Conquer Club

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:58 pm**

A member of Britain's ruling family spent lavishly from his family's civil lists appropriation to party in a $10,000-night Las Vegas hotel suite with several Ukrainian prostitutes last night. In one photo, Harry can be seen performing a maneuver on a prostitute that generally requires payment of a 50% surcharge.

The prostitutes reportedly thought Prince Harry was actor Rupert Grint and were disappointed to learn he was only a minor politician. This morning His Paleness fled a posh restaurant in Venice Beach, California in a luxury Cadillac Escalade while being pursued by reporters and quickly caught a flight back to the UK where he will be welcomed home by red carpet, ramp guard, brass band and 50-horse mounted escort.

The photos come at a damaging time as the Windsor family is up for election next year.

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 2:43 pm**

"YOUNG MAN BORN INTO WEALTH AND PRIVILEGE BEHAVES LIKE A TOOL IN VEGAS"

It's the headline of the YEAR.

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 2:47 pm**

Meanwhile, a youth centre in Worcestershire that provides vital services to homeless British youth is set to close due to lack of funds, the Bromsgrove Standard reports.

http://www.bromsgrovestandard.co.uk/201 ... 47666.html

Harry raised the issue of the Worcestershire centre to Svetlana, the Ukrainian hooker, during his taxpayer funded goodwill trip to Las Vegas. Svetlana has promised to give 10% off BJs to any homeless Worcestershire youth who visit her in Las Vegas. See? Another success by the monarchy. All for the cost of a loaf of bread per taxpayer.

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:18 pm**

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/nud ... DVZz6O6SuI

Buckingham Palace has confirmed that pictures of a naked Prince Harry at a Las Vegas hotel that surfaced online are real.

TMZ posted photos overnight of the prince playing pool in a hotel suite room fully naked. In one of the photos, reportedly taken Friday, Harry is seen standing and covering his genitals with his hand. An unidentified woman, who also appears to be naked, is standing behind him. In another photo, the prince is bear-hugging a naked woman.

"Everybody knows better than to party naked in a room full of strangers without confiscating the cellphones. That's just Hollywood 101," said ABC News public relations consultant Howard Bragman, of Reputation.com. "There's always deniability, but once the photos are taken, you're caught."

Prince Harry, 27, has been on holiday with friends, letting off steam before the next phase of his military duties, sources told ABC News.

The palace said it won't be making any further comments about the nude photos.

"I don't think the queen will say anything to Harry. I think she'll probably ignore it but I'm sure it might make Prince Philip laugh a little bit," Ingrid Seward, Editor-in-Chief of UK's Majesty Magazine said today on "Good Morning America." "The bottom line is he was having fun."

"A part of the reason we all love Harry so much is that we see the serious side of him as a serving officer in the Army and we see him at the closing ceremony of the Olympics, looking very solemn, and we see him serving in Afghanistan and then we see this other crazy side and we rather love it," she said. "That makes him more endearing."

Harry's time in Las Vegas had been low-key. Harry and Olympic gold medalist Ryan Lochte faced off Monday in a swimming battle at a pool party, according to video obtained by the New York Daily News. The impromptu faceoff occurred at the XS Nightclub pool at the Wynn Hotel. Lochte can be seen in the video raising his hands in victory, just as if he'd defeated former rival Michael Phelps for gold.

Harry, third in line to the British throne, was also spotted Saturday chilling out a few bungalows away at a pool party Jennifer Lopez hosted at MGM Grand's Wet Republic, according to People magazine.

"Harry has been here before and I'm sure he will get out of this one," Seward said. " The next thing you know he'll be in Afghanistan and we'll all be saying that he is a hero."

lol, discuss

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:37 pm**

merge - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=177156

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:53 pm**

F*CK he's right - merge, but please keep saxi as the author since he posted first

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:55 pm**

Juan_Bottom wrote:F*CK he's right - merge, but please keep saxi as the author since he posted first

okie dokes.

-rd

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:57 pm**

I'm curious, has there been any legitimate assassination attempts on the royal family in the recent past?

I feel like that would be a more recurrent thing. The royal family is pretty much like the Kardashians except the state doesn't directly fund the Kardashians' shenanigans.

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:11 pm**

Yes, but afterwards they spend so much money building 30-foot tall statues of themselves in heroic poses that it's less expensive to just fund the booze and sex junkets to Vegas instead.

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:48 pm**

Army of GOD wrote:I'm curious, has there been any legitimate assassination attempts on the royal family in the recent past?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_D ... y_theories
Granted it was about 15 years ago and possibly not an assassination attempt (that's the wonderful thing about conspiracy theories), but there you have it.

Army of GOD wrote:I feel like that would be a more recurrent thing. The royal family is pretty much like the Kardashians except the state doesn't directly fund the Kardashians' shenanigans.

I don't think I've ever heard the Kardashians mentioned in the UK.

That said, we rarely mention the royal family unless there's something interesting going on.

So, in conclusion: spongebob (and that doesn't even qualify for proper noun status in this context).

Posted: **Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:22 pm**

ManBungalow wrote:I don't think I've ever heard the Kardashians mentioned in the UK.

The Kardashians are just a family that had their own tv show and now they're all celebrities despite no one really knowing why they're famous.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:27 am**

Army of GOD wrote:
ManBungalow wrote:I don't think I've ever heard the Kardashians mentioned in the UK.

The Kardashians are just a family that had their own tv show and now they're all celebrities despite no one really knowing why they're famous.

they're so called "artificial celebrities"

they're genetically engineered pseudo-humans produced in a lab by the artificial celebrity industry which rents them out for the purposes of various media empires who use them as slaves for making money

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:51 am**

The Supreme Ruling Family has issued mandatory orders banning British newspapers from publishing the scandal photos and have ordered British citizens not to discuss them, it has emerged.

While millions of people around the world have been able to view the naked images of Prince Harry cavorting with girls in a Las Vegas hotel online, the photographs have been banned in Britain by a furious Royal Family.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z24MSxnUPx

The Telegraph has also revealed that armed British police were present at the Vegas suite during the sex and drugs escapade, resurfacing rumors that the thugs that escort members of the Supreme Ruling Family are often used to aid them in committing rapes and assaults.

Articles that cast the Supreme Rulers in a negative light are regularly banned under UK laws and the press are required to allow the Supreme Ruling Family to review and censor articles prior to publication, as in 2003 when an article that purportedly revealed that Prince Charles had violently raped one of his male servants as punishment for an act of disobedience was banned. --> http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/no ... hemonarchy

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 1:23 pm**

Your selective use of the press(those that are truthful against those that are liars) says more about you than it does the articles you cite.

And since your asylum application was thrown out, I am assuming you've never been to Bromsgrove.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:05 pm**

Too funny to make up - while every newspaper in the world except UK and Saudi Arabia has published photos of Leisure Suit Harry, censorship restrictions are still in place in the UK and newspapers face being raided and shut-down by the Royal Political Police if they question the exalted reverence of the Supreme Ruling Family.

To get around the censorship restrictions, the Sun had two reporters pose in an approximation of what the photos looked like so Britons could get some idea of what happened without Imperial Censorship Order 445-2012/C being violated.

I've heard - but I don't know if it's true - that Britons still think the Duke of Edinburgh was the first man on the moon, as British newspapers were ordered to print that at the time.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:11 pm**

A nude photo thread? Really?

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:12 pm**

Symmetry wrote:A nude photo thread? Really?

This must be the first you've heard about the scandal due to the Royal Censorship Orders.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:14 pm**

saxitoxin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:A nude photo thread? Really?

This must be the first you've heard about the scandal due to the Royal Censorship Orders.

It's the first time I've seen a thread posting naked photos of someone not get a quick ban hammer from the mods.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:18 pm**

Symmetry wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:A nude photo thread? Really?

This must be the first you've heard about the scandal due to the Royal Censorship Orders.

It's the first time I've seen a thread posting naked photos of someone not get a quick ban hammer from the mods.

What's really got you upset? That Harry prefers Ukrainian hookers over Devonshire hookers?

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:29 pm**

In Argentina, the front page of La Nacion has declared the buffoonery of Harry just the latest in a long list of scandals from the hereditary government of the UK and notes other incidences in which this particular politician has appeared in Nazi regalia. The newspaper then laughs hysterically at cowed Britons who - fearful of possible retribution - declared to reporters they were proud to pay to fund the drugs & sex junkets of the prostitute-seeking prince.

"Estaría orgulloso de él si fuera mi hijo", expresó Jim Conlon, un obrero de 60 años, al ser consultado sobre el hecho. La respuesta de Conlon refleja en gran medida la opinión de un país en donde miles de calles y bares llevan el nombre de la familia real. Encuestas publicadas a principios de este año, de hecho, mostraron que el apoyo a la monarquía está en su mejor momento, animado en parte por las celebraciones de la reina Isabel II por sus 60 años en el trono.

En las calles de Londres, el comportamiento de Harry cosechó pocas críticas. "Tengo hijos de su edad, y ellos hacen cosas como ésas. Es un muchacho, por amor de Dios'', opinó la enfermera Shirley Ashard, que se rió de las fotos y desestimó las preguntas sobre el decoro de correr desnudo por un cuarto de hotel.

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1501619-el-p ... ra-desnudo

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:29 pm**

saxitoxin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:A nude photo thread? Really?

This must be the first you've heard about the scandal due to the Royal Censorship Orders.

It's the first time I've seen a thread posting naked photos of someone not get a quick ban hammer from the mods.

What's really got you upset? That Harry prefers Ukrainian hookers over Devonshire hookers?

What's to be upset about? it's pure symmetry.

Nightstrike wrote the rules on this, not me. Or at least he posted them .I'm pretty sure that posting nudey pictures for the benefit of your particular peccadillo ain't viable.

A wang is a wang, and I see no reason to view a royal T&A as any more valid than posting T&A pics of anyone else.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:31 pm**

Symmetry wrote:A wang is a wang, and I see no reason to view a royal T&A as any more valid than posting T&A pics of anyone else.

I don't see any wangs in the pics. It sounds like you studied them closer than I did, however, and discovered one so - if that's the case - I'll trust the mods to remove the offending images.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:34 pm**

saxitoxin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:A wang is a wang, and I see no reason to view a royal T&A as any more valid than posting T&A pics of anyone else.

I don't see any wangs in the pics. It sounds like you studied them closer than I did, however, and discovered one so - if that's the case - I'll trust the mods to remove the offending images.

You're not even trying anymore.

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:35 pm**

Symmetry wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Symmetry wrote:A wang is a wang, and I see no reason to view a royal T&A as any more valid than posting T&A pics of anyone else.

I don't see any wangs in the pics. It sounds like you studied them closer than I did, however, and discovered one so - if that's the case - I'll trust the mods to remove the offending images.

You're not even trying anymore.

Sorry I wasn't as interested in trying to find the "wang" as you but is that a reason to be cross with me?

Posted: **Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:42 pm**

saxitoxin wrote:I wasn't as interested in trying to find the "wang" as you but is that a reason to be cross with me?

I find your interest in me, and your replies to my posts, more baffling than anything else.

Conquer Club

Austerity in the UK

Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Prince Harry Naked online thread

Re: Prince Harry Naked online thread

Re: Prince Harry Naked online thread

Re: Prince Harry Naked online thread

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK

Re: Austerity in the UK