sex scandals – commonplacebook.com

The royal gay sex scandal

Post author:HFM
Post published:November 10, 2003
Post category:GLBT Issues

You can read the actual alleged details here in the Toronto Star and also more here in Scotsman.com news. I remember reading some allegations like this years ago, but they didn’t specify Charles as being the royal involved, they just said “an immediate member of the royal family” and I just guessed that was probably Edward, since there were rumors of him being gay circulating for a long time.

Basically, the rumors say that former valet George Smith walked in on a sexual escapade occuring between Charles and another servant, who is, possibly, a guy named Michael Fawcett, according to the Guardian. And that Smith also claimed to have been raped by that same servant at another time. He made the claim to Diana, who taped the claim and asked that Charles fire the servant, which never happened. Diana kept the tape, but it disappeared at some point, and Diana’s butler, Paul Burrell, thinks the tape was stolen by Diana’s sister. Diana apparently believed someone was trying to kill her, and said so in a letter to Paul Burrell at the same time she entrusted him with some items for “safekeeping” before she died.

Last year, someone decided to charge Paul Burrell with theft of the items, and suddenly, when it looked like the whole mess was going to court where it would all come out in the open, the queen remember that Diana had mentioned giving the items to Paul Burrell, thus clearing him of the theft charge.

Then Burrell decided to publish his book, where he mentions the letters from Diana about fearing for her life, and suddenly, all these allegations are popping up again. So Michael Fawcett sought an injunction to keep the details out of the news, and Charles issued a denial that he never did what no one would allow anyone to print that he did.

What seems weird to me… is that I’ve never pegged Charles as being gay. When I heard the rumors of both the alleged rape and the sex incident with a “member of the royal family” I figured Smith was a disgruntled former employee making it all up to get back at the royal family.

The details of the stolen tape, the letters from Diana fearing for her life, and this weird “gag order” denial of something that, frankly, isn’t all that damned scandalous, is odd.

Clinton Family Tree

Post author:HFM
Post published:February 21, 1998
Post category:Jokes Politics

Author Unknown

One Sunday morning Chelsea burst into the living quarters at the White House and said, "Dad! Mom! I have some great news for you! I am getting married to the greatest hunk in Washington. He lives in Georgetown and his name is Matt."

After dinner, the President took Chelsea aside. "Honey, I have to talk with you. Your mother and I have been married a long time. She’s a wonderful wife but she’s never offered much excitement in the bedroom, so I used to fool around with women a lot. Matt is actually your half-brother, and I’m afraid you can’t marry him."

Chelsea was heartbroken. After eight months, she eventually started dating again. A year later she came home and very proudly announced, "Robert asked me to marry him! We’re getting married in June."

Again her father insisted on another private conversation and broke the sad news. "Robert is your half-brother too, honey. I’m awfully sorry about this."

Chelsea was furious! She finally decided to go to her mother with the news. "Dad has done so much harm. I guess I’m never going to get married," she complained. "Every time I fall in love, Dad tells me the guy is my half-brother."

Hillary just shook her head. "Don’t pay any attention to what he says, dear. He’s not really your father."

Scandal in Heaven!

Post author:HFM
Post published:February 21, 1998
Post category:Holidays Jokes

Author Unknown

Turmoil rocked Heaven this morning as allegations arose that God had an affair with a former worshipper. The scandal began when a 21 year old woman, known only as Mary, claimed that she had given birth to God’s “only son” last week in a barn in the hamlet of Bethlehem.

Sources close to Mary claim that she “had loved God for a long time,” that she was constantly talking about her relationship with God, and that she was “thrilled to have had His child.” In a press conference this morning, God issued a vehement denial, saying that “No sexual relationship existed,” and that “the facts of this story will come out in time, verily.”

Independent counsel Beelzebub immediately filed a brief with the Angelic Justice Department to expand his investigation to cover questions of whether any commandments may have been broken, and whether God had illegally funneled laundered money to His illegitimate child through three foreign operatives know only as the “Wise Men.” Beelzebub has issued subpoenas to several angels who are rumored to have acted as go-betweens in the affair.

Critics have pointed out that these allegations have little to do with the charges that Beelzebub was originally appointed to investigate: That God had created large-scale flooding in order to cover up evidence of a failed land deal. In recent months, Beelzebub’s investigation has already been expanded to cover questions surrounding the large number of locusts that plagued God’s political opponents in the last election, as well as to claims that the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah was to divert attention away from a scandal involving whether the giveaway of a parcel of public land in Promised County to a Jewish special interest group was quid pro quo for political contributions.

If these allegations prove to be true, then this could be a huge blow to God’s career, much of which has been spent crusading for stricter moral standards and harsher punishments for wrongdoers. Indeed, God recently outlined a “tough-on-crime” plan consisting of a series of 10 “Commandments,” which has been introduced in Congress in a bill by Rep. Moses. Critics of the bill have pointed out that it lacks any provisions for the rehabilitation of criminals, and lawyers for the ACLU are planning to fight the “Name in Vain” Commandment as being an unconstitutional restriction on free speech.