The Archie bump and the extracting of the micturition

Which is a polite way of being annoyed with all the shenanigans going on. Let’s start with this Archie rubbish.

Over at our place, this:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7005947/Harry-Meghans-baby-Fans-wild-theories-Prince-Harry-slipped-speech.html

But against that, this from a lady who has been unerringly right in the past but I have to respect her anonymity:

She may or may not have had one, but she does have that after look. It kicks in a day or two after having a baby at least with most women I have known.

The milk lets down and the hormones are doing their raging thing and usually there is that look. Prepubescent girls have that certain look too. I can spot them yards away. Usually when they get older and see a picture of themselves they (the girls) are horrified.

As a teacher, mother, girl, I have seen it many times. It is their last bit of innocence and freedom. Usually they have a certain roundness….not fat, just chunkier and more round before things really take off. I think there is something sweet about it.

Against that, Distant Relative, who has also been unerringly right too often:

Why was there no doctors’ sign off on the BP official announcement? Why are they so shy about revealing the place of birth? Also the ever-changing rigmarole of her plans for the birth. As far as I am aware once a woman is pregnant the planned place of birth is arranged well in advance esp as this one is classed as a geriatric pregnancy (over 35) , not the too-ing and fro-ing which occurred here. Also the cock-up over the announcement of her being in labour coming after she’d allegedly given birth. That was due to emails being lost according to their PR – presumably Ms Latham, Ms Clinton’s ex-helper who’d know all about emails ya’d think?

Also, it is alleged, her first husband Joseph Goldman-Guiliano had their marriage annulled because she was barren.

Here’s a photo of the happy couple:

https://twitter.com/Commstrategis/status/1124972777600167936

Is Haz the dad? It is claimed he had an undescended testicle when born which needed surgery to rectify when he was 3 or 4 years old. Poss result in low sperm count.

Ever changing shape and size of her bump – videos abound tracking dates and the size anomalies. Goes from large to small to enormous then back to small. Babies do change the shape of the mum’s bump due to them changing position but not like in this woman’s pregnancy. Also the seeming ability of a woman with a 7 nearly 8 month bump to squat down in 5 inch stilettos, knees together without assistance or losing balance all while the baby mysteriously disappears only to reappear once she stands up.

My attention was drawn to that by a couple of mothers of my acquaintance who say it is not possible at that stage in pregnancy. Videos of that too are in abundance on YT.

An eagle-eyed commenter spotted the absence of needle marks and what-have-you from IV’s on her ladyship’s hands which would still be in evidence 2 days after giving birth.

Bottom line – surrogate used, imho. They would have garnered more sympathy from the Great British public if they’d have been honest but a surrogate even with H & M’s DNA would not be recognised as 7th in line.

In any event Archie is just another product of Them paid for by Us. Sick of the whole damned charade.

Then FoS whose judgement I also respect:

Last sentence spot on, Sir.

Which got me to thinking:

Agreed on the charade but it’s a common enough motif and once again, back to Obama.

Let’s just say in fact that both DR here and my lady friend are right, then she was sometimes wearing the prosthetic thing and sometimes not – wild goose chase for certain types like us.

Ever changing shape and size of her bump – videos abound tracking dates and the size anomalies.

Ok, Obama once more – why?

Why the WTC7? Why the anomalies with the planes?

Why the 12 lined up in the tunnel with Di, why the tunnel of Astarte and pillar 13?

Why the symbolism in plain sight where even dummies can see it, e.g. the Supreme Court vagina staircase, lit for goodness sake, in Israel?

Why the horse near the airport in Denver?

Why the high theatre with Snopes forever at hand to debunk it?

Think it through – to discredit the likes of us, to provide us with tinfoil for our hats.

Cue the scathing trolls on social media.

And of course – what does this disdainful extracting of the micturition say to the common people like us? That We can lead you anywhere you like and your prophets and investigators are as nothing – We set the agenda at all times, you will always be playing catch-up.

Plus your prophets and investigators are kept on the edge of apoplexy the whole time, every day, no let up.

DR’s last words above again:

Sick of the whole damned charade.

You enjoy being led up and down garden paths?

9 comments for “The Archie bump and the extracting of the micturition

  1. May 9, 2019 at 6:36 pm

    The quoted lady has just pointed out that she was going on what had been shown so far, not being greatly interested in Hal and Sparkle. She added:

    The photos of the family all looking on at the baby is very contrived in my opinion. They must have all been promised their own box of chocolates if they all smiled purdy like. Now families are happy about babies I know, but considering this is Harry who has always seemed to me like the red-headed step-child or child not quite belonging…his demeanor shows it. When he and his brother were kids and teens, and in 20’s Harry seemed more confident when posing with his brother. He seemed to get his security from his brother I always thought…second born, same sex, mama a bit off, then we know the rest of the story. Until the last few years I did not know the rest of the rest of the beginning of the story about those vipers. Also, I suspect there must be photo ops for the other royal couple and their puppies.. babies. I wonder how the photo’s compare in regards to the adults …the extended family members looking on. Anyway, Harry has had a rough time growing up. I imagine he goes around with a ‘lump in his gut’ most of the time. Oh the bit with the testicle, I know a fella who had an incident occur as a baby ..I have heard about it anyway, can’t say I was there..anyway, he still has the other one and seems to have had no issue with issues as he does have children. I have not run DNAs on the children (as wouldn’t that be just weird) but they do bear an amazing resemblance to their father.

  2. May 9, 2019 at 6:50 pm

    DR:

    … there was the time of birth of Master Archie 05.26 a.m. 5+2+6=? Subtle.

  3. Pcar
    May 10, 2019 at 12:51 am

    I may be wrong (Mays often are), but didn’t pregnancy announcement date birth to be late March or early April 2019?

    Ten month gestation? Then named Harry’s-son…

    As for Harry Hewitt. I view all news as questionable.

  4. Distant Relative
    May 10, 2019 at 10:40 am

    There’s been all kinds of funny business surrounding births of the ruling classes. Seems to be their MO.

    http://www.royalfoibles.com/the-queen-and-princess-margarets-near-immaculate-conception/

    Pcar – there have been several due dates so take your pick 🙂

  5. Ubermouth
    May 11, 2019 at 5:24 am

    The ‘baby’ was a Realborn lifelike baby doll named the Sleeping Darren- not a baby at all.Due to the war being squashed(by laying on it’s side) and looking quite fake,they ensured to keep the blanket pulled up against its ear.Meghan even holds blanket in place when Harry is asked to expose baby’s face!

    https://bountifulbaby.com/products/5054

    No title for baby,not even usual Lord when parents decline title,but Master.
    Archie is also Prince George’s code/nickname poached by Meghan.

    • Distant Relative
      May 11, 2019 at 9:47 am

      All young boys are addressed as Master. It is the male equivalent of Miss. Master becomes Mister at the age of 18.

      The baby shown by H&M was heavily swaddled and didn’t move in the short time he was on show. Its been a while since I saw a newborn but IIRC they snuffle, gurgle and twitch a fair bit in their sleep. One would have thought the racket made by the cameras might have provoked a response from him. Maybe it did but was hidden by all that wrapping.

      IF it was a doll why would they use one? Makes no sense imo.

      Haz set the narrative with his spiel controversy about babies changing quickly so maybe next time we see Tiddles he’ll have changed to ???

  6. Pcar
    May 12, 2019 at 12:37 am

    Conspiracy theories taken on board, for now I’m neutral.

    Some levity:

    Darwin award miss: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we_MmdNOAJE

    Labour Loon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7QdSmkGYpM

    PS: Master? Yep, I was Master “Pcar” at prep school, then Master “Pcar” Snr.

Comments are closed.