Miley Cyrus, Disney critical of Vanity Fair photo spread -- Pho...

i think the picture is perfect i don't think the is anything wrote with it i know kidz that are around 10 to 14 that aRE TAKING NUD PICS SO DON'Y WORRY IS ALL CUZ YOU ARE A STAR SO DON'T WORRY JUST FOCUS SWEET HEART OK TAKE CARE AM 12 YEARS OLD FROM INDIANAPOLIS IN I LOVE YOU TAKE CARE AND PLEASE FOCUS FOR ME PLEASE

Hello dear ladies and gentlemen!
I would like inform you that Scarlett Johansson (actress) actually is a clone from original person, who has nothing with acting career. That clone was created illegally by using stolen biological material. Original person is very nice (not d**n sexy), most important - CHRISTIAN young lady!
I'll tell you guys more, that clones (it's not only one) made in GERMANY - world leader manufacturer of humans clones, it is in Ludwigshafen am Rhein, North Bavaria, Mr. Helmut Kohl home town. You can not even imaging the scale of the cloning activity. But warning! Helmut Kohl clone staff 100% controlling all their clones spreading around the world, they are very accurate with that, some of them are still NAZI type disciplined and mind controlled clones, so be careful get close with clones you will be controlled as well. Think wise..
Apparently those clones are very actively shown on your website. This is just a warning, because original person is not happy about those images and video, rumors and etc., in that way it would be really nice if you try slow down that ''actress'' career development on your website, original Scarlett's parents will really appreciated that. Please do that, do not wait until FBI agent give you a call with questions. Please remember that original family did not authorize any activity with stolen biological materials, no matter what form it was created, it all need to be return back to original family control to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.
Original Scarlett is not engage!
Her close friend Serg G.
P.S.
H.R. 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003, was introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives on February 5, 2003. After discussion, it was passed on February 27 by a vote of 241-155. It now moves on to the Senate for consideration. This bill makes it unlawful for any person or entity to perform or participate in human cloning, or to ship or receive embryos produced by human cloning. The penalties are imprisonment of up to 10 years and fines of $1 million or more.
These now join other nations as diverse as Norway, Australia, and Germany, which had already added cloning for any purpose to their criminal code. And in Germany where it carries a penalty of five years imprisonment they know a thing or two about unethical science.

I think that Miley already made a public apology and there's no reason to bring it up again!

I am so sorry to all my fans! It was supposed to be a fun catchy thing for my fans! SORRY!

Miley Cyrus wrote:

I am so sorry to all my fans! It was supposed to be a fun catchy thing for my fans! SORRY!

Miley's in California right now. She's out of Tennessee. She's not in New Mexico!

Lilly wrote:

<quoted text>
Miley's in California right now. She's out of Tennessee. She's not in New Mexico!

Are you such a fanatic that you want to know exactly where Miley is every second of every minute of every day? I think you may have a girl crush.

Serg G wrote:

Hello dear ladies and gentlemen!
I would like inform you that Scarlett Johansson (actress) actually is a clone from original person, who has nothing with acting career. That clone was created illegally by using stolen biological material. Original person is very nice (not d**n sexy), most important - CHRISTIAN young lady!
I'll tell you guys more, that clones (it's not only one) made in GERMANY - world leader manufacturer of humans clones, it is in Ludwigshafen am Rhein, North Bavaria, Mr. Helmut Kohl home town. You can not even imaging the scale of the cloning activity. But warning! Helmut Kohl clone staff 100% controlling all their clones spreading around the world, they are very accurate with that, some of them are still NAZI type disciplined and mind controlled clones, so be careful get close with clones you will be controlled as well. Think wise..
Apparently those clones are very actively shown on your website. This is just a warning, because original person is not happy about those images and video, rumors and etc., in that way it would be really nice if you try slow down that ''actress'' career development on your website, original Scarlett's parents will really appreciated that. Please do that, do not wait until FBI agent give you a call with questions. Please remember that original family did not authorize any activity with stolen biological materials, no matter what form it was created, it all need to be return back to original family control to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.
Original Scarlett is not engage!
Her close friend Serg G.
P.S.
H.R. 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003, was introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives on February 5, 2003. After discussion, it was passed on February 27 by a vote of 241-155. It now moves on to the Senate for consideration. This bill makes it unlawful for any person or entity to perform or participate in human cloning, or to ship or receive embryos produced by human cloning. The penalties are imprisonment of up to 10 years and fines of $1 million or more.
These now join other nations as diverse as Norway, Australia, and Germany, which had already added cloning for any purpose to their criminal code. And in Germany where it carries a penalty of five years imprisonment they know a thing or two about unethical science.

Did you win a lifetime supply of pot on a game show or something?

XXX wrote:

<quoted text>
Are you such a fanatic that you want to know exactly where Miley is every second of every minute of every day? I think you may have a girl crush.

Okay. This is wrong (you) in so many ways! Miley is my friend, and she tells me where she is, that's how I know. It's not like I go "Miley, where are you? I need to know cause I'm in love with you!" or something! She tells me if she leaves the place where she was. I think somebody (you) has a perverted mind cause that's gross and you're just nasty!

Lilly wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay. This is wrong (you) in so many ways! Miley is my friend, and she tells me where she is, that's how I know. It's not like I go "Miley, where are you? I need to know cause I'm in love with you!" or something! She tells me if she leaves the place where she was. I think somebody (you) has a perverted mind cause that's gross and you're just nasty!

No, there's a difference between a girl crush and an actual crush.
Miley wouldn't like you anyway.
Besides, if you personally talk to Miley, have her come to this forum and post the following two sentences:

"Hey y'all. This is the REAL Miley Cyrus, and I only got famous because of my father."

If she doesn't, then I KNOW you are a liar.

Miley i support u 900%

Allright, I know in another topic I said that I don't pay any attention to this girl, but I thought all the nasty comments from people on Miley's Vanity Fair photo were were ridculous.

Yes, she was topless. Yes, I will acknowledge that because of her age, people are going to go off. Yes, I acknolegde that people will get offended by certain things.

But, people will also take their comments too far.

Come on, she wasn't showing anything. She was covered up. In a sheet, which, did make it look kind of racy, but she was covered up nonetheless. If she was wearing a seethrough bedsheet, or a fishnet top with no bra, than that would be a different story.

But wasn't that photo taken by Annie Leibowitz? A very respected photographer? People are going to disagree with me on this, but photography is art.

People said she looked skanky, that she should be ashamed of herself. Ashamed of what? Posing in a bedsheet? What, like we haven't seen stars who pose in sluttier photos than that?

I've seen pictures of Christina Augilera totally naked, with just a side view of her showing, in really racey poses, and nobody as far as I know got on her case for it. Yet, Miley Cyrus poses in a bedsheet, and people spew out a little poison. And no, I'm not hating on Augilera. I'm trying to prove a point that compared to other artists, Miley Cyrus's photo was not that bad.

If you ask me, people REALLY need to know how to tell the difference between what is artistic, and what if skanky.

Lia wrote:

Allright, I know in another topic I said that I don't pay any attention to this girl, but I thought all the nasty comments from people on Miley's Vanity Fair photo were were ridculous.
Yes, she was topless. Yes, I will acknowledge that because of her age, people are going to go off. Yes, I acknolegde that people will get offended by certain things.
But, people will also take their comments too far.
Come on, she wasn't showing anything. She was covered up. In a sheet, which, did make it look kind of racy, but she was covered up nonetheless. If she was wearing a seethrough bedsheet, or a fishnet top with no bra, than that would be a different story.
But wasn't that photo taken by Annie Leibowitz? A very respected photographer? People are going to disagree with me on this, but photography is art.
People said she looked skanky, that she should be ashamed of herself. Ashamed of what? Posing in a bedsheet? What, like we haven't seen stars who pose in sluttier photos than that?
I've seen pictures of Christina Augilera totally naked, with just a side view of her showing, in really racey poses, and nobody as far as I know got on her case for it. Yet, Miley Cyrus poses in a bedsheet, and people spew out a little poison. And no, I'm not hating on Augilera. I'm trying to prove a point that compared to other artists, Miley Cyrus's photo was not that bad.
If you ask me, people REALLY need to know how to tell the difference between what is artistic, and what if skanky.

I do.
That was skanky, not artistic.

Lilly ? you have mileys email? if yesp ls send me email on arx.stranger@centrum.sk

Lia wrote:

Allright, I know in another topic I said that I don't pay any attention to this girl, but I thought all the nasty comments from people on Miley's Vanity Fair photo were were ridculous.
Yes, she was topless. Yes, I will acknowledge that because of her age, people are going to go off. Yes, I acknolegde that people will get offended by certain things.
But, people will also take their comments too far.
Come on, she wasn't showing anything. She was covered up. In a sheet, which, did make it look kind of racy, but she was covered up nonetheless. If she was wearing a seethrough bedsheet, or a fishnet top with no bra, than that would be a different story.
But wasn't that photo taken by Annie Leibowitz? A very respected photographer? People are going to disagree with me on this, but photography is art.
People said she looked skanky, that she should be ashamed of herself. Ashamed of what? Posing in a bedsheet? What, like we haven't seen stars who pose in sluttier photos than that?
I've seen pictures of Christina Augilera totally naked, with just a side view of her showing, in really racey poses, and nobody as far as I know got on her case for it. Yet, Miley Cyrus poses in a bedsheet, and people spew out a little poison. And no, I'm not hating on Augilera. I'm trying to prove a point that compared to other artists, Miley Cyrus's photo was not that bad.
If you ask me, people REALLY need to know how to tell the difference between what is artistic, and what if skanky.

Aguilera was over 18, she was of the age in which a person could safely pose nude for a magazine.
Miley's only 15.

Hi guys who knows me i am a miley fan and the best one to. i like her more than any one else in the world.

XXX wrote:

<quoted text>
Aguilera was over 18, she was of the age in which a person could safely pose nude for a magazine.
Miley's only 15.

That may be true, but the point I was trying to make was: Miley was 15, yes. But she wasn't showing anything. Christina was. Yes, I know Christina was over 18, and so it was legal for her to pose like that in a magazine. I'm not denying that.

You don't have to agree with me, but I seriously don't think there was anything horribly wrong with that Miley's photo. She was covered up, I didn't see anything that shouldn't be showing.

Lia wrote:

<quoted text>
That may be true, but the point I was trying to make was: Miley was 15, yes. But she wasn't showing anything. Christina was. Yes, I know Christina was over 18, and so it was legal for her to pose like that in a magazine. I'm not denying that.
You don't have to agree with me, but I seriously don't think there was anything horribly wrong with that Miley's photo. She was covered up, I didn't see anything that shouldn't be showing.

The very fact that an underage girl was in the nude, bedsheet or no bedsheet, is bad enough. But you think that underage nudity in a magazine is ARTISTIC? Shame on you.

XXX wrote:

<quoted text>
No, there's a difference between a girl crush and an actual crush.
Miley wouldn't like you anyway.
Besides, if you personally talk to Miley, have her come to this forum and post the following two sentences:
"Hey y'all. This is the REAL Miley Cyrus, and I only got famous because of my father."
If she doesn't, then I KNOW you are a liar.

Miley isn't aloud on chat rooms and forums and stuff like this. Her managers and agents don't allow her to. And she didn't get famous because of her father. And I don't have to prove ANYTHING to ANYONE on here. Think what you want, I don't care!

i felt so sorry for miley when the photos came out
that one photo of her covering herself with a sheet isnt even that bad nothings showing

I rock and am the best dummy not in the class and do not food on any cowys but itill do not rock not ps a can READ.i o a cutie very expensive. VERY VERY expensive who l9ikes me already i have a big butt!!!!!!!!!!1111