No sabemos de dónde huyen... parece ser que la mansión Frog sigue vacía.
Duques de Sussex: Opiniones en su contra.
- Autormajo
- Fecha de inicio
No sabemos de dónde huyen... parece ser que la mansión Frog sigue vacía.
- Registrado
- 22 Feb 2019
- Mensajes
- 1.855
- Calificaciones
- 15.378
Veo muchos comentarios en las redes sociales, foros, blogs etc que hablan sobre Lady Frog y su último atuendo haciendo referencia a su lactancia...Yo honestamente no creo que esté amamantando porque no creo que ella haya parido, incluso dudo que de verdad haya un bebé (que no sea prestado para la foto), todas las señales y los secretismos alrededor de MasterCard me hacen pensar eso, el vientre que cambiaba de forma y tamaño de un dia para otro o se ladeaba, sin firmas de doctores ni lugar de nacimiento en el certificado, todo el secretismo/misterio en torno a la supuesta labor de parto y nacimiento, las contadísimas fotos que hay de un supuesto Archie son de costado o de partes de su cuerpo o semi tapado como en el partido de polo donde casi parecía dopado y en cada foto parecía un bebé completamente distinto, todo demasiado anormal y sospechoso, ya ni siquiera misterioso 
Este otro es comparándolo con las fotos del bautizo de Louis. Que es la fuente de las fotos que se usaron para armar el bautismo .
Que es GOT ?
Quién es el que habla con Harry .. En otra foto ve a Meghan escrutando la sin mucho ánimo .. Tampoco los que estaban de mirones les animo que MandH fueran a saludarlos .. Nadie se veía contentísimo como antes, les dieron la mano y saludaron por educación .
Ahora hay unas telas elásticas .. Qué horror @rosario. Deje en línea un análisis de la foto es un vídeo.. Sé que la foto no te cuadraba ahí están todas las razones
-
- Camilla may have favourite items of clothing that she may choose to recycle, and appeared to wear a similar outfit to the christening of Louis including the same shoes and necklace, and a similar colour hat and dress. It maybe a coincidence that the outfits look similar. Charles also appears to wear a similar outfit too.
- Why all the secrecy? We are led to believe it’s for privacy reasons but is it really? The Tindalls have kept the christenings of their children private, but still allowed photographers to take photos of guests arriving and departing the ceremony.
- Jessica Mulroney did not attend and was either was too busy (doing some personal appearances while she can) or wasn’t invited to the ceremony. She is/was supposed to be one of her best friends.
- Why was Kate was wearing a blue dress when she arrived at Windsor and photographed wearing pink and red for the photos?
- Why did it take more than four hours to release two photos?
- Several pediatricians who were asked how old they thought the baby was have said they thought it was at least four months old, and not the two months the baby is supposed to be. The baby also seems to be able to support its head by itself which most cannot do until they are at least four months old, although they can lift their heads at a month old. Some even say the babies in the three known images are of different babies!
- Why is Harry wearing old suede shoes with navy laces and black socks? Was he in a hurry to get dressed?
I checked this against other PA images of the reveal and the ‘date time original’ and ‘create’ date and time are the same. This is not the case for the christening image. Furthermore, when I downloaded this image to my computer, I expected to find it in ‘recents’ but it was in my May folder as it automatically organizes them as to when an image was created, which I cannot explain other than the image must have been created in May. I have other images I have downloaded from pixabay which I use, and they too are filed under the original year they were created rather than in a recent folder. Maybe he used an ‘old’ file, but why would he need to do that? I checked the metadata file several times on different sites and all had the same information.
The photos were taken around noon and were supposed to be released about 3 p.m., but they did not surface until around 4:20 p.m., so it took nearly four hours to modify two photos? Most photographers would not get work again if it took them that long!
The ‘date time original’ is different to the ‘create date’.
Dominic Lipinski’s data on the first image of the baby May 8th 2019 where the ‘date time original’ and ‘create date’ correspond.
What does this all mean? There are more questions surrounding the saga than there are credible answers. Photos can be verified when people see those people walking in somewhere or if they are on video, but we do not have that, yet we also do not expect the Royal Family to deceive us.
People don’t actually care about the christening or who the godparents are, but they care about being lied to and being taken for fools. If the Sussex duo desire privacy so badly, then they should step down from public life because quite frankly not many would care or miss their antics. One must remember, we are all transient on this earth, and that they are mere human beings who happen to have titles. They simply aren’t as important as they think they are.
You must decide for yourself why these questions and doubts have arisen for they did not occur for any other royal births. Couple this with the secret birth, and the sudden pregnancy with a wobbling belly but no due date, and a belly that at times looked flat, and was squashed, and a heavily pregnant woman who can squat with legs together; it creates questions that no one thought they would ever have to ask. Perhaps it’s time for some answers?
JULY 9, 2019A BOFFIN
The Secret Sussex Christening
The awkward wedding photo of Harry and MM in May 2018 has been surpassed by the christening photo of a child named Archie Harrison (taken by Chris Allerton their ‘go to’ photographer), where all but MM look a little uncomfortable. There were some well rehearsed smiles, mingled with a cross between a grimace and an attempt to look happy. Last year we witnessed a wedding with no carpet, and the bride with only one family member as a guest. It comes as no surprise that the Sussex duo wanted the christening to be private, releasing details as and when they wished. To be frank, many are past caring and while being a godparent is considered important, to most it’s a token gesture these days as it is revealed the godparents for the child known as Archie will never be released.
The ceremony was held in the private chapel at Windsor Castle on 6 July, 2019 at 11 a.m., and lasted less than an hour, with about 25 guests present. Most reporters didn’t bother trekking down to Windsor and were content to boast on social media they were doing things that they enjoyed on a rare sunny Saturday. The Queen had already said she would not attend due to prior commitments, and the Archbishop of Canterbury was also busy in York, but apparently he was helicoptered in to perform the ceremony and back again (215 miles each way). Some would ask who exactly funded that journey (as it’s supposed to be private) and the hypocrisy of the Sussex declaration of being as green as possible with their environmental rhetoric. Was it really necessary to spend resources on a ceremony that lasted barely an hour?
One reporter announced the probable identity of one of the godparents as Charlie van Straubenzee, and was attacked on social media for not giving the Sussex duo their privacy, but do people really care who the godparents are, or are they annoyed at the demands for privacy? The fact is if the child becomes 6th in line to the throne at any given time, then they will be considered a public figure, and thus hiding all the information from the public was futile (such as which doctors delivered the child and who the godparents are).
Here is a much happier photo of Harry’s christening with all his godparents, who perhaps he should be turning to for some advice? Harry’s godparents:
Prince Harry’s christening photo in 1984 complete with godparents.
Only a few days before the christening, MM turned up at Wimbledon with two old college pals in tow (Genevieve Hillis and Lindsay Roth Jordan), where one can only describe it as a grotesque and blatant display of faux self-importance. Jordan lives in London, now married to a Brit, and Hillis must have flown in from the US for the weekend one assumes. The RPO asked a couple of spectators to refrain from taking photos of MM as she was there in a private capacity, but they actually weren’t; one was taking photos of the tennis, and another took a selfie of themselves with the court in the background. How utterly embarrassing for the RPO, because no one was actually interested in taking her photo, and some didn’t even know who she was. If there ever was a sense of exaggerated self-importance, it was displayed here. When you are a public figure in a public place and event, you can’t control who takes photos of you, but in this case people were more interested in the tennis! If she was trying to keep the identity of potential godparents a secret, then why display yourself publicly with two friends?
To add to the drama, the friends prompted MM when the cameras were on her, desperately trying to talk without opening their mouths, but failing oh so miserably. It reminds me of scenes when sports fans suddenly see themselves on camera and they tidy up their hair, straighten themselves up and smile! Hillis spots the camera and tries to whisper to MM to put on her hat as the camera is pointing their way, but you can see Hillis turn to her and her eyes through her sunglasses catch the camera. MM fumbles with her hat and out of the blue puts it on although it doesn’t fit well, and adjusts her hair. Jordan then tries to whisper to her to smile, and the both do a simultaneous fake smile that lasts a second. All I can say is that I have seen better on amateur nights in clubs.
The christening yielded two photos, a now typically pretentious black and white image and a family photo where you can imagine the photographer yelling, ‘cheese’ where people are holding their smiles as best as they can. Many questions have arisen from this, so take a look and decide for yourself:
The Secret Sussex Christening
The awkward wedding photo of Harry and MM in May 2018 has been surpassed by the christening photo of a child named Archie Harrison (taken by Chris Allerton their ‘go to’ photographer), where all but MM look a little uncomfortable. There were some well rehearsed smiles, mingled with a cross between a grimace and an attempt to look happy. Last year we witnessed a wedding with no carpet, and the bride with only one family member as a guest. It comes as no surprise that the Sussex duo wanted the christening to be private, releasing details as and when they wished. To be frank, many are past caring and while being a godparent is considered important, to most it’s a token gesture these days as it is revealed the godparents for the child known as Archie will never be released.
The ceremony was held in the private chapel at Windsor Castle on 6 July, 2019 at 11 a.m., and lasted less than an hour, with about 25 guests present. Most reporters didn’t bother trekking down to Windsor and were content to boast on social media they were doing things that they enjoyed on a rare sunny Saturday. The Queen had already said she would not attend due to prior commitments, and the Archbishop of Canterbury was also busy in York, but apparently he was helicoptered in to perform the ceremony and back again (215 miles each way). Some would ask who exactly funded that journey (as it’s supposed to be private) and the hypocrisy of the Sussex declaration of being as green as possible with their environmental rhetoric. Was it really necessary to spend resources on a ceremony that lasted barely an hour?
One reporter announced the probable identity of one of the godparents as Charlie van Straubenzee, and was attacked on social media for not giving the Sussex duo their privacy, but do people really care who the godparents are, or are they annoyed at the demands for privacy? The fact is if the child becomes 6th in line to the throne at any given time, then they will be considered a public figure, and thus hiding all the information from the public was futile (such as which doctors delivered the child and who the godparents are).
Here is a much happier photo of Harry’s christening with all his godparents, who perhaps he should be turning to for some advice? Harry’s godparents:
- Lady Sarah Chatto (Armstong-Jones)
- Gerald Ward (deceased)
- Prince Andrew
- Carolyn Bartholomew
- Lady Celia Vestey
- Bryan Organ
Prince Harry’s christening photo in 1984 complete with godparents.
Only a few days before the christening, MM turned up at Wimbledon with two old college pals in tow (Genevieve Hillis and Lindsay Roth Jordan), where one can only describe it as a grotesque and blatant display of faux self-importance. Jordan lives in London, now married to a Brit, and Hillis must have flown in from the US for the weekend one assumes. The RPO asked a couple of spectators to refrain from taking photos of MM as she was there in a private capacity, but they actually weren’t; one was taking photos of the tennis, and another took a selfie of themselves with the court in the background. How utterly embarrassing for the RPO, because no one was actually interested in taking her photo, and some didn’t even know who she was. If there ever was a sense of exaggerated self-importance, it was displayed here. When you are a public figure in a public place and event, you can’t control who takes photos of you, but in this case people were more interested in the tennis! If she was trying to keep the identity of potential godparents a secret, then why display yourself publicly with two friends?
To add to the drama, the friends prompted MM when the cameras were on her, desperately trying to talk without opening their mouths, but failing oh so miserably. It reminds me of scenes when sports fans suddenly see themselves on camera and they tidy up their hair, straighten themselves up and smile! Hillis spots the camera and tries to whisper to MM to put on her hat as the camera is pointing their way, but you can see Hillis turn to her and her eyes through her sunglasses catch the camera. MM fumbles with her hat and out of the blue puts it on although it doesn’t fit well, and adjusts her hair. Jordan then tries to whisper to her to smile, and the both do a simultaneous fake smile that lasts a second. All I can say is that I have seen better on amateur nights in clubs.
The christening yielded two photos, a now typically pretentious black and white image and a family photo where you can imagine the photographer yelling, ‘cheese’ where people are holding their smiles as best as they can. Many questions have arisen from this, so take a look and decide for yourself:
- Why wasn’t Charles Spencer there with his sisters?
- Why hasn’t anyone seen Doria leave or enter the UK again? We saw her arrive for the wedding and the ‘book launch’ and it wasn’t as if this was a secret. Even if private airports were used, photographers would see her leaving her home in LA, yet somehow either they are interested in her, or they have been paid off. Surely Coleman-Rayner could make a few pennies from a photo of Doria leaving LA?
- Was the Archbishop of Canterbury in attendance when he was scheduled to be in York? Did he arrive by helicopter at great expense?
no le queda chico @Rayen ..lo que sucede es que tiene los pechos tan grandes!!!!...por aquello de la lactancia (ironía)
