Monday, 26 May 2014 13:11

Naked Kate Middleton Exiled for no panties?

Written by
Rate this item
(0 votes)

kate-heelsIs Kate Middleton, wife of Prince William, pregnant with twin girls?


Is this why Kate’s been out of sight since returning home from Australia?

Or is it all about Kate's underwear issues?

As in, "not wearing any?"

Did Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and the courtiers the late Princess Diana used to call “the men in grey” order Kate to take a long “time out?”

Is Kate being made to stand in the corner of her million-dollar digs at Kensington Palace until she can behave herself and keep her skirts from flying up over her backside?

Or has Kate instead fled to a voluntary exile with her mommy and daddy while hubby William ran off to cavort at a rowdy wedding in Tennessee, and then rubbed elbows with iconic American designer Ralph Lauren and a hundred hot-hot-hot super models?

We don’t know a thing about Kate’s claim to be having twin daughters.

It seems to become a news bulletin whenever Kate is caught prancing about buck-nekked in some foreign land.

But what we do now know is that Kate’s skirts flew up pretty high while she was in Australia and New Zealand.  Her first official steps down the aircraft’s stairs to the tarmac were made all the more interesting when the skirt of her bright red Virgin Airways stewardess outfit blew up to where we know her crotch to be (provided that Kate is an anatomically correct person).  We saw something that looked like a feminine nether region.

What we didn’t see so clearly was whether there was any underwear...

Down there.

It was kinda blurry.

And admittedly, what should be the hairy side of things was photographed deep in shadow.

But with Kate Middleton, we’ve seen it all before.  Like in France, a few years ago, when her alleged privacy was allegedly invaded by someone with a camera who took photos of Kay stripping down buck-nekked in the sunshine of Provence, France, and then having Prince William rub her down with suntan lotion– all happening outdoors, in the great wide open place we call “Earth.”  As in the planet.

You could probably tap it up on Google Earth.

All of this cavorting buck-nekked in public produced a giant hoo-haw of sputtering outrage from Buckingham Palace.

How dare any mere mortal photograph the royal reproductive parts!  

Supposedly, in response to the threat of mere mortal subjects viewing the Royal breasts and things, the police were called and complaints were made, and the full force of the law was brought to bear upon a photographer who snapped pictures of William and Kate cavorting on an outdoor terrace balcony.


If one wants privacy so badly, why wouldn’t one go indoors?

Why would one not draw the curtains, dim the lights, make things genuinely “private?”

If one truly wants privacy?

Of course, times have indeed changed. Just look at what happened when Ronald Sterling went indoors.

Now, the British Express newspaper reports that Kate’s behind is in the news again.

Apparently, while Kate and Prince William were representing Her Majesty the Queen in Australia at the Blue Mountains, a photo opportunity was arranged, and it turned into quite a good opportunity for one photographer who caught a shot of Kate’s mischievous skirt again lifting up over her waist to reveal....

Well, we aren’t sure yet what. The photographer has reportedly put his picture of Kate’s...whatever...up for auction, so that whatever it is that Kate showed the world can be now sold to the highest bidder.

Queen Elizabeth II is said to be displeased.

She whose profile is still on the money and the postage just paid several million dollars so that Kate and Willie and their Baby Boy George can move into fully renovated and refurbished mansions with swimming pools, gardens and the like.

And this is how her grandson and his new wife repay her?

By flashing about?

By blinding fawning crowds with glimpses of the royal reproductive parts?

Or maybe it is the furthermost nether regions parts, like the backside.

Now, I am betting that those rumored photos of Kate being auctioned must be pretty amazing indeed. I mean, the French photographer who snapped Kate frolicking buck-nekked on the balcony in France probably made some big money, but nothing went to auction.

England's Sunday Express newspaper hints that the photos show Kate Middleton's rear-end.

And it's said to be quite an unobstructed view.

It's hard to imagine the fury these snaps may unleash in Her Majesty. Charles and Camilla are starting to look more like the next King and Queen Consort almost daily, provided they can just keep their undies in all the logical places to have undies on.

It’s one thing to not wear any panties when you go to the South of France and are living in a chateau and you believe that a screen of ancient olive trees will cloak you from being seen by pedestrians strolling down the road.  That time, Kate was naked, but at least she was in a logical place to be naked–sunning on a terrace.

But these new photos of Kate's backside are said to have been taken on an official royal tour.

Shouldn’t you wear some underwear if you are on an official royal tour?

I'm not saying that it has to be granny-panties underwear, or underwear embossed with the imperial seal or anything.

But it should be genuine underwear that politely covers you up.

My mother always made sure that I had an adequate supply of undies, and insisted that I wear clean ones every day “in case you get in an accident and you have to go to the hospital.”  Even if my clothes were cut off in an ambulance, my mother assured me that all medical personnel would know for sure that I was "a nice girl" as long as I had on clean and decent underwear.

If she ever thought that I might take a trip officially representing the Queen of England where thousands of subjects and hundreds of photographers were following my every carefully scripted move, my mother would have made sure that I had a clean pair of panties on, with a spare squirreled away in the teensy clutch bag I’d be carrying (if I were Kate).

If a photographer ever caught me with my skirts flying up and no panties on, well, honestly...

My mom would not be happy about that.

She'd grimace just like Queen Elizabeth sometimes does in those photos where she thinks about her "annus horribilis," which seems to be a pretty constant state of affairs nowadays.

And that just means that she's had a "bad year." It's not any high-fallutin' Latin-talking description of the a "horrible rear-end." You'd need to drop an "n" to make sense of that.

But back to that photo auction of Kate's patooty pics.

Is it true?

We don’t yet know, but the Sunday Express did report it. And the sunday Express is a British paper writing about British things, and so they must know something.

And it would make sense of Kate’s apparent exile from all things royal for the moment.

The Royals learned a few lessons from their struggles with Princess Diana.

Behavior modification is a process that must work with carrots and sticks if it is to work at all.

Now, they are giving Kate Middleton “time and space.” Lots of it. Lots of time away from the limelight, and a few sticks for good measure.

Next time, when the Royals hand over $61,000.00 for Kate’s new designer wardrobe for an official royal tour, they will send a “man in grey” to officially inspect the underwear budget.

Next time, instead of appearing in a new frock, Kate will have a zillion pairs of underwear like the kind you want to have on if you ever end up in an ambulance or a hospital.

Or she can face banishment and a well-timed "time out."

All the lather about Kate Middleton being too busy decorating her new mansions to put on a nice dress and come out and meet Ralph Lauren at the Windsor Castle “do” sound like drivel.

All the hysteria about Kate being allegedly pregnant with twin girls sounds even more unbelievable.

But is there a purpose to the baby rumors?

Call it the Diana legacy.

Princess Diana learned that she could blunt the injury of truly damaging stories about her by calling a reporter and giving them an even more sensational one that would easily grab headlines– and not one that was necessarily true.

Pregnancy? Twins?

It knocked the Express’s story about Kate’s naked derriere right off the headlines.

It’s now buried underneath hundreds of stories about Kate’s new twin girls pregnancy.

Meanwhile, the papers also report that the Queen’s office has officially announced that Her Majesty, the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Charles, Camilla, and Willy and Waity on June 5 will to to France to celebrate the 70th anniversary of D Day.

Will Kate’s skirts stay down this time? Will Kate wear panties that are fit for being seen in the ER?

She's got a few weeks to figure it out.

Update: See picture (Does she or doesn't she?  Only the world knows for sure)

Kate Middleton's, supporters' outrages are royal pains in naked butts

Read Sarah Whalen's latest 

kate-pippaBum deals: Kate Middleton’s naked butt, Pippa's false buns
Bayoubuzz Staff

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

Dead Pelican

Optimized-DeadPelican2 1 1