Angel.10
Aristocracy
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2016
- Messages
- 108
- City
- Rome
- Country
- Italy
Ridiculous dig up old photographs just to denigrate her. Anyway, Kate was also photographed from top-less and Harry naked in Las Vegas
Ridiculous dig up old photographs just to denigrate her. Anyway, Kate was also photographed from top-less and Harry naked in Las Vegas
I think of it this way. When the photos were taken on a beach, she wasn't alone on said beach and it didn't bother her that people could see a certain part of her anatomy in all its glory. She has, most likely, worn next to nothing that leaves little to the imagination on that certain part of her anatomy in her work as an actress and it didn't bother her. I think we can be almost 99.9% sure that somewhere down the line, Harry has seen this certain part of her anatomy in all its glory and in fact, most likely very much enjoyed it and that didn't bother either of these people.
So, with the release of these topless photographs from years ago on a beach somewhere in Greece, I'm going to just shrug and say "no big deal" and hope this is the reaction that both Harry and Meghan have. The best reaction that the vermin, that attempted to "shame" and "embarrass" and "scandalize the public" and "demean" and whatever other adjectives we can come up with, deserve is no reaction at all.
Bamp! Try again Radar Online.
Exactly. When Camilla was photographed topless in 2013, Charles and Camilla had no reaction, at least publicly. Privately, they could have warned the editors, though.
Camilla was photographed topless?
Meghan biggest drawback is her family [not a serious drawback but a pain nonetheless] and not even her immediate family. I mean, my goodness, we are quoting heavily, her father's first wife and her son [one she had apparently after her marriage to Meghan's father broke up], two people who are not even related to her. Though I will admit they did kind of discredit Meghan's sister.
When one becomes famous or at least well known via the press, the sharks [family and friends both old and new] see dollar signs. But hey, it's worked for Jessica Hay.
Does anyone know if the Daily Mail pay for stories or just pictures....
Meghan biggest drawback is her family [not a serious drawback but a pain nonetheless] and not even her immediate family. I mean, my goodness, we are quoting heavily, her father's first wife and her son [one she had apparently after her marriage to Meghan's father broke up], two people who are not even related to her. Though I will admit they did kind of discredit Meghan's sister.
When one becomes famous or at least well known via the press, the sharks [family and friends both old and new] see dollar signs. But hey, it's worked for Jessica Hay.
Does anyone know if the Daily Mail pay for stories or just pictures....
Those scroungers are half siblings 20 years older than her and some half in law married to the father...that is NOT her immediate family.
One thing we know for certain out of all of this is who will definitely *not* be on the royal wedding invitation list should one be needed to be drawn up.
With all the talk about half-sibling's half brother from a marriage over two decades ago and all the mischief and mayhem these pseudo relatives are trying to cause, perhaps the best punishment for the crimes against a half sister or sibling from another marriage of a parent (or would that be half parent? I'm getting confused by this point) is to be drawn and quartered.
Sorry... had to do it. My funny bone needed tickling.
If you look closely I state that the father's first wife and her son are not Meghan's immediate family.
We are going to have to split hairs about her half siblings and whether or not they count as immediate family. I don't have any half siblings so I can't speak on whether or not half siblings count the same as full siblings but I am going to give them [or at least the brother] the benefit of the doubt that they do. Now whether or not they are close because there are 20 years between them is another matter.
I totally agree but you better believe if that happens...there is going to be an article in the Daily Fail about how her awful and cruel sister didn't invite her to wedding.
Isn't it something. The half siblings half sibling. It would be funny if it wasn't so ridiculous.
With all the talk about half-sibling's half brother from a marriage over two decades ago and all the mischief and mayhem these pseudo relatives are trying to cause, perhaps the best punishment for the crimes against a half sister or sibling from another marriage of a parent (or would that be half parent? I'm getting confused by this point) is to be drawn and quartered.
Sorry... had to do it. My funny bone needed tickling.
child abuse um.....how? Meghan is not a child. Nor is telling stories about her to media, abuse. Done in bad taste, and if lies, then slanderous but in no way abuse. You would be okay if they were close to her in age
Seems to me the British papers are using these pseudo relatives to ruin this relationship.
If you look closely I state that the father's first wife and her son are not Meghan's immediate family.
We are going to have to split hairs about her half siblings and whether or not they count as immediate family. I don't have any half siblings so I can't speak on whether or not half siblings count the same as full siblings but I am going to give them [or at least the brother] the benefit of the doubt that they do. Now whether or not they are close because there are 20 years between them is another matter.
I totally agree but you better believe if that happens...there is going to be an article in the Daily Fail about how her awful and cruel sister didn't invite her to wedding.
Isn't it something. The half siblings half sibling. It would be funny if it wasn't so ridiculous.