The Daily Pwice

15354565859200

Comments

  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    johartuk wrote: »
    Even after this person has overstepped the mark by sharing nasty gossip about the kids?

    As long as that person doesn't continue with that piece of gossip .. Yes .. Cyril knows I don't believe it and will not discuss anything to do with the kids .. By you continuously bringing it up .. You are keeping the topic alive
  • Saltydog1955Saltydog1955 Posts: 4,134
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    scone wrote: »
    I think the pose she does with her legs stretched apart is very unflattering and why has she got the skimpiest of pants on? Knickers which are one centimetre away from displaying her bits.

    Is she still going to be posing in pants like these when she is 60 when she will actually become a leather satchel complete with wrinkles

    If she does that I expect she'll say 'I've got the body of a 16 year old!' and there'll be a heckle from the back of the room when someone shouts 'Yeah, and they say they want it back!'.

    ;)
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'd ask if the gossip was about KP also.. As I know you would :rolleyes:

    ? It WAS about KP! If it were true (and a blind monkey can see that it's a ludicrous suggestion) it would be a nasty slur against KP not Pete since it would imply that she got herself impregnated by someone other than Pete while married to him!

    Anyway, it's rubbish. And if someone is so blind that they can't look at Princess and see Pete's genes all over her, then it does call into question the validity of other 'reveals' they may provide.
  • sconescone Posts: 14,850
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If she does that I expect she'll say 'I've got the body of a 16 year old!' and there'll be a heckle from the back of the room when someone shouts 'Yeah, and they say they want it back!'.

    ;)

    Hahaha :D:D
  • Goldbear86Goldbear86 Posts: 1,141
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    No doubt about that. ;):D



    I'm surprised she didn't try to do the usual 'legs apart and hole available' pose, but i suppose it's difficult if not impossible to separate her legs when they're encased in pink fuzz. I expect the chavs who follow her and don't ride use her horse blankets on their beds. :D
    Tucked up in mine every night ;)

    :D:D:D
  • Saltydog1955Saltydog1955 Posts: 4,134
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    scone wrote: »
    Hahaha :D:D

    Perhaps she'll do a nude photoshoot in her old age saying ''This is my LOVE dress everyone!'' and the photographer will say ''Blimey Katie, I think you should have ironed it first!''. :D
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    ? It WAS about KP! If it were true (and a blind monkey can see that it's a ludicrous suggestion) it would be a nasty slur against KP not Pete since it would imply that she got herself impregnated by someone other than Pete while married to him!

    Anyway, it's rubbish. And if someone is so blind that they can't look at Princess and see Pete's genes all over her, then it does call into question the validity of other 'reveals' they may provide.
    If you read the post I was replying to ..it was they who claimed it was Anti PA .. Not I ..
    That's exactly what I said to Cyril .. Both kids are his double and I didn't discuss the topic again.. I find it very distasteful to say the least..
  • sconescone Posts: 14,850
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Perhaps she'll do a nude photoshoot in her old age saying ''This is my LOVE dress everyone!'' and the photographer will say ''Blimey Katie, I think you should have ironed it first!''. :D

    Riding her horses with her creaking old bones and false teeth and crooked wig, "I'm still beautiful, that will never change!" fast forward to a hospital scare where she is bed ridden and bald with no teeth in. The camera's aren't flashing anymore.

    I thought that when she got past a certain age she would have started to reinvent herself and become more mature, after all most of her money is now made through other ventures other than glamour, she needs to start covering up
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If you read the post I was replying to ..it was they who claimed it was Anti PA .. Not I ..
    That's exactly what I said to Cyril .. Both kids are his double and I didn't discuss the topic again.. I find it very distasteful to say the least..

    Yes, I know that. I was laughing at the irony that it was being perceived as a PA slur when it fact it was far more a KP one.
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    Yes, I know that. I was laughing at the irony that it was being perceived as a PA slur when it fact it was far more a KP one.

    I thought that last night... If either wasn't his.. He wouldn't be at fault ..she would ... But to then accuse me of only being interested cos it was anti PA was laughable ... We are all gossiping as none of us know the real story
  • Cyril_SneerCyril_Sneer Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    Anyway, it's rubbish. And if someone is so blind that they can't look at Princess and see Pete's genes all over her, then it does call into question the validity of other 'reveals' they may provide.

    Hang on a minute, how many times do people go upto babies and say "oh he looks like the father" and then you find out its the persons new boyfriend standing there, not the father. It's your perception. If you see it enough you'll believe it - and people are entitled to believe whatever they want.

    But then we aren't going into the kids i thought, except some people are keeping it going.

    And if the kids are over the line i guess the mental health is, or what's the distinction?
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Hang on a minute, how many times do people go upto babies and say "oh he looks like the father" and then you find out its the persons new boyfriend standing there, not the father. It's your perception. If you see it enough you'll believe it - and people are entitled to believe whatever they want.

    But then we aren't going into the kids i thought, except some people are keeping it going.

    No, not a perception. A solid undeniable fact based on my looking with my eyes at both of them and seeing a mini (albeit much prettier) Pete, and also seeing her in his mother. The eyes, the nose, the mouth. We even joked on here (ages back when she was very little) that should Pete and Katie ever be brought to Jeremy Kyle court, there'd be absolutely no need for a paternity test since the likeness was almost so comically uncanny!

    ETA: Re a 'distinction', you'll have to ask others here, ie. those that have a prob with your posts. I don't, I didn't find your 'paternity' suggestion nasty, just hilarious! :D

    Re the other, I'm curious, but the reason I doubt there's any real issues is that if he were really struggling, then surely he wouldn't choose to have his life permanently on show. But dunno... maybe you could take this to his 'suffering' thread and elaborate there?
  • Cyril_SneerCyril_Sneer Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't believe we see the real people on reality tv.. Most of it is set up situations and filmed over n over again.. I know for a fact the kids n peter where( when they did the cup cake making/decorating) filmed it was done over approx 6 hrs to get it right

    I can totally believe that, i have been in similar situations. ;)

    The issue i have with these two (and most other z listers) is that whilst they feel their big secrets should be protected from their "fans" they are happy to lie, fool, and even behind the scenes completely take the p*ss out of them. Yes, a certain part is the whole "TV Game" but when it comes to the point that they will flog dresses on ebay to people who are being mislead (the phrase "some i havent even got round to wearing" is very interesting there), or put their name on yet another bottle of "mysterious girl" perfume claiming they have researched perfumes when they couldnt tell a quality perfume from a bottle of domestos if their life depended on it .. well, i think its all gone a bit too far.
  • Mrs Cee JayMrs Cee Jay Posts: 979
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Headline on Bristol Evening Post website, that the rumour is she's getting married tomorrow in Weston SM. Ha ha, probably a load of bull.
  • Cyril_SneerCyril_Sneer Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    Re the other, I'm curious, but the reason I doubt there's any real issues is that if he were really struggling, then surely he wouldn't choose to have his life permanently on show. But dunno... maybe you could take this to his 'suffering' thread and elaborate there?

    This is just another example of people not knowing the real him and them being able to hide the real him on the TV shows - and her as well. They don't have their life permanently on show, its not their real life.
  • momma11momma11 Posts: 3,843
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If you read the post I was replying to ..it was they who claimed it was Anti PA .. Not I ..
    That's exactly what I said to Cyril .. Both kids are his double and I didn't discuss the topic again.. I find it very distasteful to say the least..

    I'm sorry Betty , you,ll believe other things he claims but not that ?
    Isn't that cherry picking ?
    In my mind , if there is doubt about that claim , then I have to wonder if the rest of his claims are valid.
    I don't believe him , and I think his claims about paternity of princess are abhorrent , therefore I have doubts about the other things he claims.
    Why would you think otherwise ?
    These claims say more about KP than PA
  • sidsgirlsidsgirl Posts: 4,425
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    momma11 wrote: »
    I'm sorry Betty , you,ll believe other things he claims but not that ?
    Isn't that cherry picking ?
    In my mind , if there is doubt about that claim , then I have to wonder if the rest of his claims are valid.
    I don't believe him , and I think his claims about paternity of princess are abhorrent , therefore I have doubts about the other things he claims.
    Why would you think otherwise ?
    These claims say more about KP than PA

    ^ this ^ especially the BIB

    ETA. Plus the inference regarding Princess's hair begars belief. :(
  • Cyril_SneerCyril_Sneer Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    momma11 wrote: »
    I'm sorry Betty , you,ll believe other things he claims but not that ?
    Isn't that cherry picking ?
    In my mind , if there is doubt about that claim , then I have to wonder if the rest of his claims are valid.
    I don't believe him , and I think his claims about paternity of princess are abhorrent , therefore I have doubts about the other things he claims.
    Why would you think otherwise ?
    These claims say more about KP than PA

    But you don't know either of them, you dont know what theyd do or what they have done - or whats real or not. All people have to go on here is something thats been carefully constructed. Even the kids know they are on TV when the red lights on ... it's not real

    I'd so love their thing to go to court so the real truth came out, but the fact is - it would ruin things for both of them, so they aren't that stupid.
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    But you don't know either of them, you dont know what theyd do or what they have done - or whats real or not. All people have to go on here is something thats been carefully constructed. Even the kids know they are on TV when the red lights on ... it's not real

    I'd so love their thing to go to court so the real truth came out, but the fact is - it would ruin things for both of them, so they aren't that stupid.

    :eek: You seem to think everyone on here is as dim and witless as PA and KP, swallowing whole what they put out? Do you not read the threads on here about them?! The ones filled with ridicule of the guff both they and their respective managements peddle?!

    The thing is, if you know something about them, then out with it, rather than pursue this 'something nasty in the woodshed nudge nudge wink wink' malarkey which is just annoying.
  • jannajanna Posts: 7,323
    Forum Member
    momma11 wrote: »
    I'm sorry Betty , you,ll believe other things he claims but not that ?
    Isn't that cherry picking ?
    In my mind , if there is doubt about that claim , then I have to wonder if the rest of his claims are valid.
    I don't believe him , and I think his claims about paternity of princess are abhorrent , therefore I have doubts about the other things he claims.
    Why would you think otherwise ?
    These claims say more about KP than PA
    sidsgirl wrote: »
    ^ this ^ especially the BIB

    ETA. Plus the inference regarding Princess's hair begars belief. :(

    I agree with both posts above.
    When we came home from two weeks in Florida years ago my sister accused me of having blonde high-lights put into my son's brown hair because it was so much lighter & streaked in places. AS IF ! :mad: Princess has had more sunny holidays than most kids her age & that will maintain the blondeness.Were she not to holiday in the sun for a year it would darken considerably to a dirtier blonde. And anyway she doesn't have the gingerish eyebrows & lashes of a ginger person.And I hadn't noticed before,but she really is VERY like Pete's mum in the face.
  • jannajanna Posts: 7,323
    Forum Member
    lexi22 wrote: »
    :eek: You seem to think everyone on here is as dim and witless as PA and KP, swallowing whole what they put out? Do you not read the threads on here about them?! The ones filled with ridicule of the guff both they and their respective managements peddle?!

    The thing is, if you know something about them, then out with it, rather than pursue this 'something nasty in the woodshed nudge nudge wink wink' malarkey which is just annoying.

    I have to agree it's all a bit "I have a secwet !.....ner ner ner-ner ner..." Cyril.
    Frankly ,put up or shut up (re the secwet I mean ,I would NEVER tell another poster to shut up):)
  • momma11momma11 Posts: 3,843
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    But you don't know either of them, you dont know what theyd do or what they have done - or whats real or not. All people have to go on here is something thats been carefully constructed. Even the kids know they are on TV when the red lights on ... it's not real

    I'd so love their thing to go to court so the real truth came out, but the fact is - it would ruin things for both of them, so they aren't that stupid.

    I am well aware that neither of them are really real , but claiming your insider knowledge of the paternity of one of their children as doubtful is a step too far IMO.
    I do find it to be nasty
  • Cyril_SneerCyril_Sneer Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    The thing is, if you know something about them, then out with it, rather than pursue this 'something nasty in the woodshed nudge nudge wink wink' malarkey which is just annoying.

    I do totally understand that not everyone is cheerleading for them.

    There is no point talking about stuff to do with them in reality - when people don't believe it. Even the Janna post above about the hair, completely false. If i said, well hes actually doped up half the time due to illness, people would say "yeah but he looks fine on the TV show". They dont understand the lengths celebs will go to, to keep their "meal ticket" - well until you see them dressed up as a bloody great big pink horse.

    As for whether they have a "secwet" .. well bit obvious they do or they wouldnt both be scurrying about like mad trying to stop the case going to court. He certanly seems to think she does, even compiles dossiers!
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I do totally understand that not everyone is cheerleading for them.

    There is no point talking about stuff to do with them in reality - when people don't believe it. Even the Janna post above about the hair, completely false. If i said, well hes actually doped up half the time due to illness, people would say "yeah but he looks fine on the TV show". They dont understand the lengths celebs will go to, to keep their "meal ticket" - well until you see them dressed up as a bloody great big pink horse.

    As for whether they have a "secwet" .. well bit obvious they do or they wouldnt both be scurrying about like mad trying to stop the case going to court. He certanly seems to think she does, even compiles dossiers!

    Ok, that's fair comment on here. I withdraw my 'woodshed' charge but I'm sure you take my point, which is that only their most avid fans are swallowing it whole.
  • Cyril_SneerCyril_Sneer Posts: 2,314
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    Ok, that's fair comment on here. I withdraw my 'woodshed' charge but I'm sure you take my point, which is that only their most avid fans are swallowing it whole.

    Absolutely agreed, point taken.

    Obviously she's made it a lot more obvious by almost turning into a cariacture of herself, and she's had to do that because people now expect her to make a laughing stock of herself.

    She must be fuming with CP.
This discussion has been closed.