Photos of the youngest Middleton that are sure to embarrass Kate!

[fk2989]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1050938/Photos-youngest-Middleton-sure-embarrass-Kate.html

[MapleLeaf]

All I can say to those who claimed the stupid tabs weren't getting ideas and photos for their silly articles from our Forum is: " I TOLD YOU SO!!!"

This article is giving out people's member names as if they were public property.  This article is almost scary, because the journos are definitely watching and reading our Forum, probably on a daily basis.

On another note, we're pretty famous, eh?

[Rasta Watermelon]

Oh my goodness someones been surfing the net and they didn't mention the RT forum also thats where those pics are?

In doing this, it seems she thinks that she is above everyone else, including past princesses.’ And ‘Serene Grace’ says: ‘She probably only wants a ring and to heck with the rest of it, jobs, image, career etc. I think Kate is a bit superficial.’

The pictures, along with a barrage of criticism of 26-year-old Kate and her family, appear on the website www.theinternetforum.co.uk.

Anonymous members of the site’s message board – some of whom appear to know the Middletons – have posted photos and derogatory comments about what they see as Kate’s unsuitability as a future Queen.

Do we know the Middleton's?

Anyway I've saved this because I have a funny feeling it will get pulled.

One even alleges James himself has been on the message board to read what has been written about him, along with his mother Carole, or ‘mama mids’ as she is referred to.

Last night Pippa and Carole answered the door at the Middleton family home in Berkshire and accepted an invitation to look through the photos.

Asked whether they were photos of James, Pippa said ‘yes’ and smiled briefly as she flicked through them.

As she passed them to her mother she asked: ‘Where did these come from?’

Invited to comment on whether they knew anything about the photos or had any comment to make on their contents, they replied ‘no’ and shut the door.

I believe that not......

[Anyasha]

Why do they keep doing this? James has nothing to do with PW or the royal family, he's just the sister BROTHER (holy Freudian slip) of someone who is dating William. Who cares what he does with his friends? If the Midds ripped out another PCC complaint right now I would so totally back them up on this one.

And who on here is pretending to know the Middletons? I've seen maybe two posters that were at the same place as one of them at one time or another but I don't recall anyone ever claiming to be in cahoots with them. Way to go DM, getting your "sources" from anonymous internet forum posts. Journalism at its finest.

And ‘Serene Grace’ says: ‘She probably only wants a ring and to heck with the rest of it, jobs, image, career etc. I think Kate is a bit superficial.’

Oh. My. Gosh.

I highly doubt that they opened the door and verified the photos.   But if it did (and we may never know) it just shows that they love the attention. Either that or they don't like James.

[serene grace]

The pictures, along with a barrage of criticism of 26-year-old Kate and her family, appear on the website www.theinternetforum.co.uk.

Anonymous members of the site’s message board – some of whom appear to know the Middletons – have posted photos and derogatory comments about what they see as Kate’s unsuitability as a future Queen.
DMAIL

And ‘Serene Grace’ says: ‘She probably only wants a ring and to heck with the rest of it, jobs, image, career etc. I think Kate is a bit superficial.’used in DMAIL article:
 

 
We knew they were reading the board hahahahah.   


 

DMAIL:
One posting, by ‘Contessa’, says: ‘Hell no! She would be a disaster! A lazy, freeloading disaster!’ ‘Varya’ says: ‘She doesn’t work, hasn’t worked, shows no incentive to actually do anything meaningful and productive. DMAIL article:

   

We Rock!


I just thought of something, hundreds-thousands more people& journalist coming to the site. Oh no, should we be nicer to Kateums now? 
NO WAY!!!!

[Amun]

 

I don't know what to say about this .....  I'm ... speechless ....

Congratz Selene Grace, Varya, Zdenka and everyone else they mentioned in the article!

[Anyasha]

Several compare Kate’s looks unfavourably with those of her sister, with one saying: ‘Pippa actually looks her age, whereas Kate can sometimes manage to look like she’s pushing 40.’

That was me.
http://theinternetforum.net/royalforum/index.php/topic,35279.msg768596.html#msg768596

[Amun]

It must be a SLOW newsday if they're commenting on what we're saying about Kate and William on this site.  Next there will be an article about another site who's made comments about our comments.

[Anyasha]

Hah, I'm sure there will be. The Daily Mail has just shown how useless they really are. They should be the embarrassed ones here, not James.

I'm quite confused at why they mentioned TRF in the first place. Are they trying to get comments about how people agree with what we say about Kate, or are they hoping to get comments on how awful we are? I guess we'll have to wait a few days and see what they approve and what they ignore.

[Rasta Watermelon]

Thats right the press are the ones with the agenda and wanting to slam Kate and her family, and use us to hide behind it.

Those pictures were not all that hard to find someone searched them over at photobucket the ones with James naked in the bath and the french maid costume on. I wouldn't be surprised if the press had known about embarrassing pics of the Middleton family for awhile, but chose not to print them. Now Kate doesn't look all that great in the eyes of the press and some of the UK public, they decide to publish those photo's now, and hide behind the posters comments from over here and at the RT forum also.

[MapleLeaf]

I do notice that in all the excerpts quoted here from the article, these little tidbits were left out:

And, thanks to what appears to be a smear campaign against Kate on the internet, they are now all freely available for anybody to see at the click of a mouse. ...The pictures, along with a barrage of criticism of 26-year-old Kate and her family, appear on the website www.theinternetforum.co.uk.

Anonymous members of the site’s message board – some of whom appear to know the Middletons – have posted photos and derogatory comments about what they see as Kate’s unsuitability as a future Queen. .....The detail in some of the messages is astonishing, appearing to suggest that some of those posting know the subjects themselves.

This echoes things that I've said myself before, about a smear campaign.  We here on the forum have enough sense to understand that none of us actually knows the Middletons, but so much had been said about them as if they're known personally, that it could possibly be misconstrued by lurking outsiders. 

I've said continuously that opinions should be written as opinions and not as facts.

[Rasta Watermelon]

One even alleges James himself has been on the message board to read what has been written about him, along with his mother Carole, or ‘mama mids’ as she is referred to.

 

I wonder if he logged on here a few hours earlier expecting this article to be posted on here?

[leogirl]

Are they allowed to do this? I mean, yes, it's a public forum, but they're making money off of some of our members!  

This site is fine because we're not selling anything (e.g. ad space)...

At least they're giving people credit for what they say. 

[Stix Chix]

^no one is getting paid to post here either.  unfortunately!   once its on the internet i think its more or less public property.  that might include the photos as well.  which is why you should never download a photo of yourself doing something that could embarrass you later.  although i think most of these photos were taken from friend's accounts.

but again?  that's like the 3rd or 4th time this forum's made the news.  go MediaStar!   i just wish these journalists would start taking inspiration from the Harryites if they dont have anything else to write about.

anyway....stuff like this is why we have to have so many defamatory rules around here!

[leogirl]

Of course nobody is getting paid to post here... and this site is ad-free, which means that nobody's making money.

But if you're going to publish someone else's work (for money, I see ads next to the article) and not pay them for it, that is just low. 

As for photos, we're not selling them, and I believe Facebook owns the rights to the photos uploaded over there. But the DM uses the photos for profit, that they do not own. 

[MapleLeaf]

^ ^ Or ask member's permission to reprint their comments!!  Well if nothing else, this will certainly put our Forum on the top of everyone's list!  But it also exposes the Daily Mail for the weak and ineffectual journalists they are. 

Katie Nicholl never manages to get anything right these days and she hasn't since sometime late last year, and now we find out from the Daily Mail themselves that they've been using US as their "sources", "Royal souces", and "friend sources" for the articles they write about Kate Middleton.  How sad a piece of journalism that is!!

We are posting our personal thoughts and opinions, and the Daily Mail has been trolling this site, reprinting our thoughts and opinions as coming from "royal sources" or "royal insiders".  It just boggles the mind to consider that people read this stuff and think it's coming from Clarence House or from Buckingham Palace, when in reality it's coming from US!!
And some of our members wondered why SO many article agreed with or repeated things they've said, they even thought it was some type of concerted effort from CH or BP to discredit Kate.  Instead, the DM is just continuously reprinting what they've read on our forum. 

A self-perpetuating cycle.  Talk about weird!!  And it's got to be disillusioning for those people who were believing the information coming from the Daily Mail as new info that was validating their thoughts and ideas, when in reality the Daily Mail was just REPEATING their thoughts and ideas!! 

[leogirl]

I agree, ML. 

But about the DM comments... I think that by writing them, most people want them to be printed, and are giving them permission to print them... since you are after all posting on their site. 

But going to another site and then reposting member posts for money? Especially when the so-called "journalists" are being paid to write articles. That is a little fishy if you ask me. 

I suppose I should look on the bright side, though. At least this forum is getting recognition. 

[Stix Chix]

As for photos, we're not selling them, and I believe Facebook owns the rights to the photos uploaded over there. But the DM uses the photos for profit, that they do not own. 

^i guess you could call this place the (unpaid) middleman then.   but unless the member owns the photo (meaning they actually lifted the camera and snapped rather then right clicking an image they found on the internet and sharing it) i dont think there's any claim they can make against the paper.

if anyone should be annoyed it's probably the people who took the photo, posted it to their account and BANG!  its in the news.  unless of course it was their intention that the pic make it to the papers....  either way, printing pix like that without the original owners permission is a risk i wouldn't encourage my journalists to make if i were their editor.  remember Natalie and the pic taken of Prince Harry kissing her which turned out to have been stolen and used without her permission?  she sued The Sun over that if i remember right.


anyway.....there are some really good and thoughtful posts and threads in this forum.   its not like members here dont support Kate because they dont like her hair.  and pretty much all of us know at least as much about the RF (and in some cases probably more!) as most journalists do.  we're not royal insiders or royal sources (Fawbert and Windsor might be though jk! ) but i'd say we know our stuff.

[Amun]

We just observe what's going on and put the pieces of the puzzle together.  The truth is in there somewhere, you just have to dig for it.  I just think it's hysterical that this whole article was "what's fit for print".  So many writers are trying to make it out there and they're rehashing things from a free forum.  Sheesh!

[Mairead27]

Jeez, its as if the DM has a problem with people being against Kate and her family! What, freedom of speech is not allowed anymore?
Well, Daily Mail, is it? 

[MapleLeaf]

My thought is that it's unfair to label this forum as a site that just totally dislikes Kate Middleton.  There are a lot of people who dislike Kate Middleton that post here, probably the majority who post here do dislike Kate, but there is a small minority that either likes Kate or they don't dislike her.  That should've been mentioned also.

This article makes it look like absolutely everyone here dislikes her, period.  They've totally ignored any statements to the contrary.  I admit I wish things were more balanced and there were less negative statements made here about Kate, but this article makes it look like we're on a witch hunt to crucify her.  

Although every little thing Kate does is criticised, whether its the way she walks, blinks, smiles, dresses, or whatever, there are also a few remarks made to the contrary.  Why didn't they mention that?  Why didn't they present both sides?

[leogirl]

Off with your head if you don't like the 2nd-in-line's girlfriend of 4 1/2 years.

Fortunately for me, I'm American.  

MapleLeaf, I agree. Not everyone here dislikes Kate Middleton. There are some fans of hers (people who really like her), people in the middle (don't like or dislike her), and even some royalists who will love and support Kate no matter what, simply because she is William's (the second-in-line to the throne) choice. All views should have been presented. And to be honest, many of the anti-Kate people have left, more pro-Kate people have joined, and this forum seems to be more neutral than it used to be, which is good because it keeps people balanced in their thoughts, and they're able to see both sides, whether or not they agree with "the other side".

I think they just go on a label for dramatic effect. I think the DM is for entertainment purposes only, even though they claim to be a "news" source.

[serene grace]

I think they are using our comments, as an excuse to continue their slam on Kate themselves, they've been doing it enough on their own all summer. I think this article is just a(not so thinly disguised) continuation of how the press has begun to turn on her.

DMAIL:
One even alleges James himself has been on the message board to read what has been written about him, along with his mother Carole, or ‘mama mids’ as she is referred to.

Last night Pippa and Carole answered the door at the Middleton family home in Berkshire and accepted an invitation to look through the photos.
Asked whether they were photos of James, Pippa said ‘yes’ and smiled briefly as she flicked through them.As she passed them to her mother she asked: ‘Where did these come from?’

Invited to comment on whether they knew anything about the photos or had any comment to make on their contents, they replied ‘no’ and shut the door.

  wow

We must be #%^&* someone in Berkshire off!
HA! 

[The Chocolate Princess]

It must be a SLOW newsday if they're commenting on what we're saying about Kate and William on this site.  Next there will be an article about another site who's made comments about our comments.

I coulnd't agree more 

What? What? What? 
I still can't get it? Am I dreaming or is this true???
SH*T

You guys remember when some of us complained they should aknowledge us a sources?

[serene grace]

They've always been using this board I believe. They just didn't quote us.