velo90 0 #1 February 3, 2004 I think Janet Jacksons tit exposure was planned all along. She's got to grab attention for her new album. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymama 37 #2 February 3, 2004 Oh good, another thread about Janet's tit. I was worried we didn't have enough of them yesterday. She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man, because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ScottishJohn 25 #3 February 3, 2004 From Annanova news. Janet Jackson admits bare truth Janet Jackson has admitted planning the "costume reveal" dance sequence in which one of her breasts was exposed on live TV before 89 million viewers. The incident during the Super Bowl half time show, which Jackson's co-performer Justin Timberlake had taken the blame for, has drawn criticism from family groups and could result in millions in government fines. Initially billed as an accident, Jackson apologised for displaying one of her breasts late on Monday in a statement released on MTV's website. "The decision to have a costume reveal at the end of my halftime show performance was made after final rehearsals," Jackson said in the statement. "MTV was completely unaware of it. It was not my intention that it go as far as it did. I apologise to anyone offended - including the audience, MTV, CBS and the NFL." But Michael Powell, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, has called the brief display "a classless, crass and deplorable stunt". Mr Powell says the action against television network CBS for briefly showing the incident will be "thorough and swift." Currently, $27,500 is the largest fine the FCC can levy. Since Sunday, roughly the same number of internet news pages had been created about Jackson as had been created about President Bush's budget proposal, according to a Google news search. Joe Saltzman, professor at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication, who studies media and pop culture. "Big deal. We saw Janet Jackson's breast. This is just the most absurd thing I've ever witnessed." Saltzman said he attributes the racket about Jackson's exposure not to the flesh but rather to a conservative portion of the population, reports www.courierpress.com. Story filed: 07:56 Tuesday 3rd February 2004---------------------------------------------------------------------- If you think my attitude stinks you should smell my fingers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n2skdvn 0 #4 February 3, 2004 it was pre planned linkif my calculations are correct SLINKY + ESCULATOR = EVERLASTING FUN my site Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kingbunky 3 #5 February 3, 2004 duh... i'm sure she accidently wore an outfit with a breakaway cup with fake lace so it looked like she was wearing a bra. and then justin accidentaly tore it off after his 'i'm gonna have you naked by the end of the song' line. what's the big freaking deal with a bare breast on tv? sure, it was done for shock value, and it succeeded in that admirably, but it was still just a bare breast fer crying out loud! half the population has a pair of them, and most of the half that don't have them have seen one a time or two. it's not like this was an extrordinary example either, it was just a breast."Hang on a sec, the young'uns are throwin' beer cans at a golf cart." MB4252 TDS699 killing threads since 2001 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
velo90 0 #6 February 3, 2004 Quoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RevJim 0 #7 February 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! And despite what the naysayers have to say about the quality of that breast, I think it was a beautiful breast.It's your life, live it! Karma RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
velo90 0 #8 February 3, 2004 QuoteAnd despite what the naysayers have to say about the quality of that breast, I think it was a beautiful breast. mmmmm.. To keep the number of threads about this breast on the increase maybe we should have a poll about the quality of the breast. We could also post pictures of other breast to which we could compare the breast in question. What do you think? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ian84 0 #9 February 3, 2004 Quoteone of her breasts was exposed on live TV before 89 million viewers. Some day I hope to moon 89 million people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pds 0 #10 February 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! it was a middle aged usetabe pop star without a hit since the mid 90's and who's entire family is populated by sociopaths crying for attention. it's an ugly saggy tit anyhow.namaste, motherfucker. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites velo90 0 #11 February 3, 2004 Quoteit's an ugly saggy tit anyhow. Despite what RevJim said I feel I have to agree with pds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Skyrad 0 #12 February 3, 2004 Seconded!When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jceman 1 #13 February 3, 2004 QuoteI think Janet Jacksons tit exposure was planned all along. She's got to grab attention for her new album. Well, seeing as Ms. Jackson has "apologized" even though "we didn't mean for it to go that far", I feel better that she made a clean breast of the situation. Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money. Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Unstable 9 #14 February 3, 2004 I can't belive she would go so far as to destroy whatever relationship MTV had with the NFL, just to promote her new album or attract whatever attention she could....=========Shaun ========== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Antithesis 0 #15 February 4, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! And despite what the naysayers have to say about the quality of that breast, I think it was a beautiful breast. What I can't get over Rev, is that her facial makeup is so dark against the light mocha skin of her beautiful breast. I travel the land, Work in the ocean, Play in the sky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites velo90 0 #16 February 4, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! And despite what the naysayers have to say about the quality of that breast, I think it was a beautiful breast. What I can't get over Rev, is that her facial makeup is so dark against the light mocha skin of her beautiful breast. Was her face in those pictures? I must have missed that Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
pds 0 #10 February 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! it was a middle aged usetabe pop star without a hit since the mid 90's and who's entire family is populated by sociopaths crying for attention. it's an ugly saggy tit anyhow.namaste, motherfucker. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
velo90 0 #11 February 3, 2004 Quoteit's an ugly saggy tit anyhow. Despite what RevJim said I feel I have to agree with pds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #12 February 3, 2004 Seconded!When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jceman 1 #13 February 3, 2004 QuoteI think Janet Jacksons tit exposure was planned all along. She's got to grab attention for her new album. Well, seeing as Ms. Jackson has "apologized" even though "we didn't mean for it to go that far", I feel better that she made a clean breast of the situation. Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money. Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Unstable 9 #14 February 3, 2004 I can't belive she would go so far as to destroy whatever relationship MTV had with the NFL, just to promote her new album or attract whatever attention she could....=========Shaun ========== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Antithesis 0 #15 February 4, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! And despite what the naysayers have to say about the quality of that breast, I think it was a beautiful breast. What I can't get over Rev, is that her facial makeup is so dark against the light mocha skin of her beautiful breast. I travel the land, Work in the ocean, Play in the sky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
velo90 0 #16 February 4, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteit was just a breast No it wasn't ! It was Janet Jacksons on prime time TV! And despite what the naysayers have to say about the quality of that breast, I think it was a beautiful breast. What I can't get over Rev, is that her facial makeup is so dark against the light mocha skin of her beautiful breast. Was her face in those pictures? I must have missed that Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
