Aah. So this explains the Beeb documentary.
And why the explosive news on Prince Andrews got shafted to redirect to sensationalist stories in India:
so Andrews could use the media blitzkrieg/inversion to reinvent himself as a saviour instead of a sex-slave trafficker/user.
1. First, the other news on Andrew as visible today, to make sure no one imagines anything but PR and the royalty's high profile whisked their prince away from getting the same justice as his paedo-buddies:
2. Here the magicians show us hints of "How they did it". And how they're making even more money out of it too.
The trick is called:
"How to deflect from Prince Andrew onto India and use the projected torture porn on India to make money for industry in the UK. All at the same time." Neat huh?
The photo of Indian women fawning over their Phileas Fogg accused-rapist and sudden saviour Prince Andrews is a bit too much for me: May have to go throw up soon.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3045301/Prince-Andrew-s-extraordinary-new-mission-save-teenage-sex-slaves-lurid-accusations-dropped-Duke-acts-save-girls-beaten-starved-forced-sex.html
Wow, the western women kept as sex slaves by Andrew and his gang of paedo-buddies don't get a future.
But every alien can take refuge in India to play Phileas Fogg and immediately reinvent themselves as 'heroes' after their reputation has been exposed I mean has been stained by accusations of paedophilia and sex-slavery.
I'm not surprised so many western paedophiles are packed off to Indian christian orphanages to pray I mean prey on abducted Hindu children.
Considering even their royalty is in on this game.
More western "charity" for the 3rd world.
Oh, and mustn't forget the silver lining: not all the Brits commenting at the dailymail link fell for Prince Andrew's attempt to erase the memory of the sordid details of his actions, or for his sudden and incredibly convenient transformation (for PR purposes, as they too could tell) into the 'hero' of "the sad story of the sexual exploitation of women".
3. Here, I think the full details of how Virginia Roberts' claims against Prince Andrew/Duke of York got struck out from the lawsuit against the Prince's paedo-buddy Epstein is quite interesting.
As I understand from reading the following, the telling bit is that her case against Prince Andrew - and those of others who came forward about a paedophile/sex-slave ring of many more high profile persons - were all deemed *irrelevant* to the case under consideration against Epstein in particular. And *that* is why their allegations were struck off.
telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/11520495/Prince-Andrew-sex-abuse-allegation-thrown-out-by-judge.html
The accusations involved "the Duke and several prominent Americans". Wouldn't be surprised if it goes all the way up to the top - the courts too - and that's why their accusations were disallowed. Seems to me like it was a case of mutual backscratching.
These western women seem to have hit the uh... glass ceiling (of another type): Never accuse the top dogs of the western patriarchy. Even the western courts won't allow you to make your case then or be heard or your words to be recorded. They will silence you in a very accomplished manner.
The PR person for Prince Andrew has issued thanks on his behalf to
- his highly placed contacts/co-conspirators in the US for "letting it go" (someone pulled some strings, or there merely was mutual blackmail: "Now, now, US Supreme Court judges, if I'm going to hang for this, I'm going to make double sure your being party to the same crime is made public too, so you'll be going down with me." No wonder it all magically evaporated.
- to India, their 3rd world ex-colony that never de-colonised apparently and keeps welcoming the predators with open arms as if these were their saviours. The prince wishes to state: "Thanks India/Losers for being a 3rd world sinkhole. Without you, I'd have had few other places to go to to show off how superior I am and to condescend on the locals and make myself look good thereby. So Thank You India for being stuck in a 3rd world state compared to "this, our realm of England", since my kind can always make use of/turn to your 3rd world state at such moments as this when our own sexual-predations are being scrutinized by our people, so that by our playing at being charitable all the way in 'oh so much worse off India, that it would be shameful and morally criminal for any Brit to recollect our own 1st world crimes and miseries in the comparison", people will stop noticing what I have done to western underage women and instead will compare me to the torture porn we've created on the 3rd world/India, and will come to see me as the do-gooder by means of projected comparison."
Apparently the tactic works on some. Both in England and in its Indian colony. (Let's call India what it is: a British colony still. If you act like one, you're going to get treated like one. Obviously.)
4. INSERT:
Related to both this post and especially post 28, which was also on the subject of how rich and powerful 1st world persons seem to get away with a lot of their tyranny against their own women. Post 28 mentioned the case of a Greek man in the UK accused of raping a British woman, and who reversed the charges onto her, and she killed herself. There is a pattern to this. But a more recent case follows. Note that others have observed a certain prejudice to favour perpetrators when they're in power:
smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-barristers-slam-pru-goward-for-criticising-glowing-references-for-rapist-luke-lazarus-20150407-1me2ti.html
And the news was on how Prince Andrew uses India - recently reinvented for this very purpose as "the worst place for women in the world" - to deflect from the allegations against him* and reinvent himself too: as a saviour of Indian women victimised by sexual predators.
(* which allegations were, at best, only struck off the record in the US courts because the allegations against Andrew and others in the sex-slavery ring didn't concern the case against Epstein. At worst, high-placed people have been pulling strings to save their own skins along with Andrew - since prominent Americans were also accused, apparently. As indicated in some the Telegraph article above).
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3045301/Prince-Andrew-s-extraordinary-new-mission-save-teenage-sex-slaves-lurid-accusations-dropped-Duke-acts-save-girls-beaten-starved-forced-sex.html
Need to get some Indian documentary makers to interview the women - Miss Roberts and the other one - whose testimonies against Andrew and others were asked to be struck off (essentially for not being on-topic).
I'm sure Indians (minus the ELM etc) are a fair minded people: willing to hear their side of the story too.
After all, the British monarchy may not be able to yell "off with their heads" anymore against any whose existence suddenly becomes a problem or nuisance to them, but they still have sufficient power and money to hire people to make problems go away and can silence accusers easily by calling in favours of other highly-placed people. Same goes for the new royalty of the US - the nouveau riche and powerful - who can also make problems posed to them by poorer people "go away" or be brushed under the carpet.
And why the explosive news on Prince Andrews got shafted to redirect to sensationalist stories in India:
so Andrews could use the media blitzkrieg/inversion to reinvent himself as a saviour instead of a sex-slave trafficker/user.
1. First, the other news on Andrew as visible today, to make sure no one imagines anything but PR and the royalty's high profile whisked their prince away from getting the same justice as his paedo-buddies:
Quote:HUGE Loss For Prince Andrew's Pedophile Pal Jeffrey Epstein In ...The Royal Press *and* the handpicked agents working for the BBC and the church.
RadarOnline-17/04/2015
Prince Andrew's pedophile pal Jeffrey Epstein suffered a HUGE legal loss in his quest to keep details of his plea deal sealed. The U.S. District ...
PRINCE ANDREW PILLORIED BY QUEEN OVER SEX SCANDAL
The National Enquirer-17/04/2015
Explore in depth (3 more articles)
Judge Does Not Allow Prince Andrew's Accuser to Join Suit
New York Times-10/04/2015
A federal judge in Florida has ruled that a woman who claimed she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew, Alan M. Dershowitz and others ...
Prince Andrew Faces Wrath of Queen Elizabeth Over Underage Sex ...
Celebrity Dirty Laundry-18/04/2015
Prince Andrew got extraordinarily lucky with the underage sex scandal, but he also had the royal press office and lawyers working tirelessly on ...
2. Here the magicians show us hints of "How they did it". And how they're making even more money out of it too.
The trick is called:
"How to deflect from Prince Andrew onto India and use the projected torture porn on India to make money for industry in the UK. All at the same time." Neat huh?
The photo of Indian women fawning over their Phileas Fogg accused-rapist and sudden saviour Prince Andrews is a bit too much for me: May have to go throw up soon.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3045301/Prince-Andrew-s-extraordinary-new-mission-save-teenage-sex-slaves-lurid-accusations-dropped-Duke-acts-save-girls-beaten-starved-forced-sex.html
Quote:Prince Andrew's extraordinary new mission to save teenage sex slaves: After THOSE lurid accusations in US are dropped, the Duke acts to save girls beaten, starved and forced into sexThe rest at link. Mainly advertising/deflection on how great the charity is that the British prince supports/is using as his lifeline to reinvent his character. It's all about how 3rd world women suffer more from sexual crimes committed against them by the Indian "system" of "tradition", than 1st world women suffered from Epstein and Andrews and - as seen in the article to follow - prominent highly placed Americans.
Prince Andrew has changed the fate of 100 vulnerable women in Calcutta
They were rescued from brothels, child labour and trafficking by charity
Key to Freedom was launched by the Duke after a trip to India in 2012
He recently denied allegations he had slept with a sex slave in America
The accusations, made by Virginia Roberts, have been struck from court records
By Sarah Oliver For The Mail On Sunday
Published: 00:20 GMT, 19 April 2015 | Updated: 12:10 GMT, 19 April 2015
It's hard to know quite what motivated the Duke of York to rescue teenage sex slaves in India at the same time he faced damning allegations that he had slept with one in America. But one thing is for certain: it definitely took guts.
(No, it didn't take guts. It took a carefully planned PR campaign, combined with gutter inspection on India. Not to mention pulling some powerful strings in the US to get the courts to make it all "go away".)
With a remarkable initiative combining the unlikely bedfellows of fashion and compassion, it can be revealed that Prince Andrew has personally changed the fate of more than 100 vulnerable young women in Calcutta.
Rescued from brothels and domestic servitude, child labour and human trafficking, the girls have been taught tailoring and silk printing through a charity called Key to Freedom.
Moved: Prince Andrew during his visit to an Indian refuge in 2012, which inspired him to form the charity
+4
Moved: Prince Andrew during his visit to an Indian refuge in 2012, which inspired him to form the charity
Their kimonos, duster coats, pyjamas, scarves and make-up bags are sold online and on the British High Street by Topshop, with the proceeds paid back to the women as a salary.
What makes this new mission all the more compelling is it has emerged just months after Andrew was mired in allegations that he had enjoyed an improper relationship with American ââ¬Ësex slave' Virginia Roberts, who had been working for his former friend Jeffrey Epstein, an American billionaire.
The claims, furiously denied by the Duke, have now been struck out of American court records, effectively clearing his name.
(But see next news item.)
He was inspired to launch Key to Freedom after visiting a girls' refuge on an official trip to India.
He came up with the idea less than an hour after leaving a home run by the Women's Interlink Foundation and swiftly donated ã10,000 seed capital to fund the first bales of silk.
(It took more planning than his one hour 'decision' to reinvent his persona from sexual-predator to women's saviour: the beeb drama was sent out at an opportune moment to pave the way for his 'transformation' in the public eye.
And a 1st world prince donates all of "10,000" pounds. Geez.)
Speaking exclusively to The Mail on Sunday yesterday, the Duke said: ââ¬ËI was incredibly impressed with the work of the Women's Interlink Foundation during my Diamond Jubilee visit to India in May 2012.
ââ¬ËI could see that it would be possible to complement [founder and chairman] Aloka Mitra's important work in supporting vulnerable young women to develop a skill to become economically active by helping find a route to market for their products. It is incredible to see what the team has achieved.
Roberts had been working for Andrew's former friend Jeffrey Epstein, an American billionaire (pictured together above)
[...]
Wow, the western women kept as sex slaves by Andrew and his gang of paedo-buddies don't get a future.
But every alien can take refuge in India to play Phileas Fogg and immediately reinvent themselves as 'heroes' after their reputation has been exposed I mean has been stained by accusations of paedophilia and sex-slavery.
I'm not surprised so many western paedophiles are packed off to Indian christian orphanages to pray I mean prey on abducted Hindu children.
Considering even their royalty is in on this game.
More western "charity" for the 3rd world.
Oh, and mustn't forget the silver lining: not all the Brits commenting at the dailymail link fell for Prince Andrew's attempt to erase the memory of the sordid details of his actions, or for his sudden and incredibly convenient transformation (for PR purposes, as they too could tell) into the 'hero' of "the sad story of the sexual exploitation of women".
3. Here, I think the full details of how Virginia Roberts' claims against Prince Andrew/Duke of York got struck out from the lawsuit against the Prince's paedo-buddy Epstein is quite interesting.
As I understand from reading the following, the telling bit is that her case against Prince Andrew - and those of others who came forward about a paedophile/sex-slave ring of many more high profile persons - were all deemed *irrelevant* to the case under consideration against Epstein in particular. And *that* is why their allegations were struck off.
telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/11520495/Prince-Andrew-sex-abuse-allegation-thrown-out-by-judge.html
Quote:Prince Andrew sex abuse allegation thrown out by judge
US district judge rules Virginia Roberts's claim against Duke of York be struck out as he refuses her attempt to join lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein
Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts in 2001
By Philip Sherwell, New York
7:05PM BST 07 Apr 2015
A US judge has ruled that sex allegations made against Prince Andrew in court papers filed in Florida must be struck from the public record.
The Duke of York and Buckingham Palace strenuously denied the allegations in the court documents that he sexually abused a 17-year-old girl who claimed she was used as a sex slave.
Kenneth Marra, the federal district judge in West Palm Beach, has now rejected a bid by two women to join a lawsuit against the US government over its handling of the case of Jeffrey Epstein, a billionaire financier and convicted paedophile.
He ordered that the claims made by one of the women involving the Duke and several prominent Americans in the filings lodged by her lawyer must be removed from the court record.
The Duke was never accused of any offence and he strenuously denied the claims of the woman, who was referred to in court papers as Jane Doe 3 but who later identified herself as Virginia Roberts, now 31. A Palace official confirmed that the Prince has been briefed on the latest developments.
Prince Andrew denies sex allegations with underage teenager
She was one of several women who claimed that they were sexually abused as underage teenagers by Epstein and passed for use as sex slaves by his acquaintances at parties at various locations, including his Palm Beach mansion and a private Caribbean island.
Ms Roberts and the second unnamed woman wanted to join a lawsuit filed by two other alleged victims against the US government to force the re-opening of a non-prosecution deal struck by federal prosecutors with Epstein.
Under the agreement, the investment banker pleaded guilty in 2008 to state sex offences and served 13 months of an 18-month jail sentence - a much shorter term than he could have faced in a federal prosecution.
Judge Marra has now ruled that too much time has passed since the original lawsuit for the two new women to add their names to the case.
He also said that sex abuse allegations had no bearing on the lawsuit's goal of reopening the Epstein non-prosecution agreement.
"The factual details regarding with whom and where the Jane Does engaged in sexual activities are immaterial and impertinent to this central claim," the judge wrote. "These unnecessary details shall be stricken"
If the Epstein case is reopened, he could face a federal prosecution and the US government could be forced to pay the women damages. The financer has already reached out-of-court financial settlements with dozens of victims.
The Duke was not a party to the court action and was not given the opportunity to rebut the allegations through the court.
Buckingham Palace broke with its usual policy of refusing to comment on current court cases because of the nature of the allegations and their emergence in the public domain in the court filings in late December.
"This relates to long-running and ongoing civil proceedings in the US to which the Duke of York is not a party," a spokesman said.
"As such we would not comment on the detail. However, for the avoidance of doubt, any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue"
The Duke also referred to the allegations in a brief comment at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January. "I just wish to reiterate and to reaffirm the statements which have already been made on my behalf by Buckingham Palace," he said. "My focus is on my work"
The Duke of York will spend this week privately before resuming public engagements on Monday.
The accusations involved "the Duke and several prominent Americans". Wouldn't be surprised if it goes all the way up to the top - the courts too - and that's why their accusations were disallowed. Seems to me like it was a case of mutual backscratching.
These western women seem to have hit the uh... glass ceiling (of another type): Never accuse the top dogs of the western patriarchy. Even the western courts won't allow you to make your case then or be heard or your words to be recorded. They will silence you in a very accomplished manner.
The PR person for Prince Andrew has issued thanks on his behalf to
- his highly placed contacts/co-conspirators in the US for "letting it go" (someone pulled some strings, or there merely was mutual blackmail: "Now, now, US Supreme Court judges, if I'm going to hang for this, I'm going to make double sure your being party to the same crime is made public too, so you'll be going down with me." No wonder it all magically evaporated.
- to India, their 3rd world ex-colony that never de-colonised apparently and keeps welcoming the predators with open arms as if these were their saviours. The prince wishes to state: "Thanks India/Losers for being a 3rd world sinkhole. Without you, I'd have had few other places to go to to show off how superior I am and to condescend on the locals and make myself look good thereby. So Thank You India for being stuck in a 3rd world state compared to "this, our realm of England", since my kind can always make use of/turn to your 3rd world state at such moments as this when our own sexual-predations are being scrutinized by our people, so that by our playing at being charitable all the way in 'oh so much worse off India, that it would be shameful and morally criminal for any Brit to recollect our own 1st world crimes and miseries in the comparison", people will stop noticing what I have done to western underage women and instead will compare me to the torture porn we've created on the 3rd world/India, and will come to see me as the do-gooder by means of projected comparison."
Apparently the tactic works on some. Both in England and in its Indian colony. (Let's call India what it is: a British colony still. If you act like one, you're going to get treated like one. Obviously.)
4. INSERT:
Related to both this post and especially post 28, which was also on the subject of how rich and powerful 1st world persons seem to get away with a lot of their tyranny against their own women. Post 28 mentioned the case of a Greek man in the UK accused of raping a British woman, and who reversed the charges onto her, and she killed herself. There is a pattern to this. But a more recent case follows. Note that others have observed a certain prejudice to favour perpetrators when they're in power:
smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-barristers-slam-pru-goward-for-criticising-glowing-references-for-rapist-luke-lazarus-20150407-1me2ti.html
Quote:NSW barristers slam Pru Goward for criticising 'glowing' references for rapist Luke Lazarus
Date
April 7, 2015
Rachel Olding
Reporter
Jailed: Luke Lazarus outside court during his sentencing hearing for raping a woman near his father's nightclub in Kings Cross. Photo: Janie Barrett
Mike Baird way behind on gender balance
'Was a sick night': rapist Luke Lazarus bragged about taking woman's virginity
Womens' campaigners are urging the Director of Public Prosecutions to review the sentence given to a nightclub rapist as controversy deepens over "glowing" character references provided by some of Sydney's most powerful figures.
Luke Andrew Lazarus, 23, was last month sentenced to a maximum jail term of five years for raping a young woman on her first night out in Kings Cross, then bragging about taking her virginity.
District Court Judge Sarah Huggett described the attack as the "spontaneous and opportunistic" actions of a young man who felt a sense of "power and entitlement" by virtue of his father Andrew's part-ownership of the Soho club.
On Friday, the NSW Bar Association reprimanded Pru Goward, Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, for criticising the high-profile Sydneysiders who provided glowing references for Lazarus after his conviction.
Waverley mayor Sally Betts, South Sydney Rabbitohs chairman Nick Pappas and the honorary secretary of the Honorary Consulate-General of Greece in Brisbane, Tsambico K Athanasas, vouched for his good character in references before sentencing.
A reference from the parish priest at the Greek Orthodox Christian Church of St George, Rose Bay, Father Gerasimos Koutsouras, said Lazarus was innocent and had suffered "an injustice".
(Note the Greek names of each character reference for the rapist: it ain't just the Greek Orthodox Church's priest above who is a member of the Greek Orthodox church, right? I'm sure Luke Lazarus' dad is never behind in his church donations and is an upstanding member of his church, and his son is a faithful too - high chance of that - so it would take nothing for them to insist on character references from their own.)
Ms Goward told Fairfax Media she was appalled by anyone would provide "glowing references" for a rapist.
"Not only does this diminish their standing, it can shatter the confidence of the victim and often discourages them from seeking justice," she said.
However, the NSW Bar Association has slammed the "ill-advised" comments, warning Ms Goward that such conduct might constitute contempt of court.
Junior vice-president of the association Arthur Moses, SC, said those convicted of heinous crimes should be punished but Ms Goward should not be criticising members of the public for providing references in a criminal sentencing hearing.
"No member of the community should be deterred from providing evidence in a criminal matter," he said. "In certain circumstances it may constitute a contempt of court to humiliate or victimise individuals for being witnesses.
"Ministers of the Crown should be mindful that their positions come with both privileges but also obligations to not make comments which may have the tendency to interfere with the proper administration of justice."
Ms Goward said she stood by her comments.
Karen Willis, executive officer of Rape & Domestic Violence Services Australia, said the stoush highlighted issues with the reference system because it allowed rich and powerful people to use their position to argue for better treatment, rather than providing genuine character insights.
She has encouraged the DPP to review Lazarus' sentence, saying the minimum three-year term was inadequate, considering sexual assault is the second most serious crime after murder.
"An Aboriginal man from woop woop can commit the same crime and not command those sorts of references and I think that's problematic," she said.
"We're all equal before the law and the concept someone should get a lighter sentence because of their family and position is not acceptable."
(Meanwhile, in practise, some are more equal than others. :cough: Andrew and gang :cough:
I mean, the telegraph article in point 3 above admitted that the rich and powerful paedophile Epstein just got off easy compared to what he *would* have got, right?
"... a non-prosecution deal struck by federal prosecutors with Epstein. Under the agreement, the investment banker pleaded guilty in 2008 to state sex offences and served 13 months of an 18-month jail sentence - a much shorter term than he could have faced in a federal prosecution."
No low-life criminal living from hand to mouth who did the same thing as Epstein would have been given such an offer/agreement, I'm sure.)
She said courts needed to give equal weighting to references.
"If it's someone who is fairly poor and unconnected and a local footy coach gives a reference, that should hold just as much influence as someone who is really well connected and gets a reference from the mayor or consul-general."
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story was amended to correct the title of Mr Athanasas.
And the news was on how Prince Andrew uses India - recently reinvented for this very purpose as "the worst place for women in the world" - to deflect from the allegations against him* and reinvent himself too: as a saviour of Indian women victimised by sexual predators.
(* which allegations were, at best, only struck off the record in the US courts because the allegations against Andrew and others in the sex-slavery ring didn't concern the case against Epstein. At worst, high-placed people have been pulling strings to save their own skins along with Andrew - since prominent Americans were also accused, apparently. As indicated in some the Telegraph article above).
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3045301/Prince-Andrew-s-extraordinary-new-mission-save-teenage-sex-slaves-lurid-accusations-dropped-Duke-acts-save-girls-beaten-starved-forced-sex.html
Quote:Prince Andrew's extraordinary new mission to save teenage sex slaves: After THOSE lurid accusations in US are dropped, the Duke acts to save girls beaten, starved and forced into sex
Prince Andrew has changed the fate of 100 vulnerable women in Calcutta
They were rescued from brothels, child labour and trafficking by charity
Key to Freedom was launched by the Duke after a trip to India in 2012
He recently denied allegations he had slept with a sex slave in America
The accusations, made by Virginia Roberts, have been struck from court records
By Sarah Oliver For The Mail On Sunday
Published: 00:20 GMT, 19 April 2015 | Updated: 12:10 GMT, 19 April 2015
[...]
It's hard to know quite what motivated the Duke of York to rescue teenage sex slaves in India at the same time he faced damning allegations that he had slept with one in America.
(What do they mean it's "hard to know". It was so obviously a combined exercise in damage control + PR. I'm not even in psychology let alone crowd psychology but even I can work out that much. Duh. So too did some Brits, btw. )
Need to get some Indian documentary makers to interview the women - Miss Roberts and the other one - whose testimonies against Andrew and others were asked to be struck off (essentially for not being on-topic).
I'm sure Indians (minus the ELM etc) are a fair minded people: willing to hear their side of the story too.
After all, the British monarchy may not be able to yell "off with their heads" anymore against any whose existence suddenly becomes a problem or nuisance to them, but they still have sufficient power and money to hire people to make problems go away and can silence accusers easily by calling in favours of other highly-placed people. Same goes for the new royalty of the US - the nouveau riche and powerful - who can also make problems posed to them by poorer people "go away" or be brushed under the carpet.