Kate Middleton's Breasts

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by widebody911

I was curious so I looked it up Finances of the British Royal Family - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]

Sounds like they are owned and supported by the state while surrendering any income to help offset the costs. It goes on to say the Queen gets over 7 million pounds a year for her "duties."

Not a bad stipend.

[scottmandue]

Originally Posted by NotaBRG

It was a chick that took the pict.

Just goes to show my extreme lack of interest in such trivial matters!

[Chocaholic]

Didn't read through all 5 pages of this, so apologize if this has already been stated.

It's really simple. When you're any kind of major celebrity (royalty is routinely at the top of this list), don't go outside naked unless you want your picture taken as such.

That's it. The fact that the royal family is making an issue of this is comical and only an attempt to remain in the headlines. They have NO OTHER PURPOSE or value. There is no such thing as "bad" publicity for the royals, and they know it. There's simply no other explanation. The Prince's romp in Vegas and his placement in Afghanistan is also nothing but pomp and circumstance even if it increases the risk to others serving their country.

Bottom line....it's all phony. Every statement, placement, photo, story and action. I make this statement with all the respect and dignity that the exhalted royal family deserves.

[Joe Bob]

I'm in the "I don't give a crap" category.

Now, if the pic would be showing her bobbin' on the nobbin in public.

Topless? Who cares.......

[javadog]

Originally Posted by Chocaholic

There is no such thing as "bad" publicity for the royals, and they know it.

I disagree. Everyone has a right to privacy, particularly if the violation of those rights results in a third party making money off of your misfortune. The public has no "right" to know private details of a celebrity's life, any more than you have a right to know anything about me that I choose not to disclose. And, I find that the average idiot's fascination with the details of the lives of celebrities to be a sad commentary on the miserable existence they must create for themselves.

I have no issue with women that choose to flaunt whatever they have and there are enough of those running around that we ought to leave the rest of them alone.

For what it's worth, the French court has agreed and found in favor of the plaintiffs.

JR

[70SATMan]

I'm sure any dyed in the wool angliophile has gazed by now on the Royal Pillows.

The posted tabloid pic was the first I've seen... The White Bikini pics were enough for me.

[kanadary]

she hot and all but he's the future king.. he could have done better..

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by kanadary

she hot and all but he's the future king.. he could have done better..

I was married to both a model and heart transplant surgeon.... both are ex now...

There is a lot to be said for a great personality, fun to be with and "a partner"....

No one knows what their relationship is like and they may be "two peas in a pod" and love each other to death. How about we let the two of them be happy and leave them alone?

[Halm]

Originally Posted by Joeaksa

No one knows what their relationship is like and they may be "two peas in a pod" and love each other to death. How about we let the two of them be happy and leave them alone?

+1 Joe. Could not have said it better.

[aigel]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Sounds like they are owned and supported by the state while surrendering any income to help offset the costs. It goes on to say the Queen gets over 7 million pounds a year for her "duties."

Not a bad stipend.

Thanks for looking that up Widebody and Zeke ...

Leach - plain and simple. While there is some representative function (think appendix!) left, they are completely useless. Sure, those boys join the military. For what? So they have to add another hundred soldiers protecting them?

Even if they paid themselves from their investment income, housing or whatever else they own. You do realize that they did not earn any of that either. It was squeezed out of their people over hundreds of years.

Some old aristocrat families blew through their wealth in Europe and now are selling their art, castles and whatnot BACK TO THE PEOPLE. That means today's tax payers are buying back the goods that were taken from their ancestors, to support today's aristocrats' lifestyle. Talk about the gift that keeps on giving. It makes me cringe.

Many of you on this board are of European descent but grew up in the US with several generations separating you from the old world. I am still close enough to my ancestors and talked to many of them growing up to see what an effed up life you had as an average person over there until about 80 years ago. That's 100% thanks to hundreds of years of suppression by monarchists and the church. I really have to give respect to the ones that GTFO and hopped on a boat to the US. Shoot, I am glad myself to have landed here, where none of those 1000 year old structures ever existed.

Sorry for the rant - I feel better. You can talk about tatas again now.

G

[petrolhead611]

Newly arrived Europeans shot the existing hierarchy in the US, or corralled them onto reservations or killed with imported diseases;that's why you have no old structure. Actually, the US is an older country than Italy or Germany, so your structure is comparatively old, but certainly better organized.

[aigel]

Sure petrol - it certainly was a bum deal for the people already here in the Americas. All of today's Americans however are glad that they don't have to support a royal family! Watching from afar is more fun ...

G