Current Affairs

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 15:50

poole boy wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 14:42
Thats also why she forgot to tell the court the truth _{evil woman}

We clearly have a difference of opinion as to what constitutes an evil woman.

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 15:51

towny44 wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 15:48

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 15:43
The Judge didn’t believe her him…
Her PA was a man, or at least he looked like one on the BBC news.

Unread post by **Quizzical Bob** » 02 Dec 2021, 16:19

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 14:39

Quizzical Bob wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 14:12

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 13:26
Delighted for Meghan winning her privacy case against ANL.

"Those contents were personal, private and not matters of legitimate public interest," said the court. "The articles in the Mail on Sunday interfered with the duchess's reasonable expectation of privacy."
That’s why she tells everybody about them.
She didn’t….The letter was personal and not for publication.

Eh? What was that stage interview with Winfrey about then?

“Look at me!”
“Look at me!”
“Over here”
“Look at me!”

‘Reasonable expectation of privacy’ my farce. She is a product of the Hollywood industry and knew what she was getting into when she married a British Royal.

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 16:41

I think it was pay back time and a chance to highlight the intolerance of the firm to what they perceive as not worthy intruders which could have changed the Royal family for the better…. besides, a 13-year-old girl which volunteers at a soup kitchen can’t be all bad can she?

Thankfully I’m not taken in by all this evil woman crap which is generated by the Firm.

Unread post by **oldbluefox** » 02 Dec 2021, 18:37

I find her a manipulative liar and wouldn't believe two words that came out of her lips, let alone her version of the truth which tells quite a lot. The Royal Family are better off without her.
As for their credentials for saving the planet what a pair of hypocrites!!!

PS hope you are making progress with your roof.

Unread post by **Mervyn and Trish** » 02 Dec 2021, 18:40

I agree Foxy.

Unread post by **barney** » 02 Dec 2021, 19:03

I also agree Foxy

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 19:21

Ok’ I’ll agree as well….squeak, squeak, squeak

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 19:40

oldbluefox wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 18:37
I find her a manipulative liar and wouldn't believe two words that came out of her lips, let alone her version of the truth which tells quite a lot. The Royal Family are better off without her.
As for their credentials for saving the planet what a pair of hypocrites!!!

PS hope you are making progress with your roof.

When you think about it Foxy she should have fitted well into the royal family because I can think of five of them with the same credentials.

Unread post by **oldbluefox** » 02 Dec 2021, 20:11

Not sure what makes you think that but maybe Oprah Winfrey can do another cringe worthy programme to enlighten us all. She and MeAgain deserve each other.

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 21:09

oldbluefox wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 20:11
Not sure what makes you think that but maybe Oprah Winfrey can do another cringe worthy programme to enlighten us all. She and MeAgain deserve each other.

Just thinking of some question that she might of asked...

Edit : Unsubstantiated content removed

Unread post by **oldbluefox** » 02 Dec 2021, 21:19

OL do you read The Daily Mirror and The Daily Star by any chance?

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 21:53

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 21:09

oldbluefox wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 20:11
Not sure what makes you think that but maybe Oprah Winfrey can do another cringe worthy programme to enlighten us all. She and MeAgain deserve each other.
Just thinking of some question that she might of asked...

Edit : Unsubstantiated content removed

David, how can they be unsubstantiated when they are merely ‘questions’ that an interviewer such as Oprah might have asked?

There has been plenty of unsubstantiated comments made in the last few posts but they appear to have gone unnoticed by your good self?

Unread post by **Onelife** » 02 Dec 2021, 22:12

oldbluefox wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 21:19
OL do you read The Daily Mirror and The Daily Star by any chance?

No’ but reading between the lines I can see why you might think that

Unread post by **towny44** » 02 Dec 2021, 22:18

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 16:41
I think it was pay back time and a chance to highlight the intolerance of the firm to what they perceive as not worthy intruders which could have changed the Royal family for the better…. besides, a 13-year-old girl which volunteers at a soup kitchen can’t be all bad can she?

Thankfully I’m not taken in by all this evil woman crap which is generated by the Firm.

I thought it was the Daily Mail that was the baddy in this meghan movie she is producing, not Prince Charles.

Unread post by **Stephen** » 03 Dec 2021, 08:03

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 16:41
I think it was pay back time and a chance to highlight the intolerance of the firm to what they perceive as not worthy intruders which could have changed the Royal family for the better…. besides, a 13-year-old girl which volunteers at a soup kitchen can’t be all bad can she?

Thankfully I’m not taken in by all this evil woman crap which is generated by the Firm.

I doubly agree. Can’t stand her.

Unread post by **towny44** » 03 Dec 2021, 08:15

Stephen wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:03

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 16:41
I think it was pay back time and a chance to highlight the intolerance of the firm to what they perceive as not worthy intruders which could have changed the Royal family for the better…. besides, a 13-year-old girl which volunteers at a soup kitchen can’t be all bad can she?

Thankfully I’m not taken in by all this evil woman crap which is generated by the Firm.

I doubly agree. Can’t stand her.

She's an actress, but didn't fancy her supporting role to Kate's leading lady, so took the huff.

Unread post by **Onelife** » 03 Dec 2021, 08:50

towny44 wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:15

Stephen wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:03

Onelife wrote: 02 Dec 2021, 16:41
I think it was pay back time and a chance to highlight the intolerance of the firm to what they perceive as not worthy intruders which could have changed the Royal family for the better…. besides, a 13-year-old girl which volunteers at a soup kitchen can’t be all bad can she?

Thankfully I’m not taken in by all this evil woman crap which is generated by the Firm.

I doubly agree. Can’t stand her.
She's an actress, but didn't fancy her supporting role to Kate's leading lady, so took the huff.

“Unsubstantiated”… pure speculation!

Unread post by **towny44** » 03 Dec 2021, 09:02

Onelife wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:50

towny44 wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:15

Stephen wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:03

I doubly agree. Can’t stand her.
She's an actress, but didn't fancy her supporting role to Kate's leading lady, so took the huff.
“Unsubstantiated”… pure speculation!

No more so than your speculation that the Royal family are solely responsible for all the problems.

Unread post by **Onelife** » 03 Dec 2021, 09:12

towny44 wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 09:02

Onelife wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:50

towny44 wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 08:15

She's an actress, but didn't fancy her supporting role to Kate's leading lady, so took the huff.
“Unsubstantiated”… pure speculation!
No more so than your speculation that the Royal family are solely responsible for all the problems.

The one thing that is true in your response John is that it can only ever be speculation as far as the Royal family is concerned…what goes on behind palace walls stays behind palace walls.

Unread post by **barney** » 03 Dec 2021, 09:38

They went to the States ( after Canada) to escape the British press.
That was a very conscious choice.
So it’s probably best if the British press totally ignore them and give them absolutely no coverage at all.
Then everyone will be happy.

Unread post by **oldbluefox** » 03 Dec 2021, 10:07

Onelife wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 09:12
........what goes on behind palace walls stays behind palace walls.

As in every family. Perhaps someone should tell MeAgain.

Considering they wanted to lead more private lives away from the intrusion of the press and the media they seem to relish being centre of attention.

Unread post by **Onelife** » 03 Dec 2021, 10:47

oldbluefox wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 10:07

Onelife wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 09:12
........what goes on behind palace walls stays behind palace walls.
As in every family. Perhaps someone should tell MeAgain.

Considering they wanted to lead more private lives away from the intrusion of the press and the media they seem to relish being centre of attention.

There are few places on earth where you can avoid the intrusion of the press especially when you have links with the Royal firm…you clearly don’t like my taste in fine women …first it was Theresa now Meghan

Unread post by **oldbluefox** » 03 Dec 2021, 11:22

Not forgetting Lisa ................... you're right but I have it on good authority your wife is a lovely lady unlike the others mentioned.

Actually Lisa is one of your better choices.

Unread post by **Stephen** » 03 Dec 2021, 12:36

oldbluefox wrote: 03 Dec 2021, 11:22
Not forgetting Lisa ................... you're right but I have it on good authority your wife is a lovely lady unlike the others mentioned.

Actually Lisa is one of your better choices.

Would her surname be Tarbuck or Dingle by any chance

Cruise Community Forum

Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Re: Current Affairs

Board Disclaimer