Boy oh boy the press really are making a fuss about Prick Harry of Ginger Pubes and Meghan Markle at the moment aren’t they? Even more so in fact than they are trying to convince us that we are all about to be nuked by Russia – which of course is never going to happen.
I mean why the fuck would Russia want to nuke us? But hey, why let the truth get in the way of a good bit of fear mongering.
So let’s get back to Harry and Meghan… Or should that be ‘The Prince And The Showgirl – “An American showgirl in London creates an international incident when she falls for a European prince” (1959 film starring Marilyn Monroe).
You see, no matter how hard it is for most of you to believe it; I am telling you now that Meghan Markle is nothing more than a made up persona. Or put another way, she is a series of actors playing the role of Harry’s wife.
And indeed, the more newspaper articles that I see about her, the more I know this to be true… Which hopefully you will too by the time you have finished reading this article.
Mind you, I believe that I more than proved that she does not exist in my book Meghan Markle Exposed which you can buy by clicking on that link. However, as a gesture of thanks to those readers of mine who have not read it, but have been loyal to me with their comments and donations, I will happily send you a PDF of the book via email – but I stress, this offer only applies to those with a proven track record of loyalty… You know who you are.
Nevertheless, I initially arrived at the conclusion that Meg was a fake by the way that the press were so desperate to link her and Harry as being an item – without any proof whatsoever – back in early 2017.
The press did this by – amongst other things – publishing images of a bird walking around Kensington and into Kensington Palace, which they claimed was Meghan despite all the photos being taken from the rear so as you could not see her face and publishing grainy photos of a Range Rover parked outside Meghan’s house and asking the question: “Is this proof of Harry paying Meghan a secret visit“?
Errrr, no it wasn’t. In fact the corrupt press tried this very same tactic again recently when they made out that Harry & Meg had secretly been to visit the Queer:
And once again, the answer to that question is a resounding NO. I mean, if that had been Harry & Meghan in that motor then you can be sure that the press – with their clever cameras – would have captured them… Indeed the cunts normally produce a fake photo of such events but it seems that they can’t even be arsed to do that these days.
Now, that Chimp video – from which the above screenshot is taken – was supposedly filmed just before Harry & Meg allegedly attended this years Invictus Games, which were held last month.
And of course, it was back in the day at the opening ceremony to the Invictus Games that – again, according to the press – the pair made their first ‘official’ joint public appearance… Except for the fact that Harry attended the opening ceremony with the alleged ex-prostitute, Melania Trump Whilst Meghan was photoshopped sat in the stands way, way over to the side:
And at the time, it was my contention that the Meghan we see in those photos were in fact photoshopped images of Pippa Middleton who had attended a concert, at sometime or another with a bearded mush who looks rather like a photoshopped version of the bearded mush that Meghan is with at the opening ceremony:
I mean, even their jackets are very similar so how hard would it be with all the photoshopping tech available these days to alter Pippa’s photos for those of Meghan? Indeed, Pippa even has a mole on her top lip just like Meghan’s albeit on the opposite side:
PHOTO: A reversed photo of Pippa compared to Meghan
Now, of course I accept that a lot of you (those not so clued up as to the lengths that the press will go to) will poo-poo that theory, but bear with me because I am only just warming up and there is a long way to go before I am done… Mind you, those doubting Thomas’s need to ask themselves why they needed to use photoshopped images of Meghan at the opening ceremony even if they do not accept that those images may well be of Pippa Middleton.
Course, the less skeptical of you may actually recall that at the time (2017), many people picked up on the then round faced Meghan’s resemblance to the round faced Pippa. The following is taken from www.heart.co.uk and is just one of many reports that picked up on the pairs likeness:
Is it just us or does Prince Harry’s girlfriend resemble Kate’s younger sister, Pippa Middleton…
Ever since we found out that Prince Harry is dating American actress, Meghan Markle, we have been OBSESSED with getting to know her.
The 35-year-old divorcee is known for playing Rachel Zane in the law drama, Suits, is a humanitarian and a lifestyle blogger.
Now, eagle-eyed fans are claiming that Meghan bears a striking resemblance to Harry’s sister in law’s younger sibling, Pippa Middleton.
Aside from having the same big, brown eyes and luscious, brunette locks, their face shapes are very similar. And it looks like they could share a wardrobe too!
“Their face shapes are very similar“! Indeed they were.
In fact, such was the volume of reports on Pip & Meg’s likeness that the press were forced to address the situation… Of course, they did so in such a way as to make the pair of frauds appear as different as possible – which they achieved by giving Meghan her now familiar much more gaunter features:
And that thinning down of Meghan’s face with the long pointed chin is very significant, because she certainly did not have that feature in most of the [photoshopped] images supposedly taken at that opening ceremony:
PHOTO: The rounder faced Meghan (L) compared to the pointy chin Meghan
Moreover, if you wade through the mountain of photoshopped, thin-faced pics of Meghan, taken at last months Invictus Games – as I have done – you will find one or two of the moon-faced Meghan that have slipped through the net:
PHOTO: A very round faced Meghan at last months invictus games.
Nevertheless, a day or so after that so-called 1st joint event together, the press followed up with photos of Harry & Meghan watching the games together… except for the fact that the images were all photoshopped:
And here we need to also take Meghan’s lack of height into consideration. You see, at the time, Meghan’s height was given as being 5ft 4ins… Around the same height as Pippa Middleton.
Yet since that time, there is now no mention whatsoever of Meg ever being 5ft 4ins, but I will also come back to Pippa’s and Kate Golddigger-Smith’s height shortly. However, we also saw this very short arsed Meghan in other early [photoshopped] images of Meghan and Harry… Like the time that the pair were just casually strolling around Soho in the middle of the night – without any visible security:
You will also notice that Meghan was wearing high heeled boots in the above photos.
However, as I wrote at the time, I believe that those photos were actually photoshopped images of Posh & Becks… But that is the downside of losing my old website – the information that I provided on there was lost with it.
Mind you, you only need look at Meg’s head in the top photo to see that it has been plonked on to someone else’s body… I also like the way that the double yellow lines disappear in that pic. Also, check out Harry’s left leg in the 2nd photo!
Nevertheless, getting back to it and those photos of Harry & a short-arsed Meg walking hand in hand at the 2017 Invictus games are at odds with the other [very suspect grainy] photos supposedly taken later in the evening at the opening ceremony:
Course, as I just stated, those grainy evening photos were taken later on that night of the opening ceremony whereas the short arsed version of Meg (seen in the top photo) were taken a day or two later… And they are two different actors playing the role.
Now it gets good. You see, I strongly suspect that the short arsed Meghan at the 2017 Invictus games was played by a bird called Salice Sanders… Seen in the photo below:
PHOTO: Salice Sanders picking a lottery ticket (top). Comparison of Salice Sanders & Meghan Markle (middle) and an overlay of Sanders’ face onto the photo of Meghan (bottom).
And in that top photo, Salice SANDERS is seen picking a winner for a cuff-links raffle held by THOMAS MARKLE Jewelers… Thomas Markle – as massive coincidence would have it – also being the same name as Meg’s father.
Moreover, the photo below shows Salice SANDERS working behind the counter of Thomas Markle Jewelers:
Yet that is not even the best bit!
You see, Meghan Markle’s paternal Grandmother’s surname was also SANDERS:
You could not fucking make it up!
I mean, a bird called Salice SANDERS – who looks EXACTLY like Meghan Markle – works for Thomas Markle, which is also the name of Meg’s dad, whose Mother also had the surname SANDERS.
And let us not forget Meg’s supposed half-sister, Samantha. I mean if you have read my book: Meghan Markle Exposed you will know that I alleged Sam was played by the washed up actress Melanie Griffith:
PHOTO: Samantha with Melanie Griffith inset
Yet at this point you should not be too surprised to learn that Samantha Markle is also a doppelganger for a bird called Catherine Williams – who was also an employee of Thomas Markle Jewelers:
And if you want further proof of a massive coincidence, you should know that Meg’s old man’s namesake, namely the jeweler, Thomas Markle happens to look exactly like Prince Little Bald Willie’s wife, Kate Golddigger-Smith’s drug dealing uncle, Gary Goldsmith:
PHOTO: A comparison of Thomas Markle and Gary Goldsmith… Check out the ears
Ears are of course unique to a person.
Now, with all those “coincidences”, neither can you ignore Gary Goldsmith’s surname – Goldsmith being another name for a Jeweler.
Moreover, as you will know if you have read my book: Meghan Markle Exposed you will – or fucking well should have – reached the conclusion that Meg’s old man, Thomas Markle is also a made up construct – more on that later.
And, as I say, Meghan is played by a succession of actors, starting with Pippa Middleton and Salice Sanders. For instance I also believe that Meg’s “best friend”, Jessica Mulroney has stepped in a time or two:
PHOTO: BFF’s Meghan & Jessica.
Now, no doubt you will be saying to yourselves that they are clearly two different people but look what happens when you reverse Jessica:
Hey presto, the pair suddenly look extremely similar, so how hard would it be to use Jessica to play the part of Meg and just touch up the photos… Certainly it would not require a lot of photoshopping.
Moreover, they share the same ears.
And then there is Natalie Suleman AKA Octo-mum:
All of their facial features match up perfectly!
Course, if you believe that a woman can carry and give birth to EIGHT living babies in one sitting then you aint never going to believe anything that I say.
However, you should also be aware that I recently uncovered a porn video which billed Meghan Markle as playing the starring role:
Which is also inline with the photos taken of “Meghan” when she was an alleged Yatch-Girl – a high class, deviant prostitute for the very rich:
Notice the Meghan mole in the above photo but also notice the difference in tits.
Nevertheless, I have long maintained that the vast majority of Royal photos are all photoshopped… Which begs the question as to why that would be?
For instance, check out the following photo of 6ft 1ins tall Prick Harry and 5ft 4ins Pippa Middleton:
Now, how does that relate to the photos of short-arsed Meg & Harry bearing in mind that Meg is unfathomably somewhere between 5ft 4ins and 5ft 8ins in her stocking feet – her stepmother in law, Gorilla Parker Horseface is also 5ft 8ins:
Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall is almost the same height as Meghan at 5ft 8, but doesn’t have the same fondness for skyscraper heels... Source
And when you look at Gorilla Parker Horseface stood next to 5ft 10ins Prick Charles of Buggerlugs we can assume that Gorilla’s given height is correct:
Likewise, when you see one of the Meghan’s stood next to Camilla it is safe to assume that she is also at least 5ft 8ins tall:
Indeed, Meghan’s new lofty height is confirmed when seen next to Prick Charles:
So, how in the name of fuck does that relate to the photos we have seen of Harry and short arsed Meg:
Once again, I would maintain that the Meghan in the above photo is played by Salice Sanders, as is the same for the photo below:
It makes no sense what-so-fucking-ever, does it?
I mean, if Harry is 6ft 1ins and papa Charlie is 5ft 10ins with Meghan in heels roughly the same height (or even slightly taller) as her papa-in-law, then how do the above photos relate to the following pic of Harry & Charles?
So let’s take it a step further. You see, if we accept that Pippa Midleton is 5ft 4ins as seen below:
1.66 m converts to 5.446194 in feet and inches.
And Pip’s husband, James Matthews is 6ft 4ins then there is a foot in height difference between the pair.
Yet take a look at the following photos of Pippa and Jim:
Doesn’t that 2nd from bottom photo of Pippa with the nose and pointy chin look a lot like Meghan… Certainly, it would not take a lot of photoshopping prowess to turn one into the other.
Yet, if that is a 12 inch difference between Jim & Pip in the above photos, and we have seen that Meghan is some times slightly shorter than Pippa at 5ft 4ins and other times up with the land of the giants at 5ft 8ins (5ft 10 – 5ft 11 in heels) then there is at best a 9 inch difference between Meg and Harry and at worst – in heels – as little as 3 inches.
Therefore, Meg HAS to be either played by different actors or the images of her and Harry are faked; or both… Why is that?
PHOTO: How is Meg so short when she is in heels and should therefore only be 3 or 4 inches shorter than Harry?
Course, you have to wonder if Pippa is played by more than one actress since we have already seen her only slightly shorter than Prick Harry and a match for the evil Prick Philip who stood at 6ft tall
PHOTO: 5ft 4ins Pippa has now grown to 6ft
Moreover, let’s take a look at Pippa’s lanky “sister”, Kate Gold Digger Smith – who is also a made up persona.
Now, according to the Daily Mirror, Kate Golddigger-Smith is 5′ 9″ inches, often reaching 6′ in her heels:
While not a royal by birth, Kate Middleton still measures a very regal and statuesque 5ft 9. Given than she’s not afraid of a pair of heels either, there’ll be occasions when the Meghan’s sister-in-law will be not too far off 6 ft... Source
And her husband, Little Bald Willie is 6ft 3ins, making Kate – at best – 6 inches shorter and in heels, a mere 3 inches shorter… So explain the following photos to me:
I mean, if Kate is 5ft 9ins tall and Meghan is an inch shorter (sometimes) then surely we should see a similar scenario to the above in photos of Meghan & Harry?
But we don’t… Which brings me nicely back to last months Invictus Games.
I mean I have already shown you the moon-faced Meghan photo taken at the event, which is in stark contrast to the gaunt-faced pointed chin Meg also seen at the games… Such as this one below:
Meg looks very much like Saline Sanders in that photo too, doesn’t she?
Yet the photo is clearly a fraud. I mean, for starters just look at the arm Meghan has around the woman! Does that look real? Indeed, if it is then Meg has the longest forearm known to man.
Moreover, that woman must be a midget, with a midget baby… In fact that photo kinda reminds me of the one of Meghan taken with the first draft of her Mother, Doria Ragdoll… Or whatever her fucking name is:
I mean how short must Doria MK1 have been?
Certainly she is nowhere near as tall as Doria MK2 – who is somewhere between 5ft 5ins and 5ft 8ins depending on what website you choose to believe:
So, that must be short-arse 5ft 4inch Meg in the faked photo above albeit the Queer is supposedly 5ft 3ins – fuckin’ complicated aint it?… Although to be fair, sometimes Doria MK2 is also a short arse… At least she is in the photo below:
And that must be lanky Meg.
But what about the made-up character Thomas Markle who plays Megs dad?
After all, “daddy” must also be a giant if the above photo is anything to go by
I mean he could be I suppose… Except he isn’t.
In fact Meg’s old man doesn’t even stand at 5ft 6ins!
1.70m is 5.57743 in feet and inches.
Therefore, he is actually shorter than Doria MK2 and Lanky Meg.
So going by the clearly faked family photo above, once again it just doesn’t add up does it?
Here, have another image of nearly 5ft 6ins Thomas and his 5ft 8ins daughter:
Unless of course, as I say, nearly all photos of the Royal family are faked. Certainly, all photos of Daddy Tom and daughter Meg are as I proved beyond all doubt in my book: Meghan Markle Exposed
However, for those hard of seeing, just look at the dark line down Meghan’s face in the IMAGE above and Tom’s arm and hand on Meg’s shoulder.
But of course, if Meghan does not exist then she cannot of had a childhood can she?
In fact I can tell you that the majority of Meghan’s childhood photos are actually photos of Karis Jagger.
Karis Hunt Jagger was born on November 4th, 1970 in London and is the eldest daughter of Mick Jagger – legendary frontman of the ‘Rolling Stones’. Her mother is Marsha Hunt.
And so, to prove my point about the Royal family photos all being fake or doctored in some way, let’s get back to last months Invictus Games images… Because that is what the press call them: “Images”. I mean why call them that as opposed to photos?
Nevertheless, here are just three images showing the tall Meg:
And then there is the short-arsed Meg:
Indeed, I could have gone on and on showing you how these images from the games do not add up… But I think I have given you enough to go on.
Course, if you really believe that Prick Harry (a product of one of the most racist families in the world) would have married a half-caste, plain looking woman who is not only older than him but who has also been married once before, then you really are away with the fairies.
I mean she has a good 15 years missing from her adult life of which we are told that she did calligraphy to supplement her income between acting jobs… What fucking acting jobs were they then?
Indeed, I would wager that the fact Meg is a created character is the reason behind the pair being shipped off to America. After all, the Palace has a hard enough job dealing with the made-up Kate Golddigger-Smith.
And of course, there was also the problem of the kids that Harry and Meghan are knocking out.
I mean, do you really believe that Meg, having reached the ripe old age of 37 without having any kids despite having been married previously was just able to fall pregnant straight after marrying Ginger-Pubes?
After all, I believe that I proved Meg wasn’t really pregnant in a series of articles that I wrote for my old website back in 2019… Here is what I had to say back then:
let’s get back to the national press campaign to discredit Meghan and fuel the conspiracy theories that she is not really pregnant.
And the latest of these press articles to do so came yesterday when the Chimp published the following farticle taking the piss out of how Meghan constantly holds her bump and flicks open her coat to show the said bump off:
Lots of mothers-to-be are excited to show off their blooming baby bumps, and the Duchess of Sussex would appear to be no exception.
Video of her recent public engagements shows how Meghan, 37, who is six months pregnant, uses a combination of clever wardrobe choices and ‘deliberate baby-bump-featuring behavior’ to ensure all eyes remain on her blossoming tummy.
Stylist Lucas Armitage noted the royal has largely eschewed maternity brands in favour of pieces from designer labels that fit snugly around her bump. She has also plumped for contrasting coat and dress combinations that highlight her blossoming tummy.
‘She is enjoying being pregnant and knows that that is what people want to see when she is at public engagements,’ Lucas explained… SOURCE
Now interestingly enough – albeit quite telling – the Monkey Kuntz have not moderated the comments on that farticle which has led to some brutal ones being published… Indeed, some people get prosecuted for writing less, but then again we know why that is.
However, included in the videos and photos in that article is one of Meghan visiting an animal rescue center on the 20th of this month which I was going to write about when it first appeared last week.
You see, I think that the video more than goes to prove that Meghan is not really pregnant:
Now in this first photo (above) we see Meghan at the rescue center pulling her coat to the side and showing off her very big bump… Also note the very high heels that she is wearing.
I am now using screenshots from the accompanying video and here we see Meghan begin to effortlessly squat down, while her very large lump drastically decreases in size.
Indeed, she is almost defying gravity as she effortlessly makes her descent. You may also want to ask yourself why the top photo and the two screenshots are of such poor quality since they have been taken by the press.
Still defying gravity, you would have thought that at the very least she would have put her hands down onto the floor to steady herself… The bump is now virtually nonexistent.
The large bump certainly does not get in the way. At no point does Meghan need to steady herself or show any signs of discomfort.
In fact she stays squatting in that position with her much smaller bump for over 30 seconds in her high heels… An amazing turn of events for a woman without child let alone a great big baby lump.
But then again, I only have 5 children so what do I know?…
Furthermore, I also wrote an article about the mystery surrounding exactly when baby Archie was born along with more faked photos… You can find that article HERE
And let’s not forget the time that Meghan’s fake bump actually came undone whilst she was on walkabouts:
And then there is this:
Archie’s birth papers no longer say ‘Rachel Meghan’ is his mum – instead it grandly reads ‘Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Sussex’.
Now why would they change that? Unless of course, Meghan Markle does not exist, whereas the Duchess of Sussex does no matter how many different people play her.
Mind you, I found the following photo really funny since it is the press trying desperately to convince us that Archie exists and that he is Harry’s son – Harry really, really must have super-spunk:
I mean, c’mon for fucks sake! What are the chances of Archie being a pale-skinned ginger bonce when his mother is half-caste? And of course, don’t forget that the rarely seen youngest addition is named Lillibet after Harry’s beloved grandmother.
Despite the fact that Great Granny Liz and Grand-Papa Charlie allegedly haven’t so much as clapped eyes on Archie for over two years, which must mean that they have never met Lilliput – or whatever the non-existent child is called.
Indeed, it’s all enough to produce a bit of sick in my mouth and about as believable as the following headline: