I’m guessing Kate thought they were too plain...or that they should have been a color other than white...?
DL Royal Sleuths: What do you suppose was the problem with the bridesmaid dresses?
|by Anonymous||reply 180||Last Friday at 6:46 AM|
Klan Granny thread FF
Kate made mummy cry...
|by Anonymous||reply 1||04/04/2021|
No, that is traditional and Charlotte wore white dresses in 3 other weddings the same year. The problem was, as always, MeMe.
Reportedly, Meghan had been unkind to Charlotte and had encouraged Ivy Mulrohney to bully her. Ivy was 7, I believe Charlotte was 2, almost 3. Meghan reportedly did not want to include Charoltte or George in the wedding at all. She reportedly kept chanign her mind about everything, which is why even her dress looked rushed and poorly fitted.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||04/04/2021|
What were the other weddings, r2? Are there pictures online?
|by Anonymous||reply 3||04/04/2021|
I thought the problem was that MM did not want the little girls to wear tights? But the tights are to prevent the children from getting blisters on their feet. So.....
|by Anonymous||reply 4||04/04/2021|
Yes, there are, both Charlotte and George were in 4 weddings that year.
There may have been conflict over the children being bare legged and not wearing tights or even socks as was done in the other 3 weddings. The shoes were leather and reportedly caused blisters.
After the scene, Charlotte was reportedly pulled from the fittings and thus her dress looked big on her a the wedding.
It is noteable that Meghan did not want to include her soon to be niece and nephew at all. They were similar in age to the other children included.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||04/04/2021|
I still think that Kate probably asked if Charlotte could wear white tights because that is long-established protocol for bridesmaids, and was rebuked by tights-free-at-all-times Meghan for daring to mention it.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||04/04/2021|
She just absolutely seethed with uncontrollable jealousy at Kate and the children from the very beginning. It is pathological.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||04/04/2021|
We are all out of fucks, OP!!!
Instead of stinking up our forum with your countless Meghan and Harry-bashing threads, why don't you racist, raggedy-mouthed Brits do something constructive like - oh, I don't know - maybe book your first appointment with a dentist? Mouths like Al's Junk Yard ... all tore up!
|by Anonymous||reply 8||04/04/2021|
Oh look, it's Meghan's publicist! Hi, Meghan's incompetent publicist!
|by Anonymous||reply 9||04/04/2021|
All of those little girls should have worn plain white ankle socks. Tights would have looked stupid, but their bare legs were even worse.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||04/04/2021|
Tights looked fine on all the bridesmaids at all the other weddings, r10.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||04/04/2021|
R9- I have it on ignore. Makes the threads so much nicer! 😁
|by Anonymous||reply 12||04/04/2021|
I don’t follow royal protocol. Why are all her bridesmaids children? Are they all royal kids not from her side of the family? Think it’s weird.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||04/04/2021|
That wedding photo looked as if it belonged in an Addams Family movie. Creepy.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||04/04/2021|
In Britain, 'bridesmaids' are what Americans refer to as 'flowergirls'. Usually UK weddings have an adult maid of honor, an adult best man, and all the bridesmaids and pages are children. No long line of hideously dressed "Best friends of the bride". That's an Americanism.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||04/04/2021|
'Usually UK weddings have an adult maid of honor, an adult best man, and all the bridesmaids and pages are children.'
More proof that you are not British. The bridesmaids are usually the bride's unmarried friends and family members who she's close to. Small children are flower girls.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||04/04/2021|
You're weird, R13..
|by Anonymous||reply 17||04/04/2021|
This was at Pippa's wedding. Charlotte was 2 here.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||04/04/2021|
Tights also come in handy if the children have “accidents”
|by Anonymous||reply 19||04/04/2021|
Traditional UK weddings almost NEVER have grown "bridesmaids". They're always children.
The working class might do this and the Gypsies certainly do it. The Queen did it because she has formal Ladies in Waiting (they were not "bridesmaids") but I have never seen it at any wedding I've been to in the UK.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||04/04/2021|
That wedding day turned out to have temps in the 80s at midday so I'm pretty sure Charlotte was pleased to be bare legged. It was the start of a historic heat wave summer in the UK.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||04/04/2021|
Thanks R15, I learned something today.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||04/04/2021|
What were the previous 4 weddings?
|by Anonymous||reply 23||Last Monday at 12:20 AM|
Who are the other kids?
|by Anonymous||reply 24||Last Monday at 12:34 AM|
Meghan told Charlotte she was too fat to be in her wedding party. Kate called Meghan a bitch and made her cry. Typical wedding drama. This goes back to why do people even get married when everything is so fraught with stupidity.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||Last Monday at 12:37 AM|
Charlotte wasn't even fat as a baby. I find it very hard to believe anyone ever considered this child "fat".
Meanwhile, the rumblings continue about the latest Oprah interview lie to be disproven. The media are not going to let this one go. This was a huge lie. Well, all of their lies were huge lies in that they were about essential elements of their story, but this one will run and run because it shows that they started their plans to leave at least a year before they said, at around six months after they married and took those titles in the name of being 'full working royals'.
The timing of that first meeting in January 2020 heavily implies they were thinking of leaving even as early as at the time of the wedding itself.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||Last Monday at 1:00 AM|
People are openly talking on social media about these threads being daily mail bot and troll threads. Not me I don't do social media. Apparently people are questioning whether using bots and trolls to harass someone is illegal. Twitter and insta sleuths are now involved. Ex hackers, black twitter and retired legal beagles all now on the hunt. I blame covid. People are bored. So far they have analysed the source links, linguistics and compared comments to other social media sites and are logging all info such as replicated comments and source material.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||Last Monday at 1:10 AM|
Meghan here, since one of you crazy cunts is onto the fact I post here I want you to know that my own secret Royal army has tracked you down. We know who you are and will now take legal action against you. Reason? Your pussy stinks
Don't believe me? Here's a picture of you captured by one of my drones
You are so busted... Kate made me cry and now I'm going to make you cry
|by Anonymous||reply 28||Last Monday at 1:11 AM|
The wedding didn't looks as fab as this
|by Anonymous||reply 29||Last Monday at 1:23 AM|
Probably Anne. Didn't she question the Harry & Meghan's baby's skin colour?
|by Anonymous||reply 30||Last Monday at 1:28 AM|
@r29, All the Golden Girls married Leslie Nielsen? Cool
|by Anonymous||reply 31||Last Monday at 1:30 AM|
The royal family had a pool on how dark Archie would be. It was in poor taste.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||Last Monday at 1:47 AM|
The problem is sMEG is a certifiable cunt, that's all.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||Last Monday at 1:52 AM|
Based on multiple accounts, Megs was a major Bridezilla, constantly changing her mind and demanding swift changes - and having a fit when the stodgy, slow moving BRF apparatus didn't adjust. So there was some tiff over the dresses, shoes, whatever, Kate gets tired of the whole thing and tries to tell Markle "How We Do Things Around Here" and Megs melts down, she just wants everything to be perfect for Harry, etc. etc. Kate tries to smooth things over the next day, but Megs isn't having it. Meanwhile, all the palace personnel who've been kicked around by Markle for months advance the story that Megs was the mean girl, not Kate. Because they're primarily Team Kate, but they're also sick of Markle's demands too.
I'm guessing this story isn't so much about Kate vs. Megs as the beginning of Megs vs. The People Who Run Shit at the Palace.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||Last Monday at 2:00 AM|
Mooghan's ridiculously long veil still makes me seeth. What a preposterous cow.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||Last Monday at 4:10 AM|
They were cheaply made. From a distance they look fine, but upon closer inspection, the fabric was cheap and unlined and the hems were badly sewn. If you’re Tony and Maria from Staten Island, who cares? But a royal wedding should have better quality dressmaking. Even for the little attention-stealing brats. *ahem*
Also, they were not wearing tights and should have been. That woman’s penchant for bare legs is bizarre.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||Last Monday at 4:19 AM|
The children also got painful blisters, even socks had been urged and vetoed. Sociopath who enjoys the abuse of power and the pain of others.
She did not even want to include George or Charlotte, she had NO intention of being a postive member of the family.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||Last Monday at 5:47 AM|
R7 - You are so full of shit.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||Last Monday at 5:50 AM|
[quote]She did not even want to include George or Charlotte, she had NO intention of being a postive member of the family.
Possibly, though my annoying sister-in-law tried to veto my young niece in a wedding (The Queen Mother, my mom, stepped in on that one and reminded her who was paying for this Royal Wedding), primarily because she knew everyone would be clucking over the cute flower girl instead of fawning over the bride. Some women are just like that.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||Last Monday at 5:58 AM|
Charlotte was a bridesmaid at at least 4 (perhaps 5) weddings during a relatively short period of time.
Pippa's wedding, the Sussex wedding, wedding of Sophie Carter (Charlotte's godmother and a friend of Kate), and Eugenie's wedding.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||Last Monday at 7:50 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 41||Last Monday at 7:55 AM|
^ Ha Ha! Kate wore white to Meghan's wedding which is probably the lowest, tackiest thing a woman can do to another woman. She truly is a mean girl
|by Anonymous||reply 42||Last Monday at 7:55 AM|
Kate in her "mean girl" white at Meghan's wedding
|by Anonymous||reply 43||Last Monday at 8:02 AM|
So MeAgain was the only one who did not have bridesmaids wear tights or socks? The only one who did not care about painful blisters in little girls? Hmmm.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||Last Monday at 8:08 AM|
More mean Kate...
|by Anonymous||reply 45||Last Monday at 8:11 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 46||Last Monday at 8:21 AM|
Kate didn't wear white, she wore pale yellow
|by Anonymous||reply 47||Last Monday at 8:47 AM|
What ugly shoes the flower girls had.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||Last Monday at 8:48 AM|
No socks with leather shoes and ill fitting dress.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||Last Monday at 8:53 AM|
The Mulroney children sure are breathtaking.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||Last Monday at 8:55 AM|
R50 Is it sarcastic?
|by Anonymous||reply 51||Last Monday at 9:00 AM|
[quote] What ugly shoes the flower girls had.
At the time of the wedding it was reported that Meghan's gift to her bridesmaids was..you got it...the shoes they wore.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||Last Monday at 9:17 AM|
Kate's pussy must stink too...
|by Anonymous||reply 53||Last Monday at 9:18 AM|
So she thinks she is...
|by Anonymous||reply 54||Last Monday at 9:20 AM|
They look fine. Jesus fucking christ on a cracker. No one wears tights anymore. Bare legs are In but again, who fucking cares?
|by Anonymous||reply 55||Last Monday at 9:22 AM|
This wedding was yeeeears ago. And you’re all here talking about blisters and tights? Yeesh you gals are obsessed with this woman! Embarrassing.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||Last Monday at 9:26 AM|
When Kate reads anything about Meghan...
|by Anonymous||reply 57||Last Monday at 9:27 AM|
You old bitches have no idea about 3 year old, do you?
What did it cost to Meghan to let those little girls have white socks and be comfortable? Nothing, she just didn't give a fuck.
That's fucking ridiculous but Meghan caused the issue, she could just say yeah whatever put socks on them no one will look at their feet.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||Last Monday at 9:38 AM|
R44 - No tights or socks for Zara's bridesmaids either.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||Last Monday at 9:39 AM|
R59 Not sure they are leather shoes.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||Last Monday at 9:43 AM|
Different type of shoe, R59.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||Last Monday at 9:44 AM|
Was Andrew there?
Maybe Kate felt the young were safer around him with some sort of barrier, like tights (?)
|by Anonymous||reply 62||Last Monday at 9:45 AM|
Please tell me they at least had some no-show half socks on. I mean, just a bare foot in a leather shoe?! That just isn’t done.
It’s not like it was sandals in July or something.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||Last Monday at 9:46 AM|
An entire thread filled with ladies obsessing over whether little girls wore tights for an hour or so back in 2018.
The mind reels.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||Last Monday at 9:47 AM|
Someone post pictures from Di’s wedding. We need old school rules to compare with this new no socks nonsense.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||Last Monday at 9:49 AM|
The story s not the socks, it's the battle of power around the socks.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||Last Monday at 9:49 AM|
R30 I have it on good authority that the person who questioned the baby's skin color was Camilla.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||Last Monday at 9:50 AM|
Charlotte whispered in Meghan’s ear, “My Mommy thinks you’re a cunt.” Clever girl. She WILL reign.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||Last Monday at 9:51 AM|
R30 You need to tell more cause Camilla doesn't seem to give a fuck.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||Last Monday at 9:52 AM|
EXCUSE ME R 64!
We are trying to decide whether or not Meghan was in fact being a diva. That is how we’ll know who to ally with. Mkay?
|by Anonymous||reply 70||Last Monday at 9:53 AM|
Here's what she thinks of you...
|by Anonymous||reply 71||Last Monday at 9:56 AM|
There is no story. You've invented a tale where a woman purposely, maliciously made a whole bunch of little girls, including her own relatives, get physically hurt just because she's an evil psychotic bitch. Then you and your friends started yet another thread where someone pretended to be a neutral party, simply curious as to what has happened, all so you guys can post your obsessions repeatedly, over and over again.
It's been five years. You guys started making up stories from the very beginning and you're still doing it. This is insanity.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||Last Monday at 9:57 AM|
R72- Yet here you are, still obsessing over it. Hmmm.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||Last Monday at 10:22 AM|
We see you, luv and your family
|by Anonymous||reply 74||Last Monday at 7:50 PM|
The flower girls story came out a couple of weeks ago when a Givenchy seamstress leaked what had actually happened at the fitting, infuriated with the lies Meghan told Oprah.
Go to bed, Obie Kenobie.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||Last Monday at 7:59 PM|
^ Love ya...
|by Anonymous||reply 76||Last Monday at 8:04 PM|
'So far they have analysed the source links, linguistics and compared comments to other social media sites and are logging all info such as replicated comments and source material.'
Meghan sent the person who invented the phrase Klan Granny and got it to catch on a cheque for $10k.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||Last Monday at 8:10 PM|
^ It was $15,000 you stupid cunt... Oops! Guess I said something I shouldn't
|by Anonymous||reply 78||Last Monday at 8:12 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 79||Last Monday at 8:13 PM|
British gals are so pretty...
|by Anonymous||reply 80||Last Monday at 8:16 PM|
[quote] This wedding was yeeeears ago. And you’re all here talking about blisters and tights? Yeesh you gals are obsessed with this woman! Embarrassing.
You [bold]do[/bold] realize, Toots, that OP is asking about the flower girls simply because that's what Meghan herself OBSESSED about this at GREAT length in the interview with Oprah just a frw weeks ago? SHE is the one obsessed about the flower girl outfits years after the event--not OP nor anyone else here.
But of course you knew that already. You're just pretending you've forgotten it.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||Last Monday at 8:23 PM|
R80, that's a picture of Matt Lucas in drag, you moron.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||Last Monday at 8:24 PM|
'Toots, that OP is asking about the flower girls simply because that's what Meghan herself OBSESSED about this at GREAT length in the interview with Oprah just a frw weeks ago?'
She didn't even mention them, just that she had an argument with Kate and Kate made her cry.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||Last Monday at 8:25 PM|
Love your hair and make up...
|by Anonymous||reply 84||Last Monday at 8:27 PM|
OP isn't truly asking anything, r81, her post is a plant, just like most of these Meghan Markle posts are. Someone pretends to be an innocent, neutral observer who just has, like, a simple question, you guys.
The real purpose of these threads is to act as a springboard for the psychoses of a handful of obsessives.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||Last Monday at 8:28 PM|
Here's my guess - it had more to do with Kate than Charlotte
If you recall Kate wore the same dress that she wore for Charlotte's christening. This sort of move always garnered good press for Kate because the tabs felt she was being frugal by daring to wear the same thing twice in public. So, I think at the fitting Meghan casually asked Kate what she was planning to wear and Kate told her that she was repeating an outfit. This angered Meghan, because now she was going to look like she was spending a fortune on a french haute couture gown (by a British designer) and Kate was going to show her up by trying to look as if she cared about tax payer money. Thus, the fight began...
|by Anonymous||reply 86||Last Monday at 8:34 PM|
The problem? Charlotte's early menses.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||Last Monday at 8:37 PM|
Why is Markle the central person in this wedding picture? It's as if everyone else is a prop, including the husband.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||Last Monday at 8:43 PM|
Like many others here, I think it had to do with the legware. Meghan wanted the kids to go bare legged because that's the trend now in the USA (for Adults). Kate probably thought it was trashy not to have the girls in leg ware.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||Last Monday at 8:44 PM|
Stay classy, Brits
|by Anonymous||reply 90||Last Monday at 8:53 PM|
R89-- Agree, and it was trashy, just like MM.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||Last Monday at 8:56 PM|
Details have leaked, R96, had nothing to do with your scenario.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||Last Monday at 8:56 PM|
Chav boys are so sexy...
|by Anonymous||reply 93||Last Monday at 9:00 PM|
I believe these are the dresses Meghan initially wanted the little girls to wear.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||Last Monday at 9:12 PM|
^ I believe this is the dress you wore to your wedding
|by Anonymous||reply 95||Last Monday at 9:17 PM|
You Chav girls are HOT!
|by Anonymous||reply 96||Last Monday at 9:25 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 97||Last Monday at 9:28 PM|
I think the original story still stands. Charlotte was acting up at the fitting; perhaps she was tired. MM screamed, 'That kid is going to ruin my wedding,' and yelled at the nanny to get her under control. Kate told her that was unacceptable; it was her staff and she would speak to them. The story goes that Kate was in tears, but it's possible MM was.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||Last Monday at 9:29 PM|
Oh, who the fuck CARES?????
|by Anonymous||reply 99||Last Monday at 9:36 PM|
^ We are the Klan Grannies of DL and we care...
|by Anonymous||reply 100||Last Monday at 10:03 PM|
How the world sees the BRF...
|by Anonymous||reply 101||Last Monday at 10:39 PM|
We care because it was the beginning of the Meghan Vs The Royal Family War.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||Last Monday at 10:42 PM|
The boys are dressed in outfits kids in the capitol of The Hunger Games would wear. Black wool in the summer does not sound fun.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||Last Monday at 11:18 PM|
The boys' outfits are gorgeous but with mid-80s temps, it would have been horrid for them. Yet the girls were forced to be bare-legged, in those ugly leather shoes.
MM's charming gift to her little bridesmaids - the shoes!
|by Anonymous||reply 104||Last Monday at 11:27 PM|
[quote] It's been five years.
Harry and Meghan have already got married in 2016? So not just three days, but TWO YEARS prior to their public wedding? Wow!
|by Anonymous||reply 105||Last Tuesday at 3:43 AM|
^ This post was for the sad dumbass R72.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||Last Tuesday at 3:43 AM|
I think both Kate AND Meghan are real pieces of work.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||Last Tuesday at 4:28 AM|
There are few if any accounts of diva behaviour from Kate. There aren't any mean girl stories about her and the Cambs have kept staff for years. I read that at the beginning she had terrible panic attacks before public speaking so clearly she hasn't sought the limelight. She is supposed to be the most hands-on mother in the history of the BRF. She has had a hard time of it, with all the Waity Katie jibes and ongoing rejection from the aristos. She hasn't put a foot wrong in her BRF role. Her husband probably cheats on her, because he can. And yet she has never complained, just gets on with things.
Kate deserves credit .
|by Anonymous||reply 108||Last Tuesday at 5:19 AM|
Kate's a doormat
|by Anonymous||reply 109||Last Tuesday at 5:23 AM|
I really don't think he cheats on her. I think that is BS that jealous MM started because Wills scarfed her ugly ass.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||Last Tuesday at 5:26 AM|
I agree to R110 - and even if he did cheat on Kate, he'd be getting himself some hot bird and not that fugly Rose coutness of Whatever.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||Last Tuesday at 5:29 AM|
I hope one day when Queen Charlotte & despotic King Oskar rule over all of Europe, Charlotte will tell us of the Affair of the Bridesmaid Dress (explaining, of course, why she had the Harkles killed)
|by Anonymous||reply 112||Last Tuesday at 5:32 AM|
M: "Is it true they call you Princess Doormat?"
|by Anonymous||reply 113||Last Tuesday at 5:32 AM|
K: Hey Meghan, is it true you're a cheap hooker?
|by Anonymous||reply 114||Last Tuesday at 5:35 AM|
Not as cheap as you, Waity Katy
|by Anonymous||reply 115||Last Tuesday at 5:37 AM|
I hope she whores better than she acts. Yeesh! 😲
|by Anonymous||reply 116||Last Tuesday at 5:39 AM|
Hi, cupcake, looking good...
|by Anonymous||reply 117||Last Tuesday at 5:43 AM|
Kate was afraid that she’d be upstaged by her bridesmaids. They were all prettier than her.
|by Anonymous||reply 118||Last Tuesday at 5:45 AM|
Kate is a doormat and cheating is a male Windsor family tradition. Harry cheated constantly on Chelsy, and later on Cressida. Rose was an aristo party girl who married a gay man over 20 years older than her who mainly lives in Paris with his lover. No need to repeat stories about Philip and Charles.
Both Kate and Megan are good examples of 'be careful what you wish for'.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||Last Tuesday at 5:47 AM|
The only reason I gave some credence to the “Will cheated” story was that it came out right around the time of Louis’s christening. In the photos of that day outside the church, every single one has Kate gazing at Louis (granted, he’s adorable) and it seems like she’s avoiding looking at Will. Even when they were walking as a family, eyes on Louis.
Maybe those were just the photos that ended up being published but it seemed to me that she was giving him the cold shoulder. Happy to be proven wrong and at any rate, they seemed to have gotten past it.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||Last Tuesday at 6:29 AM|
What is with the inane Pinterest posts? That poster is either a lost frau or someone with an inverted penis.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||Last Tuesday at 6:47 AM|
Typical Sunshine Suchs minion tactic to disrupt the thread, R121. Blocking is best.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||Last Tuesday at 6:48 AM|
Oh wow, well, I guess some random nameless Givenchy seamstress who, I'm sure, received a nice little bonus in her bank account after she shared that "story" (Givenchy WANT the BRF as continued clients, ain't gonna mess that gig up). I'm not on ANY team, I think Meghan is an opportunist but I also think the BRF is full of racists and bigots.
|by Anonymous||reply 123||Last Tuesday at 7:08 AM|
R123 there were half a dozen seamstresses present to witness our D list actress playing the diva.
|by Anonymous||reply 124||Last Tuesday at 7:14 AM|
There were stories on Quora about Meghan's mother's family. The claims were her mother screwed her own brother out of his inheritance. Apparently, their father had money because of a house he owned which had greatly increased in value. Then the brother got mysteriously murdered. They also claimed Meghan lived with her father for years, not with her mother and that Meghan's mother had been feuding with her own family for years. Must be genetic all those family feuds Meghan starts.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||Last Tuesday at 7:30 AM|
R125 - There are more liars, trolls, paid posters and people that do not know what they are talking about on Quora than on the DL.
Scary, is it not?
|by Anonymous||reply 126||Last Tuesday at 10:44 AM|
But the Meghanhaters are more obsessive.
|by Anonymous||reply 127||Last Tuesday at 11:28 AM|
On Datalounge I mean.
|by Anonymous||reply 128||Last Tuesday at 11:28 AM|
They're not, bimbo @ R127 & R128.
But you know that.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||Last Tuesday at 11:37 AM|
R125 You’ve mixed up the story. Doria’s father owned the house she currently lives in. Alvin Ragland died under weird circumstances; while walking his dog, he tripped on the leash and hit his head on the pavement. Allegedly, Doria had had her father sign the house over to her right before he died. Doria has two maternal half-siblings, but one younger paternal half brothe, Joffrey. That half-brother is alive and well, as is his mother, Alvin’s widow. It was strange that the widow and son didn’t get a share in the house. None of these family members were invited to the wedding, which all three siblings and stepmother publicly confirmed their sadness and disappointment about.
Below is the younger brother and stepmother of Doria:
|by Anonymous||reply 130||Last Tuesday at 11:54 AM|
Doria seems very shady but at least knows how to keep a low profile.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||Last Tuesday at 12:09 PM|
Like mother, like daughter. I wonder if a lot of the besotted MegStans on twitter aren't purely motivated by the fact she marrried a white guy. It seems like the majority of black male celebs marry blondes. Hell, even George Floyd's gf was white. Must be infuriating.
|by Anonymous||reply 132||Last Tuesday at 2:03 PM|
So are you saying Queen Elizabeth was a doormat? Prince Philip was no prince. Men are dogs. If women don't like it they should become lesbians.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||Last Tuesday at 2:23 PM|
Nothing suss there, R130. Yikes. Doria's current biz is quite shady too, she does not have the proper license to run it on her own, wonder who else is involved. It offers health care to wealthy elderly I read, cash only. Doria redefines shady.
|by Anonymous||reply 134||Last Tuesday at 2:37 PM|
The markle haters are insane and obsessive. Hatred for someone who is relatively obscure and unimportant is bizarre. Like high school mean girls, they are purely spiteful and jealous.
|by Anonymous||reply 135||Last Tuesday at 2:41 PM|
R134 Is Doria the black Rosamond Pike in I Care a Lot?? Hope Doria meets up with her Dianne Wiest.
|by Anonymous||reply 136||Last Tuesday at 3:01 PM|
r136 That was the very first thing I thought of when I read r134's post too.
|by Anonymous||reply 137||Last Tuesday at 10:24 PM|
This obsession with Doria is weird.
If there was something shady about Doria, Papa Markle or Sammy would have told us long ago.
|by Anonymous||reply 138||Last Tuesday at 10:38 PM|
I kind of like that Doria is shady and knows how to be silent and keep a low profile. She was in and out of the UK very quickly. In for the photo ops and then back to LA. Meghan is pure trash. At least Doria is naturally an attractive woman and wore the royal dress code for the photo opps better than Meghan did.
|by Anonymous||reply 139||Last Tuesday at 11:21 PM|
You have to admire Doria's self-control. No doubt she has some dodgy things in her past, and it must have been an ordeal being scrutinised, waiting for the other shoe to drop. But now that MM is being vilified, expect some painful revelations.
|by Anonymous||reply 140||Last Tuesday at 11:29 PM|
I'm not saying Meghan is like Diana but this reminds me of how the press had all these negative things to say about Diana and all these trash behind the scenes stories emerging, displaying the BRF as fucking SAINTS who have been done wrong and betrayed by Dirty, Demented Diana. Fuck you BRF sycophants!
|by Anonymous||reply 141||Last Wednesday at 5:41 AM|
[quote] I'm not saying Meghan is like Diana but [...]
Anything after a "but" is known to be drivel.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||Last Wednesday at 5:48 AM|
By the end of her life, Diana was acting so crazy that she kind of confirmed with Charles had been saying about her all along. Likewise, if the Harkles keep complaining about the BRF now that they're out of the fold and the others go on about their business, it will confirm that *they* were the problem, and not the other way around.
|by Anonymous||reply 143||Last Wednesday at 6:47 AM|
R141 it has nothing to do with the Royal family and everything to do with the tabloids' Tall Poppy Syndrome: they build some celeb up to better tear them down afterwards. The Brit tabloids acted even worse with Kate and tormenting her lasted for years. The same with Fergie (who is actually the royal spouse who most resembles Meghan) and Sophie, Edward's wife.
Meghan thought she'd get fawning coverage. Never happens. I think this is because she was unknown before Harry and hadn't been put throught the tabloid ringer like an A lister would have.
|by Anonymous||reply 144||Last Wednesday at 7:14 AM|
Kate doesn’t seem so innocent.
|by Anonymous||reply 145||Last Wednesday at 10:44 AM|
R43 Kate's outfit was pale yellow not white.
|by Anonymous||reply 146||Last Wednesday at 10:50 AM|
Doria does shady correctly. Her daughter craves attention too much. It must be exasperating.
|by Anonymous||reply 147||Last Wednesday at 1:58 PM|
Markle was NOT "put through tbe tabloid wringer" during her 17 months of "service," not even close to what Camilla and Catherine experienced. Contrary to Sparkles' never ending whining that BP didn't "protect" her, it was confirmed just today by Dan Wootten that BP repeatedly requested the tabs not cover certain experiences and generally bid them to go lightly on her.
In addition BP was covering up her consistent staff abuse and the bitch STILL did nothing but complain about them. Future business partners of the Harkles, you were warned.
|by Anonymous||reply 148||Last Wednesday at 2:15 PM|
All the 'acting' jobs Markle ever got were thanks to her ex-husband's connections. She's lazy and a pain in the ass. She'll do nothing now. Harry's dumb and lazy too so these two are headed nowhere.
|by Anonymous||reply 149||Last Wednesday at 2:24 PM|
Remember when Meghan let it be known a couple of years ago that she would only consider offers from projects with A List directors? I'm sure she was swamped with offers.
|by Anonymous||reply 150||Last Wednesday at 2:41 PM|
I'm ready to trash the social climbing sociopathic narcissistic Meghan as much as anybody but the abuse of staff is a joke. Andrew is notorious for treating staff like garbage and they never went after him. I'm sure books could be written about his behavior. Maybe after the Queen is dead.
|by Anonymous||reply 151||Last Wednesday at 2:51 PM|
Get back to us, r151, when Andrew loses 12 employees within two years.
That's 1 every 2 months.
Even Scott Rudin keeps employees longer than that.
|by Anonymous||reply 152||Last Wednesday at 2:55 PM|
What do we suppose she’s actually doing to the employees?
|by Anonymous||reply 153||Last Wednesday at 9:42 PM|
[QUOTE] Typical Sunshine Suchs minion tactic to disrupt the thread, [R121]. Blocking is best.
Fuck off, PR fixated Welp Troll.
|by Anonymous||reply 154||Last Wednesday at 9:53 PM|
[quote] Even Scott Rudin keeps employees longer than that.
Funny you mentioned that. It looks like Rubin is about to be held accountable for his shit over the years. The New York Times allegedly was forced to kill a story about him a year or two ago about his behavior as a producer on Broadway. But now this from The Hollywood Reporter yesterday:
|by Anonymous||reply 155||Last Wednesday at 9:54 PM|
[QUOTE] Get back to us, [R151], when Andrew loses 12 employees within two years.
Shame you think it wise to defend a rapist who fucked sex slaves.
|by Anonymous||reply 156||Last Wednesday at 9:58 PM|
For the last time, Andrew was never accused of being a rapist, and the legal-aged whores were not enslaved.
|by Anonymous||reply 157||Last Wednesday at 10:12 PM|
R157 actually he was accused of being a rapist by the victim and she also claims she was trafficked for sex with him. And prostitution for anyone under the age of 18 in the UK is illegal sorry! Age of consent as 16 does not apply. Andrew is a scumbag.
|by Anonymous||reply 158||Last Wednesday at 11:03 PM|
If this was Virginia Roberts, she did not say that she was raped by Andrew. As for trafficking, it depends what you mean. She was not held captive, her passport taken from her.
|by Anonymous||reply 159||Last Wednesday at 11:10 PM|
R159 lol you hate Meghan so much you’re gonna take Epstein & co’s side wtf is wrong with you.
“ Virginia Roberts, who has waived anonymity in her bid to support prosecution against the billionaire financier and convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, claims she was made to have sex with Prince Andrew three times when she was aged 17.”
|by Anonymous||reply 160||Last Wednesday at 11:13 PM|
The age of sexual consent in the UK is 16, and in NY, where Virginia Roberts was employed, it is 17. So she was not underaged in her encounters with Prince Andrew. Furthermore, she was a sex worker, not a sex slave. Like any other employee, she was required to do as her employer instructed, in this case, have sex with PA. At no time did she say she was coerced or brutalised.
I am no fan of Prince Andrew or even the BRF, but it is obvious that the only goal of these greedy whores is a chunk of Jeffrey Epstein's large estate.
|by Anonymous||reply 161||Last Wednesday at 11:47 PM|
R161 sex workers cannot be under the age of 18 in the Uk, the 16 year is for non sex work sex. She said that she was ‘made’ to have sex with him, that’s non consensual sex, or, rape.
|by Anonymous||reply 162||Last Thursday at 12:08 AM|
But kAtE's sKiRRRTsss!!!!
Always the same with you Megstans when you want to derail a thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 163||Last Thursday at 1:22 AM|
Reportedly throwing hot tea at them, R153.
|by Anonymous||reply 164||Last Thursday at 4:13 AM|
R161 - only a pedophile would defend Andrew's perversions and crimes, so I guess you are a pedophile.
|by Anonymous||reply 165||Last Thursday at 4:54 AM|
Doria may (or may not) be dodgy.
But - just for a moment imagine if we were in some scifi movie in which Meghan and her mother traded personalities, and it was a reserved, quietly strong Doria personality who had actually walked down that aisle and who then took on that title along with all those serious diplomatic missions, instead of The Greedy Tiara Grasper.
The entirety of the UK would have admired her to the point of mildly worshipping the very ground upon which she walked, and she would've gone down in the history books as one of the most popular members of the BRF ever to have lived.
What a difference a generation makes.
|by Anonymous||reply 166||Last Thursday at 4:57 AM|
R152 you STUPID, racist queen. Did it ever occur to you that the staff taking abuse from the royals had it in their minds that this is ok because they're born royals? Maybe they were thinking "who does this half breed outsider commoner black b i t c h think she is to order ME around?" I don't think Meghan is a saint but perhaps she was parroting what the other royals were doing in terms of giving directives to staff, etc.
|by Anonymous||reply 167||Last Thursday at 5:08 AM|
Oh, unclench, you tedious uptight frau, R165. Andrew paid a willing 17 year old hooker to fuck him, which she reported he did in a normal ordinary fashion.
|by Anonymous||reply 168||Last Thursday at 5:11 AM|
R167 crying RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYSIZM!!! again.
... zzz ...
Btw, calling someone a "queen" on a gay board isn't the smartest idea one can have ...
|by Anonymous||reply 169||Last Thursday at 5:11 AM|
R165, you forgot to cry RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYSIZM!!!1!11
|by Anonymous||reply 170||Last Thursday at 5:13 AM|
No one gives a flipping flying damn about her endless false cries of RACISM any longer. She overplayed that excuse and now it only pisses people off when she does it. Hehe. Game over, cunts.
|by Anonymous||reply 171||Last Thursday at 5:24 AM|
Her moronic fanbase still believes in her and all her lies, but apart from these loons literally ANY black and/or biracial person must have realised by now that they've been had.
|by Anonymous||reply 172||Last Thursday at 5:31 AM|
I think her " fans" are her and a Russian bot farm.
|by Anonymous||reply 173||Last Thursday at 5:33 AM|
[quote]who does this half breed outsider commoner black b i t c h think she is to order ME around?
Nobody thinks that way. You’d be a bad script writer.
|by Anonymous||reply 174||Last Thursday at 5:36 AM|
I hate to be unwoke, but most of Epstein's victims were wannabe hookers to begin with.
|by Anonymous||reply 175||Last Thursday at 7:23 AM|
*stepping around the puddle left by the what-about-Andrew troll*
Just as there are those who still support Mango Mussolini, there are those who think Meghan and Harry are justified. For some reason they identify with the butthurt and entitlement. We can’t do anything about it.
I’d love to know more about that “housekeeper” they hired, who used to work for the Beckhams. She doesn’t look like a pushover and she has an interesting background. Rebecca Mostow.
|by Anonymous||reply 176||Last Thursday at 1:48 PM|
That's their housekeeper? Yikes. Well, I'm sure Meghan will hire a lookalike as the nanny.
|by Anonymous||reply 177||Last Thursday at 3:49 PM|
[QUOTE] Andrew paid a willing 17 year old hooker to fuck him, which she reported he did in a normal ordinary fashion.
Sad that you are a pedophile AND a Klan Granny! What a grim combination.
|by Anonymous||reply 178||Last Friday at 1:55 AM|
Will you fuck off already, R178?
|by Anonymous||reply 179||Last Friday at 1:59 AM|
[quote]Maybe they were thinking "who does this half breed outsider commoner black b i t c h think she is to order ME around?"
|by Anonymous||reply 180||Last Friday at 6:46 AM|