[Closed] very cunning

celebrities, WGAF?

I don't normally, but all this super injunction nonsense has got me intrigued now.
Although, there's a good chance that when I find out the names, it will be someone I've never heard of.
I mean, I've seen Jeremy Clarkson on the telly, but who's Jemima Khan ?

there was an interesting article on the guardian site.

just tweet the most outrageuos allegations about celebrities.

if any get deleted then they're the true ones with a superinjuntion in place 🙂

I'm too thick too understand the OP.

I don't know if it's 'very cunning', as it sounds too complicated, and I'm too uninterested, to bother trying to work it out. But I'll take your word for it.

So basically you're saying that allegations of intimate pics of her :

[img] [/img]

with him :

[img] [/img]

are false ?

This has pretty much completed my day.

grum - Member

I'm too thick too understand the OP.

Me too, going to have a coffee and read it again.

Was not too hard to find the twitter leaker though 😉

I'm too thick too understand the OP.

Basically somebody leaked an allegation about Clarkson and Khan.
Due to injunctions, editors can't say whether it's true or not because they're not allowed to talk about it.

If it gets deleted, then it's more than likely that it's true... erm... I think?!!

no, the Khan one was untrue - the other 5 that the twitter user posted, by the fact there's no discussion of them, can be considered to be true.

If the khan one was true no one woudl be talkign about it either.

who's Jemima Khan ?

She used to be Puddleduck until she married Ghengis.

Genuine lol at Elf 🙂

Ah ok I get it now. Skoolshoes, I *think the point is that they [i]can[/i] talk about Clarkson, because there is no injunction - this then suggests that the other claims are true, but can't me mentioned as there really is an injunction.

Is there a hashtag or what have you that I shouldn't be looking at?

Ah ok I get it now. Skoolshoes, I *think the point is that they can talk about Clarkson, because there is no injunction - this then suggests that the other claims are true, but can't me mentioned as there really is an injunction.

That's what I meant, just testing! 🙂

Is there a hashtag or what have you that I shouldn't be looking at?

@InjunctionSuper

That's what I meant, just testing!

Of course 😉

Yawn, is it time for a coffee yet?

Thank you, Ernie, you've made my day.

I may not be rich or famous but at least I don't look like Clarkson.

Jemima's quite sweet, isn't she?

She's a Kahn after being married/manhandled by an ex ****stani National Cricketist turned politician. Had quite a wealthy daddy too so won't be too worried about her next Giro... 😉

<spot the stealth edit>

Has quite a wealthy daddy too

Well she did have until he died.

Has quite a wealthy daddy too so won't be too worried about her next Giro...

I dunno, have you seen the prices of the Xar? Nice helmet, mind you.

I understand the thinking Stoner, but why use two people where there's temptation to think 'where there's smoke there's fire'... why not pick two totally disparate people- George Bush and Beyonce, for instance?

Let's face it, there are more unexpected couplings than Khan and Clarkson...

I imagine because just for a brief second one could believe it [i]might[/i] be true, making it just a little less obvious that it's a stalking horse gossip. Afterall they know each other socially.

Wouldn't it be funny if all posts relating to Bush and Beyonce suddenly started disappearing now though 🙂

She used to be Puddleduck until she married Ghengis.

brilliant 😆

Having read the seemingly true allegations that accompany the demonstrably false one............. They are very so-what. Gossip column tittle-tattle at best, with protagonists that in many cases you'd need a reminder as to who they were, undertaking acts that might not be to everyones taste, but which aren't illegal, in some cases aren't immoral, non of which are uncommon, and in any instance are only harmful to anyone at all (but not the wider public) if discussed openly. There is nothing of public interest there. However the papers have filled more column inches from not being able to print them than they could ever have hoped to if they had.

Trafigura.

CaptainFlashheart - Member
Trafigura.

thats what you'd imagine given the fuss the papers were making.

Those photos are grim.