On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

bud-- wrote
Bod wrote

Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

Nope, that was one of his sons, Randy Andy.

On 4/10/2021 4:57 AM, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No, you may be thinking of Randy Andy. at Phil's age best he could do
would be watch.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 02:50:02 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

02:50 and you are up and trolling ALREADY? Do you sociopaths really know NO
shame AT ALL? LOL

--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"Why do we still have outdated laws prohibiting paedophilia? Do you
seriously think that a 12-year old who spends 15 hours a day on Facebook
doesn't know what's going on?"
MID:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 02:57:29 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

That was Andrew one of the princes. I suspect Phil was beyond those
kinds of shenanigans unless he just wanted to watch.

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 13:19:46 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 4/10/2021 4:57 AM, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No, you may be thinking of Randy Andy. at Phil's age best he could do
would be watch.

Interesting you and Rod came up with the same answer as me.

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 17:32:05 +0100, Bod wrote:

Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

One thing about the elder royals, they never do much to **** anyone
off. You really have to get down to the commoners the kids marry to
get to the tabloids.
I really don't pay enough attention to keep them all straight tho. I
know my old neighbor, a proper British lady never thought much of
Sarah and she wasn't real keen on Diana either. I imagine she is livid
about Megan. I suspect she didn't live long enough to have to see
that. She moved away, in poor health in 09 and I never heard from her
much again.

On 4/10/2021 8:45 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 13:19:46 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 4/10/2021 4:57 AM, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No, you may be thinking of Randy Andy. at Phil's age best he could do
would be watch.

Interesting you and Rod came up with the same answer as me.


I'm not 20 any more and can't do it three times a day. By 90 I'll be
watching.

wrote
Bod wrote

Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

One thing about the elder royals, they never do much to **** anyone off.

Liz royally ****ed off her sister when she wouldn't allow her to marry
Townsend.

And Liz and Phil ****ed up completely and royally ****ed
of Big Ears/Charlie when he wasn't originally allowed to
marry the only one he was interested in, Camilla, and
made him marry that fool child Diana instead.

You really have to get down to the commoners
the kids marry to get to the tabloids.

Bull****.

I really don't pay enough attention to keep them all straight tho.

That's obvious.

I know my old neighbor, a proper British lady never thought
much of Sarah and she wasn't real keen on Diana either.

Yeah, both were stupid fools.

I imagine she is livid about Megan.

Likely.

I suspect she didn't live long enough to have to see that.
She moved away, in poor health in 09 and I never heard
from her much again.

On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:38:14 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Bod addressing senile Rot:
"Rod, you have a sick twisted mind. I suggest you stop your mindless
and totally irresponsible talk. Your mouth could get you into a lot of
trouble."
Message-ID:

On 4/10/2021 11:52 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

It feels like there is a cast of thousands.

I dug out the order of succession I made a year ago
Next in line is Charles - IMHO he is a jerk
Harry is #6 - seems like the most interesting (like Diana), but about
impossible
Randy Andy is #8 - safely distant

What I think was said in "the interview" is that Harry's ?son to be will
not be in the succession order. Why?

On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:10:59 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/10/2021 11:52 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

It feels like there is a cast of thousands.

I dug out the order of succession I made a year ago
Next in line is Charles - IMHO he is a jerk
Harry is #6 - seems like the most interesting (like Diana), but about
impossible
Randy Andy is #8 - safely distant

What I think was said in "the interview" is that Harry's ?son to be will
not be in the succession order. Why?

Racism. They can't have a black royal. wouldn't be proper.

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:10:59 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/10/2021 11:52 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him
though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

It feels like there is a cast of thousands.

I dug out the order of succession I made a year ago
Next in line is Charles - IMHO he is a jerk
Harry is #6 - seems like the most interesting (like Diana), but about
impossible
Randy Andy is #8 - safely distant

What I think was said in "the interview" is that Harry's
?son to be will not be in the succession order. Why?

Wrong.
https://www.royal.uk/succession
That's archie, listed just under his dad harry.

Racism. They can't have a black royal. wouldn't be proper.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something.

And he isnt black anyway.

On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:29:57 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile pest's latest troll****

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:29:57 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:10:59 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/10/2021 11:52 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him
though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

It feels like there is a cast of thousands.

I dug out the order of succession I made a year ago
Next in line is Charles - IMHO he is a jerk
Harry is #6 - seems like the most interesting (like Diana), but about
impossible
Randy Andy is #8 - safely distant

What I think was said in "the interview" is that Harry's
?son to be will not be in the succession order. Why?

Wrong.
https://www.royal.uk/succession
That's archie, listed just under his dad harry.

Racism. They can't have a black royal. wouldn't be proper.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something.

And he isnt black anyway.

I doubt he will be an only child and every time they put the dice back
in the cup, her mom's genes get another shot at it.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:29:57 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:10:59 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/10/2021 11:52 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him
though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

It feels like there is a cast of thousands.

I dug out the order of succession I made a year ago
Next in line is Charles - IMHO he is a jerk
Harry is #6 - seems like the most interesting (like Diana), but about
impossible
Randy Andy is #8 - safely distant

What I think was said in "the interview" is that Harry's
?son to be will not be in the succession order. Why?

Wrong.
https://www.royal.uk/succession
That's archie, listed just under his dad harry.

Racism. They can't have a black royal. wouldn't be proper.

Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something.

And he isnt black anyway.

I doubt he will be an only child

That lying cow is already pregnant again.

and every time they put the dice back in the
cup, her mom's genes get another shot at it.

Irrelevant to whether he is black or not and
he is already inline for succession if say some
terrorist manages to kill all the ones above
him at say Phil's funeral which has 30 of those
parasites including his dad at it with him
and his stupid mum staying back in the usa.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 00:39:15 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

00:39 in Australia? And you are up and trolling ALREADY, you abnormal
disgusting senile troll?

--
Marland revealing the senile sociopath's pathology:
"You have mentioned Alexa in a couple of threads recently, it is not a real
woman you know even if it is the only thing with a female name that stays
around around while you talk it to it.
Poor sad git who has to resort to Usenet and electronic devices for any
interaction as all real people run a mile to get away from you boring them
to death."
MID:

On 4/13/2021 12:29 AM, Rod Speed wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:10:59 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/10/2021 11:52 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him
though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

It feels like there is a cast of thousands.

I dug out the order of succession I made a year ago
Next in line is Charles - IMHO he is a jerk
Harry is #6 - seems like the most interesting (like Diana), but about
impossible
Randy Andy is #8 - safely distant

What I think was said in "the interview" is that Harry's
?son to be will not be in the succession order. Why?

Wrong.
https://www.royal.uk/succession
That's archie, listed just under his dad harry.


What I remember from "the interview" is that not in succession will be
the kid that is not born yet (but close). That is what I said in my
question.
Is that what was said?
How could that be done?

"bud--" wrote in message
...
On 4/13/2021 12:29 AM, Rod Speed wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:10:59 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/10/2021 11:52 PM, Bod wrote:
On 10/04/2021 09:57, bud-- wrote:
On 4/10/2021 10:32 AM, Bod wrote:
Nice touch.
I'm surprised that Trump gave such a warm glowing tribute to him
though.

Isn't Philip alleged to have something to do with Epstein?

No.

It feels like there is a cast of thousands.

I dug out the order of succession I made a year ago
Next in line is Charles - IMHO he is a jerk
Harry is #6 - seems like the most interesting (like Diana), but about
impossible
Randy Andy is #8 - safely distant

What I think was said in "the interview" is that Harry's
?son to be will not be in the succession order. Why?

Wrong.
https://www.royal.uk/succession
That's archie, listed just under his dad harry.

What I remember from "the interview" is that not in succession will be the
kid that is not born yet (but close).

Nope, that isnt what was said in the interview.

That is what I said in my question.
Is that what was said?

Nope. And the second one and any later ones
will all be in line for succession too as you can
seen with Bill's kids who are above Harry in the list.

How could that be done?

How could what be done ?

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 02:30:30 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Nope

LOL

Nope.

LOL

How could that be done?

How could what be done ?

LOL You useless senile idiot you!

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing the auto-contradicting senile cretin:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID: