Not much has changed since the last post.
Spotify? Nope. Netflix? Nope but they could just be in the editing phase perhaps. Political scene? Nope. Not a whisper yet.
There, however, is the trial.
This is starting to get interesting as it can totally change their long term trajectory look. They would now more easily maintain their appearances of being VIPs by needing security as the world is a dangerous place for them.
Is it? Maybe? Maybe not when you think of all the different adventures they have where they have limited security present or security physically present but not really appearing to be on high alert for the accidental pap/scary dangerous unknown or not at all but it was ever so luckily documented by someone who just happened to be in the area. Funny how that just keeps happening so unluckily for them.
It is as if they are a boat which has left the marina (BRF), left the pond (intentional pun), and charted themselves out into the big oceans. Leaving behind the safety of his family, they have been systematically cutting the anchors which tied them back to the family to show their independence. The family tried to keep them with a safety net in the leaving negotiations. But no dice rolled by the pair. Now, they are trying to reattach one of those cut anchors by legally suing for claims of needing protection.
If they win - then it's game on for them to retake what they feel is/was their manifest destiny.
Comments
Nutty and us Mods strive as much as possible to make this a welcome and friendly blog. Please do keep in mind that everyone posts with the risk of potential dissent, criticism, and unpopularity. We depend on Nutties to keep this place respectful and hopefully fun.
Guidelines for this blog is as follows:
-Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Anonymous posts are not allowed.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject.
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-And, thank you posts are nice.
Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
Moderation still on.
Lady C claims Samantha Markle has some very influential people behind her. The defamation case is up in limbo here. Could move forward. Wasn't outright dismissed though. This could be what gets them. Interesting days ahead.
I'm glad to see that H is being criticised for wasting public money in vexatious litigation. There's a simple way to avoid needing enhanced protection in the UK - keep out of the country.
'H' thinks returning to the UK is unsafe for hime etc.. Oh the poor lad cannot faqce up to resounding boos! They are sooooo hurtful. Rather I wished rotten veggies would be tossed at him; but alas, the good people of the UK are generally too civiized for that now and have an enormous respect for the Monarchy.
Now Harry and his agents, attorneys for his case has alredy 'put a step wrong' in the Judge's eyes. Sounds like Mrs.6's lawyer tactics.
Here is a quote in the Daily Mail article:
"After the judgment was made public, Mr Justice Swift criticised Harry's legal team for breaking the embargo on the document.
High Court judgments are typically provided to lawyers in the case under embargo in a draft form ahead of being made public.
However, Mr Justice Swift said that a copy of today's ruling had been emailed to someone who was not a lawyer, against court rules, calling this 'entirely unacceptable'.
Shaheed Fatima QC, for the duke, said she and her team were unsure about whether sending the draft judgment last week was a breach, but had decided to report it to the judge on Wednesday.
However, the senior judge said it was a 'clear breach' and questioned why it had not been raised immediately."
`Wild Boar Battle-maid said…
BTW - The Queen is HM Queen Elizabeth; her father was HM King George ie it stands for Her/His Majesty. Think James Bond title - `On Her Majesty's Secret Service'.
HRH (`His/Her Royal Highness') applies to princes and princesses.
July 7, 2022 at 9:47 AM '
This might be the source of all his `issues' - he doesn't understand the word `Direct'.
Is he confusing it with the West Country `Dreckly', roughly equivalent to `mañana' - but without the urgency? `Dreckly' means `I'll fix your car/plumbing/lunch directly I've done the umpteen other things on my to-do list'. What it doesn't mean is `immediately'.
He hopes to be king `dreckly' his father, brother, nephew, niece and another nephew have had their turn. That's 3 direct moves down (HM to Charles, to Wm, to George) then 2 sideways moves (George to Charlotte to Louis) then one back up the generational ladder to him. Knights' move is simpler.
He's a total nincompoop.
Bets on how long before Carrie dumps Boris? The attention the resignation is getting exceeds the trial's attention by a long shot. * must be fuming that the court case is not the top story.
https://mobile.twitter.com/home
Updates here for the hapless one's attempt to sue the government because he wants his RPOs back.
---------------
At Harry v Home Office: The Duke’s legal team today are appealing decision to strip his taxpayer-funded security in February 2020 citing ‘procedural unfairness’ saying he had no ‘direct representation’ in the ruling.
---------------
In its skeleton argument his lawyers say Harry was “not given any or any proper opportunity to make informed representation”. They say he has been “materially prejudiced (among other things) because his offer to pay was not conveyed to RAVEC before the decision was made”
---------------
The Home Office adds: “In any event, RAVEC - as has subsequently determined - would have rejected any such offer as a matter of principle.”
---------------
The Home Office: “His claimed preference to remain a part-time working member of the royal family is entirely irrelevant the only relevant information was the final status the Claimant adopted (whether or not it is his ‘first’ choice), which was the very catalyst for the Decision
---------------
More tweets about 'I want my RPOs back' saga.
---------------
Justice Swift asks why Harry did not oppose RAVEC’s decision made on Feb 2020 until Sep 2021. Shaheed Fatima QC, for Harry, said: “The decision was taken on the eve of a global pandemic when claimant and his family were in a different country and a period of enormous flux.”
---------------
Harry’s legal team also reveal the duke believed he had conveyed his feelings about the security decision but that there were “significant tensions” between him and the Queen’s private secretary Sir Edward Young.
----------------
Harry believes Sir Edward Young “should not have been involved” in the decision, the High Court is told. Justice Swift says “that is quite a bold submission to make”. But Harry believed RAVEC was “independent” and had no members from The Royal Household, Ms Fatima QC says.
---------------------
Harry’s case seems to be that he never knew The Royal Household was involved in RAVEC’s decision. Justice Swift says the ‘penny should have dropped’ when they were told in legal papers last September. Justice Swift says he finds elements of Claimants case “frustrating”.
---------------
The Home Office skeleton argument says:”This is a very exceptional case in which a very significant burden has been imposed by the Claimant on the public purse, through pursuit of an unarguable claim and relying a details and lengthy engagement in advance of a permanent decision”
---------------
The Home Office legal team adds: “The public purse should not have to bear the cost of the conduct of the litigation and a claim which ought not to have been brought at all.”
Decision to handed down within three weeks.
He really, really wants his RPOs back!
@Jack_Royston
·
Jul 7, 2022
The Home Office filing quoted by Harry's lawyers says RAVEC included the "Private Secretary to HM The Queen, the Assistant Private Secretary to HM The Queen and the Master of the Prince of Wales' Household."
@Jack_Royston
Prince Harry is considering a new lawsuit after the palace didn't tell the Home Office he'd pay for police security. He is "engaged in pre-action correspondence for a proposed second judicial review claim in relation to these matters, and intends to issue that claim shortly."
also noted on the last blog i believe. timing for harry is impeccable. uk prime minister resigns. there is consuming the british public not crazy harry and his american bride. makes the harkles look even pettier
i know the obvious reasons for the desire for security. importance et al but they or someone is spending a lot of money on litigating this. so what is the end purpose. do they offer to pay and never actual pay. is it to launder money from someone by paying it to the metropolitan police and get a cut of the $ laundered? seems like there is a more in involved end game here
To my understanding
He's claiming that despite his/their desire to leave their status (first half in/half out which was vetoed by the Queen), which changed how they are referred to as/billed as/accounting changes and, very importantly: their work status for the country, that the Home Office had no right to inform RAVEC that there were changes and how said changes within the Home Office would impact the Home Office and therefore, RAVEC - which ultimately technically changed how RAVEC should/should not handle him/them.
And that the tension he claims (now?) he felt between the person who is the right hand person who works with the Queen (who is also the link between her and the government), that also played into the decision multiple times (originally and later in not informing of the option that he/they would pay for protection).
From what I remember though, it is always paid by the country's government as having an individual pay for their protection.
What is the liability if, say, something happened and the individual had paid. Their family could claim that despite having paid for protection, they received not enough for their money.
Or, they had paid for the Jubilee, she still opened the window but this time someone dropped something in or shot into the car? Where would that have put RAVEC?
One wonders if there was a similar notification to the government way back when there was the abdication even if RAVEC did not exist in the current state?
As for the leak, to whom was it sent? We know it wasn't a lawyer. Could someone benefit from this?
Marklenews1 on Instagram has info on their WY trip: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cfuc98RvHN1/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
An anonymous contributor very strongly hints that another shady Russian lent them their Jackson Hole home free of charge. Also says both were drinking, and it appeared to others that they can't stand each other.
They've now received housing from three different Russian oligarchs. That's a very worrying pattern.
I hope to hell I was right about Prince Charles being the principal behind the MWX LLC that owns Mudslide Manor.
It really sounds like the end is near.
They did not convey their 'offer' to pay for their RPO protection to the Home Office (which the government says is irrelevant as such an 'offer' would have had no bearing on the decision made). They conveyed this 'offer' to the Queen/courtiers twice. The courtiers (the Queen) are very bad for not passing on this 'offer' to the government and thus depriving them of RPOs.
But, that representatives of the Queen and Prince Charles are on the committee that made the decision to deprive him of the security that he is entitled to prevented him from getting that security.
It is madness!
Oh, and he is attacking another in the Queen's circle: her private secretary. It comes straight from the Harkles' playbook 'How to win friends and influence people'.
@WBBM
Brilliant summing up! In my country, our version of 'Dreckly' is 'Just now'.
------------------------
He hopes to be king `dreckly' his father, brother, nephew, niece and another nephew have had their turn. That's 3 direct moves down (HM to Charles, to Wm, to George) then 2 sideways moves (George to Charlotte to Louis) then one back up the generational ladder to him. Knights' move is simpler.
-----------------
The only difference is 'dreckly' and 'just now' indicate that it will be done/happen some undetermined time in the future; Hapless will never be king!
They were already engaged at the 2017 Invictus Games. That was when she wore the torn jeans and white shirt hanging out. At the engagement interview (November) they claimed they got engaged about a month earlier (some time in October) but IG were in September.
Archie is 95% average height for his age.
Most odd!
Similar thoughts had crossed my mind too. Safer for us to leave them unspoken?
Her on a Shoestring
A perfect fit, Ultracrepidarian
More cobblers from
sole sista libertarian
With her tongue on the rasp
Giving her awl to the last
UltracontraryM is
too big for her boots
Whilst her shoes are too big
for her foots…
@CatEyes@Maneki
@DesignDoc@Enbreth
CheersX ☺️
Flushed Away
Dreckly I ‘eard
‘bout tosspotting turd
I realised he’s wanting
in more than said word
No understanding of birthright
absurd
Security deserved
ala *Richard the Third
*Rhyming slang for turd…
Thank so much for the Instagram link! This comment was telling...
"...nobody can stand them, they are rude and aggressive not to just workers but to each other, and their little ones are never with them, they've been drinking and partying non-stop in bars and restaurants."
https://www.instagram.com/p/Cfu8-0RM_Dz/
Sorry, should have said
“Crocodilian foots”
Thanks for the newest Scobie PR lies.
Does anyone remember what he said about the proposal or engagement in the FF book he supposed wrote? I never believed the cooking chicken story but wonder what he initially reported.
Not sure what the Archie height stuff means. If, as written, it means he's below average in height for his age, that wouldn't be that surprising. Harry is tall but MM is a shrimp. Archie's reported birth weight was below average even though he supposedly was overdue by a week. But Archie being short doesn't fit with the playhouse painted Christmas card from 2020. He looked exceptionally tall in that photo especially since he was supposed to be about 1 1/2 but looked about 3. Not only was he tall, his shape was an "older" & less of a potbellied baby shape.
But why would M being bragging (through Scobie) about having a short kid? Not that anything is wrong with being short but parents usually don't brag about that (although why they brag about tall kids is beyond me. It's not like being tall is a personal accomplishment.) So maybe what was meant was that Archie is at the 95th percentile for his age group? In that case, better start teaching him basketball (although I doubt a kid raised by those two jerks will be capable of playing a team sport).
Your comment about 95th percentile makes more sense.
--------------
Confusing, but Hapless has two legal battles on in the UK. Supposedly the judge has said the article by the DM was defamatory and the matter can proceed to trial. I am confused. Here is the article:
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-court-says-newspaper-story-about-prince-harry-was-defamatory-2022-07-08/
I am struggling to do a copy and paste of the article and have a fading battery so apologies for not posting the text.
You're in great form today!
To me, she looks like she has the same nose she had in high school and simply uses make up for countering (why her nose looks narrower or broader, depending on angle and lighting).
However, plastic surgeons know what they are talking about so I trust their judgement on this one (two nose jobs).
Just did a search for engagement in the FF download I have. It comes up as the cooking the roast chicken scenario. Once that showed I didn’t bother to scan further
I said several months ago that part of me hoped that Mr.6 would get his security wish fulfilled so that we could see photos of the 2 mystery children with the RF which would convince me of their existence & provenance incontrovertibly. Once again, this did not happen. No photos of the #6 children with their extended family, which was out in force for the Jubilee. They could have so easily taken the children to the pageant & sat with all of the cousins & their respective broods in the royal box.
The RF is very cagey about actual contact with the children. According to the Telegraph: According to one source: “There was a bit of reluctance among the royals to admit to having any involvement in Lilibet’s birthday party.” To me, this is royal speak for no one laid eyes on the kids & no one was at the party.
I am prepared to believe that they exist, as both Archie & Lili are the spitting image of Thomas Markle in the few photos we have seen of them. The photos of Lili had anomalies which have been pointed out by many, but she did have Archie & Ms.6's strong resemblance to Thomas. In the two instances in which Ms. 6 had to produce a living child, the visit with Bishop Tutu, & the birthday reading, the child shown looked the same, although the child in the reading looked unaccountably large, (could have been the camera angle). Both children seem to have pronounced strabismus in the right eye, which is a trait which would be difficult to find in random child actors. I am not familiar enough with digital photo manipulation to comment with certainty on any still photos. While I can believe the children exist, I'm still agnostic about them because of all the subterfuge.
Apparently, the judge in Harry's lawsuit is allowing his suit against the Daily Mail to proceed. I don't understand the ruling, as the judge seems to be inferring what a reader would make of the article in question. How does he know what the reader thinks? The Mail will have to defend its article.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/07/08/mail-sunday-article-prince-harry-part-defamatory-high-court/
Don't know what will happen in the security proceedings. The cynic in me wonders if Charles is behind the whole mess because he wants taxpayers all over the world to pay for the protection of his offspring so he won't have to. Who knows? My feeling is that sticking the British taxpayer with the bill will hasten a the move to abolish the monarchy. Not a good look in the current UK economy. I'm astonished that the apparently over-extended UK judiciary finds time for such proceedings.
A shout out to WBBM for "Ultracrepidarian." Wonderful. The English language is so varied, & will absorb contributions from wherever it finds them.
Each time I think you have reached the towering heights and can go no further, you surprise me by an even more fantastic submission. Thank you for letting us be the glad recipients of your amazing facility with language.
getting more and more convinced this offer to pay for security is a money laundering thing. reddit rumors that they got a freebie in jackson hole from one of their russian oligarch “friends” if true suggests that someone is hiding cash and assets due to the asset seizures and freezes due to the Ukrainian War. at some point there will be payback and the oligarch(s) will want their due.
Part 1
Mail on Sunday article on Prince Harry was defamatory, High Court rules
The Duke of Sussex is suing the paper for libel over a February article about a dispute over his family's security arrangements
By Hayley Dixon, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
8 July 2022 • 10:25am
Prince Harry was defamed by parts of a Mail on Sunday article about his security row, a High Court has ruled in the first stage of a libel trial. The Duke of Sussex is suing over a story which said that he had tried to keep “secret” parts of his legal fight with the Home Office and attempted to “spin” the dispute in his favour by claiming he had offered to pay for police protection.
In the first ruling on the case, Mr Justice Nicklin concluded that the article was defamatory in parts because it suggested the Prince’s actions were “discreditable” and that he had intended to “mislead the public”.
But the High Court judge noted that this was "very much the first phase" of the libel claim and the Mail on Sunday can now file their defence. If they can prove the comments were true, an honestly held opinion or a publication on a matter of public interest, then they will not have been found to have libelled the Prince, legal experts said on Friday.
The Telegraph understands that Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), the owners of the Mail on Sunday, are now preparing to submit evidence setting out why they stand by their claims.
The case revolves around an article published in February, following the first hearing in the Duke's separate High Court claim against the Government’s decision to withdraw the police protection that he and the Duchess of Sussex enjoyed as senior working royals. The piece set out that when news of the legal battle with the Government first broke in January last year the Duke’s PR team put out statements saying that he had offered to “pay personally for UK police protection” but it was refused. When that case was before the High Court earlier this year, the Home Office revealed that they did not receive any such offer, either before the Prince visited the UK or in the immediate correspondence which followed. An offer to pay is included in the Prince's witness statement.
The Mail on Sunday headline read: “How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight with the government over police bodyguards a secret... then - just minutes after the story broke - his PR machine tried to put a positive spin on the dispute."
The Duke is suing, claiming that the story suggests that he lied and had “improperly and cynically tried to manipulate and confuse public opinion”.
His interpretation was disputed by the newspaper and at a preliminary hearing in June, and Mr Justice Nicklin was asked to determine the "natural and ordinary" meaning of the article and whether it was defamatory.
Prince "was responsible for trying to mislead and confuse the public as to the true position, which was ironic given that he now held a public role in tackling 'misinformation"' was a statement of opinion.
Part 2
He ruled on Friday that a normal reader would understand from the article that the Duke "was responsible for public statements” which set out that he “was willing to pay for police protection in the UK” and the Government had refused “whereas the true position, as revealed in documents filed in the legal proceedings, was that he had only made the offer to pay after the proceedings had commenced".
The judge found that the suggestion in the article that the Prince "was responsible for trying to mislead and confuse the public as to the true position, which was ironic given that he now held a public role in tackling 'misinformation"' was a statement of opinion.
Judgment could make it a ‘harder road’ for Prince's legal team
Mark Stephens, a solicitor specialising in defamation, said the ruling that it was an opinion gave the newspaper a defence and meant that they were “more likely to win” on that point.
He noted that the judge had also found a “less serious” meaning than the Duke alleged as he ruled the article accused him of “spinning” rather than lying.
Mr Stephens added: “Harry was the winner in this ruling, but the meaning that the judge found was ultimately closer to that submitted by the newspaper.
“I think that this judgment will make it a harder road for his legal team.”
The Duke’s claim against the Government on issues relating to his security is ongoing and on Thursday his lawyers asked the High Court to grant permission for a full judicial review. A decision on whether this claim can proceed will be given at a later date.
Twit and Twat are becoming more and more obnoxious with their defamation lawsuits.
Twit and Twat must be really worried what truths about them will leak out from wherever.
Both seem to be exceptionally paranoid.
Thanks for the article from the Telegraph. It is all making a lot more sense to me.
I wonder if courtiers or even the Royal family are going to be dragged into court to give evidence that he had offered to pay for his security. Unless he has written evidence of his offer to pay, I presume he would have to give evidence.
------------
There is a new photo of Hapless and Archie from the parade. Hapless is sitting on the kerb, holding on to Archie (I suspect the kid makes a habit of bolting), but is now wearing shorts and a different watch. I think that is the duchess sitting on the jerb next to him and wearing a big hat. Most confusing! What happened to the chairs the bodyguard was guarding for them (as described in a SM post that seems came from her).
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-8.4943382/page-91
And a supposed witness at the event reported this:
"She also saw Meghan scoop up a handful of candy treats that had been tossed into the crowd, unwrapping a lollipop for Archie then slipping an ice cream sandwich into her bag for later."
It is all very strange!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10995241/Harry-Meghan-seen-attending-4th-July-parade-little-Archie.html
missing chairs:
The only chairs I saw in the photos are the kind you bring which you own. Red canvas. No one seems to be using them for anything other than putting stuff down on if they are the same chairs mentioned.
the photos:
Seem to be all kind of closely spaced time wise and from a similar angle. If, on the other hand, they had done more sweeping photos of the parade, they would not have had to hide the camera (although it is hard to tell if they were).
Note that we don't get any from the other side of the street looking back at them. And when you search for photos of the parade (which looks like it lasts well over an hour), that both sides of the street always seems to have lots of people.
We see a lot of their backs, an arm or two but the only face you see with any consistency is Archie's and a single nice side view of him. Why him as in why pretty much only him now? the absence from the Jubilee?
It is really odd that she wouldn't appear in the photos. Usually she is front and center but this time all we see is a hat and we are told it is her. And, where is the friend, the pilates person?
Where is the security person? or is that the elbow/dangling arm? If it is their arm why didn't they notice the camera as it is fairly close so you can see the elbow, the watch detail but the arm hair is out of focus. Perhaps it is the angle but Archie seems to be of similar size to the crouching woman wearing the dark hat who is supposed to her. Security does not appear to be guarding the chairs.
And, as with great regularity, a pair of random strangers who happily manage to stay nearby and are thrilled to discover the true identity of the people next to them. And just happen to know how to contact the right people to be able to share their photos and the thrilling truth about the wholesome (always down to earth) encounter. How odd that these two are the only people who happen to make this discovery when you think about all the people around them on that same side as well as the other side of the street.
The text mentions the ice cream sandwiches but the photos show popsicles which would not be messy if they thawed in a purse.
On this topic, SecondhandCoke says:
It starts with an N and ends with an "etflix." This idea allegedly came straight from Meghan and that Netflix hasn't already announced the cancellation of their "partnership" with Meghan and Harry has all of Hollywood simultaneously exclaiming, "What the fuck?" She actually thinks that because their initial wedding was such a draw, that renewal of their vows will be too. I honestly wonder if Netflix is trolling the Harkles and that everything for this docu-whatever will be edited satirically, ending with the most extreme episode of Bridezillas yet to be seen on the Earth. It's the only explanation for all this.
"Slipping an ice cream sandwich into her bag for later"??? What?
Presumably trying to top HM's dialogue with Paddington Bear?
Serious though, how many wedding vow renewals have you been to where they seemed legit? Most of the ones I've ever heard of came off as a desperate attempt to keep the marriage together. And, then they would divorce.
I'm surprised she didn't fly to Chicago afterwards to lay flowers.
@Magatha
Her on a shoestring 🤣! Excellent! Our ultracrepidarian vegetarian humanitarian is nothing but a harridan. Do keep up the good work 😉
Wedding vows renewal? (Groan) Please noooo! They were riding the crest of a wave of popularity (for a lot of people) with the wedding but it's been downhill ever since. Why would anybody be interested? Will the strumpet be in virginal white again? The very idea of those two renewing their vows is nauseating.
She has to pull her sleeves up because it's so hot, but the kid has on long pants and a long sleeved shirt.
HMTQ and Paddington Bear are exactly what I thought of when reading about the ice cream sandwich "for later" and M's bag. Tacky tacky to feel the need to compete with that sweet video.
And @Elsbeth1847 I think a thawing popsicle would still be pretty yucky in a purse. I'll skip the long story but when I was a little kid I tried to bring a popsicle home once...thought I'd get home in time but it turned into a sticky wet wasted mess.
Regardless, what kind of weird summer version of a Mardi Gras parade was it that frozen foods were thrown into the crowd? It seems likely those items would have thawed before being thrown unless the throwers were carrying coolers in the parade. And if thawed and slushy, no one would eat them. But if not thawed, throwing solidly frozen items into a crowd, a crowd with kids in it, sounds really stupid. That's like throwing rocks!
-------
Thanks for the info about FF @Craving a Martini.
Poor kids - growing up with a mom with such severe body dysmorphia.
@Magatha, thank you so much for the laughter!
When I saw the photos from the 4th of July parade, I instantly noticed that the person who has been identified as Meghan has regular-sized feet, rather than the gargantuan flipper feet that we know Meghan possesses. I couldn’t believe it when everyone seemed to be agreeing that the slim woman seen only from the back, and hidden under a big hat was Meghan.
I was CERTAIN that person was not Meghan, and you are the first person who agrees with me that Meghan’s gigantic clown shoes would be way too big on this body double.
Another point: everyone is saying yes it must be Meghan, because she always wears those bracelets, watch, whatever. So what? A good body double would duplicate the known jewelry to help fool the public. And we know Meghan rejoices in fooling the public. Yuchhhh. She is irredeemable.
My mother the narcissist raised my late little brother as a pampered toddler prince. He was bigger and stronger than H. Guess who he blamed for everything that went wrong in his life.
I survived him and outlived him. Years ago I tried to help him, but the umbilical cord exerted a stronger pull.
The July 4th photos do NOT look like *s feet. This looks like the same body double as the one in the Lillibuck’s photo.
OMG (oh my gracious), I thought the very same thing when I saw the feet. They look shorter and wider than the demon hooves of the horse of the narcopalypse.
/I'm going to blow my free weekend by sleeping. I just know it.
I have been finding melted popsicles that small persons saved for later in the kitchen, usually left on a table to leak all over the floor. That stuff could be used as industrial strength adhesive for gluing feet to the floor. I get all frowny faced and stompy footed at having to clean up that mess.
Wonder how many a listers will refuse their invitations.
THIS time, M will merchant the wedding and keep the wedding gifts.
Later, they can " consciously uncouple" or continue their acrimonious open marriage - whichever is more advantageous to M.
A hat, careful angle when filming and claim it is that person.
I remember that from when Natalie Wood died mid-filming. Or maybe it was the movie The Crow. The concept remains but the specifics have drifted away.
That is a small purse for her but the popsicles visible in the photos, those are encased by plastic of some type and not paper. Must not be have the anti-plastic mommy brigade running the free toss outs about the exposure to it (see the book something about slow death by rubber duck or similar - it's been too long since I read it).
Or, maybe it is the special not this or that plastics so they felt safe (eh, that replacement stuff hasn't been around or tested for all that long - from what I remember).
I hear you about the ability of them as stickiness after opening SW. And the colors dripped (like RED) are not what I want to be dealing with in the dryer like after they have passed the hot water in the washer (but not naming names like - clenched teeth - spouses ... you didn't read that). Some things are just banned in Granny E's car.
the pictures now have the Archie pixelated. That didn't use to be the case.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKKFbgEsYts
...
She said: 'Getting back into studying took some getting used to but I felt really well supported by the team at UWTSD.
'The nature of the course being divided into specific modules also meant that it was easier to compartmentalise what was required each term.'
...
She carried out her study as part of her degree in physical education, sport and physical literacy. (DM)
-------------
She did this quietly while bringing up two children and expecting her third. She and her husband have just bought a £15 million country home ('stately home') close to her parents. It has 30 rooms and is set in 150 acres of land.
No dramas, no fuss, no half-baked ideas not followed through. Eat your heart out, *!
, brother of a popular future king.
She has hustled aggressively to get attention, and she still gets that. I do not admire her at all because for her it is all self-serving, whereas he is not only doing it for himself, but for her and his children.
Even if she was not the main cause of their appalling mistakes, she seems to be incapable of helping him make wise choices, and so, he has made huge mistakes:
* Attacking his family, and thus the estrangement that hurts him and his children. Instead of free, safe holidays at Balmoral and Sandringham, with plenty of royal children and lots of activities, they end up sitting on a kerb watching a parade.)
* Cutting himself off from his country in his absurd stance on being entitled to RPOs. Him and his family would be safer and more protected in the UK, living on the Windsor Estate, even without RPOs, than they are in America.
* Antagonizing the British tabloids while completely ignoring all the nonsense appearing in American tabloids and even mainstream media. (It is Britain from whence his status and wealth derives. Americans confuse celebrity with royalty, cannot connect with the history and values of the British monarchy, and are not the ones who have the power to decide if he is in the line of succession or not, a COS or not, gets privileges associated with his royalty or not.)
* Insisting that his children have privacy, and being very secretive about them, but wanting them to be HRH prince/princess and in the line of succession. The UK does not need a potential monarch who knows nothing about and has no connection with royalty or the country (and who is a complete stranger to the country and the people).
However, the photos were taken by people in the crowd and posted on social media, and they do not have legal protection for their children outside the UK, so they cannot remove the photos. Follow the social media posts and you will find the photos clearly showing Archie.
The full judgement in the defamation case can be found in this article.
Do you think she really picked one up off the road and put it in her handbag for later? How did the lollipops and ice cream wafers (both presumably suitably wrapped) get on the road? Thrown to the crowds from people in the pageant?
Skankee, Poodle Blandly*
Wondering Whyoming
was their choice
to go roaming
Parading Jackson Hole
The guttural rats
on the kerb doing squats
Have renamed it
Harrison Troll…
*No offence to US Nutties
I scream tannedwitch 😉
Thank you:
@GWAH@OCGal@Maneki
@Birdie@Swampie X
Does me glad to see I’m
hitting the mark(le) 🥰
Defeeted
The squat looks right
Years on the pole
at night
As for the feet
don’t look right to me
Far too small
lacks deformity…
No interaction between the hapless one and his wife. Always over-the-top PDA and compulsive hand holding with them, but distant interaction at the polo and now not even acknowledging each other in these latest pics.
The child ignores parents and it appears they have to have a firm grip on him otherwise he will bolt.
I do think it is them and they were not aware that they were being photographed.
Re: The Jackson Hole photo. I didn't pay much attention to it, & actually thought it made the 6s more relatable than anything else I had ever seen them do, as what parent hasn't taken their little ones to some parade on a beautiful day? It would be just like the 6s to show up in yet another nice place which has been ruined by billionaires. I did wonder why the younger child wasn't there, as even a one year old would be upset if they saw Mommy & Daddy leave with their older sibling. So mean to the little one. She should have been there with a sun hat, in a stroller with a sunshade. My first thought was how much Ms. 6 looked like the young woman in the photo of Harry helping to tag elephants in Africa, which was put out years ago by the wife trying to pretend it was herself. I also thought, oh, her feet don't look as ginormous as usual, & she really can lose weight rapidly, even at 40. Little Archie has great hair, much thicker & healthier looking than either of his parents, but he certainly hasn't grown much. The toddler in the Duck/Goose video looked as though he would grow up to be a whopper. Those were my random thoughts.
Now, after reading the observations of others, I think we've been treated to yet another Ms. 6 subterfuge. Even the gushy post sounds like her. They got their objective. We're discussing the photo; not in a good way, but that doesn't matter to them.
The ice cream sandwich detail is completely unbelievable. No adult in his/her/their right made would put one in a purse for later. Those things come out of the freezer soft & soggy; they'd ruin a handbag in a few minutes.
They were over-loaded with security on that fake visit to Oprah's gated community, so where is security in the photo? She would have brought a camera person, and Netflix would have sent a small crew. She's never missed an opportunity for PR.
Your second paragraph is an excellent account of the dog that didn't bark in this instance!
The really amusing thing is, Twat hired a very slender woman to impersonate herself.
Dog that didn't bark - nice description.
I read the article about the bullying. Her "current" lawyer says this is untrue/not their experience and her friend says they've never seen any signs of mistreatment.
The problem with that is that there is a different level in status. In one, you can just drop them/block their phone if they displease you. A lawyer, who has had some success for you, is paid well to say things for you (which may mean choosing words carefully). And if you are a mere employee (at will so to speak), you can be told to find a new job.
So, no matter how you slice or dice it, we have never seen a single one of her employees go out on a limb talking about how wonderful it is to be working for her. Nothing about her kindness. Or thoughtfulness. Or how happy they are with their employment.
Not before marriage.
Not ever in the UK.
Not ever in Canada.
Not ever at Tyler Perry's.
Not ever from Montecito (yet). Oh yeah, they might force someone to go say something but would this person be convincing? to themselves let alone BLG.
she does have people who do speak about how wonderful she is to work for. However, they are also in the business of selling themselves/their work to the public for hire.
she’s trolling all of us but i say thanks for the fun. it was getting boring and thank goodness she’s not at official events anymore.
she’s petty with the ha i have “archie” to all those who claim otherwise. my personal theory is the brf made sure the surrogate raised the baby all others are for hire. they know the truth and she knows the truth. perhaps someone in the brf said where are those kids of yours and this and the lilibucks pics are her answer. see we do have them and they are squirrels away from the likes of you
she drops these in “innocent” social media pages if they aren’t black grid which does say to me the Megxit does ban social media use and this way she can get around and gin up interest in her and the kids. does she get a cut?
she is trying to show clicks to someone for their importance on a global social media stage without having a direct presence. she’s winning at that since we all are clicking. (but i can’t help it, it’s too fun).
those two are a mess. so question is who gets the divorce first. the harkles or bojo and carrie. now that he’s no longer prime minister she may bolt faster than the duchess who doesn’t appear to have her next gig lined up as yet.
Is his kid more equal than the other kids?
Some of the comments are truly entertaining.
The top band on the shoe with the jeans jacket is wider than the other bands. Whereas in the parade picture all the bands are the same with.
Also where the side bands meet the top bands on the parade shoes is much lower in the foot than they are in the jean acket picture.
Someone suggested that the woman who is supposed to be * is actually the person (possibly a nanny) in these DM photos:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10890111/Harry-Meghan-touch-California-wooden-swing-set-similar-one-gifted-Cambridges.html
DAVID EMANUEL and his then wife, Elizabeth, created Diana’s spectacular bridal gown, but he is no fan of the Princess’s daughter-in-law.
‘You mean the American woman?’ he asks me. ‘I can’t now utter the name.’
Referring to the ivory outfit the Duchess of Sussex wore to the Platinum Jubilee service at St Paul’s Cathedral (pictured), Emanuel says it reminded him of another U.S. divorcee who wed a prince: ‘I tell you who she is channelling — Wally Simpson.’
Of the Dior belted coat and skirt set, he says: ‘I will stick my neck out here, but she looked as if she was in a nurse’s uniform. And why where they there? I can understand Her Majesty wanting her grandson, of course, but they’re not working royals.’
The former I’m A Celebrity contestant believes Harry’s fall-out with his brother would not have happened if their mother hadn’t been killed in a car crash. ‘If Diana was alive, all of this would have been sorted out,’ he says.
Speaking at a drinks party at Clarendon Fine Art in Mayfair, Emanuel, 69, adds of former Suits star Meghan: ‘They talk about her being a movie star, but she is not.
‘She’s a B-list TV actress, that’s all. She’s not Glenn Close.’
Ouch.
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/features/richard-eden/199920/pregnant-pippa-buys-a-15m-country-pile-close-to-her-parents?collection=11079&&contentLayout=Features
---------------
Huge insult to Wallis Simpson who must be turning in her grave at the sight of all those ill-fitting, inappropriate clothes and plentiful itty bitty jewellery!
Over on the Reddit thread, r/SaintMeghanMarkle, there is a new post about how ridiculous it is that H and * snubbed the Queen’s Jubilee parade yet are willing to sit in the gutter to watch a July 4th parade in the US.
Some of the comments are truly entertaining.
To me, it looks as if the two and progeny (if they are not all hired actors, and even if they are) are giving a big "F U" to the family, granny, and the United Kingdom. Have you ever seen little "Alleged Archie" wave a Union Jack at a parade in England? No? Soooo, then why was he seen waving a US flag at a 4th of July celebration at Jackson Hole, Wyoming? It was apparently 'too dangerous' for him to be at the Queen's Jubilee behind the safety of a window. Yet there he was, standing beside the curb, nothing between him and the horses or vehicles in the parade, just a seated daddy holding his hand from behind.
They are right. It is appalling to see the pair sitting on the kerb (and yes, in the gutter), hanging onto the child for dear life - a child who is completely ignoring them - not engaging with each other, and Hapless looking pretty glum.
I think his family, who know him well, should be concerned that all is not well. But, there is not much they can do and, considering the circumstances of his legal declaration of war on HM's government and courtiers, any sympathetic contact will simply be enabling, in my opinion.
They are not even engaging happily with friends. They just look isolated and downbeat. Not a good look for people who expect nega-million deals and then fail to deliver.
My guess is she is going to pull a stunt to shut down the gossip.
https://www.today.com/shop/meghan-markle-s-denim-look-may-just-be-be-your-t163227
Her feet in the Huaraches do look a bit smaller, but in the photo, to my eye, Ms. 6 looks quite a bit bigger.So maybe it's a bit of an optical illusion. At the time the photo was taken, Ms. 6 still the had the post pregnancy weight she seems to gain for some reason. Since the Jubilee she seems to have had some sort of miracle weight loss regimen.
BLG shows why it is indeed the duchess of Mudslide Manor in the photographs.
As for the weight loss - she has been skinny before so she knows what to do. It is probably not healthy, but she knows how to drop the weight and keep it off (although, the same methods will not work when she gets to her 60s). At the polo, she was wearing big boxy shorts and a fairly loose top ... you could see she had lost weight, but the clothing hid the amount of weight she has lost. She does not seem to have been working out in the gym as the muscle development is not there. Maybe swimming or running, but my guess would be that she drastically restricts her diet to get thin. Maybe I am wrong and she has been working with a nutritionist and body trainer?
I cannot imagine living with a Narcissist who is on speed, but the little smart a$$ deserves her.
Agreed! But, I think the snub was all *’s doing. H is too dim to realize what an affront sitting in front of the July 4th parade was to his Family and former nation. He was just happy to be allowed out in the sunshine with his little son.
One of the comments on the Reddit site quoted Wyoming gun law — no requirements for any type of permit, no concealed carry laws, etc. Anyone can carry a concealed or otherwise gun at any time. And, that is Wyoming’s prerogative. Byt, how could H feel more safe there than in the UK — with or without special protection?
Re Jackson Hole, I'm not sure about the 6s using body doubles and I'd say Harry is Harry. I was going to post to say M looks exactly like the vet helping H look after an elephant. I think her name is Dr Amanda something. I'm not implying it was her at Jackson Hole but she looks exactly the same from the back. Funnily enough, I tried to find her name and all the photos of her and H are labelled 'H & M tending to an endangered bull elephant' etc on several websites, yet the - deliberate - mistake was corrected...
@Magatha
Yes, the feet don't look right - too wide. Rest assured you always hit the mark(le)🎯 🤣
Trotter would drop weight by sniff sniff, sniff sniff.
Over in the Reddit thread, people are also questioning whether that is really H and * in the Wyoming photos.
Someone suggested that the woman who is supposed to be * is actually the person (possibly a nanny)...
SecondhandCoke says:
I've been told that Harry and Meghan and Archie were in Wyoming, but Harry and Meghan were not with Archie most of not all of the time. I believe that this is the real Archie, but this is not Meghan and Harry with Archie. They allegedly prefer to hire nannies and security detail that look similar to themselves these days.
I've been sharing for a few weeks that I've been told that Meghan's last stand is merching her children, specifically their clothing with the ultimate goal being a line of children's clothing. I was told that we would be seeing a huge PR push of Meghan as an "everyday relatable mom." This is part of that. However, Meghan will never actually put the work in to actually BE what she wants to APPEAR as being, hence the lookalikes. My information is that Harry and Meghan were there but they spend most of their lives trashed and drugged out of their minds. This trip to Wyoming was no different. Allegedly.
I agree, and you describe the complete disfunction on H’s part so very well. If I were his brother, I would be heartbroken — all over again.
The prescribed approach for dealing with a full-blown narcissist is to completely ignore them (go “grey rock”), but that is so very difficult when your family member(s) is/are under their spell.
Recently, a dear neighbor with a bullying narcissist husband finally decided to leave her abuser after a horrific set of his drunken rages in which he ultimately told her she could no longer have her very dear family to their home. Her family and friends had been unable to persuade her to leave, but his ultimatum finally stirred her to action.
Despite his awful behavior, I hope H has a similar moment of clarity. If not for his own sake, let it happen for Archie and Lili.
H believes he needs to create a loving home environment for his children, especially after his rocky childhood. He needs to realize that loving environment can come in many forms — and does not need to follow the traditional two-parent model to be the haven he longs for for them.
Wow, what a synchronicity…
I can definitely believe SecondHandCoke’s post.
Furthermore, two things:
1) The little boy seemed to be completely unengaged from the person holding his wrist. Don’t most clothing ads show children in idyllically happy family situations? Being held/cuddled/smiled at by perfectly groomed adults?
2) Wouldn’t the child’s clothing be ironed? I may be old-fashioned, but Archie looked like he needed a hug, a kiss and a good old-fashioned iron on his clothing.
I would feel a lot more secure in Wyoming, where I would be responsible for my own security, than in a place where self-defense is forbidden. But, that isn't Harry's background. Our gun laws are outside of his purview.
ROFL. If she thinks that she is going to become rich and build an empire on the backs of the children, real or imaginary, she really does not know children at all.
Made famous by Oscar winner Louise Fletcher in “One flew over the cuckoo’s nest”, in more recent years RATCHED or RACHED is defined by the urban dictionary as “referring to something ugly, gross or it just plain sad.” I would also contribute that when in reference to a person “that girl is so Ratched” It is synonymous with “skanky”.
So this nickname is perfect on a number of levels. And when it’s spelled without the t, RACHED, well it’s just even more perfect for our Duchess Rachel innit.
On account of the ridiculously large hat, my immediate thought upon seeing the Pillsberry dough girl belted white suit was not nurse, but Beaubatons from Harry Potter, Who did very similar styling in dove gray. Trust nurse Ratched to wear Chanel so very badly. From cult leader in white pants suit in the Netherlands to witchy sadistic nurse. She is utterly ridiculous. And certifiable.
I would feel a lot more secure in Wyoming, where I would be responsible for my own security, than in a place where self-defense is forbidden. But, that isn't Harry's background. Our gun laws are outside of his purview.
I've really wondered why Harry hasn't armed himself by now. (Apparently, even at a young age, he was a good shot.) Yes, California has some restrictive gun laws; but if he really believes his family is in so much danger and there have been documented threats, you'd think he'd be carrying, either concealed or open or both. But I guess like you say, he doesn't conceptualize security being something he can provide personally for his family.
I hesitate to call this a cultural difference (as I don't think most British heads of households fear for their family's lives). For him, it seems more socioeconomic. Security is something others provide for him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Cromwell%27s_head
I remember a `wireless' programme (BBC Home Service presumably) in the early 1950s in which the warts and other blemishes on the facial skin of an embalmed head, long said to be that of Lord Protector (ie Dictator) Oliver Cromwell, were matched exactly to those shown in Samuel Cooper's `warts-and-all' portrait:
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/nov/08/cromwell-portraitist-samuel-cooper-exhibition.
I can date the broadcast as being between June 1952 & June 1953 - I'll spare you the details of how I worked that out. The exact whereabouts of Old Noll's bonce are known only to the Master of Sidney Sussex College and, I believe, the Head Gardener of the College, both of whom are sworn to secrecy.
btw, the pattern of veins on the back of one's hands is as individual as one's finger prints and has been used to ID sex offenders.
A good memory is something to rejoice in when it comes to recalling items such as this but not so good when one is trying to lose memories of narcissistic abuse!
Lol! But you are a level-headed, responsible adult. During his time in the military, H supposedly specialized in video-game weaponry…
It’s like Peter and the Wolf story….you lie so many times, but when finally one day you are being truthful, no-one believes you. 😐
I have heard the name Adderall before, but thanks to posts here, I now know what it is! I imagine that her 'diet' also includes a low-cal white wine like Chenin Blanc or Sauvignon Blanc or a special low-cal wine (plenty on the market). It would be a drastic change from the red wine she seems to prefer.
@MagatghaMistie
Her 'diet' regime may include pole dancing in the gym (gosh, that poem brought to mind an image!).
Is this the reason for her weight loss?
Why the heck is Oprah endorsing something like this?
More here:
https://www.deccanherald.com/brandspot/pr-spot/oprah-winfrey-keto-gummies-oprah-keto-gummies-oprah-winfrey-weight-loss-gummies-1123759.html
Judging from these Indian news `reports'/`advertorials? the world's largest democracy clearly doesn't have the strict food/herbal remedy labelling laws of the UK (and I imagine US).
Here, unless rigorously controlled clinical trials have been performed proving that something works, the most one can say about a product is that it may help with weight reduction/gut microbiome/getting a good night's sleep/or whatever.
I've heard a certain form of Eastern belief (originating in US IIRC), beloved of a certain Beatle, described as `a religion for brown men run by white men; so is Oprah, a person of one colour exploiting those of another?
There is some also a migraine prevention med that also weight fall off. It is prescribed through on-line MDs. No, I don't know the name of it. Meth for Migraines? I just know that my friends have recommended it, but I'm not a fan of meds. I don't have migraines and am not prepared to claim that I do when my problem is that having the grandkids here has meant that I'm making a lot of the foods that my grandmother made for me when I was tiny. I don't remember whether grandma's house was tastefully decorated or the furniture was a trendy design. I just remember her cooking all of my favorite foods because she loved me. The smell of a baking apple pie or baking bread transports me back to grandma's kitchen. I think I want the grandkids to remember that about me.
I'm pretty sure that I gave my grandmother headaches, but she never let on. Today, she could be taking migraine prevention meds and probably wouldn't want to eat or make my favorite foods.
I'm not sure that I would want the grandkids to remember that I took up pole dancing for weight loss, but hey, if it works...y'all go first and let me know. Since I just shut a kitchen drawer on the drawstrings for my gym shorts and nearly knocked myself off my feet when I quickly turned to go (I was hurrying through chores) I don't think I have the kind of coordination that pole dancing would take.
I haven't hit the gym since COVID started and my gym closed down (grrrr). I don't know whether the macho gym that trains competitive powerlifters will be comfortable with a grandmother invading their sweaty refuge from estrogen. Maybe if I bring pie and cookies?
Love it how William lets Catherine (and George) go ahead of him ... Wimbledon is her fiefdom!
https://youtu.be/nopiGhxmXe8
The only remarkable thing about the photos in Wyoming are Ms.6's marked & rapid weight loss (a possible way to market herself?), & the fact that they were in an open carry state without much visible security. They seem very relaxed about being so close to plebes who might have guns! LOL. This makes me wonder if they know that the RF, (or Charles, in other words), is going to manipulate to UK courts once again in the 6s favor. The 6s can get taxpayer funded security wherever they are, (the poor US taxpayers!), so the RF doesn't have to fund it, & a decision against the DM will be a useful precedent for Charles if he ever wants to put the kibosh on any pesky press accounts of his more questionable fundraising activities. I doubt Tory or Labour voters would like any of this, but the wealthy donors to those parties might. Just preparing everyone for what might be yet another Judicial disappointment. Charles has beautiful taste in things like garden design & furniture, but he has a political tin ear. He should take a look at the recent photos from Sri Lanka.
It's the hair. I don't care what TBLG says, Rachet has had extensive weaving done to her hair, in fact, it's been overdone to the point of looking like she's wearing multiple yak tails. The woman, in the photo has very fine hair. Not possible with Rachet. Her hair would have to be straightened every two weeks, and that process makes hair thicker, not finer.
She's never missed a chance to give her corpse grin to a camera.
Pic of * reacting to Roe v.Wade decision. Does not look like the same body as WY parade pic.
In that case, the 6s better stay in California where they might have taxpayer-funded security from Gavin (or not). Most of the blue states are having severe budget problems because so many of the rich they were intent on fleecing are moving away and taking their businesses with them. The red state governors would just laugh at the idea because we don't care whether they're protected or not. It is up to them. You wanted real life, chump, well, now you have it. Maybe the Federal government would provide protection provided they (6s) pay The Big Guy a few million in consideration, like the Ukrainians and Chinese.
Canada is a nice place. They should move there! It will be ever so much cleaner and safer than California.
@Swamp Woman - Is the medication Ubrelvy?
Ugh, I didn't pay much attention to the name because I was NOT interested. I'll make a call this afternoon, though. I think it is a continuous medication, though, because the woman I talked to has a history of debilitating migraines.
Rachet has black, thick hair.
Not one and the same person.
She may very well have attended a Fourth of July parade sometime in an undisclosed city With friends who had a small child. If Jesus is right and that is actually her hand, and not a stunt double wearing facsimiles of her jewelry, then that could’ve easily been after she received the Cartier love bracelet from Trevor. Early Suits years. Both she and the child are holding small flags, which would be easy enough to obtain whether or not it was actually a Fourth of July parade. If it was taken five or six years ago, that would explain the slenderness. It would also explain why the little boy playing Archie looks nothing like the previous Archie we’ve seen, and why there is no Lili. Harry is allegedly pictured as well, but separately from the female and the little boy. Haz is a distinctive specimen… Not so easy to find a body double for him, but in a blown up close up of him from the side, it definitely seemed to me that the ears and the nose did not match other side views of H. The nose looked a lot shorter and the ears were different. He also seemed thicker around the neck. The level of subterfuge this couple goes to instead of just behaving normally closed mind. “Normal“ in this case would be a group picture of the three of them… Or four if they are supposed to have a baby daughter with them as well, with one or both of the kids in a stroller with the figure is all visible together. Supposedly these shots were taken by a member of the public, but if they were truly mingling amongst the crowd with no security, why only these two or three photos and not more from different angles?
They exhaust me.
Rachet has black, thick hair.
Not one and the same person."
I AGREE!
Along with my previous declaration that it was a body double or look-alike at the 4th of July parade, due to the female wearing regular woman-sized shoes on regular woman-sized feet rather than 666's known garganutan clod-hoppers, i was also disturbed by the look-alike having normal woman-sized shoulders. 666 has extremely wide shoulders, and their width doesn't change one whit with weight loss. The parade's body double does not sport wide shoulders.
i know i won't change anyone else's opinion by lodging mine, but each time i see the staged pathetic parade photos i remain convinced that the woman photographed only from the back is not 666.
--------------------
I've taken topiramate for migraine prevention - no effect on weight, more than 100?mg fogged my brain. Have huge range of side effects - `dirty drugs' according to one GP
Neurologist said to keep hydrated - seems to work!
I do keep Sumatriptan for thumping one-sided pain but haven't had to use it for yonks. For migraine/travel sickness that morphs into vertigo, Stemetil wworks (tiny tabs that dissolve when lodged between lip & upper gums.) Both are prescription only in UK. Best talk to yr physician.
There's Domperidone as well, again, see yr doctor.
HAVE YOU SEEN THE LATEST HOTBIN MEGA?
Neurologist said to keep hydrated
Ha! Isn't it what precocious Archie said, one of his favourite words if not the first? 'Hydrate' (together with 'Drive safe')
Kate looked gorgeous today at Wimbledon. Love the shoes!
Then the FDA just approvedd a specifically designed drug for weight loss that promises to be far more effecticve than anything on the market (I think I read 40% more effective. It has not been released yet I believe.
So Meghan could hvae lost 32 in 2 months like I did (and I was 68).
As for Adderall, it doesn't always make one lose weight at normal therapuetic dosages (but I suppose one might get "extra" if Harry gave her a prescription of his and she added it to her own.
@Swamp Woman, I'm with you, the thought of any American's taxes going to pay for security for these two makes my head explode, bad enough that we have to pay to protect so many of our useless pols & their nearest & dearest, much less the extended family of the head of state of a foreign country. If you want them protected, Charles, pay for it yourself.
Then, I watched the BLG’s video, comparing her veins and moles and realized that it likely WAS the 6s in Jackson. After thinking it over, I wondered what they would have actually gained from a stunt like this one. It certainly doesn’t support their argument that they need armed security. I also find it hard to understand why they would hire look-alike child carers, especially if they are concerned about the safety of their children. It seems that caretakers who look nothing like the parents would be the safest solution, to reduce the likelihood of recognition.
The angle of the camera and the angle of the sun can certainly impact appearances. I guess that’s what happened here. I still believe she is using Adderall to drop weight, because she can drop 5-8 pounds in a week, something that is just not possible after 40. Yes, cocaine can cause weight loss, but Adderall is so prevalent these days. It was developed to help ADHD patients focus, but like all drugs used for that condition, it is speed. Significant weight loss is one of the side effects.
She's never missed a chance to give her corpse grin to a camera.
This is the number one reason I was thinking it might be stunt doubles as SecondhandCoke says. (The dog that didn't bark in the night?) But, alas, I'm going with the simplest explanation that it really was them although they did coordinate the social media posting of the two women. Just too coincidental for both Liar's and Friar's faces to be turned away from the camera for the picture to be genuine.
Assuming it is genuine however, other questions emerge: They sure didn't look lovey-dovey. In fact for a crowded parade route, they had a good-sized distance between them. And no touching -- the complete opposite of St. Paul's. Maybe there really is trouble in paradise?
I’m not sure where you are located? Tall skinny gingers with alabaster skin are probably fairly common in the United Kingdom given their millennia’s worth of Celtic/ Norse heritage. Heck, at Harry’s friend circle at Eton, he had a lookalike— Guy Pelly Is another pasty curly headed ginger, and he was one of Harry’s best mates. What were the chances? William’s always been the handsome one, but Harry used to have his own brand of quirky appeal. He was a lot more strapping and robust at one time, but he’s been steadily going downhill since 2015. It all started with the beard, then the balding, then the ersatz “healthy vegan lifestyle”. Whatever. He’s gone to seed Since Markle entered his life and is the withered husk of himself.
It might be relatively easy to find someone who can pass for H in a crowd, But on a more micro level, I think his features are pretty distinctive: the close set beady eyes; The uniquely frizzy hair or what’s left of it that peaks out from under the cap. The nose is Phillips, and I noticed the same nose on William today at Wimbledon. It’s a strong nose but it looks better on William who has the strength of face to pull it off. As Harry’s face gets thinner and thinner the nose begins to look bigger and bigger. I really think that now that he is a wreck of a human being, he is one of the most unattractive faces .around and I can’t bear to look at either of them. They’ve now done three lifetime movies featuring the epic love story of twit and twat, and all three times, although a ginger haired actor with a newly trimmed beard was cast, they couldn’t re-create the wonder that is Harry. The actors were all far better looking. I have yet to have a doppelgänger sighting for H
at least he's not Hunter."
I agree with your post. Harry is Harry, same nose, ears. I too thought his arms looked very hairy but I think it was the sun on them that showed the hairs.
A couple of pix of H with bare arms in Africa in happier times:
https://tinyurl.com/8vbrthfn
https://tinyurl.com/4wve56ec
Tin foil hat time: did they stage those photos, with the collusion of the photographer, who did not photograph them actually going into the estate, or leaving? Purpose? To threaten someone with the possibility of an Oprah interview?
Who lives in the vicinity of Oprah's estate? Jeff Bridges' ex-wife (a property that Oprah bought ... lovely home but only two bedrooms). Rob Lowe? Who else?
The most logical explanation for those photos is that they were visiting Oprah. It was reported that the visit lasted just over an hour, but they were not photographed leaving.
It just seems possible that they staged a stunt with the collusion of the photographer, and Oprah has been focused on her father, so has just ignored the noise created by a visit never happened. In my opinion, possible but not probable. (Photographer waits on the road to catch them en route to Oprah. Gets the shots, goes back to his car and heads over to Oprah. When he gets there, they are already inside the estate so he photographs the parked security vehicle and the entrance then leaves instead of waiting for them to leave. She is furious that he did not finish the assignment but tells them they were there for over an hour.)
---------------
Her latest submission in Samantha's lawsuit is that everything she said in the interview was 'her opinion' and not fact so she can't be liable for defamation. So, she is admitting she lied? Yes, Samantha knows she lied. The whole point of libel/defamation is that you publish lies about a person! However, some commentators think she may get away with this defence. (No one took it seriously as everyone knew I was lying.) Messy, messy Megsie!
Scotland's the place for redheads! Also NZ because of all the Scots there.
I'm hearing rumours that H's book can't be published as it contains too much info about security etc and has had a D Notice slapped on it. Could be why it's all gone rather quiet 🤔
@Maneki Neko, funny I noticed Mole’s hairy arms and wondered was he ever that hairy. 🥴TBLG says it’s them, but why the no show faces? It’s so out of character for her particularly. I oscillate between thinking yes it’s them and then…..no, it’s not. 😳
It’s too hot..🥵I’d never thrive in a hot country!
Sussex adjacent post:
I have such a random things pop up in my Facebook feed. This turned up out of the blue, no reason why.
It’s a video ad for Reborn dolls, And it’s the creepiest thing I think I’ve ever seen. It’s just voiceover narration by the artist as we watch her hands, one of them encased in a satin glove as she dresses a Reborn And gets it ready to package and ship to the customer. Except that she says the doll is going To her forever home where “mommy” is going to love and spoil her. That thing looks realistic as hell.
I would not judge a bereaved mother for getting therapeutic comfort from a doll like this, but I would hope that such a woman would also be under a good psychiatric care And mental health counseling and the use of the doll baby would be a short term treatment and not a forever lifestyle. Talking about these dolls as if they are actually alive is psychologically disturbed and I feel like marketing them as aspirational objects is just enabling mental disturbance to continue. Much more healthy to get a dog or a cat to lavish that Levon, with or without the cute outfits. Have a look and tell me your thoughts please.
Charles has very hairy arms and legs, so H likely inherited that trait from him. I am a natural redhead and have 3 red haired siblings. Our family has blonde body hair and not much of it, thank God. Our DNA results revealed that we are 48% Scottish, 24% Scandinavian 15% Irish and the rest is a minute mixture of several European regions. We joke that we’re mostly Viking. Our Scottish clan records reveal that we descend from Norwegians from the Viking age, around 1000 AD.
@Sandie I agree that the little visit to Oprah’s gate was all a stunt to threaten the BRF. The BACKGRID copyright on all the pics was all the proof I needed. * must have been steaming mad after the booing and the second row seating assignments. After their return to the states, I am sure * poured over all of the media coverage of that trip. I think the ‘Soho Home’ pottery was flying in Montecito when she realized that Major Johnny Thompson was sitting behind them, and she saw the glares they received from Lady Sarah Chatto! The Royal Family won this round, in a big way.
re: https://fb.watch/ebVbYBozM3/
I agree - better to have some living creature with its own personality to keep one grounded in reality. Might even a teddy bear be safer psychologically? The reborn is too much like keeping a corpse, it seems to me.
----------------
@RR -
O/T: The Scotti came from Ireland in 6thC, bringing Gaelic with them. Even more went back in the 17thC.
Before the 6th, Scotland was inhabited by various tribes, including the Picts, all of whom which spoke a different kind of Celtic language (p-Celtic or Brithonic, rather than q-Celtic/Goidelic). Brithonic, with local variations, seems to have been akin to Old Welsh and spoken from Cornwall to Morayshire at the very least. It became Cornish, Devonian (which was taken to France where it became Breton), and of course Welsh itself.
Compare Ecclefechan (`Little church', Dumfries & Galloway) = Llanfairfechan (`Little church of Mary' north Wales), llan being a specific kind of churchyard ground plan; `eccles' borrowed from Latin during Roman times.
Later, Angles from Northumbria took over SE Scotland (Edinburgh is from OE for `Edwin's stronghold.)
Then again, I have a 17thC map of Skye - it reads like a modern map of Iceland - nary a Gaelic name there, all Old Norse!
My experience of Ireland has been mainly in Dublin and in the counties of the south and west - I did see black-haired, blue eyed folk though.
https://fb.watch/ebVbYBozM3/
It’s a video ad for Reborn dolls, And it’s the creepiest thing I think I’ve ever seen...
Agree. Can't believe how lifelike the doll looks.
Gonna be a media frenzy here at UNHQ. Live coverage on #sabcnews channel
Tweet from Sherwin Bryce-Pease
This article claims that the security needs of TBW are 'more complex because she is a person of colour', and, of course, he served in Afghanistan.
Unbelievable that someone could write this drivel!
Black hair and blue eyes is a common Irish combination. Clare Foy is a perfect illustration and looks very Irish to me (her mother is Irish).
@Hikari
That video of the reborn doll is very creepy and disturbing. The worst was at the end when it had its head wrapped in cling film and then the doll, including the head, was wrapped in a piece of fabric like a dead body in a shroud.
The thing is they don't make reborn children so you might be able to fool people with a pretend baby but after babyhood, then what?
I have searched and have found no verification of this anywhere.
If this is true, it is appalling.
Prince Harry will deliver the keynote address at the U.N. General Assembly's commemoration of Nelson Mandela International Day on July 18th in New York.
How in the hell did the U.N. decide on Harry for this role? He's not even literate enough to write his own speeches. So guess who will really write it?
I feel that I have irrevocably slipped down a wormhole into a Kafkaesque Bizarro World.
Just Harry, formerly known as a Royal--No longer a serving member of the royal family and therefore officially unemployed, with no discernible work skills, life skills or capacity for multisyllabic words addressing the UN as a keynote speaker at an event honoring Nelson Mandela? what fresh insanity is this? Who did they bribe, and how much? It’s inconceivable that anyone responsible for this event at the UN would have considered this a good move. This is Woke jokery at its most unbelievable. My jaw is on the floor. Somebody is greasing a lot of palms To continue to give Harry a veneer of relevance. The Harkles are not being allowed to fail in the way they deserve. Some high profile megadeal, generous celebrity, shady oligarch or a sycophantic organization always Swepson to rescue them at the 11th hour no matter how much stupidity and vindictiveness they exhibit.
What the hell. Does the UN want itself Harkled, Or does it just want to smear the memory of Nelson Mandela? If a halfwit Runaway prince with a less than half black wife and no other qualifications whatsoever can be invited to address the UN as some kind of apartheid expert simply because the granny he has taken a dump all over on the international stage And who once sent him to Africa for luxury holidays--is the Queen, I don’t know what to say. This world is too much with me and I feel like I’m losing my mind
This is what the UN has scheduled for 18 July 2022:
Monday, 18 July 2022
10:00 a.m. – General Assembly Hall
Informal meeting of the plenary to mark the observance of “Nelson Mandela International Day”.
[A letter from the President of the General Assembly, dated 9 June 2022 was sent to all permanent representatives and permanent observers.]
Monday, 18 July 2022
3:00 p.m.- Trusteeship Council Chamber
High-level special event entitled “Time to Act Together: Coordinating Policy Responses to the Global Food Crisis”
[Letters from the President of the General Assembly, dated 17 June 2022 and 1 July 2022 were sent to all permanent representatives and permanent observers.]
https://www.un.org/en/events/mandeladay/events_2022.shtml
Prince Harry’s new memoir ‘should make royal family nervous’: insider
Prince Harry’s upcoming memoir will give the royal family plenty to worry about, according to multiple sources.
The Duke of Sussex’s $20 million book contains yet more explosive truth bombs, Page Six can exclusively reveal.
It is still due to be published in the fall of 2022, despite reports it has been pushed back, and one NY publishing source told us: “It’s juicy, that’s for sure.”
Another publishing insider added: “There’s a lot of new stories in there about the past that Harry has not spoken about before, about his childhood … there is some content in there that should make his family nervous.”
Harry's email to Jack Dorsey before the January 6th insurrection and, possibly, his calls to Labour leaders on Boris's takedown suddenly aren't funny anymore.
Well, at least I'm not laughing. I don't know about you guys!
IMO those statements are veiled threats to the RF, just like the fake visit to Oprah was a veiled threat to the RF. The Harkles pulled into the entrance of her driveway, for their fake photos. The lunacy. Oprah knows about that stunt. If I was Oprah, I'd consider that stunt by Twat and Twit to be an act of stalking. I wonder if Oprah has retained Gavin de Becker on that matter?
Oprah isn't going to touch them again; she got burned once, and once was enough.
IMO those statements are veiled threats to the RF, just like the fake visit to Oprah was a veiled threat to the RF. The Harkles pulled into the entrance of her driveway, for their fake photos. The lunacy. Oprah knows about that stunt. If I was Oprah, I'd consider that stunt by Twat and Twit to be an act of stalking. I wonder if Oprah has retained Gavin de Becker on that matter?
Oprah isn't going to touch them again; she got burned once, and once was enough.
See Newsweek article wuth thus headline about David Emmanuel:
Diana's Wedding Dress Designer Says He Cannot 'Utter' Meghan Markle's Name
BY JAMES CRAWFORD-SMITH ON 7/11/22 AT 6:44 AM EDT
This comment about the DM article about Harry giving the keynote address for the Nelson Mandela observance at the United Nations. It is funny with just the right amount of truth.
Best comment: Ah yes! Harry and his wife have always been down with the struggle. Just ask their servants.
The DM confirms H will give a speech to the UN on Nelson Mandela Day but I'm scratching my head to know in what capacity. The article says it 'may refer to the impact of climate change and world hunger', both subjects he is obviously an expert on (while flying private to NYC?).
Will he talk about mommy dearest? Diana did meet Mandela when on a visit to her brother in Cape Town in 1997 so stay tuned for references to their friendship. Of course, H has to have wifey by his side. He might be the one giving a speech but she'll have to stand next to him for maximum exposure. And what ill-fitting outfit will she be wearing?
We'll need your wit to restore some sanity to the 6s' UN capers.
Suppose we all have replicas made of our beloved family members that have passed away. The arguments over whose turn it is to dust Aunt Florine could be epic.
I am so disgusted that I want to pretend thus is not happening. Curse the Nelson Mandela Foundation and the UN for trashing the memory of Nelson Mandela in this way.
The Hapless one has met a daughter if Nelson Mandela, in London at a public event, and Graca Machel, during the awful Southern African tour. Both times he was accompanied by the claw.
How is that a relationship?
I too have long had the fear that he's a puppet, with bigger hands than Meghan's pulling the strings.
No names, no pack drill for us, DV.
Apologies, I didn't note the reference
On the other hand, at:
https://i.redd.it/bi72a1m3lq991.jpg
I came across Blind Item no 8 of Jan 26 2022 revealed. It appear that al Fayed's version of Di's death is going to be launched at RF by H - as I put it yonks ago, H's core belief and is that `Grandpa killed Mummy' and that will be his `bombshell', based on Dodi's dad's `evidence'. Yawn... we've heard it all before.
I had read, at some point before the Paris crash, that many French drivers had been shown to be `well over the limit' when at the wheel. It was claimed, they were so habituated to alcohol that they seemed to be acting `normally' at alcohol levels which would have British drivers obviously plastered. I wasn't therefore surprised at the blood alcohol level found in Henri Paul.
Nor was I surprised that the silly woman hadn't put on her seat belt - it was well known that she never clunk-clicked when abroad where it wasn't a legal requirement.
Does Harry wear his seat belt in the US?
I read somewhere that the UN are not meeting on Monday, this will be an informal day to remember Nelson Mandela.
Mr.6's speech will cause a sensation among his sugars, but I'm skeptical that it will cause much of a stir in NYC. NYC elected Obama by huge margins, but we all cursed him & his security detail when he tied up traffic when he visited.
I'm beginning to wonder if Tina Brown is right, & Charles is planning to rehabilitate Mr.6. Hence, the stories about Charles meeting Lili, etc. Brown isn't a royal confidant, be she'd be a good person to plant a story with. Charles is on board with a lot of the 6s opinions, & might want them to take on some of the RF duties down the road.
Why do I think this after the cold shoulder they were given at the Jubilee?
!.Charles puts his personal comfort, reputation & pocketbook above anything else, & has dubious judgement (Look up the art scammer who victimized him.}
2. He wavers & goes back on his word without a qualm, as in the Camilla title decision, the reneging on the bullying report & the questions surrounding Prince Edward becoming the Duke of Edinburgh. The Paul Burrell incident wasn't exactly a profile in courage either.
3. There have been credible reports of his contentious & competitive relationship with his brothers, Andrew & Edward.
4.There have been rumors of his jealousy toward the younger & more popular Cambridges.
Charles seems to be a self indulgent, self pitying & entitled person, & guess who else has those qualities? Like many, I find Princess Beatrice & her aristocratic Italian husband a more attractive option as working royals, but Charles most likely would value his own sprogs over his blood royal nieces.
Tina Brown in Marie Claire:
https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/royals/prince-harry-return-as-working-royal/#:~:text=Royals-,Prince%20Harry%20Will%20Need%20to%20Retur
-----
Prince Harry’s upcoming memoir will give the royal family plenty to worry about, according to multiple sources.
The Duke of Sussex’s $20 million book contains yet more explosive truth bombs, Page Six can exclusively reveal.
It is still due to be published in the fall of 2022, despite reports it has been pushed back, and one NY publishing source told us: “It’s juicy, that’s for sure.”
Another publishing insider added: “There’s a lot of new stories in there about the past that Harry has not spoken about before, about his childhood … there is some content in there that should make his family nervous.”
-----
https://pagesix.com/2022/07/11/prince-harrys-memoir-should-make-royal-family-nervous/
-------
@ SwampWoman - I hear you - and wonder if they'd shut out *?
Blogger Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
I expect H's fear of being in the UK is derived from his belief that the same (or similar) people that `murdered Mummy' will have him in their sights, perhaps literally. It didn't however prompt him to make * raise the car window though.
Wait, what? I thought 6 was going to accuse Prince Philip of killing Mummy! Since Prince Philip has crossed the river Styx, ascended into a higher dimension, or is now walking around Heaven with General Patton depending on your religious beliefs, it will be difficult for him to kill Harry. I can't imagine Prince Philip wanting to listen to his whining in the afterlife, whatever it may consist of, so he's probably leaning hard on the Powers That Be to get extra guardian angels assigned to him.
I don't know if THEY would, but I certainly would.
Doesn't seem to have worked on him. That word salad written by wifey, I presume.
Please update your devise so I can post your terrific comment.
thanks
I can't imagine Prince Philip wanting to listen to his whining in the afterlife, whatever it may consist of, so he's probably leaning hard on the Powers That Be to get extra guardian angels assigned to him.
I don't think PP will have to worry about Hapless harassing him in the afterlife. HazBeen and his grasping wife are going to the Other Place. If they think the Royal family has been mean to them, just wait until they see what the Prince of Darkness has got planned for them. Wailing, teeth-gnashing, the whole lot. Forever. The howls will not trouble those in Paradise. When Lilibet is reunited with her beloved, I can imagine him saying, "Finally, Cabbage, we get shot of those two twats." Rumor has it that PP refused to see Harry--not that HazNowt was anywhere near--but the Iron Duke left word that the the prevaricating ginger traitor was not to be admitted to his room at any time. To refuse to see a grandson when one is dying and one knows one is dying--that speaks volumes. There was an outside chance that Hapless might've hoped for a deathbed confession from Granddad about a certain tunnel in Paris.
Diana's death was a tragic accident. As was Harry, IMO. He was such a cute little kid but look at him now.
Harry has chosen his companions and he's chosen his attitude of bitterness, jealousy and sedition. He's a bag of hate and little else. If he keeps on going the way he is, he will, sooner rather than later come face to face with his Maker and that meeting is going to be no more cordial than the recent one with Granny. Life is choices and so's the afterlife. Jesus absolutely knows Harry, but I don't think it flows both ways.
The only king whom H remotely resembles would be Oedipus who unknowingly killed the king, his father, whereas H is knowingly seeking to destroy his father, the future king.
Oedipus went on to marry his mother, Jocasta, albeit inadvertently, and blinded himself when he realised his error. Somehow I doubt if H will `go to Specsavers' and see where he's going wrong so tragedy is bound to happen, with us as the Greek Chorus.
Will the Eumenides ever catch him? I do hope so.