Kate's Breasts

Show us. I think you're just flapping your gums as always.

And while you're at it, show whether these so-called privacy laws that you are pulling out of your ass apply to the French, or anybody on French soil.

Since I know that a link to the actual french law - in the french language - would be above your intellectual paygrade, here's a link that you will understand.

Did Kate Middleton Topless Photos Violate French Privacy Laws? - Celebrity Gossip, News & Photos, Movie Reviews, Competitions - Entertainmentwise

French privacy laws are considered to be amongst the strictest in the world, protecting high profile individuals, with top politicians constantly using courts to block the publication of scandalous photos that would be considered harmless by the standards of other countries tabloids.

Thomas Roussineau, a specialist in privacy law, says the French publication Closer had without a doubt violated their country’s privacy laws by publishing images of Middleton on holiday in the South of France.

"It is totally forbidden," he said. "The castle is not the street, it is in a private place, and they are intimate pictures."

But he was very clear that the publication has considered the potential cost of a fine versus the financial gain the topless photos of the duchess would generate for them.

"They will have a big revenue, and the amount of the sentence will not equal the revenue they will make, it will be a very small part of the revenue they will have from these pictures," Roussineau explained.

I assume you'll accept the expert opinion of a French specialist in privacy laws?

Now, how about you answer my question.... make an ass of yourself much?
A law with no teeth is a useless law.

A law with no teeth is a law that the authorities have no regard for.

You really do lack basic comprehension, huh? I knew it was pointless to provide you with any evidence... you just don't get it. The law has teeth - thousands of French people use it, celebrities, politicians, etc - very successfully all the time. That's kind of why William and Kate are - as we speak - in talks with their legal advisers about it. The problem for Kate is that she did not know about the pictures before they were published. That you defend this behavior is not surprising... you have no morals. But, had this been Michele Obama, you'd have been melting with outrage about it. The left and their double standards. Funny shit.
 
Since I know that a link to the actual french law - in the french language - would be above your intellectual paygrade, here's a link that you will understand.

Did Kate Middleton Topless Photos Violate French Privacy Laws? - Celebrity Gossip, News & Photos, Movie Reviews, Competitions - Entertainmentwise



I assume you'll accept the expert opinion of a French specialist in privacy laws?

Now, how about you answer my question.... make an ass of yourself much?
A law with no teeth is a useless law.

A law with no teeth is a law that the authorities have no regard for.

You really do lack basic comprehension, huh? I knew it was pointless to provide you with any evidence... you just don't get it. The law has teeth - thousands of French people use it, celebrities, politicians, etc - very successfully all the time. That's kind of why William and Kate are - as we speak - in talks with their legal advisers about it. The problem for Kate is that she did not know about the pictures before they were published. That you defend this behavior is not surprising... you have no morals. But, had this been Michele Obama, you'd have been melting with outrage about it. The left and their double standards. Funny shit.
Michelle Obama would not be naked outside the privacy of her home.

You must have some deep-seated body image issues. Get help.
 
If the law was violated in obtaining the photographs then I believe that the people who took the photographs should be prosecuted, as should the people who published the illegal photos.

That being said - I don't have an abundance of sympathy for those celebrities who live in areas where paparazzi are highly prevalent or who engage in activities (i.e. public drunkenness, nudity, almost dropping your baby while holding onto your drink/cellphone/etc.) that would make for excellent tabloid fodder and then act surprised when their photos wind up in magazines.

As a teacher, I'll most likely never have people fighting over themselves to photography me while I'm grocery shopping. That being said, I'm probably going to have to be concerned about money - how to make more, save more, have enough to put kids through college and save for retirement - for the rest of my life.

The Duchess might have to realize that she has entered a world that comes with privileges and benefits that most people will never experience in their entire lives. She will never worry about how she will afford her childrens' education or her and Prince Williams' retirement plan. She'll never worry about paying bills, about not having enough to buy a winter coat, about having to eat spaghetti for a week because they can't afford going to the store until next month...she'll get to travel the world, live in beautiful homes, vacation in exotic locations in the best resorts in the world. She'll get to choose to volunteer for organizations that are fulfilling and meaningful...or not. She can choose to live a life of leisure - how many people get to do that?

In exchange...she has to live in a world where - if she takes her top off - sneaky people might try to snap a picture of it.

I'm sorry if I don't have a ton of sympathy for that.
 
Why are men allowed to go topless?

4400022532_ccdd667969_o.gif
 
If the law was violated in obtaining the photographs then I believe that the people who took the photographs should be prosecuted, as should the people who published the illegal photos.

That being said - I don't have an abundance of sympathy for those celebrities who live in areas where paparazzi are highly prevalent or who engage in activities (i.e. public drunkenness, nudity, almost dropping your baby while holding onto your drink/cellphone/etc.) that would make for excellent tabloid fodder and then act surprised when their photos wind up in magazines.

As a teacher, I'll most likely never have people fighting over themselves to photography me while I'm grocery shopping. That being said, I'm probably going to have to be concerned about money - how to make more, save more, have enough to put kids through college and save for retirement - for the rest of my life.

The Duchess might have to realize that she has entered a world that comes with privileges and benefits that most people will never experience in their entire lives. She will never worry about how she will afford her childrens' education or her and Prince Williams' retirement plan. She'll never worry about paying bills, about not having enough to buy a winter coat, about having to eat spaghetti for a week because they can't afford going to the store until next month...she'll get to travel the world, live in beautiful homes, vacation in exotic locations in the best resorts in the world. She'll get to choose to volunteer for organizations that are fulfilling and meaningful...or not. She can choose to live a life of leisure - how many people get to do that?

In exchange...she has to live in a world where - if she takes her top off - sneaky people might try to snap a picture of it.

I'm sorry if I don't have a ton of sympathy for that.

I'm sure she'll be devastated by your lack of sympathy. It dumbfounds me that people try and justify this... she has as much right to privacy as the rest of the world does... regardless of their wealth, celebrity or status.
 
She wanted to be seen.
No one (especially Royals with following Paparazis) puts down clothes outside home when they dont want to be seen.
 
California Girl Wrote:
I'm sure she'll be devastated by your lack of sympathy. It dumbfounds me that people try and justify this... she has as much right to privacy as the rest of the world does... regardless of their wealth, celebrity or status.

I'm sure Kate is just as devastated by my lack of sympathy as she is personally heartened by your support, CAGirl. She has the right to the same amount of protection from illegal photography as the rest of us - no more or less. As I said - if the law was violated to get the pictures then there should be arrests made of the photographer as well as those who purchased the illegally attained photos. But if they were attained legally...then she has no more right to not have those photos published then anyone else - why is that such a challenging concept?
 
Last edited:
Interesting that you feel the female body is something to be embarrassed over.

Your self-loathing is evident.

:lol::lol: How far over your head is this rather basic concept? She has the right to privacy - regardless of who she is. Just like you do, and I do.... it has nothing to do with the female body... it's about the invasion of her privacy. Of course, that basic concept is - evidently - waaaay over your intellectual pay grade.
Please show where she has a right to privacy.

This should be good. :lol:

Clearly you are unfamiliar with the laws in other countries regarding the right to privacy.
 
I'm absolutely sure if it happened to your wife or your daughter, you'd be very happy for assholes across the globe to drool or criticize.

Damn, there are some sick freaks on this planet. Shame... it could be such a cool place.

If it were my wife...honestly, I wouldn't really care.

(Note: neither would she.)
 
Michelle Obama would not be naked outside the privacy of her home.

You must have some deep-seated body image issues. Get help.

Only if she wants to be seen that way.
You cant demand privacy when you are wife to a person of Public interest.
This all seems like a PR stunt, poor Kate and her privacy.
 
FWIW: I recognize that she has had her privacy violated and that her naked breasts should not have been disclosed to the media.

That said, I stand in defense of her boobs.

She is a fairly pretty woman. She is a bit too thin, for my taste, but she DOES carry herself very well. And her petite figure DOES make her breasts stand out.

She is a pretty damn cute for a British Royal -- even of it is by marriage.

What happened to her is shameful. Paparazzis are scumbags.

But the princess is actually pretty attractive and her naked breasts are actually nothing to be ashamed of.

An besides, there are so many drunk young women perfectly willing to show of der rack, just go to Bourbon Street for an example. There is no need for sneaky sneaky boob pictures.

From my own experience, I had a husband offer his wife showing off her very nice rack for a string of rubber ducky beads I was wearing. This occured on the balcony of Paradise Island, Bourbon Street. Gotta love the Hand Grenades.

"There's nothing like a girl with a plunging neckline to keep a man on his toes."
 
Stick to things you know something about...like masturbation.

Shut the fuck up idiot.
I see you've met Colin? :)
Michelle Obama would not be naked outside the privacy of her home.

You must have some deep-seated body image issues. Get help.

Only if she wants to be seen that way.
You cant demand privacy when you are wife to a person of Public interest.
This all seems like a PR stunt, poor Kate and her privacy.

yep. Now everyone's talking about the "royal hooters" :p
 
Last edited:
The Tricky Bitch is right on the money.

IF you would be pissed if it happened to your wife or girlfriend or to your daughter, you already have the standard by which this is properly judged.

Sorry, Liability, there is no room for you on my moral high ground. You viewed the images, you are part of the problem. It's that simple. Without demand, there would be no supply. Therefore, you lost your chance to join me in being a moral, decent human being when you looked at pictures that should never have been taken.

REALLY! And what on earth does he think kissing YOUR ass after all the water under the bridge is gonna acheive anyway?

Who thought up "Sandi" V. Jayjay? That's one V. Jayjay that's never going away!

:lol:
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top