Wow. She's erm 'fun'? Right about things thoughNot sure if this youtuber is tipsy! But she's right
I do think that the child looks like Harry did at around the same age. But the child is rather big for his age. That's not too unusual but I cant see a heavily pregnant women being able to bear the weight of that child in the way she is holding him
Absolutely agree I do think it’s photoshoppedI do think that the child looks like Harry did at around the same age. But the child is rather big for his age. That's not too unusual but I cant see a heavily pregnant women being able to bear the weight of that child in the way she is holding him
I was talking about another forum, sorry might have been too oblique.I'm curious where you are from although I understand you might not want to say.
How can it be right in any country for someone to get away with lying based on the fact that they are 'of colour' and therefore cannot be questioned? That's outrageous.
I think that Sophie and Edward had IVF for their son, after the trauma of Louise‘s pregnancy.It might be an issue in some Commonwealth countries if it became public? (the more religious ones)
All that truffle scouring he’s been doing / snorting coke/ same plastic surgeon as Daniella WestbrookApologies if this has been asked before, but.... WTF is going on with the truffle hound’s left nostril?
Didn't somebody say that Pippa Middleton named her new baby daughter Grace ??Anyone seeing on Twatter the rumours that Him & Her have trademarked Gracewell recently?
Grace Diana worth an auld punt at Ladbrokes?
Like the Hollywood bike that married into principality of Monaco.... Princess Grace of Montecito
Absolute notions of the lass!
Yes but IVF is not quite the same as surrogacy.I think that Sophie and Edward had IVF for their son, after the trauma of Louise‘s pregnancy.
I think the CoE is fine with IVF. Surrogacy is another issue.I think that Sophie and Edward had IVF for their son, after the trauma of Louise‘s pregnancy.
I think HMTQ and PP were cleverly advised by the men in grey suits not to look as if they are complicit with the birth arrangements. They were said to have had another engagement the day of Christening. That must have peed he off too!It’s also possible they knew, possibly said no, and the Harkles went ahead and did it anyway. That might explain why HMTQ didn’t attend the christening.
She’s meant to be a feminist and as a feminist myself IVF fine, surrogacy not so much. Renting other women’s uteri, commoditising the female body, is not a cool look for a feminist. She wouldn’t want to have to justify that. I think she definitely looked as though she’d been pregnant after no 1 anyway.I think ‘in this day and age’ everyone would be “hmm, so?” We pretty much all know someone who has used IVF / surrogacy to fulfil their dream of family. It’s not a shocker /shame-thing anymore
Why were they ever given the Princess title? It doesn't really make sense to me. Prince William and Harry yes. Sons of a future monarch. That's why Williams children have the title but not Harry's. But why were Andrews children given it?He's got to do something about Harry's children's titles, ie., scrap the rule that they will be Prince/Princess when he becomes King.
And because he announced to the world that they no longer wish to be Royals, Harry should be removed from the line of succession and be stripped of his Prince/HRH/Duke status.
As son of Charles he should just be a Right Honourable or Lord. Nothing higher. Or no title at all because he effectively resigned his position in the Firm. If you hand in your resignation at a company you dont retain your job title.
And while he's reforming everything, I wonder if Charles will fully retire Andrew and demote Beatrice and Eugenie from Princess status?
I don't think they should ever have been given Princess titles.
And Andrew continued to associate with Epstein after his crimes were known, so he should be retired.
Now would be a good time to deal with all of this in one fell swoop.
I would support those decisions.
Maybe more a sign that the Harkles haven't pumped out their daily 5 PR pieces? I agree, it's as if a tap has been turned off. Enjoy it while it lasts..This is the only story on the idiots that I can see in today’s Mail Online. There are usually at least 5 every day. It’s almost like the Mail are loosing interest. All the ones they had over the weekend, and again there weren’t that many, were all really quite critical as well. I do hope the tide is turning!
The only European monarchy that has a tradition of abdication is the Netherlands and possibly Luxembourg. Spain and Belgium had recent abdication because...reasons. Queen Margrethe is 81 and shows no sign of abdicating, not Carl Gustav or Harald even though the latter's health has been on the decline recentlyPrince Charles is already 72. When he takes over, he's likely to follow the main European Royal families by choosing to abdicate in his 70s. That's an important act of modernisation of itself. His reign will be short but it will give the Cambridges more time as a family. It's so sensible that they are showing Charles and William united in planning the future.
(Just leave Harry out of it)
Because Andrew stamped his tiny little non-sweaty foot!Why were they ever given the Princess title? It doesn't really make sense to me. Prince William and Harry yes. Sons of a future monarch. That's why Williams children have the title but not Harry's. But why were Andrews children given it?
Which grey, washed out, shitty t-shirt will the ginger arsehole wear today?! Will HFEW wear stilts to walk down the sweeping staircase with the newborn dolly?!Can you imagine their excruciatingly boring reality show?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?