photo: 25 new messages in 12 topics

alt.gossip.celebrities
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities

alt.gossip.celebrities@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Angelina Jolie: How Brad Pitt & I Fell in Love
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/5f58966877d92399
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 12:05 pm
From: Bushman

>"And then we just continued to take time. We remained very, very good
>friends - with this realization - for a long time," she says. "And then life
>developed in a way where we could be together, where it felt like something
>we would do, we should do."

That is hysterical! What developed is they decided to bang eachother's lights out and then have Brad
dump the woman he vowed to be with for the rest of his life to God. That's what developed. These
Hollywood people are so warped.

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:09 am
From: "Doomella"

edonline wrote:
> http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,1568871,00.html
>
> Angelina Jolie: How Brad Pitt & I Fell in Love
> TUESDAY DECEMBER 12, 2006 10:20AM EST
> By Stephen M. Silverman
>
> For the first time, Angelina Jolie has described what happened between her
> and Brad Pitt on the set of Mr. & Mrs. Smith - and she insists she never had
> any intention of breaking up his marriage to Jennifer Aniston.
>
> When she first met her costar on the set of the thriller in 2003, "I didn't
> know much about exactly where Brad was in his personal life," Jolie, 31,
> says in the January issue of Vogue, according to excerpts published in the
> New York Post. "But it was clear he was with his best friend, someone he
> loves and respects.
>
> "And so we were both living, I suppose, very full lives. . I think we were
> the last two people who were looking for a relationship. I certainly wasn't.
> I was quite content to be a single mom."
>
> But "Brad was a huge surprise to me. I, like most people, had a very distant
> impression of him from . the media," she says.
>
> "Because of the film, we ended up being brought together to do all these
> crazy things, and I think we found this strange friendship and partnership
> that kind of just suddenly happened. I think a few months in I realized,
> 'God, I can't wait to get to work.' . Anything we had to do with each other,
> we just found a lot of joy in it together and a lot of real teamwork. We
> just became kind of a pair."
>
> They didn't start thinking about a relationship right away, she says. "It
> took until, really, the end of the shoot for us, I think, to realize that it
> might mean something more than we'd earlier allowed ourselves to believe.
> And both knowing that the reality of that was a big thing, something that
> was going to take a lot of serious consideration."
>
> The two remained "very, very good friends" from the time the movie wrapped
> in 2004 until after Pitt and Aniston announced their separation in January
> 2005, Jolie says.
>
> Jolie says that the time she spent getting to know Pitt before his split was
> "not as exciting as what a lot of people would like to believe. We spent a
> lot of time contemplating and thinking and talking about what we both wanted
> in life and realized that we wanted very, very similar things.
>
> "And then we just continued to take time. We remained very, very good
> friends - with this realization - for a long time," she says. "And then life
> developed in a way where we could be together, where it felt like something
> we would do, we should do."
>
> In fact, it was her son, Madddox, now 5, who helped seal the deal. (Jolie
> and Pitt are also parents to Zahara, 23 months, and Shiloh, 6 months.) One
> day, Maddox "just out of the blue called him Dad," says Jolie. "It was
> amazing. We were playing with cars on the floor of a hotel room, and we both
> heard it and didn't say anything and just looked at each other. So that was
> probably the most defining moment, when he decided that we would all be a
> family."
>
> Jolie also says she'd be willing to meet with Aniston, but "That would be
> her decision, and I would welcome it."
>
> Pitt has said he and Jolie would not wed until all couples can legally
> marry, and Jolie agrees that tying the knot is not a priority. "We both have
> been married before, so it's not marriage that's necessarily kept some
> people together," she says. "We are legally bound to our children, not to
> each other, and I think that's the most important thing."

This is so sickeningly sanctimonious it almost functioned as an emetic.
Yuck. Vulgar, self-serving and transparent.

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:12 am
From: "Parson"

>zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 5:20 pm
From: "subscriber1997"

yeah
what's so awful about a husband
stealing 'vamp' ?

they're some a da hottest
babes around .....grand fun!!

i recommend it highly

=========
"CliffB" <fleer@gosympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:1165940988.866944.240370@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Yeah, right. However you explain it to yourself Ang. I will say the two
> do seem an apt pairing as they both seem convinced of their radical
> innocence in the matter and will virtually believe any story they can
> cook up to rationalize it.
>
>
> edonline wrote:
>> http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,1568871,00.html
>>
>> Angelina Jolie: How Brad Pitt & I Fell in Love
>> TUESDAY DECEMBER 12, 2006 10:20AM EST
>> By Stephen M. Silverman
>>
>> For the first time, Angelina Jolie has described what happened between
>> her
>> and Brad Pitt on the set of Mr. & Mrs. Smith - and she insists she never
>> had
>> any intention of breaking up his marriage to Jennifer Aniston.
>>
>> When she first met her costar on the set of the thriller in 2003, "I
>> didn't
>> know much about exactly where Brad was in his personal life," Jolie, 31,
>> says in the January issue of Vogue, according to excerpts published in
>> the
>> New York Post. "But it was clear he was with his best friend, someone he
>> loves and respects.
>>
>> "And so we were both living, I suppose, very full lives. . I think we
>> were
>> the last two people who were looking for a relationship. I certainly
>> wasn't.
>> I was quite content to be a single mom."
>>
>> But "Brad was a huge surprise to me. I, like most people, had a very
>> distant
>> impression of him from . the media," she says.
>>
>> "Because of the film, we ended up being brought together to do all these
>> crazy things, and I think we found this strange friendship and
>> partnership
>> that kind of just suddenly happened. I think a few months in I realized,
>> 'God, I can't wait to get to work.' . Anything we had to do with each
>> other,
>> we just found a lot of joy in it together and a lot of real teamwork. We
>> just became kind of a pair."
>>
>> They didn't start thinking about a relationship right away, she says. "It
>> took until, really, the end of the shoot for us, I think, to realize that
>> it
>> might mean something more than we'd earlier allowed ourselves to believe.
>> And both knowing that the reality of that was a big thing, something that
>> was going to take a lot of serious consideration."
>>
>> The two remained "very, very good friends" from the time the movie
>> wrapped
>> in 2004 until after Pitt and Aniston announced their separation in
>> January
>> 2005, Jolie says.
>>
>> Jolie says that the time she spent getting to know Pitt before his split
>> was
>> "not as exciting as what a lot of people would like to believe. We spent
>> a
>> lot of time contemplating and thinking and talking about what we both
>> wanted
>> in life and realized that we wanted very, very similar things.
>>
>> "And then we just continued to take time. We remained very, very good
>> friends - with this realization - for a long time," she says. "And then
>> life
>> developed in a way where we could be together, where it felt like
>> something
>> we would do, we should do."
>>
>> In fact, it was her son, Madddox, now 5, who helped seal the deal. (Jolie
>> and Pitt are also parents to Zahara, 23 months, and Shiloh, 6 months.)
>> One
>> day, Maddox "just out of the blue called him Dad," says Jolie. "It was
>> amazing. We were playing with cars on the floor of a hotel room, and we
>> both
>> heard it and didn't say anything and just looked at each other. So that
>> was
>> probably the most defining moment, when he decided that we would all be a
>> family."
>>
>> Jolie also says she'd be willing to meet with Aniston, but "That would be
>> her decision, and I would welcome it."
>>
>> Pitt has said he and Jolie would not wed until all couples can legally
>> marry, and Jolie agrees that tying the knot is not a priority. "We both
>> have
>> been married before, so it's not marriage that's necessarily kept some
>> people together," she says. "We are legally bound to our children, not to
>> each other, and I think that's the most important thing."
>

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:24 am
From: "yD"

Doomella wrote:
> edonline wrote:
> > http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,1568871,00.html
> >
> > Angelina Jolie: How Brad Pitt & I Fell in Love
> > TUESDAY DECEMBER 12, 2006 10:20AM EST
> > By Stephen M. Silverman
> >
> > For the first time, Angelina Jolie has described what happened between her
> > and Brad Pitt on the set of Mr. & Mrs. Smith - and she insists she never had
> > any intention of breaking up his marriage to Jennifer Aniston.
> >
> > When she first met her costar on the set of the thriller in 2003, "I didn't
> > know much about exactly where Brad was in his personal life," Jolie, 31,
> > says in the January issue of Vogue, according to excerpts published in the
> > New York Post. "But it was clear he was with his best friend, someone he
> > loves and respects.
> >
> > "And so we were both living, I suppose, very full lives. . I think we were
> > the last two people who were looking for a relationship. I certainly wasn't.
> > I was quite content to be a single mom."
> >
> > But "Brad was a huge surprise to me. I, like most people, had a very distant
> > impression of him from . the media," she says.
> >
> > "Because of the film, we ended up being brought together to do all these
> > crazy things, and I think we found this strange friendship and partnership
> > that kind of just suddenly happened. I think a few months in I realized,
> > 'God, I can't wait to get to work.' . Anything we had to do with each other,
> > we just found a lot of joy in it together and a lot of real teamwork. We
> > just became kind of a pair."
> >
> > They didn't start thinking about a relationship right away, she says. "It
> > took until, really, the end of the shoot for us, I think, to realize that it
> > might mean something more than we'd earlier allowed ourselves to believe.
> > And both knowing that the reality of that was a big thing, something that
> > was going to take a lot of serious consideration."
> >
> > The two remained "very, very good friends" from the time the movie wrapped
> > in 2004 until after Pitt and Aniston announced their separation in January
> > 2005, Jolie says.
> >
> > Jolie says that the time she spent getting to know Pitt before his split was
> > "not as exciting as what a lot of people would like to believe. We spent a
> > lot of time contemplating and thinking and talking about what we both wanted
> > in life and realized that we wanted very, very similar things.
> >
> > "And then we just continued to take time. We remained very, very good
> > friends - with this realization - for a long time," she says. "And then life
> > developed in a way where we could be together, where it felt like something
> > we would do, we should do."
> >
> > In fact, it was her son, Madddox, now 5, who helped seal the deal. (Jolie
> > and Pitt are also parents to Zahara, 23 months, and Shiloh, 6 months.) One
> > day, Maddox "just out of the blue called him Dad," says Jolie. "It was
> > amazing. We were playing with cars on the floor of a hotel room, and we both
> > heard it and didn't say anything and just looked at each other. So that was
> > probably the most defining moment, when he decided that we would all be a
> > family."
> >
> > Jolie also says she'd be willing to meet with Aniston, but "That would be
> > her decision, and I would welcome it."
> >
> > Pitt has said he and Jolie would not wed until all couples can legally
> > marry, and Jolie agrees that tying the knot is not a priority. "We both have
> > been married before, so it's not marriage that's necessarily kept some
> > people together," she says. "We are legally bound to our children, not to
> > each other, and I think that's the most important thing."
>
>
> This is so sickeningly sanctimonious it almost functioned as an emetic.
> Yuck. Vulgar, self-serving and transparent.

Yup! I'd almost rather hae read that they, in good old Hollywood
tradition, had an affair while they were making the movie and then,
when it got out, denied and tried to hide it, again an old tradition on
adultery, and then, again, later found it to be more than just a fling,
and that they went on from there. Perfectly understandable, could
happen to anyone -- and has.
yD

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The bizarre courtship of Kurt and Courtney
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/d7a55cbf8c48edfb
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:07 am
From: "Messalina"

PUSSSYKATT@aol.com wrote:
> NY DAILY NEWS/RUSH AND MOLLOY...
> Just as a sobbing and sober Courtney Love was cleared of all pending
> drug and assault charges in L.A. Superior Court yesterday, galleys of a
> book circulated saying Kurt Cobain had wanted to divorce her.
>
> Everett True, an old friend of the Nirvana front man, writes in his
> upcoming book, "Nirvana: The Biography," that the first time they met,
> Courtney saw Cobain and "yelped, 'You're Kurt Cobain and you're an
> a--.'?" She then punched him in the stomach.
>
> True interviewed the couple's manny, Michael (Cali) DeWitt, who was
> charged with watching their daughter, Frances Bean. DeWitt recalls that
> on the day Nirvana shot the "Heart-Shaped Box" video, a huge fight
> escalated between Love and Cobain and "in the classic Kurt way of
> saying f- you, he put a cigarette out in the middle of his forehead. If
> you watch the video, there's a lot of makeup on his forehead because it
> was a really bad scab.'?"
>
> True adds that, soon after, Cobain "phoned Courtney, got into a fight,
> and immediately called his lawyer, Rosemary Carroll, to tell her he
> wanted a divorce."
>
> Carroll tells True, "Did he ever say that to me? Yes, he did, but I
> don't know how serious he was."
>
> DeWitt also describes to True in disturbing detail Cobain's first
> suicide attempt, which came after Courtney rebuffed Kurt's romantic
> advances on their reunion following Nirvana's European tour. He said:
> "Our rooms were connected and I ran in there and he was on the floor,
> dressed, with his eyes open, blood coming out of his nose." True
> follows up with the details that Cobain "was fully dressed, with $1,000
> in his pocket and a three-page note in his hand" and that 60 Rohypnol
> pills were reportedly pumped from his stomach that night. Says DeWitt,
> "It was one of those things like, Was it or wasn't it?"
>
> Yesterday, L.A. Superior Court Judge Rand Rubin explained his decision
> to Love - who was dressed in a conservative suit like Courtroom Barbie
> - saying, "You've shown to me you are interested in a much less
> destructive lifestyle."

If Kurt's friend was trying to stir opinion against Courtney, too bad,
because he's accomplished just the opposite. He sounds like an abusive
drama queen.

Mez

==============================================================================
TOPIC: LOUISIANA: Caught In The ADAM CLAYTON POWELL SYNDROME?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/c63159c9248405c7
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 11:50 am
From: "Joe S."

"clitteigh" <clitteigh@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1165938884.022556.272000@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
> The reelection of Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.) illustrates yet
> another instance of the Adam Clayton Powell Syndrome (ACPS) in
> politics. (It also plays in jurisprudence and social behavior.)
>
> By casting their votes for a man whose home freezer held some $90,000
> in alleged bribe money, the nation's "black community" has again
> demonstrated both a dim collective intelligence and an aversion to
> eshewing spiteful but self-hurtful actions that are obviously aimed at
> "stickin' it to whitey."
>
> Of course, Powell, an African American, was the longtime U.S.
> representative from New York City who was repeatedly reelected, gaining
> a larger vote share the more both his personal and political lives
> resembled those of craven crooks. The syndrome named after the
> politician who seemed never able to pass up a bribe, a babe, or a bar
> rears its sorry head every couple of years or so.
>
> And it makes international headlines!
>
> Louisiana this time.
>
> * The acquittal of O.J. Simpson? Chalk it up to the ACPS.
>
> * Acquittal of Michael Jackson? ACPS.
>
> * Reelection of Jefferson? ACPS.
>
> * Reelection of Marion Barry? ACPS.
>
> * Reelection, since 1993, impeached "Judge" Rep. Alcee L. Hastings
> (D-Fla.)? ACPS.
>
> * Setting fire to and otherwise destroying their OWN homes and
> neighborhoods during "race" riots? ACPS.
>
> * "Forgiving," again and again serial philandering "men of the cloth"
> like Jesse Jackson? ACPS.
>
> The list goes on, but you get the picture.
>
> Voting for, supporting, and participating in what rational minds would
> consider persons and actions that are harmful to the "sponsors"' own
> self-interests are all indicative of the ACPS and its ill- and
> misinformed rationale and the mindset that embraces it.
>
> Numerous Louisiana voters interviewed after Jefferson's reelection
> rhetorically asked, "When do we stop committing acts that hold us up to
> national embarrassment?"
>
> How about, "Never!"
>
> But please, everybody, tell me why Jefferson, whose indictment is
> reported to be just weeks away (two co-conspirators have already
> pleaded guilty to similar charges of bribery), will be of any REAL USE
> to the fools who voted for him? Again ...
>

You left out several:

-- Re-election of Tom DeLay? ACPS.
-- Re-selection of GWBush? ACPS.
-- Re-election of Jeb Bush? ACPS.
-- Re-election of Duke Cunningham? ACPS.
-- Re-election of Rudy Giuliani? ACPS.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, November 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/1f92f2bc0676814
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 5:12 pm
From: FishFood

R6 wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:49:30 GMT, FishFood wrote:
>
>
>>Daedalus wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 14:37:51 +0000 (UTC), Cujo DeSockpuppet
>>><cujo@insurgent.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler <pollster@netcabal.com> wrote in
>>>>news:Xns9894281A53F1Bpinkusenseinetcabalc@204.153.244.170:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>><music>"20th Century Fox Fanfare/Science Fiction Double Feature"
>>>>>http://youtube.com/watch?v=iN3azigz608
>>>>></music>
>>>>>
>>>>>The time has come to announce the winners of the November 2006 Usenet
>>>>>Kook Awards. Envelopes, please!
>>>>>
>>>>><music>drumroll</music>
>>>>>
>>>>>BOBO AWARD
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...PAUL GIBBONS!
>>>>>
>>>>> 14 YES
>>>>> 00 NO
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Paul! May you ponder long and hard about the
>>>>>benefits of bringing the Internet to real life every time you look
>>>>>down and see that you're wearing the Broad Arrow on your prison
>>>>>uniform.
>>>>>
>>>>>KOOK OF THE MONTH
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ROBERT "MOP JOCKEY" WOLFE!
>>>>>
>>>>> 18 Robert "Mop Jockey" Wolfe
>>>>> 05 Nightbat of alt.astronomy
>>>>> 04 Kathy Mosesian
>>>>> 01 None of the above
>>>>> 00 Sampath posting as Mathew Alexander
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Unixd0rk! For years you've been k'laming that you're
>>>>>the talk of AUK to much laughter. Now, you /are/ the talk of AUK, but
>>>>>still to much laughter. In any event, welcome to the party!
>>>>>
>>>>>http://youtube.com/watch?v=MDCcb3zRl8U
>>>>
>>>>This was long overdue. It's about time Floor Buffer to the Stars had a
>>>>reason to expand his web pages of kookiness. You GO, Roberta!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>CLUELESS NEWBIE OF THE MONTH
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...KATHY MOSESIAN
>>>>>
>>>>> 12 Kathy Mosesian
>>>>> 06 Adam Farrell
>>>>> 03 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Kathy! Did you really think that all those years of
>>>>>posting your personal information would go unnoticed, even after you
>>>>>started X-No-Archiving your posts?
>>>>>
>>>>>COWARD OF THE MONTH
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ANDREW CHUNG!
>>>>>
>>>>> 14 Andrew Chung
>>>>> 12 Mark Ferguson
>>>>> 05 Kathy Mosesian
>>>>> 04 Ernie Primeau
>>>>> 00 None of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Double-Doctor! You beat two people who habitually
>>>>>run away from AUK and another who runs away from tough questions
>>>>>almost as much as you do. No wonder you've won two of these awards in
>>>>>a row. It's a good thing you can win only one more between now and
>>>>>next September. Otherwise, you'd deprive lots of other deserving
>>>>>cowards of the recognition they need!
>>>>>
>>>>>LOONEY MAROON AWARD
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...PAM RUSSELL!
>>>>>
>>>>> 16 Pamela Russell
>>>>> 13 Ken Pangborn
>>>>> 05 Kathy Mosesian
>>>>> 00 None of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Fangirlfriend! Idiocy, cluelessness, and
>>>>>questionable k'lames of authority such as yours have done wonders to
>>>>>make the f'loons a major laughing stock of USENET. Keep up the good
>>>>>work and you may repeat as Kook of the Year.
>>>>
>>>>Way to go, Spermwhale! Beating out the Pangkake is hard to do.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>GOLDEN KILLFILE
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ANDREW CHUNG!
>>>>>
>>>>> 22 Andrew Chung
>>>>> 10 Moronis of NANAE
>>>>> 03 Ward Hardman and James C. Cracked
>>>>> 00 None of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Double-Doctor! All that effort to preach the Good
>>>>>News, and your reward is to be chosen most deserving to be thrown into
>>>>>the bozo bin. That's extremely effective, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>>JOSEPH BARTLO PATHETIC ANAL PINEAPPLE AWARD
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ALAN JONES!
>>>>>
>>>>> 11 Alan Jones
>>>>> 07 Raymond Karczewski
>>>>> 06 Ken Pangborn
>>>>> 05 Mike "miguel" Cranston
>>>>> 05 Tim Bolen
>>>>> 01 Martha Vandella
>>>>> 00 None of the above
>>>>>Congratulations, Fish Food! Your pathetic efforts on behalf of The
>>>>>King of Pop didn't get him the apology you thought he deserved, but it
>>>>>certainly placed you atop the most competitive field of kooks on this
>>>>>month's ballot. Why, you beat three past Kooks of the Month! Maybe
>>>>>you'll be ready to join them--soon.
>>>>
>>>>Looks like boring people to death might be the surest way to leapfrog the
>>>>competition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>BOB ALLISAT MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ROBERT "MOP JOCKEY" WOLFE!
>>>>>
>>>>> 16 Robert "Mop Jockey" Wolfe
>>>>> 10 Hyerdahl, pandora, and catbrier of soc.men
>>>>> 01 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations a second time, Unixd0rk! All these years, you've been
>>>>>k'laming "Jes trolling, Gov." Well, it's time to introduce you to an
>>>>>expression that explains what happened to you. It's called "Jonah
>>>>>Fishing." Now, make like Pinnocchio and make a fire to get the whale
>>>>>to cough you out. Just don't burn your nose in the process.
>>>>
>>>>Moppy beat out s0c.fr00tz! That's ironic considering what a gender-
>>>>challenged nutbar you've proclaimed yourself.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>PALMJOB PADDLE
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...MARTHA VANDELLA!
>>>>>
>>>>> 09 Martha Vandella.
>>>>> 07 Adam Farrell
>>>>> 03 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Mothra! Your attempts to stink up
>>>>>alt.gossip.celebrities just got you spanked. Click on the link for
>>>>>your special award.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://tinyurl.com/y5elvg
>>>>>
>>>>>TONY SIDAWAY "DRAMA QUEEN" AWARD
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ROBERT "MOP JOCKEY" WOLFE!
>>>>>
>>>>> 22 Robert "Mop Jockey" Wolfe
>>>>> 06 Martha Vandella
>>>>> 02 Mike "miguel" Cranston.
>>>>> 01 None of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, a third time, Unixd0rk! With this award, you've
>>>>>managed to garner more recognition from AUK in one month than in all
>>>>>the pathetic attempts to attract our (tino) attention over the past
>>>>>several years. In honor of reaching that milestone, pleace to watch
>>>>>this video, which features your role model. Keep an eye on the
>>>>>elevator!
>>>>>
>>>>>http://youtube.com/watch?v=exGLMJIFmVQ
>>>>
>>>>All those years of hanging around the saucerhead groups trained you well,
>>>>Mopster.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>VICTOR VON FRANKENSTEIN WEIRD SCIENCE AWARD
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...NIGHTBAT OF ALT.ASTRONOMY!
>>>>>
>>>>> 14 Nightbat of alt.astronomy
>>>>> 08 Ernest Primeau
>>>>> 05 Atilla of alt.abortion
>>>>> 02 Sampath posting as Mathew Alexander
>>>>> 01 None of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Commander of the Elite Earth Science Officer Corps!
>>>>>You thought your latest plagiarism from Science News--uh, I mean,
>>>>>great scientific discovery of the candidate for first life to seed
>>>>>Earth from space, along with your disproof of one of the theories of
>>>>>relativity would be enough to earn you a Nobel. It didn't. It didn't
>>>>>even earn you an IgNobel, but it did win you yet another VVFWS.
>>>>>
>>>>>GEORGE PICKETT MEMORIAL TROPHY
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ALAN JONES!
>>>>>
>>>>> 14 Alan Jones
>>>>> 09 Frank McCoy
>>>>> 00 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations again, Fish Food! And what was the reception you got
>>>>>from the American Music Awards?
>>>>
>>>>Nice work, Alien. You even beat out another pedophile-enabler.
>>>>
>>>>Stand tall!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>SPECIAL OPS CODY MEMORIAL PURPLE HEART
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ROBERT "MOP JOCKEY" WOLFE!
>>>>>
>>>>> 17 Robert "Mop Jockey" Wolfe
>>>>> 08 Mike "miguel" Cranston
>>>>> 01 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations a fourth time, Roberta! You are now the big w(h)inner
>>>>>of this month's awards, even though you earned it by being a big loser
>>>>>in kooky kombat. There's hope, however. Click on the links and
>>>>>you'll get some advice from your role model on how to stop being a
>>>>>98-pound weakling and become a man.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHiULGV04_I&NR
>>>>>http://youtube.com/watch?v=rJS_ofmT-V8
>>>>
>>>>Looks like I got my Xmas present. Hope you enjoyed yours, Bobbi.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>TAR & FEATHERS
>>>>>
>>>>> The winners are...CAROL "KOI-LO" GULLEY AND ANTONIO "JABRIOL"
>>>>> SANTANA!
>>>>>
>>>>> 14 Carol "Koi-lo" Gulley and Antonio "Jabriol" Santana
>>>>> 10 Rebecca Ore
>>>>> 01 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Persistent Duelists! Your feud has grown so tiresome
>>>>>that the members of your shared home group, rec.ponds, have proposed
>>>>>that they moderate it right out from under you and then have Frito the
>>>>>Janitor sweep away the remains. Now, that's dedication to tireless
>>>>>and clueless crusading!
>>>>>
>>>>>BUSTED URINAL AWARD
>>>>>
>>>>> The winners are...CAROL "KOI-LO" GULLEY AND ANTONIO "JABRIOL"
>>>>> SANTANA!
>>>>>
>>>>> 14 Carol "Koi-lo" Gulley and Antonio "Jabriol" Santana
>>>>> 10 Lady Motown
>>>>> 02 Martha Vandella
>>>>> 01 Wayback Jack
>>>>> 00 None of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations again Koi-lo and Jabriol! PeeYew! Calling Frito the
>>>>>Janitor! Cleanup in rec.ponds!
>>>>>
>>>>>http://youtube.com/watch?v=twcCoSWtUPQ
>>>>>
>>>>>UNABOMBER SURPRISE
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...FRANK MCCOY!
>>>>>
>>>>> 11 Frank McCoy
>>>>> 06 Sampath posting as Mathew Alexander
>>>>> 01 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Girl-lover! It's amazing how much you can write
>>>>>trying to defend the indefensible.
>>>>>
>>>>>GOOFY AZZED BABBOON
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...AZURE!
>>>>>
>>>>> 17 Azure
>>>>> 03 Sean Ruttledge
>>>>> 03 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Bl00boy! Your screeding on behalf of your kooky
>>>>>beliefs might be worthy of more recognition, if only you could write
>>>>>them more comprehensibly.
>>>>>
>>>>>BOLO BULLIS FOAM DUCK
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...MCP OF SOC.MEN!
>>>>>
>>>>> 27 YES
>>>>> 00 NO
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Male Chauvinist Pig! All those years hanging around
>>>>>the soc.fr00ts have made you lose more marbles than we (tinw) care to
>>>>>count.
>>>>>
>>>>>BARBARA WOODHOUSE MEMORIAL DOG-WHISTLE AWARD
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...MIKE "MIGUEL" CRANSTON, TRAINED BY BOOKMAN!
>>>>>
>>>>> 22 YES
>>>>> 02 NO
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Miguel! Now, who's the stupid person who should
>>>>>remove himself from USENET altogether in order to improve its quality?
>>>>>
>>>>>EDMOND WOLLMANN MEMORIAL RUBBER TURKEY FOR THANKSGIVING 2006
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ANDREW CHUNG!
>>>>>
>>>>> 31 YES
>>>>> 01 NO
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations a third time, Double-Doctor! It must be a wonderful
>>>>>thing to force yourself, a coward not worth reading, on two support
>>>>>groups when everyone else in the US is busy in meatspace, enjoying the
>>>>>company of their friends and family and stuffing themselves with
>>>>>turkey. What do you have planned for Christmas?
>>>>>
>>>>>PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...ANON TROLLBUSTER BY JADE/DAEDALUS!
>>>>>
>>>>> 23 Anon Trollbuster by Jade/Daedalus
>>>>> 06 Andre Lieber by Jade/Daedalus
>>>>> 00 Neither of the above
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Jade! With this award, you have now earned the Hat
>>>>>Trick of AUK Merit awards, the Hammer of Thor, the trainer of a Dog
>>>>>Whistle earning kook, and now the award for merit in trolling, the
>>>>>Salinger! All hail Jade!
>>>>
>>>>Welcome to the club. What took y'all so fucking long?
>>>
>>>I'm a late bloomer.
>>>
>>>Jade
>>>
>>>
>>>>>OFFICE OF DARTH BAWL
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...TOM BISHOP!
>>>>>
>>>>> 19 Tom Bishop
>>>>> 05 Kathy Mosesian
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Tosser! You managed to hold on to your office
>>>>>despite the efforts to replace you with a whiner who ran away.
>>>>>
>>>>>OFFICE OF VILLAGE IDIOT
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...KEN PANGBORN!
>>>>>
>>>>> 18 Ken Pangborn
>>>>> 08 Tom Bishop
>>>>> 03 Warhol
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Kenny Kakes! You succeeded in defending your office
>>>>>against some of the dopiest kooks on USENET!
>>>>>
>>>>>KOOKI INFORMATION MINISTER
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...AZURE!
>>>>>
>>>>> 14 Azure
>>>>> 10 PSYLVIA PSULLIVAN
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations, Bl00boi! You killed the Wicked Witch of USENET!
>>>>>
>>>>>http://youtube.com/watch?v=McHyLKw5mHc
>>>>>
>>>>>MINISTRY OF CIRCLE JERKS
>>>>>
>>>>> The winner is...THE BIG-8 MANAGEMENT BOARD!
>>>>>
>>>>> 16 Big-8 Management Board
>>>>> 13 Soc.men
>>>>>
>>>>>Congratulations again, B8MBY! You managed to defeat your stiffest
>>>>>competition yet! At this rate, you just might manage to retire this
>>>>>office.
>>>>>
>>>>>This concludes the announcement of the winners of the November 2006
>>>>>Usenet Kook Awards. Forty-four people submitted fourty-four ballots.
>>>>>Two were posted to threads other than the one in which the ballot was
>>>>>original posted, and were discarded. Fluffy was pleased with the
>>>>>shredded paper in his litter box. Consequently, forty-two were deemed
>>>>>valid and counted.
>>>>>
>>>>>See you all tomorrow, when the nominations open for the Fr00tcake and
>>>>>Bag of Coal awards. Until then, enjoy and all hail Ming, Bob, and
>>>>>Fluffy!
>>>>
>>>>Keep the Spermwhale flopping! Two more awards coming right up!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>And now, a special recessional in honor of this month's big w(h)inner,
>>>>>Mop Jockey!
>>>>>
>>>>><music>"Don't Dream It, Be It" from the Rocky Horror Picture Show
>>>>>http://youtube.com/watch?v=xFxMcq5EGRY
>>>>></music>
>>>>
>>>>Poifect!
>>
>>Seems to be my cue for a speech, after all 'no good award' is given
>>without a speech...
>>
>>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>Trolls - bored trouble makers, or magnets
>>attracting attention to the outspoken?
>>
>>So what's at the heart of this curious function. What's
>>behind their stormtroopers like actives? What is the real
>>purpose as they swoop, vulture-like upon the marginally
>>outspoken.
>>
>>Control.
>>
>>Any speech in a public space is bound to be policed in some
>>way, the Internet would no exception. So how is this done?
>>The answer it seems is this play of high-jinx.
>>
>>Our Trolls are professionals in all but name. In this
>>setting they act as anonymous devils, lost in the crowd of
>>eager copy cats. Its interesting to watch them, tease for
>>flaws, probing to try and provoke the very response, they
>>exist to suppress. A weird case of function demanding
>>circumstance. Technology in need of a role, it duly creates.
>>
>>I wonder if in some unspecified way, they also act to
>>attract attention? After all the next obvious thing to do,
>>is to check out their base of operations and see what else
>>has been bounced into that realm of cyber space. Notice
>>also what you won't find there, and you'll soon see the
>>imbalance encouraged by their actions.
>>
>>The less thoughtful will simply see a chance to make fools
>>of themselves. Its a chance to take an extreme stance against
>>anyone who thinks outside the box. In some selfish way its
>>about enforcing ignorance. Shaping behavior, promoting as
>>normal the unthinking 'juvenile' response.
>>
>>Its the high-tech version of the mob, with all the history
>>implied by that title. Mob rule, taken as just another prank.
>>Its function defies understanding. Its routines are entered
>>into without thought. Taking over groups; probing for the
>>outspoken; adopting instant dislikes; polarizing the views,
>>all to encourage the same in others.
>>
>>Don't think. Group think.
>>
>>These rent-a-mobs might also be seen as a kind of rent-a-group.
>>Keyboard jockies who use their 'talents' in the various regions
>>of Usenet, to excuse the _absence of debate_. Of course their
>>inability to fake a passion for a subject, invariably means they
>>resort to doing the other thing. And so thoughtful exchanges are
>>replaced by static, cheap slander, noise to occupy the place of
>>information.
>>
>>The irony is they can't see how they become the very thing they
>>claim to categorized. Stomping on the flowers of freedom all
>>in the name of gainful employment.
>
>
> Tell 'em about how you defend pedophilia.

Why don't you tell them how you slander at the drop of a hat.
How in your world people are guilty until proved innocent. Why
don't you tell them how the truth is what the press prints and
how you lack the will or the inclination to see beyond our
illusions.

I guess the last post was a bit galling for one who doesn't
think, one so easily lead but whatever dominant thought is
presented to him. You are a slandering fool. But then that's
small beer compared with what you say. The power is with you
and the force of your dumb invectives.

Cue the third party unable to see you for what you are...

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 5:15 pm
From: FishFood

Daedalus wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 19:49:30 GMT, FishFood <dont@home.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Seems to be my cue for a speech, after all 'no good award' is given
>>without a speech...
>>
>>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>Trolls - bored trouble makers, or magnets
>>attracting attention to the outspoken?
>>
>>So what's at the heart of this curious function. What's
>>behind their stormtroopers like actives? What is the real
>>purpose as they swoop, vulture-like upon the marginally
>>outspoken.
>>
>>Control.
>>
>>Any speech in a public space is bound to be policed in some
>>way, the Internet would no exception. So how is this done?
>>The answer it seems is this play of high-jinx.
>>
>>Our Trolls are professionals in all but name. In this
>>setting they act as anonymous devils, lost in the crowd of
>>eager copy cats. Its interesting to watch them, tease for
>>flaws, probing to try and provoke the very response, they
>>exist to suppress. A weird case of function demanding
>>circumstance. Technology in need of a role, it duly creates.
>>
>>I wonder if in some unspecified way, they also act to
>>attract attention? After all the next obvious thing to do,
>>is to check out their base of operations and see what else
>>has been bounced into that realm of cyber space. Notice
>>also what you won't find there, and you'll soon see the
>>imbalance encouraged by their actions.
>>
>>The less thoughtful will simply see a chance to make fools
>>of themselves. Its a chance to take an extreme stance against
>>anyone who thinks outside the box. In some selfish way its
>>about enforcing ignorance. Shaping behavior, promoting as
>>normal the unthinking 'juvenile' response.
>>
>>Its the high-tech version of the mob, with all the history
>>implied by that title. Mob rule, taken as just another prank.
>>Its function defies understanding. Its routines are entered
>>into without thought. Taking over groups; probing for the
>>outspoken; adopting instant dislikes; polarizing the views,
>>all to encourage the same in others.
>>
>>Don't think. Group think.
>>
>>These rent-a-mobs might also be seen as a kind of rent-a-group.
>>Keyboard jockies who use their 'talents' in the various regions
>>of Usenet, to excuse the _absence of debate_. Of course their
>>inability to fake a passion for a subject, invariably means they
>>resort to doing the other thing. And so thoughtful exchanges are
>>replaced by static, cheap slander, noise to occupy the place of
>>information.
>>
>>The irony is they can't see how they become the very thing they
>>claim to categorized. Stomping on the flowers of freedom all
>>in the name of gainful employment.
>
>
> Nice speech, kook. The "usenet disinformation agents" angle isn't very
> original though.
>
> Jade
>

so you want an original answer to an unoriginal problem, the answer
is unoriginal because the function performed by these 'trolls' remains
the same as it ever was. If i repeat the answers given by another
then it would tend to support the same observations, don't you think.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: John Travolta
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/7b8b3eef7eb8d3ad
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 12:12 pm
From: "SyVyN11"

"lj" <ljam@south.net> wrote in message
news:yxzfh.8038$Zz2.5503@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Ilene Bilenky" <ileneb@shore.net> wrote in message
> news:ileneb-DA0CE5.09300312122006@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>> In article <elma5p$180$1@news.albasani.net>,
>> "SyVyN11" <syvyn11@peoplepc.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I've given the link to my mom. AND SHE STILL BELIEVES THAT TRAVOLTA
>> > IS
>> > STRAIGHT!!!
>>
>> Plenty of older ladies always thought that Liberace just liked colorful
>> clothing.
>>
>> Ilene B
>
> And my mama stioll thinks Johnny Mathis just has not found the right girl!

I have the winner. On a road trip about 4 years ago, I told my mom that
Paul Lynne was gay. She never knew! What's worse, my sister had to
tell her what a hummer was (NOT THE CAR)!

>
>

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 12:14 pm
From: "SyVyN11"

"Kyle" <kylejj64@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1165940169.424013.185820@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> eggs wrote:
>> In article <457e4c19$1@quokka.wn.com.au>,
>> "Stormstruck" <nospam@youdork.com> wrote:
>>
>> > He was photographed snogging some guy, then it went silent.
>> >
>> > Did he go to ground (hide in his closet)?
>> >
>> > Was the guy tracked down and asked anything?
>>
>> Travolta's camp put out some thing about how Kelly was inside the plane
>> when the two guys kissed goodbye ... and somehow that was supposed to
>> prove John wasn't gay.
>
> Kelly Preston put out some stupid line that the other man was their
> babysitter or something. Okay -- so why's John smooching the
> babysitter?

It's a marriage tradition. My father was caught banging the babysitter
once, but she was a girl!!

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:20 am
From: "Kyle"

AKA wrote:
> "Kyle" <kylejj64@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1165940169.424013.185820@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > eggs wrote:
> >> In article <457e4c19$1@quokka.wn.com.au>,
> >> "Stormstruck" <nospam@youdork.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > He was photographed snogging some guy, then it went silent.
> >> >
> >> > Did he go to ground (hide in his closet)?
> >> >
> >> > Was the guy tracked down and asked anything?
> >>
> >> Travolta's camp put out some thing about how Kelly was inside the plane
> >> when the two guys kissed goodbye ... and somehow that was supposed to
> >> prove John wasn't gay.
> >
> > Kelly Preston put out some stupid line that the other man was their
> > babysitter or something. Okay -- so why's John smooching the
> > babysitter?
>
>
> If John is outside tonguing the babysitter who is Kelly inside with and what
> is her name?

That's a good question. Is KP a lesbian or does she dislike sex?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Off topic...way off topic
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/a901c03402e0014d
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 5:12 pm
From: "Kris Baker"

"A_White_Monkey" <alwaysright@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:ckzfh.3146$Et5.2517@trndny07...
>
> Ok I know this is not about a celebrity, but can ANYONE figure out how
> they do this? It's driving me nuts!!!
> http://www.milaadesign.com/wizardy.html

You didn't learn "the Magic Nines" in third grade math?

Pick any 2-digit number. I'll pick ten of them:
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Add the two digits together
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5
Then subtract them from the original number:
18 18 18 18 18 18 18 27 27 27

(Starting to get it yet?)

Now, when you do that "mystery" again, notice how
18 and 27 have the same symbol. As do 9, 36, 45,
54, 63, 72............

And the reason you get different symbols every time?
Is because they change the symbols around, but look
at how 9, 18, 27, 36, 45, 54, 63 and 72 *all* still match
their "new" symbols.

Years ago in a management class, we were told that
"failing" simple math tests like this could predict how
gullible a person was for scams. ;)

Kris

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 5:16 pm
From: "A_White_Monkey"

"Kris Baker" <kris.baker@prodigyyyy.net> wrote in message
news:7qBfh.7172$Ga1.1956@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "A_White_Monkey" <alwaysright@anywhere.com> wrote in message
> news:ckzfh.3146$Et5.2517@trndny07...
>>
>> Ok I know this is not about a celebrity, but can ANYONE figure out how
>> they do this? It's driving me nuts!!!
>> http://www.milaadesign.com/wizardy.html
>
> You didn't learn "the Magic Nines" in third grade math?

No I didn't.

>
> Pick any 2-digit number. I'll pick ten of them:
> 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
> Add the two digits together
> 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5
> Then subtract them from the original number:
> 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 27 27 27
>
> (Starting to get it yet?)
>
> Now, when you do that "mystery" again, notice how
> 18 and 27 have the same symbol. As do 9, 36, 45,
> 54, 63, 72............
>
> And the reason you get different symbols every time?
> Is because they change the symbols around, but look
> at how 9, 18, 27, 36, 45, 54, 63 and 72 *all* still match
> their "new" symbols.
>
> Years ago in a management class, we were told that
> "failing" simple math tests like this could predict how
> gullible a person was for scams. ;)

How many scams have you fallen victim to?

>
> Kris
>

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:38 am
From: "Kris Baker"

"A_White_Monkey" <alwaysright@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:YtBfh.5332$Li6.3440@trndny03...
>
> "Kris Baker" <kris.baker@prodigyyyy.net> wrote in message
> news:7qBfh.7172$Ga1.1956@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "A_White_Monkey" <alwaysright@anywhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:ckzfh.3146$Et5.2517@trndny07...
>>>
>>> Ok I know this is not about a celebrity, but can ANYONE figure out how
>>> they do this? It's driving me nuts!!!
>>> http://www.milaadesign.com/wizardy.html
>>
>> You didn't learn "the Magic Nines" in third grade math?
>
> No I didn't.
>
>>
>> Pick any 2-digit number. I'll pick ten of them:
>> 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
>> Add the two digits together
>> 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3 4 5
>> Then subtract them from the original number:
>> 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 27 27 27
>>
>> (Starting to get it yet?)
>>
>> Now, when you do that "mystery" again, notice how
>> 18 and 27 have the same symbol. As do 9, 36, 45,
>> 54, 63, 72............
>>
>> And the reason you get different symbols every time?
>> Is because they change the symbols around, but look
>> at how 9, 18, 27, 36, 45, 54, 63 and 72 *all* still match
>> their "new" symbols.
>>
>> Years ago in a management class, we were told that
>> "failing" simple math tests like this could predict how
>> gullible a person was for scams. ;)
>
> How many scams have you fallen victim to?

Did I fail the math? No. There's your answer.

Or are you just mad because this is your website?

Kris

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Princes William and Harry announce pop concert in honor of Princess Di
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/5f124114e735e914
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 5:12 pm
From: FragileWarrior

"Going For Broke" <scottmin@microsoft.com> wrote in
news:8278d$457ed952$d80c0a41$22943@NAXS.COM:

> What does/did people see in Diana?? She was no more than an average
> school teacher who married a prince.

Why ask the question if you have the answer?

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:18 am
From: "yD"

FragileWarrior wrote:
> PUSSSYKATT@aol.com wrote in news:1165940010.992408.242080
> @n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>
> > The CIA and Secret Service denied yesterday listening in on Diana's
> > calls.
> >
> > "It's not us, it's not us," a CIA official implored.
>
> Oh who gives a hairy rat's ass? If the tapes were good, release them. We
> could use some good NEW Di dish.

All the news reports I've seen say that the eavesdropping was "that
day" -- the day she died; but surely if 'they' were spying on her,
wouldn't they have been doing so before "that day" as well. If not,
why not. And if it was, indeed, only that day, why?
yD

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 12:27 pm
From: "Going For Broke"

It is my answer and wanted to know what OTHERS think. One reason for a
newsgroup, huh????

"FragileWarrior" <FragileWarrior@f'loonsmustdie.com> wrote in message
news:elmntm$civ$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
> "Going For Broke" <scottmin@microsoft.com> wrote in
> news:8278d$457ed952$d80c0a41$22943@NAXS.COM:
>
>> What does/did people see in Diana?? She was no more than an average
>> school teacher who married a prince.
>
> Why ask the question if you have the answer?

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:38 am
From: FragileWarrior

"Going For Broke" <scottmin@microsoft.com> wrote in news:3a652$457ee66d
$d80c0a41$25236@NAXS.COM:

> It is my answer and wanted to know what OTHERS think. One reason for a
> newsgroup, huh????

I think you asked an amazingly st00pid question and then answered it
yourself. Thank god for newsgroups where we can make fun of top-posting
fuckwits like you, huh?????????

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:40 am
From: "Kris Baker"

"yD" <yaffadina2@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165943905.708837.321540@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...
>
> FragileWarrior wrote:
>> PUSSSYKATT@aol.com wrote in news:1165940010.992408.242080
>> @n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > The CIA and Secret Service denied yesterday listening in on Diana's
>> > calls.
>> >
>> > "It's not us, it's not us," a CIA official implored.
>>
>> Oh who gives a hairy rat's ass? If the tapes were good, release them.
>> We
>> could use some good NEW Di dish.
>
> All the news reports I've seen say that the eavesdropping was "that
> day" -- the day she died; but surely if 'they' were spying on her,
> wouldn't they have been doing so before "that day" as well. If not,
> why not. And if it was, indeed, only that day, why?
> yD

I think it'll turn out that the real target was someone else at the
hotel, and that person phoned her.

Kris

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Paris Hilton defends Britney Spears' "partying ethics" on her MySpace
page. Yeah, she actually used the term "partying ethics."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/fc7eac7191b513e5
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:20 am
From: "Gossip Guy"

"Lately, you've been seeing pics of me and Britney partying (blah
blah) [sic] and she knows that some of her fans are very upset about
what they call her 'behavior' and sadly they're blaming the issue
on her being friends with me. For people to call out her parenting
skills on behalf of her partying ethics is appalling."

WTF?

analysis: http://www.celebslam.com/paris-hilton-types

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 3 A.M. GIRLS 12/12 **BLIND ITEM**
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/fd1c034e973b59ff
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:21 am
From: jcorn60@hotmail.com

AKA wrote:
> "Messalina" <destruction.eva@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1165941459.752834.108410@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > agcblinditems@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> 3 A.M. GIRLS/Eva Simpson & Caroline Hedley
> >> WHICH supposedly clean star recently invited a group of pals around for
> >> a mammoth drug session? She clearly hasn't gone cold on the idea of
> >> wild partying.
> >
> > Well, the "gone cold" bit is obviously a huge clue, but I got nothin'.
> >
> > Mez
> What about mammoth being included as a clue?

Queen Latifa (sp?) Played a mammoth in Ice Age 2.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Britney Spears photographed making out with her record producer
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/b10f32f822744bb6
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 5:26 pm
From: "subscriber1997"

"Doomella" <doomella_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165928903.372985.26520@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

subscriber1997 wrote:
> "CliffB" <fleer@gosympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:1165891313.332449.102360@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Doomella wrote:
> >> eggs wrote:
> >> > In article <1165873044.142826.234240@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
> >> > "Gossip Guy" <freestuff19@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Britney Spears was photographed last night making out with record
> >> > > producer Jonathan "J.R." Rotem, owner of Beluga Heights record
> >> > > label. Rotem's MySpace page confirms that he is working with
> >> > > Britney
> >> > >
> >> > > more here:
> >> > > http://www.celebslam.com/britney-spears-hooks-up-with-her-producer
> >> >
> >> > Ick. I guess she really does have a thing for sleazy looking guys.
> >>
> >>
> >> Federline is seriously looking better and better. I actually wish
> >> they'd hook up again.
> >> This Rotem guy is verging on Brandon Davis creepiness. And Beluga
> >> Heights? There are all kinds of crass jokes just waiting to hatch out
> >> of that one.
> >
> > That totally tacky piano necklace pendant is quite a laugh; as if his
> > production "talents" have anything to do with musicality. he looks like
> > a pimp, just a somewhat higher-performing one than K-Fiddle. They are
> > probably part of the same greasy stable 'posse'.
> =========================
>
> c'mon we're talkin Britney here
> ...slut of the bayous not Grace Kelly
> queen of the mainline later a real life
> princess of a make believe principality

>From what I hear, the anointed Ms. Kelly was quite the slut herself --
don't let that Mainline crap fool you. She slept her way up the
Hollywood ladder and, if I'm not mistaken, dumped her fiancé like a
hot potato when the Prince came sniffing around.
=======

and a heady mixture there was to smell i'm sure

of course it's now well known that GK
was a busy girl in the boudoir
reportedly she bedded almost all her leading men
and at the very least tried to fuck em all

Jimmy Stewart being a notable exception

despite her 24/7 open leg policy
she had the verisimilitude of the "classy dame"
...Brit comes off just as what she is
a trampy poor white trash hausfrau

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Lindsay Lohan: I Haven't Had a Drink in a Week
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/f80c1a67f83da643
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:28 am
From: "yD"

scooter34 wrote:
> edonline wrote:
> > http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,1568852,00.html
>
> >
> > "I've been going to AA, for a year by the way," she added. Why didn't she
> > say so until recently? "Well it's no one's business. That's why it's
> > anonymous!"
> >
>
> So she understands the anonymous part, but has failed to get the part
> where she's supposed to be committed to not drinking. Apparently,
> she's not getting a lot out of the meetings.
>
> scooter34

Well, a week without a drink is hard if you're an alcoholic, and as
long as she keeps going to meetings, hopefully, the time between drinks
will get longer.
A week's a week and an achievement.
yD

==============================================================================
TOPIC: DANE RULES! was Re: This Newsgroup Has Hit Rock Bottom
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/8b365739b8f1a64f
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 12 2006 9:31 am
From: "MimeOnFire"

John McWilliams wrote:
> A Pox wrote:
> > Hey!
> >
> > Anybody here remember when alt.tv.snl wasn't a complete shithole?
> >
> > Those were the days, huh?
>
> You are jealous of the greatest comedian ever

I'm into looking at things from a positive point of view.
Here's one good thing about Dane Cook:

He steals from the best.

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.gossip.celebrities"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.gossip.celebrities-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/subscribe

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com

photo

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

25 new messages in 12 topics - digest

0 Comments:

About Me

Previous Posts