Quote of the day (along with a picture of *that* picture)…

And something to look forward to in tomorrow’s Economist newspaper, I’ve just received this notice of the main articles to be had…

The economics of a duchess’s breasts…

Lots of outrage and discussion in the Irish press, including disapproval from some of the Irish Daily Star’s rival news paper group, the Independent…

Hasn’t stopped them from getting their own sneaky picture though

Hmmm…

, , ,

  • sherdy

    Much ado about very little!

  • lamhdearg2

    “Hasn’t stopped them” nor you!,
    very disappointed in slugger for putting this picture on the site. we waited a week for a mention of what I consider gutter press, a chance to discuss, what we get is an indication, that when it comes to this sort of tripe its all boys together.
    ps, I hope the Irish star is shut down.

  • tacapall

    Big deal so she’s just human and has breasts like every other woman, whats your problem Lamhdearg are you thinking every man is fantasizing about having sex with her.

  • JR

    What about closer lámhdhearg? I have no love of the tabloid media but I wouldn’t want 70 jobs lost over Cáit na gCíoch (grma Gaelscael)

    My tuppence on the issue is if you are willing to take the perks (no pun intended) of a life which is essentially being flown from holiday to holiday for the rest of your days and the guarantee of your kids head being on all the coins and stamps regardless of whether they are a waste of space or a hero then you have to forgo the pleasure of sunbathing topless on a balcony which is overlooked by a public road unless you want your baps to be paped.

  • Alias

    Given that pictures of Prince Harry naked were also placed into the public domain, just how difficult is it for these royals to keep their clothes on when other people are around?

    She will have to learn to laugh it off because these pics – now all over the Internet – are always going to be contrasted with her regal gowns when/if she becomes the British queen. Give it a few years and the Tate will have a painting of her rubbing sun tan lotion on her arse…

  • poindexter

    I’m sick of hearing about that woman’s mammaries but this is a great find Mick because the owners of the holier-than-thou Irish Independent were quick to attack the Irish Daily Star for publishing the images. In this article http://www.independent.ie/national-news/irish-star-future-under-threat-from-kate-middleton-topless-shots-3230143.html Joe Webb, chief executive of Independent News And Media said: “This was a poor decision. These pictures should not have been published. I understand the anger that many Irish citizens feel at the offence caused to the British Royal family.” Oh please! So Mr Webb why has the Irish Independent done exactly that and published royal boobies? The Irish Star’s editor was suspended over it for crying out loud. Hypocrites!

  • poindexter

    That won’t stay up for long. Screenie! http://i.imgur.com/KdI1P.jpg . Excuse the use of Internet Explorer but I’m in work.

  • Don’t be such a hypocrite LD2 – from your post it doesn’t suggest it’s your first time to see them. Perhaps you googled them to email all the site owners of your disgust.

  • poindexter,

    Why? Money is all that matters.
    When I was a young lad and worked for a newsagent, the local priest would come in on a Sunday for The News of the World. The first time, being an innocent wee boy, I looked at him askance. He blushed and said “It’s for the sport”.

  • carl marks

    What I find amusing about the whole thing is the way that papers such as the sun etc are getting so uptight out this, which is more than strange as they depend on breasts to sell their rags.
    As a matter of fact they pay big money for pics of topless celebs taken without the permission of the celebs.

  • sonofstrongbow

    It’s fortunate that the British ‘outrage’ never manifests itself in as volatile a way as that of the Arabs, and indeed those in the Republic of Ireland.

    No bands of enraged citizenry burning down the London embassies of the French and Irish. Not even a Royal fatwa or Druidic hex on the publications in question.

    Ah well, perhaps it’s best not to make a mountain out of a molehill(s) :0

  • Or the americans bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade? Different? You bet, but so is the ROI riot you reference.

  • sonofstrongbow

    ….. but it’s always “different” for Irish nationalists.

    I expect they believe that eight hundred years (and counting) of the most unimaginable oppression ever on the face of the Earth entitles them to a blank cheque on misbehaviour to, oh, at least 2516.

    Mopes-R-Us as they might say.

  • I hope they get damages from all of them. There’s no excuse for invasion of privacy. The excuses used by the mag and paper editors are really pathetic.

  • Okay, Sonofstrongbow,

    I see your embassy attack and raise you the Dresden bombings. You’re free to peddle your anti irish garbabe and stiff upper lip British restraint, just don’t expect to get a free ride.

    And, is the 800 years of oppression jibe all you’ve got? That’s a stock answer of the weak of mind.

  • carl marks

    sonofstrongbow (profile)
    21 September 2012 at 10:05 am

    It’s fortunate that the British ‘outrage’ never manifests itself in as volatile a way as that of the Arabs, and indeed those in the Republic of Ireland.

    . Dumcree. Harryville, Holy cross, short strand. carlise circus, UWC lock out to name but a few.
    You were saying about “British Outrage” never manifesting itself, I do believe I have just found another example of mote, beam, and eye syndrome.
    We have just had British loyalists rioting in the streets and trying to kill policemen because they are not being allowed to offend their neighbours and you still manage to come out with the old moral high ground nonsense. Wonderful you couldn’t Make it up.

  • About the best laugh in the whole thing was the US headline (Salon.com ?):

    Kate Middleton still has breasts: Official.

  • lamhdearg2

    not just at Malcolm,

    ould it be a laugh if it was your wife/daughter/sister/girl.
    or is it only a laugh when its someone else, someone else those family you dislike.

  • Greenflag

    @ carl marks

    And don’t forget those outraged soccer fans A.k.a Combat 18 at Lansdowne Road when the Ireland team had the effrontery to score the first goal 😉 Could have been a bloodbath worse than any Hillsborough !

  • lamhdearg2

    I think slugger should take down the link to the picture.

  • tacapall

    “It’s fortunate that the British ‘outrage’ never manifests itself in as volatile a way as that of the Arabs, and indeed those in the Republic of Ireland”

    SOS I think Unionists are lucky St Patricks isn’t a Muslim synagogue as Im sure there would be no talking about another parade past it.

  • Greenflag

    @ mister joe ,

    I agree these celebrity nude seekers and paparazzi are the scum of journalism . I’ve no love for the royal family or aristocracy as an institution – but they should be left to their privacy and private lives unless they have committed a crime .
    on the other hand

    A much better story hitting the news was the Beeb article re the disciplining of the British Minister for Discipline (Tory Chief Whip ) by the Prime MInister for being how shall I put it ‘undisciplined’ in his remarks to a police officer who had the effrontery apparently to tell the Chief Whip that he must dismount from his bicycle at the gate to Downing Street .

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19671093

    I tell you the plebs are revolting these days 🙂 and some of them are even the bobbies ye gods !

  • lamhdearg2 @ 6:27 pm:

    Point taken.

    Except the reaction of my Pert Young Piece was instructive. The difference is that some, definitively not “us”, are on a very different social plane. When that plane reaches the stratospheric, the “victim” should be aware that anything goes. Paparazzi have a living to make, and enjoy lifestyles liberally subsidised by the same editors currently bewailing this lèse-majesté.

    Thereupon there are only two possible reactions:

    1. Aw shucks!

    2. Headless chicken hysteria.

    The UK press, of course, could be guaranteed to go the second route. My guess is that thousands of good-living Irish and British girls quite happily expose themselves on beaches around the world, without regard to whether it ends up on some hard drives.

    So, c’mon: it’s no big deal. Let’s all move on: nothing to see here.

    Far more important, more significant, more telling, more enduring about the continuing class war is a UK Cabinet minister who abuses the local constabulary, and regards them as “plebs”. This week of all weeks.

  • Grief, Greenflag @ 6:43 pm: this is uncanny.

  • Reader

    Greenflag: A much better story hitting the news was the Beeb article re the disciplining of the British Minister for Discipline (Tory Chief Whip ) by the Prime MInister for being how shall I put it ‘undisciplined’ in his remarks to a police officer who had the effrontery apparently to tell the Chief Whip that he must dismount from his bicycle at the gate to Downing Street .
    He sounds like a complete git, doesn’t he? And after all, who would doubt the word of a policeman backed up by The Sun newspaper?

  • Greenflag

    @ malcolm redfellow ,

    Uncanny – indeed something about great or more modestly lesser minds thinking alike 🙂 Whatever it was certainly very uncanny of Chief Whip ‘The Thrasher Mitchell ‘ to make said remarks . As I hooted with laughter reading the beeb article my mind wandered back to that great series ‘The House of Cards ‘ and a scene in which the Chief Whip Francis Urquart is delivering a spanking to some Tory MP who has been less than discreet in his purloining the services of a lady of the night .

    @ reader ,

    Yes he does but I hope they don’t force his resignation . This ‘spoilt brat’ can keep delivering much needed humour to keep the headliners engaged . As a Minister who uses a bicycle Mr Mitchell must be commended for his environmental concern . At least if he ever rises high enough in the Tory Party and has to address the millions of unemployed he will at least be able to state with conviction and credibility those immortal words beloved of the high and mighty to their lesser well off countrymen

    GET UP ON YER BIKE !

    of course in his case it might be more like

    GET OFFa YER BIKE not a reference to OFFA’s dyke btw 🙂

  • lamhdearg2

    “My guess is that thousands of good-living Irish and British girls quite happily expose themselves on beaches around the world, without regard to whether it ends up on some hard drives.

    So, c’mon: it’s no big deal. Let’s all move on: nothing to see here”.

    maybe this girl is differant, maybe this girl does not want to expose herself to the world, if she did she could always go to the beach and do so.

    if someone was to creep around the woods and take pictures of girls sunbathing in their gardens, then post those pictures on the net, they rightly would be arrested,
    why sould it be ok to do it to someone just because they are well known, she did not want someone to take pictures of her, she did not want the world to see her topless, we should respect that.

    this is fast becoming a goodbye issue for me and slugger, I dare say I wont be missed, but if this is the way its going, I wont miss slugger either.

  • Greenflag

    @ malcolm redfellow .

    ‘This week of all weeks.’

    Indeed . A reference no doubt to the horrific murders of the two brave Manchester policewomen .:( Awful just bloody evil !

  • carl marks

    lamhdearg2
    BYE

  • Greenflag

    @ lamhdearg 2,

    No need to get your knickers in a twist and adopting a prima donna like stance . Yes it was in poor taste but thats the way of this oft times tasteless tabloid newspaper world .

    Malcolms right move on we’ve seen it all before haven’t we ?

    Kate will get over it and no doubt her lawyers will make hay with the revenues they will extract from these tabloids.

    A two day /three day wonder thats all.

  • sonofstrongbow

    smcgiff,

    For my people there is a world of difference between the prosecution of a war between two states and the burning down of the embassy of a friendly country during peacetime, whilst the forces of law and order stand idly by.

    Those said forces of law and order were also noticeable by their absence when the Ambassador was murdered.

    I do accept that in Irish republican la-la land such ‘nuances’ can be ‘misunderstood’. I also accept your characterisation of the ‘800 years’ comment, but as with the above I give Irish republicans a by-ball; ya gotta let them get a MOPE where they can find it.

    Greenflag

  • sonofstrongbow

    Greenflag, as I was saying,

    There is also a world of difference between lawbreakers attacking police and the attack on a friendly country’s embassy with the police standing about twiddling their collective thumbs. That’s contrary to the host country’s responsibility under international convention.

    tacapall,

    get behind me Troll.

  • I’m adrift here.

    I don’t recall the Great British (and/or Irish) Media frothing about “exposures” of Carla Bruni-Sarkozy. She, at least, was the wife of a Head of State.

    This latest Mrs Windsor has no official position. Her role in life is to be an heir-producer, a clothes-horse and a snipper of official ribbons. Doubtless she will do all of those tasks with aplomb, to the playing of anthems and the waving of flags.

    Her success will be measured in terms of the favourable press-coverage she wins for “the family firm”. So:

    1. Why not withdraw all publicity, good or bad? Or are we only allowed one option? In which case should the UK borrow Article 112 of Thailand’s criminal code? [Look it up.]

    2. As the aforesaid Pert Young Piece also remarked: “Where’s Pippa’s bum when you need distraction therapy?”

    Anyway, what should be expected of the daughter of Carole “Cabin doors to manual” Middleton? The establishment were happy to diss both of them when times were different.

  • Greenflag

    @ lamhdearg 2

    As it’s Friday I’ll let Kenny Rogers give you some sage advice re foldin or fightin

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XAxsS3IwXY

  • tacapall

    Lamhdearg nice try at emotional blackmail.

    SOS do try harder, I’ve been called far worse.

  • Greenflag

    sonofstrongbow ,

    ‘There is also a world of difference between lawbreakers attacking police and the attack on a friendly country’s embassy with the police standing about twiddling their collective thumbs.’

    There is indeed . But they were’nt twiddling their collective thumbs . There were 20,000 plus protestors i.e a number greater than the entire Irish Defence Force and Dublin Gardai at the time . It would have taken an Irish Army brigade prepared and willing to shoot dead a couple of hundred protestors to save the Embassy and I assume that wise heads decided that a building could be rebuilt in time but the Government/State might not survive the Irish Army shooting dead several hundred people to defend the British Embassy in particular after the Bloody Sunday killings .

    There are occasions when international conventions mean ‘diddly squat ‘ and that was one of them .

    I don’t recall the circumstances around the tragic murder of Ambassador Biggs but Taoiseach Liam Cosgrave declared at the time that “this atrocity fills all decent Irish people with a sense of shame.”

    Heres a link which disproves your assertion that the forces of law and order were also noticeable by their absence when the Ambassador was murdered.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Ewart-Biggs

  • Reader

    Malcolm Redfellow: Except the reaction of my Pert Young Piece was instructive. The difference is that some, definitively not “us”, are on a very different social plane. When that plane reaches the stratospheric, the “victim” should be aware that anything goes.
    It’s a bit like tax, isn’t it? People tend to think that others with a higher income than themselves should pay more tax; but that they pay quite enough. Similarly, your “Pert Young Piece” – pert, successful and wealthy, no doubt – thinks that the rules that protect her should not protect others in an even more more favoured position.
    But anyway, if you want to have a go at the hypocrisy of newspaper editors – go for it.

  • Greenflag

    It looks like the Chief Whip is being lined up for being the Chief whipped to judge from latest reports . The backbenches are beckoning methinks .

    “Downing Street must make clear exactly what Andrew Mitchell said to the police officer,” a Labour party spokesman said.

    “There are two alternatives. Either the chief whip used appalling and offensive language to an officer going about their duty or Mr Mitchell is saying the officer is lying.

    “Downing Street will know. They must make the position clear urgently. A half-hearted apology is not enough.”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19675297

    Ah well he can always find a refuge in merchant banking I suppose .

  • Rory Carr

    These shots of William and Kate in flagrante are mild fare indeed when, according to a report in Private Eye, the Mexican magazine, Nueva had already published, in November 2008, snapshots of Wiiliam’s half-brother, Harry urinating against a fence during his charity motor cycle ride across South Africa with William. The snaps included close-ups of the royal penis,

    Then earlier this month the US blog site, TMZ.com showed pictures taken “up-skirt” of Prince Philip at the Highland Games showing what they coyly described as. “the one-eyed Loch Ness Monster.”

    Risqué as such material may seem it is in all likliehood too tame for Daily Star, Daily Express and pornography mogul, Richard Desmond who hypociritcally condemned the Irish Daily Star (of which he retains 50% ownership) given that on the occasion of William and Kate’s nuptials, on his pornographic television channels, Television X and Red Hot TV was screened a delightful little fim titled, A Royal Romp wherein a lookalike of the newly wed bride played a character named, Kate Piddleton (Yes, you’ve probably by now guessed some of the content of the “plot”,) “Kate engages in hardcore sex scenes with lookalikes of both William and Harry and Harry’s former girl friend all while lookalikes of the Queen and Philip stand observing. Charming, what ?

    And the justification for screening this filth (if one were needed) ? Well let Desmond’sprogramming chief speak for the company –

    “We have chosen to put A Royal Romp on both Television X and Red Hot TV acroos the Friday and Saturday of the Royal Wedding bank holiday weekendto make sure as many people as possible get a chance to view,” announced Desmond’s Chief of Programming, Chris Ratcliff.

    Such consideration. Such loyalty to the Royal Family.

  • Mark

    ” the snaps included close ups of the royal penis ” …….

    You’ll have to narrow that down a bit Rory .

  • Mark

    Lamhdearg ,

    Would it be a laugh if it was your wife / daughter / sister / girl whose picture was burning on a bonfire ?

  • Mark

    And who needs Kate Middleton when we have Rosanna Davison ?

  • babyface finlayson

    lamhdearg2
    “is it only a laugh when its someone else, someone else those family you dislike.”
    For what it’s worth I for one think you have it rgiht here.
    Too many people are so blinded by their disdain for Royalty (which I share by the way) they cannot bring themselves to say this is simply wrong.
    So we get comments making a joke of it or to the effect that ,
    ‘she knows what to do if she doesn’t like it’,or
    ‘what do you expect from the press’.
    Pathetic.

  • Private Eye this week has shown the puffery of non-photo publishing editors for what it is. Classic stuff(ing).

  • Oh, come off it, babyface finlayson @ 9:09 pm. Of course it’s “wrong”. Wrong in so many ways — so let’s not bother to count them.

    The biggest “wrong” of all derives from double standards. And that’s what we have here. In a word: values.

    Take a gander at the side bar of the respectably-bourgeois Daily Mail‘s web page. Flick through any of the sleazy tabloids. You’ll see far more intrusion, far more offence, worse misrepresentation. It’s just that Jane Chav and Joe Bloke don’t have a whole press office and gilt-embossed lawyers to defend them.

    By the way, Reader @ 8:10 pm, the Pert Young Piece earned her crust at a South London Magistrates Court today, winning a RTA case. She “earns” barely two-thirds of what a new-entrant teacher would. Happily, unlike many of her generation, she still has a gainful employment. Does the former Miss Middleton, and, if so, in which posture?

  • Reader

    Malcolm Redfellow: By the way, Reader @ 8:10 pm, the Pert Young Piece earned her crust at a South London Magistrates Court today, winning a RTA case. She “earns” barely two-thirds of what a new-entrant teacher would.
    I suppose the downside of believing that wealthy people shouldn’t have the protection of the law is that she doesn’t get many wealthy clients. Anyway, congratulate her on sticking by her principles.

  • There should be no “ifs and or buts”. It’s just wrong that anyone’s off-guard photos in a private setting should be made public. Same with the young lad a couple of weeks ago.

  • Reader @ 9:40 pm:

    Keep up with the programme.

    You may not have noticed it — the rest of us did, and cared. Legal aid has effectively been abolished across many areas. It took a last-minute House of Lords revolt — against ConDem opposition, and then only by a majority of three — even to retain minimal protection for victims of the most heinous domestic violence.

    The sad truth is that, in practice, only your wealthy people now have the protection of the law. Of course, it helps even more if you are a Russian oligarch.

    But then, my set of priorities must be distorted, in that I cannot regard this shoddy royal-“privacy” business as the one legal issue that, above all else, provokes “fury … anger and disbelief“.

  • Mister_Joe @ 9:47 pm:

    Of course you are quite correct there.

    But is this an issue demanding public attention or even an extended Slugger thread?

    The fault, if there is one, lies with prurient public nosiness. As long as the Great British (and Irish. And French. And Italian. And Danish) Public are prepared to pay out good money for such trash, the sleaze-merchants and their legions of go-fers will provide it.

    If it genuinely is a matter of popular concern, the populace have an instant remedy.

  • carl marks

    Malcolm Redfellow

    I agree, those parts of the media most outraged are by and large those who make the most cash for this crap but I think it was Lord Beaverbrook (could be wrong) that said,
    “Nobody ever lost money by underestimating the stupidity of the public”
    And when we look for what passes for news in some of the tabloids we can see that he was right.

  • carl,

    Check out Private Eye on-line.

  • carl marks

    Just did that Joe
    says it all doesnt it.

  • babyface finlayson

    Malcolm
    “Take a gander at the side bar of the respectably-bourgeois Daily Mail‘s web page. Flick through any of the sleazy tabloids. You’ll see far more intrusion, far more offence, worse misrepresentation. It’s just that Jane Chav and Joe Bloke don’t have a whole press office and gilt-embossed lawyers to defend them.”
    I agree absolutely. But two wrongs don’t make a right..
    Obscuring this by having a good old chuckle about it only panders to those sleazy tabloids.
    I mean, how easy and lazy is all that Mrs Windsor stuff. At least come up with something original.