Where can I find the Janet Jackson footage from last night??

[TraceyQ]

You'll be wanting this then. Of course it was all set up!

[Pinball]

"Ever felt a right tit, Janet?"

[New World Order]

You've got to respect Justin Timberlake though, haven't you?

Yeah, me and my mates have been wandering about town "Timberlaking" girls all morning.

[smoker]

they used to be lurvers back in the day till justin stole cameron diaz from me. she was to be my bride eventually, now she is soiled

[hoverdonkey]

It's amazing really. America is busy bombing the fuck out of the rest of the world and still tries to take some sort of moral high ground over the diplay of a boob.

Makes you wonder how the moral swingometer works over there.

[Lt Plonker]

Look at that! That's the best picture ever.

[Garfield And Friends]

Look at that! That's the best picture ever.

"Bah-dah Bop Bop Bah, I'm lovin' it!" Almost - the close-up of Timberlake's face after the Britney+Madonna kiss pips it.

[jimbobsyouruncle]

Looks like you're not the only one looking for this...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3461459.stm

[weirdbeard]

Surprise, Surprise, someone in America has filed a lawsuit against the 'guilty' parties.

Link

KNOXVILLE (AP) -- Janet Jackson's bared breast at the Super Bowl has become a federal case in Knoxville.

Terri Carlin has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court and asked that it become a class-action suit against singers Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake and broadcasters MTV, CBS and their parent company, Viacom.

Carlin alleges that she and others who watched the halftime show during Sunday's Super Bowl were injured by the performers' actions when Timberlake ripped off part of Jackson's costume, exposing her breast.

But Carlin, who works in a bank, doesn't specify the type of injury allegedly suffered.

Carlin's lawsuit seeks billions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages.

[Rats]

I saw there was something up on suprnova the other day called "The superbowl boob incident ultra pack" so you can get it from there. Had me chuckling for ages that. Just imagine all the little goodies that could be in it. Boob keyring? Special limited edition boob incident baseball cap?

[El Unicornio, mang]

Believe it or not, they've actually cut a shot of an old ladies breast from an episode of ER because of this.
And who are the people who are complaining about naked breasts being shown on television? The same people who want to keep their guns, and vote for Bush, and love seeing those brown people in Iraq getting what's coming to them. A naked breast though? Evil, evil filth.

[Bamber Hopcraft]

If you're into cooking, try this-

http://www.amateurgourmet.com/the_amateur_gourmet/2004/02/janet_jackson_b.html

[Matthias]

It's just a tit.

[Gazeuse]

I don't know where this came from but I got sent this

TV viewer sues Janet Jackson over boob

A TV viewer has launched a civil action against Janet Jackson, saying the star's breast exposure "seriously injured" American children.

Terri Carlin, 47, from Tennessee, claims that Jackson's breast flash during the Super bowl half time show caused viewers "outrage, anger, embarrassment and serious injury".

Bank teller Carlin's lawsuit names Jackson and TV networks Viacom, CBS and MTV as defendants, reports the Sun.

Court papers say: "Employees of corporate defendants knew or should have known Ms Jackson and Mr Timberlake were including the act of Mr Timberlake ripping off part of Ms Jackson's costume to expose one of her breasts.

"All of the defendants knew that the Super Bowl would be watched by millions of children. Families have an expectation that they can trust companies and individuals not to expose families to sexually explicit conduct."

Damages could run in to millions if the suit is successful. Carlin says they should not exceed the gross revenues of the defendants over the past three years.

[Frinky]

It's just a tit.

Excellent summation. Do you have to practice to be able to state the obvious with such consumate ease, or is it a gift you were naturally imbued with?

[Matthias]

It's just a tit.

Excellent summation. Do you have to practice to be able to state the obvious with such consumate ease, or is it a gift you were naturally imbued with?

My summation was appropriate to the subject. Why the fuss? It's not a deadly tit. The tit will not corrupt your children. Why is it shocking?

IT'S JUST A TIT!!

[Frinky]

Becuase it offends some people, beit on grounds of upbringing or religion.

There you go. Another easy summation.

[Matthias]

Becuase it offends some people, beit on grounds of upbringing or religion.

There you go. Another easy summation.

If the sight of a simple breast upsets you then your parents did a bad job of bringing you up.

As for religion, if you follow the guidleines of a greatly outdated book that was written to control the underclasses then a tit is precisely what you are.

A breast is natural and it is beautiful. Even with a big metal thingy on it. That fact that a breast may offend certain misled people really offends me.

[smoker]

yeah but it was a brown one though, bit unnecessary

[Frinky]

Well done. See, you can't do it in three words, can you?

As for religion, if you follow the guidleines of a greatly outdated book that was written to control the underclasses then a tit is precisely what you are.

Yes, becuase it was so clear I was referring to Christianity, wasn't it? And there's certianly no other religion in the world, is there? That's a nice, outdated view you're carrying round there. I'm not at all religious, but I know it goes a fair bit further than that.

If the sight of a simple breast upsets you then your parents did a bad job of bringing you up.

Would you be happy with your kids watching a man undress a woman in public like that? Good lesson, don't you think? Stop trying to bring everything down to the most basic level you can. There's nothing wrong with tits, cunts, or cocks. Kids brought up to fear them are poor children indeed. However, "forcibly" undressing a woman (which was the act's intention, given her "suprise") on a show watched by millions, many of them who include kids, sets the wrong impression, don't you think? I'm all for sex education as soon as they're old enough to understand, I know how my kids will be raised, but when they see thier pop star heros on TV ripping each others clothes of? Of course the parent is going to have to tell them that that's not right or acceptable behaviour. Television should be repsonsible enough not to put a parent in that position. They can show what they like at appropriate times. This wasn't the case, was it?

And it's not like there was any merit in it, was there? It was for attention.

[Matthias]

It's still just a tit though!

[big hole where smiley should be]

yeah but it was a brown one though, bit unnecessary

Ha ha! But I like the brown ones best.. my girlfriend has two. They're big, brown, beautiful and inoffensive.

(edited due to BBCode dyslexia!)

[Frinky]

Oh, you're so much fun to spar with.

[Matthias]

Oh, you're so much fun to spar with.

Thank you. But I'm afraid I can't come back at you with anything on this subject, as your points are far too valid... swine!

;-)

[Mister Six]

My summation was appropriate to the subject. Why the fuss? It's not a deadly tit. The tit will not corrupt your children. Why is it shocking?

IT'S JUST A TIT!!

Yeah, but the tit ripped off Janet Jackson's top, which is a bit much.

[Frinky]

[Thank you.

I'll give you a week to prepare. They're not that valid.

[Matthias]

[Thank you.

I'll give you a week to prepare. They're not that valid.

Yes, but I just can't be arsed. Not over Janet Jackson's tit. I'd like to suck Janet Jackson's tit, mind, as long as she takes that alloy nipplenut off!

[steevbishop]

To shoot in a slightly different, yet somehow related, tangent I'd like you to consider this

The biggest story coming out of the Super Bowl is what WASN'T seen...

...it's no surprise that another issue of more importance than a flash of nudity was completely lost during the shuffle.  Of course, the main reason the issue was lost in the shuffle was due to CBS, the network that aired the Super Bowl – and the issue was lost on purpose.

The issue is that of a 30-second ad (available for viewing on MoveOn.org's website) that CBS refused to air during the game.  Sponsored by MoveOn.org, the ad featured children performing various menial adult jobs such as washing dishes and collecting trash.  All of the kids featured wear forlorn looks doing their "jobs" before the ad ends with a single question flashed on the screen:  "Guess who's going to pay off President Bush's $1 trillion defecit?"

Not one word is spoken during the commercial.  None of the kids get naked or do anything questionable other than work young.  And yet this was enough for CBS to deny airing the ad despite MoveOn.org being more than ready to pay the exhorbitant ad rates for the game.  CBS cited a network policy of not airing ads that are "too controversial" or that feature "political advocacy" as their excuse for denying the ad...

Quite the daring ad. The writer of the article breaks down the nature of some of the ads that were aired during the most expensive block of air-time in the year, and then briefly discusses the dirty dealings behind CBS, the Federal Communications Commission and Bush's office.
Of course, most of America wouldn't be outraged about this, simply because they'll never know.

Didn't know whether to give this a whole thread or not, but it's noteworthy regardless.

[Matthias]

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE!
THIS MAKES ME WANT TO KILL PEOPLE!!

IT WAS JUST A BIT OF BARE BREAST, NOT A WEAPON OF MASS FUCKING DESTRUCTION!!

Woman Sues Over Jackson Boob
An American woman has filed a lawsuit demanding billions of dollars in compensation for "serious injury" suffered when Janet Jackson exposed her breast on television.Bank worker Terri Carlin is demanding compensation for herself and millions of other viewers who were watching last Sunday's Super Bowl.

Jackson was on stage with Justin Timberlake, who tugged at her top, tearing it and revealing her right breast.

In her lawsuit, Ms Carlin, from Tennessee, said broadcasters breached an "implied contract" that viewers would not be exposed to explicit images during the prime time event.

She is suing Jackson, Timberlake, broadcasters MTV and CBS and their parent company, Viacom.

"As a direct and proximate result of the broadcast of the acts, (Ms Carlin) and millions of others saw the acts and were caused to suffer outrage, anger, embarrassment and serious injury," the lawsuit states.

The injuries suffered by Ms Carlin are not specified.

Jackson made a televised apology for the incident, saying she added the stunt to the act after final rehearsals and without the knowledge of CBS, MTV or the sport's governing body, the NFL.

But she said the "costume reveal" went too far, and her top should have torn to reveal a red bustier, not her exposed breast.

Timberlake has said he was shocked by the incident, and that his family were among those offended.

[Purple Tentacle]

Isn't Timberlake being investigated for racial discrimination?

Is this his way of proving his liberal mind by saying "ooooh, I love black tit me"?

[Frinky]

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE!
THIS MAKES ME WANT TO KILL PEOPLE!!

IT WAS JUST A BIT OF BARE BREAST, NOT A WEAPON OF MASS FUCKING DESTRUCTION!!

Didn't we just go over this? :P