British Royal Family Gossip Part 54

Zero tiaras in the near future.

Apologies for the typing catastrophes.

You're doing a fantastic job, OP, of creating all these new threads for us. Thank you!

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Honestly, is there a valid reason not to share the birth certificate? I am truly curious.

what is the necklace she is wearing in the photo at r5? Some kind of pearls set in platinum.

I think these threads are a distraction from the Mueller threads and the breakdown of the US republic.

I’m curious too, R6. What’s the point if it becomes public record anyway? And I think she clearly looked postpartum at that interview but if they don’t realize it until it becomes public record... is that enough time for it to be reissued after a surrogate? If not then they’re being attention whores but no harm no foul. But if it can fit the surrogate narrative they really are just saddling this kid with the rumors long term.

Agreed. Although at times it seems we end up obsessing over the tetchy narcissistic tendencies of one person (Sparkles) instead of the other (Trump).

^ “release it”

Spelling errors are contagious apparently

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Saw what you will otherwise about Camilla, you must concede she has the hair for those gorgeous tiaras.

Can they legally conceal the birth certificate? Doesn't it HAVE to be on public record?

Agreed r13 she really does have excellent Tiara Hair

Posts on the prior thread indicated that A certificate will be made public record but that this timeline would allow for a surrogate to surrender legal rights and for an adoption to be completed. In such a case, the original certificate would be sealed.

@12 yeh I just scrolled over there two comments. There's no way they can fix this except release the birth records yet obviously they have something to hide. Hell of a soap opera.

I don't know, r14, It might be possible - I mean, the Queen can travel anywhere in the world without a passport (she doesn't have a passport because as Head of State she technically issues all UK passports). So maybe there are documentation loopholes for Royal Family members?

Or maybe it's just more inexplicable Harkle fuckery. Nothing would surprise me at this point.

There are no loopholes for the BRF in terms of legal documentation of births. A birth cert still has to be filed in the allotted amount of time.

I think they have 42 days. Isn't it 6 months for a surrogacy adoption to be completed?

@r18 Mr.Harkle allowed himself to be swept up in the saga of a royal surrogacy. Again, it's a hell of a soap opera. With all this going on I now see Mr.Harkle as emotionally damaged the PST of his mother's murder fucked with his head he seems to be incapable of making consistently good life choices since he met Mrs. Harkle.

Has Camilla been seen wearing any of the fabulous necklaces? I know she must have been offered them - there was that photo of Kate wearing some with the pale blue gown. The thing about necklaces, is that they bring attention to the skin of the neck - which isn't something older women are as keen to display.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Another doozy on Cams:

Diamonds and aquamarines:

Blue topaz as big as a robins egg:

Thank you, R22, R23, R24, R25. !!!

Your most very welcome r26. One more for the road: pink topaz surrounded by diamonds galore:

That choker R25 is stunning.

I like seeing all the insanely beautiful jewels, and yes, the older women possess the gravitas to wear the jaw breakers. One thought that consistently crosses my mind though, when I see these rocks, is how heavy they must be. Ropes of diamonds and pearls (of THAT size!) weigh an awful lot. Then you throw in a tiara and earrings and a brooch or three, and holy fuck. Their poor little necks trembling under the weight of it!

OMFG, I agree that R25's choker is rather impressive. It looks like costume jewelry, but I know it's not.

I like to imagine her thinking "I put up with a raft of shite from the press and I've done so for years. I'm the best thing that ever happened to Spineless Prince Charlie - God Bless, I love the Nancy-boy anyway - so you can bet I'm going to wear the f*ck out of these rocks."

Camilla also has the best hat game. She can pull off the big hats too. One gets tired of all the endless fascinators that the younger royals inevitably wear.

Good point R32. I can picture Anne having the attitude for it, but not really caring enough for the fashion. Wrong?

Camilla is all class. Do we know if Charles has low hangers?

Hats? Did someone say large hats? Love them!

R34's picture was taken in 2018, is that right? Charles looked so much healthier and slimmer just a year ago.

No need for sunscreen ever - or an umbrella over one's head:

There should be a thread just for royal hats.

Somewhere...a ceiling is missing its insulation:

Trevor Engleton's new wife is attractive. Physically she's just the opposite of Meggy. Yeah, he made the right choice.

Sorry, Engleson.

Charles's nose does him no favors. Can't a dermatologist help?

She's loaded too r40. Lots of family $. No Thomas Markle or crazy sibs hovering in the background.

Something very Patsy Stone about Camilla.

I can see Patsy and Cams being friends in the mythical London of the sixties that Patsy loves to reminisce about.

There is a style of hair that frames a tiara just so. Diana employed a similar trick Camilla does now, short full hair that sweeps over the forehead and billows out the sides; this allows the tiara to be opened more on the head and gives a grander presence. Between the big hair and the open tiara neither item wears the other, instead complimenting the presentation overall.

In the Spencer.

I freaking love it when our knowledgeable DLers share tiny insights with us that are so interesting. Thanks, R46!

HRH The Duchess Of Cornwall, counts Joanna Lumley as one of her friends. So she does pal around London with Pats. In the photograph below, once can witness Dreamboat Andy and Camilla throwing shade at Catherine's choice of outfit.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Looks-wise, Andy really hasn't any room to throw shade at all, especially at Kate. Andy still thinks he's a dreamboat. He is now just a boat, albeit a large one, with yellow vampire fangs that make women, children and horses run screaming for the nearest pub.

Diana had some shiny tresses.

I will pray for you R51 while I am working my nipples to the fantasy of Dreamboat Andy ravaging me in a highland meadow, whilst he has his tea and shortbread smartly presented in proper bone china service (circa 1933 Paragon of course) with a linen cloth draped over my back while hes pounding me with his blue blood sausage.

That was great, R53!

I’m not going to go to the previous thread but why the hell is the birth certificate now a problem???

I swear that woman has been calamitous for that fucking family.

If there is something hinky about the birth, can’t they just put whatever information they need to out on a damn piece of paper? Who the hell would question it?

R53 Thank you and can I be the servant who serves the tea and biscuits?

The Sunday Times have an article (Are you expecting or could it be foam and silicone) today about how non-pregnant models can be made to look pregnant for photo shoots, with lots of helpful details. Later in the article, there’s a photo of MM next to a model wearing a fake bump.

r55 The Harkles have announced they don't want to release the birth certificate.

UK Birth Certificates include the day, time and address of the birth, baby's name, both parents' names and address (including the maiden or previous married name of the mother), both parents' birthplaces and occupations. It is signed by one of the parents and by a registrar, both attesting that all the details are true under penalty of law.

So there must be a problem with one or more of these details. Given the way this has played out, it could be almost any of them. Such unnecessary drama - it boggles the mind.

Those details don't exactly sound earth-shatteringly complex; in fact it all seems like pretty standard fare. Which portion would they have had problems with, do you think?

And yes, the sheer amount of drama does boggle the mind. It's also exhausting.

This is one of my favorite Kate looks. I hope the link doesn't stink.

I do love Camilla's hats but I think she needs to return her hairdo to Krystle Carrington.

I don't think we need shed any tears over Thomas Markle not seeing his new grandson. According to his ex-wife, he has never met a couple of them, and has had very limited contact with the others.

^^^^ his other grandchildren, that is.

I read a long time ago that Charles sent an aide out to buy some cover-up makeup for his rosacea. I don't know why he didn't get info on IPL, which is effective in eliminating it.

R57 That is very interesting of The Sunday Times, are they throwing shade because it really looks like it. I never believed it was a surrogate but all this crap surrounding the birth is very odd. If it is a surrogate then the press will find out and it will be the most delicious news story of the century and I'm here with the popcorn.

Are the royals allowed to whiten their teeth? William's are so yellow and horse like.

Andy, William and Harry all have grotty teeth.

Here is the twitter account that apparently belongs to MM, explaining that the reason the Harkles won't put out the BC is to protect the identity of the doctors to prevent their being harrassed by the media. Whoever the account belongs to sounds well-informed, and also very haughty, but no idea if this is MM or some random.

(Two problems with the argument made: One, Doctors are not named on BCs, and Two, none of Kate's doctors' have ever been harrassed by the media)

Subtle shade maybe R65, although as usual dressed up as faint praise. I’m not on board with the surrogate idea but before I read that article I didn’t realise how easily pregnancy can be faked, either.

There’s a bitchier piece later on that asks if Harry panicked and gave the baby the name of the last person he met skiing.

On another topic, I've been wondering what will happen to Camilla if Prince Charles dies first. Will she still be a visible member of the Royal Family, or will she become irrelevant, to be merely tolerated and kept at arm's length by the rest of them? She and Charles have no children together to secure her place in the family, All she'll really have left is her title, an income.and whatever properties he bequeaths to her.

r70 She'll just go back to her (apparently gorgeous) house in the countryside and be known as Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall.

R68 That twitter account definitely is either her or a paid PR person. Such bullshit about the Doctors, the British aren't the type to harass Doctors neither are members of the press if they ever want to be invited to a royal event again. The whole birth is one of two things, shady as fuck and a surrogate or worse, Harry and MM are using their child to generate press for themselves, which makes them the cuntiest of cunts alive.

Or 'Camilla, Dowager Queen Consort', if he dies King.

[quote]They won't and don't need to move. GB is not only Prince Harry's birthplace, but his Royal birthright. It's also his heirs birthplace & Royal birthright. These folks will need to fall in formation. Simple. Plain.

[quote]Yes, as will Archie's at the proper time. But it's a comparison of Apples to Airplanes. The thirst for information, and subsequently, negative spins on his birth was NOT perpetrated against the 3 Cambridge children. The obligations are diff & Kate was treated better by the press.

EDITOR! EDITOR!

The instagram story has moved to being the headline story on the mail online, 3.7k comments and rising.

We seem to have banished the Skippies, thank God.

Agree that they should have made the BC public straight away as it just fuels the Skippies.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Well that sounds at least a bit better of a story behind the name, but why not name the kid Tom then?

Psychotic Skippy has found a reborn doll called Darren, which is designed to look as if it's breathing. She is convinced this doll is Archie.

Where you aware that some of those "Darren" dolls have an activation button to make them "breath"? Some people are suggesting that when PH appeared to be digging his thumb into the doll's blanket, he was looking for the button but could not find it.

I don't know how to send the picture to you, but I'm sure another Anon can find and post it. Just so you know how lifelike they make those things. Thank you for all the info you provide. So helpful and interesting!

Jesus this woman and her drama are exhausting and I'm not even married to her. Please can the drama end? I want to move on with my life but I can't, I keep getting dragged in with the whole WTF. This is worse than the best soap opera. I like gossip and drama but I need this to end.

Has anyone been to _duchess_of_sussex instagram, I swear it is either MM or definitely a paid PR person. She's hysterical today about the Yoga bird and her expensive classes that MM endorsed for mental awareness on the Sussex royal instagram. Personally I was surprised that it took this long for anyone to criticise her mental awareness post, since there are only a few UK charities linked. The rest mainly USA based including Oprah and that yoga one for rich celebrities. I didn't know that Tarry Toomey was at the baby shower either. Was the baby shower just a meeting for MM and her cronies to do business deals?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Manhattan baby shower was a merching extravaganza that the world will not forget in a hurry.

I heard M speak for the first time when I watched the Archie intro video. I was expecting a fairly strident, authoritative, Amal Clooney tone of voice but she simpered like a southern belle. Disconcerting.

Toomey has a communications director, Katie Zion who is also an executive assistant to the CEO of Sunshine Sachs, Meghan's PR firm. So my guess is yes, it's looking very much like that showers purpose was to conduct business deals. All of these people Meghan has known now for 5 minutes are being touted as "close friends".

I don't believe one word of what either of them says, ESPECIALLY her. Regardless of all the grandiose goals we think she has, she seems to be making it up as she goes along. No matter what she's doing, even if it's giving birth, FOR FUCK'S SAKE, it's like she's winging it. Maybe it's because she's such a pioneer! You know, blazing new trails, going where no clueless bitch has gone before, refusing to be oppressed by tradition and musty, historical smells.

She hasn't a clue what she's doing, obviously. She's desperate to make it seem like the price tag dangling from her skirt is in the script; that every mistake is part of a much grander, more complex plan which she's sauteing on the back burner of her freestanding Viking Tuscany stove. And no eggs, or else.

R85, wow, how did you know that?! I keep SAYING that Sunshine Sachs and its clients keep popping up in MM’s orbit and these news stories. SoHo House as well.

Mostly I feel sorry for little Master Archie. What a bleak future he has.

Archie will be fine - hardly a bleak future - he's in the .0001% of the 1% and will want for nothing, ever, for the rest of his life. His father will love him, and so will all of his nannies.

The Instagram story.....well, I believe they held back until after the " birth ", and no-one had a clue when, or how long, that was going to be. I think the press have been holding back. The IG story, among others, released on a Sunday...to set the tone for the week ahead. They are going to absolutely let rip, soon.

Markle promotes her new " bible". A big hint that this is her PR is the term " close to her heart". Everything with that phrase in is apparently from MM herself. So much for spending time in hibernation...a la the rest of the article. * le sigh*

She needs to do a forty or fifty year hibernation.

R91 I threw up in my mouth reading that PR bullshit. Is she getting paid to promote this book? maybe she can tag it on Instagram. Plus if she is still the size of a baby whale when the Trooping of the Colour arrives she can be excused for not being there. Also wouldn't you smell if you don't shower for a month. Imagine the smell from your clunge!

Yes she can hibernate her entire life 😂

She's already broken the hibernation period by doing the bloody stupid photo call, lol. What a load of merching motherfuckery . Nice big placement photo of the book, too. How convenient.

Really do people believe that bullshit she is not going on social media for a month . All hell will have to freeze over to snag her away from social media . We all hope she do anyway ! Haha that cunt no longer on her instagram that would indeed be awesome for us .

Someone has to stop this lunatic! MM is out of control and no one in the royal family seems to be doing anything. I thought Lord Geidt was hired to control her, she's just getting worse. I really don't think the "long game" that the courtiers are supposed to play is going to work with her because she'll be long gone by then, leaving a trail of damage that I'm not sure the royal family can recover from.

I doubt they could do much during the pregnancy. If she thinks they can't touch her now a child has been born, well......

Yes I thought lord watchdog was gonna reign her in but she is now even worse then before the birth .

She's only going to get worse and worse and worse

According to this tweet by a RR the Sunday Express commissioned a poll into royal popularity MM's popularity is at 39%, that seems significantly lower than a recent Yougov poll. Contrast Kate on 62% which is close to the 64% of the same yougov polling. The opinion poll doesn't appear on the website yet, so may just be in the print issue. If she keeps dropping at this rate she will have lower approval ratings than Camilla before the end of the year!

But without Camilla's husband, money, houses, jewels, land, or wardrobe.

What's she been up to now?!

R101 That is so bad considering she just had a royal baby, under normal circumstances you would expect a royal baby to boost the mother's popularity. Charles must be happy that Camilla might end up liked more. Maybe that's why he lets MM and Harry away with all this, to make him look better. Though I don't think he would have liked the attention MM and Harry got for the baby while he was on tour in Germany.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Here's one for you tiara freaks. Skip to 12:03 if you care to see the girl scout one blinging in all its brilliant glory

Archie is a cats name . I follow someone with cats and one of them is named Archie .

This is pretty convincing that Harry was holding a Reborn Doll named Darren.

Well lots of negative press about the Harkles, which I presume will set the agenda for the rest of the week. Are the media going to go after the rest of the royals as well? Reporters are seething and if this article is anything to go by I don't blame them one little bit.

R105 There are so many PR stories about naming the kid Archie in the last few days. First George overheard it, then MM's cat was named Archie, she loved the comics and collected them with her father, they met a kid in NZ with the name Archie, Harry skied with someone called Archie. Now there is this latest one after his former boss. So many bullshit PR spin stories really has convinced me that the name is really George's nickname and she purposely stole it because in her twisted narc mind her child would have the future King's name. Narc's are fucked in the head about stuff like this and really purile too. She stole a 5 year olds nickname, how low can you go?

I can’t access the Sunday Time article. But were they really that shady as to include a MM photo in the article w all of the conspiracy theories floating,

Anyway, the Trump and MM comparisons are apt. No matter what they do, they cannot be stopped because they have no shame.

Close, but Archie has a honker and the doll doesn't. Look at Archie's upper nose (Don't know what to call that part of the face - bridge? Where one puts the botox?) - anyway there's a huge ridge there that's not on the doll.

And also Betty, who has had 4 babies and umpteen grandchildren and great grandchildren, is not falling for any doll.

Look - the whole thing is weird enough without either the Skippies, or the wretched Megstans, trying to push extra crap on to us

Headline is misleading, they mean the Cotswolds home ( near Soho Farmhouse). I heard rumours about this. I bet any monies settled do not go to charity.....

Fabulous, R4. The Queen looks utterly majestic.

As to the mystery of the name - didn't Harry actually say that the middle name Harrison came from "Harry's Son"? If he did, why wouldn't he just as proudly say "and Archie after my Army buddy"?

As with everything else in this long, sorry saga, nothing makes sense.

"Wouldn't it be terrible if you'd spent all your life doing everything you were supposed to do, didn't drink, didn't smoke, didn't eat things, took lots of exercise, all the things you didn't want to do, and suddenly one day you were run over by a big red bus, and as the wheels were crunching into you you'd say 'Oh my God, I could have got so drunk last night!' That's the way you should live your life, as if tomorrow you'll be run over by a big red bus."

Photo by Norman McBeath, 1999.

Oh dear LAWD how I'd love to sic The Queen Mother on Wallis II

I so wish I could live my life like that, R116, but I'd be a toothless, obese alcoholic drug addict living in a storage container.

R113 all that money straight into merching Megsie's slush fund. I saw this mentioned on _duchess_of_sussex instagram story last night, even though there was a press embargo on it. I know MM runs this instagram page.

Yes, she also mentioned it on her Strong Write Twitter account. That account has gone full on INSANE.

The StrongWrite account on twitter, much-rumoured to be MM herself, hinted strongly at the Gayle King interview as early as April 5th - long before anyone else even considered the possibility.....

The Sunday Telegraph's front page describes Archie as "the world's biggest influencer". Who writes this nonsense?

The Queen Mum was really a very ruthless character. Per her own admission she stated "People think I'm nice. I'm not nice, really."

The press is just riling normal people up by going all in at this point.

R122 maybe this is why Archie is listed on the court circular as doing engagements for the RF. He's also under the Queen and above all the other members of the family. He's such an influencer he's been promoted to first in line to the throne.

I don't understand why Megs and Harry didn't just admit to using a surrogate, if they did indeed use one. She could have made much of her fertility issues, it could have opened up a whole conversation about what 'heirs of the body' really mean in terms of succession, headlines for days.

My guess is that if they have more children, they WILL openly use a surrogate, a la Kim Kardashian. That way, they can continue to grab the media's attention and cause all kinds of drama.

Maybe they have admitted it to the Queen and that's why Archie wasn't given a title.

God I blocked two people and over 70 posts vanished.

Get over it tinhats. They obviously did not use a surrogate (no one can possibly fake that “just pushed a person out of my body” look) and literally no one apart from a handful of psychotic Tumblr stans think she did. Has any royal ever “released” a birth certificate? Apart from Obama I’ve never heard of anyone “releasing” a birth certificate before.

Honestly just stop. The press here in Britain has been pretty much universally positive. Trying to start rumours about birth certificates and dolls just makes you look like you’re about to be Sectioned.

GTFO with your gaslighting bullshit, R128. We can talk about whatever we want to talk about, and it doesn't make us mentally ill. As the Daily Mail articles attest, the press is starting to say the same things we are: Meghan is a selfish, narcissistic grifter. She either used a surrogate OR is using her child's natural birth as a way of creating more mystery and drama.

Either you're a paid shill or worse, you're a stan who's spewing your insulting nonsense for free. Either way, fuck off.

If you want to see how normal Royal births are done, look at how Kate managed hers: Pregnancy announcement, Lindo Wing, 5-minute press call, release birth certificate, vanish to the countryside until the christening. If Meghan had truly prized her privacy, that's how she would have done it.

She didn't want privacy, she wanted to distinguish herself from the BRF's standard way of doing things. Hence the colossal fuck-ups with the PR around the birth, which will result in shade being cast on Archie's true origins for the rest of his life. I suppose Harry thinks this sort of thing just makes one stronger, the way the rumors about him being James Hewitt's bastard have made him stronger?

If you're "a Brit" then you know that releasing the BC's for those in line to the throne is commonplace. For them not to do it is odd.

Also, if you're "a Brit" you know that the press has been so full of shade they may as well be talking about Meghan from inside a cave, and that she is the most unpopular member of the RF for many decades. Since Wallis herself, probably.

Just Google image the Cambridge kids birth certificates, they are everywhere.

Are all "Brits" as up their own assholes as you are?

Meghan is on her to being more unpopular than Camilla, in less than a year.

That's actually an impressive achievement

*on her way

R128 There is nothing more annoying than a megastan coming on here pretending they are intellectual. If you were British and could read you would know the the British Press can't stand the bitch.

R128 if you’re genuinely British, please hand in your passport because you seem to know nothing about your own country. Yes, it’s normal to release royal birth certificates, just as it’s normal for the attending medical team to sign the birth announcements outside the Palace.

The absurdity of the Sussex press stunts has been called out repeatedly in the UK press (grab a copy of today’s Sunday Times if you need some actual physical evidence). By no means is the media coverage “universally positive”.

MM has just posted on instagram the photo we all know she couldn't wait to do, the photo of her holding bebe Archie's feet with flowers in the background, I'm surprised it isn't in black and white. Apparently she is celebrating her first Mother's Day except it's not fucking Mother's Day in the UK, that was on 31st March.

What a way for her to try and bury the bad press. She is shameless.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R8 - Compared to the breakdown of the UK republic, the US is just going through a bad patch. And as the American news appear to be obsessed with Trump and to be barely able to remember there's a rest of the world out there, and there are plenty of threads on DL devoted to politics . . . you don't need to worry.

No matter how bad it is out there, sometimes you have to let the kid out to play.

This is the MM I was expecting: the baby as IG prop.

JFC, r138, she is the definition on basic. Why do people eat this stuff up?

Meghan aims for an arty, dramatic perspective. Kate's kid portraits aren't all that exciting, but they're simple and straightforward, like her.

Part of Harry's statement to the Press puzzles me.

He declared that "How any woman does what they do is beyond comprehension." And "...it was amazing, absolutely, absolutely incredible...."

Are those expressions indicative of Meghan's having had a Caesarean section? Because a woman doesn't "do" an abdominal surgery. Nor is abdominal surgery "beyond comprehension."

They sound to me as though Harry had witnessed a normal delivery.

But even he admits Archie was overdue...to them.

So did Meghan have a late but normal birthing? Did she actually have a Caesarean and Harry is bad at obfuscating?

Or did they both observe Archie's arrival via surrogate, hence the Prince's slightly emotionally distant language of "any woman....they" while saying of his son "this little thing...is to die for."

Playing games about the timing of everything. No physician named. No birth certificate shown. Indeed, only the merest glimpse of Archie's profile has been shown to us. All non-traditional to the point of odd. Why?

Because, R143, we live in the Age of Emotion. The internet has given everyone a place to celebrate and share their FEELINGS.

I think if she'd had a C-Section she'd probably be unable to move around for at least 5 days or so - it's major surgery where they have to take out the woman's innards and then put them back again. So yes, she probably gave birth

Her stans bleet about privacy but this is not privacy this is secrecy and secrecy for no real reason. Medics have not been harrassed or chased, yes one nurse died but she had other mental health issues that made her not want to live which the prank compounded. Now though with the secrecy the Mail on Sunday is calling doctors and doorstepping them to find out if they conducted the miracle birth. The not relasing the birth certificate which will become public anyway is just lending credence to the surrogacy rumours.

R30, The irony's being, of course, that for HM, Camilla, Catherine, and the rest of the BRF the pieces ARE simply "costume jewelry"!

R36, Let me tell you, one's 70s mark a sea-change.

R147 Yikes I don't know where you are from but a caesarean doesn't involve taking any innards out of anyone. It's pretty straightforward, knife to skin, through muscle, nick in the uterus, open, pull baby out. Sew up. Generally out of bed as soon as your catheter is out or before, you can walk and move about the next day. Nobody stays in bed unless they want DVT's

But no way could I wobble down that foyer in the castle w high heels after a C section 2 days previous.

r151 Well, that's what I had understood it to be, but I'm sure you're right. Not a frau so never had to consider the issue too closely. So you're saying that if she did have a C-Section she could be up and about? What about the wearing of white? Is there any blood afterwards?

R66, Read the DL thread on teeth-whitening, enamel damage, and pain, okay?

R148 The cruel prank that resulted in the suicide of that poor woman had nothing to do with the birth of George, it was when Kate was hospitalised for severe morning sickness in early pregnancy. No one had ever harassed any of the staff involved in any royal births.

My God have you seen Archies feet ? They are huge no way is that from a newborn baby .

Nobody is going to be in heel two days after a c-section, and nobody who gave birth is going to be in white.

That photo of the Queen Mother at r116 is... wow, jaw-dropping. Normally she's photographed with a beatific smile, looking all gracious and serene. This photo shows her crafty, calculating side. Go back and look at it and you'll understand how she ran King George. It's been talked about but I couldn't see it until now.

R128 - R137 is correct. The royals routinely release the birth certificates aware of the fact that the taxpayers pay into the royals' wealthy lifestyles and the need not to play those taxpayers any more than they already do; the royal birth announcements have always been signed by the physicians who attended. You don't need to be a tinhat nutter who believes she used a surrogate to observe that this is more of Meghan using any means at hand to create media fuss around her, which is all she's doing by refusing to release the birth certificate in addition to giving the tinhat nutters more ammo.

Meghan has a pathological impulse to stir shitpots. She has massive contempt for the family that gave her the thing she wanted most but couldn't get on her own merits: global celebrity. She also has massive contempt for the UK taxpayers who just paid 3 million quid to renovate her fucking home.

Meghan exhibits an interesting psychological pattern that probably began with her hapless father: she cultivates and charms those she can use, and when they fall for it, because she's aware of her insincerity, she experiences massive contempt for them because they've fallen for it. By the time they realise what's happened, she's moved too far out of reach.

I thought at first she was just a hardened social-climbing grifter. Now, watching her use a routine birth certificate record that like every one birth certificate in the known Western world, only tells the public when, where, the baby's name, and who the parents are, just to keep headlines churning, I'm convinced she's a dangerous clinical narcissist.

It will be interesting watching the BRF twist in the wind as they realise they have absolutely no ability to hold her, and by extension, Harry, to accountability to the institution that, ironically, is the source of their attraction to the public. In the end, somewhere down the line, it will come down to getting the Sussexes the fuck out of the institution or watching as she hangs them out to dry in pursuit of global fame and power. I wonder if they'll have the balls, in the end.

R153, Yes, "up and about," and no blood dripping! Are you totally unfamiliar with the concept of modern surgery?

Now, it is not giving birth--just the opposite--but decades ago I had a surgical tubal ligation, and two days later, still stitched, carried my own luggage for a JFK- Amsterdam flight.

R153 I don't think she had a caesarean but it is possible to walk ok 2 days post-op, she did seem unsteady and was clawing on to Harry. I presume she had knickers and a pad on, I don't think she's that "woke" to free bleed all over herself

I don't need them. They need me.

R87 at the risk of needing my tinfoil hat, I can tell you I saw it on Tumblr on Skippys blog but it was sharedvfrom another blog first. Think it was ilia4, but Skippy should have it. Can I upload a screenshot here?

R158 - The Windsors run to dependent men. "Running" King George could also be interpreted as how deeply she supported him emotionally. He remained besotted with her from the evening he met her till the day he died - she turned down his frst two proposals. He was as dependent on her as his older brother was on Wallis Simpson, only King George got a happy stable family life out of it and two children he adores, whilst Edward spent his life being treated like a naughty child by Wallis Simpson.

And they would hardly be the first couple in history where behind the scenes the wife held the more powerful cards.

R163, I saw it too. But not on Tumblr. It was in DM comments.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R139

Those were my first thoughts too.

'Either you're a paid shill or worse, you're a stan who's spewing your insulting nonsense for free'

Tinhatting 101 - say people who disagree with you are 'paid shills' and that they're 'gaslighting'

Nothing original about these psychotic Skippies plaguing the board. Larries did it all before.

What lend credence to Meghan's having given birth are her puffy face and the ever so slight shape given to her heretofore non-existent calves.

Perhaps all the secretiveness is due to Meghan's narcissism and irrational opinion of her and Harry's importance.

"Oh, we don't want paps harassing the doctor!"

"Oh, we mustn't encourage the Press to pursue a timeline of our activities!"

"Oh, our little Archie might be the next Lindbergh baby if we show his full face!"

"Oh, our private family documents are not for public show!"

R157 - You're behind the times. Sutures are now internally dissolving, and whilst it is true that after a c-section most women aren't let out of the hospital the same day, as it is claimed she was, surgical procedures are vastly improved these days. A friend recently had a full hysterectomy including ovaries, tubes, cervix and creation of a vaginal cuff in place of the cervix, after finding some benign tumours and fibroids. She released the next morning. She had some leakage, but pads were adequate for the leakage. There is leakage for about a month after natural births, as well. So by all odds she would have been wearing pads, anyway, and while that does make white an odd choice two days later, an odd choice isn't proof of anything but Meghan's absurd sartorial choices.

I just don't buy the surrogate bullshit - not because there would have been anything wrong with it per se, but because there would have been something hugely wrong, dangerous, and infuriating to the UK public in hiding it and pretending to be pregnant. She and harry would be forced out the next morning, not because they used a surrogate, but because they lied to the public whose taxes contribute to their lifestyles.

It would also absolutely destroy the integrity of the BRF as no one would believe they weren't a party to the deception.

R159 so spot on! and like all sociopathic narcissists she is treating her child as a pawn in her game for attention. What makes this disgusting, as I've said before, is that she is using her own kid for more media and public attention by being evasive about all aspects of his birth. She doesn't give a fuck that there will always be a question hanging over his origins especially revolting as Harry has always had the shadow of James Hewitt in his life. What a pair of monumental cunts her and Harry are. The only way they can come out of this as better people is if this was a surrogate birth, then at least there would be a reason for all the cloak and dagger stuff. Unfortunately I don't think so, MM is just an awful person.

From the latest "feet" photo and the Intro one, I'd recommend that Mumsy Meghan avoid photos of her ratchet-hands henceforth.

Damn. That baby got some big-ass feet!

Do people who love squawking about reborn dolls and surrogates just go from fandom to fandom? The Larries said Louis' kid was much too big to be the age he is. Babies vary in size, demented Skippies.

In that Instagram pic, was she dangling Archie over a balcony?

R172 - Second that - her hands look really bad and it's kind of surprising as she's not that old.

Her hands are emaciated like her twig legs. She really is very thin behind the temporary pregnancy weight. If Archie's eyes are blue like Harry's and Diana's, expect an IG showing them off. She'll be delighted and won't be able to refrain from posting, esp as the Cambridge kids have green/hazel/brown eyes.

they are not releasing the cert coz he was born earlier.

That IG photo of the baby is so Instagram frau and so not royal.

R178, no he wasn't, psychotic Skippie. The press will get hold of the birth certificate eventually anyway.

R179, agree. But if this Instahoe keeps putting up typical frau pics, her followers will rise to overtake Kate, who only posts pics of her kids once a year.

Because Kate understands the difference between a public, professional Instagram and a private account.

Let's admit it...we all suspected that the Sussex Shit Stirrer would release photos of either Archie's feet or hands. It's so ridiculous and so predicable. Duchess Yoko doesn't have an original bone in her body. How many times have we seen photos like this on the Internet? I've lost count. She wants "privacy" but can't wait to post on her Instagram account. Both of them are fucking lying assholes.

she claims she wants to shield him and all that BS, he's just an accessory in her quest to be more popular than Diana. That's her aim.

yes, she wants to put out the pics herself because she wants the public to go to her for "news", "pics" and not the "lying" British press.

Her fandom has lots of crossovers with the Kartrashians so she is copying them. I hope we see the baby's eyes soon.

R184 - Nutmeg will NEVER overtake Diana because she lacks a couple of important character trait: empathy and authenticity. She's as fake as the nose on her face.

^ traits

If the baby's eyes are blue like Diana's and the Queen's, it's all over. Archie will be the favourite amongst the public.

R177 - Archie's eyes are very unlikely to be "blue like Diana's". If they are lighter than Meghan's, which are light brown, they're likely to be greenish-brown. Even Harry and William, Diana's sons, who also had a blue-eyed father and a great-grandmother with enormous blue eyes, didn't inherit Diana's enormous violet-blue eyes.

The Mother's Day photo, like everything else about Meghan, is staged staged staged. There's just never anything natural or unforced about her. It's as if she's terrified of relinquishing absolute control. One can only feel sorry for Harry and Archie.

R187, she isn't fake. She's being her genuine Instahoe self, spending and posting and SJW-ing about mental health.

If this kid does have the big blue Di eyes, Kate will be jealous. George's are murky brown, Charl's dark greenish, Louis' hazel.

r192 Why the hell would Kate be jealous? She's not the one who seems to be dangerously obsessed with her dead mother-in-law.

It’s interesting to note that three of the Queen’s four children got divorced, yet, so far none of her grandchildren have gotten divorced. And Peter Philips have been married over 10 years

Kate is a jealous type.

R192 - If there's one thing I'd be willing to put money on , it's that Archie will not have Huge Blue Eyes like Diana. And Kate's and William's kids are attractive with the eyes they've got.

R195 - And you know this how? After all, Meghan has gotten Kate the most positive continued press she's had in years, she hasn't changed her fashion sense whatsoever in response to Meghan's idiotic clothes choices, and Kate remains ahead of Meghan in the yougov popularity polls. For all Meghan's efforts, she still comes out sxith.

And I'm pretty damned sure that the Queen is far happier with Kate's handling of her royal role than Meghan's - she just made Kate a Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order.

Meghan would kill for Kate's hair, legs, waistline, and higher status.

Kate has nothing to be jealous of. She just has to go on being Kate - and wait.

baby's eyes change color, they become darker.

Megalodon's pics are getting a lot more likes than Kate's which will please her.

Meghan's desperation is so revolting and obvious.

Babies who grow up to have Diana's eye colour have very very light eyes at birth.

R198 - Yes, they do. They darken in those first six months and wherever they are around then is where they say. But that milky blue cast disappears quite quickly.

^*where they stay

R203, not true. I have 3 nephews whose eyes were blue until about 8 years old and then darkened to green.

Good Christ she's just SO incredibly revolting.

And so is he, now that's he's become her slavish assistant.

They've got to go.

Comments on the IG feet photo reference the fact that the blue forget-me-nots in the background were Diana's favorite flower. MEghan is really a shameless try-hard.

You never know but it wouldn't surprise me if Meghan photoshop the color of baby's eyes. Then she cay say...oh but they change as they grow...when real pics of baby (as he grows older) comes out.

R204 - a shift from blue-ish to green-ish isn't that unusual. My own eyes were quite blue until I was about six, and then became blue-ish-grey-ish-green-ish.

But kids who have brownish-greenish eyes at six months don't suddenly at eight years suddenly develop large violet-blue eyes.

The only pregnant woman I’ve ever seen who failed to get pregnancy boobs.

The camb kids all got small beady eyes, so much you can't even tell what colour they are.

R160, women bleed for several weeks after birth, whether vaginal or c-section. It is particularly heavy in the first days after birth. That is why wearing white is commented on.

I wonder how they keep everything under wraps.....how do they keep everyone quiet? I have to believe the whole Downton Abbey scenario where the servants know all the juicy gossip, no?

the kid's feet are tan. They are darker than I expected. I know a few Irish women who had babies with very dark black men and their kids are white with kinky hair. Maybe that poster is right about Meghan whitening her skin. I thought the kid would be lighter due to Harry being a ginger.

R210 - The Cambridge kids are all very attractive, George has large eyes and is beginning to look like Diana. Go back to Celebitchy where Cambridge-dissing is so deeply appreciated.

Harry Styles/spazz/Larries troll stop going on about Larries all over DL in 2019, you are not going to make that word happen. Keep to your Harry stanning thread.

Unless you are paid by the post?

R128 the birth certificates for the three Cambridge children are readily available online. It’s quite obvious, however, that she gave birth to the baby, so why the straw clutching questions about dolls and surrogates is still going on is beyond me. What isn’t so clear is why the evasion about the place of birth. It’s all becoming tedious.

R213 - He was pretty much exactly the colour I expected, faintly tan but neither noticeably black nor very white. His colour looks much like Meghan's. Of course, we haven't seen his hair yet, if it's the texture of both his parents, the overall affect is going to be more racially obvious than his skin colour. I would guess that Meghan is more concerned with his hair than his eye colour. It's going to be a bit comical parading around with straightened hair, toting a kid who looks the way she looked when she was five years old.

R214 I didn't know you owned the place.

Dumping on the sussex baby is Ok but camb kids are off limits? Lol, by the way, the camb kids are not cute and deep down you know it too. I've heard murmurs about how disappointed the camb fairweather stans are that none of them stand out and how average they look. Poor george looks haunted with his black eyes with undereye circles. Mini carol with the beady eyes and frizzy hair and the forgotten one who looks like a Portuguese cab driver...I'll say no more.

r218 No one is "dumping on the Sussex baby" you insane old bat. Also, your declaring that the Cambridge children are not good-looking is some weak attempt at pure gaslighting. Every one of them is very beautiful, and the next one will be too.

Why are you here? Aren't you happier with the other catladies over at Celebitchy?

Ooer, you are a little ray of sunshine, aren't you R218? Bloody hell.

[quote]...the forgotten one who looks like a Portuguese cab driver...

I’m not a fan of taking down babies, but I’ll admit, I laughed at that.

R218 - I suggest you google images of Princess Charlotte so you can see her straight hair - the only frizzy hair in the neighbourhood is Harry's and Meghan's brutalised hair in her strenuous efforts to hide her own frizz.

Five year old George looks "haunted"?

Portuguese Cab Driver:

I don't see the resemblance, myself.

R222-if George is haunted, it's because his insane aunt is trying to decimate his birth right. And she's doing a bang-up job, too.

Prince Louis, for comparison:

The resemblance to Thomas Markle is marked, though.

R225 - Louis is my favorite Cambridge child.

Meghan's tawny skin is her best feature (her markle nose being the worst) so archie would be lucky to inherit it. People get skin cancer trying to get that tan skin.

Louis will be the handsomest one in that brood. Those emphatic eyebrows look a little much on a baby but will look great on a grown man. See also: James Middleton.

'stop going on about Larries all over DL'

Skippies > Larries. Larries are insane, but not racist. You skip off to your fave Megxiteers on Tumblr. Torontopapers has stopped posting, at least.

Louis gets those emphatic eyebrows from his mama. He's going to look a lot like her.

R225, that terrible pic of Louis makes him look like one of the baby raptors in Jurassic Park.

Harry doing a Markle gaze at the camera.

There will be photos of Archie will be released in the interview with Auntie Gail. That is my prediction.

Harry's eyes are more grey than blue .

Hapless Harry looking stunned - or stoned.

Which will. Sorry

I would bet money that Meghan will hold off on showing us Archie's hair for as long as she can. Not that there's anything wrong with his hair whether it's curly or straight, dark or ginger, but she'll want to tease the reveal.

Ew, that ginger neck beard is so unflattering.

R232 - Only to idiots.

Agree, R234. Photos, not video. I believe the interview was completed before the birth.

Does CBS pay? Of course, the PR value alone is vast.

Diana had Earl Spencer's melting blue eyes, which came from his American grandmother, Francis Work. Neither of her sons got them. It will be interesting to see if her grandchildren do.

Of the three Cambridge children, only Charlotte has blue eyes.

It's my understanding that birth certificates are only sealed if a surrogate is used. If Archie's birth went the normal route, which I personally believe to be the case, they have 42 days in which to register the birth as William did within 15 days of each of his children's birth, and the certificate then becomes a public record UNLESS there is some other circumstance that justifies sealing it. Being a member of the BRF isn't such a circumstance. The only other instance I can fathom for wanting it sealed is Harry's infertility, which would have necessitated a sperm donor, in which case naturally they would want it kept secret, because that would automatically bar the child from the succession.

R218 - Hey, first of al all, no one is dumping on the Sussex baby, and the fact that you're either blind or a pathologcial liar is evident because one look at a photograph of Princess Charlotte shows a child with straight hair and perfectly nice eyes. In point of fact, she looks now much more like her father than she does Carole Middleton. George doesn't look haunted, and Louis is the spit of his mother, with her eyebrows and eyes.

The only frizzy hair in the neighbourhood is Harry's and Meghan's brutlised hair. And you're blocked.

Who's the spaz who insists on calling toddlers 'Prince' in such a subservient way?

R233 LMAO Are we sure Harry hasn't been lobotomized do or does Megs just carry his balls around. Love the blank chicken look.

R243, the latest pics show Charlotte has dark greeen eyes like Kate, not blue eyes.

R245 - Who's the nutter who pretends that this isn't a thread about the British Royal Family and that Prince William's oldest child isn't a Prince?

He's become a father so I don't know why Harry's eyes look so angry.

Has anyone read the Camilla Long article in The Times? . " If you had asked me before this week who Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor was, I’d have said Elton John’s Pomeranian " killed me . She has TURNED, girlfriend!

R246, 'lmao', really? Skippy is wondering where you are, you silly teenage girl.

Diana's eyes came from her mother, Frances Shand Kydd. She's the one descended from Frances Work, not Earl Spencer.

Calling him Archie doesn’t tell us you’re different, Harry. It tells us you’re confused.

Camilla Long

The birth of a royal baby is a joy for many. It is a wonderful chance for us all to come together, to laugh as one. It is an opportunity for everyone to be unified over how bonkers it is to become a parent for the first time, and for Prince William to say, in that disarmingly matey way he has, “Welcome to the sleep-deprivation society.” (Has he ever been sleep-deprived? Je pense que non.) Nothing, however, could have prepared any of us for the sheer horn-honking, kazoo-tooting, pebble-flinging madness of Prince Harry deciding to call his first child Archie. I’m sorry — Archie? Not even Archibald? How many sleepless nights had he had? It was unifying, all right.

R249, his eyes are coy and amused there, not angry. Skippies like you are so relentlessly stupid.

“Well, they’ve done it,” said a friend. “They’ve managed to find the worst possible name.” Archie, followed by a second name that Robbie Williams had clearly suggested. If you had asked me before this week who Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor was, I’d have said Elton John’s Pomeranian. So weird was their choice that I have to confess that for at least 90 seconds I was entirely floored. So they weren’t going to call him Prince Martin Luther King after all? The most generous explanation I could come up with was that Harry had panicked and given him the name of the last person he met skiing. The least generous is that he has no idea what messages he is sending at all — at any point, through any of it.

Under normal circumstances this would be fine. Except Harry’s only job, as long as he is a member of the royal family, is sending clear and concise messages. Words aren’t available to royals, so they spend their days carrying out symbolic tasks at symbolic events in the hope of conveying a feeling of national unity and togetherness. The Queen has spent her life subtly crafting and transmitting messages. She has conveyed volumes through the mere angle of her handbag. There is one word on a royal’s job description, and that word is “symbols”. Harry’s current message is that he wants to be “different”, but he has no idea how to convey this, or, indeed, even what this is. Is “different” unwittingly inspired by the fact that Meghan is biracial? I hope not, not least because she’s not very different from Harry at all. She isn’t exactly a girl from a council estate in Liverpool — now that would be different. I suppose the vague idea is that “different” means something that’s sexy and alternative, a sort of Kate and Wills diffusion line. But in his struggle to do things his way, I don’t see “different”, I see a string of angry and puzzling rejections of what it is to be royal.

First there was the poseurish insanity of the home birth that wasn’t. Then came the news Meghan was in labour hours after she’d given birth, an act of alarming dishonesty that was totally unnecessary, or so you’d have thought. There were the spelling mistakes in nearly every announcement, which (at best) suggested Harry had dumped a huge event on his press team without notice, so great is his mistrust of everyone around him. And then there was the dangerous void. In the absence of any decent material from the palace, broadcasters had to rely on footage of the people outside Windsor Castle, including one woman from Wales holding an ominously copper-coloured helium balloon in the shape of a baby. She told a Sky News presenter that balloon-makers “do sell Afro-American babies now, of ethnic, ethnic minority, ethno . . . can’t say the word, sorry”. The problem, of course, with not sending clear messages is that people will start making up awful ones. So there was CNN’s article headlined: “How black will the royal baby be?” And then there was the horror of Danny Baker’s tweet — which people should have seen coming. A royal baby always claims at least one radio presenter — when Prince George was on the way, they sacked two Australian disc jockeys.

R247 - Charlotte has blue eyes like her father. I don't know what Kate the amateur photographer did to the photos to make her look like she has any other eye color.

And where was Meghan in all this? Last Wednesday she was finally wheeled out, all dobbed up in a white dress that bizarrely conveyed the idea that she was virginal and fresh and sexy and still up for it, which is quite an odd message two days after you’ve given birth. There was not a single simple, unmixed message all week, except the wonderful first appearance Harry made to the cameras at Windsor on Monday, when he said his new son was “to die for”. This is the Harry I want. Not the one who doesn’t want to be a royal, or who hates photographers, or who smuggles his wife resentfully into the Portland like a lunatic. I want this one.

Harry thinks symbols are parts of a drum kit. Meghan, with her degree in communications, should be better at conveying a consistent message, but she is not.

On another topic, Charlotte appears to have dark blue eyes that can look greenish in some lights.

R258, her eyes are dark green. When she was younger they were a lighter green. I challenge you to find any photo where they are blue.

Jesus, that necklace at R23!

Wow, the press is really going all in, aren't they? Barely waited until the placenta smoothies were drunk at Frogmore Cottage.

Which shows they had the knives ready for months, and were just waiting for Archie to clear his mother's birth canal. Whoever his mother might be.

R261, click on the high-res photo at R260, which clearly shows a little girl with dark blue eyes.

One does not have to be crazy to be suspicious of Meghan and Harry. They do not behave like normal people. I mean, what idiot would name their kid Archie, especially if his future lies in the U.S.? Child will automatically become a figure of fun. now, I don’t read Tumblr or believe in conspiracy theories generally, but with Meg, anything is possible, as she considers herself above the law. So she looks like a woman who has just given birth? Alternatively, she could have stuffed her face with cheeseburgers. And maybe she used fillers on her face. Meghan is a schemer. Otherwise, why all the cloak-and-dagger stuff about the birth? Attention whore that she is, she would have thrown the documents in our faces.

The press are going in HARD now the birth is over. I'm a'flutter at to what is coming next.

'Whoever his mother might be.'

Delusional Skippie. Go and fill your Seroquel script, you're hallucinating again.

The press has every right to as they got duped. Stupid mistake by Meghan and Harry.

It is fair to question the birth. When you translate the use of the word " privacy " to "secrecy ".

I was being ironic, you addlepated fuckwit R267. Quit gaslighting people with erroneous accusations of mental illness, when you yourself can't even read a freaking Datalounge thread without flipping the fuck out.

All the lunatic Americans making crazy comments about this couple and baby. No wonder Trump is president.

At least we're not paying for them, like the Brits are.

There is no secrecy. She gave birth at Portland Hospital in London on 6th May. They chose to wait a day before presenting the baby and they don't want the BC in the press straight away. This doesn't scream surrogacy or reborn doll to anyone but Skippie CTs.

'Quit gaslighting people with erroneous accusations of mental illness...'

That's not what gaslighting is. You've spent 54 threads tentatively proferring your batshit conspiracy theories and getting knocked back time and time again by the many sane posters here.

You'd have a much easier time of it on Tumblr.

All they had to do was be honest and have someone sign the announcement. They wanted to be special and different, so now they have no ability to complain when they are treated differently than other royal births.

Ignore established protocol at your own peril, and all that.

I don't know who the fuck you think you're talking to, R274, but I am not Skippy and I don't have a Tumblr. Why don't you concentrate on writing interesting posts that grow the thread instead of slinging mudheaded accusations at other posters?

Oh right, because you're a fucking asshole. Never mind. Blocked.

Readers should click W&W for OP. The thread is greyed out and several threads have been closed recently, including a BRFG thread that closed prematurely.

I always W&W for the BRF threads, come on everyone, we do know there are interlopers that come over. W&W your life on them. And show us jewels, Camilla's hats. The Queen Mother......everything!

The idiot who keeps calling everyone Skippy is probably the one getting these threads greyed out. I don't know why they can't move on to some place more aligned with their views. The criticism is only going to continue to mount for H&M since the press is out for them. Just wait for when they get vigorously booed or called out st some public function, because it's coming.

What is the point of the copyright Sussex Royal on their photos? Kate’s personal photos of the kids have been credited to her but I don’t remember ever seeing a copyright

Harry, your problem is your wife. Grow some balls.

It's pathetic af to have a royal play at copyrighting instagram pictures all while merching left, right, center. Especially when her entire lifestyle is funded by the public.

I cannot UNSEE this photo shop. LOL.

I'm sorry, but I thought the birth of a child would maybe make her more humble. But no. It's full on self publicizing , merching, burying stories. This stinks of fish.

Margaret appears to be mauling her mother.

As tempting as it is to ascribe their cloak and dagger secrecy to a surrogate conspiracy, I think it’s good old-fashioned attention-seeking. Someone has a baby and does all the normal things, it’s over and done quickly and people give a satisfied nod and move on. Can’t have that, if you’re SPECIAL.

I don’t know if anyone remembers when Kim K’s son was born, they didn’t show photos of him for a year or something. People talked about it a LOT - was he deformed?

Of course it’s not fair to the poor child, to have its basic provenance questioned forever, but any attention is good attention to a narcissist.

[R129] Why don't you fuck right off. I remember the HKN threads around here a few years ago. I gleefully participated in them at times but I bet you don't even know what I'm talking about. We made fun of people like you with your idiotic tin hat theories. The DL is for bitchery but not sheer stupidity and mental illness.

There are some similarities between Harry and Meghan - wonky nose, gap tooth grin, close set eyes. Let's hope that Archie gets dealt a better hand by genetics.

The Harry Styles/spazz troll has posted thousands of times about Hairloss Harold on this board. His posts about Me-Gain are also quite an impressive number. Is Styles also tied to Sunshine Sachs? The Larries/Skippy invocations are so lazy. Fuck off to your Harry thread.

The boosting one by tearing others down tactic is a SS classic after all. Hmmm.

Also quite lazy - Wintour has made strikingly similar comments re: MeMe and Styles. SS cutting corners? Or is there just so little to say about either? Talk about cheapening your brand, Anna. She also loves the Kartrashians. That Me-Gain makes Kate look better is a given, that she even makes Kimye seem to have slight gravitas is hilarious.

Jeezus F' ing Christ youse people are nutso over a broad and her new bambino. I'd hate to think what youse would be saying if Harry was lucky to score a real woman like one of the Calecci sisters.

Diana's American great-grandmother, Frances Work, hails from Diana's Mother's side of the family.

I'd like to start a thread mocking these idiot OTT haters.

Any ideas for a clever name?

God knows there's plenty of material to choose from.

R292 - I would advise against doing so. Too many threads will get the legitimate threads deleted.

According to the DM, Jess is commenting on the Instagram posts of Me-Gain and Dim. Guess her not doing so was just another cheap trick to drive chatter/speculation.

From another site, a damning but truthful comment.

"Wow. This woman is severely mental. The American spellings. The time of day of the post. Making the post about herself but referring to herself in the third person. The feet of a child much older than 6 days old. Hiding the baby’s face yet again. Diana’s favorite flower in the background. Another day, another stunt from MeAgain. "

R292, perhaps Kiwi Farms might suit? Would not want to restrain your glee.

R295, not sure mental is the right word?

Shameless in her quest to cloak herself in Diana affection and in her drive to create some US based influencer brand comes closer.

What IS mental is that the BRF seem to have only bad choices for containing a situation that has snowballed. Drive more toward Republican sentiments or pay her off? Seems they will have little control over her in any event. The harm she has done to the carefully built brands around Charles, Harry and the Cambridges in less than a year is significant.

R295, she always posts at US morning time. I was at Sunday dinnertime here in the UK. Very telling. She is addressing her US audience. Always.

Grrrr IT was, not I

She is using the British taxpayer like she used her father. Hope she ghosts the UK soon!

Imagine these threads during the Fergie era, or even post Diana-book era. It be rough for the short term, but the institution will survive.

You think the press are annoyed now? Wait till she reveals the first baby pictures on some US magazine cover. Wasn't the rumor that she was going to do Vogue? I'm laying odd that's when Archie makes his first full on appearance. (Or rather the IG of the cover cause you know Sussex Royal needs to have it first) . Privacy in this case really means We want control.

[R293] Shame because I do enjoy tiara talk and tidbits of info from informed royal watchers. Discussion around the clothes and ceremonies, plus old royal gossip etc. I just really dislike the ridiculous tin hats who ruin these threads with their mental illness.

Oh yes, full baby show will be via US press. When's that Gayle King programme? Next week? I'm in the UK, bound to read about it in the press , though, lol.

Who knew? Apparently, Willis and Harry are 3rd or 4th cousins to the American actor Oliver Platt. All three are great-great grandchildren of Frances Work.

Bringing it back down to reality.

I have a really General BRF question... until QEII I thought the crown passed down to males. How did Queen Victoria and others such as QEI become queen?

Not sure what attractive feature poor Archie can get from his parents. Maybe Megaloon's tawny complexion and linebacker shoulders? Harry's height? Otherwise, both parents really have little on their person that is appealing in a genetics lotto. Poor kid...

Worse, I fully expect this kid to be a petulant out of control hellion, directionless and chafing under the thumb of an overbearing mother.

R287, I was there on the HKN threads, laughing at her crazy conspiracy nonsense about Rob and Kristen.

HKN and her cronies called FKA Twigs IT, just like the Skippies call MM IT, so there's probably a crossover. The Skippie here is exactly the same type of sick fantasist.

'Not sure what attractive feature poor Archie can get from his parents. '

Harry's eye colour, height and physique. Megan's olive skin and defined jawline. Dark hair from Meghan too. He could be gorgeous.

No son was available to inherit leads to a Queen, if QEII had a brother he would have been king.

r307 There were no men alive in the line of succession to inherit. Elizabeth I was the second daughter of Henry VIII. Her half brother Edward VII ruled then died (trying to pass his crown to Lady Jane Grey ) that failed. Mary I took the throne with Phillip (King of Spain) they had no living children. After she died it was Elizabeth.

Victoria's father was the 4th son on King George III. She inherited because all the other heirs before her had died.

That kid is going to grow up to look like Thomas Markle.

r307 The story of how QEI became Queen is a long and bloody one. Start with her father Henry VIII. He got divorced (scandal at the time) went all choppy-choppy on his wives, several times over, and even established a new State Religion all to ensure a male heir....

R287, what are you rambling about? You are that Larrie from the 1d threads who never forgave Harry Styles for not being gay and with ugly Louis.

Of course you have become a Skippie and have come here to squawk about reborn dolls, as you did when Louis had his kid. Tinhats don't change, they go from fandom to fandom.

^made my case

Is everyone drunk on red wine gravy, this evening?

R287 is a Skippie. Block and f and f.

No, R317. Although now I hear it's possible to become drunk on gravy, I have another item to add to my to-do list.

Just checking out the many photos in the DM article covering the Wessexes (and HM) at the Royal Windsor horse show. So...what exactly is carriage driving? I understand it's an activity but is it... competitive? Just for fun? What kind of training and skills does it take? I will say they're all fabulously turned out. Lady Louise is in her awkward stage for sure, but she looks confident being out there driving her own carriage. Good for her. As far as posh privileged types go I find the Wessex-types much more tolerable than the Sussex-types.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7019973/Lady-Louise-Windsor-joins-Sophie-Wessex-carriage-ride-Royal-Windsor-Horse-Show.html

^made my case. Idiot. Reading comprehension is vital.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Archie will inherit Harry's beady close-set eyes with a slight cross in the one eye from his mother. Will make Louise's awkward childhood stage comely by comparison.

Megstans and Skippies are equally annoying and should be sent to their own island to engage in a series of death matches.

She was pregnant and had a baby, that's true. She's an attention-addicted stunt queen. Also true.

As others have pointed out, that 'baby feet in parent's hands' photo on their IG is as basic as it gets. I keep wondering if I'm ever going to get over how frau MM is, but so far it's as entertaining as it ever was. I'm legit shocked she didn't post the black and white version of the photo. Maybe with a single one of the forget-me-nots still colourized. *kisses fingertips* MWAH

I’m going to sit over by r323. They get it.

Who keeps bringing Harry Styles into this?

One thing I’ll say about Meghan is, she really does keep things interesting. Of course, if anyone has someone with her disorder in their life, the “interesting” wears off rather quickly.

Has anyone read Richard palmers tweets about a new poll on the royals?

That would be the HS/Spazz troll, R325, with dozens upon dozens of posts in the BRF threads ranting about Skippies and Larries.

I'm tipsy on white wine gravy, it's a full Sunday Dinner experience, lol. I guess poster above was having roast beef Myself and my husband had chicken, we love cooking together. Drinking whilst cooking, and sploshing over the joint. It makes great gravy. And yes, we are tipsy which mkes the dinner more fun. I get you! ( No leftovers for the cats, though, it's soaked).

R53: more kilts, please. It's the only thread better than tiaras!

Those are still not the feet of such a new baby.

Don't shoot the fuckin messenger! I saw this unfurl, I'm sorry it's a Tumblr link, but hey ho.

Nobody cares about their boy baby. (He'll never inherit the throne; he'll have terrible hair, and no fashion leadership). Prince Dimwit's graspy wife gave birth to a baby that can't be merched. (Had they a girl, that would have been valuable to their $$uchex$ branch, but a boy buys them nothing).

Skippie alert at R330!

Just watch, she will continue saying the baby is too big for his age whenever he appears. Tinhat 101.

R326 - No. Because this is DL not Twitter. Please feel free to share, though.

R332, lucky for him. Imagine how awful it would have been, Meghan pitting her against Charlotte.

L ady Louise looks very smart in her carriage -driving outfit. Love the snood. Is it difficult to drive a carriage? It looks like fun.

R332, how would they merch a girl?

The boy might have the height and looks to be a catwalk model with any luck.

Prince william is most popular, then the queen and Harry and then kate, then Charles and then meghan.

I was in Scotland (the highlands, north of Stirling but I was a tourist and no expert on geography) and overheard the famous question about what to wear under there...

The Scotsman wearing the tartan kilt replied that "would make it a skirt."

Pics of royals in kilts!

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R324, Dorothy Parker and I are at the bar; we're sending you a drink.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Sorry to be so out of the loop. I know who and what Skippy is but what is a Larry?

'I don't think we have ever seen Meghan stare at him like his CO "Archie". How curious.'

Oh fuck off, R342, stop trying to turn this into a 'he's closeted and bearding thread'. Go back to your Sam Heughan thread, you silly frau.

Best not to encourage the troll with such questions, R343. It has naught to do with this thread. Just block him and watch the thread shrink.

The hat looks photoshopped on Charles, at r340. Tee hee.

R343, a Larrie is a crazy conspiracy theorist who believes Harry Styles and Louis Tomlinson from One Direction have been dating for 8 years and thinks that Louis' gf on six years is a beard and his 3 yr old son is a child actor. They also think he was forced by management to push a doll around in a stroller.

R342 is a Larrie, as is the poster who mentions 'spazz' all the time.

Lady Louise is adorable. I love her awkwardness; I love her braces. That kid is as cute as a button.

Oh come on, he's been there, loves, and Megzilla knows. Hardly enough to bring down the monarchy. We would dance in the streets with tiaras and paste jewels on. But Megzilla has a hold. Wrong, love, the British public are more accepting than Hollyweird.

Is a blanket around the legs part of the carriage-driving costume?

It's part of the outfit, yes, R50, more like a buckled over skirt. Looks like a blanket It's a lot to do with dress, and performance.

Sorry R350

What is a Larry?

Thanks, r347. I'm an eldergay and have never paid any attention to that One Direction shit. Although I briefly got sucked into following the Havenette Follies, it was hysterical for awhile.

R326 I saw the tweets, and they very politely suggest Meghan's numbers are in the shitter.

R351, thank you.

WTF has Duchess got little Archie by he scruff of the neck?

The

He's obviously layed down. Stupid messy photoshop picture. Excuse spelling. I'm gravy and wine drunk, too,. It's very British, home cooking. Don't get this wobbly dining out. Cook dinner at home....quicker to bed

Does anyone remember this incident from a few years ago? The photo is evidently not photoshoped since it was widely reported on at the time. The officer on HM's right claimed he was totally unaware and humiliated. What happened to his career?

The most-read article on BBC News right now has the title "Meghan reveals baby Archie's feet". What a time to be alive.

Welp, she certainly has accomplished her goal then, R361.

If she truly amended the post to incorporate a poem from the comments, said comment then deleted, how telling. Much like her appropriating the film script line re: the embryonic kicking of feminism. That one she did attribute though.

A couple of alleged Royal exchanges, Probably apocryphal.

At some sort of Gala event, HM was disturbing other audience members, maybe by loudly rummaging through her purse or talking during the performance, I can't remember. Her mother The Queen Mum leaned over and hissed "Elizabeth, who do you think you are?"

Margaret and her mother The Queen Mum were having some sort of vicious row and Margaret said something to the effect of (I can't remember verbatim): "You need to remember that I am born of Royal blood and you are not!"

Unseen royal photos and du Maurier poem auctioned

I find it entirely plausible that Margaret actually said that, R363!

Love the quotes, am choosing to believe they are 100% real.

Two posters (admittedly one of whom was me) have now asked about carriage driving. Surely there are some real toffs on here to explain it to us peasants?

How is Harry still polling so high given his wife is unpopular?

Has William always topped the poll (or been doing so recently)? Or, is he growing more popular because his distaste of MM is so apparent?

I don't know what Carriage Driving is, other than the obvious - Driving of Carriages as some kind of sport. However here is the governing body's website, knock yourself out.

Another quote - at lunch, the Queen accepted the offer of another glass of wine.

The Queen Mother: “Are you sure, darling? You have to reign all afternoon!”.

R363 Reminds me of that line from Evita, when she storms to an aide:

"Who the hell does the King of England think he is? Tea in some tinpot castle of his, what kind of invitation is that?!"

[quote]How is Harry still polling so high given his wife is unpopular?

Harry used to poll much higher. He was the most popular after the Queen. I suspect next time he will be even further down the list.

Copied from the George VI is Hot thread:

[quote]Wallis and the DoW called The Queen Mum "Cookie" as a sarcastic reminder of the rumor that she was the illegitimate daughter of a cook in the Bowes-Lyon household if I remember an earlier DL BFR family thread correctly.

I remember that thread.

Archie's feet, an offering from Meaghan.

R360, nicely done, sir.

[quote] You think the press are annoyed now? Wait till she reveals the first baby pictures on some US magazine cover. Wasn't the rumor that she was going to do Vogue? I'm laying odd that's when Archie makes his first full on appearance. (Or rather the IG of the cover cause you know Sussex Royal needs to have it first) . Privacy in this case really means We want control

Why shouldn't they be able to control things about their baby? That's exactly what Will and Kate did. Kate showed off her baby when it was born. The baby wasn't seen again until his/her christening. And then they weren't seen for many, many months. And then it was only a photo on their website

How could that guy hanging brain in the picture with the Queen not be aware? Didn't he feel the draft?

Louis has been seen 4 times. His birth, his christening a picture of the family for Charles birthday and then they recently released a picture of the family (kate, william and the kids)

Did anyone think the feet were kind of big for a newborn baby?

As soon as everyone gets a good look at Archie so they can trace resemblances, that will be it as far as big reveals go. People are talking about the birth certificate now, but it will get released eventually, and since the kid doesn't have a title and is seventh down the list (and will only drop further), even if she did use a surrogate, who cares? She probably didn't and this is just more dramatic bullshit from Megs, but in the grand scheme of things this ain't the Warming Plan Plot.

If Meghan wants to keep grabbing headlines, she'd best get knocked up again ASAP, and make damn sure it's a girl this time (she'll probably need IVF anyway, at her age). Happily, by the time that happens, Charlotte will be so much older than Miss Veronica Meghansgirl that direct comparisons will be more difficult.

R375, do you see no differences between what Kate did and selling the photos to a US based magazine? Are you high? Sugars, FFS!

Feet are huge, not a newborn baby born less than a week ago at just over 7 pounds. But the baby in the press photo looked like a 10 pounder anyway. Everything with them is so weird and for no reason.

Oh yes, r378. Their are all sorts of problems with many of the released photos. I don't want to engage about all that here. I don't need the drama.

R364, I liked your link, thanks. I am a G&S aficionado, Daphne's grandfather George du Maurier was a famous caricaturist and writer who designed the costumes for the original production of their Patience. He was also the grandfather of the boys who inspired J.M. Barrie to write Peter Pan, basically a long and tragic story for another thread, and wrote the novel Trilby which inspired several classic horror films and other horror literature based on Trilby's mentor Svengali.

^ There are, not Their are, of course. Sorry. Whatever.

Here's my question: What would be the purpose in using a fake baby, either during the press conference or in the IG photos? Suppose they did use a surrogate: Wouldn't they have a live baby to show people? That doesn't make much sense.

It appears that they consistently present things so as to court controversy/discussion/attention using all sorts of tricks and devices.

Attention we all ardently provide.

I would love more Queenly quotes. "Who do you think you are, Elizabeth?" is priceless. I am choosing to take it as gospel. Any other fabulous Royal quotes as a nice interlude from the climbing Megsteria?

In terms of Young Elizabeth being put in her place, apparently once when she was a small girl her grandmother Queen Mary took her on an outing. People cheered the cute little Princess, who waved back and seemed to be greatly enjoying the attention--too much. Queen Mary took her straight home with a tart remark that enjoying attention was not the purpose of being royal.

I've been reading up on newborn feet apparently they are curled up and the skin is pealing in many cases. MM's picture of feet does not appear to be from a baby only a week old.

As far as famous Elizabeth quotes go, do folks know that her famous 21st Birthday speech, in which she pledged her lifelong service to the British people, was actually written by a 50-year-old male London journalist named Dermot Morrah? According to his grandchild:

[quote]I have always thought my grandfather’s genius in writing the speech lay in his ability to put into words what the speaker herself genuinely thought. Her declaration that her whole life would be devoted to our service rang true in 1947, and rings even truer in 2017, because she really meant it. Had those words been put into the mouths of others, they could easily have sounded false. But there was nothing remotely false about them when she said them.

R388, I was just thinking that maybe it's not even her kid's baby lol. just some random picture. However, I do believe she gave birth. I just don't think she wants the public to see what the baby really looks like.

*kid's feet

For the umpteenth time to the poster upthread who said So what if she did?: Meghan using a surrogate wouldn't have been so much of a big deal. Lying about it and faking a pregnancy whilst using a surrogate would be the problem - it would have made fools of the taxpayers contributing to the Sussex lifestyle and no one would have believed the BRF wasn't in on the deception. It would have caused as much damage to the institution as the Abdication did.

In addition, children of surrogates even if they are biologically the child of the royal in question are barred from inheriting titles. The Weymouth's challenged this as their second child was born using a surrogate in California. The peerage rules about only "heirs of the body" being able to inherit titles remain unchanged in the UK.

No way a surrogate was used. The whole birth certificate mystery is just Meghan stirring the pot because she can and she's ill-natured

They may have fuged the actual birth date for reasons only known to their disordered minds, but if Meghan faked a pregnancy and used a surrogate and it got out, she and Harry and that kid would be on a plane for New York the next morning.

Thanks to the poster upthread who mentioned Du Maurier's relationship to the grandfather of the boys who inspired J.M. Barrie's best known (and exquistely poignant) work, whose essence of tragedy and irony is never truly captured in film and television versions.

^* fudged, not fuged

R392

The face was hidden, too

Royal quotes, this one widely disputed:

During the vicious discussions over Charles and Diana's divorce:

Philip: You'd better behave, girl, or we'll take away your title.

Diana: My title is older than yours, Philip.

R394 - Oh, come now children. The babies' faces are always nearly invisible in these early photos. It was raining and chilly that day and they put a hat on - new borns outside for the first time unless it is high summer or unusually warm always have hats on. The Cambridge kids were also carried out of St. Mary's swaddled in white cashmere and one at least wore a hat. The child was two days old.

I was in Copenhange when Princess Isabella was born - the first girl born to the Danish Royal Family in a generation, so there was a great deal of TV coverage. When the royal couple left Rigshospitalet with the newborn with a knitted cap on, one of the journalists outside said, "Can you take off the hat so we can see the hair?" and Frederik, understandably, said angrily, "This is a real little baby here, not a doll!" Nice photos of Frederik and Mary and Prince Christian and the new little princess were duly published a week or so later.

And by the way, Princess Isabella had dark hair and blue eyes early in infancy, and whilst she has retained the blue eyes, her hair is now a light bronwish blonde and she looks to be growing up very pretty. Contrariwise, the heir, Prince Christian, was blonde and blue-eyed as an infant looking remarkably like his late grandfather, Prince Henrik, and now has dark hair like his mother and looks very much like her, although he, too, has retained the blue eyes.

So predictions at this stage are mostly pointless.

My sister had a giant baby last year and it's feet were much smaller than that. I think she had it early and just hid it.

Stand your ground Meghan. Do not let the ratchet British assholes break you. They are angry because you are not groveling over their stupid heritage, their stupid traditions and their equally stupid institution. You are an American! We kicked their ass in 1783. We saved their ass in 1941. Now stomp on their ass in 2019!

It's almost like you're trying to get a reaction, R398.

R398 - All whilst taking their money.

I think the next BRF gossip thread should start with a poll: Which one of Archie’s body parts will Meghan reveal next?

I really don't believe it's a surrogate which makes them the biggest assholes alive for putting a question over Archie's birth for the rest of his life. The only reason I can think of for the whole secrecy is she did give birth earlier than she said and stayed hidden because she was so incredibly fat and had to wait at least a couple of weeks to show herself. So instead of a massive whale we got a de-bloated baby whale. You could tell she was so uncomfortable with her appearance at her press call.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

He'll probably be in a flower pot for the next one.

R402 - I agree, that's about the only reasonable explanation I can think of for being so ridiculously secretive about something as ordinary as a bloody birth certificate. If Harry agreed to lie to the public to feed Meghan's vanity, he's farther gone than I originally thought, and that's the real problem, not the silly date. No one gives fuck all about whether it was 28 April or 6 May. Or else it's just more shit stirring by Meghan - I really think she's unhinged sometimes.

[quote]I thought the kid would be lighter due to Harry being a ginger.

Maybe she's putting self-tanner on him like Tanya Turner.

A hand in a bigger hand for fathers day

So the baby is fake AND looks exactly like Thomas Markle. How did they pull that off?

She’ll have to do something like this, R401:

'Feet are huge, not a newborn baby born less than a week ago at just over 7 pounds. But the baby in the press photo looked like a 10 pounder anyway. Everything with them is so weird and for no reason.'

His foot is the length of a petite woman's thumb, how the hell is that 'huge'? Try harder, Skippie.

Per Kitty Kelley's "The Royals," a tradesman inside the palace do some work encountered 1 0 year old Princess Elizabeth. He smiled at her and asked "How are YOU, little lady?" The Queen to be fixed him with a cold gaze, pointed to the floor, and replied " on your knees, boy! Bow! " He went on to say "I don't know what it was, but there was something about that little girl that scared the he'll out of me."

What surprises me - and also makes me believe the pov that Megs is attention-crazy and not wanting 'privacy' at all - is that they did an Ig post today at all. It isn't Mother's Day in the UK! That's in March. Meghan decided to do a 'reveal' post of Archie's baby feet on the -American- Mothers Day. What country does she live in and now represent lol? talk about thirsty.

She is absolutely, most definitely playing up to her American fan base. She's shown no inclination at all to show same attention to the UK citizenry. This photo today; the timing of the baby photo call last wk to correspond to the US morning shows; the inclusion of Gayle K's camera crew; the lack of British fashion in her endlessly large closet - she has little to no interest in the UK or representing the British people (her current job description and source of her income).

Her not doing her job may have impacted her place of residence and spot on balconies, R412 but until it impacts her income it is not likely to change her behavior. If anything it feeds the hard done by, real victim, poor Bean narrative. Look at all her father did for her and how she cut him dead. Doing the same to the BRF and citizenry of the UK just goes to brand building anyway. Win/win & merch/merch.

Poor kid. Narc mom and child in adult body druggy dad - it is a shit family situation and she has cut him off from his extended families on both sides before birth. Real mom of the year material, our Me-Gain.

Since we've been discussion the Queen Mum, here's a great shot of her in all her glory, wearing the Oriental Circlet tiara:

A great shot of the Queen in the Girls of GB & I, you can see the intricate detail of the piece here:

Just for fun, one of my fave pics of Camilla in full finery, in the towering Delhi Durbar with other diamonds:

If that alleged exchange between Diana and Philip is true (it has been reported but disputed, as you said, r395) she was technically correct. Her original aristocratic title of Lady Diana Spencer, as the daughter of The Earl of Spencer, dated back for hundreds of years. Philip had to surrender all his previous titles as Prince of Greece and Denmark in order in order to marry Elizabeth. He was only created Duke of Edinburgh by George VI in 1947 on his marriage and as Prince of England later in the 1950s by his wife. Diana's original title was indeed much older.

If you do not have Twitter you are missing out on the fun.

All of the drama and intrigue created deliberately by Me-Gain and SS, natch.

Hmmm, why didn’t Eug wear the York tiara her mother owns? According to the Harper’s Bazaar article linked at r414, “ It is the piece most likely to be worn by her daughter, Princess Eugenie, on her wedding day.”

The version of the exchange that I’ve read (which sounds a little more likely to me) is that he said “If you don’t behave yourself my girl we’ll take away your title” to which Diana’s response was supposedly “But you can’t Pa, I have one of my own”.

And he supposedly laughed.

There’s evidence that he continued to exchange letters with her throughout the separation and divorce and was, despite his reputation, quite conciliatory with Diana.

R420, sweet of Prince Phillip.

R418, who is SS? Anyway that Twitter feed is nuts.

That twitter feed is nuts, but hilarious really. Both in its premise and in its delicious, balls-out mockery of Sparkle.

r419 there's a question as to whether Sarah still owns her wedding tiara (the "York" tiara). It hasn't been seen in public in some time. As it was a wedding gift it was hers to keep and subsequently do what she wanted with once divorced. There was talk she might have sold it for needed funds.

Either that or Eugenie simply had a different idea of what she wanted aesthetically on her wedding day. The emerald Greville really looked fantastic on her, the pop of color was perfect.

Or its possible the York girls had a deal that Bea would be the one to wear their mother's tiara on her wedding day, being the eldest.

That is a weirdly aggressive way to push a thumb in while holding a tiny newborn

[quote]Per Kitty Kelley's "The Royals," a tradesman inside the palace do some work encountered 1 0 year old Princess Elizabeth. He smiled at her and asked "How are YOU, little lady?" The Queen to be fixed him with a cold gaze, pointed to the floor, and replied " on your knees, boy! Bow! " He went on to say "I don't know what it was, but there was something about that little girl that scared the he'll out of me."

Total rubbish.

[quote] [R375], do you see no differences between what Kate did and selling the photos to a US based magazine?

Why are you listening to some damned rumor? you fool. Let's go down the rumor mill parkway

Meghan was having the baby at St Mary's (where Diana, Kate and Ann had their children)

Meghan was going to have her baby at Frimley Park

Meghan was going to have a home birth

They did none of these things. NONE. . . . . . N-O-N-E. Stop listening to rumors and taking them as the gospel fact. They're usually wrong. You already having her selling pictures to U.S magazines and all she did was post one picture of her son. Calm your dumb ass down

After going thru the thread and catching up, it appears more posts are about how people post than about the BRF itself...there are some outlandish theories out there sure, and crazy people from Tumblr etc. But if you don't like a post simply skip it and put the poster on ignore, rather than take up bandwidth and post 5 times about how crazy someone is.

We're all fairly intelligent here and can see crazy for ourselves. No need to continually point it out...flamewars are so 1990s.

Fergie's tiara is cheap and it was purchased from a jewelry store. The Queen's tiara's are very grand and custom made

R425 - is your sarcasm detector broken?

R427 - Flamewars may be 1990s, but are they non-U?

lol r429.

Non U?

Fuck you, R226.

You post as if both the CBS interview and place at the photo call had not happened and as though US Vogue was not fawning all over MeGain all of a sudden.

Money making opportunities and brand building in the US are real and sustained goals of her and Dim. Bit different than idle speculation about hospitals.

We shall see who is right in the end.

Goes along well with Me-Gain and her whole 90s aesthetic, no? Ripped jeans, boyfriend shirts, flame wars...not sure about alleged dolls that appear to breathe tho.

Sincere question: how can Sparks & Dim "build a brand" anywhere, if they're no longer public working Royals? Because if they openly continue to 'brand-build' in the fashion they've been doing, they will be made to give up their 'working royal' assignments and make their own way....but if they aren't part of the main BRF anymore, doesn't that take away the same cachet they would need to brand themselves?

It's a bit of a dilemma isn't it?

Quite, R434. Particularly in light of the fact that the Queen is said to have put the kibosh on Sussex brand building.

How many see Sparkle and Dim together in 5 years? Where will each be living and where will Archie be?

Yes it is R434. But seems like the BRF is doing nothing to stop them.

R431 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_and_non-U_English - perhaps you can help us to determine whether flamewars are U or non-U. Interesting note at the end of that Wiki article, on something discussed previously in the thread (Garry and formerly William's habit of putting on a working class accent in interviews):

"Some of the terms and the ideas behind them were largely obsolete by the late 20th century, when, in the United Kingdom, reverse snobbery led younger members of the British upper and middle classes to adopt elements of working class speech..."

I seem to have a specific disability related to posting links. Once again:

Why the fuck would you lie about the date of birth? That is so messed up. If they indeed lied, then I believe they would lie about anything and everything for sake of "image" and "brand building".

Harry is so fucked LOL!!!

Is the baby kind?

How long before the first Nanny quits?

Let us say it is a real baby, born of someone. Then why would he be pushing his thumb into the tiny arm so aggressively? Why would the baby have no reaction or movement whatsoever, even when stroked and poked? Why would they stoke speculation that it was a breathing reborn doll (WHAT will they think of next?!)???

The mind boggles.

R435 - interesting question. Opinions seem to run the gamut from Celebitchy style "these two will have their bodies frozen in order to be revived when technology finally allows it and continue their Literal Greatest And Most Long-Lived Love Affair of All Time' to the more Skippyish (sorry, I dislike the twats throwing that word around but it seems appropriate here) 'They Were Already Broken Up Before The Wedding But She Witchcrafted Him Into It Anyway' end of things.

I tend to think they are besotted with each other, as well as sexually entranced, but not necessarily in the kind of love that will last. This intense kind of infatuation/attraction can sustain a relationship for ~5 years, I think, so I don't expect any tabloid stories of marriage troubles anytime very soon. But 2-5 years? In my opinion that's the time-span we're looking at. I don't think this marriage will go the distance and when it does begin to go wrong and, I suspect, to come to an end, I think it'll be as vicious and poisonous as the Charles-Di relationship became. Relationships that start out passionately and intensely usually end the same way, but in the 'I hate this person and the way they breathe makes me want to smash their face in' way rather than the 'I want to have this person powdered so I can dissolve that powder in water and mainline them' way.

Ultimately I think each is attracted to the other for the wrong reasons. Childhood damage reasons. I would almost be willing to put money on it ending badly.

They might depart the BRF for a large sum but what control can they have over them? I would assume that money would be doled out slowly and in response to good behavior but any curbs seem to inspire her to greater acting out. If you think of them as pre-teens, in adult bodies, their behavior makes a lot more sense. Harry lost his mother at 12 but was struggling before that. When did Doria abandon MeMe?

I do see their antics as a threat to the monarchy. Which could be good/or bad, depending on your perspective.

Agree it will end badly, R442, and suspect there will be a lot of badly along the way to that point.

#ArchieTheDoll

I don't think they're lying about the date of birth for Occam's Razor related reasons. What's more likely? That they're lying about the DOB, knowing full well that birth certificate will show them to be lying in a few weeks time at most and cause a media shitstorm of epic proportions (being caught lying about that, and having BP to be seen to be complicit would be an actual, damaging scandal for the RF)? Or that they're not lying, the kid was extra bundled up and has big feet? I mean, some newborns have big feet.

#RoyalBabyFraud

Here's another photo of Archie's feet. Doesn't look like a newborn to me.

Can we discuss clothing? Kate has long been a disappointment on that front, because part of me wants her all dressed up all the time. I understand it's not her role and I actually think she's walking the line very well these days. No flash at all. Boring, but exactly what's necessary.

But what about Charles? Fucker is always dressed to the goddamn nines. Why is he allowed to be snazzed up every time we see him and Kate is stuck with that interminable line of coat-dresses? Is it because people just don't view men's clothing as extravagant in the way they do women's?

Well, he is going to be King?

Prince of Wales with his decades of building up his own stacks v. married-in lady

wow i really do wonder why

Yes Marys, we need a standalone royal accessories thread. The Harkle drama is tawdry, it's a downer. Bring on the jaw breaking baubles.

I'd love to know what the members of the National Theatre think of having Sparkle as the new Royal Patron.

Charles gets away with it because he holds his own purse strings.

I very much suspected the Sussexes of pulling this stunt, especially when they announced how they were going to control info during birth. The thing is, I don't think withholding release of the birth certificate is anything more than a ploy for attention. It's their clumsy attempt at giving their position an air of mystery and they know it gets the tongues awaggin'. I also do not think MEghan and Harry have any notion of leaving the BRF and will continue to use their means to create themselves as royal celebrities of the lip service philanthropy variety.

R454, do you think their trashing of the Cambridges, including the kids, will be tolerated? If not, how will it be addressed?

Don't leave us, R451! The baubles (and the old pics and bits of gossip) are what keeps this thread bearable in the lulls between MM's frau-y instagram posts and "is he kind?" interviews.

On possible next instagram posts: I guess we need to see what gets the most likes amongst mumsy types, and that she'll do. Maybe a close up of MM's face gazing down at him beautifically. Or something from behind again.

All this privacy business has certainly been manna for the the conspiracy-minded. I think it was just meant as spin to counterbalance her attention-seeking, a kind of virtue-signalling. And of course a way for them to bypass traditional media and do the baby PR themselves.

[quote]On possible next instagram posts: I guess we need to see what gets the most likes amongst mumsy types, and that she'll do. Maybe a close up of MM's face gazing down at him beautifically

She can copy Kate at Louis's christening and stare at the baby while having a ridiculous rictus grin on her face

LOL. Their privacy mania isn't spin or PR. It's Occam's Razor, bigtime.

Come on, Bean; we're waiting for the genderfuck tiara shot. Get into that vault!

They insult our intelligence by stating that they will not 'release' the birth certificate. In the UK, all births must be registered (English births within 42 days). It is illegal to make a false statement on any aspect such as date, time and place of birth. Any medical staff involved are not named. All birth entries in the register are available for public search and subsequent purchase of a birth certificate. No exceptions for royalty. They are attempting a delaying tactic.

R459, lol, I came close to liking Kate in those christening pictures--she looked so thoroughly in love with her new baby.

Completely agree R454 - and thank you R453 for a non dick-ish answer to my question.

'They are attempting a delaying tactic.'

Go away, Skippie. Even Torontopaper has stopped tweeting about this.

Not 'Skippie', kind hearted at r465. Did your contribution to this thread need to be so nasty?

Archie, the commanding officer, is totally hot. Love the straight hair, large nose, tanned skin, fit body combo.

R466, only conspiracy theorists under the influence of Skippy/Toronto/Drip Drop think 'delaying tactics are necessary' ( so they can exchange the 'doll' for a surrogate child). So not mean, just accurate.

Psychotic Skippy:

Body language,..I found the Fake doll IG feet here is the link. 6th pic to left wwwDOTetsyDOTcom/sg-en/listing/632258452/beautiful-custom-realborn-darren Compare both pics.

It PS the big toes to make them longer. The bulb on the end is abnormal. IT chopped off the top foot & PS it to straight leg. On the bottom foot, pinky sticks out, group of 3 toes, then big toe. Bottom feet (called friction ridges) have same V on middle toe. On top foot, pinky wraps under, PS w/ black line to hide. FYI.

Becoming a laughing stock, now.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The baby's name is STILL listed under the Queen's on the Court Circular. What is going on?

Maybe they have to wait till monday till the IT people are back to work ? Who knows what is going on ?

It's Monday, here R473. I shouldn't let it worry me so much, probably, haha.

Upthread the York tiara was mentioned, strangely enough the Express published this two days ago. Of course it doesn't say where the tiara is, but it's a nice little read about Eugenie's choice for her wedding day.

She wears Pampas Grass as finely as she wears the Delhi Durbar!

I love this. And there's that amazing choker (?) again. That seems to be a constant of hers.

That's clever, R476. But I like that hat, I think. It looks fabulous on her.

I love it too. R477. I've never seen a hat that looks like a meadow. Camilla is finding her voice.

It does R478, she wears some incredible hats and headwear. I love her use of textures and fabrics.

Whilst looking through pictures of her incredible hats, this did make me LOL.

Yes, the textures and fabrics. And she's incorporating beautiful, interesting textures and fabrics into her clothes as well. Some of her pieces with the amazing embroidery? All the incredible silks and velvets. It's all so sumptuous and tactile and pleasing to the eye.

A more severe look, but incredibly daring.

The Lover's Knot Brooch, referred to as The True Lover's Knot by Queen Mary. Mary acquired the brooch from Garrard in the early 1930s.

The brooch features brilliant cut diamonds set in silver and gold tied in a "lover's knot". The scalloped ribbon has joints on each of the "tails" to allow the ends to move.

I love Eugenie in this blue dress

It's quite flattering on her, r485. My only quibble is the sleeves; they need to be just a little bit longer. Big arms don't look good in cap sleeves. But the color is perfect, and it fits!

I love the Valentino shoes she wore with it, too R485

I think it would have looked better with a silver clutch, but hey ho, it's a great look on her.

Can I just say how much I hate modern women's hats? Specifically, fascinators, bandeaux, and those horrible tip-tilted things that look like flying saucers. Kate recognises how weird and unflattering they are and hers usually have some height or added dimension. The queen's hats are frequently boring. Camilla for the win, but she doesn't exactly do her clothes and hats justice.

Oh, but she does do them justice, R489. I'm inspired by rather horsey-looking women who have their own unique style. They don't allow their lack of beauty to inhibit them; they don't necessarily play it safe. They let their tits hang down to their knees inside their shantung silk caftans. Think of Diana Vreeland and women like her - chic, chic, chic.

Wow!

I found Fergie's fascinator:

And MM's:

Disagree, R490. Carole Middleton, a pleasant-looking but not beautiful woman, was far and away the most stylish at the Cambridge wedding, because of her slim figure, natural looking hair colour, and lovely outfit which fit and suited her perfectly. Some of Camilla's clothes are breathtaking, but her aged appearance, damaged skin, bad teeth, 1980s ultra-bleached hair, excess weight and utter disregard for correct foundation garments overrides them.

I like Camilla, by the way.

I think Fergie sold off that tiara, too. It’s okay - she wasn’t wearing it and her daughters can borrow their Gran’s.

We shall have to agree to disagree, then. Agreed?

An unusually small hat for Camilla, here.

I agree, [r389] It’s strange to me that Camilla doesn’t take more pains with her appearance. But I guess what makes her not care is also kinda why I like her.

The Prince of Wales joined Combined Cavalry Comrades Association Parade at Hyde Park, London yesterday. I can't say he's looking too good , right now.

....

....

He looks like a doddering old fool. Not to say that's what he IS, just what he looks like.

Charles, the Prince of Fugs.

Let's hope for a pic of the baby's eyes soon.

I thought you wrote the Prince of Fags.

He looks older than his own mother, how in the fuck

Betty has absolutely gorgeous skin, R505, which her son obviously...does not.

Camilla's ruby and diamond necklace The impressive piece was a gift from Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, along with matching earrings and a bracelet.

I like Camilla for not giving a fuck what you think of her low hangers . They are natural breasts and not some plastic surgery breasts . Fake breast are funny to me !

R479, isn’t that from her wedding day?

Sorry, I meant R476.

Yes it was R510

The Bloody Mary fascinator for Fergie made me giggle, above! Maybe she'd had one too many leaving hospital after giving birth to Bea, she went flying! In this article it's very refreshing to see a whole different baby reveal, anyway, take a look at the video ( arse-over-tit fall , included). Fergie is such a character, and always has been. Like an affable, bumbling , gurning old pal.

I've always read that Harry is close to his cousins especially Eugenie, and that he visits them all in Verbier, where he stays up all night drinking with Fergie. I wonder if Fergie and Meghan get on or if she has alienated him from the Yorks as well.

Kate dresses well

She would never allow her handbag to party with Fergie and the girls. They're entirely the wrong type, as far as she's concerned. And I bet she keeps her handbag on a very short strap.

R411 - And if you believe that story, you're on drugs. Elizabeth was a mild, well-mannered child who didn't become Heir until she was ten years old and was strictly brought up to have beautiful manners. Even Wallis Simpson mentioned in her one visit to the Yorks at Royal Lodge how beautiful the children's manners were. Her comment, as I remember it, went something like, "They were both so blonde, so well-scribbed, and so beautifully mannered, that they might have stepped straight from the pages of a fairy book," her tone nearly acidic in having to admit it. People forget that both girls were blonde as children even though they grew up as brunettes.

The man was taking the piss out of Kelley or whoever her source was.

Yes she does, R514. I like about 99% of her wardrobe, and I also like the way she wears clothes. She's beautiful, IMO.

Yes, R517.

R506 - The Queen, her mother, her sister, and Queen Mary all had legendarilly beautiful complexions. Diana also had an exceptionaly complexion but it just doesn't show much on the boys. Anne's skin and the York girls skins are very clean and peachy but they also don't show quite as exceptional as the former ladies . You know what Bette Midler said when she met the Queen, I think at one of the Royal Variety Comman performances, "Man, that lady is white." The late Dame Margot Fonteyn put it more elegantly in her autobiography, describing as she went up to be honoured that, "I was struck dumb up by the beauty and delicacy of the Queen's complexion."

R517 - I agree, Kate has nailed her particular look well, and mostly gets it right (including the lavender Wickstead dress), sticking to simple clean lines and good tailoring. Once in a while she comes out in something awful - I do seem to remember a truly vile Erdem gown she wore on a foreign tour, Sweden perhaps? Pregnant at the time, but it was ghastly, very fussy with gold colouring. She looked stunning in the white gown at the BAFTAS a few months ago.

Everything is meticulously branded/crafted. I’m not a plant person so I didn’t catch it but comments online were referring to the wonderful homage to Diana, the plant behind the feet is Forget Me Not. Apparently Diana’s favorite.

I also saw a slide of the white trench engagement and the white belt birth announcement- that’s probably why she chose the unflattering outfit and was willing to chance white two days after birth.

Future Goop is her goal. 100%. Give them a year or two to solidify the brand and she’ll be hocking tummy tea and vagina eggs after birth #2.

Yeah, once in a while she misses the mark, but those times are rare. I'm not a fan of the prairie schoolmarm look she seems to have an affinity for: the high, ruffly collars, funky prints, and too-long dresses, but even then she still looks freaking great.

Meghan looks awful most of the time in her clothes .So she wants to be like Paltrow . You can say what you want and i’m not a fan of Goop but she dresses nicely something Meghan has yet to learn .

If you Google These Photos of Queen Elisabeth at the royal Windsor Horse Show Are an Absolute Delight Town & Country mMagazine 9 Mei 2018 . You will see she has the same clothes on as in that family picture with Archie and PH and Doria . Have only an IPad so no links sorry !

I think they photoshopped prince Philip and her majesty in that pic .or they photoshopped PH and Meghan and Archie and Doria in that pic . Either way that are the same clothes as in 2018 !

R213 The skin colour could be due to jaundice.

R524 You can post a link in the box below the one you comment in. That can be done with an iPad.

R524, I did as you suggested, and I observed that:

1. The Queen’s hair is shorter in the 2018 photos.

2. Her cardigan seems to be the same, but the skirts are a different pattern.

I must admit, I've seen the pictures you mean R525. And a picture from 2016 (?) of the Duke of Edinburgh, same clothes, same position. But I won't say any more as there is another thread for that .

R528 You’re absolutely correct about the skirt. It’s a different colour and pattern. R525 I’ve copied the link for you.

What is the other thread, R529? Link?

R529 Where is the other thread?

Here you go, the link to the mysterious " Other Thread" .

It's "The baby has been revealed" thread, actually, but there is a lot of speculation going on there that you might enjoy :-)

The skirt of the queen has been made black and white but the rest of the outfit is the same .

I'll bring you the article from beyond the paywall in the next few posts, a little bit of an interesting read for both Wallis and Judy fans.

Judy Garland and Wallis Simpson were frequent dining partners. Now, a note written by the Duchess of Windsor to the Hollywood icon expressing regret that the star could not join her and her husband for dinner has come to light.

Sitting in The Colony, the New York restaurant that became the favourite haunt of high society, and possibly enlivened by a few glasses of champagne, the duchess adapted Over the Rainbow, the song Garland sang in The Wizard of Oz. She wrote: “Somewhere up in the Plaza/ Way up high/ There’s a gal that we miss,/ Oh me, oh my, oh my/ etc . . .” The note, on the headed notepaper of The Colony, was signed by her, the Duke of Windsor and their dining companions that night. The message reached Garland as it was later referred to in her official biography, published 20 years later. Her response is unknown.

The note was written in 1955, some 19 years after Edward abdicated the throne to marry the American divorcée. It must have held sentimental value for Garland, as she is said to have kept the note in a memories book for years. It was acquired 15 years ago by a British collector who is now selling it at auction for £600.

Valentina Borghi, a books and manuscripts specialist at Chiswick Auctions of west London, said: “This is a funny note that Wallis Simpson wrote when Judy Garland was unable to join her and Edward for dinner one evening in 1955. Wallis wrote a variation of the famous song from The Wizard of Oz and sent it to Judy Garland after getting those at the table to sign it. These people included her husband and other high-ranking members of New York society.

“Wallis Simpson was a very witty woman and possibly after a glass or two of champagne, thought it was a good idea to write this. But it appears she ran out of steam quite quickly because she only wrote the first verse of the song.”

The other signatories are Bill Paley, chief executive of CBS, Babe Paley, his wife, Bob Young, president of the Penn Central Railroad, and the composer Charlie Cushing.

The note is being sold in London on May 30.

That other thread should be renamed Mental Illness Has Been Revealed. There’s a line between snarky gossip and flat earth believers type of cray.

So disturbing but funny! At least the jokers on the plane obsessed Frogmore threads KNOW they are jokers.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Why is that cowbag so obsessed with Diana? Is that how she keeps her claws on her Handbag?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I notice no comments allowed on the DM polo article.

Or the amount decreased

I wonder what Duchess Yoko agreed to then? I see the four month paternity leave is no more, if her pockets can get lined instead.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

It's amazing how they're literally letting an American divorcee do whatever the fuck she wants.

I've mentioned it here before, but even my grandmother is enraged about it. And she has been a long time royalist. And a long time tax payer.

R548 - I"t's amazing how they're literally letting an American divorcee do whatever the fuck she wants."

They're probably caught between a rock and a hard place: at this point, Harry is still completely under her spell, so if they give her the shove, they lose Harry, as well.

Another theory: The BRF already know that Harry and Meghan want to leave and have asked for a couple of years to put their own plans in place, have a couple of kids that are acknowledged by the family, agree on settlements, and the BRF are cooperating with the PR so they can't be accused of pushing the Sussexes before they jump.

If that IS her crazed account on Twitter, she is promising all sorts of fireworks for this month.

I would add to my stated "theory" in my post above that I would absolutely love it if this were the case, just to see the fraus on CB lose their shit at losing their WoC Duchess.

If Harry has chosen to so publicly insult the people that gave him everything, then fuck him. Let him get used up in his wonderful LA

Royals and aristocrats shouldn't this fucking pathetic

Black Mermaid - what say YOU?

Prince Andrew is on the road again - this time it's South Korea.

Sources confirm? Gee, did Nutmeg contact her ass kisser Scobie again to break the news?

Some other interracial couples in various royal families.

R554 - Beautiful set of Tarot cards . . .

Last night I saw a preview for Gayle's special. It's airing on Friday night. The preview showed two people being interviewed: her make-up artist/stylist (who posted the avocado toast message that subliminally promoted a Soho House product) and a woman, I think the Mulroney woman.

I want me some Black Mermaid action!

It's a week until the Chelsea Flower Show and the unveiling of Kate's "Back To Nature" garden.

R559 - Both are probably on the list for godparents. The christening will be a farce, with Meghan and Harry nailing their celebrity identities to the mast.

I wonder if Meghan will release a photo of the Cambridges meeting Archie as well as the Prince of Wales? Ok, maybe just the Prince of Wales to stick her middle finger to Alpha Will.

Will and Kate seemed comfortable with children even before they had their own.

A casual photo of Diana.

Our Monday laugh.

Lord Louis Mountbatten and his wife a had quite an - ahem - interesting marriage.

It is interesting, the way the Harkles seem to give Diana’s family preference. Was Harry always so close to them?

Alpha Will seems to have climbed up the popularity polls.

I like this photo of the Queen.

Did someone say we needed more kilts in this thread?

Charles in a kilt.

After that photo came out, my mother bought my father the same light blue sweater. Pringle of Scotland. He still has it.

Here is the link to Part 55. Please post on this thread until it reaches 600. Thanks.

I remember when that photo op occurred. So much promise then. We the public were all swirling in the romance... and then reality eventually kicked in.

Diana keeping an eye on William and Harry.

I think both Diana and Anne look quite elegant in their outfits and hats at Ascot.

Photos of the Queen's grandmother Queen Mary and her various titles over the years. Swipe for some serious bling.

I love the photo at r582. Diana had a knack of making clothing look good. It’s a boxy checked suit, but she looks chic, and showing just a bit of her fabulous legs, almost sexy.

Whoops, ^^ r572

A fan gets a reply signed by Camilla.

Photos of fhe Queen's grandfather George through the years.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Can you imagine if all those Windsor cousins still married, and Beatrice had married Freddy Windsor? The children would basically be Hypno-Toads.

R583, we don’t know what Archie’s eyes look like, yet...

One will get you 20 they'll be small and close-set. Probably hazel.

So poster upthread has mentioned the Gayle interview preview. One more to add to the tally of Duchess Yoko's greedy purse?

R583 - Freddie gets his green eyes from his mother, Princess Michael of Kent. Of course, Marie-Christine's eyes aren't as freaky as Freddie's.

I agree about the color, R588. But the shape of Freddy's are closer to the classic Hanoverian bulge. Not a great combination, really.

I like this pearl choker worn by Princess Michael of Kent.

For being minor royals, the Kent family have some serious gems.

That interview with Gayle King will have a serious pricetag on it . I don’t think she would do it for free . I,can almost think how this will going on . Humble bragging about her humanitarian causes and how Harry and she will shake up the monarchy . How close to his heart the Invictus games are for Harry and how he will be a hands on father . Blablablabla ...... Hopefully we see something from the inside of Frogcottage . I’m sure our American friends here will fill us in with was said in that interview .

I love big old pearl chokers with a gobsmacking stone in the middle, like Camilla's or this famous one of Diana's.

re Camilla's gorgeous massive ruby and diamond necklace at r597, a gift from the Saudis: is this considered a 'personal' gift in the sense that she owns it outright, and can pass it down to her own daughter Laura after her death? Or does it become part of the Royal Jewel collection, that will go to future Kings/Queens of the UK?

Lol at the hat at r481. That was at Haz & Megs wedding, it was a large-ass hat. Kate was seated next to her in an equally saucer-like yellow hat. I think they agreed to wear largish hats that day so they could smirk at each other re the proceedings and not be seen on camera doing so.

Another day, another tiara.

Link to Camilla's necklace above in r594 should be r497.

aaargh! trying again - necklace at r507.

R592 - Gayle King's special on Harry and Meghan's wedding was cringe worthy so I have very low expectations for the new one.

WoW that is a beautiful choker that Diana is wearing . It goes really well with her amazing blue eyes .

The Kents used to own the fabulous Girandole earrings, but they were sold after Princess Marina's death to pay death duties.

My favorite photo of Princess Michael of Kent. She was - and still is - quite a striking woman. I can't wait to see what she'll wear at her daughter Lady Gabriella's wedding this weekend.