Naomi Campbell - want to punch so hard!
Discussion
john_p said:
carmonk said:
Her evidence is certainly compelling. She's woken by two men knocking on her door. She opens the door and they hand her a bag. They don't tell her what's in it, or who it's from, and she never thinks to ask. She's so curious that she goes straight back to bed without looking in the bag and in the morning finds that it contains "some dirty stones". Not diamonds, though, no way, not at all. She then gives the stones to the head of a charity and forgets about the whole incident. Clearly this is what anybody would do in the circumstances.
The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Does she not have legal representation? Surely they would have come up with a better story than that...The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Pesty said:
I blame the media for constantly raising the profile of these vacuous, vain people and portraying them as celebrities.
She walks up and down in an outfit. Nobody should even know who the f
k she is.
Absolutely.She walks up and down in an outfit. Nobody should even know who the f
k she is.As someone said earlier, the really sad thing is that this war crimes trial is only getting front-page space because this clothes-horse is involved. Apparently that makes it newsworthy. It's disgraceful that it isn't deemed newsworthy anyway.
shoggoth1 said:
I thought it was rather disgusting when she, in response to the judge asking about her being nervous attending, stated that she hadn't wanted too and had been made to attend - that it was an 'inconvenience'. Bloody hell woman, it's a war crimes trial.
As my girlfriend put it 'not half as inconvenient as the poor people who had their arms chopped off'.
My initial reaction when she said it was an inconvenience was that of disgust. As my girlfriend put it 'not half as inconvenient as the poor people who had their arms chopped off'.
Silly bint.
Her convenience has no place in a freaking war crime tribunal.
Her elevated sense of self importance is pretty sickening as if I was pulled up to be a witness for such a case I would do everything in my power to cooperate.
Some things are just bigger than yourself.
carmonk said:
Her evidence is certainly compelling. She's woken by two men knocking on her door. She opens the door and they hand her a bag. They don't tell her what's in it, or who it's from, and she never thinks to ask. She's so curious that she goes straight back to bed without looking in the bag and in the morning finds that it contains "some dirty stones". Not diamonds, though, no way, not at all. She then gives the stones to the head of a charity and forgets about the whole incident. Clearly this is what anybody would do in the circumstances.
The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Absolutely. A statement so watertight it would take a team of Sherlock Holmes' a thousand years to pick a hole in.....The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Of course, someone could just ask her why she'd give a back of "dirty stones" to a Charity, did she think they would build a really small house with them?
Jasandjules said:
carmonk said:
Her evidence is certainly compelling. She's woken by two men knocking on her door. She opens the door and they hand her a bag. They don't tell her what's in it, or who it's from, and she never thinks to ask. She's so curious that she goes straight back to bed without looking in the bag and in the morning finds that it contains "some dirty stones". Not diamonds, though, no way, not at all. She then gives the stones to the head of a charity and forgets about the whole incident. Clearly this is what anybody would do in the circumstances.
The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Absolutely. A statement so watertight it would take a team of Sherlock Holmes' a thousand years to pick a hole in.....The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Of course, someone could just ask her why she'd give a back of "dirty stones" to a Charity, did she think they would build a really small house with them?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaan...
Asterix said:
Kindersley said:
As for her....Jesus , nothing more than a Hooker
Some of the stories I've heard out here in Dubai when some of the young Sheikhs have 'entertained' top models are quite interesting.Stories, I admit, but where there's smoke...
mattley said:
Except it would appear that that's exactly what she did.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaan...
Yes, BUT the question is whether or not actually believed that they were just dirty stones.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaan...
1. If she thought they were, then why the hell would she give them to a Charity? It's not like they ask for donations of bags of stones, is it now?
2. If she knew full well what they were, then why not hand them in to the authorities?
Robbo66 said:
Frankeh said:
I liked one of The Daily Mails pictures they had.
It looks like someone's going to have the most organized and depressing wk of their life.
The funniest post I have ever...ever read. Hat's off.It looks like someone's going to have the most organized and depressing w
k of their life. You and I, and most people would see that photo and see a bunch of innocent things that someone may need while sat at length in a court room.
But Frankeh, poor poor Frankeh, saw something familiar to him, something so close to his own sad lonely mastabatory habits, that he saw this collection of items and thought 'w
king kit'.Poor, poor Frankey, he is a man we should pity, and cherish him to raise his self worth until he relates w
king to a box of tissues next to a copy of Razzle or a Big Jugz DVD.Sad w
king is a condition we could all suffer from some time in our lives, give generously, help someone less fortunate than you.Please donate to ConianTahitiTour2010@paypal.com
Conian said:
Robbo66 said:
Frankeh said:
I liked one of The Daily Mails pictures they had.
It looks like someone's going to have the most organized and depressing wk of their life.
The funniest post I have ever...ever read. Hat's off.It looks like someone's going to have the most organized and depressing w
k of their life. You and I, and most people would see that photo and see a bunch of innocent things that someone may need while sat at length in a court room.
But Frankeh, poor poor Frankeh, saw something familiar to him, something so close to his own sad lonely mastabatory habits, that he saw this collection of items and thought 'w
king kit'.Poor, poor Frankey, he is a man we should pity, and cherish him to raise his self worth until he relates w
king to a box of tissues next to a copy of Razzle or a Big Jugz DVD.Sad w
king is a condition we could all suffer from some time in our lives, give generously, help someone less fortunate than you.Please donate to ConianTahitiTour2010@paypal.com
mattley said:
Jasandjules said:
carmonk said:
Her evidence is certainly compelling. She's woken by two men knocking on her door. She opens the door and they hand her a bag. They don't tell her what's in it, or who it's from, and she never thinks to ask. She's so curious that she goes straight back to bed without looking in the bag and in the morning finds that it contains "some dirty stones". Not diamonds, though, no way, not at all. She then gives the stones to the head of a charity and forgets about the whole incident. Clearly this is what anybody would do in the circumstances.
The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Absolutely. A statement so watertight it would take a team of Sherlock Holmes' a thousand years to pick a hole in.....The problem with many thick people, I find, is that they assume everyone else is as thick as they are.
Of course, someone could just ask her why she'd give a back of "dirty stones" to a Charity, did she think they would build a really small house with them?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaan...
130R said:
Awful, awful woman. She said being there was a "big inconvenience" for her, never mind the hundreds of thousands of people that were murdered off the back of these diamonds then.
Her entire story was a pathetic fabrication but that remark about it being an inconvenience truly marked her out as total scum. I suspect that being mutilated or orphaned in a third world country would be a better definition of inconvenient.
Moral free, repugnant, sub human.
Gaz. said:
Second point- has no one asked? This trial has been going on for four years and is reaching its conculsion, but as others have said it's only newsworthy because Campbell took to the stand, much to the disgust of some PH'ers, not that this trial was a hot topic on this forum before.
I have been surprised by a few of the responses on here, although I must confess that I know very little about the lady in question.However, I wonder what effect her evidence on the outcome of the trial. As far as I can see, whether she accepted blood diamonds, or not, has absolutely nothing at all to do with Taylor's war crimes.
I also wonder if the term "blood diamond" had been coined in 1997. Even if it was known at the time that diamonds were funding conflict - would Miss Campbell (not renowned for her intellect) have known anything about this?
I think that lots of people seem to have forgotton that it is Charles Taylor who is accused of war crimes involving children. He is the true monster in all this.
Reading PH, one could be forgiven for thinking that Miss Campbell had personally taken part in child murders.
Don
--
don4l said:
I think that lots of people seem to have forgotton that it is Charles Taylor who is accused of war crimes involving children. He is the true monster in all this.
Reading PH, one could be forgiven for thinking that Miss Campbell had personally taken part in child murders.
Don
--
Yes, but NC has a history of being a nasty piece of work. Maybe not a child murderer, but certainly a self-obsessed, arrogant, selfish, rude, patronising, spoilt little brat who has been in Court herself before for verbally and physically abusing people who worked with her or got in her way.Reading PH, one could be forgiven for thinking that Miss Campbell had personally taken part in child murders.
Don
--
So no love lost here for Ms Campbell and her performance in this trial has done her no favours, as usual.
One thing about her 'explanation' of the events which I feel should have been brought up is the point about who gave her the 'dirty stones'.
If someone knocked on your hotel room door in the middle of the night, what would you do?
Personally, I'd look through the spyhole or if there wasn't one, ask who it was knocking.
If it turned out to be two men I had never seen or heard of before, I doubt I would open the door and I don't know any women who would. Yet Ms C, who makes a big thing about her personal security all the time, states that she got up and opened the door to two men she had never met before.
b
ks.I think maybe she was given the diamonds by someone she knew well enough to open her door to in the middle of the night. Maybe that person was even invited in for a nightcap...
In any case, doubtful that we'll find out the real truth now. We certainly won't from that dozey cow.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff