BassChick
Micro Member
Reputation: 23
Offline
United States
Posts: 103
|
So Charlie van Straubenzee, Izzy May (Soho House publicist), Tiggy Legge Bourke, Markus Anderson and the two US college friends, then?
I think that is a good prediction. Links to the past with Charlie, Tiggy and the college friends along with two more recent ones. I'd also wonder about a lesser known Spencer cousin... the Aunts were there ... one of their children They were laying on the Spencer connection so thickly I wouldn't be surprised if it was both aunts, Kitty Spencer, Viscount Spencer, Abigail Spencer, Frank Spencer, Spencer Matthews, the current chief Executive of Marks and Spencer and all three members of the John Spencer Blues Explosion.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
lisadug
|
How much more bad news about her character is out there? And how much more has the Palace managed to neutralise?
As much as they can drag up or make up, it’s never ending and impossible to tell truth from fiction, she goes from saint to sinner and back again on an hourly basis. It’s all kind of tedious now.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Crayon
Most Exalted Member
Reputation: 4201
Offline
Posts: 15042
"Near catastrophic"
|
How much more bad news about her character is out there? And how much more has the Palace managed to neutralise?
As much as they can drag up or make up, it’s never ending and impossible to tell truth from fiction, she goes from saint to sinner and back again on an hourly basis. It’s all kind of tedious now. It is quite exhausting. And, a bit off topic, maybe royal reporters could write one less Meg piece a day and maybe look a bit closer at Andy, who is currently far more newsworthy, if you ask me.
|
|
|
Logged
|
Cool your jets, everyone
|
|
|
|
|
Margaret
|
Deleted. Totally o/t.
|
|
« Last Edit: July 13, 2019, 04:23:00 AM by Margaret »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
PruNordstrom
|
Maria, do you think it's time to close this topic? Thre really is nothing more to be said about it. IMHO.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hester
Board Helper
Warned
|
Maria, do you think it's time to close this topic? Thre really is nothing more to be said about it. IMHO.
Just don't follow it if you don't want further posts here. Threads lapse after a while anyway.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
cordtx
Warned
|
Maybe will find out who the “mystery”godparents were at soma point
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eliza B
|
How much more bad news about her character is out there? And how much more has the Palace managed to neutralise?
As much as they can drag up or make up, it’s never ending and impossible to tell truth from fiction, she goes from saint to sinner and back again on an hourly basis. It’s all kind of tedious now. Sara learned from her run against Trump, flooding the market with ridiculous stories buries the truth. There's so much out there, no one knows what's what. As for God parents, well, I doubt anyone cares. They should not have released a press statement to drum up interest. But I don't think anyone cares at this point and wants a break from the Sussex daily drama.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh_Caroline
|
The upset was less about not knowing who the godparents are (because really no one cares) and much, much more about withholding harmless information yet again. With the Cambridge kids there were a few articles in the week after with short bios but that was it.
All the Stans are like "the don't want the doctors/godparents hounded" and RR are like "that's never happened and the one person you use to backup you claim (poor Jacintha) wasn't hounded but was part of a prank by an Aussie radio show...keep us Brits out of it". Heck if you rewatch the videos from the arrivals and departures for George & Louis's christenings the press are silent (other than the clicking of cameras)...so yeah no hounding. Hard to tell over the crowd at Charlotte's.
The RR don't like being blamed for things they had no part in, really don't like when American outlets are favored over British ones, and really, really don't like how everything the Sussexes are pulling* is keeping British RR from doing their jobs.
*Archie's Birth, Archie's Christening, kicking reporters out of events, keeping RRs physically further away at events, etc.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Margaret
|
I still cant get over "Archie Harrison". Just dreadful.
I feel the same. My dislike of the name has not lessened with time and I doubt it will.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gate Keeper
Baby Member
Reputation: 9
Offline
Brazil
Posts: 15
|
Looks as though there's an "arrangement" with Chris Allerton Photography - or the company wouldn't be named on the announcement. Have there been ANY previous royal occasion announcements that included a promo for a photography business like that?
Has Harry forgotten how to behave?
He has forgotten many things, hole in his shoe, the unmatched socks with the shoes...is going down hill
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
jolene
|
As others have said, the name Archie is tragic. He'll legally change it once he's 18. When we had our daughter, we wanted a classic name. We didn't want her to later hate us when she's in school or sending her resume.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
SvenskaSarah
|
The upset was less about not knowing who the godparents are (because really no one cares) and much, much more about withholding harmless information yet again. With the Cambridge kids there were a few articles in the week after with short bios but that was it.
All the Stans are like "the don't want the doctors/godparents hounded" and RR are like "that's never happened and the one person you use to backup you claim (poor Jacintha) wasn't hounded but was part of a prank by an Aussie radio show...keep us Brits out of it". Heck if you rewatch the videos from the arrivals and departures for George & Louis's christenings the press are silent (other than the clicking of cameras)...so yeah no hounding. Hard to tell over the crowd at Charlotte's.
The RR don't like being blamed for things they had no part in, really don't like when American outlets are favored over British ones, and really, really don't like how everything the Sussexes are pulling* is keeping British RR from doing their jobs.
*Archie's Birth, Archie's Christening, kicking reporters out of events, keeping RRs physically further away at events, etc.
I think a lot of the animosity too has caused by how public they were. If they wanted a completely private lifestyle, why the huge wedding that cost the taxpayers millions, during which homeless people were moved on to make Windsor and the streets "look nice"? Why did Harry keep his title, and gain a dukedom? Why carry out engagements on behalf of the Royal family if you want a private lifestyle? They are no better than the average benefit cheats we have in Britain, who want all the money and niceties without having to work/pay for it. As Marie Antoinette learned to her horror, you cannot have your cake and eat it, because revolution will happen!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eliza B
|
The upset was less about not knowing who the godparents are (because really no one cares) and much, much more about withholding harmless information yet again. With the Cambridge kids there were a few articles in the week after with short bios but that was it.
All the Stans are like "the don't want the doctors/godparents hounded" and RR are like "that's never happened and the one person you use to backup you claim (poor Jacintha) wasn't hounded but was part of a prank by an Aussie radio show...keep us Brits out of it". Heck if you rewatch the videos from the arrivals and departures for George & Louis's christenings the press are silent (other than the clicking of cameras)...so yeah no hounding. Hard to tell over the crowd at Charlotte's.
The RR don't like being blamed for things they had no part in, really don't like when American outlets are favored over British ones, and really, really don't like how everything the Sussexes are pulling* is keeping British RR from doing their jobs.
*Archie's Birth, Archie's Christening, kicking reporters out of events, keeping RRs physically further away at events, etc.
I think a lot of the animosity too has caused by how public they were. If they wanted a completely private lifestyle, why the huge wedding that cost the taxpayers millions, during which homeless people were moved on to make Windsor and the streets "look nice"? Why did Harry keep his title, and gain a dukedom? Why carry out engagements on behalf of the Royal family if you want a private lifestyle? They are no better than the average benefit cheats we have in Britain, who want all the money and niceties without having to work/pay for it. As Marie Antoinette learned to her horror, you cannot have your cake and eat it, because revolution will happen! Exactly! One can argue they're public, but he's private, but they released a press statement saying the date, church, and priest but NO godparents for privacy. Why not just you know have a private affair and don't release a statement.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|