|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Sept 14, 2012 13:59:35 GMT
I would pay around £4.23 to see them lactate
|
|
|
|
Post by Campervan Von Bigglesworth on Sept 14, 2012 14:20:12 GMT
imagine having a wank over the future queen, its great! "imagine"  Or when she is on the stamps, you could manufacture your own "glue" and invite unsuspecting friends and colleagues to lick your stamps.. as indeed I am sure Poisoned does already.... |
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Sept 14, 2012 15:21:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Time4aPINT on Sept 14, 2012 15:56:40 GMT
I remember seeing Diana's baps on a boat. Hopefully this time the queen will follow suit and get her floppy titties out too.  |
|
|
|
Post by Plain Jane on Sept 14, 2012 16:09:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Nyron Nonceworthy on Sept 14, 2012 16:38:29 GMT
Clearly his thumb. Nobody pisses like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by WineDelilah on Sept 14, 2012 16:54:37 GMT
;D Sterling work PJ... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Plain Jane on Sept 14, 2012 16:57:31 GMT
We wont talk about the Prince Phillip 'up kilt' shots.
|
|
|
|
Post by WineDelilah on Sept 14, 2012 16:57:53 GMT
And while we are on the subject...
it's interesting that it is considered acceptable for the British press to publish pics of Harry with his arse showing and yet when the Frenchies do similar.., there is an outcry..
Not even fat arsed...
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Sept 14, 2012 17:01:52 GMT
And while we are on the subject... it's interesting that it is considered acceptable for the British press to publish pics of Harry with his arse showing and yet when the Frenchies do similar.., there is an outcry.. Not even fat arsed... From the Sun's article... Today The Sun's editor Dominic Mohan confirmed the paper would not be running the shots.
He said: "The Sun has no intention of breaching the royal couple's privacy by publishing these intrusive pictures.
"The circumstances are very different to those relating to the photos of Prince Harry in Las Vegas. As we said at the time, he was at a party in a hotel suite with a large group of strangers and one of those present released a photograph into the public domain." |
|
|
|
Post by Plain Jane on Sept 14, 2012 17:08:25 GMT
And while we are on the subject... it's interesting that it is considered acceptable for the British press to publish pics of Harry with his arse showing and yet when the Frenchies do similar.., there is an outcry.. Not even fat arsed... What i don't get is this. You are one of the worlds most photographed women living a life where nothing is private and you are photographed everywhere. Knowing this, why would you get your baps out in the middle of the French countryside where any number of photographers with a decent telephoto lens can be taking your picture. A cynic would wonder if its a 'lets deflect from Harry' ploy, especially given that gossip mags have hinted that there may be a lot more indiscretions from Harry to come. Then throw in this gem: So, Kate's tits appear, they sue, nobody dare upset the Royals again and Harrys indiscretions stay on the downlow. Convenient? |
|
|
|
Post by WineDelilah on Sept 14, 2012 17:15:23 GMT
And while we are on the subject... it's interesting that it is considered acceptable for the British press to publish pics of Harry with his arse showing and yet when the Frenchies do similar.., there is an outcry.. Not even fat arsed... From the Sun's article... Today The Sun's editor Dominic Mohan confirmed the paper would not be running the shots.
He said: "The Sun has no intention of breaching the royal couple's privacy by publishing these intrusive pictures.
"The circumstances are very different to those relating to the photos of Prince Harry in Las Vegas. As we said at the time, he was at a party in a hotel suite with a large group of strangers and one of those present released a photograph into the public domain."True Donks, it's also true that regardless of which 'member' of the group released the photo of Harry into the public domain, the British press could still have taken the decision not to publish it... it matters not whether such photographs are taken by 'observers'.. ;D or professional photographers...they will all end up in the public domain sooner or later..... |
|
|
|
Post by Ribanjo Fuller on Sept 14, 2012 17:15:32 GMT
God save the queen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beermonster on Sept 14, 2012 17:30:22 GMT
kates norks look like theve been stamped on ,tits like that and a arse like shes got , somethings outta wack lol , somebody has been swinging on them ..Philip ? .... and btw im back ;D ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Ribanjo Fuller on Sept 14, 2012 17:37:04 GMT
Welcome back, when you off again?
|
|
|
|
Post by Beermonster on Sept 14, 2012 17:42:54 GMT
Welcome back, when you off again? was that intended to be offensive ? if so may i suggest that you go fuck yourself .....if not ...I LOVE YOU XXXX |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2012 17:46:28 GMT
I'm going to crack one out over Kate Middleton's blurry tits later.
Little minx.
|
|
|
|
Post by Revolver Ocelot on Sept 14, 2012 17:53:49 GMT
Fucking decent to be fair ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Sept 14, 2012 18:13:18 GMT
Third time lucky BeerMonster? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2012 18:55:10 GMT
It is quite amazing when you think about it, seeing the future queen (provided she keeps her nose clean as far as the tutti capo Don Greco's concerned of course) with her tits out on a magazine and then susbsequently all over the internet.
Imagine that 60 years ago. The outrage!
I wonder if Poisoned would have fucked the young Elizabeth II?
|
|
