More Royal photos published - this time topless Kate

[RalphC]

This time it is clearly an invarion of privacy and should not have ben published IMHO

 

Do others feel that the Duchess of Cambridge should be open to seeing topless photos of herself in publications like other famous people - or should an exception be made for her as she is a member of the Royal family?

 

[Eastside Urchin]

NO

[missunderstood]

Dont know what all the fuss is about really. The royal family are not exactly famed for having much upstairs are they.

[Eastside Urchin]

ok,so a member of your family was sunbathing in the garden and next thing you know the pictures are plastered all over the front of the romford recorder,you would be happy with that??

[Loose]

Must be a slow news day.

[HKP]

Apparently the photos break French privacy Law, so no they should not have been published.

 

BTW, what are they like (her breasts?)

[RalphC]

Apparently the photos break French privacy Law, so no they should not have been published.

 

BTW, what are they like (her breasts?)

 

Google for images under topless kate middleton egotastic. Not that I have been looking

 

IMHO the Royal family know this is likely to happen, so why openly go around topless on holiday?

 

If you do it, then there is always a risk someone will record it.

 

Looking at the photos she was clearing having fun and not at all worried about which of her friends saw her.

[missunderstood]

ok,so a member of your family was sunbathing in the garden and next thing you know the pictures are plastered all over the front of the romford recorder,you would be happy with that??

 

Not sure, although it would give me another reason to get a letter published.

 

IMO the Guardian do this type of thing much more tastefully.

[The Mayor Of Simpleton]

About par for the course for Closer - you have to have an IQ lower than that of plankton to want to read it imho.

 

About time Lizzy set the corgi's on to them.

[missunderstood]

These pampered parasites expect to live a life of unbelievable luxury at our expense, and seem to thoroughly enjoy all the adulation they receive from the forelock tugging masses, so perhaps they shouldn't be quite so indignant when the paparazzi intrude on their privacy because for some reason that baffles me, people are genuinely interested in their lives. Knowing that these days photographer have all the technology needed to take long distant images she would have been best advised to have kept her top on.

[The Mayor Of Simpleton]

They are human beings,like you and I, therefore they deserve some respect and privacy.

 

The paparazzi had better watch themselves, because if they were to cause a 'Diana 2' there will be a major backlash.

[The Mayor Of Simpleton]

Besides, as much as some people hate and detest the Royals, they are the only thing stopping 'Call Me Dave' from being President.

 

They don't want a Royal Family, yet they don't want Cameron as President... no pleasing some peoples.

[Loose]

She's a pretty girl with an unappealing undernourished look at the moment, and obviously her breasts were for private consumption but the cattle-like celebrity worshippers lap this sort of thing up for some reason so a picture or two of her t1ts are worth a few bob. Big news, she's got t1ts. End of story.

 

I don't subscribe over much to this sacred privacy of the royals though I'm afraid, they love the attention they get, sometimes it won't be the sort they want but tough t1tt1es it seems.

[Rhodes]

Loosely - Trust you to put in your twopennysworth!

[Loose]

Loosely - Trust you to put in your twopennysworth!

 

Oh dear, Rhodesy now wants to choose who does and doesn't have a right to comment on these boards. Doesn't have an opinion himself though so why is he here? Because he's not welcome on the SSML forum would be my guess.

[missunderstood]

Besides, as much as some people hate and detest the Royals, they are the only thing stopping 'Call Me Dave' from being President.

 

They don't want a Royal Family, yet they don't want Cameron as President... no pleasing some peoples.

 

If President Cameron, or whoever got elected we have the choice to choose someone else if they fail to deliver. With a monarchy we are denied that choice, even though we live in a so called democracy. Surely that cannot be right.

[The Mayor Of Simpleton]

President Milibland?

 

Oh dear.. I would leave the country if he was ever president.

 

Don't forget that our Royal Family is THE biggest tourist attraction - without the extra revenue they bring in, we would have to pay far higher taxes. I'm already paying enough for the miscreants who won't work, so sod me paying any more.

[Loose]

Yes. The Royal Firm contribute just £7.62 to each and every one of us a year through tourism. Crikey we'd be sunk without that wouldn't we?

 

Can anyone remember the last time a member of the "Firm" actually physically took in some readies from a tourist? I love these so called stats when the money Britain's leading attractions take in is over the £10bn mark. Actual physical money.

[The Mayor Of Simpleton]

The Royal Family only cost us,at most, 69p per year - for that, they bring in 500 million to the UK Economy:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/royal-family-costs-each-taxpayer-69p-a-year-1723735.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4119194.stm

http://www.gotimeshare.org/visitbritain/00847-royal-family-boosts-uk-tourism

 

Besides, there are no clear signs that us becoming a Republic would benefit us - we would still have to do the same job as they have done, and we would lose the tourism (all of it gone - this would cost us millions!)

 

People may brand the Royals as stuck-up and pompous, but that is often because they have poor standards themselves. The British Monarchy stands for history and heritage as well as for confidence in Britain's future - do we want to dash our own history? Without history and pride, we might as well rebrand ourselves Chavland.

[Loose]

Sorry Adam, I'm missing the link that tells us when the last time a member of the Royal Firm actually physically took actual real money?

 

The estimates of the income brought in by the Royal Family are only ever.. estimates.

 

As for what they cost us, well that of course is only since the Civil List was amended to take off all the hangers on eh? So let us know when that gets paid back will you and in the meantime perhaps you can take off the income produced by the "Royal Estates" and the Duchy of Cornwall etc etc which is British Land that the Firm seem to have inherited through "Divine Right".

 

Perhaps we can have a discussion on just how much sense there is in "Divine Right". Accidents of birth etcetera etcetera....