Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise at the baseball park (05/16/2006)

[A*O]

EXCLUSIVE! STOP PRESS!!!
They just released this artist's impression of the 'newborn' baby Cruise. No wonder we STILL haven't seen any real pics.

[dakodas]

Originally Posted by Sojiita

I love that term "Grassy Knollists"...I admit...I AM A GRASSY KNOLLIST!

I used to live in downtown Dallas, home of the original grassy knoll.

Originally Posted by prnjcq7

But...........Suri is not Tom's baby. He is sterile--Mimi Rodgers let this slip eeons ago. I'm with the Chris Klein theory.

When did Mimi say he was sterile? That is an urban myth. She said she wanted to get divorced so she could get some sex. She was on a talk show and seemed rather drunk.

[A*O]

I don't think he's necessarily sterile, he is just repulsed at the idea of going anywhere near a hoohah. That's why he and Nicole adopted, and then he had to come up with another plan for Katie, ie, IVF with donor sperm from some poobah in the Co$ OR a surrogate if you go with the fake pregnancy theory.

Either way, it's absolutely not natural for a mother of a newborn to spend so much time out and about without the baby in tow. There's deffo something fishy going on here.

[enctpc]

I read somewhere that he had a low sperm count??? But who knows what is true when it comes to Tom

[moomies]

She's still wearing a prosthetic stretch marked skin!!!

[HWBL]

Originally Posted by Karizma

I still don't think she was pregnant because it seems to me that Tom and Katie (oops i mean Kate) are trying so hard to convince us she was pregnant. First there was the "accidental" unhooked nursery bra and now her "stretch mark". If some of us can believe she faked the pregnancy, what will stop her to fake the stretch mark? There are many wonderful artists out there. I'm not psychotic but things don't add up. First Katie disappeared, then she was seen dating Tom, then his excessive hyper behavior of loving her, then annoucing pregnancy, then Tom bought sonogram (probably so she won't go to real hospitals and expose their lie), then her bump fluctuate in size, then although being surrounded by crowds of crazy razzies they manage to go to hospistal and come back without one single blurry photo being taken, and finally Katie travells from one spot to another (leaving her daughter behind) to promote Tom's movies!!!?? Nothing make sense. Besides she and her ex broke up early last year (by March i think) and if she ws pregnant by him we wouldn't see her tummy flat in the summer.

I agree. Nobody in their right mind and with some decency in their upbringing would go out like that, especially not when you KNOW you're being photographed all the time. It's too staged.

[bella]

I disagree. I don't think 'showing a stretchmark' shows someone to be indecent.

[HWBL]

^ I mean the two "incidents" as being sold off as "coincidence". Leaving the house with your nursing bra out in the open and unhatched, wearing very short shirts/jackets that "accidentally" reveal your stretchmarks a few weeks after giving birth. Might not be so much for us everyday Jane's and Joe's but for these stars with entire teams who look after their images? STAGED! As far as the decency factor: do you think it's decent or even common good taste to purposely dress so that you can let everybody get a glimpse at your stretch marks? Here's where "accidentally" and "staged" clash. If it happens by accident, it's not intentional so not in bad taste (goes for too much cleavage from breasts and butts - the buttcrack - too). When you purposely stage it, I don't find that particularly good taste.

[bella]

I have no interest in 'defending' Kate/Katie, but its not like she went out there is a cropped top, and low-slung jeans. The picture was taken from lower than waist-height, and she was wearing a jacket that, has she been photographed from the front and at normal height, would not have revealed her stretch marks. I think it is beyond even the likes of Tom and Katie, to stage stretch marks.

I agree with you on the maternity bra front, but I really think you are looking too deeply into these stretch marks

[darksithbunny]

I say she did have a baby. It is not Tom's. She did prolong the pregnancy to the public to make people think that it is Tom's. I mean really, what 9 months, ready to blow pregnant woman goes SHOE SHOPPING PEOPLE!!!! C'mon!!!

[sprynkles]

Originally Posted by darksithbunny

I say she did have a baby. It is not Tom's. She did prolong the pregnancy to the public to make people think that it is Tom's. I mean really, what 9 months, ready to blow pregnant woman goes SHOE SHOPPING PEOPLE!!!! C'mon!!!

I worked and went shopping up to the day I "blew" lol!
I've also had tight jeans on before , and when I took them off they had left marks resembling stretch marks. But hers look like the real thing.

[Ida]

What baby??

[HWBL]

Wow, there must be a lot of psycho Scientology strategists on-line because out of the 233 guests visiting right now, 31 are viewing this thread. They probably are brainstorming about a new way to convince the world crazy Tommy really fathered and dazed Katie really gave birth to an actual child, aside from heavy handed hints like loose nursing bras and unveiled stretch marks

[sweetrebel]

Then we should have publicly seen him impregnating her and publicly seen her giving birth to the little bundle of joy...I have to admit the stretch marks certainly seem real and would point to her being pregnant (don't think just normal weight gain would make them that big, deep, and purple) but still in the back of my mind I am just not buying the whole charade.

[mia981]

oh thats a shame