Niall McCrae
On Wednesday UNN chief David Clews was invited on to George Galloway’s ‘Mother of All Talk Shows’ to elaborate on his scandalising tweets on the Royal Family. Over several weeks UNN has reported on the palace intrigue around Princess Kate, who hasn’t appeared in public since Christmas. A spate of incidents has occurred in a short period of time, which could simply be coincidental: family friend Jacob Rothschild’s death (followed by three ceremonial horsemen trotting down the Mall with an obscured flag), the presumed but surprising suicide of Thomas Kingston (son-in-law of Prince Michael of Kent, the country’s top Freemason), cancer surgery for King Charles and lack of public appearances since, and Kate’s hospital admission for gastro-intestinal surgery.
As the public was beginning to ask questions about Kate’s welfare, Kensington Palace issued a photograph showing her with smiling daughter and sons. But it soon transpired that the picture was fabricated. The mistakes were so numerous that Clews, after breaking the news of the fake, suggested intent. For whatever reason, Kate or the Royal Family wanted us to see that the photo wasn’t real. The first hint on viewing the picture was that Kate’s face is not quite where it should be.
Mainstream media were instructed to delete the photo. Judging by comments on the Daily Mail website, most people were aghast at the nitpicking and criticised the treatment of a lovely princess who is recovering from major surgery. These people do not seem to realise the implications of the Royal Family lying to its loyal subjects while the monarch, heir to the throne and future queen have gone missing. George Galloway’s audience on Wednesday was similar in its ignorance, typically commenting that the host should not waste time on such nonsense instead of Palestine and everyday politics.
Clews certainly gave Galloway and followers something to think about (and credit to the newly elected Rochdale MP for inviting a conspiracy theorist on to his widely-watched show). He presented three possibilities: that Kate has ‘downed tools’ in response to her domestic difficulties (William is suspected of having an affair with Rose Hanbury, Marchioness of Cholmondeley), that she is incapacitated in some way, or that she is dead. Galloway’s poll for the show was on whether viewers thought that Kate was becoming another Diana; less than half thought so.
With Charles ageing and possibly ridden with cancer, he might not be monarch for more than a year or two. Heir to the throne is his son William (although perhaps not his biological son, as the likeness with Juan Carlos of Spain is uncanny). But William seems to be in trouble. Kate and the kids have been kept out of sight. Could it be that the throne will be taken not by William or his children but by a very controversial figure standing eighth in line?
That would be Prince Andrew. If this seems too far-fetched, consider the man with dementia who has occupied the White House for the last four years, and is standing again. For all she was adored, Queen Elizabeth did whatever she was told. But the ideal person to lead a country as prime minister, president or monarch is someone who is deeply compromised. Andrew was a regular on Jeffrey Epstein’s island, and there is probably a catalogue of video recordings of his playtime there.
Imagine what the globalists at the commanding heights could do with King Andrew the First? It’s enough to bring us all out in a sweat!
