Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums

White Heat

Elitists
  • Posts

    1,829
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by White Heat

  1. 3 hours ago, jonski43 said:

    Yes, I think they did frequent the Elm Guest house. Don't know anything about Dunblane though??? But yes, if you look at Epstein's flight book there were so many huge stars, politicians and VIPs listed. I'm sure one or two names will have to fall on their swords to cover the rest of them. Blinds saying that Ghislaine Maxwell has so many recordings and videos that she's safe. 

    I can see this dragging on and going nowhere like Spacey and Weinstein.

    So the Dunblane thing; There was an inquiry into the massacre (The Cullen Inquiry) during which evidence of Thomas Hamiton's previous interactions with the police was presented but the information was sealed, under a closure order to prevent publication for 100 years. So nobody knows just how much the police already knew about him before he went & murdered a bunch of innocent kids. I believe since the initial inquiry one of piece of information has been released about him being arrested for assault, obstructing police & contravention of the Children and Young Persons Act 1937. He was released without charge. For years there has been speculation that there is some kind of cover up. There is much more to it but that is the main thing that make people question the story that has been told. 

    Epstein's book had all sorts of people in it, some of them probably completely unaware of what he was/is but there certainly must be a lot who were aware & complicit. I do wonder about Ghislaine Maxwell. The blinds are probably right, I see no other reason why she wouldn't have been thrown under the bus yet.

    It will drag on. Sadly, I really don't see anything changing any time soon.

  2. 19 hours ago, jonski43 said:

    Everybody knew about Jimmy Savile but he had good connections and very tough lawyers as does another well known celebrity in the UK who'll be exposed when he dies.

    I'm surprised but Andrew is getting a lot of heat in the press at the moment. 

    As for Meghan, she's a known yachter and known gold digger. She's nothing like Diana who was just posh and naive. Just look at the rift between William and Harry. They were so close for years.

     

    His "good" connections & lawyers were/are just as sick as he was. These kinds of "people" tend to stick together, that's why you can't even find out where Sidney Cooke is. It's also probably why the records about the Dunblane massacre were sealed for 100 years & why nobody really talks about Vishal Mehrotra or Martin Allen much. 

    Did the other well know celebrity like a vest to the Elm Guest House by any chance?

    The fact that Andrew is getting a fair bit of press tells me there must be something bigger that we are being distracted from. 

    I know Meghan is not like Diana as a person, but it seems like the people who used Diana are using now Meghan in a similar way.

     

  3. 10 hours ago, Kelmadfan said:

    I’ve seen stuff like that too. I don’t know if it was from a movie or doctored in some way, a young naked boy climbing down from an upper window of some Royal estate (sorry, I’m not knowledgeable on Britain's Royal Palaces and such). And that Jimmy Saville person. Wasn’t he knighted? I mean that sends up red flags right there. 

    I think it’s horrible how they’re treating Meghan. It does ring of the way Princess Diana was treated. They do seem to gang up on their in-laws. 

    The boy was escaping from Buckingham Palace but it was for a TV show.

    Yes, Jimmy Savile was knighted & he was only outed for what he really was after his death. My guess is he knew enough about other people to be protected by them. 

  4. 7 hours ago, Jazzy Jan said:

    Thanks White Heat.  It is both infuriating and interesting.  Not a Meghan fan but do feel the media is being disgusting to her.  Piers Morgan and all of the Right wing Murdoch columnists have been bashing her relentlessly for months and in such a misogynist way.    Meanwhile,  they have known about Andrew for YEARS ( was confirmed by other journalists )  and have left him alone all the time.   

    They are treating her in a similar way to how they treated Princes Diana a lot of the time & honestly, I think other members of the royal family are happy to let that happen because it is a very effective distraction from all of the vile things some of them get up to.

    There was a guy over here who did a couple of interviews a few years back about abuse he had suffered as a child, he did one interview with The Express newspaper where his name & face was shown (https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/453381/Female-MP-abused-boy-in-care) & then later did another with BBC Panorama (where his identity was "hidden"). Since those interviews were released to the public, video footage has emerged of him naming people that neither The Express or Panorama included in their reports, he also insinuates that a member of the royal family was involved in some of the abuse. There is also footage showing him being coached & coerced into lying & including details that would discredit his own claims. I've heard this has happened to other people too. So yes, they have know for years & it seems highly likely that they have been covering up for him for a long time. 

  5. 3 hours ago, Jazzy Jan said:

    He is horrible.  Glad that he is finally being exposed. 

    I am not sure about the UK but there has been a lot of talk regarding how the "Murdoch press"  in Australia has been hounding Meghan Markle so much over every tiny thing and never reported much on Prince Andrew.  Her crimes are being American,  having so called  "leftist views" and not showing the "stiff upper lip"  that royals are " supposed to show.  Andrew's crimes - hanging around and staying with with a well known sex offender who provides rich men with under-age girls. Some have even named him as using Epstein's services.   Just appalling.  

    It's pretty much the same in the UK, they'll most likely report on Andrew for the next couple of days & then it'll be back to the Meghan bashing. 

  6. 1 hour ago, MattyMads said:

    She’s being ripped apart on Twitter as per usual

    By idiots. I've been reading the comments on there & every single negative one was written by a halfwit.

    44 minutes ago, loveperanders said:

    She wasn't rude, it was all banter. People don't have any sense of humour online especially not on shitty Twitter. I think she was funny, made fun of herself and joked a lot. Who cares about people's opinions, Madonna couldn't care less so why should we.

    Exactly. I'm sure Ian McKellan can handle a bit of banter. He seemed alright.

    33 minutes ago, Silverfox said:

    I don't understand why she was a late addition though. On any big promo round she always does Graham Norton or Jonathan Ross. The rest of the campaign has been meticulously planned for months - seems so odd that the publicity team would overlook this and have to shoehorn her in at the last minute. Unless she just didn't want to do a full show. 

    I enjoyed it too but after years of wondering what she would be like next to other guests, I've realised I prefer it when she has the show to herself!

    My guess is that she agreed to do it last min because Graham Norton was doing the Q&A.

  7. 31 minutes ago, Nick said:

    I'm confused was the official full audio of Dark Ballet released before the video premiered? 

    My friend told me yes, but I told him I didn't think so.

    It was on iTunes in the UK before it was on Youtube & on iTunes in some other countries before that. New Zealand got it first I think. 

  8. 7 minutes ago, john_andy said:

    You might like the performance or not, which is okay, but if you pay attention to what's beneath the criticism, it's rather transparent that it has nothing to do with her singing abilities, but with the fact that some people just can't cope with her still being around. Madonna has not based her entire career on having amazing control over her voice: she's not what you can call a vocalist. She's much more than that. I could understand it if someone like, let's say, Celine Dion had a somewhat poor vocal performance, given that her great voice is basically what she has to offer (with all due respect to her amazing, amazing voice), I could understand the meltdown, the criticism, the fear. But we are talking about Madonna, who is a far superior performer and a totally different animal. Would anybody have said that Bob Dylan's career or David Bowie's career or John Lennon's career were over after a not-so-brilliant vocal delivery? Would anybody have limited their contributions to music to just a nice singing voice? That is blatantly trying to diminish her talents and downplay her impact on music and culture. 

    Social media is, in a way, a celebration of simplistic thinking and reductivism (look it up). Do you imagine what would have happened had social media existed at the times of Frida Khalo or Picasso? "Damm, man, that dude can't get a damn nose straight. He can't get no eyes in the right place. My 6 year-old-boy can do better than that". Or... "And she thinks she can paint, she can't even get proportions right, man, no doubt she can't even fix her own eyebrows". What would they have said about Egon Schiele or Man Ray or Oscar Wilde or Virginia Woolf? Guess what? They would have torn them to shreds because they wouldn't have been able to understand them. Nor do they understand Madonna, simple as that. 

    In the end, our generation is not ready for a woman like Madonna. Wait thirty or forty years and we'll see what happens then. They will celebrate her then. Meanwhile, they're too busy now complaining about the fact that —oh, surprise—, she's a human being and somehow imperfect. Her voice can fail, what a scandal! 

    I think that if a provocateur can get people so polarized and so galvanized just for not being perfect, he or she might be doing something right. I'm certain Madonna is. 

     

    100%

  9. 12 minutes ago, Amelia said:

    For me, after watching it over and over, the choreography was on point!  I'm a bit baffled by the fans who are "disappointed" or whatever by it.  Not every performance must be an energetic dance fest.  This was very theatrical and I expect this is what we're are going to see more of with the new tour.  I specifically thought the choreography among the spoken part and throughout Future was excellent.  I just hope some fans can realize that it doesn't always have to be her dancing like a maniac with a lot of energy to show how great of a performer she is and how much she is into it.  She obviously was into this, and it was a very theatrical presentation.  There are performers half her age who still can't keep up with what she did last night!

    I completely agree. It actually made me look forward to this theatre tour a bit more. The interlude was perfectly executed. 

    3 minutes ago, rocknrolla said:

    One thing that worries me is that one bad performance really can stop a career in its tracks.   Look at Mariahs NYE performance

    This was nowhere near as bad as that, calm down.

    2 minutes ago, Nikki said:

    what are u saying? didn't this diva just got praise with her icon award?

    Yep.

  10. It would be really nice to come here & see people discussing the theatrical side of the performance.

    I think we have mostly agreed that the LAP section could have been better & that it's difficult to walk down stairs in time, sideways, while wearing an eye patch & a long, heavy costume. Especially when you're supposed to be singing & (likely) having technical problems.

    I know, I know  "she shouldn't have worn the eye patch then" but maybe it's part of the message of this album, maybe it fits & we just haven't been told why yet.

×
×
  • Create New...