General News for the Duchess of Cambridge 1: November 2010-February 2017


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
^contrary to how the media has played it out, i don't think she followed him there...didn't he go in 2002?
also, Diana wasnt expected to work AFTER the engagement...as Catherine isnt.
 
Oh those pictures are beautiful.
 
Catherine was a sweet looking toddler. Boy this couple will have lovely children.:flowers:
 
Last edited:
As far as I 've read some time ago,on Facebook there was a blond woman under the same name as Kate's,her profile was deleted.Then it came on the surface that she is just another Kate Middleton in her own right.
What strikes me is that now on FB there is one or some Kates and I doubt anyone of them is Kate.So I do not understand why they stay on FB under a celebrity name,if the previous girl was not allowed.
 
Well I suppose if their name is legitimately Kate/Catherine Middleton, it's a little harsh for them to be kicked off facebook simply because they share their name with a famous person (unknowingly of course since these people's parents obviously wouldn't have known a Kate Middleton would become famous later in life ;) )

What should be (& probably is) done is facebook organisers/whoever runs that thing should ask the various Kate Middletons to prove they are who they say they are privately to them & just let that be enough. If anyone is attempting to pretend to be KM then sort that out but if they're just using facebook legitimately for themselves & just happen to share a famous person's name & are making no attempt to fool anyone else into thinking they are that famous person then I think facebook should leave them alone, they can't help what they were called! Lol!
 
These persons have perhaps also a 2nd christian name and could use that one for the FB.
 
Tilla said:
These persons have perhaps also a 2nd christian name and could use that one for the FB.
Click to expand...

Why should they? If Catherine Middleton is their name, they shouldn't have to change it because there is now a Catherine Middleton who will one day be the future Queen.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps some of those profiles also named "Kate Middleton" or "Catherine Middleton" display themselves as "not her"/ or not really her" while the other one, the ones of "real " Catherine's Middleton, who obviously never intended to be mistaken by PoW future bride, didn't even thought about it. I'm just guessing here, but sure the Facebook people, should be more careful. with all the money they earn, you'd think they could take a more carefully look.
 
I realize that we are all excited to share information on Catherine but if we can stop double posting (i.e. posting the same information in a variety of different threads) that would be GREATLY appreciated.

One time is fine :ROFLMAO:

Zonk
 
The Newsweek article on Kate actually has new info--surprisingly. But it actually doesn't paint a great picture of Charles and Camilla--they come off catty, prissy and snobby, especially in regards to the Middletons.
 
zembla said:
The Newsweek article on Kate actually has new info--surprisingly. But it actually doesn't paint a great picture of Charles and Camilla--they come off catty, prissy and snobby, especially in regards to the Middletons.
Click to expand...

Are you able to provide a link to the Newsweek article?
 
:previous:

Many thanks for posting the Newsweek link
 
christinacg said:
Thats a terrible article IMO. Filled with things the author can only assume or imagine. I thought Newsweek was more reputable than your average tabloid.
Click to expand...

All things could be read before in the Daily Mail - but are assumptions more than verified information. In addition the author put some negative slants to it. Eg that Camilla was amused to hear the Middletons visited her old home was printed but I read nowhere that she was catty because of that as claimed here. Plus it is known that Charles, while being very concious of his station and social position, is never unkind or unpolite to people. He expects people who are employed as servants to serve but he does not treat them with disrespect. He is open and friendly to people he meets on official engagements. So while the Middletons need not become part of his inner circle of friends, why should he be anything but kind and attentive to the parents of his son's chosen bride and treat them with the respect due to them?
 
I think we all need to be grateful that we are able to participate at all! Obviously he is HER choice and she is HIS choice. We should be happy for them, not trying to figure out what fault either have that is new and interesting. The article was not that well written or informative. It seems to have been stitched together with a lot of speculation and un-named sources (always suspicious of those!). Congratulations Will and Kate!! Many years of adventure and happiness await!!
 
I wasn't impressed with the Newsweek article either.

They really haven't told US (by US I mean TRF members and those who follow the BRF) anything that we haven't already known in the last 8 years. I agree that the snarky comments about Charles and Camilla were totally uncalled for. Sounds like the author did a google and read some Daily Mail, Sun and Daily Mirror articles and that was about it.

I also loved the implication that Kate was going to save the BRF. Not to get into comparisons but they certainly said that in the past about a blonde and a redhead. While Kate will certainly be a welcome addition to the family and there are certain things that can and should be changed...its not about Kate. Its about Charles and William.
 
christinacg said:
Thats a terrible article IMO. Filled with things the author can only assume or imagine. I thought Newsweek was more reputable than your average tabloid.
Click to expand...

Not for many years. It is now a magazine with an agenda.
 
Newsweek is owned by Tina Brown who is high on tabloid talk mixed with news.
 
Zonk said:
I wasn't impressed with the Newsweek article either.

They really haven't told US (by US I mean TRF members and those who follow the BRF) anything that we haven't already known in the last 8 years. I agree that the snarky comments about Charles and Camilla were totally uncalled for. Sounds like the author did a google and read some Daily Mail, Sun and Daily Mirror articles and that was about it.

I also loved the implication that Kate was going to save the BRF. Not to get into comparisons but they certainly said that in the past about a blonde and a redhead. While Kate will certainly be a welcome addition to the family and there are certain things that can and should be changed...its not about Kate. Its about Charles and William.
Click to expand...

They say this all the time. I subscribe to the Nook version of the magazine and I lol when I saw the cover. She looks great but Catherine is not going to change much. I say that as a realist. The media does this with every marriage. I recall reading how Queen Elizabeth II's marriage and reign was supposed to be the new Elizabethan Age. Talk about hype! :lol: The reality is some small things might change but they will have to evolve and change as a whole. No one person is going to do that.
 
Zonk said:
I wasn't impressed with the Newsweek article either.

They really haven't told US (by US I mean TRF members and those who follow the BRF) anything that we haven't already known in the last 8 years. I agree that the snarky comments about Charles and Camilla were totally uncalled for. Sounds like the author did a google and read some Daily Mail, Sun and Daily Mirror articles and that was about it.

I also loved the implication that Kate was going to save the BRF. Not to get into comparisons but they certainly said that in the past about a blonde and a redhead. While Kate will certainly be a welcome addition to the family and there are certain things that can and should be changed...its not about Kate. Its about Charles and William.
Click to expand...




I so agree with you. Its just article to sell copies of Newsweek,with the wedding so close.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom