Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Political Manipulation / Cover-Ups / False Flags
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 30-06-2010, 08:46 AM   #1
icke_is_right
Senior Member
 
icke_is_right's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,462
Default Prince Andrew Illegitimate?

Click on link for photo comparison.

http://www.diabolik.tv/site/features/detail.php?ID=1528

We all know Harry's alleged to be the progeny of a certain Major Hewitt, but were we also aware of the much older rumours of the Queen's dalliances of the extra-marital variety that resulted in Princes Andrew and Edward?

The story begins way back when in ye olde times (the 1950s) when the Queen discovered her husband's affair with her cousin Princess Alexandra. Accoring to the story, the Queen was extremely upset by his philandering but of course divorce was out of the question. The love, however, was gone, and the marriage fell into the usual royal convenience arrangement with Phillip continuing his adulterous liasons while Lizzie sought psychiatric treatment for depression and banned him from the royal bedchamber.

Lord Mountbatten intervened at this point, ordering the twat to stop the affair and being promptly told to fark orf. By 1956, the couple were living separate lives, with Phillip's affairs numerous and Liz to all intents and purposes a free agent.

Lord Porchester

WIth the death of her marriage, it seems Lizzie is alleged to have sought comfort in ther arms of royal stablemaster Lord Porchester. References to the exact start date of the affair are scarce, but it is thought to have begun in the late 1950s. Allegedly, the two would spend hours talking about horses and go for romantic walks in the grounds of the Queen's various palaces.

Naturally, this didn't last long before royal busybody Lord Mountbatten stuck his oar in. He's alleged to have written a letter to the Queen giving her a good ticking off and urging her to be more discreet in the relationship. And then Prince Andrew appeared, looking strangely like Porchester and unlike Phillip.

Cabinet papers of the 1959 government were released in 1990, and the royal family figured in three discussions. However, the exact references were blanked out for reasons of national security; one of them being held under a 50 year rule and the other two held under 100 years - the earliest date the public will learn of these discussions and their content is 2059.


When Andrew was born, it was rumoured amongst those in the know that Phillip had not been around in the period when the baby had been conceived. Coupled with a lack of public exposure of the newborn, which included a suspicious lack of photographs, and the rumour was entrenched.

Nigel Dempster referred to the rumour in an early 1990s issue of the New York Times, leading journalist Fiammenta Rocco to ask Prince Phillip if it was true during an interview in 1993. He did not answer the question, and Dempster's article was not challenged by the royals.
__________________
Gold $742 Silver $9.52 (at start of G/S thread Nov08')
http://goldsilver.com/newsletters/newsID/8050/

We Will Win: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbaemWIljeQ
Focus on what you want, never give up, it will come.
icke_is_right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2010, 09:04 AM   #2
gabeygoat
Senior Member
 
gabeygoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 455
Default

who cares, monarchy is dumb
gabeygoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2010, 09:38 AM   #3
icke_is_right
Senior Member
 
icke_is_right's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gabeygoat View Post
who cares, monarchy is dumb
Dumb enough to run most of the planet and tax you into serfdom.
__________________
Gold $742 Silver $9.52 (at start of G/S thread Nov08')
http://goldsilver.com/newsletters/newsID/8050/

We Will Win: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbaemWIljeQ
Focus on what you want, never give up, it will come.
icke_is_right is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2010, 10:15 AM   #4
emerald
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Prison planet
Posts: 5,644
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gabeygoat View Post
who cares, monarchy is dumb
The real dumbasses are us, u, moron. I applaud the monarchy for his smartness. We get what we deserve. "Power to the ppl", what a joke!
emerald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2010, 10:41 AM   #5
gabeygoat
Senior Member
 
gabeygoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 455
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by emerald View Post
The real dumbasses are us, u, moron. I applaud the monarchy for his smartness. We get what we deserve. "Power to the ppl", what a joke!
Can you please clarify what you're saying? I'm pretty sure the monarchy ( a system of government by divine right) is not a single dude.
gabeygoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2010, 04:01 PM   #6
brokenshadow
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 839
Default

There is an awful lot of this going on in the "royal" family. Makes you wonder if their gene pool is a little too small so they have to dip their toe outside once in a while to make sure people are being born with the right number of fingers.
__________________
Your head will collapse if there's nothing in it.
brokenshadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-06-2010, 11:02 PM   #7
firepoet
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dál Riata
Posts: 5,499
Default

With the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha anything is possible. I remeber a few years back my mother in law mentioned the Lord Porchester story, at that time it was in all the major newspapers.
firepoet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 05:34 PM   #8
eshalis
Senior Member
 
eshalis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 190
Default

Ha what is funny is that the German Princess you have for a Queen has no right to sit on the throne by blood right, just Parliaments. They forged their genealogy during the Second Glorious Revolution against the Stewarts.

I have more English and Scot Royal blood than her, plus I have French and the Bourbons have second blood right claim to the throne.

So the Germans did win WW2, just look at the Hanovers you call Queen.

Only with Lady Diana did some royal english blood finally get in the mix. That is why Prince Harry is so cute compared to his so called Dad.
__________________
Royal Gateway Ancestors: Elizabeth Alsop (Back to King Edward I and Hamelin Plantagenet), Olive Welby (Back to Henry II), John Prescott 3x(Back to Henry II), Jean Bourbon Iron Mask (son of Prince Louis de Bourbon, Count of Soissons, Clermont, and Dreux). King Edward III via Robert Morgan
eshalis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 05:49 PM   #9
diamond dogs
Senior Member
 
diamond dogs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,410
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by icke_is_right View Post
Click on link for photo comparison.

http://www.diabolik.tv/site/features/detail.php?ID=1528

We all know Harry's alleged to be the progeny of a certain Major Hewitt, but were we also aware of the much older rumours of the Queen's dalliances of the extra-marital variety that resulted in Princes Andrew and Edward?

The story begins way back when in ye olde times (the 1950s) when the Queen discovered her husband's affair with her cousin Princess Alexandra. Accoring to the story, the Queen was extremely upset by his philandering but of course divorce was out of the question. The love, however, was gone, and the marriage fell into the usual royal convenience arrangement with Phillip continuing his adulterous liasons while Lizzie sought psychiatric treatment for depression and banned him from the royal bedchamber.

Lord Mountbatten intervened at this point, ordering the twat to stop the affair and being promptly told to fark orf. By 1956, the couple were living separate lives, with Phillip's affairs numerous and Liz to all intents and purposes a free agent.

Lord Porchester

WIth the death of her marriage, it seems Lizzie is alleged to have sought comfort in ther arms of royal stablemaster Lord Porchester. References to the exact start date of the affair are scarce, but it is thought to have begun in the late 1950s. Allegedly, the two would spend hours talking about horses and go for romantic walks in the grounds of the Queen's various palaces.

Naturally, this didn't last long before royal busybody Lord Mountbatten stuck his oar in. He's alleged to have written a letter to the Queen giving her a good ticking off and urging her to be more discreet in the relationship. And then Prince Andrew appeared, looking strangely like Porchester and unlike Phillip.

Cabinet papers of the 1959 government were released in 1990, and the royal family figured in three discussions. However, the exact references were blanked out for reasons of national security; one of them being held under a 50 year rule and the other two held under 100 years - the earliest date the public will learn of these discussions and their content is 2059.


When Andrew was born, it was rumoured amongst those in the know that Phillip had not been around in the period when the baby had been conceived. Coupled with a lack of public exposure of the newborn, which included a suspicious lack of photographs, and the rumour was entrenched.

Nigel Dempster referred to the rumour in an early 1990s issue of the New York Times, leading journalist Fiammenta Rocco to ask Prince Phillip if it was true during an interview in 1993. He did not answer the question, and Dempster's article was not challenged by the royals.
Nice one Ickeisright my Aunt told me about this years ago (she should know ..and there was a link with the story (now removed) about Edward being the illegitimate son of a former Private secretary to the Queen, again the resemblances were canny.

I have always wondered what part Mountbatten (Charles 'favourite' uncle) actually played in all this and I am also very suspicious about his death.. It could be possible Prince Philip never actually fathered any of them?
__________________
''Media control is still based in the main on cultural manipulation. It's just so easy to do. When you set up one set of objectives toward the public and you've given them a certain definition for each code word, you hit them with the various code words and they're not going to believe anything if you don't want them to." Bowie

Last edited by diamond dogs; 01-07-2010 at 11:13 PM.
diamond dogs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2010, 11:18 PM   #10
eshalis
Senior Member
 
eshalis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 190
Default

Aren't you more concerned that you have a German Princess of Hanover as your Queen. Shouldn't you at least have a English monarch? Let alone one that allowed Princess Diana's murder go uninvestigated.
__________________
Royal Gateway Ancestors: Elizabeth Alsop (Back to King Edward I and Hamelin Plantagenet), Olive Welby (Back to Henry II), John Prescott 3x(Back to Henry II), Jean Bourbon Iron Mask (son of Prince Louis de Bourbon, Count of Soissons, Clermont, and Dreux). King Edward III via Robert Morgan
eshalis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:03 PM.