference is that the Diana affairs were fact, whereas this is currently just speculation. Plus, Charles is next in line to the throne and Diana wasn't. I think if/when the UK press can find a way to substantiate the rumours they will have a field day.

Also, the difference between this and, say, Clinton, is that Clinton was elected but Charles will be the next hereditary monarch. If it had been an elected official - Blair for example - then I'm sure the story would already be all over the Sun/Mirror/News of the World, which are basically the UK equivalents of the Enquirer type of publication.

The Royals I am thining sitcom all the way :)

We've already got a sitcom called "The Royle Family" :)

http://www.phill.co.uk/comedy/royle/

I think it would make a great reality show here in the US let see we had the prince of beverly hills lets see how about the pumping prince |jester|

also, as was just pointed out on something I was listening too, it isn't because of Charles that things can't be said. It is because of the other man..he is the one that took out the injunction. Which has meant that the Royals themselves can't say anything in public until it is dealt with by the courts.

So, it is a 'normal' joe silencing the Royal family.

Forget the fluff Urb :) you will find a few others they don't want you to know either here http://www.gregpalast.com/