‘Very unwell’ King Charles’ funeral plans reportedly being updated amid cancer battle: ‘It’s not good’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Charles was out doing stuff today.

Eeek! Looks very frail.

He looks pretty darn good for being "very unwell" in a situation that's "not good". He looks..... the same.

My thoughts too, and this is a guy who's undergoing chemo. He looks the same.

He was visiting a cancer center, BTW. In these pictures from the DM ( ) he's shaking several peoples' hands and exposing himself to germs, so he can't be that frail.

Maybe chemo done. Usually limit exposure during treatments.

Or maybe the tabloid got it wrong. Wound't be the first time.

There's a non-zero chance that these uber fangirl, can't say anything negative about RF, incessant dog-with-a-bone responses, are plants. Almost certainly from the same very few posters - their responses follow very similar patterns and language. I think a tag team because once they identify the thread, their responses come fast and furious, 24 hours a day. Like it's their job. They also ping admin to death to get unkind posts deleted. So, bye.

Wtf are you talking about? Sorry he’s not in his deathbed like the fake headline.

He may be dying and ceased treatment. Not saying this is true but that it is a possibility, not because I am a prophet or have an interest in any of this, it is just thst I have critical thinking skills. The fact that he looks good in a pic doesn't make the article wrong (but of course the article can be wrong)

Well sure, we're all dying, every day. Even you. You might not be here tomorrow.

You didn't negate what I said.

You haven’t proven he’s very unwell and its not good.

I didn't say I did. You have not proven he is well. You have not proven the article is wrong. But, he may be well and article may be wrong. But saying ooh look at this pic sew article is wrong is not a logical line of thinking.

There hasn’t been an iota of evidence for the headline. It’s usually customary to provide some evidence to support it. Where is it?

[Anonymous]

Snopes did a Fact Check on an InTouch article that got a lot of publicity.

We rated this claim "Unproven" because the alleged sources in the In Touch Weekly article were anonymous and, therefore, we were unable to track them down to independently verify their claims. Snopes contacted the publication asking for information on how it reported the story.


Fact Check: King Charles III Was Allegedly Diagnosed with Pancreatic Cancer, Given 2 Years To Live. We Looked for Verification

[Anonymous]

There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

thank goodness you'll be able to set us straight about when RF, KP, rota, etc, are giving us true facts or photoshopping them.

[Anonymous]

Who could question the integrity of Lady C?

[Anonymous]

God save the King.

[Anonymous]

The next big royal event is trooping the colour in mid-June. It’s usually the last thing many of them do before summer break.

Will the king ride a horse? Go in a carriage? Just appear on the balcony?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

thank goodness you'll be able to set us straight about when RF, KP, rota, etc, are giving us true facts or photoshopping them.

I just hope Catherine is well. 🙏

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

thank goodness you'll be able to set us straight about when RF, KP, rota, etc, are giving us true facts or photoshopping them.

I just hope Catherine is well. 🙏

and all the spares 🙏🙏🙏

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

+1. Often it’s clear these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are just speculating (“Will and Kate won’t want to meet Harry when he comes to Britain”).

But outlets like the DM are desperate for royals coverage these days, so these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are making bank.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

+1. Often it’s clear these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are just speculating (“Will and Kate won’t want to meet Harry when he comes to Britain”).

But outlets like the DM are desperate for royals coverage these days, so these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are making bank.

But the BRF likes for it to be this way. They have these tabloid publications on the royal rota. They would rather have these tabloids out there reporting a mix of truths and falsehoods, and the ability to plant stories without them having to be verified since it's all reported anonymously, than become irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

+1. Often it’s clear these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are just speculating (“Will and Kate won’t want to meet Harry when he comes to Britain”).

But outlets like the DM are desperate for royals coverage these days, so these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are making bank.

But the BRF likes for it to be this way. They have these tabloid publications on the royal rota. They would rather have these tabloids out there reporting a mix of truths and falsehoods, and the ability to plant stories without them having to be verified since it's all reported anonymously, than become irrelevant.

Or risk getting photographed actually working? Charles gets it but Will doesn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are all kinds of people who tout themselves as “royal experts” or “royal insiders” and they were completely wrong about these recent royal health situations. Like, one of the more well-known ones claimed Kate’s abdominal surgery was her donating a kidney. When it comes down to it, none of them know anything of importance. They’re fed gossipy tidbits and that’s all they’ve got. I would hope that especially after the completely off-base stories recently that people would realize they’re just making things up. But I fear that will soon be forgotten when the next juicy story comes out.

+1. Often it’s clear these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are just speculating (“Will and Kate won’t want to meet Harry when he comes to Britain”).

But outlets like the DM are desperate for royals coverage these days, so these so-called “experts” and “insiders” are making bank.

But the BRF likes for it to be this way. They have these tabloid publications on the royal rota. They would rather have these tabloids out there reporting a mix of truths and falsehoods, and the ability to plant stories without them having to be verified since it's all reported anonymously, than become irrelevant.

Or risk getting photographed actually working? Charles gets it but Will doesn’t.

(Doesn't like Prince William, but uses a diminutive of his name.)

[Anonymous]

Why does anyone in the US use the titles? The US partially exists in opposition to the notion of leadership by blood.

I’m sure plenty of empire/commonwealth countries could care a less if the blood line of their oppressors had cancer. The were having a toast when the “queen” died.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does anyone in the US use the titles? The US partially exists in opposition to the notion of leadership by blood.

I’m sure plenty of empire/commonwealth countries could care a less if the blood line of their oppressors had cancer. The were having a toast when the “queen” died.

Blasphemy. Off with thee head. Or on DCUM, bye.