The Instagram account @SussexRoyal, generally assumed to be run by Meghan Markle, posted a new photo of Baby Archie today to commemorate Father's Day.
Although the photo is sepia-toned - a nod to Markle's beloved black-and-white - at least the baby's back isn't to the camera, as Meghan is so fond of posing in photos of her and her husbands.
Strangely, the baby's face is half-obscured, covered by Harry's hand, which is
shot from an angle that makes it appear larger than the baby's head.
The
real centerpiece of the photo is Harry's wedding ring, which is right in the middle of the frame.
A cold and loveless photo
Baby
pictures with a parent are a classic that dates back to the Renaissance
painters and before. Sometimes the mother and child (or, less often, father
and child) both gaze out at the viewer; in other images, they look lovingly at each
other.
But unfailingly, they interact. Part of the visual story is the interaction between the parent and child.
But unfailingly, they interact. Part of the visual story is the interaction between the parent and child.
Not
in the Baby Sussex photo. Harry's face isn't shown; we see only the hands of a
man, presumably Harry, who could be said to be flaunting his wedding ring at the
camera.
(Had it been a female hand, it would have looked like an advertisement for jewellery).
Is the message here "my marriage, and my spouse, is more important than this child"?
Is the message here "my marriage, and my spouse, is more important than this child"?
The baby appears trapped
Archie
appears trapped behind the man's hand, almost as if he is trying to climb
out of a hole. His mouth is covered, as if he has no voice.
The baby's eyes reach out to the viewer, but they don't radiate peace or joy; in fact, he seems unhappy and afraid.
What's more, he's not interacting with the man who is holding him.
Is he interacting with the person taking the photo? If so, there appears to be very little affection between them.
What's going on in this photo? And what does it say about the person who took it and chose to post it?
What's more, he's not interacting with the man who is holding him.
Is he interacting with the person taking the photo? If so, there appears to be very little affection between them.
Odd little hand hairs
Oddly, the hairs on the man's hand cover part of the baby's nose in the photo. This would have been a good opportunity for Photoshop; it seems unlikely that his random body hair is really more important than seeing a new baby's face.What's going on in this photo? And what does it say about the person who took it and chose to post it?
Comments
https://ca.hellomagazine.com/royalty/02017090738526/prince-william-prince-harry-first-day-of-school
Or this . . .
https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/23/europe/princess-diana-william-harry/index.html
Harry does not look at his brother like that any more.
Harry had stick-straight hair as a child. When did it get so curly?
What is that old saying? Once you're in an exclusive club, then there is an inner circle that you also need to penetrate. Meg has not punctured that inner sanctum of the royals. She never will, despite any delusion of her followers. The fact that she was an actress was always going to cause disharmony. As PP said, "you don't marry one" ...
I agree she is sinking herself, which was the whole strategy, IMO. I've no doubt the senior members of the BRF know Megs is an opportunist, obnoxious and disingenuous. But I think they are more concerned with her behaviour from engagement - what is in the public domain to embarrass and humiliate the Queen.
I just feel that Harry would not have been able to marry her if they knew the extent of her proclivities. Of course, they knew she was quite promiscuous, just by the sheer number of men and what has been published recently. But I don't know that they knew of her "yachting" and what it entailed ... am I naive?
FC is a real insult indeed, owned by the Crown, not the Queen. Just try claiming that house from the UK taxpayers, Megs! I dare you!
Aus Unknown.
I'll just add that I feel sorrow knowing that Diana's baby boy has made such a mess of his life ... maybe Harry would have been mature and responsible had he been born first.
Oooooh, and did I miss another damaging article? Where? Do tell!
When investigating fraud cases we look at two fundamental things 1) capability and 2) intent. Some are opportunity fraudsters who take advantage of immediate circumstances and others are career fraudsters, who plan for a long game - they pick their targets by 1) status, 2) finances, 3) Personality types and 4) family circumstances.
1) Status - they want someone who has a high societal and/or professional status and access to contacts, finances but not someone who is top tier - top tier indicates they also have advisers or a certain brain functioning that means high level critical thinking and/or strategic planning (this is not positive as they dont want them cottoning on to what is going on)
2) finances: Pretty obvious but these finances have to be easy as possible to be accessed - so any trust funds or finances that require multiple levels of authorisations to be accessed may be too difficult.
3) Personality types - You want to target someone who isn't high functioning in critical thinking, ability to rationalise. Someone who is needy emotionally, as well as requiring a sense of ego stroking is ideal. The fraudster will want to be the decision maker, but at the same time not be shown to others for their dominating ways - Harry is perfect target (same as trump but that is another rant)
4) family circumstances - Your target cant have a super close family dynamic as they want to have control over them. At the same time this can be used for emotional or financial blackmail if the fraudster has information that may be embrassing to the family's reputation or legally contentious.
I get the impression Harry was really affected by hius mother's death, the expectations from being in the firm and constantly being compared to his brother. I honestly think Harry was trapped in some way (either a pregnancy or a secret she knows) and has been partly manipulated. I cant say for sure whether he was aware of her motives, but i get the impression he may be impaired in some way - his behaviours has always been inpulsive and testing the limits - which the public have always forgiven him for, but now he is being faced with not being a favourite.
As to how he looks when he is with her - i have also noted the difference in his looks - take note of his eye line, how his postures different and gestures. When he wasnt with her he stood straighter, his eyes looked more animated, his stance was more confident. When with her, he is lackluster and his posture is slouched, his clothing not sharp and his demeanour is almost deferring to her. A domestic abuser will try to isdolate their victim from family, friends or anyone that could undermine their influence. (I am not saying any abuse is happening, but psychologically it just appears that way).
I also think that much of Meg's envy and jealously of Kate may stem from the great relationship harry has with her, as well as her position in the heiracrchy.
I could write more but just my thoughts :)
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12242596
... maybe Enty's blind about someone linked to Harry and Meghan house scouting on their behalf, is correct?
A video of Meg cursing at her former assistant and throwing tea at her would be much more damaging for her in the UK and US than nudie shots or a sex video, which might make her look like a victim. (See Bella Thorne's recent drama.)
The opposite is probably true in some Commonwealth countries, where abuse of servants is common but a Royal's wife is expected to be a woman of "high morals" and to keep her clothes on.
A video of Meg cursing at her former assistant and throwing tea at her would be much more damaging for her in the UK and US than nudie shots or a sex video, which might make her look like a victim. (See Bella Thorne's recent drama.)
The opposite is probably true in some Commonwealth countries, where abuse of servants is common but a Royal's wife is expected to be a woman of "high morals" and to keep her clothes on.
A video of Meg cursing at her former assistant and throwing tea at her would be much more damaging for her in the UK and US than nudie shots or a sex video, which might make her look like a victim. (See Bella Thorne's recent drama.)
The opposite is probably true in some Commonwealth countries, where abuse of servants is common but a Royal's wife is expected to be a woman of "high morals" and to keep her clothes on.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a21250237/trooping-the-colour-2018-prince-harry-meghan-markle-lipreader/
Most of this is purely speculation on my part. What else do [they] expect with such a charade they are publishing in the public domain?
I agree that he is impaired, too, and is trapped. I fear the growing isolation and control she's imposing on him will be very damaging to him. It's already showing when he's with her and will only get worse over time.
You're spot on about her envy of Kate, too. Everything for Megs is about competition and control.
No, PH certainly does not look at his brother like that anymore... :[
We recently had a baby in our family - I'm also mixed race - the baby was born quite dark, now she's fair, light hair and very blue eyes. We haven't had a paternity test done - suppose I shouldn't joke ...
William always had serious eyes, even as a small child. The English like to dress their little boys as little girls, it seems . . and they are attached to certain baby outfits, since Louis wore an outfit of Harry's at the TOC.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4084243/prince-harry-william-age-gap-princess-diana-death/
This topic is officially the Champ of NuttyBlog! Because the Mystery of Archie is never-ending. The baby in that pic kind of does look like Harry, but the proportion is all wrong. He appears far too small relative to the Giant Hand to be nearly 6 weeks old. I smell Photoshop magic. Farkle might have mucked around with an old infant picture of Harry's and done her 'arty' thing with it. That picture brings me out in the yips, it's so sinister. A photo tribute of a sweet baby on Father's Day should be wholesome, but Farkle does not know the meaning of the word. She was never pregnant during that 10-month long scam she subjected us to . . it was so blatantly obvious, her walking around with her undulating pillow that changed sizes and shapes by the hour. Far from trying to be authentic-seeming with the faux pregnancy, it's like she was daring anyone to comment and laughing at the world. None in the MSM did dare comment, which is why we are here. But if she's still carrying out the charade and photographing a doll or some other fakery . . .why does the BRF continue to collude with such an obviously deranged person? It's making them look weak. Who knows what's really going on behind the scenes . . I had thought she's probably under house arrest, and cut off from phone and Internet and any other tools of her spin trade. But then this sinister and ridiculous photo appears, along with hundreds of sugary articles singing her praises every day. How is this happening? She's obviously responsible for this repugnant photo of 'Archie' . . .and her PR bills are still getting paid. Lord G. is letting me down. I want that B--witch locked up in the Tower, not posting her self-serving twaddle all over the Internet.
If she convinces him to move to the US, she would be successfully isolating him from his family and friends even more and, all he's known and relied on all his life. I think such a culture shock alone will be damaging.
This of course is all just speculation and opinion on my part. Can't wait to read the other things you look for Elle.
The Woman in Brown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr9ZY1qXzYQ
I do not want my salad tossed and I don't want to toss anyone else's, either.
Q: If bona fide video (or several) exists of Farkle tossing salad, WHY does this woman have any hold over/leverage with the Royal Family? A person who tosses salad indiscriminately for money or baubles or whatever doesn't have any sort of moral authority.
Did the security services check this woman out pre-marriage? Assurances have been made that they did, but the ball seems to have been dropped, big-time, because it's taken 18 months for things to come to light about her that should have been discovered before H. was ever permitted to propose marriage. Like, Harry's betrothed was a prostitute, for example, and a known drug user. There are photos of her blazing up with the ganja in her favorite hat with J. Mulroney. Beyond these--and even these could be forgiven *if* her love for Harry and commitment to her new role were genuine . . a word that does not exist in Farkle-speak . . just the fact that she was American should have made her a no-go. Foreign agent with ties to dodgy types like Markus Anderson, e.g.
Forget the biracial, divorced, dodgy show-business past or the economically hapless fractured family . . . Harry should have been told in no uncertain terms that he had to marry a British subject as a non-negotiable, or else renounce his title and place in the Firm. Cressida is an actress, and the family were quite pleased when he was dating her. Acting, like any other profession, is one of levels of accomplishment/prestige. Markle was trolling around in the low, seedy end of the business . . certainly no RSC-level thespian aspirations for our girl. And yet her Maj goes and makes her patroness of the National Theatre (and she can't even be arsed to get the hashtag of her own patronage right on the SR Instagram account . . .) Why??? A salad tosser is now chief patron of a British institution that means so much to so many Britons. That patronage should have gone to Edward. Have they all lost their minds over there??
Remember how the Royal Family is the family Meghan never had? (Well, except for the one she had, PH, you played fool).
See how that worked.
Most people hate to be pitied. So when someone is actually making the pity play, there's a reason. I once read that if Satan came to earth, the first thing he'd do is make us feel sorry for him.
Pity is a skill the fraudster can use quite well and often does. When I see pity in play and actively encouraged, I know to keep digging.
Aw, Diana is so beautiful in that picture. I notice PW's PG seems to have his father's more serious gaze. (Of course, whoever is in the Archie Father's Day pic has quite the unhappy wary look in his eyes). Aak, here's hoping everything turns out well for everyone, esp the kids and the Cambridges.
Ok, the reason the muling idea hit me so "square" was because I remember reading way back in the day, on-line (I'm going back to the 90's when things weren't so "bleached") that .... marker buoys were actually hatches (pick-up/drop-off points) for contraband while en route to their respective destination. It's how "moving" contraband went undetected. It never moved "through" a port, while en route, just tangent to it. The ships were never submitted to searches at their destination, because... well there is a reason for everything. *blink, blink* Interesting war "story", isn't it? I put "story" in quotes because how can anyone ever prove such a thing. But I've never forgotten it, and it makes sense how contraband could get from point A to B then, when considering the thousands of miles [it] would have had to travel/limited air travel. So "muling"/blackmail is a *very* interesting slant. jmo
Also, I agree that "Harry seems so emotionally inept, fragile..." and also agree that he may suffer some real emotional fall out from this. But there is one thing I observe that I haven't seen discussed, so I will throw this out and see what you think:
Harry has always been second, lesser-than, etc. Even when he was popular, he was still a spare. His nuclear family consists of two kings-in-waiting and Harry. Talk about never quite being good enough. And I think that was one of the megster's biggest draws is that (in the deep recesses of his mind) he knows that in his world, he'll always be "better" than her. Unfortunately for her, it's one of the things that would allow him to have contempt for her later.
Unequal relationships with a pity play are a solid red flag every time.
Yes. This probably means MM's PR Gestetner machine is working overtime/deflecting negative news. I may be wrong about this, but aren't trusts set up with a "float" by the bequeath (but in this case living entity/ies). And then subsequent to this, campaigns are scheduled throughout subsequent fiscal years to raise monies/fund the trust? I don't know. PW by lineage is padded, PH not so much. I'm open to correction.
That's bizarre. I wish it had better resolution. I'm surprised no one has identified her yet.
IDK, I'm American, but I think that if the BRF had shut this down directly, then they'd have been called racist and risked a "Diana". Instead, they're letting mm burn her own self down, and that's much more powerful. Yes, it means some money gets spent and a lot of blogs fill up with the WTF is HMTQ allowing here, but OTOH, by the time megster burns herself down, she'll have less-than-Fergie level options and money. She will be well and truly done and outed. Maybe that's why. IDK. Just speculation.
And I have to laugh because I didn't know what salad tossing was either. All I can say is that if there is that video and if megs is tossing it with more than one man or different men in different videos, then every time PH goes in for a smooch, he's got the image in his head of meg's tongue up someone else's salad. That's gotta suck lol. "Can you see now, my love?"
Meg was treated as a favorite in her family. Almost like an only child as well, so she has never had to share, or take turns let alone have or feel genuine empathy for anyone. She is so self important that she feels entitled to take and take and never give back unless there's a quid pro quo. She has managed to convince Harry that although he's the spare in his family, that together they can "change the world" and become more popular, famous, powerful, adored than his father or brother and her goal is to outflank Kate.
You're right about the pity scam, too. She got Harry to believe she is a damsel in distress who he can rescue; be her hero and at the same time outshine William. What's lacking in such a relationship built on such things is how weary the rescuer eventually gets when his life is an ongoing series of saving her, and realize she's the one creating the false flags. One day he'll find out the truth and leave her tied to the railroad tracks. It's quite possible that he has already seen the cracks in her façade and that explains his utter contempt for her on the balcony.
I also think you're right about him knowing deep down that he is better than her. He is in so many ways, but he won't see it very well until he finally starts to look and listen to the truth. Megs is incapable of love, IMO. I think his brother will be there for him when her ways are revealed. One thing a fraudster can't do is destroy unconditional love between brothers who have been through so much together. Sure, she can create a lot of troubles along the way, but when the truth comes out, and it always does, she won't be able to control him anymore.
Megster had the perfect pity play, and every time someone tried to talk to PH about this, it just pushed him closer to her so he could rebel and show all them. He could also protect her from them like he couldn't protect his mother.
Well, he's shown them now... but somewhere, deep inside, PH is still a royal spoiled child who knows he married down (according to the social world he lives in, not me being a snob), and I predict that it will be deep and public humiliation that will push him away from her. That may be what BP and HMTQ will allow to happen. Until then, I've got to hand it to the Suitcase-and-Salad-To-Go Girl, she played this one.
The reason I think there's something truly despicable is because of the way HMTQ is being shielded completely and H&M are being socially excommunicated. No gushing about the baby, no talking about the baby, neither one at Royal Ascot. I know MM is on "maternity leave", but she'd have crawled to Royal Ascot on her hands and knees with a baby strapped to her back. I think they were uninvited. I have even read MM wasn't supposed to be at TTC. And no HMTQ at PHs first child's christening? Yes, HMTQ did miss Louis' christening, she made it to those of the first two, and if she'd wanted to attend Archie's, they'd have scheduled a date when she'd be available.
Would someone really throw tea at an assistant (or at anyone else, for that matter)?
If this were a logical situation, then what the public knows *would* have chased PH away. But that's not how this works. Once someone is hooked, logic is not driving the behavior.
Anyone who has ever been truly/madly/deeply in love knows that crazy OTT behavior, but in this case, you have that along with a deeply unhealthy dynamic, and MM played PH very well, filling all of those emotional blackholes and allowing him to save her and protect her, etc. everything I wrote above. The more the public and PHs family and friends tried to present facts, the more PH dug in emotionally to "protect" MM -- it was them against the world, and that's how MM would like to keep it.
This happens every day, just not on this scale. For ex, there are people who "meet" someone online, and "fall in love". The situations vary, but the types of emotional manipulations don't. The victim needs the attention of whatever sort and the grifter figures out the emotional holes that need filling during mostly email, later phone convos. It can take awhile, but "feelings" arise (the victim thinks this is love, the grifter just knows it is about time for the pity play). Victim & Grifter want to meet, they want to be together, they're soulmates, it's like nothing else (except it's all BS and the lines are very predictable), the fall-in-love drugs are gushing thru the victim's system. Then, and only then, can the grifter make the play.
The play is typically the Pity Play. The grifter "loves" the victim and feels so close that then the grifter "opens up" and shares: There's a problem, something reason they cannot be together *yet*, and the grifter wants to figure it out and will figure it out, as soon as the grifter can find... yes, you guessed it... the money. (And that's why you watch for pity, because pity is almost always in the play in these romantic/caretaking schemes.)
At this point, it gets real because the victim says "aha! I have money! I can fix your problem, grifter, and we can be together" and the victim is there with the money.
The money often happens in small increments at first, but later, gets bigger when the problem gets bigger. The stories get more outlandish, the stuff out of really bad novels (governments holding them, they're being watched, the ex-wife has a mobster boyfriend, etc., etc.), absurd stuff that it's hard to imagine people believe...
Once a possible problem has been spotted, contact is made with the victim by the firm. The victim explains that they're just helping their friend/loved one, etc. Conversation ensues. Inevitably, the victim will reveal that they've "never actually met in person..." but they are going to when the problem is solved. My favorite (not really) part of the whole insane thing is when the victim shares some bizarre situation and the financial person investigating asks how the victim knows this and the victim says "well, my soulmate told me!" like that's just the most logical, bulletproof thing ever. It's truly bizarre. And it's financial crime that happens every day.
So, that's why PH didn't listen to logic. Logic has left the building along with Elvis.
I know of more than one case where a spouse in their later years wanted a divorce because they met their soulmate and they had only emailed and talked on the phone but the soulmate had this problem and for them to be together.... yada yada.
PH and MM were a richer version of that, but it's all the same. Grifter sees emotionally-vulnerable-but-high-dollar target, figures out how to play them, makes the cash grab, eventually leaves with the cash. Ruins lives in the process. Nothing about this is logical, unfortunately.
IDK why the BRF is allowing this to happen, but I do know that a statement that it "will happen" is different than a statement that it has happened. Just like H&M are going to America, but just not until the Fall now. And MM couldn't go to Royal Ascot b/c maternity leave, and PH wasn't there because "meetings". I don't watch what they say, I watch what they do, and listen for the lies of omission, passive-voice and in-the-future statements, and the crab-walk statements. I also watch for patterns of three, and we have those here.
So IDK. Whole thing is screwy, but the anomalies are there. And it's a hellagood soap opera and the only starring role the megster will ever have unless the straight-to-DVD-by-way-of-Kensington-Palace yacht movies are released.
Your response left me thinking. Another possibility that hasn't been considered here is money laundering. If the megster was yachting, she would have been an easy choice (no soul, willing to do anything for money). That would be one scandal that the BRF would fear because of Andy esp. I could see her being a part of money laundering - either carrying the loaded debit cards or through Soho House.
Oh, and I should add one correction to the above: odd wire transfers aren't the only way to monitor or uncover. It's just a common way because there are transaction alert systems employed.
honestly when I read that she was pregnant my first thought went to the interview that Zara did about her miscarriages, and I thought - this is what Meghan will do: pretend to be pregnant then pretend to have a miscarriage in an ultimate bid for sympathy (as in "if this doesn't make people like me then I'm out of here") but then nothing happened and I thought - maybe she liked the attention too much and they decided to go with it a little bit longer, anyway I'm team pillow.
the thing with Meghan is I think her mind is way too much into a "celebrity" mindset - "there is no bad press", to the point where she probably thinks that the bad press will get her headlines for longer time, good press would keep her in press a short time, so for all we know she could have even been pregnant but she knew that is she makes it look like there is something off with the pregnancy people will talk about her,
this is why I think she doxxed all those blogers - because she knew they will triple their efforts to "uncover" her secrets, and create even more media attention for her,
I think she is either a sociopath or there is something seriously wrong with her mental health
and I can't believe that The Queen is letting them do whatever they (Meghan) wants, what happened with the grey men? doesn't she realize how bad all of this looks for the Royal Family and it's survival? or is she not being informed about many things?
I just really wanted this entry to make it to this magic number. :p
I read an online article this morning that suggests that Megs will have Archie's christening on July 4th possibly to coincide with Wimbledon . . .when current BFF Serena Williams will be in town for Wimbledon . . and also to pay tribute to Archie's 'American roots', doncha know.
I'm on pins and needles to see what the christening photos will look like, and of whom . . or what . . they will be comprised. I'd like to say I believe that 'Archie' is a real child, but who among us can tell? Meg has already trotted out images of two separate babies that are allegedly 'Archie'. Shall we lay bets on a third for this Christening Show?
I've also read that the Obamas are going to be godparents . . .Whatever Meg is smoking these days, that's some good stuff.