 According to one Sunday tabloid, Burrell, the Butler to Princess Di is now claiming he had sex with her, and also that whilst working for the Queen, he chased one of the Royal corgi's into the Queen's bedroom, when she, the Queen, was standing there naked. We all know this man is a publicity seeking liar, who lied at Princess Di's inquest, so I am wondering why do the tabloids print this sort of nonsense? I certainly would not buy a newspaper simply because of a "sensational" headline such as the above. Besides, it besmirches the name of a very popular Princess who is much missed by many people.
|
| Edited: 15/06/08 15:50 |
 He is a sad git, you can only sell your soul once, better to sleep at night methinks.
|
 |
Mr Burrell is indeed a liar as he himself has admitted. However Princess Diana was hardly the Virgin Mary - you would have to be a blind fool to think both sons were the fruit of Charlies loins. The fact that Charles was an adulterer does not excuse Diana's behaviour. Two wrongs don't make a right.
|
|
 He is a sad git, you can only sell your soul once, better to sleep at night methinks.
Very true Deanos. He would sell his grandmother if it would make him a few bob. A creep of the highest order! An Arch-Creep in fact!
|
|
 LIAR??? if he said he had fu##ed his mother you would believe him.
|
|
 on that one yes
|
|
The royals get a ton of bad press, even liar fatty Fern Briton gets a ton of bad press, we are all flawed as humans, those who are not known or famous are the lucky ones!. I met Prince Charles a couple of years ago, and had the pleasure of discussing youth training with him. I liked him a lot, so what can you know in ten minutes?well as it is part of my work to know a great deal about people in a minimum amount of time. A top bloke, and I dont care if he is a bit of an old shagger, Mick Jagger gets a pat on the back for it, and I dont get the bloody chance!...good luck to them say I, heaven is for angels!
|
|
Well said Deanos......... Anyway She, Lady D that is, could have had me anytime, why the fek would she pick that Louse Burrell?  The statement that the Princes are of different sires because of their looks is the biggest load of bollocks yet!!
|
| Edited: 15/06/08 18:42 |
I agree Brummie, there was a rumour that she had a fling with Ken Dodd, well I dont think they look a bit like him!
|
|
The statement that the Princes are of different sires because of their looks is the biggest load of bollocks yet!!
I think you ought to research the alleles necessary for red hair. Diana's family have the genetic history, Charlies don't.
Can you name the naturally red headed royal responsible for giving Charles the recessive genes necessary to father red haired children? Neither his father, grandfather, mother or grandmother are/ were red headed. Oddly enough Mr Hewitt has the genetic make up required.
|
|
I promised I would never disclose this, but perhaps now is the right time, Paul Burrell is NOT a liar, in fact I can now reveal that HE and DI were involved in a threesome, modesty, and not wanting to be in the 'public eye' prevent me from revealing the name of the third person............DOH !!!.
|
|
 Bloody hell, we have our own geneticist in the membership Has anybody else got a hidden qualification?
|
| Edited: 15/06/08 20:49 |
Sogster......so what you are saying is that the red hair on the mothers side couldn't come thru?...,......BOLLOCKS!! Oh....and Henry V111 was red headed,( and didn't Q Vic have red headed children?) but most of the genetic make up comes from the female side, the male does tho determine if the child is male or female. Yes Fred
|
| Edited: 15/06/08 21:07 |
I'v e been told that's it's not as big as you tell everyone 
|
|
|
|
|
 I'm qualified to drink vast quantities of Magners 
|
|
Irish cider!!....wasamarra with Hereford and the West country produce? That magners is for red headed aides!
|
|
Can't trust anybody anymore!
|
|
SO!.....IT WAS KEN DODD THEN!...I stand corrected!
|
|
 FWIW I reckon Harry is a dead ringer for James Hewitt!! Coincidence or not. So there!! Colin
|
|
