IUC World Exclusive: Princess Di Had Affair With Late Rocker Named Robert And Had Abortion

Posted on April 11th, 2010 by HisHighness in IUC:Entertainment, IUC:Exclusive

princessdianaA former employeed of the late princess revealed to IUC that Princess Di had an abortion after a three month affair with a rocker named Robert back in 1994. “It definitely happened and Diana was head over heels in love with this man,” the source said. “It took a bad turn when she got pregnant and had to fly to a private clinic in Switzerland to have an abortion. She was terrified that if anyone found out it would have been the biggest royal scandal ever.” Two years later Diana and Prince Charles divorced. Another former employee of Princess Di refused to comment, but did say that “there was definitely another man in her life for a short period in 1994.” He wouldn’t divulge who. One thing that’s certain is that he rocker was not Robert Palmer. A source close to the deceased rocker told IUC that there’s no way the affair could have taken place. “I was his manager at the time, and I can positively guarantee that that story is complete and utter fantasy.”

” Developing…

  1. danielle said on April 11th, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    Ian, you are disgusting. Both Palmer and Diana are dead so you post a comment made by someone with absolutely no proof of this. Unbelievably low journalistic standards.

    Reply
  2. lurkeyloo said on April 11th, 2010 at 6:09 pm

    You are stooping to new lows, Ian.

    Reply
  3. Mili said on April 11th, 2010 at 6:48 pm

    God!!!. Your Failure about Brangelina made you CRAZY. Go to the psychiatrist.

    Reply
  4. Nottonightdear said on April 11th, 2010 at 7:39 pm

    Ian do yourself and your readers a huge favor….scrub this post before anyone else gets a chance to read this.

    Reply
  5. purdy said on April 11th, 2010 at 8:10 pm

    Disgusting journalism. No fair talking about the dead.

    Reply
  6. purdy said on April 11th, 2010 at 8:12 pm

    Oh and by the way, what happened to the “developing” story about Bullock?

    Reply
  7. J said on April 11th, 2010 at 8:30 pm

    Nice to see that others recognize you for the poser that you are…. Speaking ill of the dead isn’t a litigious matter in this country, fortunately for you.

    If you really want to be a journalist, and not just writing some fluff piece to show your mommy that you’re actually doing somethng for your trust fund money, try sticking to real stories about the living……

    Reply
  8. aviation_guy87 said on April 12th, 2010 at 12:47 am

    If this is true, the million dollar question is: was it Robert’s baby or Oliver’s?

    Reply
  9. Emerson said on April 12th, 2010 at 12:20 pm

    You know, I enjoyed reading and talking to people on here, but I believe Ian to just be another Perez, and not at all a respected journalist. I find his posts to be disgusting, and to quote “strippers” as well as talk ill of the dead is beyond disgusting. Ian, why don’t you and Perez join forces, you have absolutely sunk to his level of “journalism”

    Reply
  10. aviation_guy87 said on April 12th, 2010 at 12:47 pm

    I don’t think Ian is being “disgusting.” He’s only stating what he was told BY A SOURCE. It’s everybody’s individual decision as to whether to believe it or not, but don’t shoot the messenger! And about this “not speaking ill of the dead” thing, both Diana and Robert are dead. So, it doesn’t matter what anybody says about them. At the end of the day, they were both flawed human beings, just like you and me, and what was (allegedly) done in the dark is now coming into the light.

    Multiple sources (since the early 2000s) have stated that Diana had an abortion in 1994. I’m sorry, but that’s what can possibly happen when one has extramarital affairs with several men. I’m just sayin’.

    Reply
  11. Diana said on April 12th, 2010 at 1:07 pm

    @aviation_guy87:

    True, Diana used to have extramarital affairs. And so, Charles had his too…

    Reply
  12. Reality Check said on April 12th, 2010 at 1:13 pm

    @Emerson:

    This is the precise reason I’ve lost any will to post on this blog – with his latest posts on Sandra Bullock and the one on Princess Di, Ian Halperin has revealed himself as nothing but a vulgar fake and the most pathetic excuse for an investigative journalist I’ve ever seen. Even Perez Hilton is better because he doesn’t pose as something more than what he is.

    This is a VERY SAD BLOG. It counts on nothing but dirt of the most disagreeable, offensive kind. I used to like it a lot because there were some great discussions on Brangelina here in the past, but now it’s impossible to see any decent, thought-provoking topic. It’s all about going through Hollywood’s garbage of the lowest kind.

    Well done, Ian! Not leaving Princess Di even in the grave? Trying to smear her image when she can’t defend herself anymore? Why don’t you choose someone who is still alive and can stand up to you? You know what? I think I now know why Brangelina don’t acknowledge you at all and don’t want to sue your ass out of existence – it’s because they figured out you are a total nobody.

    I wish I had figured it out myself sooner, but hey – better late than never! You are a total loser. With topics like this one, you will soon knock yourself out of any credibility and this is not good for the sales of your Brangelina book, either. I’d rather wait to read Andrew Morton’s book when it comes out rather than believe you are a journalist of any kind.

    Reply
  13. guest123 said on April 12th, 2010 at 1:20 pm

    @Reality Check:
    well GOLLY i’ve been telling people this all along LOL. You should’ve listened to me instead of keane…who has been absent of late – sigh and i miss her wisdom so much

    Reply
  14. aviation_guy87 said on April 12th, 2010 at 2:03 pm

    @Diana:
    At the end of the day, praise be to Jesus that Charles married Diana. Two wonderful sons came out of it, and Lady Diana was (and still is) a wonderful example of what a royal should be in public. Thank goodness she was who she was. The only regret is that the marriage didn’t work out, and that more wasn’t done by the Establishment to help them with their relationship. I wonder if Charles thinks about her from time to time?

    Reply
  15. Jalyn said on April 12th, 2010 at 2:53 pm

    Bravo Reality Check! Well said.

    I totally agree. This blog has gotten
    boooooooring…

    Reply
  16. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 12th, 2010 at 3:00 pm

    @guest123:

    So why do you still keep coming here to comment sweetheart? And faling to string one sentence together without mentioning me yet again? I know you think you are “much closer” to me than other trolls on this board and that we have “tangled” together before, but you need to understand that we are not lovers nor will ever be. I remember you saying what a fantastic husband you have and what an attractive child, so why not confine your fantasies to the real people in your life? I think it would make you a lot happier and less bitter. And as to why I haven’t commented on this board for a few (shock horror) days now well that’s because, as I’ve said, I do not dig the Howard Stern-esque stories. So if you want to keep alive our love affair in your head, you may have to follow me elsewhere. Or maybe try to live without me for a while? See if you can manage. xx

    Reply
  17. danielle said on April 12th, 2010 at 3:04 pm

    @aviation_guy87:
    Diana has children who don’t need someone like Ian posting unsubstantiated comments from an anonymous source. It doesn’t matter what multiple sources say about Diana if you can’t prove things. All it does is allow hurtful gossip to resurface and hurt those that loved her. With a person like Diana, who was probably the most famous person in the world at one point, it isn’t like allegations that surface die in obscurity.

    What happened to journalistic standards? This may be a blog, but Ian ruins his own credibility by posting stuff like this–items for shock value, not for truth. Stories to get hits from posters instead of legit stories. It is hard to respect a blogger who posts scurrilous information and ends with “developing….” and never gets back to the story to either show proof and confirmation of the validity of it or to say it was false.

    As far as I can remember from the gossip neither Palmer nor Diana were connected except by the lowest of gossips.

    Heck, if Ian wants to take someone on–why doesn’t he go after TomKat? Oh. Yes. Tom Cruise will sue.

    Reply
  18. alif said on April 12th, 2010 at 3:13 pm

    Being married to Prince Charles must have been too much to handle, according to reports this side of the pond.
    We read that he was having an affair with Camilla all the while. There was that especially noxious statement he allegedly said to Camilla about how he wished he was her tampon. Something similar.
    It elicited snickers even as it came from a royal personage.
    Princess Diana must have been humiliated. No wonder she turned her attention to someone who could return her affection.
    There was also the extensive reporting of the prince’s affairs with a male member of his staff while the princess was alive. More recently, other reports surfaced, claiming that Prince William caught him and another male in a situation that left no doubt about what was taking place.
    Whether all this is true, perhaps some investigator will dig and find the truth. Ian?

    Reply
  19. DogBlissYou said on April 12th, 2010 at 4:16 pm

    @Mili:
    Exactly.

    Reply
  20. purdy said on April 12th, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    Well Alif, it wouldn’t take much to convince me of his majesty’s gayness.

    Reply
  21. aviation_guy87 said on April 12th, 2010 at 4:57 pm

    @danielle:
    Very good points.

    Reply
  22. Geez Louise said on April 12th, 2010 at 6:15 pm

    Even if this were true why would you want to print it? Diana and Robert are both dead for crying out loud.
    I’m sure Diana’s loved ones including her two children would be discusted at seeing Diana’s name dragged through the mud for no reason at all. Really, does this story benefit anyone? Diana is dead, not hurting anyone. Have some class for once Ian, let her rest in piece. Geez, I really thought you couldn’t get any lower. You really are gross.

    Reply
  23. pepsimaewest said on April 12th, 2010 at 6:56 pm

    What is the big deal? The Royals do not marry for love (except for Queen Victoria).

    Diana gave birth to two male heirs, and the buck stops there; she did her job as Princess of Wales.

    RIP DS and RP.

    Reply
  24. alif said on April 13th, 2010 at 2:06 am

    @purdy:
    One of the mags over here printed several nude photos of Prince Charles, taken unawares. Don’t recall any fuss having been made over this. This was around the time he was rumored to be involved with Barbra Streisand.

    It’s well known that when a white celeb acts like an unabashed fan of Barbra Streisand, he is most likely gay or bi. It’s similar to their knowledge/singing of all the Broadway musicals.
    There’s an entertaining comedy called “In and Out”, starring Kevin Kline that points this out with much humor.

    Many Americans know just where they were and what they were doing when they heard the news about Princes Di. Similar to when other famous beloved figures died too soon!

    Reply
  25. Emerson said on April 13th, 2010 at 10:59 am

    @Reality Check:
    Plus, Ian himself has said that Princess Diana is his favorite (paraphrasing) person in the World…yet, this story (Trust, I use that worse loosely) is put out there smearing her memory? Ian, you gross me out, and if you are not ashamed by what you write, then I will be ashamed for you….this is pure sicko news, and you are SUCH a hypocrite! Tell me one thing that is positive about writing this sh** please, I need to know exactly why you would think this type of gossip would benefit anyone? I have NEVER seen such garbage out there about a deceased person, let alone a beloved Princess to many. I mean, does Ian really think this stuff benefits anyone, her family and children included? Yuck, double yuck…

    Reply
  26. Grom said on April 13th, 2010 at 1:21 pm

    Портал просто отличный, все бы такие!

    Reply
  27. guest123 said on April 13th, 2010 at 1:33 pm

    @Keane Cyber Queen Supreme:
    i’m here because i think its important to mock and belittle you at every turn. It amuses me :) And to see how quickly people turn on someone from “oh you’re so brilliant when you’re bashing Angelina Jolie” to “you’re such an ass leave people like Sandra Bullock and Princess Diana alone”. Its a real study in sociology right here. I’ve said it again, IT AMUSES ME Keane., nothing more…..nothing less. Just like Just Jared, Perez Hilton.

    Reply
  28. Reality Check said on April 13th, 2010 at 2:17 pm

    @Emerson:
    Moreover, Princess Diana has never done anything to harm anybody in her life – that’s why this so-called topic really pisses me off! Unlike others, she was a genuine humanitarian, very humble and down-to-earth – a really good woman and wonderful mother rolled into one. She didn’t go to hospitals to hold the hands of AIDS victims in order to erase a past like some people who shall remain nameless. She also gave birth to and brought up two wonderful young men making sure they would grow up as down-to-earth as her. This is amazing when it comes from someone who was raised in privilege and whose sons are two of the most privileged boys in history. I have no idea why, of all the people in the world, Halperin chose her as a target for his pointless crap! She didn’t wreck a marriage; instead her marriage was preyed on and wrecked by somebody else. How come he throws dirt at Diana but avoids “revealing” anything about the woman who put her through hell?

    Developing? Yeah, sure … go ahead … show who you really are, Ian! And leave the dead in peace – they deserve better! Choose someone who is still alive and has the power to disprove you or at least ignore you the way you deserve.

    Talk Royalty with His Lowness Hollywood! Blah blah blah!

    Reply
  29. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 13th, 2010 at 3:32 pm

    @guest123:

    Aw sweetheart, I kind of feel bad for you though. Seriously is this as good as your life gets? After all that drama you created over how outraged you were that I had referred to the fact you have a child and how you tried to insinuate that I was thus making fun of the fact that you had had several miscarriages, even though we had already established that you are the sort of person who is far too afraid to give any details of their own life in case they are left vulnerable to the kind of snide remarks and bullying that you are happy to inflict on others. You made that grand proclamation that you “would never come back to this site again” as if – what – you were expecting Ian or anyone reading here to miss your contribution or something? Really d it was most ridiculous, and genuinely, I felt bad for you at that point. It was as if this interaction with me was giving your life some meaning or something, which is quite a worrying state of affairs. And then when it turned out that you had actually in fact never left and had been posting under a different username all the time and actually described yourself as someone who was “close” to me and that we had “tangled” together before I did begin to quite worry about you. I mean, have you been thinking about me all this time d and do you think we have some sort of relationship of any sort? I am just asking because I need to be really careful to point out that we don’t, and that you don’t count in my life in any shape or form, whether as a positive presence or a negative – do you understand that? I just wanted to make this really clear as there have been occasions before where people have obsessively talked about some minor interaction with me as if it was something that really mattered in their life and that was quite worrying for me so I just need to watch what is going on here.

    Also, I’m not entirely sure what you meant by the loving how people can turn from saying how brilliant I am to how awful I am because they don’t agree with what I’m saying bit? Do you see this as some sort of victory or something? And if so, do you have any idea how this makes you look as a person? I’m just trying to understand your psychology here d, because frankly it is worrying. You are engaging in a battle with someone who never gives you a moment’s thought and it seems to be giving your life meaning. I am just suggesting that you might like to talk to someone about this, that’s all, before it develops any further. By the way, when I say stuff I don’t do it to try to make myself popular, I do it because that’s what I think, whether people like it or not. And that is the difference between a strong person and a weak one. Ask your therapist.

    Reply
  30. Emerson said on April 13th, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    @Reality Check:
    what really threw me was that Ian just published a blurb on William’s possible engagement (that he had linked from Perez HIlton, HA), and he was all aglow at the possibility that a “child” could be named after his favorite person of all time, Princess Diana! HUH? SO, one week she is his favorite person, and the next he is smearing her name? AND posting something about not one deceased person, but two?? Gross, gross and more gross….who does that? Especially regarding something that will never be able to be verified, not ever? Just in time for that wonderful engagement annoucement Ian was just so over the moon about! Happy future wedding, Prince William!! Yeah right Ian, shame on you!

    Reply
  31. alif said on April 13th, 2010 at 11:14 pm

    Ian, this does in no way, shape or manner make me think less of Princes Di. She slept with a man when she couldn’t have the much-needed love of her husband.
    While it’s a wrong, one can understand the reason behind it.
    Here, in our country, we have read about our late and beloved First Lady, Jackie Kennedy-Onassis, who has been written about in a similar manner. Ditto, Nancy Reagan, who’s still with us, and is a favorite of so many who aren’t Republicans. Same may be said of Eleanor Roosevelt of the Democratic Party, except the reports alleged she had a long time lesbian love affair.

    Reply
  32. 123abc said on April 14th, 2010 at 2:08 am

    @Keane Cyber Queen Supreme:
    Gee Keane, for someone who says they don’t give another thought to certain poster’s comments, you remember some very specific details about previous comments made to you.

    Also, I think what guest123 is trying to say about this site is that it’s OK to bash Brangelina regarding their ‘lifestyle habits’, yet it’s not OK to say anything about Sandra Bullock or Princess Di. Really, what’s the difference? I am sure no one on this site personally knows/knew any of them.

    Reply
  33. alif said on April 14th, 2010 at 2:48 am

    I don’t personally know Elizabeth Taylor, but I believe she had a major role in the breakup of the Eddie Fisher/Debbie Reynolds marriage.

    I didn’t know Marlon Brando, but I believe he had had affairs with men, and I believed him when he admitted that he had failed as a father.

    I don’t know Robert Wagner, but I believe he got away with murder. Same with Robert Blake, O.J. Simpson, and the list goes on and on! To find out more, people must do their own research!

    I don’t know Brangelina, but I believe many things, not all, I’ve read from various sites. And that’s because there’s a history of such behavior in the tough movie business. But when she manipulates the media to try to ruin another actress, we movie lovers have every right to know about Angelina, and her agenda.
    This is because there are people, esp. the young, who blindly follow these stars. And we consider Brangelina an evil force that could hurt America, and the world. Unfortunately, the rest of the world also idolizes the celluloid images and think they are the real thing!
    If Ian’s book wasn’t true, Brangelina would have sued.

    I don’t feel Sandra Bullock or Princess Di personally hurt anyone by manipulating the media against anyone they feel is in their way.

    Reply
  34. Reality Check said on April 14th, 2010 at 5:46 am

    @123abc:
    I don’t understand how anyone can have difficulty seeing the difference, but here it goes:

    Sandra Bullock and Princess Di have never wrecked anybody’s marriage or committed relationship and Angelina Jolie did it twice in her life. They have never been involved in anything scandalous or dishonest – they were publicly betrayed by the men they trusted. Unlike them, Angelina Jolie was always on the wrong side and to anyone who says that this was a coincidence, I say that too much coincidence is no coincidence but a clear pattern.

    Angelina Jolie is just the kind of serial home wrecker, who delights breaking up homes and once she has her man, she is no longer interested. She just settles down, has kids and gets more respectable than anyone who never thought about wrecking anything in their lives – a true role model for stability and normalcy for anyone whose moral standards are not high enough to see something wrong about it.

    And in the meantime, she thinks there’s nothing wrong about bragging about the great trophy she settled down with and all the great things that happened to her thanks to him AS IF his ex-wife won’t hear and get even more hurt than she already is. She has given the public all kinds of lurid details about how her affair with Pitt started, how her feelings for him developed (“I think a few months in I realized: “God, I can’t wait to get to work!”) and so on and so forth.

    I think she is so much in love with the sound of her own voice and her legendary success with the married Brad Pitt that she can’t resist listening to herself in front of the entire world’s audience. To her mind, the most romantic story in the world is her own. She is the most hurtful and obnoxious narcissist I’ve ever seen since I got interested in movies and we bash her lifestyle because she is not at all the person she pretends to be. Is that clear enough or do you think you’ll need more than that?

    For the record, I do believe she tried to ruin Jennifer Aniston by presenting her as “a woman who didn’t want to have kids, so she deserved what she got.” She didn’t want to appear like the home wrecker that she is and wanted not only the man but also his wife’s spotless reputation – something she had never had herself. She wanted a clean start with a man of her choice (even if the man was married) and a snow-white reputation (even if that meant she would have to start rumours that would destroy the public sympathy for his wife).

    All in all, in terms of her private life, she reminds me of a young Mia Farrow who started a huge family of biological and adopted children after stealing another woman’s husband – Andre Previn. The difference is that Andre Previn’s wife was a close friend to Farrow and that Farrow got pregnant, compelling her to separate from her husband. However, karma is a bitch and Farrow and Previn separated nine years and six kids later (three bio and three adopted).

    Does that remind you of someone, by any chance?

    The funny part is that Farrow lost her next husband, Woody Allen, in the most humiliating way possible – to one of the Vietnamese daughters she adopted with Previn. She called the loss “a tragedy”. (I wonder if she remembered the tragedy she had caused to Previn’s wife or just thought it was “so unfair”.) Anyway I would be interested to see how and when karma will come back to get Jolie because she thinks she’s untouchable.

    Six kids have not made anybody faithful. They can stop a man from leaving for a long time but if his history shows he has no staying power, which Pitt definitely lacks, he will leave – kids or no kids. Or he will find a way to have an “open” relationship, which is all the same. This relationship hasn’t been entirely about these two anyway, because they didn’t have the time to get to know each other anyway and the kids shifted the focus from them from the start.

    So is it clear now why we bash their “lifestyle habits”, as you put it, or do you still have trouble figuring it out? If you already forgot what my answer is all about, go back to the first paragraph to refresh your memory.

    RC

    Reply
  35. Reality Check said on April 14th, 2010 at 5:57 am

    @alif:
    You know something, Alif? I’m beginning to have some respect for Elizabeth Taylor. At least, she didn’t try to ruin Debbie Reynolds’ name and satisfied herself by simply taking her man away. In the world of home wreckers, this sounds almost like a class act. Not that it really is, but after Angelina Jolie/Brad Pitt/Jennifer Aniston, it almost is.

    Reply
  36. guest123 said on April 14th, 2010 at 6:50 am

    @Keane Cyber Queen Supreme:
    Also, I’m not entirely sure what you meant by the loving how people can turn from saying how brilliant I am to how awful I am because they don’t agree with what I’m saying bit?

    WOW – you thought that was about YOU …..get over yourself darling. I was referring to Ian – you know the OWNER of the blog. God i feel for you and your over inflated sense of self worth. Honey , we just aren’t that into you. Deal with it.

    Reply
  37. guest123 said on April 14th, 2010 at 6:53 am

    @123abc:
    Thanks 123abc – nice to see how a rational thinking person can actually comprehend something!! And yah, she remembers way more of our “discussions” then I do. Probably has all her conversations stored locally on a server so she can reference them to seem so much wittier and smarter than everyone else. Shame as it only makes her look….sad and pathetic.

    Reply
  38. Yorkshire Girl said on April 14th, 2010 at 9:59 am

    What are the odds on guest 123 and 123 abc being the same person?

    Reply
  39. guest123 said on April 14th, 2010 at 10:43 am

    @Yorkshire Girl:
    sorry to disappoint Sherlock…nope

    Reply
  40. Reality Check said on April 14th, 2010 at 10:59 am

    @Yorkshire Girl:
    I was going to ask the same question, YG. :)

    Reply
  41. Yorkshire Girl said on April 14th, 2010 at 1:15 pm

    @Reality Check:

    Good post earlier RC. This is funny, maybe not all true, but the fact that it is being reported should be a blow to Jolie’s massive ego. Apparently she is now planting stories about JD because she has realised that he doesn’t want to know. What happens to a washed up tramp when she hits her 40’s?

    “Star Magazine: Depp Humiliates Fatal Attraction Jolie
    by Guest on Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:50 pm
    Star Magazine has an article on Jolie.

    It basically says that Jolie keeps getting spurned by Depp but she’s not giving up without a fight. Here are the juiciest bits:

    Jolie tried to jam her tongue down Depp’s throat during a kissing scene. The script called for just a peck on the lips. It freaked Johnny out. She keeps pulling stunts like these and she won’t stop till she gets what she wants.

    Jolie is trying to use tricks she used to get Miller, Thornton and Pitt on Depp.

    She stands too close to Depp on the set. Depp is trying to get her to cool it.

    Jolie walks into Depps dressing room wearing a thin robe and nothing underneath. She tries to engage him in conversation by looking deep into his eyes.

    Johnnie got freaked out when Jolie took her dress of and walked around in her bra and underwear in front of him. He left the room. He thinks it’s weird that Jolie is always touching him. She brushed crumbs out of Depp’s beard and he felt awkward. Depp has turned down several of Jolie’s dinner meeting invites.

    She is pouring on the heat because she is not used to being ignored.

    Depp has told his entourage not to leave him alone with Jolie. He and his bodyguards have developed signals. When Jolie gets too close, Johnny gives the look and someone runs interference.

    I wonder if Brad ever feels foolish that she was humped and dumped by most of Hollywood, Cage, Farrell, Miller and even Billy Bob left her… but Brad fell for the charming, smiling, caring, sensitive girl with a small child in tow pulling at the heartstrings routine, which he gobbled up and fell hook, line and sinker.

    Now he must realise he has got the booby prize….

    Reply
  42. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 14th, 2010 at 3:47 pm

    @123abc:

    Gee entirely new created-for-this-specific-argument poster, I think I would remember someone else’s comment when they accused me of making fun of the fact they had had several miscarriagesk, when they had in fact never mentioned it (or any other detail of their life other than the bare minimum of course) and I had in fact only referred to the fact that they had a child. All the regulars remember it and were all very pleased to see the back of her insidious, vile little presence as a result of it. Unfortunately she seems to be sticking around like a bad case of Bombshell McGee’s genital warts – but what can you do? Oh and by the way, I am as happy to criticise Sandra Bullock for her “lifestyle habits” as I am Brangelina’s, did you not read my posts? If not, catch up!

    Reply
  43. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 14th, 2010 at 3:51 pm

    @guest123:

    “Also” in relation to which previous post d? I assume you mean the one you posted as 123abc as you didn’t make a previous one! Oh d what an epic fail that was! You had 24 hours and that was the best you could do?! Book that appointment with your therapist d stat – I think it is the only option left to you!

    Reply
  44. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 14th, 2010 at 3:57 pm

    @guest123:

    Yeah babe, you’ve been stalking me for a good year now – you’re SO not into me! And now you’re making up other usernames to try to defend yourself! Two words: desperate schizophrenic. Seek therapy.

    Reply
  45. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 14th, 2010 at 4:06 pm

    @guest123:

    Oh I bet you wish we could all forget about your little “making fun of my miscarriages that I have never once mentioned like every other detail of my life” crazy accusations – it was all a bit of a spectacular fail on your part wasn’t it? All the other regulars who hadn’t paid enough attention to you up until that point to see what an insidious, vile little bully you are suddenly saw you scream it from the roof-tops in unmistakable style, and commented to that effect too. Shame you don’t have quite such a good memory. Oh and I don’t need a server to make me sound witty and smart (although I appreciate the compliment), some of us are just born that way. So I’m thinking this little dialogue of ours will not be one to run back to your home turf to try to impress the big girls in the playground with. Or your family for that matter. Keep it coming though d, you are excellent cannon fodder.

    Reply
  46. alif said on April 14th, 2010 at 4:54 pm

    Reality Check;
    If it sounded like I had no use for Elizabeth Taylor, I’m happy to clear that up.

    When it happened the world was aghast! But the world also knew that she had recently lost her latest husband in a plane crash. So there may have been mixed feelings.

    Now we all know that when a person is going thru intense grief, that person will often avail themselves sexually to someone they ordinarily won’t harbor any such feelings about. So, people, esp. those in behavioral science, will understand the reason behind her stealing Eddie Fisher away from Debbie Reynolds. Ordinary people will not. So there was the intense backlash. It propelled both women into boxoffice favorites, btw.

    I have much respect for Elizabeth Taylor. I saw her in person. She was very gracious.
    Her work for Aids victims brought her much praise among her peers. She didn’t do it with cameras recording the activities.
    She married her lovers, because in some way she was traditional; crazy as it sounds!
    She became friendly with outcasts, just as Princess Di did.
    She eventually made up with Debbie Reynolds. This is a must, to make amends, in her AA program.

    So I’m not anti-ET, in case anyone got that idea. Thanks!

    Reply
  47. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 14th, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    @guest123:

    Oh so you admit you are the poster previously known as d then? Funny that because you denied it the other day. Bit like you’re denying being 123abc now. CANNON FODDER d, cannon fodder.

    Reply
  48. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 14th, 2010 at 5:57 pm

    @guest123:

    Oh and yeah, you were the one who started talking about me first when the convo had nothing whatsoever to do with me (as you always do), so it wouldn’t exactly be that much of a stretch to think you were doing it again on this occasion would it? Perhaps you can invent another username to debate this with yourself. Oh and, as always though, don’t forget to run it past your therapist first. I only have your best interests at heart d!

    Reply
  49. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 14th, 2010 at 6:02 pm

    @guest123:

    Ok now d, I’m gonna have to love you and leave you, so I hereby give you a 24 hour start to come back at me. (You definitely need it). Or maybe you could demonstrate just how “not into” me you are and FF off back to FF? The choice is yours amiga. NIght all!

    Reply
  50. 123abc said on April 14th, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Keane, for the record I am NOT guest123, though we seem to share similar views.

    You must wear out alot of keyboards with all your dull replies!

    Reply
  51. Reality Check said on April 15th, 2010 at 1:40 am

    @alif:
    I didn’t mean you were bashing Liz Taylor, not at all. All I meant was that your post was very informative and just got me thinking. Thanks!

    Reply
  52. guest123 said on April 15th, 2010 at 6:52 am

    um yah i skipped over most of those non sensical rants from the local loco. Anyone else have anything interesting to say?

    Reply
  53. Reality Check said on April 15th, 2010 at 10:46 am

    @guest123:

    How about you? Do you have anything interesting to say?

    I don’t mean to be ironical here but sitting back in your chair in front of your PC and lazily encouraging the others to say something interesting, though you don’t agree with most of what they have to say, is a very unproductive way of using a blog.

    Hereby I encourage you to say something that will rock our world to its foundations.

    Looking forward to your deeper – than – deep insights …

    :)

    Reply
  54. Yorkshire Girl said on April 15th, 2010 at 1:07 pm

    @Reality Check:
    I wouldn’t hold your breath….LOL.

    Reply
  55. guest123 said on April 15th, 2010 at 1:40 pm

    @Reality Check:
    well who peed in your cornflakes …oh perhaps you’re KEANE posting under another name hmmm …LOL

    Reply
  56. guest123 said on April 15th, 2010 at 1:43 pm

    @Yorkshire Girl:
    gosh another Keane alias. (since you know we ALL post as mutliple people). WEll since you’re all holding your breathe, heres my insight on the topic at hand – let the dead rest in piece. No good can come from flinging mud at people who can’t defend themselves.

    Reply
  57. Emerson said on April 15th, 2010 at 2:20 pm

    I’ve got nothing (interesting to say I mean) lol but I do so enjoy the posts from the normal folks up there….so thanks!

    Reply
  58. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 15th, 2010 at 3:16 pm

    @guest123:

    24 hours, d, 24 hours – and that was the best you could do. Enough said!

    Reply
  59. Keane Cyber Queen Supreme said on April 15th, 2010 at 3:23 pm

    @guest123:

    Ah so now you do think people post under multiple usernames now d? But of course you do as you have already said that you are “much closer” to me than another troll I mentioned and that we had “tangled together before” (sorry have to keep repeating that, gets me every time!) – so you have already admitted you are using a second username right? And then when you switched from guest123 to 123abc (inventive!) you referred to a previous post you had made, except the previous post was under your original username (guest123) – another massive slip-up! Like shooting fish in a barrel.

    P.S. While Yorkshire Girl is not me (for one I am a Londoner) – I would be happy for you to mistake us for each other as she is a pretty cool chick. Not everyone needs to invent multiple usernames to win an argument d, some of us just use our brains. Sorry to be so “dull”. :-)

    Reply
  60. Reality Check said on April 15th, 2010 at 3:51 pm

    @guest123:
    No, honey, I’m sorry to disappoint you – I’m not Keane. Keane and I don’t even live in the same country, let alone in the same body. But that was an interesting idea on your part – at a long last. LOL. :)

    Reply
  61. Emerson said on April 15th, 2010 at 4:06 pm

    I have no split personalities on here eithere, lol, I’m just a lowly person from Pennsyvania…not sure anyone else would admit to even that, LOL, but there is only one of me…. :)

    Reply
  62. Reality Check said on April 16th, 2010 at 1:23 am

    @Emerson:
    … And I’m based “somewhere in Europe”. :) But I won’t admit more than that, even if I have to. :)

    Reply
  63. Yorkshire Girl said on April 16th, 2010 at 5:34 am

    @Keane Cyber Queen Supreme:

    Thanks Keane, ditto.

    Sorry to disappoint Guest 123/123 abc/d/? But I am not Keane, who is in the south of England and I reside in Leeds which is in the north (although I am moving to London this weekend for a short spell on a work attachment I am not a Londoner, unlike Keane)

    Wherever you are based in the world ladies, have a fun weekend x

    Reply
  64. Emerson said on April 19th, 2010 at 12:02 pm

    @Reality Check:
    God I feel a Michael Jackson song coming on…ABC 123..blah blah blah, reality check you are safe in your European country! As I am safe in my small town u s of a…woohoo

    Reply
  65. Miranda Ann said on April 19th, 2010 at 12:16 pm

    @Yorkshire Girl: Where are the photos of Angelina trying to jam her tongue down Depp’s throat? Where are the photos of Angelina going into Depp’s trailer in a thin nightgown with nothing under it? There have been hundreds of photos from the set of “The Tourist” published in numerous publications. Where are the ones of Angelina getting “too close” to Depp? There are numberous photos of the two of them filming together. There is not one photo of Angelina standing “too close” to Depp. You need to stop reading the ragmags and think for yourself.

    Reply
  66. Живопись said on April 19th, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    да,но это еще и не все…

    Reply
  67. Yorkshire Girl said on April 22nd, 2010 at 1:40 pm

    @Miranda Ann:

    And you need to learn to read. If you were paying atention to the comment, you would have noticed that I wrote ‘probably not all true’ before gaily posting the bit of tabloid gossip from the Star.

    Numberous? Do you mean numerous? One day I aspire to be just like you. Hopefully, when that day comes I will be finally able to think for myself. Peace out.

    Reply
  68. wowpvp said on May 2nd, 2010 at 7:02 am

    Good! Thank you! I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?

    Reply
  69. aion kinah said on May 3rd, 2010 at 5:54 am

    Such a usefule blog wow !!!!

    Reply
  70. wow gold said on May 5th, 2010 at 2:25 am

    There is obviously a lot to know about this.

    Reply
  71. Dofus Kamas said on May 7th, 2010 at 8:02 am

    Such a usefule blog wow !!!!

    Reply
  72. wow power leveling said on May 10th, 2010 at 2:00 am

    Of course, what a great site and informative posts, I will add backlink – bookmark this site? Regards, Reader

    Reply
  73. lotro gold said on June 10th, 2010 at 10:51 am

    Such a usefule blog wow !!!!

    Reply
  74. powerleveling said on June 13th, 2010 at 12:12 am

    Hey very nice blog!!

    Reply
  75. asfa said on June 19th, 2010 at 1:31 am

    Of course, you can get much fantasy earth zero gold, Call on your friends to play and fez gold, Have you heard buy fez gold, it can help you beat the monster buy fantasy earth zero gold,

    Reply
  76. louis vuitton said on December 15th, 2010 at 2:56 am

    I’d like to read the articles in this website.May be you can go to louis vuitton,there will be some new and cheap louis vuitton products for choosen.You know louis vuitton didn’t have the outlet store himself,but we provide the discount louis vuitton handbags,shoes,wallets,belts for Factory Direct price.So,enjoy yourself on our online shop.

    Reply

What do you think? Join the discussion...

How do I change my avatar?

Go to gravatar.com and upload your preferred avatar.

Categories

Posts By Day

April 2010
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Meta