Thursday, 11 October 2012 01:47

Is Prince Charles behind Kate Middleton photos topless, bottomless and maybe breathless?

Written by
Rate this item
(0 votes)

charles-william-dianaWe’ve now seen Kate Middleton topless and bottomless.



Will we soon see her breathless as well?

Breathless with passion, that is. Or at least, sweaty from physical exertion.

News sources (such as they are) now claim that Prince William and Kate are "concerned about a spy in the royal palace giving away their secrets. They are also worried about a reported video of the couple sharing intimate moments together."

And they don’t mean whispering sweet nothings with all their clothes on!

Wow! Did some Buckingham Palace insider really take a video showing Kate Middleton and Prince William topless, bottomless, and breathless?

Who would do such a thing?

To get the answer, ask another question: Who benefits?

For all readers now screaming, "The press! The paparazzi!," ask the same question again: "Who benefits from de-elevating Prince William by showing his commoner wife topless and bottomless, and now breathless, in the act of passionate/sweaty sex?"

It seems that the person at the Palace who benefits the most from de-elevating the young royal couple with topless and bottomless photographs and even a sex tape is Prince William’s own father, Charles, Prince of Wales.

Why? Because Charles is next in line to the throne, but he may have a problem being able to actually sit on that throne.

And it’s a problem that one of those inflatable donut seat cushions cannot fix.

No. Prince Charles has other problems.

His biggest problem is that he would be England’s next king–after his mother and before William-- but not all of the British Empire sees things his way. At least, not yet.

Prince Charles and his commoner wife, the infamous Camilla-the-rottweiler, are not popular among their subjects, nor are they redeemingly photogenic, like William and Kate. Charles is not beloved by his mother’s subjects because his long-standing adulterous love affair with the married-mother-of -two Camilla -the-rottweiler caused their truly British, beauteous Diana, Princess of Wales, much public pain and heartache, and fundamentally destroyed the royal marriage. Who wants the evil fairy at the wedding feast to triumph?  When news of Charles’s fleshy shenanigans with his former girlfriend first leaked out, Diana royalists were said to have confronted their idol’s homewrecker at a supermarket in Wiltshire, cursing and pelting Camilla with bread rolls. Of course, there’s always another side to these colorful stories, but let’s stay en pointe for now.

But Charles has been waiting all of his life to take his mother’s throne. And he and Diana had might even remained married in the typical aloofly-flexible royal style to which they both appeared to be increasingly accustomed, were it not for something Diana did.

She gave an interview. On television.

And in that interview with Martin Bashir of the BBC, Diana said that Charles should step down from the succession, and that their young son, William, should be king instead. Diana went so far as to imply that, while she herself would "never be queen," she would serve as a kind of regent, training William for what lay ahead, while Charles and his rottweiler mistress took off for a stressless, bohemian life in sunny Tuscany.

BASHIR: "Do you think the Prince of Wales will ever be King?"

DIANA: "I don't think any of us know the answer to that. And obviously it's a question that's in everybody's head. But who knows, who knows what fate will produce, who knows what circumstances will provoke?"

BASHIR: "But you would know him better than most people. Do you think he would wish to be King?"

DIANA: "There was always conflict on that subject with him when we discussed it, and I understood that conflict, because it's a very demanding role, being Prince of Wales, but it's an equally more demanding role being King.

"And being Prince of Wales produces more freedom now, and being King would be a little bit more suffocating. And because I know the character I would think that the top job, as I call it, would bring enormous limitations to him, and I don't know whether he could adapt to that."

BASHIR: "Do you think it would make more sense in the light of the marital difficulties that you and the Prince of Wales have had if the position of monarch passed directly to your son Prince William?"

DIANA: "Well, then you have to see that William's very young at the moment, so do you want a burden like that to be put on his shoulders at such an age? So I can't answer that question."

BASHIR: "Would it be your wish that when Prince William comes of age that he were to succeed the Queen rather than the current Prince of Wales?"

DIANA: "My wish is that my husband finds peace of mind, and from that follows others things, yes."

Pay attention to that "yes."

Diana’s answer to the explosive question of whether Charles should be passed over as King in favor of William was "yes."

Up to that point, the Queen and her courtiers had been icily tolerant of her angelic-looking, waif-like, binging and purging bulimic but still glamorous daughter-in-law. But Diana’s publicly-proclaimed suggestion that the Queen’s eldest son and heir was inherently unsuitable to take the throne and should be passed over in favor of his then-thirteen-year-old son was a dagger aimed squarely at the heart of the monarchy.

The only time a British monarch had taken off publicly with his pet rottweiler for, well, not Tuscany, but the South of France was the Queen’s own uncle David, King Edward VIII. The memory of that crisis, created by the Commonwealth’s prime ministers and an uncooperative British Parliament who refused to approve the King’s choice of bride, is still fresh with Queen Elizabeth. Without her Uncle David’s abdication, she and her sister Margaret would have been just part of the extended royal family–overprivileged, undereducated, overdressed, behatted, and wearing pearls and good earrings at all times. In striving to marry a twice-divorced American woman already married to a British subject and still stay on the throne, Edward alienated much of mainstream British society, and obtained support only from the communists, fascists, Winston Churchill, and a slew of romantics who still make a tidy profit writing books about Mrs. Wallis Simpson, Edward’s lover who became his wife. The crisis thrust Edward’s next-ascending brother, Albert, into place as heir to the throne, with his daughter, the very young Princess Elizabeth, in line after him. Albert was Queen Elizabeth’s father, who was coronated as King George VI, and died of lung cancer and stress when his eldest daughter was 25. As he had no male heirs, and Elizabeth was his eldest daughter, Elizabeth took the throne in 1952 .

Charles was then three years old.

As Elizabeth’s eldest son, Charles then became what royalists call "the heir apparent"–the next-in-line. As the heir apparent, he then also took his titles (including the one now used by Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, his second wife) –Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles, and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland, in addition to his "Prince" title as being a prince of the United Kingdom–quite a lot of suffixes for a child scarcely more than a toddler. Since the reigning monarch’s heir apparent is almost always considered to be the Prince of Wales, this title has been traditionally affixed to Charles since his mother’s coronation. When Charles turned 9, Queen Elizabeth officially proclaimed him to be Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester. In making her proclamation, Elizabeth declared to her subjects that, when Charles "is older, I will present him to you at Caernarvon." Caernarvon, a spectacularly medieval castle built atop more ancient ruins, was where Elizabeth, in front of a throng 4,000 strong, placed a special coronet on Charles’s head just before his 21st birthday, and he in turn pledged to be her "liege man of life and limb and of earthly worship and faith and truth I will bear unto you to live and die against all manner of folks."

And die Charles almost did, when two Welsh terrorists tried to disrupt his investiture by blowing up a bridge to the Castle on the day of the ceremony. Code-named "Operation Edding," scholars now suspect that the former U.S.S.R.’s KGB assisted the Welsh separatists, who accidentally blew themselves up while transporting the bomb.

So, his untidy divorce from England’s most beloved princess in modern times aside, Charles has literally risked life and limb and endured a thwacking in the press by his first wife that few mortals could likely bear–all in the name of becoming king upon the death of his mother. To Charles, it is likely infuriating to consider that he would be passed over in favor of his eldest son.

But it is also likely that the courtiers who handle Charles as he carpet-walks his second wife Camilla know that danger to the anticipated reign of King Charles III lurks in the form of New Age celebrity. The royal marriage by Diana’s much-loved son to a commoner who devoted her twenties to sexually servicing him and being his travel companion did much to elevate Waity Katie Middleton, and also to raise her family to a level not seen since the era of the Boleyn sisters. In her white wedding gown, face-covering veil, and borrowed tiara, she seemed very princessy indeed. Royal weddings always elevate the patriotic sensibilities of the British people, and inspire affection for the monarchy as symbol of the nation. The notion that a royal baby might be on the way as well puts the British public into a flush of feeling the joy of renewed promise.

Coy tactics by Kate like declining foods with peanuts, toasting with water rather than wine, and placing fancy clutch bags in front of her abdomen at every photo opportunity feverishly fans these fervered feelings even more. The "is she or isn’t she pregnant" news flashes have emboldened people to parrot the late Princess Diana’s suggestion that Charles is unfit to rule, and that William should reign in his place.

Prior to Diana’s death in 1997, Charles’s biggest stumbling block to being able to ascend the throne was that his ex-wife was still alive–the Church of England not permitting the remarriage of members whose divorced spouses are still living. Diana’s untimely death in Paris’s Alma Tunnel technically allowed Charles to remarry, although the truth is that he opted for a civil ceremony at Windsor’s town hall rather than face the scrutiny of clergymen reluctant to marry a couple both of whom were at adulterous fault in the dissolution of their respective first marriages. It seems a fine point in this day and age, but it remains a fact that if Diana had remained alive, Charles would have been the first British monarch since Henry VIII not to also be the titular head of the Church of England.

Not everybody cares deeply about these issues, but some people do. And Charles certainly does.

Having gone through fire and brimstone to stake his claim as his mother’s heir apparent and still marry the woman he loves, Charles now likely wishes to take the throne with Camilla by his side. Since a poll showed that many subjects did not favor this idea, it has been suggested that, when Charles becomes king, Camilla will not use the title of "queen consort" but instead be styled, "princess consort." So while there may not be a "Queen Camilla" to stoke the masses’ ire, there may well be a "Princess Camilla" in good time.

The recent royal wedding encouraged the late Diana’s supporters to "vote" for William for king rather than Charles. But royalty is not run this way. The easiest way to derail ambition in the younger set is to make it clear to the public that Kate and William, even at age 30, are too young, too immature and self-indulgent, and not ready for prime time. No-- what the United Kingdom and Commonwealth need is an older, steadying, practiced hand of the experienced prince who has been long in waiting. Charles may be photographed with his shirt off, but never with his pants down (at least, not since one time in 1994, at a private chateau in the South of France...oh, isn’t this familiar?!). Experience, sobriety, stability–this will be the byline of the man who will almost certainly be king, provided that he outlives his now-aged mother.

If an insider "mole" did indeed leak information that allowed enterprising photographers to snap Kate Middleton topless and bottomless, and if there was taken as well a breathless video of the royal couple naked in flagrante, the person who would benefit the most from this de-elevation of Prince William and his bride is Charles. As to who exactly the mole is within Charles’s court, that may not ever be known, even to Charles. But a mole very likely exists. In her Panorama interview, Diana remarked, "Well, my husband’s side were very busy stopping me" from increasing her own popularity. The BBC asked Diana about leaked tape recordings of her private conversations with her lovers and friends:

BASHIR: "Have you any idea how that conversation came to be published in the national press?"

DIANA: "No, but it was done to harm me in a serious manner, and that was the first time I'd experienced what it was like to be outside the net, so to speak, and not be in the family."

BASHIR: "What do you think the purpose was behind it?"

DIANA: "It was to make the public change their attitude towards me."

Is there a topless, bottomless, and breathless video in Kate Middleton’s future?

As one dearly-departed princess once mused: Who knows what fate will produce, who knows what circumstances will provoke?


 {article k2:Oiling naked Kate Middleton bottomless to be anointed Queen consort}{title} {introtext} {readmore}{/article}

Princess Diana 1995 interview

Princess Diana Panaroma-1995 interview



Bayoubuzz Staff

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Dead Pelican

Optimized-DeadPelican2 1 1