Kate's tits

Should they be photographed and displayed like washing on a line?

1 to 20 of 33 messages
Blisters    pirate
14/09/2012 at 22:46

KK, your view?

15/09/2012 at 07:34
Quite rightly this invasion of privacy is being condemned. Even by anti royalists like me. She has tits. Big deal.
15/09/2012 at 07:39
Totally wrong whoever owns the t**s but also a little naive, lets hope she learns, the good thing is the British press seem to have resisted or ave been scared off. Only snag is its news now and will likely grow. Poor girl will be looking over her shoulder everywhere and I sympathise with her.
15/09/2012 at 09:44

The Onion

Where can I download those photos, look at them once, shrug, and never care about them again?

15/09/2012 at 10:12

get your tits out for the cameras?

15/09/2012 at 12:35

 

15/09/2012 at 12:51

She was in the grounds of a chateau that had been rented out for the Roayls. The photo was taken with a telephoto lens at a distance of about 1000 metres. A definate invasion of privacy. The only problem is that if she can be photographed from 1000 metres, then a terrorist with a high powered sniper rifle would have no trouble bumping her off. Whoever is in charge of her security needs to take note.

15/09/2012 at 14:34

I thought we were talking about kk's tits here.  If so, then I don't see what the problem is given that she doesn't have any.  or so I have heard.

15/09/2012 at 15:58
I was shocked to find out that it is Belusconi's publshing empire that is publishing the pictures. Shocked that the Italian PM would allow it and shocked that it seems that a madia mogul can become PM. Something is clearly wrong in Italian politics.

She has tits. They are very small and strangely fuzzy and blurred.
15/09/2012 at 16:02
Isn't it illegal to take the pictures in the first place?
If I peeked over the garden fence and started snapping away at my neighbour ( female) sunbathing topless I'd get arrested.
15/09/2012 at 18:22

I think it depends whether you are in a public place Millsy, and whether you could reasonably expect people to see you

Kryten    pirate
15/09/2012 at 18:50
Rickster wrote (see)

The only problem is that if she can be photographed from 1000 metres, then a terrorist with a high powered sniper rifle would have no trouble bumping her off.

Good point, and equally an SAS sniper placed on the roof of the royals' building could have taken out the photographer. Just an idea.

 

15/09/2012 at 19:37

I think it just goes to show there are no lengths to which people wont go to make money, and there are some people such as the Royals, who deserve their privacy more than others. She was naive to think she wouldnt be photographed, but you forget she is still just like us and does do very human things, like exposing yourself when on a beach.

I hope the film, the photos, all get burned and never see the light. There is no way of justifying the right to show those images.

15/09/2012 at 20:32

If I recall correctly, she first attracted William's eye by showing a fair bit of flesh.

Just sayin' ...

15/09/2012 at 20:56
They shouldn't be, but how bloody stupid do you have to be to go topless in the first place. I mean who would possibly be interested in photos of that!! FFS common sense sort of doesn't seem to be a common enough sense it seems.
16/09/2012 at 12:11
Muttley wrote (see)

If I recall correctly, she first attracted William's eye by showing a fair bit of flesh.

Just sayin' ...

That was HER choice. Slightly different.

I think these photos were a bit much.

Nurse Ratched    pirate
17/09/2012 at 11:03
21/09/2012 at 12:36
Rickster wrote (see)

She was in the grounds of a chateau that had been rented out for the Roayls. The photo was taken with a telephoto lens at a distance of about 1000 metres. A definate invasion of privacy. The only problem is that if she can be photographed from 1000 metres, then a terrorist with a high powered sniper rifle would have no trouble bumping her off. Whoever is in charge of her security needs to take note.

Did you think before you typed this?

 1000 metres...just think when she does public walk abouts she must be 1 or 2 metres from the crowd....bet her security should lock her up out of sight.....why make it difficult and shoot her at 1km when you can get that close?

21/09/2012 at 15:49

No professional would kill her from 5 yards - have you never read Day of the Jackal ?  

21/09/2012 at 16:12

A kill-shot from 1,000 is very difficult to make.

1 to 20 of 33 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums