Celebrity Gossip
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » EDS Lounge

free skin care · Fri Oct 06, 2006 10:37 am

carekate wrote:

And another thing...

Is anyone else as gleeful as I am to learn that Parisite Hilton got punched in the face by Shanna Moakler (soon-to-be ex of Travis Barker)? Neither one of these women is any prize, but I'd still love to shake Shanna's hand for finally giving that skank a little bit of payback! Bad Grin

Just what I was thinking! I just hope the story is true. If it is, yes, actually I am incredibly happy that Moakler boxed Hilton in the chops! As nasty and low dignity as a girl-fight is, my thought is this: Moakler finally did something A LOT of people have wanted to do for a long time: knocked that $h!t-eating smirk off Parasite's face! Bad Grin

BTW, CareKate, I PMd you regarding purchase of some of your products. I will patiently await your reply. wave

You know, I have a spare computer at home (its only a Pentium I though) that I can send you until you rake in enough $$$ from selling Dr. Holland's magical potions to get a newer one for your home use. Let me know if you want it. I can dump all my personal stuff off of it and send the whole kit and caboodle to you. I'm sure all of the gals would like to have more access to you! Very Happy

free skin care · Fri Oct 06, 2006 10:47 am

MermaidGirl wrote:

carekate wrote:

And another thing...

Is anyone else as gleeful as I am to learn that Parisite Hilton got punched in the face by Shanna Moakler (soon-to-be ex of Travis Barker)? Neither one of these women is any prize, but I'd still love to shake Shanna's hand for finally giving that skank a little bit of payback! Bad Grin

Just what I was thinking! I just hope the story is true. If it is, yes, actually I am incredibly happy that Moakler boxed Hilton in the chops! As nasty and low dignity as a girl-fight is, my thought is this: Moakler finally did something A LOT of people have wanted to do for a long time: knocked that $h!t-eating smirk off Parasite's face! Bad Grin

BTW, CareKate, I PMd you regarding purchase of some of your products. I will patiently await your reply. wave

You know, I have a spare computer at home (its only a Pentium I though) that I can send you until you rake in enough $$$ from selling Dr. Holland's magical potions to get a newer one for your home use. Let me know if you want it. I can dump all my personal stuff off of it and send the whole kit and caboodle to you. I'm sure all of the gals would like to have more access to you! Very Happy

That's lovely, MermaidGirl. You're a dream.

free skin care · Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:43 pm

scalawaggirl wrote:

MermaidGirl wrote:

carekate wrote:

And another thing...

Is anyone else as gleeful as I am to learn that Parisite Hilton got punched in the face by Shanna Moakler (soon-to-be ex of Travis Barker)? Neither one of these women is any prize, but I'd still love to shake Shanna's hand for finally giving that skank a little bit of payback! Bad Grin

Just what I was thinking! I just hope the story is true. If it is, yes, actually I am incredibly happy that Moakler boxed Hilton in the chops! As nasty and low dignity as a girl-fight is, my thought is this: Moakler finally did something A LOT of people have wanted to do for a long time: knocked that $h!t-eating smirk off Parasite's face! Bad Grin

BTW, CareKate, I PMd you regarding purchase of some of your products. I will patiently await your reply. wave

You know, I have a spare computer at home (its only a Pentium I though) that I can send you until you rake in enough $$$ from selling Dr. Holland's magical potions to get a newer one for your home use. Let me know if you want it. I can dump all my personal stuff off of it and send the whole kit and caboodle to you. I'm sure all of the gals would like to have more access to you! Very Happy

That's lovely, MermaidGirl. You're a dream.

<sheepish grin Embarassed

> Sorry - I know what I said about the Moakler/Hilton incident didn't sound very classy or nice! Its just that, living in LA like I do, it is not uncommon at all to run into celebs in various places. (The street I live on has Sony Studios and Culver Studios on one end of it and MGM, Fox and some other studio on the other.) Recently, my best friend and I were eating at a Greek place near Sony and a whole slew of extras from the cast of "Las Vegas" came in, and they brought James Caan with them. That's just one of MANY celeb sightings I've had - I went to UCLA, and various studios were CONSTANTLY filming either on campus or in various spots off Sunset or Wilshire, or in Westwood. It was a total pain in the butt and very annoying!

While I have thankfully never seen Hilton anywhere, I know a few people who have run into her at various nightclubs in the area, and every one of them has said she is NOT AT ALL a nice person (unless you have a penis, are famous and/or have tons of $$$!). Rolling Eyes

free skin care · Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:45 am

Why is it we ALWAYS see Tom Cruise and Katie at their kid's games but NEVER Nicole? Sounds like she is a pretty absent parent.

I NEVER see pics ofher with her kids, only at special events or out with her hubby Keith. Wonder what arrangement is going on with Tom and Nicole with the kids...

free skin care · Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:48 am

MermaidGirl wrote:

You know, I have a spare computer at home (its only a Pentium I though) that I can send you until you rake in enough $$$ from selling Dr. Holland's magical potions to get a newer one for your home use. Let me know if you want it. I can dump all my personal stuff off of it and send the whole kit and caboodle to you. I'm sure all of the gals would like to have more access to you! Very Happy

That's lovely, MermaidGirl. You're a dream.

Quote:

<sheepish grin Embarassed

> Sorry - I know what I said about the Moakler/Hilton incident didn't sound very classy or nice!

Whoa! I was referring to your kind offer to Carrie of your Pentium I! Not the catty comments, which I happen to agree with. Smile

free skin care · Sun Oct 08, 2006 12:29 pm

scalawaggirl wrote:

MermaidGirl wrote:

You know, I have a spare computer at home (its only a Pentium I though) that I can send you until you rake in enough $$$ from selling Dr. Holland's magical potions to get a newer one for your home use. Let me know if you want it. I can dump all my personal stuff off of it and send the whole kit and caboodle to you. I'm sure all of the gals would like to have more access to you! Very Happy

That's lovely, MermaidGirl. You're a dream.

Quote:

<sheepish grin Embarassed

> Sorry - I know what I said about the Moakler/Hilton incident didn't sound very classy or nice!

Whoa! I was referring to your kind offer to Carrie of your Pentium I! Not the catty comments, which I happen to agree with. Smile

Hee hee!

Silly me! Must've been my guilty feelings that made me think it was the other! I'm such a dweeb sometimes!

I would happily send Carrie my other computer. Like I said, its not the latest model (by a longshot), but she could use it at home on her free time. I actually don't have room for it here so it would be a help to me as well if she agreed to take it. I'm sure all the ladies here would love to have more access to her (me included!). Smile

free skin care · Sun Oct 08, 2006 5:16 pm

Here is something I've read in magazines about Uma Therman, Hillary Duff, and Sienna Miller.
They all use Amore Pacific skincare products.

free skin care · Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:10 am

MermaidGirl wrote:

I would happily send Carrie my other computer. Like I said, its not the latest model (by a longshot), but she could use it at home on her free time. I actually don't have room for it here so it would be a help to me as well if she agreed to take it. I'm sure all the ladies here would love to have more access to her (me included!). Smile

MermaidGirl, that is so nice of you to offer your computer (and btw, I agree with all your other comments about the Parasite vs. Moakler Smackdown...LOL! Laughing

) I really hope she takes you up on it!

Mary Very Happy

free skin care · Tue Oct 10, 2006 12:49 pm

Skincare wrote:

Here is something I've read in magazines about Uma Therman, Hillary Duff, and Sienna Miller.
They all use Amore Pacific skincare products.

Uh oh! Another line for me to investigate!

free skin care · Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:56 am

Why do millionaire stars have to continually behave like sh*ts toward hired help?
----------------------------------------------
October 10, 2006
Jennifer Lopez's Air Rage
Filed under: Candids , Jennifer Lopez

You best better be able to make Jennifer Lopez a double espresso or the woman will rip you a new one.

J.Lo, famed for her outrageous demands, took out her frustration on the stunned stewardess, hurling a torrent of hurtful insults at her.
The unnamed hostess is quoted on website AirlineCrew.net as saying: "She yelled at me because I could not make her a double espresso and then she told me my shoes looked cheap."

Lopez has also been added to an online blacklist called the "S****y Tipper Database" after she left a tip of just $1.27 on $350 restaurant bill in New York.

Never insult the shoes bitch.

Source: http://socialitelife.com/2006/10/10/jennifer_lopezs_air_rage.php

free skin care · Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:56 am

In another chapter in the saga of the world’s creepiest father:

-------------------------------------------------
October 10, 2006
Joe Simpson Blows Smoke Up His Daughter's Ass
Filed under: Candids , Jessica Simpson , Joe Simpson , Ken Paves , Photos

It sounds like Papa Joe Simpson has been leading Jessica to believe that her next movie, "Blonde Ambition," is going to be a star-studded affair and Jess has been interviewing around town that she's going to be starring with Luke Wilson in the pic. According to The National Ledger:

According to a report from MSNBC, in September, Jessica lamented that she was "preparing myself" for the inevitable November tabloid covers that would link her to Wilson when she starts filming a role as his love interest in "Blonde Ambition." And Jeannette Walls reports that just last week, she told Jimmy Kimmel, "I'm going into doing another movie with Luke Wilson called 'Blonde Ambition!'"

Jessica's blonde ambition may be just a bit to much for Luke according to Walls. The 'Scoop' columnist cites Star Magazine that claims a rep for Wilson told Star, "This project is in talks." What's more, a source told the tab, "Luke Wilson will never do a movie with Jessica Simpson."

Jeannette notes that the insider suggests that the star's manager dad Joe Simpson has been exaggerating prospects for the flick. "Joe is telling Jessica he's getting big stars," says the source. "Joe's been working on it for months. It'll end up having a bunch of nobodies if it happens.

I just love how poor, clueless Jessica is already complaining about future hypothetical speculation of her romantic involvement with a co-star she may or may not actually have in a movie that may or may not actually happen. It's like me bitching about all the polishing I'll have to do for my Emmy that I'll win for the television series that I will one day create and plan on having run for seven seasons.

Written by Lisa Timmons
Source: http://socialitelife.com/2006/10/10/joe_simpson_blows_smoke_up_his_daughters_ass.php

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dare I hope that this is the beginning of the end of her reign of terror as her looks continue to morph until she has begun to resemble nothing so much as a pre-op trannie?

free skin care · Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:44 am

So is the dad the one who set up that whole John Mayer thing to get publicity for Jessica?

It is so funny b/c John M denied that crap asap b/c although it could help her career it will put a bit of a bruise on his. Same with Luke wilson, stay away from Jessica Simpson if you know what is best for your career!

She said at the premier of that lousy movie of hers, "Employee of the Month" "I feel like a real movie star now and its so cool. I can't wait to attend one of those awards shows, now THAT will make me feel like a star"

So she is implying that she would be NOMINATED for something someday. you have to be nominated or involved in something that is nominated to attend those events. She is clearly DELUSIONAL!!!!

free skin care · Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:20 am

This is fascinating – and it also confirms my own belief that fake boobs are about as attractive and enticing to look at as Bessie the Cow’s udders when she’s overdo for a milking....(yeah, okay, so this isn’t a celebrity-related story but I wanted to share it and didn’t want to start a new thread just for this so sue me!)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Men Just Can't Handle Fake Boobs Wednesday October 11, 06:54 AM

Modern men don't want women to have fake boobs, according to a new survey. Rather than lusting after big breasted beauties, with plastic puppies, today's men are plumping for the natural look. A poll found that 85% of men aged 18 to 34 said that they hated plastic surgery and found it a "complete turn-off" in women.

The survey, which polled 1,600 men in the age-group across the UK, found that a further 15% claimed not to even notice women's cosmetic surgery.

A spokeswoman for More magazine, which commissioned the poll, said: "Women would be better off spending their money on new dress and shoes rather than fake breasts.

"They look at false cleavages but it is clear that it is a big turn off both sexually and in terms of forming a relationship.

"It seems as though women may have misjudged a lot of blokes."

Asked which female celebrity they were most attracted to, most opted for the slimline celebrity look with 51% going for singer Cheryl Tweedy, 24% fancying actress Scarlett Johansson and 10% choosing model Kate Moss.

Just 9% said they liked the look of pumped up silicon glamour girl Jordan.

The survey also found that most of those polled admitted looking at ------------, with 49% saying that they do so with the knowledge of their girlfriend and 33%

answering "Yes, of course".

Only 10% answered "No, or course not," while 4% said that their girlfriend would not let them.

Source: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/11102006/140/men-t-handle-fake-boobs.html

free skin care · Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:12 am

I'm sure most of you have already heard about how the Paul McCartney divorce proceedings have taken an ugly turn for the worse but you may not have had a chance to read all the details for the court papers so here they are for your delectation and disgust:

------------------------------------
Mills' Allegations Against Paul -- Blow by Blow
Posted Oct 18th 2006 1:34PM by TMZ Staff
Filed under: Celebrity Justice, Celebrity Feuds

TMZ has obtained a transcript of the allegations Heather Mills has made in court documents against her estranged husband, Paul McCartney. TMZ obtained the transcript from the Evening Standard, a London newspaper that broke the story.

Transcript:

10.1 The petitioner has been physically violent towards the respondent.

10.2 The petitioner has behaved in a vindictive, punitive manner towards the respondent, on occasion thereby exposing her to risk.

10.3 In breach of his promises to the respondent made when she agreed to marry him, the petitioner continued to use illegal drugs, and to consume alcohol to excess, throughout the marriage, thereby causing the respondent distress.

11.2 On one occasion in Los Angeles in or about the end of October or beginning of November 2002, in the presence of others, the petitioner (who was drunk) loudly pointed out that the respondent was in a "bad mood." (The respondent was unhappy because hostile comments had been made about her on the Barbara Walters show). When the petitioner and respondent got back to their house they began to argue about the petitioner's behaviour towards the respondent. The petitioner grabbed the respondent by the neck and pushed her over a coffee table. He then went outside, and in his drunken state he fell down a hill, cutting his arm (which remains scarred to this day).

11.3 On 12 May 2003 when the petitioner and the respondent were in a hotel in Rome and the respondent was four weeks pregnant, the petitioner behaved coldly and with indifference towards the respondent who was distressed by a derogatory newspaper article about her. An argument ensued between them in the bathroom during which the petitioner became angry and pushed the respondent into the bath. The respondent suffered shock and distress. Notwithstanding this, the petitioner procured the respondent's attendance at his concert that evening by instructing his staff to pester her until she relented.

11.4 On the same occasion, and following the concert, in a fit of pique because the respondent refused to go to the after-show party and instead dined privately at a restaurant with her sister and her personal female bodyguard, the petitioner directed the female bodyguard to abandon the respondent, leaving her exposed to the attentions of the hordes of fans (500,000 attending a free concert) in Rome at that time. At the end of the meal, the respondent was forced to take a 30-minute walk back to the hotel, no taxi being available and the car driven by the female bodyguard having been withdrawn from her use by the petitioner.

11.5 In Long Island in August 2003 the respondent asked the petitioner if he had been smoking marijuana. He became very angry, yelled at her, grabbed her neck and started choking her.

11.17 The respondent was delivered of her daughter by Caesarean section and was very tired after the birth. Despite this, the petitioner forced her to accompany him everywhere having no regard to her emotional or physical (and especially, her disability) needs. Indeed in this connection some two and a half years later (22 April 2006), shortly after the respondent's revision amputation surgery, she was forced to crawl on her hands and knees up aeroplane steps because they were not wide enough to take her wheelchair. The petitioner had assured the respondent that he had taken care of her disability needs in connection with thee trip (which he compelled her to take with him), but in fact he had not troubled to do so.

11.18 The petitioner often told the respondent when she was pregnant that he did not want her to breast-feed their child, making on occasion the comment "they are my breasts" and on another occasion, "I don't want a mouthful of breast milk." Notwithstanding this, the respondent did breast-feed Beatrice until, after six weeks, the petitioner's constant interrupting of her when breast-feeding (often in the presence of a midwife) had become so intolerable to her that she gave up. This made her feel very miserable and demoralised.

11.19 On 19 November 2005, the petitioner required the respondent to defer an essential and once-cancelled operation on her leg for two months because it would have interfered with his holiday plans.

11.20 The respondent was expected to prepare two dinners every night, one for the child of the family and one for the petitioner. The petitioner did not like the respondent to be assisted in the preparation of his meals, despite her disability. Even when the respondent had a broken pelvic plate in December 2003 the petitioner insisted that she cook for him while she was on crutches, could barely move and was in agony.

11.21 The petitioner refused to allow the respondent to get out of bed before he was ready to get up in the morning even though she would wake up early and wished to use the time for essential physiotherapy for her leg and to attend to emails and administrative tasks before the staff arrived or their child woke up.

11.24 The respondent often needs to go to the bathroom during the night, when he prosthetic limb is not fitted and so has to crawl to the bathroom on her hands and knees. This causes calluses and scrapes on her knees. She asked the petitioner if she could buy an antique bedpan to keep under the bed and use at night if necessary (whilst he was asleep) so as to avoid her having to struggle. The petitioner objected vociferously, saying that it would be like being in "an old woman's home."

11.25 Throughout the marriage, the petitioner refused to allow the respondent to use his beautiful spare office in New York, on the floor beneath their apartment, in a building owned by the petitioner; he told her that he did not want her to have an office in the same building. This was notwithstanding that she wanted to work on charity matters during Beatrice's two-hour nap and also be near to Beatrice in case she woke up. Using the office in the apartment block would also have meant that the respondent could have created a creche area in part of the office for Beatrice to play in for part of the time. The respondent could not understand the petitioner's refusal as he allowed his staff to work in the spare office if necessary, but he remained firm in his view. At the end of September or the beginning of October 2005, the petitioner reluctantly agreed to provide he with alternative office space in the city but in the even insisted that she sue and office that was far too small for any sensible purpose and was 20 minutes' walk away, which meant the respondent would have to leave Beatrice behind during her nap. When the respondent went to view it, she was chased by paparazzi, and was so demoralised by the experience she never used the office. The petitioner called her "an ungrateful bitch" in front of their driver when she explained why the office was not right for her. The petitioner made his position known in front of other people, including staff, which caused the respondent to feel insignificant and humiliated.

11.26 The petitioner promised the respondent that he would protect her and support her in relation to adverse press reports but has failed to do so on numerous occasions, when he has been in a position to do so. In mid-November 2004 the respondent was warned that a forthcoming article about her was to appear in the Sunday Times magazine and included the line "the best thing that ever happened to Heather Mills McCartney was losing her leg" which was distressing and vulgar press commentary. As the petitioner had been asked to participate in the half-time entertainment for the Superbowl on Fox TV owned by Rupert Murdoch (who also owns the Sunday Times), the respondent asked the petitioner to tell Mr Murdoch that he would not confirm his participation in the Superbowl unless he agreed not to run the deeply unpleasant story. However, the petitioner refused to assist the respondent in this way, announced his involvement in the Superbowl and therefore the Sunday Times had no reason not to publish the story.

11.27 The difficulties in the marriage came to a head at the end of April 2006 On Tuesday 25 April 2006, following an operation on the respondent's amputated leg, an argument occurred during which the petitioner poured the balance of a bottle of red wine over the respondent's head and then threw what remained in his wine glass at the respondent. The petitioner then reached to grab the respondent's wine glass, and broke the bowl of the glass from the stem. He then lunged at the respondent with the broken, sharp stem of the wine glass, which cut and pierced the respondent's arm just below the elbow, and it began to bleed profusely. He proceeded to manhandle the respondent, flung her into her wheelchair and wheeled it outside, screaming at her to apologise for "winding him up." The respondent still bears the scar of the assault.

11.28 On Wednesday 26 April 2006, at about 8pm, the respondent asked the petitioner not to leave her alone with Beatrice at the Cabin (because it is isolated in the middle of a forest). She had just had surgery on her leg (a revision amputation), was in a wheelchair, and was anxious about her ability to cope by herself. Notwithstanding this, he walked off. The respondent then telephoned the petitioner, and asked him to return. The petitioner mocked her please, mimicking the voice of a nagging spouse, and refused to return. (Later, she alleges, she) pulled him, staggering, towards the ground-floor bathroom, undressed him, ran the bath and helped him into it. She then phoned the petitioner's psychiatrist for advice and he told her not to attempt to move him (she might otherwise "do herself an injury"), to get a duvet and two pillows, to empty the bath of water, cover him, and leave hi m there. The respondent thereupon dragged herself upstairs, on her hands and knees, she was unable to wear a prosthetic leg as the wound from the surgery had not yet healed), and brought back down the duvet and pillows. She found that the petitioner had vomited on himself. She rinsed him off, and (worried that he might choke if he vomited again in the night, unattended), she got him out of the bath, dried him, and dragged him upstairs to bed. At that time, the respondent also had a broken plate in her pelvis, and she was in agony; she also feared the exertions would cause the stitches from her pelvic scar revision operation to burst.

11.29 On Thursday 27 April 2006 the respondent knew that the petitioner would be too hungover to help her with Beatrice and due to her own incapacity as a result of the recent operation, she had to call the babysitter to ask if she could come to help at 7.45am in getting Beatrice into the car and to the nursery. The respondent went with the babysitter to drop Beatrice at the nursery and collect her later that day. When she returned, the petitioner had woken up and tried to make a joke of the incident the night before. The respondent appeased him, as she reared what would happen otherwise. That evening the petitioner drank very little (a half bottle of wine) and went to bed. The following day, Friday 28 April 2006, the petitioner wen to London but said he would be back in time to help the respondent put Beatrice to bed. He did not arrive back at her bedtime, even though he know the respondent could not cope on her own. The respondent had to ask a friend to help put Beatrice to bed. At 10pm the petitioner returned home staggering drunk and slurring his words, demanding his dinner. The respondent stated that it was on the stove but that she would not be cooking for him again, as he had no respect for her. The petitioner called her "a nag" and went to bed. That evening the respondent realised the marriage had irretrievably broken down and left, crawling on her hands and knees whilst dragging her wheelchair, crutches and basic personal possessions to the car.

Source: http://www.tmz.com/2006/10/18/mills-allegations-against-paul-blow-by-blow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You’ve got to be kidding me! This woman needs to hire new legal advisers if her current attorney told her that this was the way to garner public sympathy so she could try to take a bigger cut of Paul’s fortune. The irony is that she has failed to realize that the underlying theme in all of the “deeply unpleasant” media stories that upset her so much during the marriage was the fact that she was a ball-faced liar so she’s apparently completely oblivious to the fact that she has absolutely no credibility whatsoever when it comes to making these allegations.

Most of the stuff she’s alleging is, in fact, part of the normal ups and downs of marriage. It isn’t hunky dory 24/7/365 (though from what we’ve seen/heard, Paul’s union with his beloved Linda may have come mighty close). Oh my God, the absolute AUDICITY of Paul McCartney to expect his wife to travel with him and spend time together. The cad – what an inconsiderate bastard! If he was a wife-beater, don’t you think that we would have heard whispers about it during the 25+ years he was with Linda? Both Linda McCartney and this Heather-creature appear to be very strong, self-sufficient women. Do you expect me to believe for a moment that either of them would tolerate being any man’s punching bag for a single second? To paraphrase Mr. Spock from Star Trek: “That doesn’t seem logical.”

Notice that this gold-digging cow’s accusations always follow incidents where she herself is “in a bad mood.” I don’t doubt Paul was smoking pot – for Chrissakes, that was the only time her and Linda ever spent a single night apart in their entire relationship was when she was kept overnight in jail for marijuana possession – and I think he was probably driven to drink when he realized what a self-serving, entitled, whining bitch his 60-year-old libido tricked him into marrying. If I’d been married to this “Lady,” I would’ve wanted to try and drown my sorrows, too!

But the absolute piece-de-resistance is the last line when she’s crawling on her hands and knees to the car, dragging her wheelchair and crutches behind her. Hello? Why didn’t she put her sorry ass in the wheelchair and lie her crutches across her knees along with her suitcase?! And notice that baby Beatrice didn’t number among her “essential personal belongings?”

Paul McCartney is one of the richest musicians of all-time – both from his own musical legacy and from the money left to him from Linda’s estate (there ain’t no way in hell “Lady” Heather is entitled to a penny of THAT money!) – but he couldn’t afford housekeepers, nannies, a cook, and a personal maid to help his wife get to and from the pot in the middle of the night if she was that incapacitated?? Boo hoo, the steps of the private jet weren’t wide enough to accomodate her wheelchair so she had to crawl on her hands and knees. Like there wasn’t a bodyguard around that could have carried her up the stairs and helped her to her seat if she couldn’t manage on her own?

Lady McCartney sure as hell spent a lot of time crawling on her hands and knees up and down the stairs. I guess it simply never occurred to a seemingly intelligent, scrappy woman who had worked so hard to overcome her own personal tragedy to crusade for the rights of other amputees that she could have braced her hands on either bannister and hop-swing her way up and down the steps! I just tried it myself and it wasn’t that difficult, even for a sometimes clumsy, uncoordinated clod like myself.

And this woman seriously expects us to believe that she was able to crawl on her hands and knees up that staircase, carrying the approximate 175-lb deadweight of her drunken husband behind her to their bed and yet she could cope with a 25-pound infant/toddler’s nightly bedtime routine? She is asking us to suspend our common sense and credulity in order to accept any of her self-serving complaints are truthful. I think that Mrs. McCartney’s London lawyers must have taken a page out of Denise Richard’s attorney’s playbook

If the media coverage of this woman’s previous exploits was so distressing to her, mightn’t she have given a thought to the fact that she would become a person of interest in her own right if she married one of the most famous and beloved musicians in the world? Of course not, she must’ve been blinded by the predatory gleam in her eye as it reflected back the brilliance of all those stacks of beautiful, shiny bundles of cash and coin. The fact of the matter is that Paul McCartney went out of his way to use his power and influence to protect her as much as possible during their marriage, otherwise we would’ve heard about her ------------ career and party girl reputation during which she “entertained” wealthy Arab businessmen with girl-on-girl and menage-a-trois sex orgies but these salacious details weren’t made public until AFTER the marriage had “irretrievably broken down” and Paul had withdrawn his support of her.

The sheer smug, condescending, supercilious and self-centeredness of this woman is just extraordinary. I think that Heather Mills missed her calling in life: she should have been an opera singer! I can already hear her practicing her arias: “Me, me, me, me, me, me, me...”

In the meantime, she brings shame upon every REAL victim of domestic violence and abuse.

free skin care · Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:13 am

I'm sure most of you have already heard about how the Paul McCartney divorce proceedings have taken an ugly turn for the worse but you may not have had a chance to read all the details for the court papers so here they are for your delectation and disgust:

------------------------------------
Mills' Allegations Against Paul -- Blow by Blow
Posted Oct 18th 2006 1:34PM by TMZ Staff
Filed under: Celebrity Justice, Celebrity Feuds

TMZ has obtained a transcript of the allegations Heather Mills has made in court documents against her estranged husband, Paul McCartney. TMZ obtained the transcript from the Evening Standard, a London newspaper that broke the story.

Transcript:

10.1 The petitioner has been physically violent towards the respondent.

10.2 The petitioner has behaved in a vindictive, punitive manner towards the respondent, on occasion thereby exposing her to risk.

10.3 In breach of his promises to the respondent made when she agreed to marry him, the petitioner continued to use illegal drugs, and to consume alcohol to excess, throughout the marriage, thereby causing the respondent distress.

11.2 On one occasion in Los Angeles in or about the end of October or beginning of November 2002, in the presence of others, the petitioner (who was drunk) loudly pointed out that the respondent was in a "bad mood." (The respondent was unhappy because hostile comments had been made about her on the Barbara Walters show). When the petitioner and respondent got back to their house they began to argue about the petitioner's behaviour towards the respondent. The petitioner grabbed the respondent by the neck and pushed her over a coffee table. He then went outside, and in his drunken state he fell down a hill, cutting his arm (which remains scarred to this day).

11.3 On 12 May 2003 when the petitioner and the respondent were in a hotel in Rome and the respondent was four weeks pregnant, the petitioner behaved coldly and with indifference towards the respondent who was distressed by a derogatory newspaper article about her. An argument ensued between them in the bathroom during which the petitioner became angry and pushed the respondent into the bath. The respondent suffered shock and distress. Notwithstanding this, the petitioner procured the respondent's attendance at his concert that evening by instructing his staff to pester her until she relented.

11.4 On the same occasion, and following the concert, in a fit of pique because the respondent refused to go to the after-show party and instead dined privately at a restaurant with her sister and her personal female bodyguard, the petitioner directed the female bodyguard to abandon the respondent, leaving her exposed to the attentions of the hordes of fans (500,000 attending a free concert) in Rome at that time. At the end of the meal, the respondent was forced to take a 30-minute walk back to the hotel, no taxi being available and the car driven by the female bodyguard having been withdrawn from her use by the petitioner.

11.5 In Long Island in August 2003 the respondent asked the petitioner if he had been smoking marijuana. He became very angry, yelled at her, grabbed her neck and started choking her.

11.17 The respondent was delivered of her daughter by Caesarean section and was very tired after the birth. Despite this, the petitioner forced her to accompany him everywhere having no regard to her emotional or physical (and especially, her disability) needs. Indeed in this connection some two and a half years later (22 April 2006), shortly after the respondent's revision amputation surgery, she was forced to crawl on her hands and knees up aeroplane steps because they were not wide enough to take her wheelchair. The petitioner had assured the respondent that he had taken care of her disability needs in connection with thee trip (which he compelled her to take with him), but in fact he had not troubled to do so.

11.18 The petitioner often told the respondent when she was pregnant that he did not want her to breast-feed their child, making on occasion the comment "they are my breasts" and on another occasion, "I don't want a mouthful of breast milk." Notwithstanding this, the respondent did breast-feed Beatrice until, after six weeks, the petitioner's constant interrupting of her when breast-feeding (often in the presence of a midwife) had become so intolerable to her that she gave up. This made her feel very miserable and demoralised.

11.19 On 19 November 2005, the petitioner required the respondent to defer an essential and once-cancelled operation on her leg for two months because it would have interfered with his holiday plans.

11.20 The respondent was expected to prepare two dinners every night, one for the child of the family and one for the petitioner. The petitioner did not like the respondent to be assisted in the preparation of his meals, despite her disability. Even when the respondent had a broken pelvic plate in December 2003 the petitioner insisted that she cook for him while she was on crutches, could barely move and was in agony.

11.21 The petitioner refused to allow the respondent to get out of bed before he was ready to get up in the morning even though she would wake up early and wished to use the time for essential physiotherapy for her leg and to attend to emails and administrative tasks before the staff arrived or their child woke up.

11.24 The respondent often needs to go to the bathroom during the night, when he prosthetic limb is not fitted and so has to crawl to the bathroom on her hands and knees. This causes calluses and scrapes on her knees. She asked the petitioner if she could buy an antique bedpan to keep under the bed and use at night if necessary (whilst he was asleep) so as to avoid her having to struggle. The petitioner objected vociferously, saying that it would be like being in "an old woman's home."

11.25 Throughout the marriage, the petitioner refused to allow the respondent to use his beautiful spare office in New York, on the floor beneath their apartment, in a building owned by the petitioner; he told her that he did not want her to have an office in the same building. This was notwithstanding that she wanted to work on charity matters during Beatrice's two-hour nap and also be near to Beatrice in case she woke up. Using the office in the apartment block would also have meant that the respondent could have created a creche area in part of the office for Beatrice to play in for part of the time. The respondent could not understand the petitioner's refusal as he allowed his staff to work in the spare office if necessary, but he remained firm in his view. At the end of September or the beginning of October 2005, the petitioner reluctantly agreed to provide he with alternative office space in the city but in the even insisted that she sue and office that was far too small for any sensible purpose and was 20 minutes' walk away, which meant the respondent would have to leave Beatrice behind during her nap. When the respondent went to view it, she was chased by paparazzi, and was so demoralised by the experience she never used the office. The petitioner called her "an ungrateful bitch" in front of their driver when she explained why the office was not right for her. The petitioner made his position known in front of other people, including staff, which caused the respondent to feel insignificant and humiliated.

11.26 The petitioner promised the respondent that he would protect her and support her in relation to adverse press reports but has failed to do so on numerous occasions, when he has been in a position to do so. In mid-November 2004 the respondent was warned that a forthcoming article about her was to appear in the Sunday Times magazine and included the line "the best thing that ever happened to Heather Mills McCartney was losing her leg" which was distressing and vulgar press commentary. As the petitioner had been asked to participate in the half-time entertainment for the Superbowl on Fox TV owned by Rupert Murdoch (who also owns the Sunday Times), the respondent asked the petitioner to tell Mr Murdoch that he would not confirm his participation in the Superbowl unless he agreed not to run the deeply unpleasant story. However, the petitioner refused to assist the respondent in this way, announced his involvement in the Superbowl and therefore the Sunday Times had no reason not to publish the story.

11.27 The difficulties in the marriage came to a head at the end of April 2006 On Tuesday 25 April 2006, following an operation on the respondent's amputated leg, an argument occurred during which the petitioner poured the balance of a bottle of red wine over the respondent's head and then threw what remained in his wine glass at the respondent. The petitioner then reached to grab the respondent's wine glass, and broke the bowl of the glass from the stem. He then lunged at the respondent with the broken, sharp stem of the wine glass, which cut and pierced the respondent's arm just below the elbow, and it began to bleed profusely. He proceeded to manhandle the respondent, flung her into her wheelchair and wheeled it outside, screaming at her to apologise for "winding him up." The respondent still bears the scar of the assault.

11.28 On Wednesday 26 April 2006, at about 8pm, the respondent asked the petitioner not to leave her alone with Beatrice at the Cabin (because it is isolated in the middle of a forest). She had just had surgery on her leg (a revision amputation), was in a wheelchair, and was anxious about her ability to cope by herself. Notwithstanding this, he walked off. The respondent then telephoned the petitioner, and asked him to return. The petitioner mocked her please, mimicking the voice of a nagging spouse, and refused to return. (Later, she alleges, she) pulled him, staggering, towards the ground-floor bathroom, undressed him, ran the bath and helped him into it. She then phoned the petitioner's psychiatrist for advice and he told her not to attempt to move him (she might otherwise "do herself an injury"), to get a duvet and two pillows, to empty the bath of water, cover him, and leave hi m there. The respondent thereupon dragged herself upstairs, on her hands and knees, she was unable to wear a prosthetic leg as the wound from the surgery had not yet healed), and brought back down the duvet and pillows. She found that the petitioner had vomited on himself. She rinsed him off, and (worried that he might choke if he vomited again in the night, unattended), she got him out of the bath, dried him, and dragged him upstairs to bed. At that time, the respondent also had a broken plate in her pelvis, and she was in agony; she also feared the exertions would cause the stitches from her pelvic scar revision operation to burst.

11.29 On Thursday 27 April 2006 the respondent knew that the petitioner would be too hungover to help her with Beatrice and due to her own incapacity as a result of the recent operation, she had to call the babysitter to ask if she could come to help at 7.45am in getting Beatrice into the car and to the nursery. The respondent went with the babysitter to drop Beatrice at the nursery and collect her later that day. When she returned, the petitioner had woken up and tried to make a joke of the incident the night before. The respondent appeased him, as she reared what would happen otherwise. That evening the petitioner drank very little (a half bottle of wine) and went to bed. The following day, Friday 28 April 2006, the petitioner wen to London but said he would be back in time to help the respondent put Beatrice to bed. He did not arrive back at her bedtime, even though he know the respondent could not cope on her own. The respondent had to ask a friend to help put Beatrice to bed. At 10pm the petitioner returned home staggering drunk and slurring his words, demanding his dinner. The respondent stated that it was on the stove but that she would not be cooking for him again, as he had no respect for her. The petitioner called her "a nag" and went to bed. That evening the respondent realised the marriage had irretrievably broken down and left, crawling on her hands and knees whilst dragging her wheelchair, crutches and basic personal possessions to the car.

Source: http://www.tmz.com/2006/10/18/mills-allegations-against-paul-blow-by-blow/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You’ve got to be kidding me! This woman needs to hire new legal advisers if her current attorney told her that this was the way to garner public sympathy so she could try to take a bigger cut of Paul’s fortune. The irony is that she has failed to realize that the underlying theme in all of the “deeply unpleasant” media stories that upset her so much during the marriage was the fact that she was a ball-faced liar so she’s apparently completely oblivious to the fact that she has absolutely no credibility whatsoever when it comes to making these allegations.

Most of the stuff she’s alleging is, in fact, part of the normal ups and downs of marriage. It isn’t hunky dory 24/7/365 (though from what we’ve seen/heard, Paul’s union with his beloved Linda may have come mighty close). Oh my God, the absolute AUDICITY of Paul McCartney to expect his wife to travel with him and spend time together. The cad – what an inconsiderate bastard! If he was a wife-beater, don’t you think that we would have heard whispers about it during the 25+ years he was with Linda? Both Linda McCartney and this Heather-creature appear to be very strong, self-sufficient women. Do you expect me to believe for a moment that either of them would tolerate being any man’s punching bag for a single second? To paraphrase Mr. Spock from Star Trek: “That doesn’t seem logical.”

Notice that this gold-digging cow’s accusations always follow incidents where she herself is “in a bad mood.” I don’t doubt Paul was smoking pot – for Chrissakes, that was the only time her and Linda ever spent a single night apart in their entire relationship was when she was kept overnight in jail for marijuana possession – and I think he was probably driven to drink when he realized what a self-serving, entitled, whining bitch his 60-year-old libido tricked him into marrying. If I’d been married to this “Lady,” I would’ve wanted to try and drown my sorrows, too!

But the absolute piece-de-resistance is the last line when she’s crawling on her hands and knees to the car, dragging her wheelchair and crutches behind her. Hello? Why didn’t she put her sorry ass in the wheelchair and lie her crutches across her knees along with her suitcase?! And notice that baby Beatrice didn’t number among her “essential personal belongings?”

Paul McCartney is one of the richest musicians of all-time – both from his own musical legacy and from the money left to him from Linda’s estate (there ain’t no way in hell “Lady” Heather is entitled to a penny of THAT money!) – but he couldn’t afford housekeepers, nannies, a cook, and a personal maid to help his wife get to and from the pot in the middle of the night if she was that incapacitated?? Boo hoo, the steps of the private jet weren’t wide enough to accomodate her wheelchair so she had to crawl on her hands and knees. Like there wasn’t a bodyguard around that could have carried her up the stairs and helped her to her seat if she couldn’t manage on her own?

Lady McCartney sure as hell spent a lot of time crawling on her hands and knees up and down the stairs. I guess it simply never occurred to a seemingly intelligent, scrappy woman who had worked so hard to overcome her own personal tragedy to crusade for the rights of other amputees that she could have braced her hands on either bannister and hop-swing her way up and down the steps! I just tried it myself and it wasn’t that difficult, even for a sometimes clumsy, uncoordinated clod like myself.

And this woman seriously expects us to believe that she was able to crawl on her hands and knees up that staircase, carrying the approximate 175-lb deadweight of her drunken husband behind her to their bed and yet she could cope with a 25-pound infant/toddler’s nightly bedtime routine? She is asking us to suspend our common sense and credulity in order to accept any of her self-serving complaints are truthful. I think that Mrs. McCartney’s London lawyers must have taken a page out of Denise Richard’s attorney’s playbook

If the media coverage of this woman’s previous exploits was so distressing to her, mightn’t she have given a thought to the fact that she would become a person of interest in her own right if she married one of the most famous and beloved musicians in the world? Of course not, she must’ve been blinded by the predatory gleam in her eye as it reflected back the brilliance of all those stacks of beautiful, shiny bundles of cash and coin. The fact of the matter is that Paul McCartney went out of his way to use his power and influence to protect her as much as possible during their marriage, otherwise we would’ve heard about her ------------ career and party girl reputation during which she “entertained” wealthy Arab businessmen with girl-on-girl and menage-a-trois sex orgies but these salacious details weren’t made public until AFTER the marriage had “irretrievably broken down” and Paul had withdrawn his support of her.

The sheer smug, condescending, supercilious and self-centeredness of this woman is just extraordinary. I think that Heather Mills missed her calling in life: she should have been an opera singer! I can already hear her practicing her arias: “Me, me, me, me, me, me, me...”

In the meantime, she brings shame upon every REAL victim of domestic violence and abuse.

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:49 am

carrie -- i can't believe you didn't really comment on the antique bedpan. sorry, but that really was the straw for me! what? since she became a Lady, her pee is too precious to be contained in something that doesn't cost a bloody fortune??? and the need to crawl? hello! what are crutches for? actually, i lived with an amputee for a short while and if nature called in the middle of the night, he just used to hop to the loo.

as for Sir Paul's character around women. i got a chance to work with him (i was his minder for a charity event) some 14 years back. there was a complication (meat in the press tent) and i can tell you unequivocally that Linda wore the pants in that family! he was absolutely lovely and a tiger does not change to spots.... i truly can't help but feel if there was any abuse in that marriage, it was heather doing the nasty work!

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:06 am

More creepy/freaky from Papa Joe Simpson: http://socialitelife.com/images/2006/10/jess101906_03.php

Check out this photograph that he took of her. Note the faint impression of a head imprint on the other pillow – is that same sort of subliminal message he’s trying to send, or did he really just roll out of his daughter’s bed to take a snapshot of her in dishabille? Shock

What you wanna bet that 15-20 years from Jessica and/or Ashley write a tell-all book about their father’s molestation of them as children, a lá similar revelations from LaToya Jackson regarding the über-controlling patriarch of the Jackson musical family??

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:16 am

OMG, did you guys hear about this?!

---------------------------

O.J. Simpson to confess — hypothetically
By Jeannette Walls
MSNBC
Updated: 8:34 p.m. CT Oct 19, 2006
O.J. Simpson is confessing. Hypothetically, that is.

The former football great, who was acquitted in criminal court 11 years ago of killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, reportedly has been paid a whopping $3.5 million to write about the double murder that shocked and riveted the nation in 1994, according to a detailed report in the new National Enquirer.

But Simpson is not actually confessing to the murder — rather, he’s writing a “hypothetical” book — which the Enquirer reports is tentatively being called “If I Did It.”

The early part of the book tells how Simpson fell in love with Nicole and how the marriage collapsed, reports the tab. He goes on, according to the article, to describe in gruesome detail the killing of his ex-wife and Goldman; he stipulates that the murder scenes are “hypothetical.” But, notes the tab, the descriptions are “so detailed and so chillingly realistic” that readers are left with little doubt as to what really happened.

Simpson can never be retried for the murders because of double jeopardy laws, according to the Enquirer, which also claims that Simpson aims to keep any book money instead of paying it out in a civil suit judgment against him by spending it all quickly.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15066202

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You know there are going to be some sick f*cks out there who will buy it. If there is any justice in this world, any proceeds he makes from the sales should be seized by the courts and given to the Brown and Goldman families to pay off the damages awarded to them in civil case/wrongful death conviction.

ETA:
P.S. I hope Johnny Cochran is spinning in his grave.

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 5:14 am

carekate wrote:

O.J. Simpson is confessing. Hypothetically, that is.

P.S. I hope Johnny Cochran is spinning in his grave.

that is thoroughly disgusting! it really truly makes me sick to my stomach especially if this hypothetical account then goes on to implicate AC -- one of the sweetest and gentlest champions of women in distress (no matter how trivial) i've ever met yet seemed to love OJ (in a platonic way) beyond reason. and what it will do to some friends who quietly supported OJ throughout.... grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!! i so hope this isn't true.

and to malign johnny cochran.... the man was just doing his job and he did it brilliantly (okay, so the prosecution sucked). johnny was a good man and a great lawyer. to define him by this one case and this one client is wrong. he had many righteous cases and clients and always did his best for them. i know this is only a gossip thread, but johnny deserves our respect. (getting off my high horse now)

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:03 am

thanks carekate for the gossip updates! The Heather Mills article was outrageous. I could absorb some of it in the beginning but it just got more and more ridiculous. I want to give her some credibility because as a married couple, only those two actually know the truth. Even if her side of the story is biased and probably (very) exaggerated, but there might be a little grain of truth in it somewhere. I think it takes two people for a marriage to completely collapse.

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:24 am

la vie en rose wrote:

carrie -- i can't believe you didn't really comment on the antique bedpan. sorry, but that really was the straw for me! what? since she became a Lady, her pee is too precious to be contained in something that doesn't cost a bloody fortune??? and the need to crawl? hello! what are crutches for? actually, i lived with an amputee for a short while and if nature called in the middle of the night, he just used to hop to the loo.

as for Sir Paul's character around women. i got a chance to work with him (i was his minder for a charity event) some 14 years back. there was a complication (meat in the press tent) and i can tell you unequivocally that Linda wore the pants in that family! he was absolutely lovely and a tiger does not change to spots.... i truly can't help but feel if there was any abuse in that marriage, it was heather doing the nasty work!

I'm just going to put this right out there: If I were missing a leg, you better BELIEVE that I would be crawling on my hands and knees to use the bathroom at night. You couldn't pay me enough to use a bedpan, even a froo-froo antique one.

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:04 am

la vie en rose wrote:

...i can tell you unequivocally that Linda wore the pants in that family! he was absolutely lovely and a tiger does not change to spots.... i truly can't help but feel if there was any abuse in that marriage, it was heather doing the nasty work!

I have just been informed that 6-pages were actually missing from the court documents leaked to the press containing Her Lady’s abuse allegations against Paul. Apparently the information contained in these missing pages cast Madame in a VERY UNFLATTERING light!

I wonder if she’s now still trying to maintain that she or her camp weren’t behind the leak?!

If anyone can find details about these mysterious missing pages, please share the details or post the link because I’ve run out of surf-time for today and therefore can’t spend time trying to hunt them down.

TIA!

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:31 am

carekate wrote:

la vie en rose wrote:

...i can tell you unequivocally that Linda wore the pants in that family! he was absolutely lovely and a tiger does not change to spots.... i truly can't help but feel if there was any abuse in that marriage, it was heather doing the nasty work!

I have just been informed that 6-pages were actually missing from the court documents leaked to the press containing Her Lady’s abuse allegations against Paul. Apparently the information contained in these missing pages cast Madame in a VERY UNFLATTERING light!

I wonder if she’s now still trying to maintain that she or her camp weren’t behind the leak?!

If anyone can find details about these mysterious missing pages, please share the details or post the link because I’ve run out of surf-time for today and therefore can’t spend time trying to hunt them down.

TIA!

Still trying to find an actual copy of the missing pages, but all I could find was this so far:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2412718,00.html

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10202006/news/nationalnews/ill_ruin_you_nationalnews_todd_venezia.htm

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:09 pm

It just breaks my heart. I have someone in my family with Bipolar disorder & wonder if Heather suffers from some ailment like that.It's so sad because they have a child.

free skin care · Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:44 pm

c4ward wrote:

It just breaks my heart. I have someone in my family with Bipolar disorder & wonder if Heather suffers from some ailment like that.It's so sad because they have a child.

That's an interesting thought! Never occurred to me...but she is acting rather strangely, so who knows? Confused

Maybe she does have some serious mental problem like that..??

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.