The King to be

[walter05]

It would appear that the UK has a nudist future king.

[walter05]

I think the king to be will be a friend to nudists.

[EZ Nude]

Don't you love Photo Shop.

[bill2me]

These are a riot. Thanks for posting. Wonder what the Queen would say if they were real?

[nudenwv]

lol.....if i didn't know who he was i'd walk right passed him. just looks like another nudist to me enjoying the day. thanks for the post.

[maxnude]

The attached picture by "walter05" is probably real as the press and rumor is Prince william had himself circumcised privately after Dianna's death.

http://www.foxnews.com/images/267418/0_65_harry_prince_020707.jpghttp://www.clothesfreeforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1318&d=1237234568

Royalty
Now that Diana is gone, can we assume William (15) and Harry (12) will be going to live with Dad (Prince Charles) and the Queen? If so, perhaps a couple of teen circumcisions are in the boy's future! I'd bet the boys would be wondering about their nippled skins when most all of the other Royals and upper class friends have clean, bared glans... maybe they will even ask if they can be circumcised. While I know it will never happen, can you imagine how the circumcision rate would increase in England if William and Harry announced they were going to be circumcised at their own request?? There wouldn't be enough teen sized Gomco's in the country to handle the requests that would flood in and teen girls would never want anything but a cleanly circumcised boy (like the new young Princes) ever again!
The tabloid press recently reported that Prince William was circumcised at his request at a private surgical clinic in London. No doubt he felt different than his peers and wanted to be circumcised like them and the other men in his family.* Decide for yourself by watching this video clip of Prince William urinating outdoors. (To save the video to your computer, just 'right mouse click' and select 'save target as'.)
A relatively good and obviously genuine picture of Britain's Prince William has appeared recently.** The young prince is pictured is pictured in tennis gear, next to his mother in very loose fitting shorts, with one leg up. Without a doubt, Prince William is indeed circumcised. It seems that earlier reports of his circumcision are true.
Apparently Queen Victoria introduced circumcision into the royal family and this tradition has been carried on ever since. The jury is still out on whether or not Prince William has subsequently had the op at his own request. Perhaps one day the definitive answer will be known. Coming from a cut family and having access to the best surgeons without any worries about cost etc, plus a Father who would, no doubt, support his choice, it is difficult to imagine that he hasn't taken advantage of this situation already.
I think circumcision in the UK has always been something chosen by upper class families although not necessarily a class issue. Many families in the 30's and 40's from whatever background saw circumcision as a symbol of a gentlemen that they wished to pass onto their sons.
Whilst RIC has never been practiced here, circumcision in the UK, during the first half of the 20th century, was freely available if requested and often recommended if your family Doctor was pro circ. This lead to local variations, including a low or high cut rate at your local school, depending on the local Doctors views.
With the introduction of our free health service in 1948 the variations in circ continued, but perhaps as a money saving exercise during the 50's and 60's, circumcision was considered unnecessary surgery and went into decline. It is ironic to think that at these times, that if a boy had been born in any English speaking country, around the world, except the UK, it is unlikely that he would have left the hospital intact.
Whether or not it is just the Doctors here in the UK who continue to circumcise their sons or not, I don't know, but they are likely to have private medical insurance along with many other similar professionals suggesting that since the introduction of private health insurance circ is available again here for those who are prepared to pay for it.
Mark (UK)

It is documented in one of the biographies of Prince Charles (I don't now know which) that he was circumcised by Dr Snowman - a leading mohel of his time. A Jewish friend of mine confirmed this one day when he said that his own younger brother was also circumcised by Dr Snowman.
Pictures of Prince Andrew, and reports from his fellow pupils at Gordonstoun school, confirm that he is circumcised. Prince Edward is widely held to also be circumcised.
Princess Diana for some reason best known to herself was opposed to circumcision and refused to allow either William or Harry to be done. There were reports at the time which suggested that both the Queen and Prince Philip were very annoyed at this (which would back up the suggestion that Edward was done).
Believe it or not circumcision of the Royals is actually one of the questions in the game Trivial Pursuit! According to the answers there - and what I have read elsewhere - Edward and Andrew are indeed cut, as of course is Charles.
As regards the claim that the princes were circumcised by a mohel, my understanding is that the gentleman in question is a leading urologist (in fact, the urologist who circumcised me insists that he learnt his technique from the doctor who circumcised the princes) but I believe he is Jewish, (as was the doctor who cut me) so he may have some formal recognition as a mohel as well. I believe his name is Dr. Snowman.
Prince Charles was circumcised by Dr Snowman, as were his two brothers Andrew and Edward. When Charles was born the Queen, naturally, wanted him circumcised. She decided though that rather than using one of the appointed Royal doctors she would ask a Mohel to do it as "they have more experience".
The full truth about Prince William and Prince Harry may never come out - or we might get to know when they are at university and not protected quite so much from publicity. All reasonable commentators indicate that the boys were not circumcised at birth because Diana objected, much to the annoyance of the Queen and Queen Mother.
Prince William had a ‘hernia’ operation as a young boy. This probably was exactly what was reported, or it could just possibly have been a ‘red herring’ to disguise a need for a circumcision - we will almost certainly never know on that one.
More recently there was one suggestion (made on the alt.circumcision newsgroup) from a previously unknown writer that Charles had taken the two boys to be circumcised almost immediately after their mother’s death. A variant of this story is that William alone chose to get himself circumcised at about the same time (ie shortly after his mother’s death).
These stories have never been substantiated. All attempts to get the originator to quote the actual chapter and verse of the claimed reports in the press have failed. It is most unlikely that there is any truth at all in them. Certainly it is almost inconceivable that Charles would have forced circumcision on his teenage sons. There is a small possibility that William developed phimosis whilst going through puberty and something had to be done. However, I don’t think anything is gained by wild speculation as to his current state. Let’s just wait and see if a newspaper somewhere publishes a nude picture of him on holiday somewhere when he is older (as they did when Andrew was caught skinny dipping - and thus proved his cut status!)
Vernon* (England)

Pasted from: http://www.circlist.com/rites/british.html

[Pumpkinpie]

All I can say is long live the :king:welcome to the world of Naturists wonder where the picture was taken and what is going through the Queen mind.
Thanks for the post Walter05.

[walter05]

If they are photo shopped, I did not do it.

The second photo of the king to be has a definitely not circumcised penis.

[Edmontonnudist]

I can't imagine what is going down at Buckingham Palace right now!

[maxnude]

walter05

The second younger looking [intact/uncircumcised] image attached is a fake.

Prince William has blue eyes, the 2nd attached photo has other than blue eyes.

One cannot tell much about a photograph by the file date. Most "PhotoShopped", cloned, modified images have all the original digital information deleted or suppressed.

Photo journalist and news services photographers are not allowed to modify casual, covert or on the spot photographs taken or submitted for publication.

If not suppressed, the original digital cameras "EXIF info. is embedded digitally in each exposure has all the information, date, exposure information, etc. [See example attached below:]

[b]Click on attached for full size:

[FreeinNJ]

both nudes look photoshopped