Female First Logo
  • Love & Sex
  • Find out more

    • Dating
    • Relationships
    • Weddings
    • Agony Aunts
  • Community
    • Discussion Board
    • Quick Chat
  • Celebrities
  • Find out more

    • Celebrity Gossip
    • Entertainment Gossip
    • Royal Family
    • Celebrity Interviews
    • Photo Gallery
    • Celebrity Directory
  • Lifestyle
  • Find out more

    • Parenting
    • Motoring
    • Travel
    • Food & Drink
    • Health
    • Home & Garden
    • Money
    • Business
    • Recruitment
    • Women's Issues
  • Entertainment
  • Find out more

    • Entertainment Gossip
    • Music
    • Movies
    • Sport
    • TV & Soaps
    • DVD and Blu-Ray
    • Games
    • Bollywood
    • Book Reviews
    • Bizarre
    • Competitions
    • Horoscopes
    • Big Brother
  • Fashion & Beauty
  • Find out more

    • Style News
    • Celebrity Style
    • Beauty Tips
    • Fashion Trends
    • Style Surgery
    • Shopping
  • Shopping
    • Fashion
    • Lingerie
    • Offers
    • Swimwear
    • DVDs
    • Gaming
    • Books
    • CDs
    • Gifts
  • Blog
    • Fashion Blog
    • Health Blog
    • Movies Blog
    • Music Blog
    • Sport Blog
  • Video
    • Latest Videos
    • Exclusive Videos
    • Celebrity Gossip Videos
    • Movie Trailers
    • Video Interviews
  • Follow us
  • femalefirst facebook
  • femalefirst twitter
  • Follow Me on Pinterest
FemaleFirst.co.uk Discussion Board Quick Chat  

Advanced search
  • Board index ‹ Films and Celebrity ‹ Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt Section
  • Change font size
  • E-mail friend
  • Print view
  • FAQ
  • Register
  • Login

In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

All posts on Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston
Post a reply
95 posts • Page 6 of 7 • 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:07 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:Because they are so OTT. The best fiction writer in the world could not come up with two more nefarious characters. They sell all the details of their private life (in print and photos) and then complain about lack of privacy. They pretend to care about the world's poor but then have people who have no money work for free while AJ garnered a 3 million dollar salary. They are like a juicy trashy novel. They are not fascinating (too shallow and superficial for that) but they are deliciously entertaining.


It's people who make them OTT, because they're, both of them, famous and interesting and goodlooking (otherwise, why follow them?), with a bunch of cute kids. We don't hear or read about other people who lead much richer lifestyles.
Whether haters/antis want to admit it or not, both are involved in good work outside Hollywood. I don't know another couple/family in public life to rival them right now.

I haven't heard them complain about lack of privacy more than other celebs. When asked, BP has said that he only wants the paparazzi to please take pictures from the distance because all the flashes bother the kids. He hasn't complained about it for himself and AJ. Actually, he has said that he enjoys the trade-off! I guess movie stars welcome the interest, because it's good for their careers, so if haters/antis can't stand them, why add to the interest?

Who is working for free while AJ is paid $3 million? Do yo have a link?


You don't hear or read about other people lives so much because they don't sell their lives as much as Brangelina does. They are a a reality show come to life. They can live off camera when they want to which only shows they pre-arrange all those pap shoots. Anyone who can deny they have sold their children's privacy for a buck is living in loon world. And again, they are entertaining - they are too shallow and superficial to be interesting.


First of all, nobody is forced to read about any celeb, so if people do read it's because they want to. Secondly, I'd say that people are not interested in other celebs as much as they're interested in the JPs. Talk about reality shows, the Kardashians are a reality show and, I hear, the Eastwoods will have one. Hope that's true, because I like CE.

It's easy to avoid pap shoots. Surely you know that. They made money with pictures of their children and spend it on good projects of their choice. They didn't sell pictures of your children, so why are you angry?
I think, compared to so many Hollywood stars they are most definitely, absolutely not shallow and superficial. I was going to mention a few Hollywood stars who are, in my opinion, shallow and superficial but that wouldn't be nice, so I won't.
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:08 am

Guest wrote:You don't hear or read about other people lives so much because they don't sell their lives as much as Brangelina does. They are a a reality show come to life. They can live off camera when they want to which only shows they pre-arrange all those pap shoots. Anyone who can deny they have sold their children's privacy for a buck is living in loon world. And again, they are entertaining - [b]they are too shallow and superficial to be interesting


yet you people cant get ENOUGH of them and have their names in your mouth all the time even when they arent seen in public


Again, it's called E-N-T-E-R-T-A-I-N-M-E-N-T
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:09 am

Guest wrote:You don't hear or read about other people lives so much because they don't sell their lives as much as Brangelina does. They are a a reality show come to life. They can live off camera when they want to which only shows they pre-arrange all those pap shoots. Anyone who can deny they have sold their children's privacy for a buck is living in loon world. And again, they are entertaining - [b]they are too shallow and superficial to be interesting

yet you people can't get ENOUGH of them and have their names in your mouth all the time even when they aren't seen in public.


:clap: :clap: :clap:
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:15 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:Not VAJ but the fact that you used the word private when referring to the biggest famewhores on the planet is hilarious!


EVERYBODY has a private life. That part of their life that is nobody's business! I can call it personal life.


They have sold out their children's lives and then complain about the lack of privacy. HYPROCRITES MUCH?


They have not, as far as I know, complained about the lack of privacy more than other actors, but I'd say they have been stalked more than other actors. If you find them hypocrites I'm sure you know there are plenty of hypocrites in the world, but you have chosen the JPs to follow. Why them? No need to answer. :)
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:19 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:You don't hear or read about other people lives so much because they don't sell their lives as much as Brangelina does. They are a a reality show come to life. They can live off camera when they want to which only shows they pre-arrange all those pap shoots. Anyone who can deny they have sold their children's privacy for a buck is living in loon world. And again, they are entertaining - [b]they are too shallow and superficial to be interesting


yet you people cant get ENOUGH of them and have their names in your mouth all the time even when they arent seen in public


SO WHAT?! Now why don't you take your sticky fingers back to your pittporn and finger humping your idols?


You must be a proud FF poster!
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:25 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:You don't hear or read about other people lives so much because they don't sell their lives as much as Brangelina does. They are a a reality show come to life. They can live off camera when they want to which only shows they pre-arrange all those pap shoots. Anyone who can deny they have sold their children's privacy for a buck is living in loon world. And again, they are entertaining - [b]they are too shallow and superficial to be interesting

yet you people can't get ENOUGH of them and have their names in your mouth all the time even when they aren't seen in public.


Again, it's called E-N-T-E-R-T-A-I-N-M-E-N-T


Okay, we all like to be entertained, and you have chosed the JPs to entertain you. Enjoy yourself, just try not to make up stories.
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:30 am

Guest wrote:They pretend to care about the world's poor but then have people who have no money work for free while AJ garnered a 3 million dollar salary.


Do you have a link?
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Wed May 16, 2012 1:32 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:You don't hear or read about other people lives so much because they don't sell their lives as much as Brangelina does. They are a a reality show come to life. They can live off camera when they want to which only shows they pre-arrange all those pap shoots. Anyone who can deny they have sold their children's privacy for a buck is living in loon world. And again, they are entertaining - [b]they are too shallow and superficial to be interesting

yet you people can't get ENOUGH of them and have their names in your mouth all the time even when they aren't seen in public.


Again, it's called E-N-T-E-R-T-A-I-N-M-E-N-T


Okay, we all like to be entertained, and you have chosen the JPs to entertain you. Enjoy yourself, just try not to make up stories.
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Sun May 20, 2012 6:13 pm

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:I asked why them! Why THEM of all the nefarious (in your opinion) things/people? There must be something that attracts you to them.


I dunno if i'd call it 'attraction"! But when I realized that the ho-bag used VOODOO to destroy Pitt's marriage, I felt absolutely compelled to go on-line and EXPOSE this fact, even if it was just on a gossip board. Then I found out that it went even DEEPER: the ho was in fact engaged in LARGE-SCALE DRUG SMUGGLING (I first noticed this fact when she used the Pax adoption as a COVERUP) Then there was the FAKE TWIN PREGNANCY and the See Eye Eh operative thing. It is an odd fact that every time I started to 'lose interest' yet ANOTHER brangelina "plot" would rear its head and keep me engaged! It's kind of like Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty; the fact of more and more sub rosa CRIMINAL and SATANIC activities surfacing and needing EXPOSURE!

VAJ


I don't know why you insist on living in the past. The ex-wife now has a partner who also left a relationship. Don't you feel like you're meddling in other people's private business? If you think Jolie is engaged in drug smuggling, you should report it. Make sure you can prove it, and get yourself a lawyer.

Can you please stop with the fake twin pregnancy and See Eye Eh?


Nope. Last I checked it was a FREE COUNTRY and I can write about whatever the hell I CHOOSE to write about, and YOU can choose to take your eyes ELSEWHERE; that's what a SCROLL BUTTON is for!
At least I am ON TOPIC and NOT blathering on endlessly about the LOONS.

Oh: and about the "past"? The fact is: the FUTURE is based on THE PAST. So if you want to know where the future will go, just look to the PAST. Also, people FORGET about things, so I talk about 'the past" in order to REMIND them. But, since YOU are obviously intellectually LIMITED, you can just pass over anything I say; it would probably be like "pearls before swine" ANYWAY.

And I also agree; to talk about "privacy" in conjunction with the two miscreants is LUDICROUS; these two hypocrites constantly share their so-called "private" life with the WORLD- and then have the NERVE to "complain" that "we have no privacy wah wah wah!" That was THEIR choice, wasn't it? So if they insist on making their private business "public" then they have NO room to complain when people take them up on it, nor do they get to dictate TERMS.

VAJ

VAJ
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Sun May 20, 2012 6:14 pm

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:I asked why them! Why THEM of all the nefarious (in your opinion) things/people? There must be something that attracts you to them.


I dunno if i'd call it 'attraction"! But when I realized that the ho-bag used VOODOO to destroy Pitt's marriage, I felt absolutely compelled to go on-line and EXPOSE this fact, even if it was just on a gossip board. Then I found out that it went even DEEPER: the ho was in fact engaged in LARGE-SCALE DRUG SMUGGLING (I first noticed this fact when she used the Pax adoption as a COVERUP) Then there was the FAKE TWIN PREGNANCY and the See Eye Eh operative thing. It is an odd fact that every time I started to 'lose interest' yet ANOTHER brangelina "plot" would rear its head and keep me engaged! It's kind of like Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty; the fact of more and more sub rosa CRIMINAL and SATANIC activities surfacing and needing EXPOSURE!

VAJ


I don't know why you insist on living in the past. The ex-wife now has a partner who also left a relationship. Don't you feel like you're meddling in other people's private business? If you think Jolie is engaged in drug smuggling, you should report it. Make sure you can prove it, and get yourself a lawyer.

Can you please stop with the fake twin pregnancy and See Eye Eh?


Nope. Last I checked it was a FREE COUNTRY and I can write about whatever the hell I CHOOSE to write about, and YOU can choose to take your eyes ELSEWHERE; that's what a SCROLL BUTTON is for!
At least I am ON TOPIC and NOT blathering on endlessly about the LOONS.

Oh: and about the "past"? The fact is: the FUTURE is based on THE PAST. So if you want to know where the future will go, just look to the PAST. Also, people FORGET about things, so I talk about 'the past" in order to REMIND them. But, since YOU are obviously intellectually LIMITED, you can just pass over anything I say; it would probably be like "pearls before swine" ANYWAY.

And I also agree; to talk about "privacy" in conjunction with the two miscreants is LUDICROUS; these two hypocrites constantly share their so-called "private" life with the WORLD- and then have the NERVE to "complain" that "we have no privacy wah wah wah!" That was THEIR choice, wasn't it? So if they insist on making their private business "public" then they have NO room to complain when people take them up on it, nor do they get to dictate TERMS.

VAJ

VAJ
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby mademoiselle » Sun May 20, 2012 6:25 pm

Guest wrote:
Sy-nic wrote:I think Pitt did an admirable job of destroying his marriage by responding to his e*e*t*o* on more than one occasion. :roll:


Wow, if you know that for a fact, he must be the only one in the world, and how is that any of your business?


I'm sorry - but did you miss something?

Didn't HIS DICK lead him to JoLIAR? The fact he was getting his balls and C*** hummed (along with the photos on the beeeach) caused his ex wife to kick his skanky filthy arse OUT. :clap:

Pitt seems to have a problem controlling his balls and C*** ... because he hasn't got a MIND, much less a brain - look at the list of ladies (and probably not to mention men) that he cheeses up with his appendage. :nanana:
mademoiselle
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Mon May 21, 2012 2:25 am

mademoiselle wrote:
Guest wrote:
Sy-nic wrote:I think Pitt did an admirable job of destroying his marriage by responding to his e*e*t*o* on more than one occasion. :roll:


Wow, if you know that for a fact, he must be the only one in the world, and how is that any of your business?


I'm sorry - but did you miss something?

Didn't HIS DICK lead him to JoLIAR? The fact he was getting his balls and C*** hummed (along with the photos on the beeeach) caused his ex wife to kick his skanky filthy arse OUT. :clap:

Pitt seems to have a problem controlling his balls and C*** ... because he hasn't got a MIND, much less a brain - look at the list of ladies (and probably not to mention men) that he cheeses up with his appendage.


Millions of men were led by their other brain to other women. What I find strange is that you're obsessed with this particular couple. They are under your skin. In your blood. Maybe you need professional help to get rid of this obsession, so you can go on living your own life without this unhealthy hatred for a couple you don like, don't know and will probably never meet.
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Mon May 21, 2012 2:36 am

Guest wrote:
mademoiselle wrote:
Guest wrote:
Sy-nic wrote:I think Pitt did an admirable job of destroying his marriage by responding to his e*e*t*o* on more than one occasion. :roll:


Wow, if you know that for a fact, he must be the only one in the world, and how is that any of your business?


I'm sorry - but did you miss something?

Didn't HIS DICK lead him to JoLIAR? The fact he was getting his balls and C*** hummed (along with the photos on the beeeach) caused his ex wife to kick his skanky filthy arse OUT. :clap:

Pitt seems to have a problem controlling his balls and C*** ... because he hasn't got a MIND, much less a brain - look at the list of ladies (and probably not to mention men) that he cheeses up with his appendage.


Millions of men were led by their other brain to other women. What I find strange is that you're obsessed with this particular couple. They are under your skin. In your blood. Maybe you need professional help to get rid of this obsession, so you can go on living your own life without this unhealthy hatred for a couple you don like, don't know and will probably never meet.



Wow!! If you are taking this board that seriously perhaps you are the one who should stay of the board. Pointing out the fakery of fakers is fun especially when they are so blatant and OTT. But if it's affecting you as seriously as your post suggests perhaps you should stay away. Seriously you need help.
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby Guest » Mon May 21, 2012 2:52 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:I don't know why you insist on living in the past. The ex-wife now has a partner who also left a relationship. Don't you feel like you're meddling in other people's private business? If you think Jolie is engaged in drug smuggling, you should report it. Make sure you can prove it, and get yourself a lawyer.

Can you please stop with the fake twin pregnancy and See Eye Eh?


Nope. Last I checked it was a FREE COUNTRY and I can write about whatever the hell I CHOOSE to write about, and YOU can choose to take your eyes ELSEWHERE; that's what a SCROLL BUTTON is for! At least I am ON TOPIC and NOT blathering on endlessly about the LOONS.

Oh: and about the "past"? The fact is: the FUTURE is based on THE PAST. So if you want to know where the future will go, just look to the PAST. Also, people FORGET about things, so I talk about 'the past" in order to REMIND them. But, since YOU are obviously intellectually LIMITED, you can just pass over anything I say; it would probably be like "pearls before swine" ANYWAY.

And I also agree; to talk about "privacy" in conjunction with the two miscreants is LUDICROUS; these two hypocrites constantly share their so-called "private" life with the WORLD- and then have the NERVE to "complain" that "we have no privacy wah wah wah!" That was THEIR choice, wasn't it? So if they insist on making their private business "public" then they have NO room to complain when people take them up on it, nor do they get to dictate TERMS.VAJ


I think it's you who are intellectually limited! To go on about the twin pregnancy being fake is just brainless and ridiculous, and if you're certain that Jolie smuggles drugs, then report it, take her to court. Instead you're yammering on a gossip board.

There is more to a private life than they have shared with the public, and if you're not intellectually limited you'd know it! It's haters/antis who have tried to make up vulgar stories about their private life that they have not shared with the public. If you've been reading here, you'd know that too.

Plenty of celebrities have complained about not having privacy. Do you have a link about Pitt and Jolie complaining that "we have no privacy wah wah wah?" Pitt's complaint is that the paparazzi come too close to the children with their bright flashes, and he would like them to take pictures from the distance with their zoom lenses. Not that they listen to him, and that is what bothers him. I remember reading that he himself doesn't mind the intrusion/interest, because there's the trade-off that he enjoys.

'The future is based on the past,' so I guess you are saying you're not learning and will be intellectually limited in the future too! Do you know who dictates terms? People do! People with a sense of decorum do not make up intrusive and vulgar stories about anyone!
Guest
 
Top

  • Report this post
  • Reply with quote

Re: In London and not a peep. Not even in The Daily B'stard

Postby madame » Mon May 21, 2012 6:54 am

uhhhhhhhhhhhh....
considering they are probably related to politics in some filthy way & have a brood of kids who they use to pimp publicity and a simulated image ..
phony humanitarian deeds ...
no friends ..
obvious drug smuggling & usage ..
& all kinds of other unsavory activities ,
i'd say they would attract the interest of any truth seeker who is appalled at the blatant 'posturing' of these 2 slimeballs ...
one who was concerned with the welfare of children or interested in fighting or exposing the 'luciferian' elements of hollywood ...
these are the people who i believe are interested in them ...
the ol' war against good & evil baby !
pick a side ...
madame
 
Top

PreviousNext

Post a reply
95 posts • Page 6 of 7 • 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Return to Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt Section

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: marcikarvalho, SophiaP and 50 guests

  • Board index
  • The team • Delete all board cookies • All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Sign up stay updated
Tweets by @FemaleFirst_UK

Like Us On facebook

Save up to 75% in the Lovehoney Sale
web2 - 0.01s