Harry & Meghan #445 Their conning has us yawning 🥱

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Order Thread by Most Liked Posts

Cinnamon.girl

LadyMuck said:
Bookworm. A comprehensive overview of the harkles kids

Click to expand...
@TheMiceInTheShed

Thanks @LadyMuck
Video on the Flatpacks
BookWorm says the truth as she sees it, not 100% correct. Yesterday Paula M invited BookWorm to a live stream but she wasn't able to make it which she regrets. Each blogger seems to have a piece of the puzzle, and they should pool their information to get to the truth - Piers Morgan, Paula M, Lady C.

BookWorm believes Ffark was a surrogate with Stoat and Ho DNA, but that Lili was a designer baby and adopted.
She went through the moonbump details, but impossible to prove in a court of law without proof. The legal implications however are huge, and not only for the Line of Succession.

There were signs early on from TRF that something was wrong, though HM and PC refused to acknowledge the truth and it was left to the Cambridges to drop hints.

There was no clarity about Ffark's birth date, and Harald's description of the birth details was ludicrous. Nothing added up, the Portland, Ob-gyn, Midwife, doctors, no bodyguards or royals, no press, no action. Where was Snakebite? Supposedly there but nobody saw her.

Five years on, still no information. The question is, Why? What about the birth has to be kept secret?

BookWorm discussed subsequent Ffark photos. The one with the baby feet was generic, the Father's Day photo also generic according to KP - but likely Rex, Stacy Solomon's son born around the same time. Why copy and paste other people's babies?

On the BP photo of HM, PP, Snakebite and the Sussexes with Fffark,(shawl) the people in the photo had pixel density differences. The end result was copied, pasted or photoshopped, and was not in its original form.

A contact of Bookworm's said that she saw Ffark at 5 days old but that he looked very big for 5 days. The Ho said Ffark was a big baby (he wasn't ) . The contact said she also saw Ffark on zoom. The contact also confirmed that Ffark's Christening did not happen when or how we were told. The contact then deleted her profile.
 
Reactions: 45

Chita



Maybe we should send the gallery some of our memes and cartoons from in here.
 
Reactions: 46

PurvyPanda

I didn’t hear that one about the cab drivers. God this man is a fucking bore! Can you imagine living with him. Everyday, he’ll coming home on his First Class train ticket, having encountered another bloody racist. Tut!

Maybe a games developer can create a Nissan Haribo computer game, where he has to walk the streets of Britain, dodging all the racist Taxi drivers, florists, commuters, farmers, and pensioners.

It could be called ‘Nissan Haribo’s Racist Rambles around Britain’.

 
Reactions: 38

TheMiceInTheShed

Thank you.

I have been waiting excitedly for this since I saw the Bookworm thingy get posted by @LadyMuck
 
Reactions: 23

wibble

It's nice to see Diana's ghost will be helping at the proposed Invictus centre in Abuja...

 
Reactions: 33

Thalia



Edited to add game title:

 
Last edited:
Reactions: 28

Cinnamon.girl

Chita said:
Maybe we should send the gallery some of our memes and cartoons from in here.
Click to expand...
I wonder if this is a coincidence from the other day, already posted. Different gallery but both photos of RF members.

Daily Mail
"EXCLUSIVE
"Retouching of royal photos is 'very important', curator of new Buckingham Palace exhibition says after Kate's Mother's Day picture controversy which saw agencies 'kill' the edited image
Alessandro Nasini is curator of Royal Portraits: A Century of Photography
Mother's Day photo caused controversy after it emerged Kate edited it ."

Is the message: "If Catherine edited her photos it's OK for Harriman to do the same"?
Harriman has just hit back at editing and photoshopping claims, though he's totally incompetent and photoshopping is the least of his problems.
The Stoat photo has made the first hurdle into the building. It's on the premises, and we're soothed by being told it's gathering dust in the queue downstairs. Downplayed.
It will soon be on the wall.
In the Harriman photo the only reason she's standing slightly behind him for the first time in 5 years is that if she was parallel to him in a sideways photo, all you'd be able to see of the Stoat would be his cock nose, mad staring eyes and domed doomed forehead. Not a good look.
 
Reactions: 36

TheMiceInTheShed

Before I got caught up in the drama of these threads, I remember seeing stuff on YouTube which speculated that Sprog No1 was H's sperm and possibly M's shrivelled up, dehydrated egg (or possibly surrogate's egg - but deffo H's little swimmers), so was of the Royal bloodline, but wouldn't have been in the line of succession because not "born of the body" (also illegitimate). Sprog No2 was allegedly definitely nowt to do with M, may or may not have been H's, but was again arranged by surrogate. It was speculated that there had been twins but one had been lost.

Speculation also was that Sprog No1 was not neurotypical, and Sprog No2 looked nothing like either H or M, and that these were among the reasons that no photographs were forthcoming (another reason being that charming as they might be (all infants are), they weren't as photogenic as the Walses' children, and M wasn't prepared to present them to the public gaze).

I could believe the last bit.
 
Reactions: 49

Cinnamon.girl

LadyMuck said:
Good point
Click to expand...
When Lady C says the Royals are "planning" on winning the long term game, it doesn't necessarily mean they will win it. They have no plans and are treading water.
One person who didn't manage to "wait out the Harkles" unscathed is Catherine.
Who are these clever long-term royal planners and what game are they planning on winning? Where are they in this circus?

Thank you O wise Lady C for pointing out that the great unwashed "need to understand that to an extent, the king's and government's hands are tied". How convenient, and what rubbish. Their hands aren't tied, and it is all of their choosing as anyone with half an eye can see. They are covering all bases and all eventualities by blasting us with their gas. What a bunch of knaves and fools.
---
TheMiceInTheShed said:
Thank you.

I have been waiting excitedly for this since I saw the Bookworm thingy get posted by @LadyMuck
Click to expand...
Thank you. It is absolutely unheard of that anyone would "wait excitedly" for a BookWorm post, and I'm much heartened!
I bet @LadyMuck is too...
I can highlight future transcriptions with a few discreet mice so you don't scroll past by mistake.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: 34

wibble

Well yes, but the thing to remember is that key in all of this Prince George.
In exactly the same way as Princess Elizabeth was the key in the debacle of Edward and Wallis.
 
Reactions: 34

TheMiceInTheShed

I can highlight future transcriptions with a few discreet mice so you don't scroll past by mistake

<thrilled>.
 
Reactions: 24

wibble

Here's a thing...

If the Harkles really are serious - which we know they re not - they would, after Nigeria, have issued a statement that the Great She Ostrich was dressed as she was in support of Armita Geravand.
At a stroke the Great She Ostrich would have made herself both a representative of something, and a role model for something.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: 23

Maggiemaynot

Apologies if this pic has been posted already. I’ve just seen it on Twitter.
I don’t know who the artist is but I do think they should be strongly encouraged in their Harkle career. It’s just so delightful and the world needs more of this …

 
Reactions: 31
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Menu
Log in
Register