Let's keep going...
Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event? Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th? Oscar's - March 10th? In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US. The IRS just never goes away. Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on). There's always another one. Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California. That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales. Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere. But. The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC84tsL5SmYO84ZKrwskEWbg
(Cambridges)
I think that whole Yahoo piece was vomitously pro-Harkles, don’t you? But I couldn’t resist sharing. Agreed: I don’t think the RF give a great hoot about what these two idiots say anymore, because he RF can choose to release files or tapes anytime they like.
And Harry as a creator or producer is laughable. I know someone who worked on a series and the show runner’s do-nothing, substance-slowed girlfriend at the time got a producer credit even though she was never around, not a creator of anything, and spent her days getting tattoos, waitressing, and sleeping. The show runner used the credit as payment to get rid of her. Producer credits in various forms are often handed out like party favors. I imagine Harry got one for showing up showered to a taping or something.
When you look at the general pr, often is it either sad based but not saying much or ... all about how terrified the other side is (insert group of your choosing - BRF, Palace, random staff?) and how truly powerful the two of them are.
I just don't buy that the people in the UK are afraid of some real truth coming out and then the world will have to come to an end. I think they are sad about how things have gone, concerned about what might be said next (especially since the last interview had so many things which were factually incorrect) so they would be reacting to correct more misinformation yet again to US media which doesn't listen but cowering in fear under the blankets is not one of them.
But yet we keep reading (again and again) that they are ever so afraid. Demanding or ordering them to be afraid just isn't working well for someone.
But here's the super fun part:
Ms. Averiss wrote and published a very special children's book in 2017:
FLOSS THE BOSS
Floss says STOP, Floss says GO! Floss says YES, Floss says NO! Floss is the playground boss!
That is until a new boy named Peter moves into the house on the opposite side of the playground from Floss. When Peter decides he doesn't want to play along with Floss’ rules, she learns that having friends can be much more fun than being the playground boss!
Hmm.....
And remember when little Meghan was sort of a real-life Floss the Boss? Here you go if you forgot:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq3-khQJo8o
@Raspberry Ruffle,
I asked on the day of my vaccination, I didn’t get any opportunity beforehand either. If they think whatever one isn’t right for you, they will discuss options with you.
I managed to talk to someone after all and they have confirmed that the AZ jab should be fine for me, so I'm hoping all goes well.
Unless I misheard what was said to me over the phone, (quite possible!!)... it will be 6 weeks between my first and 2nd shot.
**************************************************************************************
Thank you also to everyone else for your opinions on the subject. It's always good to hear both sides. :-)
I'm classed as in the 'vulnerable' group of people due to lung disease, so think it's in my best interests to have it.
Still nervous as hell about it though! 😌
We are being gaslighted.
How is it that our perception of the Wife is so different from that held by so many others?
I swear that she is the worst threat to my health around here - just when one is convinced that she's on her way to perdition, the situation is abruptly reversed and we're left scratching our heads, wondering what just happened.
Now the Very Good News
The question of who is our Head of State, and how this is determined, is a matter for us, not for opinionated persons who are citizens of other countries. As long as we are more or less content with how things are, she can't do a thing.
Beware of the wife turning politician.
A very early red flag was that she was free with her opinion on the relationship pf Britain and the EU. Regardless of whether or not she agreed with our decision, she was jumping into a very delicate situation she knew bugger all about. The country was divided almost, but not quite, evenly. Guaranteed to upset 50% of the people and inflame matters.
@Elsbeth1847, I expect the RF follows the "not airing your dirty laundry in public" guideline, and I would classify both Harry and Harry's Wife as dirty laundry. The RF doesn't have to do anything; the Duo wave theirs proudly in front of God and everybody. I would personally be embarrassed to admit that I was too stupid to follow the guidelines for making appearances in the royal family, but not our Harry's wife! She's proud of that.
she's about the same size as Meghan is at the same period of gestation
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9546349/Inside-Moroccan-maternity-ward-Malian-mother-gave-birth-record-breaking-NINE-babies.html
It’s actually insane considering their goals. Will and Kate are going to be SO famous, worldwide.
It's number one in the children's black and African American stories category, probably not a very large category.
I don't understand why she would also narrate the book. The whole point of young children's books is for parents to read to them, a bonding moment for parent and child, and instilling a love of books at a very early age. One of my favorite memories is sitting on my parent's laps as they read to me, turning me into a voracious reader for life.
*********************
Bookworm is furious today about the book. At one point in the video she reads a statement from Random House (the parent company of the wife's book), saying that they are accepting only minority written books at this time. Well worth a watch.
Total weight of the nine babies was about 26-27lbs. In the DM article they include this--- "Babies born at 30 weeks measure an estimated 39.9cm in length and weigh 2.8lbs, according to the NHS."
Quite an amazing birth.
"did everyone see the photos of the woman who had 9 babies at 30 weeks?
she's about the same size as Meghan is at the same period of gestation"
Wow, what an incredible story. Thanks for that link! I was born at 29 weeks (back in 1982), weighing 2lbs 3oz and 15 inches long (38cm), so my interest is always piqued with stories like these.
have you ever seen this Christmas video? I had not.
Can't now recall where I read it... but in one article it was mentioned as a 'picture' book!
now this is funny. Those Australians just love M&H
“There’s a little bit of hypocrisy here but look, she’s gonna make a buck, that’s the aim of this now.”
He concluded: “The sooner the media and the public lose interest in this couple who live just north of Los Angeles in California, the better we’ll all be.”
Delivering one final bit of criticism, Andrew added: “Having read some of it from the publisher’s press release, I mean the prose is pretty terrible.”
https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1432009/Holly-Willoughby-Andrew-Neil-clash-Meghan-Markle-book-This-Morning-ITV-video
That Christmas video was awesome, thanks so much for sharing!!!!
Can't now recall where I read it... but in one article it was mentioned as a 'picture' book!
---------
True! I wasn't thinking, it could be a few lines per page. I don't think the pictures are suitable for the younger age range. Maybe 7 year olds but the range is 1-7. Somehow I don't think the book will find its way into the Cambridge household ;-)
I am very tall for a woman. Slim but tall.
I weighed 7 lbs and was 23 inches at birth, which surprises a lot of people. They assume I must have been one of these big, giant babies that we see so often these days. At the time, that was considered the average weight but a smidge on the tall side.
I am always interested in learning how the preemies do in life. Have you had a lot of health challenges?
This is rather long post and make no claims to its accuracy but found it rather sensible and worth a share. I pulled it from celtic cross. It was in response to tarot reading.
Anonymous asked:
“would they be shocking, or would they be considered ‘standard (if shady) American business practise’”
(American here) It depends on how you look at it. There are 3 ways Meghan’s finances, including Archewell, could be considered shady or troublesome. I’ll try to keep it short as I’m not a financial expert and don’t know the specifics of Meghan’s issues.
Issue #1: her charities and corporations, including Archewell if I am not mistaken, are registered and incorporated in the state of Delaware. Delaware has some of the loosest laws, allowing the most flexibility lies, so tons of people register their charities in Delaware. Delaware requires only one director per nonprofit (most require around 3) and there are very few regulatory statutes (for instance few meeting requirements, no approval for real estate transactions, and the attorney general doesn’t review corporate transactions). Meaning that with her nonprofits registered and incorporated in Delaware, Meghan can pretty much do whatever she wants, within law, as there is very little oversight.
Issue #2: Taxes - this one had multiple parts. The US government loves taxes and will always come collecting what it is due. And here, the tax laws are some of the most powerful and most stringent laws we have on the books. Case in point: the US govt was able to bring the mob bosses down, including Al Capone, not because of violent crimes but because of taxes. So please trust me when I say the US govt will get their due when it comes to taxes.
Part A: Meghan had a few tax issues with the IRS in the past (I don’t know the specifics, sorry - either bankruptcy or she was late filing). She is a famous person who is always in the news. And not only is she in the news, but so are all of her deals and how much money she is purportedly earning. The IRS will be paying attention to make sure they get their part of these deals.
Part B: Harry - a member of the British royal family who at one time was receiving funds from said royal family to support their lifestyle - lives in the US. He and Meghan will have to report any wealth earned or given to them over a certain amount to the IRS. I think it’s $15K. Meaning any money Charles has given them probably has to be declared, especially if any was given to Meghan. The BRF is notoriously very private about the true extent of their wealth and holdings. It is thought that because Meghan, an American, married into the family and now lives with Harry in the US, the IRS and the US govt are going to use Meghan’s taxes to understand the real BRF wealth and finances, which could blow the lid wide open on the BRF’s own financial dealings. (The law has recently changed such that the IRS is no longer able to provide tax filings or records to third parties without the owner’s consent so there is some safety there. Not even FOIA can get around this new law, I don’t think.) (And because of this I think Charles set up some kind of trust fund for Harry to draw from to get around the gift taxes and Meghan doesn’t get a single penny of it.)
1/2
Part C (and this one is important for Issue #3 below) in the US, nonprofit organizations are exempt from paying federal taxes. So as a nonprofit incorporated in Delaware, Archewell doesn’t pay any federal taxes so pretty much much any money that is donated to Archewell isn’t really “tracked” for tax purposes. And in the US, charity donations can be used as tax deductions. So if Meghan or one of her friends made a big donation to Archewell, not only does Archewell not have to report it, the donor gets to deduct it from their taxes (which lowers the amount they owe the govt and increases their return/payout from the govt if they are found to have overpaid through their salary deductions - I can only make small personal donations like $100 at a time so I don’t know what the rules are for big donations or corporate donations are.)
Issue #3: in the US, the minimum a nonprofit is mandated and required to give to charity is 5% of any money fundraised or earned. The nonprofit can keep the remaining 95% for themselves, usually as “administrative overhead.” Meaning that if Archewell received a donation of $100,000 then Meghan is only required to give $5,000 of that money away to another charity or to the community that Archewell supports and she can put the remaining $95,500 in her pocket as her salary for being Archewell’s executive director. Archewell doesn’t have to report that donation but Meghan does have to report that salary. So to avoid that, she could get an expense/corporate account for Archewell and charge her personal costs to that corporate account as “administrative overhead” (THAT IS SPECULATION ONLY). That is how some people, including celebrities, have been caught and charged with fraud.
Again, I’m not an expert on taxes, nonprofits, or other financial matters so please take what i have written with a grain of salt. This is only what i know from reading the major newspapers and being involved in charity fundraising drives.
(American finance anon again) One thing I forgot to put in my original mega-long post was that as Harry is now getting paid for work/jobs done here in the US, he has to pay taxes on that salary. The only way I think he can get around it is if the company donates that salary to Archewell or Travalyst or whatever other nonprofits he and Meghan have set up but I'm not clear on what the rules are for that and I would be very suspicious of the companies if they do this.
Harry's citizenship status makes it a little murky but I'm fairly certain he has some kind of permanent residency (via his marriage to an American citizen) and it's my understanding that permanent residents are required to pay taxes so he's probably being watched too.
**congrats to Pearl Jam. 32 years and counting 😉
Meghan Markle is 'very high maintenance and rude' when cameras go off, videographer claims
MEGHAN MARKLE has been branded "difficult" and "demanding" by a photographer who has made a series of claims on what the Duchess of Sussex is like when the cameras go off.
[...]
He added: "But it was kind of like a caricature of someone playing the superstar, you know, because a real superstar, generally unless it's a super bad day, they will play it naturally and be generous with their presence."
They are high-giving the publication of their queen’s bestselling kids’ book.
They are proclaiming the Harkles success in being hugely $$£ successful & kicking the world in the teeth.
They can hardly wait until she starts publishing her rumored other books (adult novels, romances, etc).
They reiterate how gorgeous she is, especially in her caped green insect dress.
A couple noted they love her and find her bright and beautiful, but add “she isn’t a good writer”.
She is being praised for daring to tackle the “difficult”, never before addressed topic of infant-dad bonding.
They laugh at those who say she shouldn’t have used “her real name” & they don’t seem to know she got the title wrong.
....Yes, the sugars remain delusional.
Pull the other one.
Do read the comments on Blind Item ~2 - have you been busy, Magatha?
That financial info is fascinating. I keep expecting to wake up to headlines about their tax woes. How much can they bury and hide? And even an Australian morning show was tsk-tsk-ing over the idea that she won't be giving book proceeds to charity, yet used her "royal name" on the cover.
Melanie McDonagh
What is the point of Meghan Markle’s new children’s book?
Meghan Markle has written a book for children. Of course she has. There is no celeb, no matter how busy, who doesn’t have a children’s book in them, because children’s books, you might think if you didn’t know better, don’t need plot or character or much in the way of style. It was either that, or a cookbook.
The Bench, for that is the name, is based apparently on a poem Meghan wrote for her husband for father’s day, a month after little Archie was born. Because that’s what you do with a small baby, isn’t it… you write a poem. It’s short, it would seem, but then William Nicholson’s wonderful, illustrated book, Clever Bill, which Maurice Sendak thought a masterpiece, had fewer than a hundred words. Brevity isn’t a problem in a book for children.
There are only a few excerpts of Meghan’s book available, illustrated with watercolours by one Christian Robinson. The Duchess reportedly wanted to tell the story through an 'inclusive lens' and put an emphasis on diversity. The caption to the picture of a red-headed soldier (with US army cap) holding his son up while a woman at the window looks on, is: ‘This is your bench, Where life begins, For you and our son our baby, our kin.’
Mmm. Our son and our baby… our kin? Bit redundant, not to say odd. And the ‘you and our son our baby’ is a mouthful. But on we go:
“
‘Looking out at my love / and our beautiful boy, And here in the window / I’ll have tears of great joy.’
Let’s not worry about the syntax without knowing what comes before, but the ‘And’ is clumsy and redundant, and the poet’s iron determination to get a rhyme out of boy and joy is notable. It’s pretty good rubbish, no? As a private poem from a mother to a father, it may be terrifically affecting but I’m not sure these sentiments aren’t better kept to the couple concerned.
On a later page, where a little black boy rests on his father, we learn that
“
‘From here you will rest / See the growth of our boy.’
Meghan is getting her money’s worth out of words that rhyme with boy, but I think we get the gist: on this wooden bench, a boy sits or lies or larks around with his father, sensitively observed by the mother. I am sure Thomas Markle will appreciate this tender parental relationship, given that his grown-up daughter hasn’t had much time for him in the last couple of years, but I expect it’ll be the template for an equally affecting poem about grandmothers, mothers and daughters when Meghan’s baby girl is born.
Usefully, for those who need a steer when it comes to reacting to poetry, even a poem for children, the publishers (Random House Children’s Books) observe: ‘Evoking a deep sense of warmth, connection and compassion, The Bench gives readers a window into shared and enduring moments between a diverse group of fathers and sons.’ Oh and the press release describes the Duchess as a ‘mother, wife, feminist, and activist’ who ‘currently resides in her home state of California with her family, two dogs and a growing flock of rescue chickens.’ Don’t you love the regal ‘reside’?
Two things. No, make that three. The book is going to be atrocious; you can tell on the basis of about 20 words. And it won’t matter. It’ll be given plugs from Meghan’s celebrity mates and it’ll be cue for endless guff about the father-son bond, though perhaps that bit wasn’t really thought through either, because it might involve Archie’s dad reflecting on his own relationship with his father – whom he pretty well trashed in his interview with Oprah Winfrey. Chiefly though, it will give Meghan another string to her bow. As well as describing herself as feminist, mother and activist, she can now add the job description ‘author’ to the list.
Doesn’t it make you pine for Sarah Ferguson and Budgie the Little Helicopter?
---
Perhaps why other author was all "nope not mine" 😆
Lol sorry just playing around:)
Barely can read CDAN anymore. I usually skim blinds but rarely read comments (missing that comment count old format had, drew me in)
Do not miss "dancing boy" however my deliberate mention is only to slip in this. My favorite Dancing Boy 🙂
https://youtu.be/P2v8IgJdsm4
(Thanks also to WBBM(?) for sharing pirate vid other day, I really liked it! grandson quips too! ❤)
*sorry if double post. Thought I previously posted story but never showed on my end
(Morbid attempted humor, please disregard)
I can report my father received vaccination (feeling like bad kid as I can't recall which one) but his only complaint was sore arm and with 2nd shot zero side effects. He is also cancer survivor with afib.
Sister and her husband zero side effects.
I ,for own reasons am opting out at this time, but wow last daddy daughters luncheon left me uneasy. Dad super disappointed at my choice . Rebel in me stated(far more respectfully as about to relay) that he will be ok in my continued presence as he is fully vaccinated, and if as effective as claimed
shouldn't matter if I am not.
Of course led to "herd" speak (cue: pizza)
My personal opinion if I had underlying health issues (obesity, lung issues, age, compromised immunity etc.) I would opt in. For those who are high risk/committed to jab no sense in panic or fright, keep positive. Mind is so powerful. And when that third leg sprouts you'll outrun us all! 😉
Be kinda funny if Bill managed to Catfish her.
I don't see a negative, as I kinda feel they have behind the scenes communication, which would not only allow M complete control of narrative but of father's subsequent actions/interviews. Of course it would unleash/expose rest of family (samantha, brothers, etc.) but it seems she has bit of power over them too as they rarely ever comment on events when they so easily could.
What really bugs me about her book is that it's such a vanity piece. Ish!
As expected as well, she just couldn't resist and had to insert herself into the story.
The caption reads: 'Wishing Archie Mountbatten-Windsor a very happy 2nd birthday today.' It is almost identical to the one shared for Princess Charlotte's sixth birthday last week.' (DM)
Ah, yes, Archie's birthday. Will we be treated to a video of mummy reading The Bench to her little boy?
The Daily Telegraph6 May 2021By Victoria Ward
The Duchess of Sussex successfully sued Associated Newspapers over five articles in The Mail on Sunday
THE Queen came to the aid of the Duchess of Sussex in her legal battle against The Mail on Sunday by dismissing claims that she owned the copyright to a letter Meghan wrote to her father.
The Queen’s lawyers intervened in the High Court case as the two sides locked horns over one of the final bones of contention.
The Duchess’s former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, also “emphatically” denied having any copyright claim to the letter, landing a final blow to the newspaper’s case.
Their interventions yesterday paved the way for Lord Justice Warby to award a summary judgment on the outstanding copyright claim and with it, further costs.
The Duchess successfully sued Associated Newspapers for breach of privacy and copyright relating to the publication of five articles featuring extracts of the letter in February 2019.
In February, she won a summary judgment, a legal step negating the need for witness evidence, in relation to the privacy claim and the bulk of the copyright claim.
One of the final issues on which both sides disagreed was whether the Duchess was the sole owner of the copyright of the letter, having admitted that she sought guidance from others, including Mr Knauf and her husband, Prince Harry.
Associated Newspapers suggested that the Duchess sought professional advice because she knew that it would be made public and that it was intended for use as part of a media strategy to enhance her image.
As a co-author, Mr Knauf’s role at Kensington Palace might have rendered the letter Crown copyright. However, the court heard that Mr Knauf had confirmed in writing that despite making a “very minor suggestion” that Meghan include a reference to her father’s ill health, he did not co-write the letter. As such, he said he had no wish to become a party to ongoing legal proceedings.
Lawyers representing the Keeper of the Privy Purse, on behalf of the Queen, also confirmed they “did not consider the Crown to be the copyright owner”.
Andrew Caldecott QC, for Associated Newspapers, said it was “a matter of regret” that Mr Knauf ’s lawyers had not made his position clear before the summary judgment hearing in January.
The Duchess had already been awarded 90 per cent of the costs of the first summary judgment application and the judge yesterday awarded her the remaining 10 per cent.
I thought tax post was good read as well! I am curious how it all works, for instance what would trigger a deep dive? I would imagine/hope there would be added scrutiny due to how complicated their filing surely is. But what/who would take it further to look for kickbacks and payments involving the merching, alleged paid meet and greets,etc. All the "little" stuff. Equates to millions I am sure. Perhaps just answered my own question?
Or will Archwell, Lion King payment, Travalyst infinitum be enough to sink them? I guarantee too there is blatant fraud involving her clothing expenses but how would it be exposed. With zero knowledge of how Prince Charles is taxed is he able to deduct her clothes as expense and *that* would trigger investigation into whether he ever paid for them in first place?
Very complicated.
I honestly do not see how they fund themselves. Disregarding house, I view as part of some shady deal and don't see them paying anything for it. Their expenses have to be astronomical between lawyers and PR alone. Add to it every article of M that has "related stories" at bottom, she has different face in every single one. I wouldn't be surprised if her plastic surgery alone was in upper 6 figures.
Although too that also relates to taxes because I am sure there is line that allows her to claim cosmetics, clothes, maybe even cosmetic surgery as deduction due to her profile (or not as she is no longer actress?) however there is sure to be cap that is tenth of amount spent .
How many accountants do they have? Another expense and not cheap. Advisors probably bill her double too cause could you imagine being in meeting with her and the word vomit and the hands and her pausing to hear herself speak as she flippantly bitches of improper temperature of beverages and soy content of a pastry . She is batsh*t.
Regarding Markle family muzzle? $$$$ overrides the taunts of sugars (and yes they are vicious) but they don't strike me as wealthy family and since they aren't forever cashing in on association. $omething keeps them hushed, as well as strategically brings them out when needed. My opinion of course.
One last return to taxes before I sign off for night. Archie ,if claimed as deduction, will be required to have social security number. Could get interesting if birth certificate is wonky. Do they footprint babies at birth over there? As again, my own belief, but I believe Archie was literally a doll until SA. I cannot believe I just typed such lunacy but I would be lying if I said I didn't 100%believe it. Goodnight!
shouldn't matter if I am not.
Of course led to "herd" speak (cue: pizza)
My personal opinion if I had underlying health issues (obesity, lung issues, age, compromised immunity etc.) I would opt in. For those who are high risk/committed to jab no sense in panic or fright, keep positive. Mind is so powerful. And when that third leg sprouts you'll outrun us all! 😉
I've had the vaccine; I support your right to refuse it. No problems. Half the family has had the vaccine, half the family hasn't. It isn't a point of contention for us. I just lay out the pros, cons, and possible consequences either way.
All signs point to yes — a few articles this week stated MM would release a video of her reading the book to “Archie” today. You know, on his cheap, birthday cake-less special day.
Taking bets on
* loaded diaper under toddler pants
* hat
* still doesn’t know her
Can’t transfer old followers (or their 100s of 1000s purchased bots).
+
Can’t pay to buy more bots right now.
I currently assume they fund themselves as a key part of a laundered cash stream, from some sources, funneled through all these deals and businesses and charities.
I too think “Archie” was once a doll. I think present “Archie” hired or borrowed for appearances now, either from the surrogate or from a friend or colleague.
Even when not in my tin tiara, those are the explanations I can come up with, since they don’t produce much work, do cheap stunts, spend like water, and Harry was videotaped in a funk with Oprah because daddy turned off the payments. And because Archie is an unseen mystery lately seen in computer paintings, a giant hat, or strongly resembling her friend’s older child. Plus, he never seems to know them.
Maybe my tiara is titanium now actually.
This Sunday is Mother’s Day in the U.S.
How will MM celebrate herself? Or will she lay low, to keep focus on the connection between her mealticket “Archie” and Harry?
Also, I think this is a big reason for the "privacy" issue. They want to make their photos rare and expensive.
LOL. Your poor eyes.
I'm a big believer in "By their fruits ye shall know them."
...
And according to royal biographer Phil Dampier, the children's book hints at how unhappy Prince Harry, 35, who served a decade in the military and two tours in Afghanistan between 2007 and 2008, is to have lost his military titles.
...
Speaking to The Sun, Phil Dampier said: 'The illustration of a red-haired soldier (obviously you know who) hugging his little boy, looks as though he has come home from war after many years and pulls at the heart-strings.'
...
'Mum is in tears as she looks through the window, and sees her husband returning from battle to pick up family life once more.
He continued: 'It's a scenario familiar to so many military couples separated by conflicts. 'But of course it wasn't a reality for Harry, who was in a different relationship when he served in Afghanistan.
'Rather Meghan is probably showing how much the Army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles.'
...
And according to Dampier, the book is another way for the couple to express their feelings on the matter.' (in the DM)
-------------
This is only an opinion piece but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if this was the unmentionable two's way of getting back at the BRF
@Swamp woman,
LOL. Your poor eyes.
EXACTLY! I hit the website of the local NBC affiliate for severe weather info, and there was the smirking picture of the author (who shall not be named) of the new Bench Book, informing me that it would be published. I scrolled past that with a quickness. I could not care less about some Hollyweirdo who has cut all her family ties with her father and siblings writing a children's book. Why would she be extolling the relationship between her husband, who has also cut ties with his sibling and dad, and his alleged invisible child? I suppose that if she publicizes it enough, we will believe that this warm relationship exists? HOW IS THIS EVEN NEWS?
They don't tell me when 'real' authors whose books I enjoy are publishing their latest. Maybe they are insinuating that people that would buy that book are too stupid to look up the information.
/I should have gone to the National Weather Service or one of the storm chaser YouTube channels for my weather information.
'Rather Meghan is probably showing how much the Army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles.'
He didn't "lose" his military titles. HE QUIT! He threw them away. He ran off. He abandoned his Commander in Chief in the hour of her greatest need. He figuratively spit on his family.
If he weren't HRM's grandson, his butt would have been kicked to the curb before he finished training because he's a worthless sack of something.
And according to royal biographer Phil Dampier, the children's book hints at how unhappy Prince Harry, 35, who served a decade in the military and two tours in Afghanistan between 2007 and 2008, is to have lost his military titles.
...
Speaking to The Sun, Phil Dampier said: 'The illustration of a red-haired soldier (obviously you know who) hugging his little boy, looks as though he has come home from war after many years and pulls at the heart-strings.'
Who knew that the wokist crowd was so pro-military? This came as a shock to me. Anyways, this red haired soldier bit in the book is M's way of taking #6's side against those meanie royals who stripped him of (some of) his military connections, honorary titles and military patronages. Now #6 owes her! I am fairly sure that #6 can display medals he was awarded directly by his military commanders. But #6 can longer wear the fancy-schmantzy military get ups that Charles, Andrew and William are still entitled to wear due to being awarded honorary titles.
I can see why missing dress up in these snazzy uniforms will upset #6. He did pitch a fit over this during his recent visit.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ask fans to donate $5 to vaccine distribution in developing countries to mark Archie's second birthday - but don't share a new photo of the toddler
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9550353/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-urge-supporters-make-vaccine-donation-mark-Archies-big-day.html
I’ve been seeing comments on twitter from people who have either served in the US army or have family that have and they are not happy about “H” wearing a US army uniform in the book.
I haven't seen that. Revisionist history? If it is in a children's book, it *must* be true?
Apologies if already posted...
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ask fans to donate $5 to vaccine distribution in developing countries to mark Archie's second birthday - but don't share a new photo of the toddler
Ah, now we see the vaccine chair in action!
What IS it with those two? It is all about the bling for both of them, never the substance.
So ... Thomas Sr. on a bench by himself. Multiple layers of meaning including Diana at the Taj?
I haven't seen that. Revisionist history? If it is in a children's book, it *must* be true?
************************
Yeah exactly. We know how she likes change the story.
I have seen some comments elsewhere but there are also some on this thread https://twitter.com/luca31404488/status/1390027907293237252?s=21
If not, this will do:
Newsweek magazine here in the States has an article that refers to an editorial opinion in The Telegrahs calling out Meghan’s book as so woke that children will not find it interesting.
Newsweek headline:
Meghan Markle’s ‘Woke’ Book May Put Children off Reading, Claims Op-Ed
Markle’s first children’s book has been dismissed as being "woke" and unappealing to children.
An op-ed [by Ella Whelan] published in the British newspaper The Telegraph suggests that children will not be interested in The Duchess of Sussex's first book because it centers "soupy stories about love and kindness."
The Bench, which will be published in June, is inspired by Prince Harry's relationship with his son Archie.
Ella Whelan writes that: "They [children] certainly don't like to be lectured—if there is a moral to the story, every good writer from Aesop to Road Dahl knows you've got to disguise it with a bit of fun."
The story began life as a Father's Day poem and is illustrated by acclaimed artist Christian Robinson.
"And here from our window I'll have tears of great joy... Looking out at My Love and our beautiful boy," read one excerpt from the book.
Whelan writes that while parents may be interested in buying a celebrity-authored book for their kids, the kids themselves may not enjoy the content.
"From the preview, it looks like Meghan's entry into children's literature has more to do with her drive to nurture her and Harry's new role as activist celebrities than a desire to connect with children," Whelan writes.
She also takes issue with the somewhat military-focused aspects of The Bench, such as the illustration of Prince Harry returning home in a soldier's uniform.
"Perhaps it's a cultural thing, but if my kids have to read about soldiers, I'd prefer Hans Christian Andersen's tin version rather than the woke posturing of a former royal," she says.
Another of Meghan's fiercest critics, Piers Morgan, has also shown contempt for the book, labeling it "beyond parody."
“Lest we forget, Ms. Markle has ruthlessly disowned her father Thomas and refuses to have anything to do with him despite the fact they now live just 70 miles from each other," the former Good Morning Britain host wrote in his Daily Mail online column.
"She is also reported to have disowned every other Markle, none of whom were invited to her wedding. This doesn't seem like someone overly keen to operate 'an inclusive lens' to me. In fact, it seems a singularly EX-clusive lens."
He continued: "She also spray-gunned Thomas in her lie-packed Oprah whine-a-thon in a manner that was more 'ice, rage and irritation' than 'warmth, joy and comfort.'"
"Notwithstanding Ms Markle's seemingly unlimited thirst for committing attention-seeking acts of gargantuan hypocrisy, this seemed beyond parody. But it was real."
https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-woke-book-put-children-off-reading-op-ed-1589174
Apologies if already posted...
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ask fans to donate $5 to vaccine distribution in developing countries to mark Archie's second birthday - but don't share a new photo of the toddler
_______
You and/or other Nutties pls correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't being forced to go to the A**ell site to click on the charities' sites mean your data is automatically collected for resale elsewhere?? Even if you merely click on the site (not even contributing to the probable kickbacks involved with the charities)? If that makes sense.
_______
@ Those mentioning Harry being depicted in (American!!!) Army uniform ..... all I have to say is, he can %^&*$%#@&%* AGAIN. Her, she is already on permanent *(*&^%$#@-itude.
Can Harry and Meghan really rewrite their family stories?
As they celebrate Archie’s birthday and announce Meghan's book on father-son ties, are the Sussex's trying to find healing of their own?
I've stayed away from their website for that very reason.
Sorry guys, this needs to be clarified. Indigo, the site on which it says 1% of the net proceeds of ALL children's books sold by the retailer goes to charity, is a nation wide (Canadian) initiative that the retailer has been doing for the better part of a decade.
As a uni student i used to work for them. The donations are accumulated and given as grants to under privileged schools across Canada who apply for these grants to stock their libraries. I've personally gone to one school and seen the impact, and actually welcomed the principal and some teachers when they came into the store to purchase their books with the money they were given. They are also given a 30% discount on sale price, which eliminates the company's own profits, and the money of the sales go to the publisher, author, etc.
Indigo has 1% of proceeds of every children's book sold online and in stores go to the foundation, which is called Love of Reading.
This is NOT unique to Meghan's book. I'm all for calling her out, but I'm not gonna blame her for something she has no control over such as this.
Follow-up comment from another poster:
This is a bookstore policy. It is not a voluntary donation from M&H but they're making it look like they are making a donation.
Can Harry and Meghan really rewrite their family stories?
As they celebrate Archie’s birthday and announce Meghan's book on father-son ties, are the Sussex's trying to find healing of their own?
By
Camilla Tominey,
ASSOCIATE EDITOR, The Telegraph
5 May 2021 • 6:05pm
Full archive is here:
https://archive.ph/E7nHp#selection-1395.1-1395.58
(in fact it was archived previously. I did not have to do anything)
Can anyone here get the complete opinion piece from The Telegraph?
From UK Telegraph -- Meghan Markle’s fun-free children’s book may put an entire generation off reading
Another one fully archived already>>>>> https://archive.ph/IqEDM
___________________________________
Meghan Markle’s fun-free children’s book may put an entire generation off reading
Yes, parents will buy it. But the intended audience for the Duchess of Sussex's literary debut prefers silliness and being scared to sermons
ELLA WHELAN
5 May 2021 • 10:47am
Thanks! :)
Why do they act like the kid is dead?
And again, if he's not, did they get his consent for this?
The entire way they approach their supposed toddler son and his person is inappropriate.
No one still really knows who they are day to day, and most people buy children's books based on recommendations.
Yes, this is the best evidence that they're not parents. They don't act like it.
Last year, for his birthday, he was filmed in a dingy onesie, reading a book he clearly wasn't interested in, and being told on camera that he was the one who scared away the rabbit in the story, not her. At every turn there's a story where he's not getting presents, not having a cake, etc...
I think their angle is to be "we are such humanitarians" but it doesn't fit when they take private jets and she wears extremely expensive clothes. You can get a cute baby outfit for $15 that would be more appropriate for his birthday than last year. I think the onesie was to make him look younger than he really is, but at least choose a birthday printed one or something.
Little kids love pizza, chicken nuggets, ice cream, sliced bananas...they don't care about vegan cakes or 40 page preachy kid books. They like books like "Not the Hippopotamus" and "Dinosaur Tacos"
That's a great observation. I agree.
@Wild Boar Battle-maid,
I know -- I had the same reaction. MM didn't even know him when he soldiered. And as she knows him now, Harry's probably always at home, on the floor, near the doll.
the famous picture of Doria and little Meghan counting their coins on THE BENCH at Disneyland.
Link to the article containing the image is below, scroll down through the article to see it:
Meghan Markle's family share intimate private photo album | Daily Mail Online
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5139821/Meghan-Markles-family-share-intimate-private-photo-album.html
I was just channel surfing, and noticed DEAL OR NO DEAL (MM as a suitcase girl) is being re-run on Game Show Network at noon on weekdays. I'd never seen it before, the suitcase girls are the definition of "bimbettes". LOL, as if I didn't know that. Even then, Hairy's FUTURE wife was B-. If you want a good laugh, tune in. It's a great demonstration of exactly how over her head she is these days. She was 20,000 feet deep back then, too.
PS. Happy Birthday to the Darren Doll.
The entire way they approach their supposed toddler son and his person is inappropriate.
Indeed. I actually find it creepy, and am wondering what further awfulness we will see when their daughter is born. Narcissists tend to raise up one child and demean the other(s).
I just saw the headline but I'm not sure I have the stomach for more...
Full article https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9550193/Meghan-aide-tried-protect-father-media-intrusion.html
Indeed. I actually find it creepy, and am wondering what further awfulness we will see when their daughter is born. Narcissists tend to raise up one child and demean the other(s).
Hmmmmm. Would a narcissist female be harsher to a son or a daughter? Anybody with direct knowledge?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9550941/Harry-Meghan-release-new-photo-son-holding-balloons-celebrate-turning-two.html
Is she trying to imply she's been an Army wife? Left alone for months on end?
-------------------
Well, she was locked up in the palace for months. Does that count?
At the time, I assumed she was locked up with H, but maybe not?
Maybe he was free to go for coffee but she was not?
Do you think they took away his keys and passport, too?
Balloons - that's not very eco sensitive. Mylar is a real problem for wildlife.
_____
My thought exactly. They are dangerous for both land- and sea-based wildlife of many different species.
But, this is the pair that seems to desperately need 100s of thousands of gallons of water for their 16 bathrooms, swimming pool, not to mention lawn maintenance, in a state where drought sometimes reaches crisis proportions.
I know three women who are the daughters of women who are narcissists. Two had brothers. The two women with brothers were treated worse, while the brothers are treated like little kings. The third woman I know was one of four sisters, but she was the one selected to be treated far worse. She is a professional artist (which her mother wanted to be), so I don't know if that factored into the abuse and mistreatment. She's been in therapy for years and is doing well now, but the damage is still apparent. Her husband and sisters have been hugely supportive over the years, as they can view the situation and help block or stop the abuse. It's tough to watch as a friend.
Moving 1000 to 2000 miles away from the mothers as soon as they left university was the trick all of them have used with some success.
It's a sepia toned photo of Archie from the back. lol!!
https://torontosun.com/news/world/meghan-markle-mocked-book-called-pious-hectoring-gibberish
They are in a water-deficit situation such that some farms have had 95% of their water cut.
It’s not PC to exploit their child this way. They talk about him everyday and obscure him to remain relevant.
The other Royals are Royal and show their faces because that is their destiny. They are still presenting Archie and creating ongoing speculation.
This will eventually get called out for what it is: disgusting.
They are in a water-deficit situation such that some farms have had 95% of their water cut.
_____
Oh, swell, just swell. At this moment, I feel like hurling something breakable across the room, such as I haven't felt in all this whole tawdry saga.
Nevertheless, I'm glad you brought that up, and wish plenty of other people would as well, thank you.
Like, whatever Meghan. Your father never earned a buck off your back!
I agree she has major issues with her mother. I think she also resents her father for never telling her No, that is if she has any intellectual ability as an adult at all. It has to have occurred to her what has made her unrepeatable and weird, with an incessant need for relevance. Her mother abandoning her during her formative years with a father who gave her everything she wanted and more (probably to help mom being gone, however the compensation only harmed)...she’s screwed up. But most adults go through these realizations in their 20s- especially those with resources and time to think. Meghan either has no compass, no insight, or is dumb like Harry.
Hard to know.
I don’t think Archie goes to any school. Photo op only. Someone would spill the beans.
All was well as long as I complied. I thought Id got off lightly in my teens, with none of the rows my school friends had with their parents - boy, was I wrong.
The moment I showed independence, got a boyfriend, all hell broke out. When I married, she did her utmost to reclaim me.
Part of my marrying unsuitable blokes was down to trying to escape from her.
I have no idea how she would have behaved with a son.
Upon the bench the three of us sit
When Harry My Love starts to throw a fit
As the media will reveal our lies very soon
About the birth of a girl arriving in June.
I spy a pap in the tree of life
I smile despite my internal strife
And then my dark heart turns ever colder
As I realize a bird has crapped on my shoulder.
My Love on the bench with our bundle of joy
A surrogate sister for our surrogate boy
The perfect pair for merching so well
Through Meghan’s Mirror, there is lots to sell.
The new pic of Archie - so artistic. Sepia toned, from the back & slightly out of focus. so predictable.
_____
A DM commenter noted that there is no shadow. Even when the sun is supposedly directly overhead, there is always a shadow, however slight.
Another one noted that "A" appears to be 3 years old, and not 2. I agree. I don't believe a 2-year-old could handle such a big bundle of balloons with much coordination. Large motor skills are not that developed at that age.
I thought the kid looked 3 too, and had to double check the article to confirm that he's supposed to be 2.
Very interesting about the lack of shadow.
@Lt. Nyota Uhura
I thought the kid looked 3 too, and had to double check the article to confirm that he's supposed to be 2.
Very interesting about the lack of shadow.
_____
I had to take another look at the photo, too. My own 2 daughters looked just like that at 3.
_____
Blogger Pantsface said...
Does anyone else think the new birthday picture is just sad? If indeed he is a real boy, what a sad picture - no doubt considered "artistic" by his parents, but a boy on his own, with few balloons....
_____
Yes, it truly is sad. Makes me wonder which, if any, little tots his age are around for him to interact with and play with. There certainly aren't any in the neighborhood, at least not nearby, from what I gather, they're mostly older people. Seems to me I remember reading about her saying that she can't take A to playgroups because she's "too famous." I could be wrong, and hope I am.
Speaking to The Sun, Phil Dampier said: 'The illustration of a red-haired soldier (obviously you know who) hugging his little boy, looks as though he has come home from war after many years and pulls at the heart-strings.'
...
'Mum is in tears as she looks through the window, and sees her husband returning from battle to pick up family life once more.
😏
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9548055/PAUL-THOMAS-Meghan-Markles-book.html
https://twitter.com/ledbettercarly/status/1390364065550282760?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1390364065550282760%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.purewow.com%2Fnews%2Farchie-new-photo-birthday
Lack of face? Harry's wife says for $1MM I will give you a face but her photoshoppiing skills (or that of the intern) are not up to snuff
Lack of Color? in Sepia - Harry's wife says we are celebrating his brownness We should be color blind
Archie looks at the sky? He is celebrating mother earth or waiting for money to rain from heaven or the archewell foundation account
Forget the balloons. Look at sad sepia birthday “Archie’s” hair.
Extremely curly. Like rippled thick 1920s permed silent movie hair. Look at the crown of his head. Color seems light-ish as well.
But, “Beach Archie” had straight thick dark hair.
I guess this is why the hat, in the LA pap walk, as they switch actors around.
.....Also, rumor is they are preparing to sue for the school walk (hat) photo.
I guess I'm not the only one who noticed that the RF paid an exceptional amount of attention to Archie's birthday this year...
Charles' olive branch to Harry? Royal fans notice that Prince of Wales posted a birthday tribute to Archie after NOT marking Louis or Charlotte's special days on social media this year
_____
Seems more like CYA to me. That is, leaves less room for any more "mean ol' Dad" stuff. The best the stans seemed to manage was that "racist" Charles was "snubbing M" by not including her in the pix. (Not to mention those pix are all they've got! H and his wife would make them pay for any current ones, probably.)
The Cambridges, like any other sane people, don't need public tributes for each and every one of their childrens' birthdays. I'm sure they get plenty of love behind the scenes.
The hair, the hair, the hair.
_____
Good eye!
See my note above about the hair texture of Birthday Archie vs Beach Archie. Thoughts?
Also, I would say if I was a top family concerned about the welfare of Mystery Child living abroad with two abusive narc family members (particularly if I had a file and digital evidence about one of them), I would keep posting about the child to force them to show him and keep the Media eye on him, wondering about him, researching him, for his safety. Prince C and others may want visuals. (My connected friend insists there are no zooms or calls going on.)
RF releasing those pics is amazing. Trolling done right IMO
I am not concerned regarding
Jason Knauf. In fact when I read of it I cracked a smile,they are feeding the beast for a reason.
Back around later tonight:)
Hi! lol, 20 years of closely assessing model imagery for campaigns/ image continuity automatically makes my eyes go there, and there and there with photos even in real life. It’s a curse! But useful here, I guess!
So, what do you think. Look especially at the close up shot of Beach Archie In a buttoned sweater rushing head slightly down toward camera. .....then compare with this curly tot.
@Lt Nyota Uhura,
Hi! lol, 20 years of closely assessing model imagery for campaigns/ image continuity automatically makes my eyes go there, and there and there with photos even in real life. It’s a curse! But useful here, I guess! (Me: Extremely useful! :)
So, what do you think. Look especially at the close up shot of Beach Archie In a buttoned sweater rushing head slightly down toward camera. .....then compare with this curly tot.
_____
Well, IMO they are two different tots. Beach A's hair is clearly straight and dark, while Curly A is, as you say, curly-haired, and lighter. And also IMO, both are 3 years old, not 2. Not to mention the book A is blond, while the Christmas card A was red-haired. Aaagh, so many smoke and mirrors, feeling a bit dizzy now, LOL
His hair kind of looks like it's blowing in the wind, yet the balloons stand straight up as if there's not a breeze at all. I would love it if somebody found a stock photo of a mylar balloon bunch that matches the one in the photo- that would be a bit of a smoking gun.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9551225/Pfizer-hits-Biden-administration-vaccine-patent-waivers.html
@AnT Great point about the outfit being so similar to "beach Archie." Almost as if they had taken the photo that day and 'shopped it into this weird shadowless scene.
_____
Good point about the outfit, I missed that.
A commenter in DM said s/he thought the balloons were tethered to the ground somehow, but I'm not seeing it. However, is it just me, or are there bare tree branches IN FRONT OF the balloons' string?
@Lt. Nyota Uhura
Here --- the DM kindly gives us a big close-up of Birthday Archie's light-colored curly hair (with daddy's bald spot?).
https://mobile.twitter.com/DailyMailUK/status/1390418631452921856?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
I think the DM knows what's up.
Lady C ON Meghan & Harry's $ shenanigans/father complaint/press defeat/Palace antics/book peurile.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2N06WjEY2M
My apt complex is chock full of toddlers. I would call the kid in the photo easily 3 years old. And would a 2 year really old be able to handle how many helium-filled balloons is that? 12 or more? It makes me think they don't actually have custody and the real Archie is elsewhere. Someone commented on the DM that he is with his gestational mother.
@Ziggy said:
the outfit being so similar to "beach Archie."
Perhaps like his father, "Archie" is only allowed one outfit, or one onesie, or one diaper, every three years..... I mean, she was hustling to give his clothes away on the Africa trip.
I too think the child looks like our 3-year-old neighbors' kids, and our 3-year-old niece and nephews.
There is definitely something odd about the photo. Look at the DM photo link I posted at 1:10 AM above. The DM show us a close-up, and it's odd and you can see the weird areas even better. Hazy, area with a sort of bald spot, super "worked" at base of neck and blown-out n the right side of head near lifted arm, as if someone is quickly trying to cover more poor Photoshop work. Just my opinion.
"Blind Item #9
Hey, if the old man who was paying all your bills and funding your lifestyle for the years you were living overseas doesn't want to include you when he wishes happy birthday to his grandson, there is probably a reason. The old guy is not really that subtle."
there is something you can see at the inside bend of his right leg at the knee. I would normally say it could indeed be a pole base for the balloons to be tethered in place. But to the right side of "Birthday Archie's" sweater, there is also an excess object which, dimensionally thinking of visual distance and position, seems more likely to be a wider weighted base.
Either way, there is something "extra" left behind in the photo at the inner knee or the right side of the child. Both can't base, and the inner knee object is at the wrong distance to be a base.
That, coupled with the way the feet float in the grass, and the blow-out halo at the outside of the right ankle at jeans' hem, suggest the child was pasted into this image from some other photo. I would sent this back to be retouched in pre-press, rather than release it for use, in other words. And I would ask to see other picks. Something is gobbed up with this "birthday photo" . Just my opinion.
Interesting CDAN blind! I know CDAN isn't the best with royal ones, but this one seems real, like a peevish attempt to reveal something negative about PC by Rachel with the hotmail -- except that the readers will be thinking PC is FINALLY wising up.
My contact -- well, he is firm that PC is not reaching out. The Harkles went over the last line in the sand.
I think the Harkles will finally learn how an angry, betrayed Scorpio reacts: you are dead to me.. (Sorry to go atrology logic there, but this is one time I'd be interested to see how a betrayed top Scorpio figurehead reacts. Like my friends to their ex BFs, and bad in-laws? If so, this is going to be entertaining to watch: Extreme Narc MM rushing headfirst, unhelmeted, at the stone fortress walls.)
oops correction we have the back of a kid with black balloons for the birthday he doesnt have a face ;-)
Nothing says "Happy Birthday!" like a child standing by himself in an empty yard with black balloons.
Yup -- you caught it. Enlarging the photo a bit can show the errors, sometimes the pixelation, lines, too.
A colleague in NYC who is a genius at digital photo manipulation and who earns his living that way working images in publishing, ads, and magazines can barely stand the sloppiness of most Harkle photoshopped images. I'll have to see what he thinks of this one.
I agree with @SwampWoman - Nothing says Happy birthday like a child standing by himself in an empty yard with black balloons.....at any age.
@Humor Me
It's tragic, isn't it? Really, really disturbing. That's why I HAVE to hope there is no real "Archie" with them, and that these children are models or the kids of participating friends.
If there is an Archie, living this sad awful way....god.
Once lockdown is over, what are they going to do, do you suppose? Leave him locked up and isolated, with security excuses? How can they lock up TWO kids? Will they say they have each other and need no other companionship? Will Archie become the Boo Radley of Montecito, while Baby Diana becomes the dragged-around-town star?
Will Archie become the Boo Radley of Montecito?
You always write some great lines, AnT, but I think this is one of my new faves. 😂
RF releasing those pics is amazing. Trolling done right IMO
I am not concerned regarding
Jason Knauf. In fact when I read of it I cracked a smile,they are feeding the beast for a reason.
Back around later tonight:)
I too think the RF is "feeding the beast" for a reason. Every other week the Disastrous Duo are getting bad press and trying to cover it up with flowery fluff articles. I doubt that Charles is currently funding them, once H is broke, I doubt M will stay. The RF are counting on that. At some point M is going to go apocalyptic in her mania. Thats the perfect time to shut her(and H) down. Better to wait for the perfect opportunity-like if she tries to run for public office, or gets audited by the IRS, or DIVORCE!!! M will get pittance after H is out of money. She cant really demand Charles/William pay her in a divorce from H, especially after their attacks on the family.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/news/pregnant-meghan-markle-holds-son-archie-new-baby-bump-pic/
That picture of Archie reminds me of those black and white videos of a cat napping and/or wandering around, looking depressed suffering from "ennui". I don't know if any of you saw those on youtube years ago.
_____
I don't remembering Wandering/Napping Cat, but every so often I watch No-No Cat when I need a great, big belly laugh just for heart's ease :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMESRatAG04
(Bear in mind this lovely kitty, though he appears scared, has loving owners, and kitty lived from 2002 to 2018, I'm sure he had his *issues* taken care of :)
@AnT, another thing-no diaper.
_____
Good gosh. Which photo??
He has a Wikipedia entry, if anyone cares (sniff!)
@Lt Uhura, the one today. If there was a diaper, the jeans would likely be filled out a little more.
_____
Oh, I see what you mean! Yes, even pullups would leave a bulge. Good catch.
That picture of Archie reminds me of those black and white videos of a cat napping and/or wandering around, looking depressed suffering from "ennui". I don't know if any of you saw those on youtube years ago.
The cat with the French accent that despaired about the humans?
Yup! Good spot. They repeatedly fail with blobby, apparition hands or feet. I think they think we are thick.
@ConstantGardener33,
That’s it! You are brilliant. I kept looking wondering why he seemed so much leaner and older — and the stance — no diaper bulge! Okay, while it is possible he is in training pants at 2 now, that still looks like an older child than Beach Archie, or LA Backpack Archie, and...the hair.
I still say it looks like a tree branch is IN FRONT OF the balloon string, or like a bundle of twigs was tied on the string ... but no one else agrees. Maybe you could ask your colleague if I'm just seeing things :) (Oh, and thank him in advance for looking at it for us!)
It just gets better and better! Happy birthday, kid, now get out in the yard and play with your black balloons tied to yard waste sticks that were raked up by illegal gardeners.
The latest photo
From the bowels of ‘Cito
Disturbingly dark, and plain weird
Boy, has he grown
If his face had been shown
He’d be sporting a tash
and full beard
yes, that cat. The cat that despaired about the humans.
Lt. Nyota Uhuru said: I still say it looks like a tree branch is IN FRONT OF the balloon string, or like a bundle of twigs was tied on the string ... but no one else agrees. Maybe you could ask your colleague if I'm just seeing things :) (Oh, and thank him in advance for looking at it for us!)
It just gets better and better! Happy birthday, kid, now get out in the yard and play with your black balloons tied to yard waste sticks that were raked up by illegal gardeners.
_____
Hahaha! "And when yer done, release those non-biodegradable mylar balloons filled with non-renewable helium like a good little environmentalist! A cookie for each animal killed or waterway polluted, or hitting a power line and knocking the electricity out!"
the videos of the existentialist cat
someone should do one about Archie the existentialist.
Nice one :)
I've been enjoying people around the internet joking that the RF will still be sending out the same happy birthday pix of baby A when he's 18!
@ Magatha Mistie,
Nice one :)
I've been enjoying people around the internet joking that the RF will still be sending out the same happy birthday pix of baby A when he's 18!
Well, maybe the RF will be able to replace it with his arrest photo before he turns 18. I think a kid with those parents is going to grow up very, very angry.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said...
Well, maybe the RF will be able to replace it with his arrest photo before he turns 18. I think a kid with those parents is going to grow up very, very angry.
_____
Sigh, you're right. I agree. One of two things will probably happen, as I see it; 1) He will direct all his anger inside, and self-destruct somehow, or 2) Direct all his anger outward, with potentially lethal results.
I pray to the good G-d that somehow he comes through okay. But with no family support, and a peer group like those Hollywood kids ...
Good catch on seeing the little playhouse off to the left. Whatever is a little bit further to the left in black....would be interesting to know what that is.
harry and meghan posted a picture of Archie holding balloons for his birthday on their website 🎈🥳 https://t.co/R8YAmqzdDI
It was a photo released by Mm and H for Prince Charles's birthday.
https://theworldnewsdaily.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-share-new-photo-of-baby-archie-for-prince-charles-birthday/
********
Also, I think the curly hair on top of the kid's head for this year's birthday picture has been photoshopped in.
In just a short span of time, the Harkles have recently interfered in a complex matter regarding a global pandemic speaking out on something they do not have the qualifications to get involved in. Their meddling could impact and/or cause the development of a serious problem for controlling the virus in the future. They really are unbelievable!
In addition, they refuse to share their child and have once again offered a blurry, hidden-faced photo of a boy who is supposed to be in the line of succession!
And Markle has offered for sale a book she plans to personally profit from using her TITLE on the front cover. This is clearly an example of monetizing the monarchy and there are many around the internet who are saying that she would never have gotten that book published if she wasn't married to Harry. Why didn't she use Meghan Windsor-Mountbatten?
⭐The monarchy and parliament must remove all their remaining connections to the royal family including the titles, the HRH, the places in succession, the funding from the duchy, etc. All royal angles that can be used as a platform for money-making or power-playing MUST GO!!!!⭐
I don't know. The whole thing is so frustrating. I'm so sick of people cow-towing to Harry's wife. They need to pull the rug out from under her.
I really want to know the truth about Archie because if nothing else something is very strange about that situation.
If you look in the background of Archie's sad birthday celebration you can see Harry's sleeping accomodation -
the little plastic Cottage. <--- I am dying laughing.
@JennS,
Hear! hear! I agree sooooo much with what you wrote! Not only did she use her title on the book, she used the title incorrectly! What a complete idiot. Anyway, to monetize anything for her pocket using the title from the monarchy she claims to loathe --- off with their titles!! THE HAIR THE HAIR!!!! so shopped!!! And yeah, I saw the little house but somehow I think if it the Archie Chicken Inn from Oprah, whatever it was called? It looks too non-ivied to be the pseudo Wendy house from Christmas? I was trying to track those palm trees in the overhead photos of the Montecito property you can find online. I see what seems to be them, in seeming correct ground, directly down the yard from the house terrace.....what do you think?
So I just spent an hour texting with 7 friends, we are all laughing and cooing over the marvelous. Henri the Chat videos. I mourn the loss of this star. May he be dining luxuriously over the rainbow bridge.
Also, no, my kid who is Archie’s age would let go of the balloons and be running in circles or chasing something. This ‘Archie’ is 3-4 years old.
Going to have my hubs look over the photo in photoshop. He has a whole art team- maybe I’ll be able to get them to pass it to them ;). It would be great to have a map layout of all the flaws!
I share your frustration. I am sick of the BRF tip-toeing around these two dangerous lunatics. I hope this is just optics obscuring a grand master plan, and the BRF are priming the pumps for a great reveal and takedown. But, gah, hurry it up!!
@Mel,
I agree with you, the hair is weird and looks shopped. A graphic designer I work with swears they used some old photo of Harry's head for it and is trying to track an image to prove it-- mostly she feels it is the head of a man, Harry or not, but, definitely not a child. She had some measurement issue she is basing this opinion on, and is now sitting in Seattle, trying to figure it out with her BF for fun.
NK1970, Toronto, Canada, 8 minutes ago
This pretentious woman would take a black and white photo of a rainbow.
The sepia color makes the property look burnt-out and dead. Even Archie's sinister-looking tar-colored balloons are weird and unattractive with their twisted streamers all crushed and poking out at odd angles.
She so very obviously does not want to show his hair. So it's either a hat on his head or no-color in the photo.
I get an ugly feel on this, as though it is in remembrance of a little boy that died.
Oh yes please see what your husband and his team think! I am waiting for two reports back from my designer friends, lol! The hair or head is such a poorly done addition or switch or tweak. Let us know what Mr Jessica thinks went on there. I still have to get over and see what someone said Murky Meg or Danja Zone posted about it being a photoshopped image.
We live in a leafy little cul de sac th4 pandemic babies too!) Two, three, and four-year-olds abound. Older owners, moved out, and young couples bought in, and now we have a flock of about 11 little ones running around in the little private park behind the houses, so cute.) -- while gardening last year, I watched the then-2-year-old son of friends here let go of kites in the park --- dad goes here, kid takes them, immediately lets go, and up into the high treetops they wafted stuck. Not two weeks ago, same thing, different dad, different two year old who decided to run after the fat little urban chicken our neighbors found wandering around and adopted last year (it walked into my yard on a hot day, very spirited little hen! So we all cared for her or let her stay over in terrace boxes. But one neighbor's little girls fell in love with the hen and they adopted her, two dads worked together to built a big Wendy house hen house for this hen,, and now the hen follows the family everywhere, answers to her name (Karla Lola) and runs home super fast through the park when they call her. She even allows the girls (about 6 and 8) to dress her in pearls and scarves for wagon rides through the park. I dare say she has a far better life than any Harkle "rescue chicken".
One thing for sure. That is not a happy picture so the misses must not be living her best life 😉
That rainbow comment you reposted is BRILLIANT.
@JennS,
That burnt-out looking grass etc makes me think someone isn't paying Gardners or water bills?
@SwampWoman,
Your dead child comment gave me a shiver. The image is so bleak, the balloons so depressing -- depressing balloons, imagine that. It is an ugly, twisted sort of image, isn't it. I cannot imagine having THIS depressing photo be "the" photo of my two-year-old child. The woman is sick. And I blame Harry too. Amazing that two such hate-filled, conniving, ruthless dimwits found each other.
maybe Harry wife wanted a depressing pic of archie. This is the sad life. Our two year old who is really three stands guard In front of the house protecting against intruders and paparazzi. He holds his balloons as a signal to the parents - one of by bicycle two if by Range Rover just like stat great patriot Paul revere. If only mean grandpa chuck would pay for the needed security then archie would be free to play and laugh and have full color in his next photo
Okay,
(1) this is absolutely hlarious. @Hikari needs to award you a giant week of lattes and pastries. I want to read this ten times.
But,
(2) I can also absolutely believe this is nearly true.
My impression was that it is to tell the world "I spend my child-life alone, in an empty world of silence, like a French art film, because the BRF threw my parents out of the UK and we are forced to huddle here in this barren land without money, in Montecito, exiles, alone, struggling."
@SwampWoman,
Your dead child comment gave me a shiver. The image is so bleak, the balloons so depressing -- depressing balloons, imagine that. It is an ugly, twisted sort of image, isn't it. I cannot imagine having THIS depressing photo be "the" photo of my two-year-old child. The woman is sick. And I blame Harry too. Amazing that two such hate-filled, conniving, ruthless dimwits found each other.
I have never seen a photo like that in my life to commemorate a child's second birthday. Anybody with a 2-year-old child knows that there will be cake everywhere, and the child may play with the boxes and wrapping paper instead of the gifts.
Instead of happy excitement, that photo says loneliness, despair and depression.
Anyone to see Reborn dolls in videos, so you can grasp how scarily real they look?
Aunt Jane on LSA, whose posts are always amazing, has posted 3 Reborn videos. See them in post #244,481.
Be prepared to be shocked, or to understand why some of can say we do think MM used dolls to fool the BRF, etc.