‘Do you think the Prince of Wales is bisexual?'

[DuctapeFatwa]

When quizzed last night about the "bisexual" query Sir Michael said: "I've never asked Mark any such question. Bisexual is a word I don't think I can ever remember using."

When asked if he'd ever discusssed Charles's sexuality using a different word, he replied: "I really don't want to discuss it...


1995 The News of the World reveals that Prince Charles's under-valet George Smith told Princess Diana he had been raped by one of his boss's gay servants. He was afraid to tell police because the rapist was "too powerful". Courtiers say Charles and Diana are helping Smith with treatment for mental problems...

1996 Diana makes a tape recording of Smith's allegation. During the interview he makes a further shocking claim about an incident involving Prince Charles and a servant. St James's Palace investigates the rape claim but finds no evidence to call in police. Details of the rape tape emerge through friends of Diana...


Charles summons a fawning flunkey to remove his shoes

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/story_pages/news/news1.shtml

[alittlelark]

1. and he's suuuuuch a LIBERAL

I find it facinating that all of this is coming out now. I am no fan of the 'royals', however p.charles is rabidly pro-environment, anti - Iraq war, and appears to have a distain for neo-con's. Maybe I'm just a bit paranoid...but why now (Bush's lowest ratings)??!? PERHAPS THIS CAN BE BIGGER THAN LACI!!!!!!!!!!!!

Naw, It'll never happen, we're in it for the long haul (Where is OJ when you need him?).

Enjoy, Gina

[La_Serpiente]

2. Welcome to DU

:hi: :freak:

[JI7]

3. maybe he is

not that it matters. i think prince charles is a good guy as he supports many good causes. he seems like a good father also. i think the british are accepting of people who are gay and bi , far more so than americans are.

[economic justice]

4. Uh.......

I think RAPE is the real issue. A "good guy"???? He is a frickin slug. Lives off the wealth of the British working class and has a mighty haughty attitude. He's a loser, and if it turns out he raped a guy - he should have the book thrown at him. He probably thinks that, like everything else, he would get away with it. Spoiled rich brat who has never worked a day in his life. Scum!

[JI7]

5. rape ?

i never said anything about rape. i'm only responding to rumors about whether he might be gay or bi. and the british mostly like the royal family.

[alittlelark]

6. Who cares so long as the $ rolls in

It appears to me that P.Charles is a big cause of anti-war sentiment among the British

[alittlelark]

7. chill and think

I know a lot of spoiled rich brats.......some of whom are verry liberal. The alleged rape was by an employee. If PC knew aout, hang him. It is thusfar an alleged occurance. PC may be a RWF (Rich White Fuck), but that does not mean that these allegations are accurate (maybe they are). I amw illing to let any case go to it's finality.

Gina

[iverglas]

16. whew

And that's how gossip and rumours go.

"He's a loser, and if it turns out he raped a guy ..."

I guess one could just say that about just about anybody ...

"<Democratic presidential candidate of your choice>
is a loser, and if it turns out he raped a guy ..."

WHOA. Why would someone say "if it turns out <Prince Charles> raped a guy" WHEN NO ONE HAS MADE THE SLIGHTEST SUGGESTION that Prince Charles did any such thing???

Two separate stories:
- the allegation of the sexual assault of one of the Prince's staff members by another
- the allegation that the Prince was observed in a sexual act with a man.

They are NOT CONNECTED.

But putting them together in a block of text sure does seem to make it easy for anyone who doesn't read too well, or who has a motive for misrepresenting what s/he reads, to say they are.


"He is a frickin slug. Lives off the wealth of the
British working class and has a mighty haughty attitude."

Unlike, oh, Donald Trump. Or the head of state of a number of countries one might name ... none of whom has even one of the very definitely redeeming qualities that the Prince of Wales happens to have, as has been noted in this thread. Bush starts a war, Charles opposes it ... Bush and his pals pollute the atmosphere, Charles opposes it ...

Sigh, if only Charles had some actual power, or even a little more influence than he in fact has ...

But no. The countries in which the British monarch is head of state tend to prefer our heads of state to shut up and keep their noses out of our business, and especially not go starting wars for us to pay for. In that sense, whatever the monarch gets paid (and yeah, Canada for instance should probably contribute a bit to that; we don't at present) might be seen as getting good value for money.

Hands up anybody who wouldn't trade George W. Bush for the Prince of Wales.

.

[Cronus Protagonist]

8. He went to a public (private) school

Everyone has to either perform, receive or condone blow jobs between the boys to get along. Some enjoy it more than others. Apparently Charles still enjoys it to this day.

Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets

[T_i_B]

22. It is quite well known...

...that Charles was bullied at school and that he hated his school days. I think the school he went to was Gordonstoun, where his father was head boy and a big success, but the son apparently was not.

[Mairead]

9. How shallow would someone have to be to care?

I know: 'about as shallow as they are'. :(

[izzie]

10. No I do not

:silly:

[Screaming Lord Byron]

11. Maybe William will be easier to control than his dad.

Few too many ideas of his own, that Charles. Very dangerous. Hence the smears.

[LittleApple81]

12. Shouldn't this be in the Lounge? n/t

[maha]

13. The goat was NOT SPANISH

Not only are the allegations untrue but:

a) the goat was not, in fact, Spanish, but Portuguese, and is currently living safely in a wildlife preserve in East Molesey.

b) The Tango is a dance made famous in Argentina. "Erotic licking" plays no part in the Tango. Neither, of course, do balloons.

c) only a lunatic would apply shoe-polish to a weasel.

d) if the alleged incidents had in fact occurred in broad daylight during a car-boot sale in Harrow then there would be photographs, and quite possibly a plaster cast.

e) by now the "Use by" stamps on the yoghurt would have expired, indicating it as unfit for human consumption.

PS Not original; discovered on this great blog (scroll down; there's a gap):

http://18minutegap.blogspot.com/

[Noordam]

14. Noordam hiding from the Brits on here... BUT has heard the

Brits do like ya ya ya Greek Sex............ :evilgrin:

[LeftHander]

15. No the real question is....

Is he top or bottom...


Sorry couldn't resist....

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

17. The man won't even take his own shoes off?

What a disgrace to humanity

[iverglas]

19. I'll bet that was sarcasm

The shoes were obviously being removed at an official function in a culture where shoes are removed in those circumstances.

A head of state is not just a "man" (or "woman"). The head of state embodies the position of head of state, and the state itself. And in many situations is treated as such, by pretty common accord.

You know: the respect for the "office of president" that apparently drove Democratic members of Congress and Senators to give standing ovations to the US head of state during his state of the union address last winter ... .

One simple, practical reason for having a third party remove the shoes of the head of state at an official function involving dignitaries from another state, and photographers, would be to avoid the possibility that the head of state might fumble the job and look like an idiot, and possibly disrespectful of the hosts.

It's hard to prevent one's head of state from tripping on his own shoelaces as he walks down a gangway, or from puking on another head of state at the dinner table, but it's relatively easy to make sure he doesn't botch taking off his shoes -- have someone else do it. Anybody wanna bet that George W. Bush doesn't get assistance from a third party for the shoe-removal job in such situations?

.

[Padraig18]

18. 'Royalty'???

The very idea is absurd. :eyes:

[iverglas]

20. and on the other hand

"George W. Bush"??

The very idea is absurd.

And need I mention .... "Ronald Reagan"?

At least to those of us who prefer our heads of state not to embarrass us internationally, and oppress us domestically ...

.

[SiobhanClancy]

21. Indeed it is..

how utterly silly when you think about it:)