Kate Middleton Topless Photos

2»

Comments

  • BelgianBeerGeek
    BelgianBeerGeek Posts: 5,226
    Rolf F wrote:
    ddraver wrote:
    Sorry, are you suggesting that she should nt ever remove her clothes ever?

    I find the attitudes that it's OK to show us Harry but not Kate hilariously hypocritical. Personally my life would have been just the same if I hadn't seen either of them but I admit that I did have a quick google search to find the pics.

    The argument that Harry is different because one of the other partyers took the pictures but it's not fair on Kate because it was a "journo" is side splittingly stupid. Even if there is a difference it is so far down the spectrum of "public interest" that the difference is like a arguing over whether or not a truck or a bus rolled past versus the Haiti Earthquake!

    Anyway, back to nork jokes...

    There is a difference - presumably Harry was aware of the photos being taken because someone in the group he was with took them. Of course, it says something about the class of people he was hanging about with but I do think that that is different to someone snooping about with a telephoto lens.

    What I do find a bit rich is the Sun trying to claim that it was in the public interest to show the Harry pics. Given that we know what happened, the pictures don't add anything to the story at all. It is hypocritical of the Sun to pretend that they are on some high moral ground by choosing this time not to post the Kate pics.
    Isn't that the point though? I thought the Sun justified it 'cos it shows Harry doesn't always keep good company. Kate's norks is something different. Serves her right for going to France, anyway. Keep yer British norks in Blighty, ma'am!
    Ecrasez l’infame
  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    Daz555 wrote:
    Future Queen of England should not be getting her norks out in public. :mrgreen:

    she wasn't in public :roll:
  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    beancounter wrote:
    Daz555 wrote:
    Future Queen of England should not be getting her norks out in public. :mrgreen:

    Um....she wasn't in public (hint - that's kind of the issue)

    bc

    sorry ther beancounter hadn't got to yours
  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    big p wrote:
    those photo's are naff, when are they going to publish the one's were wills is hanging out of the back of her....??

    TO THE TOWER, YOU PEASANT
  • big_p
    big_p Posts: 565
    RideOnTime wrote:
    big p wrote:
    those photo's are naff, when are they going to publish the one's were wills is hanging out of the back of her....??

    TO THE TOWER, YOU PEASANT

    :oops:
  • southdownswolf
    southdownswolf Posts: 1,525
    I think that it's disgusting that Kate's norks have been shown in the newspapers. I'd much rather see Pippa's. :-)
    http://www.stuartmole.co.uk/
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,697
    Between Rolf and BBG I think we have it - Yes there is a small difference, but on the scale of Public Interest it's so small as to be irrelevant...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • capt_slog
    capt_slog Posts: 3,973
    I haven't seen the photos, but I'm guessing that it's all a storm in an 'A' cup


    The older I get, the better I was.

  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    now T-cups... :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
  • fatreg
    fatreg Posts: 43
    St James Palace are going to court in Paris today to stop anymore printing in France,that's handy but I'm sure someone else has already bought the photos, and they are online.

    Lesson here is don't do anything that may disgrace yourself unless you know you are in complete privacy.
    fatreg

    "live fast, die young"

    \'Dale F2000sl
  • smidsy
    smidsy Posts: 5,273
    Daz555 wrote:
    Future Queen of England should not be getting her norks out in public. :mrgreen:

    Well as she is not then its OK :lol

    To be factually correct she will be the wife of the potential future King of England (if charles does the decent thing and misses his turn).

    That does not make her future Queen.
    Yellow is the new Black.
  • natrix
    natrix Posts: 1,111
    smidsy wrote:
    That does not make her future Queen.

    I was always under the impression that the wife of the King was referred to as the Queen, although the husband of the Queen is not the King.
    ~~~~~~Sustrans - Join the Movement~~~~~~
  • smidsy
    smidsy Posts: 5,273
    natrix wrote:
    smidsy wrote:
    That does not make her future Queen.

    I was always under the impression that the wife of the King was referred to as the Queen, although the husband of the Queen is not the King.

    Interesting - if that is so it hardly seems fair, another more equal, equality I suppose :?

    I am sure someone will be along presently with the definitive.
    Yellow is the new Black.
  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    natrix wrote:
    smidsy wrote:
    That does not make her future Queen.

    I was always under the impression that the wife of the King was referred to as the Queen, although the husband of the Queen is not the King.

    Prince Consort I think is the term.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    natrix wrote:
    smidsy wrote:
    That does not make her future Queen.

    I was always under the impression that the wife of the King was referred to as the Queen, although the husband of the Queen is not the King.

    Yep, the Queen Mother was called Queen Elizabeth which was quite strange as she wasn't Elizabeth I and her daughter was Elizabeth II so numberless!
  • Mystique
    Mystique Posts: 342
    "Kate Middleton" is an anagram of "Naked Tit Model"

    I bet the French courts didn't take that into consideration :wink:
  • springtide9
    springtide9 Posts: 1,731
    RideOnTime wrote:
    Daz555 wrote:
    Future Queen of England should not be getting her norks out in public. :mrgreen:

    she wasn't in public :roll:

    Thought I'd post a photo of the location from where the photo was taken:

    http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/ ... danish.jpg

    Now that must have been a very very long lens and will agree it is hardly "public". Think it was stated to be roughly half a mile from the road.
    Simon
  • big_p
    big_p Posts: 565
    0note_zps321567a2.jpg
  • EdgarAllenPoe
    EdgarAllenPoe Posts: 48
    Wouldn't mind smashing her back doors in!

Categories