|
|
Post by steveandthedogs on Jan 16, 2023 22:39:33 GMT
Listening to the radio on the way home, I like his description of some woman [ex-Sun editor, now very high in the organisation] who works for Murdoch - "An infected pustule on the arse of humanity." Good description of anyone who works for Murdoch. S Rebekah Brooks by any chance? Weelll... possibly.
S
|
|
|
|
Post by squeamishossifrage on Jan 17, 2023 6:08:33 GMT
I still believe it's time for a DNA test on both of Diana's sons to confirm (or otherwise) Charles's input. In an ordinary family somebody would have got this done years ago and lived with the result. Why do you assume that they haven’t? Mick Personally, I believe this has already been done, a long time ago. Until William had progeny, Harry was third in line for the throne. Neither the nation nor the royal family could afford the scandal if Harry did accede to the throne, and it was then discovered that he was not of royal blood. The rumours had been around pretty much since Diana's second pregnancy was announced. |
|
|
|
Post by mick on Jan 17, 2023 11:27:42 GMT
Why do you assume that they haven’t? Mick Personally, I believe this has already been done, a long time ago. Until William had progeny, Harry was third in line for the throne. Neither the nation nor the royal family could afford the scandal if Harry did accede to the throne, and it was then discovered that he was not of royal blood. The rumours had been around pretty much since Diana's second pregnancy was announced. I refer the honourable gentleman to my post at the top of page 2 Mick |
|
|
|
Post by Chester PB on Jan 17, 2023 21:40:24 GMT
I still believe it's time for a DNA test on both of Diana's sons to confirm (or otherwise) Charles's input. In an ordinary family somebody would have got this done years ago and lived with the result. Why do you assume that they haven’t? Mick Because if they had it would probably be one if the book's exciting revelations... |
|
|
|
Post by MJB on Jan 17, 2023 21:42:51 GMT
Why do you assume that they haven’t? Mick Because if they had it would probably be one if the book's exciting revelations... I suspect if it was done, it would have been as an infant and Harry wouldn't be any wiser. |
|
|
|
Post by gezza on Jan 18, 2023 5:12:59 GMT
He isnt
|
|
|
|
Post by mick on Jan 18, 2023 8:46:57 GMT
Because if they had it would probably be one if the book's exciting revelations... I suspect if it was done, it would have been as an infant and Harry wouldn't be any wiser. Maybe that's for the second book. Alternatively, you can read my post at the top of page two. Unfortunately my source is expired but, when alive, she was adamant and she was most certainly in a position to know. It's clear that I believe what I was told but I can't prove anything.
Mick
|
|
