A Very Royal Narcissist : Part 5

A VERY ROYAL NARCISSIST? PART 5

 

Were you expecting the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle? Not this time. She will be ready with some scene-stealing since the gaze of the media is (for once) not on her and instead we consider whether another member of the British royal family is a narcissist.

This time it is Prince Andrew, The Duke of York or is it Randy Andy, The Duke of Porkie Pies (Lies)?

The Duke of York was second in line to the British throne. He is now eighth. During his younger years he earned the nickname “Randy Andy” on account of his fondness for the ladies, his relationships with the American actress, Koo Stark and Sarah “Fergie” Ferugson, with whom he has two daughters, being two of his prominent relationships.

He has gained a reputation for arrogance and was also nicknamed “Air Miles Andy” as a consequence of his lofty expenses in particular his habit of taking a helicopter to perform official duties when he could easily have taken a car instead. For example, in Feb 2009, he took a helicopter from his Royal Lodge home in Windsor to an engagement in Shoreham, West Sussex, at an estimated cost to the taxpayer of £6,000. The journey would have taken one hour and 27 minutes to drive and would have used only about half a tank of petrol for the round trip.

He has received press attention for questionable activities and business practices, which include

  • His friendship with Tarek Kaituni who the Duke of York has known for over ten years. Kaituni is a convicted Libyan gun smuggler who also attended the wedding of the Duke of York´s daughter, Princess Eugenie
  • His friendship with with Saif Gaddafi (the second son of the former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and his second wife Safia Farkash. He was a part of his father’s inner circle
  • In Feb 2011: David Cameron (then British Prime Minister) faced calls in Parliament to strip the Duke of his role as trade ambassador over his friendships with Saif Gaddafi and Tarek Kaituni
  • October 2010: Hosts a business lunch at Buckingham Palace for Sakher el–Materi, the son–in-law of the now deposed Tunisian president Zine al–Abidine Ben Ali. Mr el–Materi is under investigation for money laundering.
  • Hosting trade talks with Muammar Gadaffi in 2008
  • Claiming expenses of GBP 620 000 in 2010 in his role as special representative for international trade and investment for the United Kingdom ontop of the GBP 249 000 he is paid by the taxpayer for his royal duties
  • Reputed multiple meetings with Ilham Aliyev, the president of Azerbaijan, an individual who has faced repeated accusations of corruption
  • The sale of his home, Sunninghill Park purchased by a wealthy figure in the Kazakh regime, Timur Kulibayev, for £15m after five years on the market, for GBP 3 million more than the market value. . Kulibayev is alleged to have used “corrupt” funds to make the purchase, something he denies.
  • In May 2016, a fresh controversy broke out when the Daily Mail newspaper alleged that the Duke had brokered a deal to assist a Greek and Swiss consortium secure a £385 million contract to build water and sewerage networks in two of Kazakhstan’s largest cities, while working as British trade envoy, and had stood to gain a £4 million payment in commission. The newspaper published an email from the Duke to Kazakh oligarch Kenges Rakishev, (who had allegedly brokered sale of the Prince’s Berkshire mansion Sunninghill Park), and claimed that Rakishev had arranged meetings for the consortium. After initially claiming the email was a forgery, Buckingham Palace sought to block its publication as a privacy breach. The Palace strongly denied the allegation that the Duke had acted as a “fixer” calling the article “untrue, defamatory and a breach of the editor’s code of conduct.”
  • In March 2011, Kaye Stearman of the Campaign Against the Arms Trade told Channel 4 News CAAT sees Prince Andrew as part of a bigger problem, “He is the front man for UKTI. Our concerns are not just Prince Andrew, it’s the whole UKTI set up. They see arms as just another commodity but it has completely disproportionate resources. At the London office of UKTI the arms sector has more staff than all the others put together. We are concerned that Prince Andrew is used to sell arms, and where you sell arms it is likely to be to despotic regimes. He is the cheerleader in chief for the arms industry, shaking hands and paving the way for the salesmen.
  • In January 2014, Prince Andrew took part in a delegation to Bahrain, a close ally of the United Kingdom. Spokesman for CAAT, Andrew Smith said, “We are calling on Prince Andrew and the UK government to stop selling arms to Bahrain. By endorsing the Bahraini dictatorship Prince Andrew is giving his implicit support to their oppressive practices. When our government sells arms it is giving moral and practical support to an illegitimate and authoritarian regime and directly supporting their systematic crackdown on opposition groups.  We shouldn’t allow our international image to be used as a PR tool for the violent and oppressive dictatorship in Bahrain”

Accordingly, the Duke of York has either embraced or moved within circles of individuals of questionable reputation. Might this be just the hazard of being a prominent royal and something one comes across in the role of special representative for international trade and investment? Or is this pattern indicative of someone who has no issue with such individuals, who has a broken moral compass, no emotional empathy, haughtiness, a sense of entitlement and a rejection of accountability?

Those questions have found answer as a consequence of the Duke of York´s friendship with deceased, convicted paedophile, Jeffrey Epstein and the repeated allegations that the Duke of York was involved in the sexual abuse of a young girl.

In March 2011, it was reported that the Duke’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, an American financier and convicted sex offender, was producing “a steady stream of criticism”. Sarah, Duchess of York, disclosed that the Duke helped arrange for Epstein to pay off some of her debts. The Duke was photographed in December 2010 strolling with Epstein in Central Park during a visit to New York City, according to The Daily Telegraph, while negotiating this financial help. In July 2011, the Duke was reported to have cut all ties with Epstein, and the Duke’s role as Trade Envoy was terminated that month

In January 2015, there was renewed pressure for Buckingham Palace to explain the Duke’s connection with Epstein. Peter Osborne, writing in The Daily Telegraph in January 2015, stated that “the proven facts are grim enough. What was the prince doing, in the first place, with Epstein, a paedophile who was jailed in 2008 for soliciting young girls for under-age prostitution?” Such a question smacks of either a terrible lack of judgement or simply not caring as a consequence of having no emotional empathy, a significant sense of entitlement and no concept of accountability for one’s actions, including ones choice of friends or contacts.

The same month, Virginia Roberts Giuffre made allegations of sexual impropriety against the Duke in court papers related to a civil action in Florida arising from her connection to the Epstein case, but to which the Duke was not a party. Roberts claimed that the Duke was among men, including “a former prime minister” and Alan Dershowitz, who had sex with her while she was a teenager. She alleged Epstein paid her £10,000 to have sex with the Duke. She asserted that she had sex with the Duke on three occasions, including a trip to London in 2001, when she was 17 and again in New York and on a private Caribbean island. Flight logs show the Duke and Virginia Roberts were in the places she alleges the sex happened. The Duke and Roberts were also photographed together with the Duke’s arm round her waist though Andrew’s friends have repeatedly claimed the photo is fake and edited Roberts said she was pressured to have sex with the Duke and “wouldn’t have dared object” and feared leaving, as she felt Epstein, through contacts, could have got her “killed or abducted”. The allegations have, as of early 2015, not been tested in any court, but Roberts repeated allegations against the Duke and against Epstein in a sworn legal statement under penalty of perjury.

Buckingham Palace stated that “any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue”, later repeating the denials. Lawyers for Roberts claim a request to the Duke for a statement under oath about the allegations was returned unanswered. When the Duke was asked about the allegations by a journalist at the World Economic Forum, he refused to answer and left the room.

Dershowitz said, “she’s lied about me … she should not be believed about anyone else … it must be presumed all her allegations against Prince Andrew were false as well.” Dershowitz initiated legal proceedings contesting the allegations and he and Epstein were suing the lawyers representing Roberts. In response Virginia Roberts stated she would not “be bullied back into silence.”

On 7 April 2015, Judge Kenneth Marra ruled that the “sex allegations made against Prince Andrew in court papers filed in Florida must be struck from the public record”. Marra made no ruling as to whether claims by Roberts are true or false, specifically stating that Roberts may later give evidence when the case comes to court.

In August 2019, court documents associated with a defamation case, involving Ghislaine Maxwell, revealed that a second girl, Joanna Sjoberg, gave evidence alleging that Prince Andrew had placed his hand on her breast while seated with Roberts in Epstein’s mansion while posing for a photo with his Spitting Image puppet. Later that month, the Duke released a statement, emphasizing that “At no stage during the limited time I spent with [Epstein] did I see, witness or suspect any behaviour of the sort that subsequently led to his arrest and conviction,” though he expressed regret for meeting him in 2010 after Epstein had already pleaded guilty to sex crimes for the first time. By the end of August 2019, The New Republic magazine also published an email exchange between John Brockman and Evgeny Morozov from September 2013 in which Brockman mentions seeing a British guy nicknamed “Andy” receiving foot massage from two young Russian women at Epstein’s New York residence during his last visit to the mansion in 2010. He then added that he “realized that the recipient of Irina’s foot massage was His Royal Highness, Prince Andrew, the Duke of York”.

Despite the denials or silence, a pattern of behaviour is evident.

Against this backdrop of mounting public pressure and claims which appear to have some prima facie weight, the Duke of York was interviewed by British journalist Emily Maitlis on a television programme, Newsnight, which was recently broadcast. It is this interview which provides us with considerable insight. The following points arose from the broadcast, I have added analysis in bold and italics:-

  1. The Duke of York Does Not Regret Being Friends With Epstein

 

Prince Andrew has defended his relationship with Epstein before – including as recently as August – two weeks after the disgraced financier( apparently) took his own life while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. (Lack of awareness, lack of remorse, sense of entitlement, lack of emotional empathy, sense of entitlement)

In the BBC interview broadcast the prince gave more detail about why he “still” did not regret the friendship. (Notwithstanding mounting pressure and an opportunity to reconsider, the refusal to regret underlines the lack of emotional empathy (it also questions whether cognitive empathy exists) , his sense of entitlement and the repeated need of the individual to assert control over the situation. The suggestion that he should regret his friendship with a criminal (and a particularly vile one) is Challenge Fuel, it challenges his sense of entitlement to be friends with whoever he chooses and challenges his lack of accountability to be held responsible for such a poor decision. These challenge his constant need for control and the response to this threat to control is to reject the challenge and offer no remorse, no sense of regret and no apology.)

He said knowing Epstein had “some seriously beneficial outcomes”, at a time when he had left a career in the Navy and begun one as a trade and industry special representative. (Deflection, Improper Justification, The Ends Always Justifies The Means)

Prince Andrew said: “The people that I met and the opportunities that I was given to learn, either by him or because of him, were actually very useful.” (Sense of Entitlement, Lack of Awareness, Improper Justification.)

His reason for visiting the convicted paedophile to end their friendship?

‘My judgment was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable, but that’s just the way it is,’ he said. (Grandiosity, Magical Thinking, Dismissive.)

 

2. The Duke of York Met With Epstein´s Ex-Girlfriend Recently

Prince Andrew has always said he met Jeffrey Epstein in 1999 through the financier’s then-girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell – a well-connected socialite.

Ms Maxwell , daughter of the late newspaper tycoon, Robert Maxwell, (narcissist) has generally kept a low profile since claims about Epstein began to emerge.

But the prince said he met up with her earlier this year, before Epstein was arrested and charged over sex trafficking allegations.

“She was here (in the UK) doing some rally,” the prince said.

He said they did not discuss Epstein during the meet-up.

“There wasn’t anything to discuss about him because he wasn’t in the news, you know, it was just… we had moved on.” (Flippancy, Arrogance, Lack of Accountability)

The prince stressed throughout the interview that he and Epstein “weren’t that close”. (Revision of History, Deflection)

Invitations Epstein had received to events at Windsor Castle and at Sandringham were in the financier’s capacity as Ms Maxwell’s “plus one” rather than as a friend in his own right, he said. (Deflection, Blame Shifting, Lack of Accountability)

3. He Met Epstein in 2010 To Put An End to The Friendship 

Much of the interview focused on why the prince went to stay with Epstein in 2010, following Epstein’s conviction and imprisonment for soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution.

The prince said the visit was to explain to Epstein that their friendship was over. (Although apparently he was not that close to Epstein but still regarded him as a friend and one whereby he felt compelled to fly several thousand miles to explain that the not close friendship was over – Contradiction, Lie. This is also at odds with the allegation that the Duke was actually there negotiating for financial assistance, something which Sarah Ferguson confirmed was the case. Clearly a not close friend willing to pay off the debts of the ex-wife of the not close friend. Contradiction, Lie, Sense of Entitlement.)

He said he had considered speaking to Epstein on the phone, but decided to meet him face-to-face “to show leadership”. (Arrogance)

“I took the judgement call that because this was serious, and I felt that doing it over the telephone was the chicken’s way of doing it, I had to go and see him and talk to him.” (See contradiction of other points above suggesting the Use of Lies. Also demonstrates a Lack of Awareness as to how such an interaction would appear given Epstein´s previous conviction.)

4. Being Shot At During The Falklands War Meant He Had Stopped Sweating.

The interviewer, Emily Maitlis asked the prince for his response to allegations against him made by one of Epstein’s accusers, Virginia Giuffre (then known as Virginia Roberts). Ms Giuffre said she met the prince in 2001 when she dined with him, danced with him at a nightclub in London, and had sex with him at Ghislaine Maxwell’s house in Belgravia.

Maitlis pointed out that Ms Giuffre’s accusations were “very specific” and included that the prince had been “profusely sweating”.

The prince said a “problem” with Ms Giuffre’s story was that a medical condition meant he could not have been sweating.

“I didn’t sweat at the time because I had suffered what I would describe as an overdose of adrenalin in the Falklands War when I was shot at and I simply… it was almost impossible for me to sweat,” he said. He accused her of therefore lying.

Here is a picture of The Duke of York, leaving Chinawhite Night Club in 2001

21130730-0-image-m-60_1574028519255

Clearly sweating. In case you did not know, the Falklands War was in 1982.

(Lie, Arrogance, Revision of History, Need To Assert Control, Projection)

5. The Photograph of The Duke With His Arm Around Miss Giuffre´s Waist

_108379992_hi011467909

 

Prince Andrew revealed he had investigated the possibility that a photograph – or elements of it -provided by Ms Giuffre was fake. (It certainly looks like him, but of course, photographs can be doctored, but this rebuttal must be looked at in terms of the explanation given AND against the backdrop of all the other behaviours.)

One reason the prince gave was his attire. “I don’t believe it’s a picture of me in London because… when I go out in London, I wear a suit and a tie,” he said.

“That’s what I would describe as… those are my travelling clothes… if I’m going overseas.”

However, newspapers have previously pictured the prince wearing jeans without a tie or blazer on a night out in London. (Lie, Contradiction, Deflection, Desperate Explanation to Assert Control, Denial.)

Speaking about the photo with Ms Giuffre, Prince Andrew told Newsnight: “Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken.” (Denial.)

He also said he did not believe the photograph “was taken in the way that has been suggested” because it shows the prince’s hand on the woman’s waist.

“I am not one to, as it were, hug – and public displays of affection are not something that I do.” (The picture is at a private party, not a public occasion.)

Responding to the allegations that he had spent time with Ms Giuffre, Prince Andrew said: ‘I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.’ (Revision of History, Denial.)

On Miss Roberts’s claims that he bought her a drink, the prince said: ‘I don’t know where the bar is in Tramp’s. I don’t drink, I don’t think I’ve ever bought a drink in Tramp’s whenever I was there.’

The prince is a bona fide teetotaller and has been for a large part of his adult life. He said he didn’t know where the bar was. However, pictures taken on multiple occasions between 1983 and 1990 place him at Tramp nightclub. (This demonstrates that he has been at Tramp night club on many times and even though he may not drink alcohol, this does not prevent someone from knowing where the bar is, especially in a place regularly frequented. Lie.)

Flight records from Epstein’s private jet – dubbed ‘the Lolita Express’ – place Miss Roberts/Giuffre in London on the day in question following a whistle-stop tour from Palm Beach, Florida to Canada, Paris, Grenada in Spain and Tangier in Morocco, before touching down in Luton on March 9, 2001. (This corroborates her version of events.)

6. Pizza Express

The duke said the day on which Ms Giuffre’s allegations are said to have happened, 10 March 2001, he was not out in London but “at home with the children”.

He said he had taken his eldest daughter, Princess Beatrice, to a party at a Pizza Express restaurant in Woking at about four or 5pm.

“And then because the Duchess was away, we have a simple rule in the family that when one is away the other one is there.”

He added he remembered the occasion “weirdly distinctly” because it was one of only a couple of times that he had been to Woking, and going to the Pizza Express there was “a very unusual thing for me to do”.

(He may well have been at Pizza Express, then or on another occasion, it is not outside the realm of possibility, but given his penchant for high end tastes and the clear lies and contradictory behaviour he has engaged in, his response when viewed in such context is far from the realms of possibility.)

7. Caribbean Orgy

Andrew’s third alleged sexual liaison with Miss Roberts is said to have occurred around the time of her 18th birthday on Epstein’s private Caribbean island – Little Saint James.

Putting the claims to the prince, Emily Maitlis said: ‘In a legal deposition 2015, she said she had sex with you three times.

‘Once in a London house when she was trafficked to you in Maxwell’s house. Once in New York a month or so later at Epstein’s mansion and once on his private island in a group of seven or eight other girls.’

Andrew said the incidents had not taken place, but stopped short of accusing Miss Roberts of lying. ‘I’m not in a position to know what she’s trying to achieve but I can tell you categorically I don’t remember meeting her at all,’ he said. (Denial, Revision of History.)

‘I do not remember a photograph being taken and I’ve said consistently and frequently that we never had any sort of sexual contact whatever.’ (Circular Argument, Repeated Assertion of the Need For Control)

In a 2015 legal deposition, Miss Roberts said that she and Andrew had sex during an ‘orgy’ on the private island with other girls – who she said looked under the age of 18 – who did not speak English. These allegations were struck from the record in the US. Flight logs show that Miss Roberts arrived in the US Virgin Islands on April 11 and then took a boat transfer to Epstein’s private island next door.

A group including Miss Roberts, Epstein, Maxwell and a finance manager-turned aspiring politician called Gwendolyn Beck then departed the island five days later for Epstein’s mansion in Florida.

The Court Circular does not indicate where the prince was during this period, however by April 15 – Easter Sunday – he was reportedly in the Bahamas. He had been absent from the Queen’s Easter service at Windsor Castle, and a courtier told The Daily Telegraph that he was on holiday at the exclusive destination – about a two-hour flight away from Epstein’s island.

Miss Beck, a Donald Trump fan who was given thousands of pounds by Epstein when she unsuccessfully ran for congress in 2014, said she had been on Little Saint James in the days preceding April 16, 2001.

In a previously unseen email to a freelance journalist, sent in 2015, she claimed the prince arrived ‘very late at night’, stayed for the following day and left early the following morning.

‘He was in the bungalow next to me,’ she claimed. ‘I heard no strange noises or anything unusual. If anything, he was flirting with me, but as I mentioned before I was in love with someone else.’ (Boundary Violation, Sense of Entitlement)

Finally, with regard to the interview itself, one particular moment encapsulated what the Duke of York is. There was a moment towards the end of the interview with Prince Andrew when she was unable to conceal her astonishment at what she was hearing. Did he, Ms Maitlis had asked, feel any sense of shame at his association with the convicted child sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein? “Do I regret that he [Epstein] has quite obviously conducted himself in a manner unbecoming? Yes,” was the prince’s reply. “Unbecoming?” said Ms Maitlis incredulously. “He was a sex offender.” (By labelling the conduct of a convicted sex offender as unbecoming demonstrates without any doubt that the Duke of York lacks both emotional and cognitive empathy, no sense of remorse and blames Epstein for his behaviour but does not offer any recognition or acceptance for his own behaviour by being and staying friends with Epstein. Of course it suited the Duke to do so, it enabled him – through sex and money – two of the most potent ways of manipulating people – to exert control and Epstein granted access to those two things. Just as the various dubious rulers and business men have granted access to financial resource as detailed earlier in this article.)

 

The response to the interview was almost universal condemnation, bewilderment and the conclusion that it made matters worse for the Duke.

Former Buckingham Palace press officer Dickie Arbiter described the interview as “excruciating”.

Asked about the prince’s decision to be interviewed by BBC Newsnight’s Emily Maitlis, Mr Arbiter said he thought many questions would be asked in Buckingham Palace.

He said: “They will be wondering: Was this the right decision? Was the right decision made? Who made the decision to put him on? Did he make it himself or did he seek advice within the Palace?

My guess is that he bulldozed his way in and decided he was going to do it himself without any advice. (Sense of Entitlement, Arrogance, I Know Best)

“Any sensible-thinking person in the PR business would have thrown their hands up in horror at the very suggestion that he puts himself up in front of a television camera to explain away his actions and his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.”

He added that the interview was “not so much a car crash but an articulated lorry crash”.

Mr Arbiter said he believed the interview would have an impact on the Duke of York’s relationships with various charities.

The BBC’s royal correspondent Jonny Dymond said the prince was “very damaged” by the interview and the opportunity to clear his name had “failed, badly”.

Royal biographer Angela Levin said she was gripped by the interview but felt it was “ill-judged” to offer insights into his life with Epstein.

“Unfortunately it was a sign of his arrogance,” she said. “He has always been arrogant.

“The Queen’s motto is don’t complain don’t explain. I think in her heart she will be extremely embarrassed.

“I know for a fact Prince Andrew does not listen to his advisers.

“A very senior member of the press team left suddenly two weeks ago and the implication is he would not have approved of what Prince Andrew did.” (Arrogance, Haughtiness, Poor Listener, Lack of Awareness, Wrecking Ball.)

 

Yet, notwithstanding observations such as those above and beyond, The Duke of York stands by his decision to take part in an interview about his links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, sources  told the BBC. (Rigidity of Approach, Lack of Awareness, Always Knows Best, Need to Maintain Control to the repeated challenge responses of commentators and observers.)

People close to Prince Andrew said he wanted to address the issues head-on and did so with “honesty and humility”. (Magical Thinking, Grandiosity.)

What did the British newspapers make of the interview?

It was, the Financial Times says, one of the Royal Family’s most misjudged forays on television, eclipsing even those of Prince Charles and Princess Diana on the collapse of their marriage. (Always Knows Best, Lack of Awareness, Sense of Entitlement.)

For the i newspaper, it was the Newsnight horror show – one of the weirdest royal interviews ever.

The Guardian says the prince faced disbelief and fury on both sides of the Atlantic over the defence of his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.

It says he is under growing pressure from his critics here and in the US to apologise to Epstein’s victims.

In the paper’s own view, there was a “grotesque mismatch between the Duke of York’s language and demeanour, and the gravity of the allegations”. (Lack of Emotional Empathy, Lack of Cognitive Empathy.)

But the Daily Mail reports that the prince has told friends he regrets he did not make it clear he had great sympathy for anyone who was abused by Epstein. (False Contrition, Too Little Too Late)

“When I said I was shocked I thought that was implicit,” he is quoted as saying. (Lack of Emotional Empathy)

The Mail’s Richard Kay says: “The jaw-dropping insensitivity of it all left millions of viewers, not just in Britain but around the world, asking: why? (The answer is at the end of this article Richard.)

“Why on earth had he agreed to do this, and what was he thinking?” He describes the interview as one of the most egregious acts of self-harm by any member of the Royal Family.

According to the Sun, the prince told the Queen that his interview had been a “great success”. It was, the paper says, his “craziest” claim yet. (Grandiosity and Magical Thinking)

The Times says Buckingham Palace insiders, while taken aback by the reaction, believe it will be possible to judge the impact of the interview only after the dust has settled.

They are bracing themselves for several days of negative publicity, it adds.

In the Times’s view, Prince Andrew’s “broadcast equivocations were an embarrassment and a disgrace” and “the monarchy stands mired in scandal as a result”.

His position is “probably irretrievable”, it suggests, adding: “The first step in extricating the monarchy should be his retreat from a public role, and a long period of silence.”

The Telegraph’s main cartoon shows a puzzled diner at Pizza Express in Woking inquiring about a dish on the menu. “That’s our new one”, the waitress replies – “the alibi”.

And, in its editorial, the paper says that as an exercise in making a bad situation worse, it has few equals.

“Since Prince Andrew saw this interview as an opportunity to put the record straight, it is surprising that he was so ill-prepared for the line of questioning,” it says. (It has nothing to do with being ill-prepared and everything to do with his arrogance, lack of accountability and sense of entitlement.)

 

The Duke of York has exhibited through this interview (and behaviours previously)

  • A complete lack of emotional empathy
  • Intermittent  absence of cognitive empathy
  • Arrogance
  • Haughtiness and Being Dismissive
  • Boundary Violation
  • The exhibition of the need for control
  • The exhibition of a threat to the need for control
  • The Telling of Lies
  • Deflection
  • False Contrition
  • Lack of Remorse
  • Improper Justification
  • The Ends Always Justify The Means
  • Lack of Awareness
  • Always Knowing Best
  • Silent Treatment
  • Sense of Entitlement
  • Lack of Accountability
  • Objectification
  • Revision of History
  • Blame Shifting
  • Projection
  • Circular Argument

There is clear evidence time and time again of his narcissism.

The Duke of York is indeed A Very Royal Narcissist and once again, not one commentator,  television broadcast or newspaper, for all their condemnation and amazement was able to identify precisely what is driving his behaviour.

 

 

 

Advertisements

207 Comments

  1. Wow, just watched the interview. Sounds like The Grand Old Duke of York suffered Post Traumatic Sweat Disorder after the Falklands. It’s a very serious medical condition!

  2. Shaun attwood is a channel ive been following on updates to the epstein case. Daily videis on whats going on.
    Epsteins girlfriend/madam recruiter id thought may be dead but she has a legal team lined up so i think itll be interesting seeing what comes out of her mouth. Im sure all lies. She knows about everything as she was the one pimping these girls. Smh that any woman could be so disgusting! What a trash person!
    I hope the truth comes out.

  3. Fergies another one that is not innocent in the fact shes accepted money numerous times from epstein to pay off debt.
    The whole thing stinks of filth.

    1. Hi HG…i dont believe any of the royals will be exposed in this scandal. They seem untouchable. Its already been tidied up by whoever killed epstein probably the queens and prince philips doing. After this story i no longer look at the queen as i once did. I knew very little about the royal family but enjoyed the tradition of seeing a monarchy still in place. Ive lost a lot of respect for the royals the more i learn.
      I just cant see prince andrew or fergie being exposed. They have too much power and money within the royal family.
      I dont think prince andrew will travel to the usa until this blows over. They can haul him in for questioning and possibly arrest him.

  4. Reading up on the jimmy saville scandal prince charles friend. I dont know much about the royal family but what ive been reading is an eye opener. Of course lots of conspiracy theories too. One story that is eerie is about how the queen took 10 kids out of a residental school for first nations in kamloops bc canada and supposedly they went missing. It seems far fetched but it makes you think about the secrets the royals hide from the public.
    A lot of the british public want the monarchy abolished. They dont want their money to keep going towards it.

  5. I wonder what prince andrew would think if a man violated his two daughters the way him and epstein did these girls? Mind you maybe he wouldnt care as hes a psycho narcissist.

    1. He would not care with emotional empathy, but he would respond to it since it would threaten his control.

  6. Tbh before this write up i knew next to nothing about epstein or prince andrew and now ive been reading and watching a lot on the subject. I think theyve only just scratched the surface. One of the victims virginia was asked to have a baby and sign it over. Its scary to think this may have extended past sexual abuse and into sadism or satanism. I have read about elite underground organizations where this supposedly exists. I cant remember the name but there are catalogues with pics of children that can be chosen. I wont go into details but its scary and disgusting. The terrifying thing is the fbi is involved as well. There was a boy who went missing and his parents hired private investigators. They uncovered this underground organization ran by elites. There has been stories from survivors about satanic ritualism and children being beaten and killed.
    Money is the root of all evil!! Their money protects them and hides their evilness!
    I get a very dark feeling about this story that goes beyond paedaphiles.
    Epsteins girlfriend is missing….or i suspect dead and murdered. She holds the key to a lot of info in this case. Prince andrew needs to be investigated. Its obvious hes lying his ass off! Whether he was honey trapped or not he committed a crime and he knows crucial info hes not telling authorities!

  7. I wonder if prince andrew was sexually abused as a child? Many pedophiles are victims repeating a cycle much like narcissists.
    As far as the royal family goes i look at them all as a facade. They were born to act and create an image. What goes on behind closed doors im sure would be shocking. Just because theyre royals does not exclude them from things that can happen in life. Its totally probable given his sex addiction and attraction to younger women and his involvement in sex trafficking. I wonder if he still talks to any of these girls he was involved with. I also wonder to what degree his involvements been? Is he involved in the criminal underground activity? I think theres way more to prince andrew than we know. Ive always wondered about the royals. Charles seems messed up too. Maybe prince andrew was violated as a child by someone in his family or close circle???….

    1. A lot of Royals have gone to school at Gordonstoun, which Charles compared to a Nazi prisoner-of-war camp (although Andrew appears to have fit in better than Charles). If they had narc neurological tendencies, that would do it.

      1. Ive not heard of gordonstoun. Another thing to look into. My initial comment about prince andrew possibly being sexually abused i feel silly posting bc it looks like a lot of thos sort of thing goes on in the royal family or has. I hope the new generation of children are treated better.

  8. Has Mr Tudor ever mentioned Billy Mc Farland and the school of N he is?
    I tried via the search button but nothing came up.

    There is a netflix documentary about the Fire Festival and his other ‘business’ projects, wow what a fraud…

  9. Its uncanny ive never heard prince andrew speak before but not even watching the interview it sounds like you HG! Im not suggesting you are him but you sound so similiar.

  10. HG you and prince andrew have very similiar voices i noticed. Im not up on my accents but they sound alike.

  11. Someone other than me has been directing people on news sites such as DM and yahoo to check out HG Tudor’s narcsite, even specifying the article “A Very Royal Narcissist Part 5.”

    So if it’s not another Tudorista on here, the word is spreading out there l.

    My shout-outs did get a number of up-arrows, so either readers are already familiar with the site or they searched for it and were impressed by what they saw.

    Today the web… tomorrow the world.

  12. I am so pleased Andrew has been made to step down from Royal duties and made, he has been !!
    It has not been his choice as the statement would have us believe , clearly the family allowing him to save some face.
    I think this is a step forward in changes that may be seen in the family to come. The very fact that his ex wife has been hanging on to the Royal finances via Andrews so called work …. should have been cut off years ago. Those children are adult women now. Much more to come from this Epstein case I would imagine.
    I think when the Queen and Phillip die it will remain to be seen how much longer this over privileged extended family holds up. Particularly those further down in the pecking order.
    Sarah apparently even said if it was up to her Andrew would not have done the interview as he’s not good with those sort of things . What sort of things would they be ??
    Explaining why you continued to be friends with a sex trafficker amongst other undesirable qualities . So basically doesn’t matter that he’s done it , just he should have kept quiet because he’s not good at interviews and said the wrong things. You couldn’t make this stuff up !!
    HG, I believe you’ve said before Sarah is not a narc ? What is she ? She certainly has some major issues and some of the stuff she’s done , and the debts and the getting caught trying to sell stories , she definitely lacks something ??

  13. HG anecdotally speaking what percentage of offspring would you say are a narcissist if both parents were Ns.

  14. He could not be involved with that much political intrigue without everyone that should have know about, knowing about it. So his entitlement as it is called looks like business as usual to me. In fact, he does not seem lazy. Then all businessmen that are not lazy may be Narcississt.

  15. Underage is a vague technical term. Females` age of consent depends on the locality. So, I find it odd that age of consent violations are not mentioned in these newspapers? Lots of young women love what they call `leveling up` from their often boring and lackluster life full of pimply and slobbery teen boys and they are very interested in being around what they consider to be wealthy and important men. I see it every day. They line up. They beg to go to the parties. To be introduced. To jetset. They take fake photos of themselves that they are already living the life and partying with high-powered men, even when they can not break into these circles. Hoping, one day they may be scooped up. I know about it. The President of France had sex at what age at first with his now wife? Why is not his wife considered a sex offender? Age of consent? Who does not know this. It all sounds like some sort of smear job, when millions of men are doing the same thing. Wealthy men do this with women since how long? And are hanging out with young women and the young women are hanging out with them. Even today, all over the world. I still do not see what Andy is doing that men at that level are not doing. In fact, he sounds sort of mild, in comparison, to just what some guys do in one night at certain clubs in every city. Who gains for pointing out this Andy, this lone gunman, this one bullet, so to speak. I guess he is some sort of sacrifice. For not doing much. And I guess a lot of something else much larger is tiptoeing by and out of view, with this distraction. Epstein and Andy are scapegoats. Why? Who knows. Are all wealthy men narcissists? When the majority behave even worse with women than this Andy? If so, case closed.

    1. Princess emp, I thought about the age of consent too but I think the real issue here, from a legal standpoint, is the trafficking that was going on. Also he was associating with a man charged with trafficking girls as young as 13 and 14. Scapegoat or not, it has brought awareness to the subject. Maybe the exposure was needed in order to make change.

      1. Mercy; That is what I mean by a sacrifice. But for whose good? And if society really cared about young women, the Kardashians et al would be banned. (and maybe Celine Dion, as well). I do not believe that there is this great desire to protect young women in society. Why? Because, I live in society on this planet and I know what I see. Andy: He is old. He is passing his prime. He is not even close to the throne any longer. Less than a Spare, at this point. He is no King Pin. And, Epstein is no more than a servant. It is like a yard sale. For those that will be pacified by the old things, that earlier were agreed upon to be a layer of grime to be removed and sold, so that the valuable things can go on and increase in value with more room to breath, and with less public scrutiny into their age old activities. The Head of the households all determined what items would be part of the yard sale. Open the Preview Catalog: So far, Andy and Epstein are the 2 expendables items to be sold to the pubic. (1) Andy is the can that was kicked down the road. (2) Epstein is the coffin with or without a corpse inside. They know how the game is played, but magical thinking would have them believe it could not happen to them. No matter. And, HG says there are also blind spots with Narcissists. How long will this yard sale go on? Whom, of little value, will be sacrificed next? Stay tuned. I am staying tuned. The salvage sale is concluded for the moment. The 2 scapegoats have been sacrificed (Epstein twice already since 2008?). Anyway, Going once…Going twice….. SOLD! The people in general bought in and believe change is a comin`. Excellent. Same as it ever was. All rise! The matter has been resolved with the public, in that: The old meat has been accepted as the sacrifice. BOOM! ~~The End– unless another scapegoat is necessary. (This could all go on for at least a millennium at this rate)

        1. Princess, haha that made me laugh and I see your point and I agree for the most part. Someone has to be sacrificed in order to calm society and make them feel safe again, or to able turn a blind eye on what’s happening. I live in society as well and I also see many that don’t care but some do, in fact a lot do. Why? Because it is happening in our neighborhoods. We live next door to predators, we work with them, they are in our families, we are married to them. The only thing that makes Andy and Epstein different is their social class. So if society needs a scapegoat in order to wake the hell up then I say bring on the next auction. Keep people talking, give the victims strength to come forward. No it will never go away but that doesn’t mean we have to make it easy for them.

          1. Mercy: Once, when I was a very little girl, a teacher told the class that, `most people in the world are good, and that a few bad people were messing things up in the world.` And so, I asked her, why don`t all the many good people go and stop the few bad people. crickets….the teacher had no response. And she did not like me, anyway. And, so I just wondered why she had no answer. So much for that question. lol. That is why I say society is not concerned with the preservation of the well being and the healthy chastity of young women, and it starts at the top, where the violation is established in so many ways against young females, and enjoyed and promoted and protected, from the top down, with so many practices and policies that are against young females, including even killing them when they are born, because of their gender, mutilating their private parts to hurt their natural hormones, and do I need to go on? Killing them, because they were raped, selling them on the internet porn and into slavery, even by their own parents, marrying them by arrangement and then forcefully impregnating them under 12 years old, promoting and applauding and rewarding them for their sex tapes on the internet, and the majority of people in general, go along in general, for a myriad of reasons they would explain to one, if asked, regarding, why are the few allowed to violate the many?

    1. Here’s the official Royal response today (obviously not written by the Prince himself given the notable difference in language and tone from his original communication in the live interview):

      “A statement by His Royal Highness The Duke of York KG:

      “It has become clear to me over the last few days that the circumstances relating to my former association with Jeffrey Epstein has become a major disruption to my family’s work and the valuable work going on in the many organisations and charities that I am proud to support.

      “Therefore, I have asked Her Majesty if I may step back from public duties for the foreseeable future, and she has given her permission.

      “I continue to unequivocally regret my ill-judged association with Jeffrey Epstein. His suicide has left many unanswered questions, particularly for his victims, and I deeply sympathize with everyone who has been affected and wants some form of closure. I can only hope that, in time, they will be able to rebuild their lives”

      I find it interesting that the Prince consistently refers to Epstein’s death as suicide even though the cause is still under investigation and controversial and he was his ‘friend’.

      I was curious how Epstein was connected to so many people and found this article interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/10/business/jeffrey-epstein-net-worth.html

      Quite the CV: Math teacher to debt collector to corporate raider to Madoff-style investor to sex trafficking pedophile. There were obviously many people that could have exposed his criminality but chose to stay silent and keep attending his parties. Disgusting that his shady life and the others involved were not exposed sooner.

      1. He was “suicided.” There was a news story about a guy in Inwood trying to burglarize an apartment when the tenant, an 8-months pregnant woman, was home. She screamed for help, and her neighbors broke in and came to her aid. He fled to the bathroom, where he “either jumped or was pushed” out the window, and died.

        A co-worker said, “That’s my old neighborhood. He didn’t jump. He was ‘helped.'”

          1. FYC: Yes, that is the term used for that, `suicided.` And then there is the perhaps more familiar term used when a person that is a political or legal threat or an embarrassment or a damaging witness or a liability of some sort, etc. is, `disappeared.` And the distraught families and friends can not find the person, and they then know that their missing person has been `disappeared.` And they never usually see the person again and they do not know if the person is alive or dead, But, I think the `disappeared` person is usually dead.

      2. FYC, “I deeply sympathize with everyone who has been affected and wants some form of closure”. Whoever wrote that should have done some coaching before his interview. Wow these guys really thought they were above the law. I read the first time Epstein was convicted in 2008 he took a deal. 1 year in prison but was allowed to leave 12 hours a day 6 days a week on work release.

        1. Hi Mercy, I did not know that. It really disgusts me. I also learned today that the executors of his estate are attempting to limit or sequester only a percentage of his estate to settle with the victims. HIs estate is estimated to be valued at 570M to 1B. It would be wonderful if a judge could break the trust, compensate the victims, and donate the balance to victims of human trafficking the world over. If that happened it would be the first decent thing Epstein’s money ever funded.

          1. Yes FYC, one of the last things Epstein did before his death was change his will. I remember reading that it was a huge loss for his victims because it will make it almost impossible for them to be compensated. If I’m not mistaken he met with his lawyer just days before he died while in prison. I don’t remember details but it should be easy to look up.

            I agree, it would be a huge win if the money could go to the victims of human trafficking and I’m glad that the issue of trafficking is being talked about. Unfortunately the victims are being put in the back seat because the media wants to focus on their abusers.

            The fact that Prince Andrew would associated with someone involved with that is mind boggling. His narcissism made him think he was untouchable.

          2. Thanks Mercy, I did not know that either as I have not followed the details closely. If figures he would selfishly protect his assets from his victims. Would be interesting to know the details of that attorney/client conversation.

            Yes media love anything salacious. I look at these gross, entitled middle-aged men and think of them taking advantage of any impressionable girl, much less a teenager, and it disgusts me. But the N perps warped grandiosity probably made them think they were doing these kids a favor. Barf.

            I googled and found out that an estimated 1.2 million kids are trafficked each year. That is so horrific and sad. I hope the #metoo advocates make sure these victims of abuse have a voice that is heard too.

            As for your kind comment on the infamous thread, I find it interesting that certain people never ask questions, make assertions, shame and blame with little self or other awareness and self-promote. I am beginning to see that the lack of awareness is a very big portion of the mix. This padewan is learning with practice, thanks to the dark Jedi. Far more training is needed though.

          3. FYC, I have also been noticing lack of awareness as being a key indicator. My new rule has been, when I realize the person I’m speaking to is incapable of understanding the affect of their actions I will disengage. Incapable being the key word. The tricky part is realizing this before I get in too deep. I think with anything the training never ends. It seems like there is always something to learn.

            1.2 million kids a year is something I can’t wrap my mind around but just think of all the people that have googled the same thing that wasn’t aware of the issue before this incident. I don’t care about Andrew, he is just 1 predator of many. But the publicity this is getting forces people to recognize the tragedy of what’s happening around them.

          4. Hi Mercy, I agree. That is a wise and useful rule to follow. I also agree that the pursuit of knowledge here and practicing that knowledge never ends. I hope you are right about awareness regarding trafficking. Now if only people will be brave enough to expose more offenders.

          5. That is to say, impressionable young women versus girls, but at my age, I think of legal 18 year olds as girls. Sorry if that might have been offensive to any younger members of the blog.

          6. I have a 22-year-old daughter. Even though she is now, the age that I was when I gave birth to her – I see her as a girl. In retrospect I understand why my mother cried when she found out I was pregnant at 22 (with a ML narc’s) child after knowing him 8 months LOL

            When my daughter travel to Europe with her school when she was 15, she was so well educated on human trafficking, that her friends found it amusing (Paranoid) that she wouldn’t let anyone go to the bathroom alone.
            I’m sorry I made her a little paranoid but I’m glad she listened to me.

            I suddenly became hyper aware of the extent of human trafficking probably about 10 years ago.
            Something just clicked in my head and I just suddenly realized with all these missing kids/women were going you know what I mean?
            I felt like I knew a truth that was not being acknowledged ( similar to how I feel about narcissists, since this blog)

            18 yr olds are still girls .

            I look after 95 and 100-year-olds and they tell me that I’m still a baby. Lol .

            An 18 yr old isn’t making a decision to be a prostitute. They are being manipulated into it.

          7. Woke: I appreciated your response. Since I have no kids, I lose sight of age. I use girls/guys as a normal gender reference, but I know some people may take issue with that phraseology. For the most part age is irrelevant. I see people as people. Everyone deserves respect and appreciation at all ages.

            I think you were wise to educate your daughter, especially if she is an empath and too trusting as most young empaths are. You kept her safe in unfamiliar surroundings when you could not be there for her. Well done.

            I agree that human trafficking is not well covered nor often exposed, and as a result, the practice thrives. It is a form of modern day slavery. Hideous and so sad.

          8. FYC: It is not the case of the money of the estate, being a problem. It is a case of what names are being decried as the victimizers, and these names and records are part of the estate. That is why the estate was frozen immediately when some of the names started coming out. If all the supposed victimizers, that I guess will be named in the future by some women, were allowed to anonymously donate the money to shut down the case, and especially close down and seal the books and records of names of what people had what habits and did what with whom and where, they would leap at the chance, to shut this matter down by giving money in the amount of the estate. Whomsoever gets the names on those records of mostly men, some of the names are out, but not the proclivities, and also the activities of these men, will have a lot of power, or will have fear of their life, all depending. And a lot of the female escort `victims` are being used as pawns and they know it, but some of them may not be all that smart and some others are surely in over their heads in this power scrimmage. It is about leverage over powerful people, that is the issue, not the money that is holding up the estate. Many people have been killed over the records they keep, if threat of exposure reared its head. The money is acting essentially as a false flag or a red herring for some people. These people involved could and do easily spend multi-millions of dollars in one day on just a house purchase, and on a house that they do not even really like that much. It is not about the money value of the estate. Leverage and Control means the world to these people, and a lot of the keys to the weaknesses of many important people of this world are locked up in the records that are part of that estate. Herein is the problem. And the pressure. It is a battle of information and a fight to get that information and thereby knowledge out of that estate, and of course, knowledge is Power. Scientia sit potentia

          9. PSE: I do not understand. Perhaps I missing something. How are the other abusers part of Epstein’s estate? Are they named as beneficiaries? Are they co-trustees? Do they have personal access to the assets named in the will? What’s the NYC media saying? I have not following this case closely.

          10. FYC: The abusers are not part of Epstein`s estates. Documentation of what some of these people did that may be said to be abusers by people that may say they are victims, could be found in documents that are part of his estate. It is said that Epstein kept many records to keep up with his dealings with many powerful people, and that there are even little black books on their activities and proclivities as well. He had a lot of ODD money to build his estate, as well. How will a lot of his ODD wealth be accounted for. All that needs to be traced back, and from whom did all this ODD money come from? And for what, exactly? Many powerful people are afraid of what may be in Epstein`s records. It was also said that many important people believed that he was going to strike a deal and expose these records that he kept, to obtain leniency for himself.. Also other records unknown that may be found in his estate are part of his estate. And hidden inside physically. People that want to claim that they are victims need proof and their lawyers need to discover what documentation could boost the victims` arguments, but if the estate is frozen then they can not demand these records and search for more records. You have seen, even in movies, how the FBI go into a property and search and they have very special talented people that excel on how to search a place physically for hidden documentation, and they also take away all the tech devices and box up lots of paperwork and take it out of a person`s home. Why? For information. You have seen it. And they go into safe deposit boxes, of all the located bank accounts of the person, and all of that, which is all part of the estate. So, many powerful people want Epstein`s estate frozen because of the records contained that are part of the estate, both psychically, in the estate itself, but also including his bank accounts, safe deposit boxes, legal dealings and records, diaries, calendars, appointment books, payments, clients, and whatever else that is documented that they can find, wherever it is located, that is also part of his estate, and so the problem is not over the money value of the estate. But, the possible illegality of it all. Records that will show who did what and when and where and for how much (lots of odd money) and with whom and how. Even surprises could be found regarding people that have nothing to do with anyone saying they are abusers. Surprises about Powerful People. Bad Surprises. Who knows what all could be found. It makes powerful people that dealt with him paranoid in so many ways. And this information can be bought and sold by powerful people and their enemies Leverage. There is a lot of scrambling going on behind the scenes to shut this down. To control is to cope, with this level of people, so they do not like the Epstein estate issue. So, the problem is the documentation of activities, that could be proof of perversion and malfeasance and crimes regarding all sorts of things. The ODD wealth that he had. How far do the tentacles reach? This is not a problem about the monetary value of the estate, per se. It is an estate problem about damaging information on many powerful people. It is a big problem and about a lot of odd money and damaging records that he acquired that is all tied up in that estate. Problems, problems, problems…. Galore.

          11. PSE: I think you are confusing how an estate is settled. With regard to information as power, I am highly aware.

          12. FYC, what I am understanding is that Epstein signed his will two days before his death leaving his estate worth 577 million to a private trust. Some are saying that he likely did this to keep his dealings private and make it harder for his victims to claim assets. From what I’m gathering the estate is very complex. The lawyer representing the executors is working out a private way to settle the claims. They haven’t come to an agreement yet on how the process should be done. On top of all this, there are dozens more women that have come forward.

          13. Thank you, Mercy. I understand. This path of sheltering wealth is not uncommon for the wealthy, but there is legal protocol for such matters. I am sure there are many lawyers and forensic accountants involved and the courts will have to sort out the legal claims for the trust to be settled.

          14. FYC, not related to this conversation but I wanted to get your opinion and didn’t want to post it on the other thread. I just got done reading every comment. Most of the comments by the subject made my eyeballs numb but there was one that stood out to me

            “How do I put this, to admit I was wrong, means to be vulnerable, to be vulnerable means I am open to be controlled”

            What is the one thing a narcissist can not give up? Control

            So you have the empaths fighting for an apology (normal empath behavior) and the subject that won’t give up control ( normal narcissist behavior) but what makes me pause is that the subject knows she cannot give up control. That feels like self awareness.

            It’s been 6 days and I stopped looking for narc traits a few days ago and started looking for empath traits. None, not a single one. Not even toward the subject’s supporter.

            So this is what I wondering your opinion on. Do you think a normal or an empath could fake it for 6 days without showing 1 single sign of empathy?

          15. Hi Mercy, I noticed that too. And also lack of empathy in one of her supporters and some odd jealousy/envy of the person they maligned and one of her defenders. In direct answer to your question, I think it would take an extraordinary set of circumstances (physical/psychological torture, etc.) for an empath to suppress empathy entirely for more than a few hours or a day. I saw no evidence of torture or duress. Mercy, you saw evidence of what you felt and you put it together very well. It was painful to see that thread unfold. It stands as a good example of how a MRN, unfettered by empathy, can stir the pot and remain in their defense with ease.

          16. NarcAngel,
            Haha no need to close the door. Your opinion would be appreciated as well. I feel strongly that I know the answer but a small little voice in my head keeps wondering if it’s possible this could be some keyboard warrior messing with us.

          17. Hi Mercy
            If we’re still allowed to give opinions (and I want to be clear this is just my opinion and not an accusation)….
            She reads like a narcissist on that thread but then so do I come across to some as that. I thought initially, ok she’s annoyed about what she feels is noise pollution on the blog and she became over confident in her abilities (due to life coaching and motivation business she stated she’s in) to read and assess people and charged forth with narcissist. Although of all people Lorelei as dangerous was funny. That’s why I noted in my summary about Supers. Not as some declaration of superiority as some feel, but as a reminder that some of us have higher narc traits and to maybe temper further dialogue with that in mind. I also made a note of what traits would become evident in further dialogue if they were in fact empath ( more specifically SE ). It was an opportunity also for her if she was reading, to display those to avoid the narc label herself. I offered a loophole to correct if she found she may have erred. An apology or softened stance I felt would have helped to correct the path it was going down as a solution but apparently I spoke out of place and it was too late. Some people took that to mean I was being superior again. My truth seeker trait came out huge then because I saw a lot of BS coming out on all sides. Fine, I thought, if people admire strong opinion, here are some of mine. Strangely though, when I do it it is aggression and attack where it is mere opinion for others. That was pretty transparent I thought. Also, if someone asks me to clarify I do. I noticed that was not the case for others. People should give opinion but we should leave thd labels and assessments to HG if we trust him enough to be here and to pay for his services. But even that was exposed by some not to be accepted. There was a lot of noise and I was part of that. I don’t find it painful at all given my disposition and background so I can remain calm during these conversations, but I know it is upsetting for some and I wish they would leave the room and let if be worked out, but for those it affected negatively, I’m sorry, and my apologies to HG for any “unbecoming” behaviour in his house.

            Sorry, I can’t stay serious too long – thus the Andrew quote/joke.

          18. NarcAngel, you are always going to have your critics. It is because of your strong opinions, the narc traits, and tough skin. Some appreciate this type of straight forwardness and others would rather a softer approach. Then there are some that will mistake confidence as superiority. I think that has alot to do with envy of the strength you portray. That isn’t your problem, it’s theirs but like everyone else, they are allowed their opinions.

            Many people offered her a loophole. Many tried to have a reasonable conversation. I believe it was my second comment directly to her and then her response that made me aware nothing said was going to penetrate that brick and mortar. Its because I have just started my NC again that I was able to recognize the circular conversation because it is fresh in my head. I knew immediately I was at risk of loosing my shit (ET). Like you, I stayed to learn.

            In my opinion, because of your long term status and your personality (like you or hate you) others took notice and started to participate in the conversation. This is when the real learning began. It was a feast for us truth seekers. I kept thinking we are going to be in so much trouble when the boss comes back.

            You are right, leave it to HG to diagnose. Narcissistic or not she is not someone I would engage with in real life. So that is enough for me.

            A few things I wanted to point out that I noticed

            1. The loophole – empaths do this. We are always trying to give a way out when we feel strongly that we are right. The loophole is like a truce In my experience a narcissist never takes advantage of the loophole because it’s a loss if control. A stubborn person will.

            2. A narcissist will create their own loophole and we usually don’t recognize it. This time avoiding an apology because they doubt the accuracy of HGs ED. Nevermind the behavior right?

            3. We all can be pushed to our limits. Some will stop participating, some will leave the room all together, some will back down and others will release their inner narc traits. Who’s to judge whats right or wrong? It’s all subjective anyway.

          19. NarcAngel,
            I wanted to say that those 3 points were not directed to you specifically. They are just things that I noticed and wanted to throw out there.

          20. NA, Dang! I guess our invisible cone of silence needs some calibration. Thanks for keeping it on the DL NA, you’re the best.

          21. Thanks FYC, I agree I don’t think it’s possible either but I only have my own experiences to base my opinion on. You are right about it being painful to watch and I feel bad we lost FM1T. I understand needing a break though.

            I don’t think I caught the jealousy/envy part. Care to share?

          22. Mercy, I was really amazed at some of the commentary on that thread. Definitely changed my opinion of some people. I don’t blame FM1T for ducking out. Smart woman. She has a sensitive soul and does not need that crap. She will be back again to grace this blog; hopefully at a time when people return to some semblance of decorum.

            As for weird jealousy/envy, I was referring to those who are envious of anyone HG engages with or pays recognition. Where does this come from? Why do they feel the need to put others down (“brown nosers!”, “useful narcissists!”) as a means to build themselves up? Instead of being jealous and petty, why not either enjoy a conversation or move on? These people portend they are the true group this blog is intended for, not others. Wow. The sheer arrogance and ignorance of such a statement is mind boggling. What causes such behavior?

            Do those people have a clue that NA is deeply sensitive and empathic but has a layer of defense that helped her survive the awful abuse she endured as a child and adult? If they had any emotional empathy, they would not miss that obvious fact. Heck even cognitive empathy would help them put that together. And why the jealousy over the word super? Or should I quote, “card-carrying SE who says it’s me me me!” That is venom. I never considered any category as inspirational or superior and cannot imagine why anyone would. I wonder if the same people are jealous/envious of a super infection? Does the word “super” make a disease more desirable? I think not. So much ego drama.

            Sorry for my letting off steam. I am done with that sad, unfortunate thread. I did appreciate your comments, Mercy and I thought you handed yourself very well through the whole ordeal. Hope you have a lovely evening.

          23. FYC, oh yes I noticed the jealousy in that context. It annoys me when people say that stuff too. Nobody is stopping anyone from participating. I don’t like the clique comments either. I have taken breaks before and I’ve never felt unwelcome or left out when I come back. In all honesty I don’t know Lorelei that well because she wasn’t here a while back. She was one of the first people to engage with me when I came back. It was a funny comment but I actually like the light conversation sometimes because it makes me feel normal when I’m in that dark place after being worked over by the Ex N.

            The card carrying SE got me too. I didn’t feel like her comment was asserting superiority. I felt like she was trying to bring clarity to the subject. She is always going to have her haters. I think she has accepted this and I’m glad she is who she is and won’t change because of the criticism. The difference between NA and Julie is that NA is willing to listen and change her opinion if new credible information is given. I have witnessed this many times.

            I’m done with that ordeal as well. I’m willing to talk about it constructively but Ive seen enough on the other thread. I think Lorelei did a beautiful job with her last comment. I’m sorry she had to go through this. It cannot be easy watching people debate your own personally.

          24. It reminds me of HG saying a mid ranger could be diagnosed as a narc but not accept it- however use the diagnosis as a pity play and excuse for their narc behaviours.
            My “self defence mechanism” made me do it.

            Not the sign of the self awareness Of a Greater, but the sign of the lack of self awareness of a MR

            I also note the only ones who poopoo using the HG appointed Empath title, are the ones who have not yet taken the ED for their own reasons that have nothing to do with being a narcissist.

          25. Woke, I noticed your response to that quote today and thought it was brilliant. Something along the lines “I wonder what that defense mechanism would be diagnosed as”. I might not have gotten it word for word but it was a great 1 liner.

            Ok so I get your explanation about the mid using a diagnosis as a pity play. We can’t deny she has some understanding of what HG is teaching. Do you think she is a reader because she’s using being an empath as a pity play IRL? I question that because I didn’t get the pity vibe from her at all.

          26. Mercy
            I know a guy in AA who occasion mentions he was diagnosed as a narcissist. He seems to use it as a more grandiose label that he somehow recovered from.
            No idea if he was misdiagnosed but other markers are there as well as his energetic imprint of being empty. It’s creepy AF.

            Anyhow I think a mid could self-diagnose , themselves with insecure attachment style from trauma. I’ve studied the attachment styles and I also have insecure attachment style but I’ve been actively working on it for years and let me say NOT being in a relationship with a narcissist who bloody well ENCOURAGES and perpetuates it helps a LOT. Lol

            I think a mid of the guru-type could excuse unknowingly , their narcissism as insecure attachment
            and use that to act like an asshat and never have to apologize for it because their defence mechanism made them do it.
            If an empath has a defence mechanism that they are aware causes conflict- I suspect they’d work extra hard to resolve it- not use it as an excuse

            Meanwhile the narcissism prevents them from knowing what they are or what they’re doing.

          27. WokeAF, that must be interesting listening to this “recovered narcissist”. Have you ever been tempted to engage. I have to watch myself in situations like that because I tend to spew sarcasm when people annoy me and that would annoy me. When you say energetic imprint of being empty, have you had that same experience with other narcissist?

          28. No never tempted to engage at all. It’s a support group !
            Plus, I don’t have anger at narcs just for being narcs.
            This guy hasn’t hurt me or anyone else there. – we are part of his facade , he has some grandiose to him , so we are all white . He gets annoyed and tries to outshine sometimes but it’s all good

          29. Woke and Mercy: I am trying to learn from the unfortunate experience. The following may be helpful for future reference.

            From “Come One, Come All”:

            “The Unwitting Narcissists
            From time to time this very small group has a membership when one of our kind wanders by and repeatedly exhibits all the traits which demonstrate that they are one of our kind, but they do not see it. Indeed, their blame-shifting, projection and deflection are manifestly obvious, but not to them for they have no insight.”

            and

            HG Tudor says:
            November 11, 2019 at 21:07
            “…Mid Range Narcissists…Envy and jealousy would undoubtedly be the manifestations of the unconscious sensation of a loss of control.”

            From “Why Arguments are Never Resolved”:

            “When one of the participants [in an arguement] is one of us, a narcissist, it always seems to be the case that it is never resolved, at least, not to your (the non-narcissist’s) satisfaction.”

            “What is the narcissist’s mindset?
            Gain fuel;
            Assert and maintain superiority over the victim”

            “The narcissist will not apologise because that is ceding superiority to the victim by admitting that the narcissist is wrong. It will also bring an end to the victim’s hurt/upset/anger and thus the fuel ends.”

            “Accordingly, whenever a victim argues with our kind, the victim never feels like there is any resolution because their aims are never fulfilled. Even when the narcissist’s aims are achieved and he halts the manipulation, the victim still understandably believing the matter to be unresolved, keeps going. This causes the narcissist to respond to the challenge and then the narcissist sees the victim as maintaining an argument unnecessarily.”

          30. FYC, those are great. Can you tell me, is there a better way of looking up articles and comments other than the search bar? I know k has some tricks and I wish I would have wrote them down.

            “Even when the narcissist’s aims are achieved and he halts manipulation, the victim still understandably believing the matter to be unresolved, keeps going .” So true!

            I had a thought today. She left once the focus started being directed towards MP. You, NA, K, woke, PE, and lisk (I can’t remember who else) all started paying attention to MP and shortly after that she exited. I wanted to see if I could find something that HG has written about that situation. I vaguely remember an article about him being out with friends and a newcomer came along and HG felt like the new guy was trying to outshine him. Do you remember anything like that?

            Also are you feeling better today? I saw your comment on the other thread and wanted to say something but I’m not getting half my notifications and it’s getting harder to reply directly to someone. I think it’s important to stay true to yourself and the things you believe in. You did that and you shouldn’t feel bad about it.

          31. Hi Mercy, Thank you so much for your kind thoughts. I value your POV. I was upset and disappointed, but I learned a great deal. I was surprised by the content of only one comment (given the consistency of the participants), but that comment really made me question everything, including my participation on the blog. I put a very high value on respect and trust on whatever level that exists and when that is shaken it is a big deal (for me). When something effects me this way, I seek the truth as best I can find it and also take some time for self-examination and introspection. I take my values very seriously. I then accept things as they are, own my own part, make amends where called for and value the lessons I have learned. The biggest lessons always come at a cost, but often have the greatest value.

            My mind is logical, but my emotions are vast and deep so I wear a bit of armor (especially on the blog for obvious reasons). Some may read LT and protective armor as narcissism, and that is their prerogative, but they are missing so much of the picture. My coat of armor and standing up for others or issues is quite a natural reflex given what I faced growing up (and still do to a much smaller yet toxic degree).

            Due to my questioning as a result of this experience, I wanted to get at the truth and learn as much as possible so I started with Woke’s link to the midranger YouTube audio. That was very helpful so I listened to several more audios until my AirPods ran out of charge. I also reread Come One Come All. Then I used K’s search tactics to find specific behaviors I saw consistently exhibited by certain commenters and I searched how to detect a narcissist to be very clear on narc traits. This process was extremely helpful. Each time I read or listen to HG’s works, something new emerges that I apparently was not ready to absorb or acknowledge previously. This is one reason why I am grateful for the repetition of posts so simply going back and seeking it out to reread or listen again.

            K once said that if you put Narcsite in the google search bar along with specific words or phrases you will come up with a better results list than if you put a topic or phrase into WP. This has helped me so many times! Thank you K. WP can be totally frustrating in its inaccuracy. I like that this method of search gives both articles and YouTube audios in the results (even an occasional book reference). She also noted when searching within comment sections, you can use (for Macs) Control/Command F and a search bar will appear on the upper right, then type in your search word. Very helpful as well.

            My biggest take aways was this: When someone uses provocation, displays envy, lacks emotional empathy, denies and deflects, casts aspersions on others, insinuates, triangulates, lacks accountability and threatens to take their marbles and go home, etc.; It is our cue to either opt out entirely or state our case once only (per HG) and go (that said, I can relate to the dogged determination of truth seeking). People will never see what they choose not to consider or are incapable of seeing for a variety of reasons.

          32. FYC,
            Thank you for the tips, I didn’t want to bother K again. My laptop is updating now (and taking forever) but I’m hoping the ctl f function works on PC. Like you, I’ve also started listening to the audios the last couple days. I’m trying to start a new morning habit.

            I know that you take your values very seriously because it can be seen by the way you present yourself here. You are always here to offer a kind word of support or information that you’ve learned that might be helpful to others. The coat of armour you wear as a result of your upbringing is understandable but it doesn’t define you. Your empathy still shines through. You should be proud that you are the type of person that will stand up for others.

            I’m sorry that the content of one of the comments made you question some things (my savior traits are wanting to know who, what and why but I wont pry) Obtaining the information you need to work through the question you have is the best thing you can do for yourself.

          33. I know you know this Mercy, but for those who read and judge others by their “usefulness,” I would like to clarify: My contributions/comments arise solely out of respect or gratitude or my attempt to give back/be part of the solution or offer some insight gained from the road I have traveled, and occasionally to defend another. I feel no need for approval seeking. I do not define myself by or through anyone else. I believe in giving back and paying forward and do so regularly. I believe in giving sincere recognition to anyone, empath or narcissist, when due. Why hold back or be stingy or envious? Recognition, kindness and love are free and abundant and you lose nothing by giving them away. I give freely. That is where I am coming from. It would never have occurred to me I would need to qualify such things prior to some of the comments on the world’s longest thread.

            Now back to more important matters. Mercy, you may find this helpful for your searches of narcsite on google:

            To gain the widest search on a topic (e.g. provocation), enter:
            narcsite provocation
            This will include every site plus narcsite

            To narrow your search to only narcsite enter:
            site:narcsite.com provocation
            This will bring up all instance of provocation only on narcsite. Unless I am broadly researching a topic, this is the preferred google search for anything on narcsite.

            To search comments about provocation from a specific commenter enter:
            site:narcsite.com Mercy provocation

            To search all comments by a single commenter enter:
            site:narcsite.com Mercy

            Lastly, your comment, “The coat of armor you wear as a result of your upbringing is understandable, but it doesn’t define you,” is true, and indicative of who you are, Mercy. People with resident EE always see this when my armor is active. Most people in my real life rarely see my armor as it is only evident when necessary. Thank you for kindness and insights. You are very much appreciated.

          34. FYC: I absolutely am not confusing how an estate is settled, as you said to me. This is an odd and mysterious estate. The unusual estate of Jeffrey Epstein. And, not some estate of a wholesome grandpa that died. Those women are not easily going to get a penny. And, Epstein was not even convicted of a crime. Also, the courts do not have the bank accounts and locations of all his mysterious money, even if he were convicted. And that money has to be analyzed. There are laws in place in settling an estate. He has at least a brother, and possibly secret children. Also, past clients that may want to sue. They believe he has hidden money. They have to obey legal precedent to take away his money that they do locate. Also, it is said there are phenomenal roadblocks to settle this estate. How about that? Hahahahah!!!! Phenomenal Roadblocks: A lot of those phenomenal roadblock are covered in the mini novellas I wrote about concerning a lot of powerful people and secrets and power and information and knowledge and leverage that is tied up in the records pertaining to that odd estate. That is the main problem of the state, like I keep saying. I feel like a voice crying in the wilderness. I just spell it out, and they just call it phenomenal roadblocks, which is an euphemism being used to not alarm people. Phenomenal roadblocks means important people equals ticking time-bomb. That estate is a big problem. And is in a tug-of-war between 2 groups of powerful people regarding getting that info out versus keeping that info locked up. I just spell it out. These are powerful people. And, some dangerous people. The courts obtained a few names from searches when he was arrested, like I said, but no proclivities were mentioned, like I said, but how did he make so much money, etc. etc. etc. ? and then BAM! he was gone, like magic, and so by law they had to stop the searches for the criminal investigation, by law. Now, civil investigations could help them out, but the phenomenal roadblocks as they call it, but I call it as it is: these powerful people, are still around. NOW, I will say this, FYC, a `Red Phone` could ring at any time and say `Shut It Down,` and, `Here is some cash to toss to those females and shut them up, because they are becoming too aggravating and problematic.` But, unless that `Red Phone` rings, there are many phenomenal roadblocks that obstruct the settlement of this odd and mysterious estate, and I reiterate, it is a matter of the potential of important people of power being exposed though the information gathered that pertains to that odd and mysterious Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. Knowledge is Power. These people are into power. That estate is caught in the middle of a power play with much incriminating info that could be sold to the highest bidder. Extortion possibilties against powerful people is the problem with that estate. I rest my case now.

          35. NA and others:

            I didn’t remark too much on that other thread (aside from some stupid stuff–Hands: the Hands of Fate! lol) but I agree with you, NA. I felt that was totally unnecessary for her to pick on Lorelei as that, which to me seemed to stem out of jealousy re: HG’s attention. Even if it is true that Lor is a narc, then has she picked on anyone? Does she bother people? Is she aggressive? No, no and no.

            I find Lor funny and open and she’s definitely not someone I would think to label as that. I have gotten grandiose and ridiculous plenty myself but that is also b/c I feel comfortable commenting here. We all should feel that and not worry about being attacked like on that other thread. She was just relentless. Let it go! Nothing she said changed my opinion about Lorelei.

            I think we’re all pretty reasonable here, but if I had to admit someone who annoyed me, it was that person from a yr or so ago who was bragging about her IQ and claiming she had ‘high octave fuel that HG craves’, implying we’re just a bunch of schlubs with fuel that couldn’t light a cigarette.

            One of the things I like about you, NA, is your to the point, no nonsense authenticity. I think many overlook the fact that you have tender feelings underneath the frankness. As example, I know you are genuinely offering help to others and for them to interpret it as superiority can be frustrating, as that is absolutely not your intention. I have had the same happen to me. Not on here so much but in life. It’s frustrating and I get where you are coming from.

          36. Thank you Bibi
            I appreciate that you are able to look at the whole picture instead of chosen snapshots. People allowing themselves to feel inferior does not make the other person superior in any way. My only concern ever has been if my prescence on the blog damages it in some way, and I know that HG would not allow that and would let me know. I would show myself out as my intent has never been to harm.

          37. Bibi:
            Hey, Manos is a masterpiece compared to Red Zone Cuba or The Castle of Fu Manchu. Even on MST3K, they’re unwatchable.

          38. NA:

            You absolutely do not damage the blog by being here. You add a ton of positive insight, and for those who do not resonate–they are free to move on. You can’t control how they react. For everyone who does not like your presence there are many more who do. So, carry on. They are free to not interact with you. You have no reason to hold yourself back. I just wanted you to know that I and many others think so.

            So, fuck ’em! (Lovingly of course.) LOL

            I long to say that to someone. Fuck you! (Albeit lovingly of course.) Tee hee!

          39. Mercy: Yup, Harvard it was. She irked a number of us. Then someone remarked (and I don’t recall who) said, “Triangulated much, ladies?”

            Funny but true.

            Violetta: I actually like Manos. It is a garbage piece of film making but the badness is hilarious. I love how the scenes switch to show the back of the head on those speaking. Also, the time of day changes multiple times. Day, night, day, night, in just a few mins.

            My all time fave bad film is Plan 9 of course. ‘You humans with your stupid minds. Stupid! Stupid!’

            If you guys ever want to see a parody film poking fun of those bad films, I highly recommend The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra (2001):

            But here is an example of my kind of humor. HG you would love it. It is funny as shit:

          40. Bibi:
            Manos was unintentionally funny, but Red Zone and Fu Manchu were unintentionally dreary. Even the riffing on the Satellite of Love couldn’t save them. One if the bots said afterwards, “I’ll never experience joy again.” The Mads gloated that they had broken them at last.

        2. Mercy, the people involved in trying the Epstein in 2008 said that phenomenal pressure from all over the place came down upon them. The people that were involved in the prosecution of the case found out that they were also being privately investigated over their own lives, including the lawyers and the judges and the witnesses all were being privately investigated, and info was presented to them about themselves and their families that alarmed them. All the investigators were being privately investigated during that time. They found this very shocking and unnerving. Heck, maybe even the copy boy and the receptionists were being investigated. And they said that they had never seen anything like it in their careers then, and they have not seen anything like it again so far, thereafter. They said they were threatened, challenged, and received phone calls from incredible people in high places, that they could not pin down they said, and they were afraid and afraid for their families, and that they are still afraid, some of them said, and they could not resist the phenomenal pressure that came down on them on behalf of Epstein during that time, and that is how Epstein received such a light sentence. And some say they feel ashamed of his light sentence back then, but that they could not fight the powerful forces that supported him. Some from that timeframe say they are still afraid, even though he is out of the picture, now, and so much time has passed. And they do not want a case like that to ever come to them or come near them again, because it was a bad and strange and terrifying time for them. Phenomenal Pressure gave those people a little visit on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein during that first trial, and many of those people involved in the prosecution of Jeffrey E. back then, are still afraid of it all now, they said.

      3. FYC: In NYC, it is reported that Charles told the Queen that Andy has to stop down, so she fired Andy and therefore he will no longer be paid from the pubic coffers, but from the Queen`s own incredible wealth.

        1. FYC. Typo. I meant Andy will now be paid from the Queen`s incredible wealth and no longer paid from the public* coffers, not pubic* coffers. Hahahaha. Is this what some call a Freudian slip? Hahaha. I can not afford this sort of typo. lol. From now on I will say: people. I will leave the other P word alone. Much safer for me. Lessons learned. LOL!!!.

        2. PSE: I am fairly certain the Queen did not need to be told and equally certain that Prince Charles does not direct the Queen. It would have been entertaining see the Queen and her court react to randy Andy’s interview. Just imagine the Prince in protest, “But mummy, I clearly explained I am simply too noble. I was brilliant. Besides, it was just a bit of fun and rather noble of me to share the royal ‘jewels’ haha. I really don’t understand all the fuss.” Off to the dungeon for Andy!

          1. FYC: I do not know how those people deal with each other behind closed doors. And she is getting old. And, Andy is still her son. So, I would not be surprised in the least if she did not consider removing Andy at this time, and that Charles stepped in swiftly and gave her a super strong nudge and told her it was in the Saxe Coburg Gotha Mountbatten Windsor family interest to do so immediately. And Charles is next in line to the throne, the last I heard. Anyway, you asked me how the story is being reported in NYC, and so It is reported that Charles stepped in and told the Queen to remove Andy, or Andrew Saxe Coburg Gotha Mountbatten Windsor as I call him, from duty immediately, and payment for him will now come from the Queens`s incredibly and extremely full coffers, and no longer will Andy`s payment come from the people. (the news source that I heard this from has never erred in their reports…one of my secret accurate information weapons). So, there it is, reporting in dear readers, from NYC. ~~~PSE.

          2. Correspondant PSE: I am sorry if that came across as me doubting it was reported that way by the media, I did not. I was just presuming, based upon the Queen’s past performance with regard to controlling pubic perception, that she would not need Charles to tell her to take such an action. Then again, she is in her 90s now and may not be as aware. I have no idea of the inner workings of the royals, but I would guess such a statement made to the media was for the purposes of absolving the Queen and positioning Charles in a positive leadership light.

            Not sure if my other comment went through, but your pubic typo was a funny one and I had missed it entirely. No worries, I make plenty of typos too.

          3. Hahhaha oh god great idea! Imagine that! A royal version of ‘gogglebox’ (a British tv programme where we the viewers stupidly watch other viewers watching tv) with the royals all sat around their TV, watching themselves on the news and being discussed in current affairs programmes. I reckon you’re onto something here FYC.

          4. Haha Alexis. That is a slightly different concept, but I imagine a reality show on the royals would be highly watched right about now.

          5. FYC: Also, it is rumored that Andy Saxe Coburg Gotha Mountbatten Windsor is her favorite son. So, I guess that could be a factor, as well. Who knows. FYC, personally, I believe that she did not want to remove her son from a prestigious situation, and so quickly. And Reason from somewhere in the House styled Windsor stepped in, perhaps from Charles even as reported, or some other wise council that they use to advice them. Maybe they determined that HG Tudor had a finger on which way the wind was blowing and so they took the fast road out of this, for now, as well. And the turnabout time to do this was quite speedy, yes? And she is older now, although very smart. Age is age, for most people, and perhaps it includes her, as well. But, you could be right as well, FYC, that this move was also managed to make Charles seem more Kingly. And so the move may have been a combination of factors to also throw the best light as possible in whatever arenas available from the debacle. As they say in politics, why let a good disaster go to waste.

          6. No way to know for sure, PSE. But if Andy is the ‘golden’ child, it does make one wonder about the Queen’s awareness, judgement, and empathy.

          7. FYC: I wonder if H was Diana`s favorite, as well….maybe Spares are loved more, or obtain more sympathy and pity and quality time…from their moms, because the oldest is basically taken away from the mothers more time-wise and training wise, to be groomed more to rule. And therefore the eldest may become more like strangers to their moms, unlike the Spares? Charles does come off like a stranger, yes? I am just guessing about the favorite status of the 2 Spares Harry and Andrew Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg, as I also call them. But, like you say, FYC, who knows.

      4. “I deeply sympathize with everyone who has been affected and wants some form of closure”

        – Randy Andy’s scriptwriter

        ********

        “I weep for you,” the Walrus said:
        “I deeply sympathize.”
        With sobs and tears he sorted out
        Those of the largest size,
        Holding his pocket-handkerchief
        Before his streaming eyes.

        “O Oysters,” said the Carpenter,
        “You’ve had a pleasant run!
        Shall we be trotting home again?’
        But answer came there none–
        And this was scarcely odd, because
        They’d eaten every one.

        – Lewis Carroll

        1. Violetta
          Brilliant! Thank you Violetta, I did not know that poem but that is just perfect, it says it all. Also makes me want to know who that scriptwriter was.

          1. Given that the Alice books are well-known even over here, you have to wonder if the scriptwriter knowingly threw that in, figuring Andy wouldn’t pick up on it.

  16. HG, I did not see the interview and your article was the first that I read. I was curious to see what others are saying about the interview. You nailed it and more!

    1. There are a number of pieces on Daily Mail, including one tying him to rich petty tyrants in oil countries. They don’t mention narcissism, but of course I’ve been directing them here.

      I used to doubt the pedophile accusations because he had a track record with clearly developed females such as Koo Stark and Fergie. I still don’t think he’s an exclusive pedophile so much as he is an amoral, entitled narc who wanted to try everything and thought he could do so without repercussions.

      1. Legally he would be considered a pedophile if it was proven. I just looked up age of consent in Florida. It says 17 is under the age of consent so I assume 18 is the legal age. As a narcissist it’s more about control so I see how a young girl would be would be a feast of fuel for him. I think you’re right about him thinking hes entitled and there will be no repercussions.

        1. This is almost hilarious. Almost everyone alive should be labeled as either sex offenders or victims, according to those laws regarding age of consent, including the people prosecuting those for violating age of consent laws. So first, why don`t we just start at the top of the govt. and include the lawyers and the judges first, and work our way down to see whom all are sex offenders and victims in their own lives. and get them labeled on the record/ Some laws are unreasonable and seem to create more crimes, by criminalizing people, than they prevent. What I see is that such laws will often be used against someone in anger and when convenient,

  17. So in another intresting turn of events, I’ve just been called by the Complaint Officer for a national radio station. Very very impressed by the quick response considering she is off sick today.

    I called in to a program. I hold strong views on subjects and I’m not afraid to be challenged. But as I always say, argue the point and not the person. Logical fallacy et al.

    He started to become agitated. All I had said was, ‘What on earth is the Queen doing sanctioning Andrew’s behaviour?’ He then became very angry. I ask him why is he so angry? I’m then called dumb and stupid. Live, on air.

    When I pointed out that when I could work, as a teacher, my hard earned cash was funding Andrew’s proclivities. His response?

    ‘I’m glad you aren’t a teacher anymore.’

    How fucking DARE he. I was always the professional when I taught. Always. That he is so arrogant that he assumes I drip fed my own political ideology into the classroom is breathtaking in his own conceipt. I would like to believe I tried hard to make all my students free thinkers.

    Now people know that I’ve endured domestic abuse. That I’ve tried to commit suicide. That I’ve been raped by two men. And HE knew that too through previous interactions.

    I exited that interview incredibly distressed. I cried myself to sleep then I cried again the next day. That’s unacceptable. And it ruined the next day for my partner and I.

    In this case, no harm done except a few tears shed. But there are a lot of vulnerable people who call in. You can hear it in their voices. This was a near miss. That’s why I complained.

    The woman who has just called me was incredibly apologetic. Shes looking into it and I’ll get a call back. This lady mentioned the ongoing Jeremy Kyle investigation. A man took his life after going on that show. They ARE taking it seriously. Brilliant!

    I also mentioned two things.

    1 – That presenter (who was let go off by another very big broadcaster) SERIOUSLY needs to get a grip of his temper (fury). She tacitly agreed.

    2 – That man is ok, infact one might say positively giddy, when I talk about sex. I talk about sex as an educator. I find it DISTINCTLY creepy that hes ok with that but nothing else. Therefore this is not a straightforward clash of personalities. Which I’m happy to take on the chin if it was true. Its not true. Hes a creep and a menace.

    I know what it’s like to be removed from a position and I dont wish that on anybody but in this case, hes a liability. If I dont speak up, someone may die. I dont want that on my conscience.

    She thanked me for reaching out. I’m incredibly grateful that she listened to me with empathy and concern. Even if nothing else happens. To be honest, I dont think he can spin is way out of this one. Thankfully, I didnt lose my temper nor did I insult him. Part of me wishes I’d torn a strip off (indeed, at one point I felt myself sliding into supernova) but I believe it’s far more powerful not to be cut off and to allow words to stand with no response. Dead air time on radio speaks volumes.

    It truly should not have to be this way.

    What is he? Well he has a good, working understanding of cognitive empathy. He does and frequently so, says the right thing. However…

    He rarely does with me unless its about sex. What I percieve with this man is that he has very VERY deep seated issues regarding females. For example, he restricts what I can talk about.

    I cannot talk about rape or any kind of abuse. Let alone NPD.

    If I present a view then he takes the opposite one. UNLESS it concerns sex

    He frequently plays the victim

    He was removed from post by another broadcaster because of his use of words. I strongly suspect there had been more complaints but this one tipped the organisation over the edge and into action.

    He frequently refers to this but never properly explains himself. No matter. Google is our friend.

    He bullied a man on air because they held opposing views. That man behaved like a gentleman and was noticeably shocked by his words. He kept his dignity.

    When talking to him (unless it’s about sex), he cuts across me. Does not allow my point across and disrupts what should be a neutral exchange of views. This is provocation.

    This guy is no middle. Hes way to angry. His producer is no better. A female. BTW she condones the view that it’s ok for males to approach females just to get numbers. Please reference my own and HGs articles on ‘The Game’. Apparently I was arrogant and conceited because I warned a young woman about this recently on a train. I was aghast at this and I lost my own ER. I called her an idiot for expressing that view. I apologised on air, a couple of times. She did not respond.

    She was and is a idiot. However I took her point on board. Maybe I was arrogant? Thankfully, two young females approached me on a night out. I’m a teacher so I know how to ask open ended questions.

    I asked with referencing PUA, ‘Is this OK?’

    Absolutly not, they both responded.

    ‘Why is it not OK?’

    One piped up, ‘Because you dont know who they are. You need to ensure phone number matches internet profiles. Are they who they say they are? Are there numerous profiles. Is he a player?’

    Bang fucking on. I said I agreed and to please, pass it on if you can. I’m 44. They were 20 and 22. Some millennials have their heads screwed on. Good

    It just shouldn’t be this hard. But it is. Frequently.

    What is he?

    Lesser. Towards the upper end. Victim I’d say though he fancies himself as a Somatic. Hes not.

    Maybe he was abused as he says? Maybe not. Who can tell?

    Thanks HG. If it wasn’t for your work I’d never have been able to respond in a dignified manner.

    I will listen tonight. Considering the severity of what he did, I hope hes been immediately suspended.

  18. This analysis is brilliant, as always. Lots of details I did not know about.

    His lack of cognitive empathy leads to the Lesser school.
    He seems to have the traits of a Somatic ULN.
    Although I have read other comments saying he is a Type B, I would say he is a Type A – the AAA, he looks relaxed, does not seem to care about anything, a happy-go-lucky, ‘that’s just the way it is’ sort of narcissist.

    He is considering giving a second interview ‘to put things right he did not say’. The Queen is not amused :-)

  19. So insightful as always, HG. I actually may be borderline obsessed with you and your work :)
    Would you consider putting Kayne West and Joel Osteen under your Tudorscope? I assume they’re both narc’s but I’m no expert.
    It makes me wonder if there’s another objective with this collab thing they’re doing, other than to make money. The other day I was reading somewhere that people think Kanye is going to try and run for POTUS in 2024, so he’s trying to get the “Christian’s” on his side. Kanye is also known to support Trump too.
    I would love to hear your opinion!!

  20. I’ve been waiting to get home so I could read this one. Definitely worth the wait, very interesting. Did you see Epsteins prison guards were charged today?

    1. Epstein got off easy, I don’t care the circumstances of his death even thou it shows others of their true colours, Epstein should have been made to beg for death for his hand in the actions of his decisions. I can only think of one kind of man to service that justice to someone like him.
      It is a damn if you do and damn if you don’t, pick your poison and have the cure……HG you seem to fit both poison and cure.

      1. I agree he got off easy. His victims were children and easily manipulated but children become adults. Very brave women to come forward and face these powerful men.

      2. Epstein is just a scapegoat. An effigy that the public are encouraged and allowed to say, Booooo to. To hiss at and throw tomatoes at. And then go home. To get it all out of their systems. Problem solved. Scapegoat is gone. It is bad to be a scapegoat and then a sacrifice. The short straw was pulled, and he was the scapegoat again. Twice. I guess double jeopardy does not apply to scapegoats. He even looked surprised. Now just a few more loose ends to wrap up, and the short straw now has Andy`s name on it. Everyone approve? Is it unanimous? Good. He is old and used up, anyway. An aging Narcissist. Very tiresome. No loss. Now, to set the media up to get Andy now. And throw tomatoes at him. He is a popular sacrifice. Too bad he looks so unattractive. Thankfully there are photos of his better days.. How long will this go on? Well, I am enjoying my popcorn as I watch the Andy and Epstein show. With millions doing the same thing as these 2 guys, It will take tons of popcorn to watch these scapegoats go down, and more than one lifetime at this rate. But, I will be watching.

        1. PSE

          Epstein is no scapegoat he deserved much more then what he did. He is a pawn in a bigger scenario, nothing more nothing less.

          1. Twilght. A scapegoat is a pawn. So, I do not see that we are disagreeing, except I see Epstein as the servant effigy that the public are encouraged to hiss and boo and throw tomatoes at, while the big shots that provided the demand for his services, ride off into the sunset. Just like Lee Harvey Oswald took the fall for the Kennedy Assassination for his handlers. Then lone wolf, one bullet, no-conspiracy-here-folks, Lee Harvey, was presented as the person for the public to hiss and boo and throw tomatoes at, while his handlers rode off into the sunset, as well. Lee Harvey, also, was then no longer on the scene soon after. Nothing new to me. So, if people want to hiss and boo and throw tomatoes at Epstein, they have that right. However, it does not move me, personally, when I see a dinghy is being pushed off an ocean liner. But, I would watch the dinghy take that long fall, if I were in the vicinity. Why not. And I would watch the ocean liner sale away into the sunset, as well. I would watch both.

          2. PSE

            My perspective of a scapegoat is an innocent being used to take the fall,
            Both innocent and guilty are pawns.

          3. Twilight. This is the definition of scapegoat that is on my mind from google: [ scape·goat
            /ˈskāpˌɡōt/

            noun
            1.
            a person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes, or faults of others, especially for reasons of expediency. ] ~~google. Also, a scapegoat is not always blameless, but a person deliberately chosen by someone that is more powerful than they are. So, also, a scapegoat can be selected to carry the guilt, anger and frustration directed towards an entire group. Such as what was done to Epstein. He is the face for the entire group. The scapegoat. For Expediency. It is convenient. If this move using Epstein as the scapegoat works, it will prove to be expedient and majorly convenient for all the other guilty parties. Maybe the matter will melt away, they hope. It happens all the time.
            One can also volunteer for the role, and say, I will be the scapegoat for this or that or the other. Like when a teenager is caught participating with a group in a crime with adults, and the teenager takes all the blame when he speaks with police, because the teenager believes he will not be tried as an adult for the crime, as would his adult cohorts be tried. The teenager voluntarily becomes the scapegoat for the entire group, for the crime. Now a Fall Guy, though, is usually innocent. So Epstein is not a Fall Guy. Even though he had a big fall. But he is a Scapegoat and a Pawn and Expedient and Convenient to be sacrificed on behalf of all involved. Will this play, this push before the people of Epstein, the scapegoat, the face of the crime, and a pawn, be a winning move to pacify the people? Who knows. I say Epstein is a scapegoat, by definition, as well as by how the term is used, even culturally. Whew! this guy is causing me a lot of work.

          4. Twilight: A scapegoat in a crime is usually the one that is often the weakest link in the main group, power wise, and is the one that often does not have a voice for one reason or the other, depending on the situation and the stronger power of others in the group. That person, although not innocent, becomes the scapegoat and sacrifice for the powerful members of the group. The sacrifice. Here is a little example: there was a big scandal in a sport and many powerful people behind the scenes were involved and here is a headline about one guy being made the scapegoat in the debacle: [ Germany makes Mesut Ozil the scapegoat for World Cup exit
            10 Jul, 2018, 05.52PM IST
            And yet after almost two weeks of reflection, the German soccer federation (DFB) appears to have decided midfielder Mesut Ozil is the main culprit for the team’s shock early World Cup exit.] ~~The Economic Times. So, he is not called a Fall Guy, because a Fall Guy is usually innocent. So, he is called a scapegoat. He is The Epstein in this Soccer debacle. The blame is largely placed on him for the sport debacle, before the upset pubic.. The other more powerful culprits now will ride off into the sunset. They hope.

          5. PSE

            I said it was my perspective which translate as my opinion on how things feel not by what we are taught as the definition of scapegoat.
            I understood the definition, what I don’t understand is why you assumed I didn’t.

  21. Something I’ve thought of before is.. Circumstance in life often mingles with the size of a fuel matrix right? His is extensive by birth? So Ms. Markle’s increased by means of marriage.. How does this impact where they fit (say) in the middle? Neither are “self made” really. R Kelly—he cant read but has an extensive fuel matrix. Is he an upper lesser based on resources? Is Megan now an upper middle from a middle mid? See what I mean?

    1. Yeah you can’t just go by the fuel matrix as I e learned

      It is weird to me that someone in the royal family will turn out to be a lesser with all the culture and education privileges etc they are exposed to but there you go 🤷‍♀️

      1. Woke: Hahahahahaha! I am not saying that I understand what conclusively makes the schools and cadres. I have a weak point in that arena. BUT< I can say, your point is hilarious. So, there you go. LOL!!!!! Once the cameras are off, and `the people` are no longer around, and the press and publicists, and the new servants. etc. etc. are not around, who can guess what all goes on with these people and how they act with each other and the names they call each other??? I can. I can. I can guess.

        1. There can be a big difference between formal education and intelligence. There can also be a huge gap between intellectual achievement and self-awareness.

          1. Violetta, “There can also be a huge gap between intellectual achievement and self-awareness” – absolutely!
            That would be the case of a Mid-range Cerebral, for example. In Narc Tales 1, if I remember correctly, one of the stories involves a MRNC and it shows this lack of self-awareness in action.

          2. Just because someone is a narcissist does not mean they are always a good actor: Andy is probably wondering, Why should I alone be ashamed of Epstein, when I have seen most of you all also hanging out with Epstein or those similar to Epstein, all of my life. We always have the Epsteins in the word to do our bidding. In fact, why am I in this position of having to explain myself in the first place, when many were far more involved with Epstien that I was. Answer: Because you are taking a fall on behalf of the family as a whole, Andy. And after we `chastise ` you, we will appear more modern and sympathetic towards the sheeple women of the type that we have always amused ourselves with for eons. And you made a better scapegoat than we could have imagined during that interview. And you can thank yourself for that. Because you are not a Greater Narcississt. Another reason that we sacrificed you. The hisses and boos and tomatoes have been coming nonstop towards you, Andy, after that interview. And, although it was not intentional on your part, nevertheless, Well Done.

  22. I have to say, I believe the reason the media doesn’t identify that he or anyone else is a narcissist is, most don’t even know. I mean most people only know one kind of narcassist the greater and the phycopath. Whenever I try to explain the different cadres they look at me like I am some kind of lunatic or a woman scorned if you will. They just don’t want to hear the truth, they would rather make excuses like ‘Oh he grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth, therefore, he is entitled that’s just the way it is or oh he/she had a rough upbringing you must be patient blah blah blah blah blah blah. Excuses, Excuses, Excuses. The media the everyday person walking around with blindfolds on which makes them of course ” The Perfect Victim”.
    As always, thank you H.G. for the education.

  23. This is only a surprise to the brainwashed ignorant. Has not the world been governed by pyschopaths for thousands of years? It is so obvious to a thinking person.

  24. This is great. I just watched session 3 of The Crown on Netflix. Plethora of personalities and manipulative behaviors. It was hard for me to see so much of it in one place. Please pick another royal soon as these analyses are very enlightening