#2 2011-02-06 10:43:43
Where do you read money into this, fnord? The kid's family were promised visitation, that they'd see the kid and didn't. Can't imagine you really sympathize with a skank like Madonna.
Offline
#3 2011-02-06 13:08:55
Whose gonna pay the transportation cost?
Offline
#4 2011-02-06 15:13:49
The legal threat comes as Madonna – currently directing a film about Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson
Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs
Offline
#5 2011-02-06 16:32:34
phoQ wrote:
...Madonna – currently directing a film about Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson
Yeah, that's the most horrifying thing in the whole article.
Offline
#6 2011-02-06 17:39:13
choad wrote:
Where do you read money into this, fnord? The kid's family were promised visitation, that they'd see the kid and didn't. Can't imagine you really sympathize with a skank like Madonna.
Madonna has an estimated net worth of 500 million (that makes her a pauper compared to the 70 billion estimated net worth of Mubarak, but I digress), of course they will go for monetary damages. And no, I don't sympathize with Madonna; she's getting what she deserves for using Turd World nigglets as fashion accessories. The sperm donor of her other Homo erectus pet has caused her problems in the past, and will probably do so again. The fact that she would ruin the childhoods of her biological children by making them pretend that subhuman animals are their siblings shows she's an unfit mother and deserves much grief in her life.
Offline
#7 2011-02-06 17:50:13
fnord wrote:
And no, I don't sympathize with Madonna
Suit yourself, then. She reneged, or renigged, if you insist. Make her pay.
Offline
#8 2011-02-08 06:58:40
no, she shouldn't pay. If she promised visitation rights, then visitation rights should be granted. Nothing more. Nobody should be getting rich off this action except, perhaps, lawyers.
Offline
